21 When Jesus had again crossed over by boat to the other side of the lake, a large crowd gathered around him while he was by the lake. 22 Then one of the synagogue rulers, named Jairus, came there. Seeing Jesus, he fell at his feet 23 and pleaded earnestly with him, "My little daughter is dying. Please come and put your hands on her so that she will be healed and live." 24 So Jesus went with him. 25 A large crowd followed and pressed around him. And a woman was there who had been subject to bleeding for twelve years. 26 She had suffered a great deal under the care of many doctors and had spent all she had, yet instead of getting better she grew worse. 27 When she heard about Jesus, she came up behind him in the crowd and touched his cloak, 28 because she thought, "If I just touch his clothes, I will be healed." 29 Immediately her bleeding stopped and she felt in her body that she was freed from her suffering.
30 At once Jesus realized that power had gone out from him. He turned around in the crowd and asked, "Who touched my clothes?"
31 "You see the people crowding against you," his disciples answered, "and yet you can ask, 'Who touched me?' "
32 But Jesus kept looking around to see who had done it. 33 Then the woman, knowing what had happened to her, came and fell at his feet and, trembling with fear, told him the whole truth. 34 He said to her, "Daughter, your faith has healed you. Go in peace and be freed from your suffering."
35 While Jesus was still speaking, some men came from the house of Jairus, the synagogue ruler. "Your daughter is dead," they said. "Why bother the teacher any more?"
36 Ignoring what they said, Jesus told the synagogue ruler, "Don't be afraid; just believe."
37 He did not let anyone follow him except Peter, James and John the brother of James. 38 When they came to the home of the synagogue ruler, Jesus saw a commotion, with people crying and wailing loudly. 39 He went in and said to them, "Why all this commotion and wailing? The child is not dead but asleep." 40 But they laughed at him. 41 After he put them all out, he took the child's father and mother and the disciples who were with him, and went in where the child was. He took her by the hand and said to her, "Talitha koum!" (which means, "Little girl, I say to you, get up!" ). 42 Immediately the girl stood up and walked around (she was twelve years old). At this they were completely astonished. 43 He gave strict orders not to let anyone know about this, and told them to give her something to eat.
The Healing of Jairus' Daughter and the Hemorrhaging Woman
Mark 5:21-43
Sermon
by James W. Moore
A business executive became depressed. Things were not going well at work, and he was bringing his problems home with him every night. Every evening he would eat his dinner in silence, shutting out his wife and five-year-old daughter. Then he would go into the den and read the paper using the newspaper to wall his family out of his life.
After several nights of this, one evening his daughter took her little hand and pushed the newspaper down. She then jumped into her father’s lap, wrapped her arms around his neck and hugged him strongly. The father said abruptly, “Honey, you are hugging me to death!” “No, Daddy,” the little girl said, “I’m hugging you to life!”
This was the greatness of Jesus. He took people where they were and hugged them to life. That is precisely what we see Jesus doing here in this dramatic passage in Mark 5. He is loving needy and hurting people, hugging them to life. This passage is a fascinating one because here we have a story within a story, or two healing stories rolled into one and the people involved could not be more different.
On the one hand, the family of Jairus represented the “upper crust” of society. Jairus was the ruler of the synagogue. He was a man of substance, rich and powerful and religiously prominent. In the synagogue, he called the shots. He decided who would preach, what scripture would be read, and what hymns would be sung. He represented the Elite of Society, especially the religious world, but this day Jairus was troubled. His 12-year-old daughter was dying.
On the other hand, the hemorrhaging woman in the crowd was a social outcast. She was considered unclean as one who was under the judgment of God and therefore not allowed to set foot in the synagogue. In this magnificent passage, these two vastly different people, the down and out hemorrhaging woman and the upper-crust daughter of Jairus, are loved into life by our Lord. Remember the story with me.
Jesus and His disciples had been going from town to town. He had been preaching the gospel and healing people. Large crowds were coming out. They were clamoring to see Jesus and hear Him. One day this man called Jairus came looking for Jesus. Jairus was the ruler of the synagogue. He fell down at the feet of Jesus and begged the Master to come to his house because his only daughter (who was about 12 years of age) was gravely ill and dying. Jesus agreed to go with him and as they went, people began to press in around Jesus. The New English Bible puts it dramatically: “He could hardly breathe for the crowds.” The people were so excited to be near the master that they were pushing and shoving and crowding in close to Him.
In the crowd that day was a woman who had been hemorrhaging for 12 years. She had tried everything she knew to try, but no luck… no relief, no help for her problem. No one had been able to cure her. She slipped up behind Jesus, working her way through the crowd… and when no one seemed to be looking, she reached out tentatively, fearfully, and touched the hem of His robe. At once, the hemorrhaging stopped. For the first time in 12 years, the flow of blood stopped.
Jesus simultaneously felt or sensed that something special had happened -- it was a unique touch -- and He felt strength go out of Him. Immediately, Jesus stopped. He turned around and asked, “Who touched Me?” The disciples were astonished by the question in the midst of all the pushing and shoving and jostling. “What do You mean, ‘who touched You?’ Everybody’s touching You.”
But, you see, they couldn’t tell a push from a touch. Jesus could! He knew the difference and He knew that it was a tender touch that had drawn strength out of Him. The woman had not expected to be detected, but when Jesus turned and asked that question, she knew that He knew, and she came forward trembling and she fell at His feet and confessed that she was the one who had touched the hem of His garment. She explained in a rush of words why she had touched Him and how she had been instantly cured. Graciously, Jesus lifted her up and said to her, “My daughter, your faith has made you well. Go now in peace.”
Notice how gentle and loving Jesus is with her as He gives her a new lease on life. He doesn’t chastise her for interrupting Him. He doesn’t critique her theology or her superstitious expectations. He doesn’t rebuke her for seeing Him as a sort of last resort. Rather, He gives her act the most gracious possible reception. And although we know the healing came from Him, He humbly gives her the credit. “Your faith has made you well,” He says to her.
Now, the rest of the story is even more remarkable. They tell Jesus that Jairus’ daughter is gone. It’s too late. She has already died! I’m sure at that moment Jairus (as any father would be) was devastated. His only daughter snatched away. But again, Jesus is gracious and generous and loving. I can just imagine Him touching Jairus’ shoulder and saying, “Don’t be afraid now; only believe, and she will be made well.”
They go on to the house. The people are weeping and mourning. They scoff at him for thinking he can do anything about this. But Jesus goes in to that little girl, and He resurrects her. He loves her into life, and then (I love this) He tells them to give her something to eat.
Now, of course, there are many beautiful lessons here in Mark 5 in these two dramatic stories of healing, and we could go off now in any number of directions. But for the moment, let’s look closely together at the power of love and the amazing, incredible things love can accomplish when it is given and when it is received.
I. FIRST OF ALL, LOVE HAS THE POWER TO HEAL.
Scientific research is now confirming what many of us have suspected all along – that love plays a big part in the healing of a hurting body. Love has the power to heal physically, emotionally, and spiritually.
Have you heard the legend of the Fisher King? When the Fisher King was a boy, he was sent out to spend the night alone in the forest as a test of his courage to be king. During the night, he had a vision of the Holy Grail (the cup used by our Lord at the Last Supper), surrounded by great flames of fire. Immediately, he became excited by the prospect of wealth and glory that would be his by possessing such a great prize. Greedily, he reached into the flames to grab the Holy Grail, but the flames were too much and he was severely wounded.
As the years went by, the Fisher King became more despondent and alone and his wound grew deeper. One day the Fisher King, feeling sad and depressed and in pain, went for a walk in the forest. He came upon a court jester. “Are you all right?” the jester asked. “Is there anything I can do for you? Anything at all?” “Well, I am very thirsty,” the Fisher King replied. The jester took an old dilapidated cup from bag, filled it with water from a nearby stream, and gave it to the Fisher King. As the Fisher King drank, he suddenly felt his wound healing for the first time. And incredibly the old cup he was drinking from had turned into the Holy Grail. “What wonderful magic do you possess?” the Fisher King asked the jester. The jester just shrugged and said, “I know no magic. All I did was get a drink for a thirsty soul.”
This old legend underscores a great truth that is written large in the scriptures, namely this… Greed and selfishness bring pain and suffering, but love brings healing and life. We see it here in Mark 5 as Jesus reaches out to the hemorrhaging woman and the daughter of Jairus… love has the power to heal.
II. SECOND, LOVE HAS THE POWER TO RECONCILE.
This is why Jesus insisted that the one who had touched the hem of His garment come forward. This woman was considered ceremonially unclean. She was not permitted to set foot in the synagogue. She was a social outcast. Jesus wanted to make it clear to everyone that she was well. He not only healed her, he restored her to an active place in normal society. He reconciled her with the community.
In his book, The Preaching Event, John Claypool tells a poignant story about identical twin brothers who never married because they enjoyed each other’s company so much. When their father died, they took over his store and ran it together in a joyful collaboration. But one day a man came in to make a small purchase and paid for it with a dollar. The brother who made the sale placed the dollar on top of the cash register… and walked the customer to the door to say goodbye. When he returned, the dollar bill was gone. He said to his twin brother, “Did you take the dollar bill I left here?” “No, I didn’t,” answered the brother. “Surely you took it,” he said. “There was nobody else in the store.” The brother became angry: “I’m telling you, I did not take the dollar bill.”
From that point, mistrust and suspicion grew until finally the two brothers could not work together. They put a partition right down the middle of the building and made it into two stores. In anger, they refused to speak for the next 20 years.
One day a stranger pulled up in a car and entered one of the two stores. “Have you been in business very long here?” the stranger asked. “Yes, 30 or 40 years,” was the answer. “Good,” continued the stranger. “I very much need to tell you something… Some 20 years ago, I passed through this town. I was out of work and homeless. I jumped off a boxcar. I had no money and I had not eaten for days. I came down that alley outside and when I looked into your store window, I saw a dollar bill on the cash register. I slipped in and took it. Recently I became a Christian. I was converted and accepted Christ as my personal Savior. I know now it was wrong of me to steal that dollar bill, and I have come to pay you back with interest and to beg your forgiveness.”
When the stranger finished his confession, the old storekeeper began to weep as he said, “Would you do me a favor? Would you please come next door and tell that story to my brother?” Of course, with the second telling, the two brothers were reconciled with many hugs and apologies and tears. Twenty years of hurt and broken relationship based not on fact, but on mistrust and misunderstanding. But then healing came, reconciliation came, because of that stranger’s love for Christ.
The point is clear: Christ is the Reconciler, but as the Apostle Paul put it, we can be “agents of reconciliation” when we live in the spirit of love.
Love has the power to heal. Love has the power to reconcile.
III. THIRD AND FINALLY, LOVE HAS THE POWER TO REDEEM.
Let me ask you something. Be honest now. Do you know the redeeming love of Christ in your life? Has He turned your life around? Has He loved you into life?
There is a beautiful old story about Zacchaeus the tax collector. It tells how in later years, he rose early every morning and left his house. His wife, curious, followed him one morning. At the town well he filled a bucket and he walked until he came to a sycamore tree. There, setting down the bucket, he began to clean away the stones, the branches, and the rubbish from around the base of the tree. Having done that, he poured water on the roots and stood there in silence, gently caressing the trunk with both of his hands. When his amazed wife came out of hiding and asked what he was doing, Zacchaeus replied simply, “This is where I found Christ!”
I can just imagine that for the rest of their lives, that woman who touched the hem of Jesus’ robe that day on the street, and the daughter of Jairus who was raised up in that room in her home, continually brought people back to those sacred spots and said, “This is where I found Christ! This is where Christ loved me into life!”
Do you have a sacred spot like that? This is the Good News of our Christian faith, isn’t it? Love has the power to heal, to reconcile, and to redeem.
ChristianGlobe Networks, Inc., Collected Sermons, by James W. Moore
The third and fourth miracles in this series are sandwiched together to dramatize Jesus’s power over disease and death. Just as the influential synagogue ruler Jairus cares deeply about his twelve-year-old daughter, so Jesus cares deeply about his “daughter” (5:…
The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016
21 When Jesus had again crossed over by boat to the other side of the lake, a large crowd gathered around him while he was by the lake. 22 Then one of the synagogue rulers, named Jairus, came there. Seeing Jesus, he fell at his feet 23 and pleaded earnestly with him, "My little daughter is dying. Please come and put your hands on her so that she will be healed and live." 24 So Jesus went with him. 25 A large crowd followed and pressed around him. And a woman was there who had been subject to bleeding for twelve years. 26 She had suffered a great deal under the care of many doctors and had spent all she had, yet instead of getting better she grew worse. 27 When she heard about Jesus, she came up behind him in the crowd and touched his cloak, 28 because she thought, "If I just touch his clothes, I will be healed." 29 Immediately her bleeding stopped and she felt in her body that she was freed from her suffering.
30 At once Jesus realized that power had gone out from him. He turned around in the crowd and asked, "Who touched my clothes?"
31 "You see the people crowding against you," his disciples answered, "and yet you can ask, 'Who touched me?' "
32 But Jesus kept looking around to see who had done it. 33 Then the woman, knowing what had happened to her, came and fell at his feet and, trembling with fear, told him the whole truth. 34 He said to her, "Daughter, your faith has healed you. Go in peace and be freed from your suffering."
35 While Jesus was still speaking, some men came from the house of Jairus, the synagogue ruler. "Your daughter is dead," they said. "Why bother the teacher any more?"
36 Ignoring what they said, Jesus told the synagogue ruler, "Don't be afraid; just believe."
37 He did not let anyone follow him except Peter, James and John the brother of James. 38 When they came to the home of the synagogue ruler, Jesus saw a commotion, with people crying and wailing loudly. 39 He went in and said to them, "Why all this commotion and wailing? The child is not dead but asleep." 40 But they laughed at him. 41 After he put them all out, he took the child's father and mother and the disciples who were with him, and went in where the child was. He took her by the hand and said to her, "Talitha koum!" (which means, "Little girl, I say to you, get up!" ). 42 Immediately the girl stood up and walked around (she was twelve years old). At this they were completely astonished. 43 He gave strict orders not to let anyone know about this, and told them to give her something to eat.
This healing story is another example of Mark’s sandwich technique, in which the story of the healing of Jairus’s daughter (5:21–24, 35–43) is interrupted by that of the woman with a hemorrhage (5:25–34). Having crossed the lake, Jesus and the disciples disembark on the western (Jewish) shore. A synagogue ruler named Jairus emerges from the crowd and begs Jesus to heal his daughter, who is deathly ill. A synagogue ruler was the president or head of a local Jewish worshiping community. His duties included general oversight and maintenance of the building, procuring Scripture scrolls, arranging Sabbath services, and perhaps education of Jewish children. Worship services were officiated, however, by scribes, rabbis, and trained laypersons rather than by the synagogue ruler. In going with Jairus (5:24), Jesus fulfills his mission declared in 1:38, “This is why I have come.”
While Mark’s Gospel is the shortest of the four, his stories, although fewer in number, are usually recounted in fuller detail. This is particularly true of his portrayal of human need. Mark’s account of the woman’s futile attempts to receive medical help and her desperate effort to reach Jesus (5:26–27) are omitted in Matthew and Luke. The description of the woman’s recovery—the Greek word translated “suffering” (5:29) combines both physical affliction and shame—conveys that the woman’s prospects for health were no better than the little girl’s prospects for life. As was the case with leprosy, a protracted menstruation problem left a woman unclean throughout its duration. Like the leper (1:40), the woman risks defiling Jesus with her uncleanness, in the desperate hope of being healed. She acts on what she hears and knows of Jesus. Although it was a serious violation of Jewish law for her to approach Jesus in her state, Mark portrays her act as a sign of faith. Immediately she is healed from her long-incurable disease. Like the man in 3:1–6, in bringing her infirmity to Jesus, she is healed. The woman’s intent to touch Jesus is rivaled by Jesus’s desire, despite the disciples’ remonstrations, to know who touched him. Not content simply to dispatch a miracle, Jesus wants to encounter the woman. For Jesus, miracle must lead to meeting. Jesus’s tender response, “Daughter, your faith has healed you” (5:34), overcomes the woman’s fear of social ostracism. The Greek word for “heal,” sōzō, means both “to heal” and “to save”—both senses are appropriate in this instance.
The drama now intensifies as the interruption, so profitable to the woman, has cost the life of Jairus’s daughter. “Why bother the teacher anymore?” ask Jairus’s servants (5:35). In the Greek, Mark’s description of Jesus’s response is masterful. The word parakouō (NIV “overhearing”) can mean (1) to overhear something not intended for one’s ears, (2) to ignore (see NIV note), or (3) to discount the truth of something. All three meanings apply to Jesus’s response in verse 36. In direct address to Jairus, Jesus commands, “Don’t be afraid; just believe.” The present tense of “believe” means to keep believing, just as in the parable of the sower it meant to keep hearing (4:20). The word for “believe” in verse 36 is the same Greek root as the word for the woman’s faith in verse 34. Jesus thus bids Jairus to demonstrate the same trust that the hemorrhaging woman demonstrated. Arriving at Jairus’s house, Jesus allows only Peter, James, and John, his inner circle of disciples, and the girl’s parents to accompany him into her room. Jesus’s figurative reference to the girl’s death as “sleeping” is met with scorn by the professional mourners. The command talitha koum is Aramaic, meaning, “Little girl [literally ‘little lamb’], arise.” Immediately, reports Mark, the girl arises, to the amazement of all present. What does Mark achieve by sandwiching the story of the hemorrhaging woman into the story of Jairus and his daughter? Mark wants to show that Jairus, a man of reputation and respect, must learn the meaning of faith from an unnamed woman whose only identification is her shame. If Jairus can trust Jesus as the woman trusted Jesus, he need not fear. Faith means trusting in Jesus when all human hopes have been exhausted.
The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary by Gary M. Burge, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
Big Idea: In these healing miracles two transformations take place: (1)Jesus’s compassion for the sick causes him to ignore the purity laws and bring purity/healing to suffering people; (2)he reverses the status rules of society by making the nameless, unclean woman the model of faith.
Understanding the Text
This is another of the sandwiching episodes like the one in 3:20–35, as the two stories interpret each other. In the context of this miracle section (4:35–5:43) these comprise the final two of the four types of miracles: in order, power over nature, demons, sickness, and death. The two here (sickness and death) are similar to the exorcism story in that both deal with matters of the purity laws. It has often been called the “love hermeneutic”;1Jesus’s compassion for people who are hurting has priority over all legal codes, such as touching unclean people here. Three things link the stories: both deal with uncleanness, both of the afflicted are women, and both are associated with the number twelve (the age of the girl, the number of years the woman has been sick).
Interpretive Insights
5:22 one of the synagogue leaders ... fell at his feet. Jesus and the disciples proceed back across the lake, apparently to Capernaum, and as usual another “large crowd” gathers. Out of the crowd emerges another petitioner. This is a very influential member of the community, one of the “rulers of the synagogue.” Matthew 9:18 calls him a “ruler,” one of seven community leaders in the average town, and the synagogue ruler (usually one of the seven) was one of three administrators of the synagogue. He was usually a wealthy patron of the synagogue who was given charge over both the physical building (including the finances) and the order of worship (choice of who would read the Scripture and give the homily). For such a VIP to fall at Jesus’s feet shows both his plight and his regard for Jesus. It is unusual to name a person in a healing miracle (see also 10:46). “Jairus” may mean either “he awakens” or “he sees”; either would fit.2Naming him shows his great status (as well as provides a contrast with the woman who is not named in 5:25).
5:23 My little daughter is dying. In 5:42 we learn that she is twelve years old. We are never told what the disease is, but obviously it is quite serious, for she “is dying.” Jairus is at the end of his rope and clearly is praying that Jesus can heal so terrible a disease. In 1:41 Jesus touched the leper and healed him, and in 3:10 many ill people tried to “touch” Jesus to be healed (also 6:5; 7:32; 8:23), so Jairus asks Jesus to “put his hands” on the girl, believing that this could “heal” her.
5:25–26 a woman ... subject to bleeding. In the large crowd jostling Jesus there was a tragic figure, a woman of no particular status (not named or wealthy like Jairus). Mark tells her heart-wrenching story in seven successive participles. During the entire life of Jairus’s daughter (twelve years) this woman has suffered from a terrible malady, a menstrual disorder that has not stopped but worsened for that entire time. In Leviticus 15:19–33 (and an entire tract, Niddah, in the Mishnah), we are told that a woman with menstrual flow is unclean for seven days, and anyone touching her will be unclean for an entire day. In Ezekiel 36:17 Israel’s unholy conduct was likened to “a woman’s monthly uncleanness” in its defiling aura. This was exacerbated by the belief that blood was the basis of life, so menstruation symbolized life leaving the body. She had lost all her possessions searching for a cure, and now she was a pariah, a virtual leper, to everyone around her. We cannot imagine the horror that this sad woman’s life had become.
5:28 If I just touch his clothes. The doctors were powerless (and probably mortified at treating so unclean a person). But she knows that Jesus can do what they cannot, so she comes to a bold decision. Her faith is great, for other sick people want to be “touched” by Jesus (see on 5:23), but she has faith that touching his garment (even without him knowing it) will be enough (the clothing of both Jesus [Mark 6:56] and Paul [Acts 19:12] did have healing power).3She may be afraid that he, like everyone else, will recoil if aware that so unclean a person is approaching him. So she sneaks through the crowd (probably hiding her face because many in the town would know her) and slinks up to touch Jesus’s robe.
5:29–30 Immediately her bleeding stopped ... power had gone out of him. The powerful effects of the miracle are “immediately” felt by both the woman and Jesus. Not only does the bleeding cease, but also she feels “free from her suffering,” undoubtedly a physical sensation of wellness and the lifting of the terrible burden that she had lived with for so long. The effects on Jesus are equally powerful. The woman had hoped to pass unnoticed in the crowd (for all whom she had touched, including Jesus, would be unclean), but this was not to be. Jesus feels divine power transferring from him to the woman. Only here in the miracle stories is such a thing explained. His healing power was a physical thing, and he felt some of it leave him.
5:33 the woman ... trembling with fear. The disciples are shocked that Jesus can detect one person’s touch in the midst of the chaos caused by the huge jostling crowd (further proof of Jesus’s supernatural powers). The woman apparently had been surreptitiously stealing away and had to return when Jesus looked around for her. Her “fear” likely had three aspects: many in the crowd would know of her unclean state; Jesus could be displeased that an unclean woman had touched him (and made him unclean); but mostly she would feel the trembling “awe” (cf. 4:41) of knowing that she had been miraculously healed.
5:34 your faith has healed you. One of the major themes of the passage, the power of faith, is now presented. She had been a nobody, a nameless, unclean woman with no status whatsoever. Now Jesus completely lifts her out of that quagmire and not only bestows status on her (calling her “daughter”) but also will use her as a model of faith for Jairus (5:36). (For “faith” in healing miracles, see on 2:5.) Rather, faith does not produce healing, nor is it a necessary prerequisite. Jesus healed many who were not followers. Faith allows the individual to participate in Jesus’s healing act, to experience spiritual as well as physical healing.
5:36 Don’t be afraid; just believe. Jairus is utterly devastated by the terrible news that while he was beseeching Jesus for help, his daughter had died. Everyone assumes that it is too late and so naturally concludes that there is no use to “bother the teacher anymore.” They need mourners now; it is too late for healers. Jesus is a great “teacher” but has power over illness only as long as there is life. Jairus had shown a modicum of faith when he had thrown himself at Jesus’s feet earlier. Now he needs more faith—the woman’s faith commended by Jesus in 5:34. He must “believe” like she did. As in 4:40, fear is the antithesis of faith, an earth-centered rather than God-centered reaction to life’s tragedies. As David Garland says, Jairus must realize “that faith is something that trusts in the midst of hopelessness.”4
5:37 He did not let anyone follow him except Peter, James and John. Jesus keeps all his followers back except the inner circle of his disciples. There are four concentric circles of followers named: the 120 (Acts 1:15), the seventy (or seventy-two [Luke 10:1]), the Twelve (Mark 3:13–19), and these three, probably those closest to Jesus (cf. Mark 9:2; 13:3; 14:33).
5:39 The child is not dead but asleep. As in 5:35, the people have entirely lost faith in Jesus’s authority to heal, and the professional mourners (common at ancient funerals) have taken over. This was common at Jewish funerals (cf. Phil. 2:27: “sorrow upon sorrow”), but Jesus, as at the death of Lazarus (John 11:33), wanted more. Some have taken “not dead but asleep” to indicate a coma, but 5:35 implies that she was dead. People of that day were well acquainted with death, and when everyone “laughs” at Jesus’s remark, that points strongly to the reality of the little girl’s death (but also to their lack of faith). So Jesus meant that in the eternal sense she was only asleep (a common first-century euphemism for death but used in an ironic sense here) and was soon to come back to life.
5:41 Talitha koum! The mourners lack faith, so Jesus leaves them outside and brings only the parents and his disciples into the place of healing. In one sense, this is a harbinger of the future resurrection of Jesus and of all believers, but in another sense, all biblical raisings from the dead are resuscitations,5 for all would have to die again. Still, Mark’s transliteration of the Aramaic words said by Jesus (“Little girl, get up!”) is intended to add a poignancy and power to the scene.6We are allowed to hear his actual words; this is not a magic formula but a dramatic touch. The miracle is instantaneous; she starts to walk and is ready to eat.
5:43 strict orders not to let anyone know about this. This seems almost an absurd demand. Who can keep quiet when a little girl is raised from the dead? Yet the messianic secret has already been seen in 1:34, 44; 3:12 and will be seen again in 7:36; 8:30; 9:9 (see at 1:34). Here it means that the true meaning behind the miracle cannot be known until the resurrection (also 9:9), and that the crowds cannot understand the true nature of Jesus. They think of him only as a wonder-worker and future conquering king.
Theological Insights
Jesus not only has control over the cosmic powers but also is sovereign over the human dilemma of sickness and death. Our God is a healing God, filled with compassion for his suffering and beleaguered people. He raises up his people, asking only that we place our trust in him. Our response must be faith in his greater will, for we know that in all things good will emerge from our trials (Rom. 8:28). Physical healing is a harbinger of our future resurrection, and we must learn to rely on his loving presence in our lives.
Teaching the Text
1. Faith allows us to participate in God’s healing power. Recent preaching on faith healing (which seems often to be linked with “prosperity preaching”) has dangerously and heretically made God subservient rather than sovereign in this world. Some wrongly believe that God must respond to our prayers and can never say no. This is not the God of the Bible but rather a human construct that is non-Christian at the core. Our faith does not tell God what to do. He is sovereign and has the perfect right to say no to our requests and give us what we need rather than what we want. Nor does the degree of our faith influence God’s healing power. If we are not healed, the reason is not that our faith was insufficient but that God has sovereignly decided that healing is not best (Rom. 8:28) for us at this time. Faith allows us to participate spiritually in the healing process, but it does not control God. David Garland says faith does two things: it “opens the door to the power of God,” for it surrenders the situation to God at work, and it “shows persistence in overcoming any obstacles,” for it responds to serious situations with bold action in responding to Christ’s presence.7
2. The “love hermeneutic” prioritizes compassion. When faced with a need or an illness, Jesus never allowed Jewish legal codes to deter him from helping others. Again and again he got into trouble with the authorities for breaking the oral tradition (Sabbath rules, food laws, etc.) in order to heal someone seriously ill. Compassion outweighed cultic expectations for Jesus. In the process Jesus transformed an unclean situation into something ritually pure, for he brought the presence of God and the Spirit into that troublesome circ*mstance. All things are made clean by the presence and love of Jesus. His concern overrides all difficult conditions.
3. Death is not so much an end as a beginning. The raising of the little girl is a harbinger of Jesus’s resurrection and therefore of the future resurrection of all of us for whom Jesus’s resurrection is the “firstfruits” (1Cor. 15:20, 23). Her death was temporary, as Jesus raised her once more to life. Our death will be far more temporary, for it will immediately be transformed into a life that will be everlasting. Death is the “last enemy” (1Cor. 15:26), and it devastates every person, but in Christ it has been decisively defeated, once and for all. Death is sorrow and grief (John 11:35; Phil. 2:27), but it also means the cessation of earthly suffering as well as the immediate transportation of each of us into the very presence of God (2Cor. 5:8; Phil. 1:21–23). It does denote the end of our earthly existence, but far more, it is the beginning of our eternal joy.
Illustrating the Text
Faith and healing
Story: The thirteen-year-old, angry with her mother, said, “You obviously don’t love me!” The mom had told her daughter that she could not attend the middle-school party. The child had begged to attend; everyone was going to be there, and all the other parents had given their consent. But the mom had other concerns. She was not confident in the supervision of the party. She also knew that her family would pay a price for a few days if her daughter did not get a good night’s sleep before they left the next day for a family vacation. The mother made her decision based on what was best for the girl and for the family. But the daughter could only see that she was not getting what she wanted.
This gives us a glimpse into the correlation between faith and healing. There are times when in faith we bring our needs to God and our prayers are not answered in the way we would like. What happened? Did we lack faith or did God have a bigger picture and a different perspective when it came to our request? When God answers, “No” or “Not now,” it is not that we lack faith or that he does not love us. Rather, God has a better plan for his glory.
The importance of bold requests
Quote: Eugene Peterson. Have you ever thought about prayer as an act of boldness? If God is sovereign over the universe and really does love us, then prayer is a way we engage boldly and powerfully in a broken world. Consider these words:
Prayeris not a leisure-time activity. Matters of life and death, salvation and judgment, suffering and justice, peace and war, recrimination and reconciliation are being worked out in our families and among our neighbors all the time, in our nation and our world all the time. We must not be silent and passive spectators to any of it. We find ourselves, quite miraculously, on the front lines, where God’s praying people have always found themselves.8
The compassionate ministry of Jesus
Film: City Slickers. In this 1991 movie there is a powerful conversation between Curly (the cowboy played by Jack Palance) and Mitch (the city slicker played by Billy Crystal):
Curly: “Do you know what the secret of life is?”
Mitch: “No, what?”
Curly: [He holds up one finger.] “This.”
Mitch: “Your finger?”
Curly: “One thing. Just one thing. You stick to that, and everything else don’t mean [nothing].”
Mitch: “That’s great. But what’s the one thing?”
Curly: “That’s what you’ve got to figure out.”
Jesus knew the “one thing.” He was committed to glorifying God by living in perfect obedience to the Father. In this way Jesus perfectly lived out the nature and purpose of God, and this obedience included embodying God’s compassion for the world. What we see in the compassion of Jesus, in healing the woman and raising the daughter of Jairus from the dead, is the compassion of God. We are to live out God’s nature and purposes as well as we seek to glorify him through our obedience.
Teaching the Text by Grant R. Osborne, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
Direct Matches
The word for “blood” in the Bible is used both literally and metaphorically. “Blood” is a significant biblical term for understanding purity boundaries and theological concepts. Blood is a dominant ritual symbol in biblical literature. Blood was used in sacrifices and purification rites, and it was inherently connected to menstruation, animal slaughter, and legal culpability. Among the physical properties of blood are the ability to coagulate, the liquid state of the substance (Rev. 16:34), and the ability to stain (Rev. 19:13). Blood can symbolize moral order in terms of cult, law, and power.
The usage of blood in the OT is predominantly negative. The first direct mention of blood in the biblical text involves a homicide (Gen. 4:10). Henceforward, the shedding of human blood is a main concern (Gen. 9:6). Other concerns pertaining to blood include dietary prohibitions of blood (Lev. 17:10–12), purity issues such as the flow of blood as in menstrual blood (Lev. 15:19–24), and blood as a part of religious rites such as circumcision (Gen. 17:10–11; Exod. 4:24–26).
Leviticus 17:11 contains a central statement in the OT concerning the significant role of blood in the sacrificial system: “The life of a creature is in the blood.” Blood was collected from all animal sacrifices, and blood was poured onto the altar (Lev. 1:5).
The covenant with Abraham was sealed with a covenantal ritual (Gen. 15:10–21). Moses sealed the covenant between the Israelites and God with a blood ritual during which young Israelite men offered young bulls among other sacrifices as fellowship offerings (Exod. 24:5). Moses read the words of the Book of the Covenant and sprinkled the blood of the bulls on the people, saying, “This is the blood of the covenant that the Lord has made with you in accordance with all these words” (Exod. 24:7–8).
During the Passover observance at the time of the exodus, blood was placed on the sides and tops of the doorframes of the Hebrews (Exod. 12:7). Not only altars were sprinkled and thus consecrated with blood, but priests were as well. Aaron and his sons were consecrated by the application of blood to their right earlobe, thumb, and big toe, and the sprinkling of blood and oil on their garments (Exod. 29:20). On the Day of Atonement, the high priest entered the holy of holies and sprinkled blood on the mercy seat to seek atonement for the sins of the people (Lev. 16:15).
Many events in the passion of Christ include references to blood. During the Last Supper, Jesus redefined the last Passover cup: “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins” (Matt. 26:28). Judas betrayed “innocent blood” (Matt. 27:4), and the money he received for his betrayal was referred to as “blood money” (Matt. 27:6). At Jesus’ trial, Pilate washed his hands and declared, “I am innocent of this man’s blood” (Matt. 27:24).
The apostle Paul wrote that believers are justified by the blood of Christ (Rom. 5:9). This justification or righteous standing with God was effected through Christ’s blood sacrifice (Rom. 3:25–26; 5:8). The writer of Hebrews stressed the instrumental role of blood in bringing about forgiveness (Heb. 9:22). In the picture of the ideal community of Christ, the martyrs in the book of Revelation are situated closest to the throne of God because “they triumphed over him [Satan] by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony; they did not love their lives so much as to shrink from death” (Rev. 12:11). The blood of the Lamb, Christ, is the effective agent here and throughout the NT, bringing about the indirect contact between sinner and God.
Faith in the context of the OT rests on a foundation that the person or object of trust, belief, or confidence is reliable. Trust in Yahweh is expressed through loyalty and obedience. The theme of responsive obedience is emphasized in the Torah (Exod. 19:5). In the later history of Israel, faithfulness to the law became the predominant expression of faith (Dan. 1:8; 6:10). OT faith, then, is a moral response rather than abstract intellect or emotion.
Faith is a central theological concept in the NT. In relational terms, faith is foremost personalized as the locus of trust and belief in the person of Jesus Christ.
In the Gospels, Jesus is spoken of not as the subject of faith (as believing in God), but as the object of faith. In the Synoptic Gospels, faith is seen most often in connection with the ministry of Jesus. Miracles, in particular healings, are presented as taking place in response to the faith of the one in need of healing or the requester. In the Gospel of John, faith (belief) is presented as something that God requires of his people (6:2829).
In the book of Acts, “faith/belief” is used to refer to Jews and Gentiles converting to following the life and teachings of Jesus Christ and becoming part of the Christian community. The book correlates faith in Christ closely with repentance (Acts 11:21; 19:18; 20:21; 26:18).
Paul relates faith to righteousness and justification (Rom. 3:22; 5:11; Gal. 3:6). In Ephesians faith is shown as instrumental in salvation: “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God” (2:8).
In Hebrews, faith is described as “being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see” (11:1). Faith thus is viewed as something that can be accomplished in the life of the believer—a calling of God not yet tangible or seen. To possess faith is to be loyal to God and to the gospel of Jesus Christ despite all obstacles. In the Letter of James, genuine works naturally accompany genuine faith. Works, however, are expressed in doing the will of God. The will of God means, for example, caring for the poor (James 2:15–16).
In 1Peter, Christ is depicted as the broker of faith in God (1:21), whereas in 2Peter and Jude faith is presented as received from God (2Pet. 1:1). In the Letters of John “to believe” is used as a litmus test for those who possess eternal life: “You who believe in the name of the Son of God, ... you have eternal life” (1John 5:13).
People in the Bible were family-centered and staunchly loyal to their kin. Families formed the foundation of society. The extended family was the source of people’s status in the community and provided the primary economic, educational, religious, and social interactions.
Marriage and divorce. Marriage in the ancient Near East was a contractual arrangement between two families, arranged by the bride’s father or a male representative. The bride’s family was paid a dowry, a “bride’s price.” Paying a dowry was not only an economic transaction but also an expression of family honor. Only the rich could afford multiple dowries. Thus, polygamy was minimal. The wedding itself was celebrated with a feast provided by the father of the groom.
The primary purpose for marriage in the ancient Near East was to produce a male heir to ensure care for the couple in their old age. The concept of inheritance was a key part of the marriage customs, especially with regard to passing along possessions and property.
Marriage among Jews in the NT era still tended to be endogamous; that is, Jews sought to marry close kin without committing incest violations (Lev. 18:617). A Jewish male certainly was expected to marry a Jew. Exogamy, marrying outside the remote kinship group, and certainly outside the ethnos, was understood as shaming God’s holiness. Thus, a Jew marrying a Gentile woman was not an option. The Romans did practice exogamy. For them, marrying outside one’s kinship group (not ethnos) was based predominantly on creating strategic alliances between families.
Greek and Roman law allowed both men and women to initiate divorce. In Jewish marriages, only the husband could initiate divorce proceedings. If a husband divorced his wife, he had to release her and repay the dowry. Divorce was common in cases of infertility (in particular if the woman had not provided male offspring). Ben Sira comments that barrenness in a woman is a cause of anxiety to the father (Sir. 42:9–10). Another reason for divorce was adultery (Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18). Jesus, though, taught a more restrictive use of divorce than the OT (Mark 10:1–12).
Children and parenting. Childbearing was considered representative of God’s blessing on a woman and her entire family, in particular her husband. In contrast to this blessing, barrenness brought shame on women, their families, and specifically their husbands.
Children were of low social status in society. Infant mortality was high. An estimated 60percent of the children in the first-century Mediterranean society were dead by the age of sixteen.
Ancient Near Eastern and Mediterranean societies exhibited a parenting style based on their view of human nature as a mixture of good and evil tendencies. Parents relied on physical punishment to prevent evil tendencies from developing into evil deeds (Prov. 29:15). The main concern of parents was to socialize the children into family loyalty. Lack of such loyalty was punished (Lev. 20:9). At a very early stage children were taught to accept the total authority of the father. The rearing of girls was entirely the responsibility of the women. Girls were taught domestic roles and duties as soon as possible so that they could help with household tasks.
Family identity was used as a metaphor in ancient Israel to speak of fidelity, responsibility, judgment, and reconciliation. In the OT, the people of Israel often are described as children of God. In their overall relationship to God, the people of Israel are referred to in familial terms—sons and daughters, spouse, and firstborn (Exod. 4:22). God is addressed as the father of the people (Isa. 63:16; 64:8) and referred to as their mother (Isa. 49:14–17).
The church as the family of God. Throughout his ministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a call to loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26), a call to fictive kinship, the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50; Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock I will build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call to community. Entrance into the community was granted through adopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and the initiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–63; John 1:12; 3:16; 10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9). Jesus’ presence as the head of the community was eventually replaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18). Through the Spirit, Jesus’ ministry continues in the community of his followers, God’s family—the church. See also Adoption.
In Proverbs, the phrase “fountain [maqor] of life” refers to the mouth of a righteous man (10:11), the law of the wise (13:14; cf. 18:4), the fear of the Lord (14:27; cf. Ps. 36:9), and understanding (Prov. 16:22). Similarly, Jer. 2:13 describes God as a fountain of living water, an idea echoed in Rev. 21:6. In Prov. 5:18 the fountain (along with wells, cisterns, streams, and springs) symbolizes the fecundity of marriage.
The “fountains of the deep” mentioned in Gen. 7:11; 8:2 (NIV: “springs of the deep”); Prov. 8:28 refer to a particular aspect of ancient cosmology: the notion that the terrestrial earth is supported by pillars (see Job 9:6; Ps. 75:3) above a subterranean sea. In the story of the great flood, the “fountains” of this sea, the “great deep,” were a source of the waters of the flood.
The word “hemorrhage” is sometimes used to refer to a “flow of blood” or “discharge of blood” related to a woman’s reproductive organs (Lev. 12:7; cf. Matt. 9:20), which rendered her ritually unclean. The impurity of menstruation made a woman unclean for seven days and was transmitted to anyone or anything she touched (Lev. 15:1924). Thus, sexual intercourse with a woman during this period was prohibited (Lev. 18:19; 20:18; cf. Ezek. 22:10). A woman suffering from irregular or prolonged bleeding was considered clean only after the bleeding had ceased for seven days (Lev. 15:25–28). Jesus healed a woman who had been suffering from bleeding for twelve years (Matt. 9:20–22; Mark 5:25–34; Luke 8:43–48). Instead of Jesus becoming unclean by her touching his garment, the power of his holiness cleansed her. The woman, who had been excluded from worshiping in the temple due to her physical “uncleanness” (Lev. 15:31), was transformed by grace and now a member of Jesus’ new family.
The father of a twelve-year-old girl whom Jesus raised from the dead (Matt. 9:1826; Mark 5:21–43; Luke 8:40–56). All three Synoptic accounts of this story record that Jesus, on his way to Jairus’s house, healed a woman who had suffered with a hemorrhage for twelve years. Only Mark and Luke name Jairus and identify him as a synagogue leader; Matthew, who shortens the story in several respects to include only the basic elements, merely calls him “a synagogue leader.”
The name “James” is a form of the name “Jacob” (Heb. Ya’aqob; Gk. Iakōbos), which was very popular in the first century. In the NT there are five individuals named “James.”
(1)James the son of Zebedee and the older brother of John. He was martyred by Herod AgrippaI in AD 40 (Mark 1:19; 3:17; Acts 12:2).
(2)James the son of Alphaeus we know very little about other than that he is consistently listed among the disciples (Mark 3:18; Matt. 10:3; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13).
(3)James “the younger” (Mark 15:40), whose mother, named “Mary,” appears in Mark 16:1 just as the “mother of James.” In church tradition, he is sometimes identified with James the son of Alphaeus.
(4)James the father of Judas (Luke 6:16; Acts 1:13) is mentioned only to distinguish this Judas from Judas Iscariot.
(5)James the brother of Jesus was an early leader of the Jerusalem church (Matt. 13:55; Mark 6:3; Acts 12:17; 15:1331; 21:18; 1Cor. 15:7; Gal. 1:19; 2:9, 12; Jude 1). A number of Jesus’ family members became prominent leaders in the early Christian movement in Palestine, James being the most prominent.
A common name in first-century Judaism. The Greek name Iōannēs comes from the Hebrew name “Yohanan.” (1)The Baptist or Baptizer, he was the son of the priest Zechariah and Elizabeth. (See John the Baptist.) (2)The son of Zebedee, he was an apostle originally belonging to the inner circle of the twelve main disciples of Jesus. (See John the Apostle.) (3) John Mark, a cousin of Barnabas (Col. 4:10) and the son of Mary (Acts 12:12). (See Mark, John.) (4)The elder. Both 2John and 3John claim authorship by “the elder” (2John 1; 3John 1). Traditionally, all three Johannine Letters, the Gospel of John, and sometimes the Revelation of John have been attributed to John the apostle. However, modern scholarship often attributes 2John and 3John, and sometimes 1John, to “the elder”—John the elder. (5)The seer, the author of the book of Revelation (see 1:1, 4, 9; 22:8). Some scholars ascribe the authorship of Revelation to John the apostle, in line with the view of the church father Irenaeus. Other scholars ascribe the writing of Revelation to a certain John the elder. The book of Revelation does not further identify the author. However, the author is among the prophets, a seer, and his name is “John”—hence, John the seer.
Simon Peter is the best-known and the most colorful of Jesus’ twelve disciples. The name “Peter” means “rock” in Greek. In some biblical texts, he is also called “Cephas,” which is the Aramaic word for “rock” (see esp. John 1:42). Despite the ups and downs of Peter’s spiritual life, God was able to use him as the foundational apostle for the establishment of the NT church.
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).
“Salvation” is the broadest term used to refer to God’s actions to solve the plight brought about by humankind’s sinful rebellion and its consequences. It is one of the central themes of the entire Bible, running from Genesis through Revelation.
In many places in the OT, salvation refers to being rescued from physical rather than spiritual trouble. Fearing the possibility of retribution from his brother Esau, Jacob prays, “Save me, I pray, from the hand of my brother Esau” (Gen. 32:11). The actions of Joseph in Egypt saved many from famine (45:57; 47:25; 50:20). Frequently in the psalms, individuals pray for salvation from enemies that threaten one’s safety or life (Pss. 17:14; 18:3; 70:1–3; 71:1–4; 91:1–3).
Related to this usage are places where the nation of Israel and/or its king were saved from enemies. The defining example of this is the exodus, whereby God delivered his people from their enslavement to the Egyptians, culminating in the destruction of Pharaoh and his army (Exod. 14:1–23). From that point forward in the history of Israel, God repeatedly saved Israel from its enemies, whether through a judge (e.g., Judg. 2:16; 3:9), a king (2Kings 14:27), or even a shepherd boy (1Sam. 17:1–58).
But these examples of national deliverance had a profound spiritual component as well. God did not save his people from physical danger as an end in itself; it was the necessary means for his plan to save them from their sins. The OT recognizes the need for salvation from sin (Pss. 39:8; 51:14; 120:2) but, as the NT makes evident, does not provide a final solution (Heb. 9:1–10:18). One of the clearest places that physical and spiritual salvation come together is Isa. 40–55, where Judah’s exile from the land and prophesied return are seen as the physical manifestation of the much more fundamental spiritual exile that resulted from sin. To address that far greater reality, God announces the day when the Suffering Servant would once and for all take away the sins of his people (Isa. 52:13–53:12).
As in the OT, the NT has places where salvation refers to being rescued from physical difficulty. Paul, for example, speaks of being saved from various physical dangers, including execution (2Cor. 1:8–10; Phil. 1:19; 2Tim. 4:17). In the midst of a fierce storm, Jesus’ disciples cry out, “Lord, save us! We’re going to drown!” (Matt. 8:25). But far more prominent are the places in the Gospels and Acts where physical healings are described with the verb sōzō, used to speak of salvation from sin. The healing of the woman with the hemorrhage (Mark 5:25–34), the blind man along the road (Luke 18:35–43), and even the man possessed by a demon (Luke 8:26–39), just to name a few, are described with the verb sōzō. The same verb, however, is also used to refer to Jesus forgiving someone’s sins (Luke 7:36–50) and to his mission to save the lost from their sins (Luke 19:10). Such overlap is a foretaste of the holistic salvation (physical and spiritual) that will be completed in the new heaven and earth (Rev. 21–22). The NT Epistles give extensive descriptions of how the work of Jesus Christ saves his people from their sins.
While in the OT suffering is regularly an indication of divine displeasure (Lev. 26:1636; Deut. 28:20–68; Ps. 44:10–12; Isa. 1:25; cf. Heb. 10:26–31), in the NT it becomes the means by which blessing comes to humanity.
The Bible often shows that sinfulness results in suffering (Gen. 2:17; 6:5–7; Exod. 32:33; 2Sam. 12:13–18; Rom. 1:18; 1Cor. 11:27–30). Job’s friends mistakenly assume that he has suffered because of disobedience (Job 4:7–9; 8:3–4, 20; 11:6). Job passionately defends himself (12:4; 23:10), and in the final chapter of the book God commends Job and condemns his friends for their accusations (42:7–8; cf. 1:1, 22; 2:10). The writer makes clear that suffering is not necessarily evidence of sinfulness. Like Job’s friends, Jesus’ disciples assume that blindness is an indication of sinfulness (John 9:1–2). Jesus rejects this simplistic notion of retributive suffering (John 9:3, 6–7; cf. Luke 13:1–5).
The NT writers reveal that Jesus’ suffering was prophesied in the OT (Mark 9:12; 14:21; Luke 18:31–32; 24:46; Acts 3:18; 17:3; 26:22–23; 1Pet. 1:11; referring to OT texts such as Ps. 22; Isa. 52:13–53:12; Zech. 13:7). The Lord Jesus is presented as the answer to human suffering: (1)Through the incarnation, God’s Son personally experienced human suffering (Phil. 2:6–8; Heb. 2:9; 5:8). (2)Through his suffering, Christ paid the price for sin (Rom. 4:25; 3:25–26), so that believers are set free from sin (Rom. 6:6, 18, 22) and helped in temptation (Heb. 2:18). (3)Christ Jesus intercedes for his suffering followers (Rom. 8:34–35). (4)Christ is the example in suffering (1Pet. 2:21; 4:1; cf. Phil. 3:10; 2Cor. 1:5; 4:10; 1Pet. 4:13), and though he died once for sins (Heb. 10:12), he continues to suffer as his church suffers (Acts 9:4–5). (5)Christ provides hope of resurrection (Rom. 6:5; 1Cor. 15:20–26; Phil. 3:10–11) and a future life without suffering or death (Rev. 21:4).
The NT writers repeatedly mention the benefits of suffering, for it has become part of God’s work of redemption. The suffering of believers accompanies the proclamation and advancement of the gospel (Acts 5:41–42; 9:15–16; 2Cor. 4:10–11; 6:2–10; Phil. 1:12, 27–29; 1Thess. 2:14–16; 2Tim. 1:8; 4:5) and results in salvation (Matt. 10:22; 2Cor. 1:6; 1Thess. 2:16; 2Tim. 2:10; Heb. 10:39), faith (Heb. 10:32–34, 38–39; 1Pet. 1:7), the kingdom of God (Acts 14:22), resurrection from the dead (Phil. 3:10–11), and the crown of life (Rev. 2:10). It is an essential part of the development toward Christian maturity (Rom. 5:3–4; 2Cor. 4:11; Heb. 12:4; James 1:3–4; 1Pet. 1:7; 4:1).
Suffering is associated with knowing Christ (Phil. 3:10); daily inward renewal (2Cor. 4:16); purity, understanding, patience, kindness, sincere love, truthful speech, the power of God (2Cor. 4:4–10); comfort and endurance (2Cor. 1:6); obedience (Heb. 5:8); blessing (1Pet. 3:14; 4:14); glory (Rom. 8:17; 2Cor. 4:17); and joy (Matt. 5:12; Acts 5:41; 2Cor. 6:10; 12:10; James 1:2; 1Pet. 1:6; 4:13). Other positive results of Christian suffering include perseverance (Rom. 5:3; James 1:3), character and hope (Rom. 5:4), strength (2Cor. 12:10), and maturity and completeness (James 1:4). Present suffering is light and momentary when compared to future glory (Matt. 5:10–12; Acts 14:22; Rom. 8:18; 2Cor. 4:17; Heb. 10:34–36; 1Pet. 1:5–7; 4:12–13).
Throughout the Bible, believers are instructed to help those who suffer. The OT law provides principles for assisting the poor, the disadvantaged, and the oppressed (Exod. 20:10; 21:2; 23:11; Lev. 19:13, 34; 25:10, 35; Deut. 14:28–29; 15:1–2; 24:19–21). Jesus regularly taught his followers to help the poor (Matt. 5:42; 6:3; 19:21; 25:34–36; Luke 4:18; 12:33; 14:13, 21). It is believers’ responsibility to show mercy (Matt. 5:7; 9:13), be generous (Rom. 12:8; 2Cor. 8:7; 1Tim. 6:18), mourn with mourners (Rom. 12:15), carry other’s burdens (Gal. 6:1–2), and visit prisoners (Matt. 25:36, 43). See also Servant of the Lord.
In English, the word “synagogue” refers either to a Jewish congregation or to the place where that congregation meets. Synagogues of the biblical era functioned as both religious and civic centers for the Jewish community.
Since synagogues were institutions with a documented history no earlier than the third century BC, they are not mentioned in the OT. The Greek word from which the English one is derived does appear frequently in the LXX, but always with a general reference to a gathering, assembly, or meeting.
Synagogues frequently were locations of the teaching and healing ministry of Jesus. He began preaching the kingdom of God, teaching, and performing healing miracles in Galilean synagogues (Matt. 4:23; 9:35; 12:9; 13:54; Mark 1:21 29, 39; 3:1; 6:2; Luke 4:15–38, 44; 6:6–11; 13:10–17; John 6:59; 18:20). Later, the apostle Paul customarily initiated his mission work in the local synagogue at each of his destinations (Acts 9:19–20; 13:5, 14–15; 14:1; 17:1, 10, 17; 18:1–8; 19:8).
The last (and, from a twenty-first-century perspective, most controversial) use of the word “synagogue” in Scripture is the difficult phrase “synagogue of Satan” (Rev. 2:9; 3:9), which must be read in its context. This was written in response to the significant persecution in Asia Minor of the churches at Smyrna and Philadelphia by Jews who were in collusion with the Roman authorities. They were falsely accusing Jewish and Gentile Christian believers, creating unspeakable suffering for them. This phrase, intended to encourage Christian perseverance, implies that the churches in view represented true Israel, while their accusers were false Jews.
The KJV and RSV rendering of Jesus’ words in Mark 5:41 to Jairus’s daughter. The NIV, following a different manuscript tradition, reads “Talitha koum.” The underlying Aramaic phrase, talyetha’ koumi, literally means “Little girl, get up!” Mark’s addition of “I say to you” in his paraphrase accurately conveys the sense of the command. Matthew and Luke also record Jesus’ healing of Jairus’s daughter (Matt. 9:2326; Luke 8:49–56), but only Mark includes the Aramaic words that Jesus spoke.
In the Bible, woman is first encountered along with man in Gen. 1:2628. God created “man” in the plural, male and female, and commanded them to reproduce and to fill the earth and subdue it. Being created male and female is set in parallel to being created in the image of God. In the ancient Near East, perhaps the king would be thought of as the image of God. But in Genesis, not only is the first man the image of God, but the first woman participates in the image as well. This is all but unthinkable in the ancient world, and it suggests an unparalleled dignity and worth in womankind.
Genesis records that the human race fell through the instrumentality of a man, a woman, and the serpent. The serpent approached the woman, not the man. The woman was convinced by the serpent and ate the forbidden fruit. She gave some to her husband, who also ate it without saying a word. Thus, the woman can be blamed in part for the fall of the race. Adam was condemned because he “listened to [his] wife” (Gen. 3:17). Her judgment, for heeding the serpent, was pain in childbirth and a desire for her husband, who would rule over her (Gen. 3:16). The exact parameters of this judgment are unclear, but it appears that her desire will be for his position of leadership and will be perpetually frustrated.
Often in the Bible, women are motivated by their desire to have children. Rachel demanded of Jacob, “Give me children, or I’ll die!” (Gen. 30:1). She saw herself in competition with her sister, Leah, in this respect (30:8). The “fruit of the womb” is a reward, and like arrows, the blessed man’s quiver is full of them (Ps. 127:1–5). Note also the beatitude of Ps. 128:3: “Your wife will be like a fruitful vine within your house; your children will be like olive shoots around your table.”
In Genesis, the reproductive capability of slave girls is at the disposal of their owners. Thus, Rachel and Leah’s maidservants became surrogate mothers for a number of their sons (Gen. 30:3–10). Sarah also became frustrated at her inability to conceive, so she gave Hagar to Abraham. The result was great familial turmoil, finally resulting in the banishment of both Hagar and Ishmael, whom she bore to Abraham.
In the beginning, God joined one man and one woman together as husband and wife. But soon this idea was corrupted, and Lamech, a man from Cain’s lineage, is credited with the first polygamous marriage (Gen. 4:19). Although the patriarchs (such as Jacob) did have more than one wife, the household discontent and strife are what is highlighted in those stories, such as with Hagar. In the NT, an elder is to be, literally, a “one-woman man” (1Tim. 3:2; ESV, KJV: “the husband of one wife”), meaning monogamous.
The Torah contains significant legislation regarding women. The daughters of Zelophehad argued that their father died without sons, so in Canaan they were disinherited. God agreed and decreed that in Israel daughters would inherit land in the absence of sons. Only if there were no children at all would the land pass to other kin (Num. 27:1–11).
When a man made a vow, he must fulfill it, but a young woman’s vow was subject to her father. If he remained silent, the vow stood, but if he expressed disapproval, then she was freed from it. If she was married, her husband governed her vows, but if she was divorced, then there was no responsible male over her, and her vow was treated as a man’s (Num. 30:1–16).
Sexual intercourse was also regulated in the law of Moses, insofar as the act rendered both parties ritually impure (Lev. 15:18). Both must bathe and were unclean until evening. A woman’s menstrual discharge also made her unclean for a week. Everything she sat or lay upon was unclean, as was anyone who touched these things. She must wash and offer sacrifice to become clean again (15:18–31).
If a man discovered on his wedding night that his bride was not a virgin, he could accuse her publicly. If her parents provided evidence that she had in fact been a virgin, then the man was severely punished for lying and not allowed to divorce her (otherwise, it was simply a matter of writing a letter to divorce her [Deut. 24:1]). If her virginity could not be proved, she was to be put to death by stoning (Deut. 22:13–21).
In the case of a rape of a betrothed virgin, if it occurred in the city, both the rapist and the victim were stoned, since apparently she had failed to cry out for help and thus, the law assumed, consented to sexual intercourse. If she was raped in the countryside, only the man was killed. But if he raped a woman who was not spoken for, his punishment was that he must marry her without possibility of divorce (Deut. 22:23–29).
Numbers 5:11–31 treats cases where a husband was suspicious that his wife had been unfaithful—that is, a matter of covenantal jealousy. The unprovable was left to God to punish.
In the Bible, women sometimes are afforded dignity beyond what is expected in an ancient Near Eastern provenance. Hagar is the only woman in all ancient Near Eastern literature who gave a name to a deity (Gen. 16:13). In Judg. 4:4, Deborah “judged” Israel (despite the NIV’s “leading,” the underlying Hebrew verb indicates “judging,” as in the NRSV). Even as judge, however, she did not lead the army against the enemy general Sisera; Barak did so. But Barak was unwilling to undertake this mission unless Deborah went with him (4:8). Thus, God ensured that the prestige of killing Sisera went to a woman, Jael (4:9, 21). Another prominent woman was Huldah, to whom the priests turned for guidance when the law was rediscovered (2Kings 22:14).
Many biblical stories feature heroines. Mighty Pharaoh was undermined by two midwives in his attempt to destroy Israel (Exod. 1:15–21). Ruth the Moabite woman gave her name to the book that recounts her trek from Moab to Israel, including her famous oath of loyalty (Ruth 1:16–17). Esther too was a courageous woman whose book bears her name. Heroines are especially prominent in the Gospels, and the women there have the distinction of being the first to witness the risen Lord. Luke’s birth narrative is largely organized around Mary. Priscilla (with her husband) taught and helped to shape the early church (Acts 18:26). Paul lists many women in Rom. 16, calling them “deaconess,” “fellow worker,” and possibly even “apostle.”
Scripture also at times portrays various women as being temptations to men. Eve handed the fruit to Adam (Gen. 3:6). In the wilderness Israel worshiped Moabite gods in conjunction with sexual activity (Num. 25:1–9). Later, Israelites intermarried with Canaanite women, directly leading to worship of their idols (Judg. 3:6). Bathsheba was a temptation to David, and this began a series of events that marred his career as a man after God’s own heart. Solomon loved many foreign women, who turned him to worship their gods. After the exile, the Israelites were admonished by Nehemiah to put away their foreign wives lest history repeat itself (Neh. 13:26).
Women and marriage are used in the Bible as images for spiritual things. Paul writes that marital love mirrors the church’s relationship with Christ (Eph. 5:32–33). A man should love his wife as Christ loved the church. Revelation portrays the climax to human history in the figure of two women: the bride of Christ, adorned with righteous deeds for her husband (19:7–8), and the whor* Babylon, drunk on the blood of the saints (17:5–6). The consummation of the age is when one is judged and the other enters her eternal marital bliss.
The book of Proverbs also separates humankind into two groups, symbolized by two women. Along the path of life, the youth hears the voices of Woman Folly (9:13–18) and of Woman Wisdom (1:20–33) calling out to him. Folly is incarnated in the flesh-and-blood temptation of the immoral woman (7:6–27), whereas Woman Wisdom has her counterpart at the end of the book in the detailed description of the woman of virtue (31:10–31). There, the woman who fears God is set as a prize far above earthly wealth—the highest blessing of the wise.
Paul uses two women from sacred history to help explain his gospel of law versus grace. Hagar the slave woman represents the Mosaic covenant given at Sinai, and the earthly Jerusalem—that is, a mind-set of slavery that futilely attempts to earn God’s favor by works of the law. Sarah was the free woman, and her son was the promised son, who represents the heavenly Jerusalem, the new covenant, and freedom from the requirements of the law (Gal. 4:21–31). Again, two women symbolize two paths and two peoples—one being slaves, the other being God’s free people.
“Word” is used in the Bible to refer to the speech of God in oral, written, or incarnate form. In each of these uses, God desires to make himself known to his people. The communication of God is always personal and relational, whether he speaks to call things into existence (Gen. 1) or to address an individual directly (Gen. 2:1617; Exod. 3:14). The prophets and the apostles received the word of God (Deut. 18:14–22; John 16:13), some of which was proclaimed but not recorded. The greatest revelation in this regard is the person of Jesus Christ, who is called the “Word” of God (John 1:1, 14).
The psalmist declared God’s word to be an eternal object of hope and trust that gives light and direction (Ps. 119), and Jesus declared the word to be truth (John 17:17). The word is particularized and intimately connected with God himself by means of the key phrases “your word,” “the word of God,” “the word of the Lord,” “word about Christ,” and “the word of Christ” (Rom. 10:17; Col. 3:16). Our understanding of the word is informed by a variety of terms and contexts in the canon of Scripture, a collection of which is found in Ps. 119.
The theme of the word in Ps. 119 is continued and clarified in the NT, accentuating the intimate connection between the word of God and God himself. The “Word” of God is the eternal Lord Jesus Christ (John 1:1; 1John 1:1–4), who took on flesh and blood so that we might see the glory of the eternal God. The sovereign glory of Christ as the Word of God is depicted in the vision of John in Rev. 19:13. As the Word of God, Jesus Christ ultimately gives us our lives (John 1:4; 6:33; 10:10), sustains our lives (John 5:24; 6:51, 54; 8:51), and ultimately renders a just judgment regarding our lives (John 5:30; 8:16, 26; 9:39; cf. Matt. 25:31–33; Heb. 4:12).
Direct Matches
Affliction is a condition of physical, mental, or spiritualdistress, or the cause of suffering. Afflictions may be a variety oftemporal, physical sufferings, such as infertility (Gen. 25:32;1 Sam. 1:11), injustice and toil (Gen. 31:42), slavery (Exod.1:12; 3:7, 17; 4:31; Deut. 26:6–7; Neh. 9:9), militaryoppression (Judg. 2:18; 10:18), loss (Ruth 1:21), displacement andmocking (2 Sam. 16:12), disease and disorders (Mark 3:10; 5:29,34; Luke 7:21; John 5:4; Acts 28:8), and famine (Acts 7:11).Affliction may be mental or spiritual, arising from the prospects oreffects of physical afflictions, feeling the futility of life(Eccles. 1:13), or concern for others in their afflictions (Isa.63:9; 2 Cor. 2:4).
Thereare several different causes and reasons for affliction, but there isno simple formula for determining the cause of one’safflictions, as Job reminds us. Clearly, Job is blameless (Job 1:1,8; 2:3), but his friends carry on wrongly in their assumptions thathis sins are to blame. The agents of affliction include God (2 Kings17:20; Nah. 1:12), Satan and/or demons (Job 1:12; Acts 5:16), otherpeople (Judg. 10:8; 2 Thess. 1:6), oneself (1 Kings 18:28),or the general condition of life (Job 5:7).
Thereasons for affliction also vary. One reason might be called “noreason,” in that “man is born to trouble as surely assparks fly upward” (Job 5:7). Troubles, afflictions, and sorrowjust happen. In retrospect, this is a condition of living in a cursedworld (Gen. 3). But this is a general consequence for the whole humanrace, not a punishment directed at a specific sin. The widespreadafflictions of the curse appear random. In various forms they preventus from turning to easy living as a refuge from broken relationshipsand therefore force us to look elsewhere. The intent is that we lookto God (see Hos. 5:15). Multiple specific reasons, however, may liebehind any particular affliction. They include punishment for sin(Deut. 29:22), often to induce repentance leading to restoration(Hos. 5:15; Zech. 10:9; 1 Cor. 11:30). Affliction may be dealtout by people as they sin against others (1 Sam. 1:7; 2 Sam.16:12; 2 Thess. 1:6). One’s own choices may have naturalconsequences (Prov. 11:24; 13:20; 19:9, 15; 22:3), or consequencescome due to a lack of leadership (Zech. 10:2). Some result from beingassociated with those going through afflictions (Num. 14:28–35;1 Kings 2:26), suffering afflictions due to following Christ(Matt. 13:21; John 15:18–20; Acts 20:23), or feeling empathyfor the afflicted (2 Cor. 2:4). Other afflictions are given astraining, prevention, or refining (Isa. 48:10; Rom. 5:3–5;2 Cor. 12:7; Heb. 12:5–13). Suffering affliction may alsobe substitutionary, on behalf of others (Isa. 53:4–7; and thesubstitutionary atonement of Christ generally).
Inresponse to others’ afflictions, we are called to sympathy,compassion, comfort, and justice. Appropriate responses to our ownafflictions range from patient endurance for the cause of Christ(James 5:11) to lamenting (the psalms and Christ’s example,Matt. 27:46).
Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.
In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).
Articles of Clothing
A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.
In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).
Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).
The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).
In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).
Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).
Special Functions of Clothing
According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).
Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).
Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).
Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.
Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).
Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.
In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).
Articles of Clothing
A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.
In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).
Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).
The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).
In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).
Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).
Special Functions of Clothing
According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).
Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).
Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).
Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.
Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).
Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.
In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).
Articles of Clothing
A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.
In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).
Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).
The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).
In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).
Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).
Special Functions of Clothing
According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).
Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).
Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).
Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.
Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).
Leviticus 15:1–33 provides regulations concerningbodily discharges causing ritual impurity, including emissions ofsem*n, menstruation, and other discharges of blood or fluids (onchildbirth, see Lev. 12:7). Such discharges contaminated not only theperson with the discharge but also any object that such a persontouched, including beds, clothing, seats, and clay and woodenvessels. The impurity could be reversed by waiting for a specifiedperiod, washing, and offering a small sacrifice of birds. Impuritycould spread to anyone who contacted the impure persons or objects.Discharges disqualified men from serving as priests (Lev. 22:4).Jesus healed a woman who had been bleeding for twelve years, whichhad made her impure under the law of Lev. 15:25 (Mark 5:25–29pars.).
Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.
In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).
Articles of Clothing
A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.
In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).
Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).
The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).
In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).
Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).
Special Functions of Clothing
According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).
Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).
Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).
Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.
Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).
The restoration to full health of one who has been ill orinjured. The Bible makes a few brief references to standard “medical”attempts to heal people. For example, Jeremiah mentions a balm ofGilead (Jer. 8:22; 46:11), and Isaiah orders a “poultice offigs” to be applied to a boil on King Hezekiah (Isa. 38:21).But medical treatment in the biblical world was primitive and oftenbased more on superstition than on understanding. Before the adventof modern medicine, most injuries and sicknesses were quite serious;treatments and therapies were rarely effective. Most of the healingmentioned in the Bible, therefore, is of a miraculous nature andassociated with divine empowerment.
OldTestament.In the OT, the occurrences of healing miracles, as well as othermiracles, are not evenly distributed throughout Israel’shistory but instead are concentrated in two time periods: that of theexodus, and that of Elijah and Elisha (1Kings 17–2Kings13). During these two eras, miracles in general, and healing inparticular, authenticated God’s prophets and leaders andauthenticated the word of God spoken by these prophets and leaders.
TheOT prophets, Jeremiah in particular, frequently use the imagery ofwounds and sickness to describe the apostasy and the terriblespiritual situation of Israel and Judah. In his first twenty-ninechapters, while Jeremiah is bemoaning the fact that the people ofJudah have turned to other gods and refuse to repent, he regularlyuses imagery of sickness and wounds. He declares that Israel/Judah iswounded and/or sick, but that there is no healing for them, onlyjudgment. He asks, for example, “Is there no balm inGilead?... Why then is there no healing for thewound of my people?” (Jer. 8:22). This theme is repeated in thebook (8:15; 10:19; 14:19; 15:18).
InJer. 30–33, however, Jeremiah turns to the glorious restorationbrought about by the coming Messiah. Part of this gloriousrestoration, Jeremiah declares, will be a drastic reversal from atime of sickness with no healing (symbolizing sin and defiance) to atime characterized by healing and health. For example, in 30:12–15God uses physical sickness and wounds in his imagery to describe theserious, incurable spiritual sickness in Jerusalem. Yet in starkcontrast to statements like these, in the passages that follow Godlooks to the messianic future and proclaims, “But I willrestore you to health and heal your wounds” (30:17). Isaiahuses similar imagery, but he expands it by adding that people willultimately be healed through the suffering and the wounds (i.e., thedeath) of the coming Messiah (Isa. 53:4–5).
NewTestament.In the Gospels, healing is a significant component of Jesus’ministry. Although the prophets used sickness/healing imageryprimarily in a metaphorical sense to describe the spiritual conditionof Israel and Judah, Jesus actually fulfills their prophecies bothfiguratively and literally. That is, not only does Jesus heal peoplespiritually, providing forgiveness and restoration to wholeness, butalso he frequently heals people physically (blindness, leprosy,paralysis, etc.), ironically fulfilling figurative prophecies in aliteral manner. The Greek word for “to save” (sōzō)can also mean “to heal,” thus adding to this dual idea ofliteral healing that is also figurative of spiritual salvation. Forexample, when Jesus turns to the bleeding woman who touches him infaith, he declares to her, “Your faith has healed [sōzō]you” (Mark 5:34). Here the word sōzō can indicateeither physical healing (her bleeding had stopped) or spiritualhealing (forgiveness of sins and deliverance from judgment).
Jesusfrequently heals people throughout his ministry here on earth. Hisacts of healing authenticate him as the fulfillment of specific OTmessianic prophecies and also highlight the fact that he comes ingreat power, a power that identifies him with the Lord, the greathealer in the OT. In addition, Jesus’ acts of healing announceand characterize the inbreaking of the kingdom of God, underscoringthat in the ultimate consummation of the kingdom all sickness (aswell as blindness, leprosy, lameness, etc.) will be eliminated. Thistheme is continued at the end of the book of Revelation as Johndepicts the tree of life growing on both sides of the river of thewater of life. The leaves from this tree, John concludes, “arefor the healing of the nations” (22:1–2).
The word “hemorrhage” is sometimes used to referto a “flow of blood” or “discharge of blood”related to a woman’s reproductive organs (Lev. 12:7; cf. Matt.9:20), which rendered her ritually unclean. The impurity ofmenstruation made a woman unclean for seven days and was transmittedto anyone or anything she touched (Lev. 15:19–24). Thus, sexualintercourse with a woman during this period was prohibited (Lev.18:19; 20:18; cf. Ezek. 22:10). A woman suffering from irregular orprolonged bleeding was considered clean only after the bleeding hadceased for seven days (Lev. 15:25–28). Jesus healed a woman whohad been suffering from bleeding for twelve years (Matt. 9:20–22;Mark 5:25–34; Luke 8:43–48). Instead of Jesus becomingunclean by her touching his garment, the power of his holinesscleansed her. The woman, who had been excluded from worshiping in thetemple due to her physical “uncleanness” (Lev. 15:31),was transformed by grace and now a member of Jesus’ new family.
The word “hemorrhage” is sometimes used to referto a “flow of blood” or “discharge of blood”related to a woman’s reproductive organs (Lev. 12:7; cf. Matt.9:20), which rendered her ritually unclean. The impurity ofmenstruation made a woman unclean for seven days and was transmittedto anyone or anything she touched (Lev. 15:19–24). Thus, sexualintercourse with a woman during this period was prohibited (Lev.18:19; 20:18; cf. Ezek. 22:10). A woman suffering from irregular orprolonged bleeding was considered clean only after the bleeding hadceased for seven days (Lev. 15:25–28). Jesus healed a woman whohad been suffering from bleeding for twelve years (Matt. 9:20–22;Mark 5:25–34; Luke 8:43–48). Instead of Jesus becomingunclean by her touching his garment, the power of his holinesscleansed her. The woman, who had been excluded from worshiping in thetemple due to her physical “uncleanness” (Lev. 15:31),was transformed by grace and now a member of Jesus’ new family.
The father of a twelve-year-old girl whom Jesus raised fromthe dead (Matt. 9:18–26; Mark 5:21–43; Luke 8:40–56).All three Synoptic accounts of this story record that Jesus, on hisway to Jairus’s house, healed a woman who had suffered with ahemorrhage for twelve years. Only Mark and Luke name Jairus andidentify him as a synagogue leader; Matthew, who shortens the storyin several respects to include only the basic elements, merely callshim “a synagogue leader.”
In the Bible, “laugh” rarely denotes a responseto humor. Most prominent in the Scriptures is the laugh of scorn orderision. Animals and humans can laugh at danger (Job 5:22; 39:7;Prov. 31:25). God laughs at those who oppose him (Pss. 2:4; 37:13;59:8), and Wisdom laughs at those who ignore her (Prov. 1:26). Peoplecan become laughingstocks to others (Exod. 32:25; Lam. 3:14). Jesuswas laughed at in ridicule (Matt. 9:24; Mark 5:40; Luke 8:53).
Laughteris prominent throughout the narrative of Isaac’s birth. BothAbraham (Gen. 17:17) and Sarah (18:12) laughed when they heard thatIsaac would be born to them in their old age. When Isaac, whose namemeans “he laughs” (see 17:19 NIV mg.), was born, Sarahspoke of the laughter that God had brought to her and that otherswould have (21:6).
Furthermore,the biblical writers often contrast laughter with mourning. In suchinstances, laughter represents feelings of happiness or joy (Eccles.3:4; Luke 6:21, 25; James 4:9).
A transliteration of the Greek word synagōgē,meaning “gathering, assembly, meeting.” In English, theword “synagogue” refers either to a Jewish congregationor to the place where that congregation meets. Synagogues of thebiblical era functioned as both religious and civic centers for theJewish community.
Origins
Theorigin of synagogues is uncertain. The earliest archaeologicalevidence is from Egypt in the third century BC, consisting ofinscriptions and a papyrus letter. The oldest architectural find isfrom the island of Delos in the Aegean Sea, although whether this wasconstructed as a synagogue or redesigned into one is unknown, as iswhether it was Jewish or Samaritan. The oldest structures yet foundin Israel consist of two rooms at Qumran and the synagogue at Gamla,which date from the late first century BC. In Capernaum, the basaltsynagogue was built by a Gentile centurion for the community in thefirst century AD (Luke 7:1–5).
Bythat time, synagogues were well attested in Israel, elsewhere in theRoman Empire, and in Egypt (Matt. 4:23; Luke 4:44; Acts 9:2; 17:10,16–17; 18:8, 19). Synagogues were found wherever there werecommunities of Jews, in cities and rural areas alike. Especially inDiaspora settings or remote locations, they were the heart of Jewishlife. Several hypotheses have been suggested to account for theirapparently sudden appearance.
Somebelieve that synagogues were developed during the Babyloniancaptivity as the response of the exile community to the destructionof their temple and sacrificial system. Despite these enormouslosses, the Jews still had the Torah, and from that point forwardworship and prayer based on the reading and studying of theScriptures, which could be done locally, began to gain ascendancy.Critics of this idea, however, point out that while it makes sense,there is no direct evidence to support it.
Othersthink that the spread of Hellenism in the second century BCprecipitated a crisis of identity among Jews. For example,1Maccabees reports with distress that some Jews had abandonedthe covenant and teamed with the Hellenists, even going so far as tobuild a Greek-style gymnasium in Jerusalem (1:11–15). Thus, thethought is that synagogues were a form of resistance to theoverwhelming and perversely appealing cultural changes of the day.
Morerecently, it has been suggested that synagogues were the gradualsuccessors to functions that had previously taken place at citygates. First-century synagogues served a wide range of functions forthe community. Throughout Israel’s prior history, however,these same activities—assembly, legal, social, educational, andreligious—had taken place at the city gate (Deut. 12:15; 2Sam.15:2; 2Kings 23:8; Neh. 8:1–8). The Gamla synagogue sitsagainst the east city wall next to a probable gate, and its locationcould be evidence of the slow development of the synagogue as citygates changed from multipurpose facilities to portals of ingress andegress.
First-CenturySynagogues
First-centurysynagogues served as integrated centers supporting Jewish life.Regular communal reading and exposition of Scripture, includingteaching and discussion of the law and transmission of its complexassociated traditions (Luke 4:16; Acts 13:14–15), occurredthere. Although formal liturgical rites evolved after the destructionof the temple in AD 70, synagogues were places of prayer in the firstcentury (Matt. 6:5). Synagogues also served as courtrooms and placeswhere crimes were punished (Acts 22:19), as well as locations forcommon meals and festivals (see Acts 6:2).
Synagogueswere administered by local community leaders, including a presidentand a board (Acts 13:15). Synagogue leaders named in the NT includeJairus (Mark 5:22; Luke 8:41), Crispus (Acts 18:8), and Sosthenes(Acts 18:17). The role of the leader was to preside over services, torule as the judge in court cases, to represent the community, andoften to act as a patron. The board served in an advisory role andassisted with teaching. A scribe maintained community records andtaught.
Congregationsincluded Pharisees, who advocated strict adherence to the law,although they were chided by Jesus for their false piety (Luke11:42–44). Women participated in the synagogue along with themen, and in some cases they were financial donors (cf. Luke 8:3).God-fearing Gentiles were welcomed (Acts 17:17). In Jerusalem,synagogues included both Hebrews and Jews from the Diaspora (Acts6:1, 9).
Asynagogue could be a designated room in a house or a discretebuilding. Most of the better archaeological evidence is later thanthe first century and reveals more clearly religious intentionalityin design than may have been characteristic earlier. This evidenceincludes the door facing Jerusalem, artistic temple motifs, a nichefor the Torah scrolls, and perimeter bench seating around an opencentral hall.
TheSynagogue in the Bible
Sincesynagogues were institutions with a documented history no earlierthan the third century BC, they are not mentioned in the OT. TheGreek word from which the English one is derived does appearfrequently in the LXX, but always with a general reference to agathering, assembly, or meeting.
Rabbinichistory (but not Scripture) makes reference to the “GreatSynagogue,” meaning a group of men who transmitted traditionsfrom the prophets to the earliest named rabbinic teachers. It isloosely based on Neh. 8–10, which describes the prayers andactions of the Jewish leaders who had returned from exile.
Synagoguesfrequently were locations of the teaching and healing ministry ofJesus. He began preaching the kingdom of God, teaching, andperforming healing miracles in Galilean synagogues (Matt. 4:23; 9:35;12:9; 13:54; Mark 1:21–29, 39; 3:1; 6:2; Luke 4:15–38,44; 6:6–11; 13:10–17; John 6:59; 18:20). Later, theapostle Paul customarily initiated his mission work in the localsynagogue at each of his destinations (Acts 9:19–20; 13:5,14–15; 14:1; 17:1, 10, 17; 18:1–8; 19:8).
Thelast (and, from a twenty-first-century perspective, mostcontroversial) use of the word “synagogue” in Scriptureis the difficult phrase “synagogue of Satan” (Rev. 2:9;3:9), which must be read in its context. This was written in responseto the significant persecution in Asia Minor of the churches atSmyrna and Philadelphia by Jews who were in collusion with the Romanauthorities. They were falsely accusing Jewish and Gentile Christianbelievers, creating unspeakable suffering for them. This phrase,intended to encourage Christian perseverance, implies that thechurches in view represented true Israel, while their accusers werefalse Jews. Similar language was used by the covenant-keepingcommunity in Qumran when, in the DSS, it referred to apostate Jews asa “congregation of Belial” and an “assembly ofhypocrites” (1QHa 10:22; 15:34).
A transliteration of the Greek word synagōgē,meaning “gathering, assembly, meeting.” In English, theword “synagogue” refers either to a Jewish congregationor to the place where that congregation meets. Synagogues of thebiblical era functioned as both religious and civic centers for theJewish community.
Origins
Theorigin of synagogues is uncertain. The earliest archaeologicalevidence is from Egypt in the third century BC, consisting ofinscriptions and a papyrus letter. The oldest architectural find isfrom the island of Delos in the Aegean Sea, although whether this wasconstructed as a synagogue or redesigned into one is unknown, as iswhether it was Jewish or Samaritan. The oldest structures yet foundin Israel consist of two rooms at Qumran and the synagogue at Gamla,which date from the late first century BC. In Capernaum, the basaltsynagogue was built by a Gentile centurion for the community in thefirst century AD (Luke 7:1–5).
Bythat time, synagogues were well attested in Israel, elsewhere in theRoman Empire, and in Egypt (Matt. 4:23; Luke 4:44; Acts 9:2; 17:10,16–17; 18:8, 19). Synagogues were found wherever there werecommunities of Jews, in cities and rural areas alike. Especially inDiaspora settings or remote locations, they were the heart of Jewishlife. Several hypotheses have been suggested to account for theirapparently sudden appearance.
Somebelieve that synagogues were developed during the Babyloniancaptivity as the response of the exile community to the destructionof their temple and sacrificial system. Despite these enormouslosses, the Jews still had the Torah, and from that point forwardworship and prayer based on the reading and studying of theScriptures, which could be done locally, began to gain ascendancy.Critics of this idea, however, point out that while it makes sense,there is no direct evidence to support it.
Othersthink that the spread of Hellenism in the second century BCprecipitated a crisis of identity among Jews. For example,1Maccabees reports with distress that some Jews had abandonedthe covenant and teamed with the Hellenists, even going so far as tobuild a Greek-style gymnasium in Jerusalem (1:11–15). Thus, thethought is that synagogues were a form of resistance to theoverwhelming and perversely appealing cultural changes of the day.
Morerecently, it has been suggested that synagogues were the gradualsuccessors to functions that had previously taken place at citygates. First-century synagogues served a wide range of functions forthe community. Throughout Israel’s prior history, however,these same activities—assembly, legal, social, educational, andreligious—had taken place at the city gate (Deut. 12:15; 2Sam.15:2; 2Kings 23:8; Neh. 8:1–8). The Gamla synagogue sitsagainst the east city wall next to a probable gate, and its locationcould be evidence of the slow development of the synagogue as citygates changed from multipurpose facilities to portals of ingress andegress.
First-CenturySynagogues
First-centurysynagogues served as integrated centers supporting Jewish life.Regular communal reading and exposition of Scripture, includingteaching and discussion of the law and transmission of its complexassociated traditions (Luke 4:16; Acts 13:14–15), occurredthere. Although formal liturgical rites evolved after the destructionof the temple in AD 70, synagogues were places of prayer in the firstcentury (Matt. 6:5). Synagogues also served as courtrooms and placeswhere crimes were punished (Acts 22:19), as well as locations forcommon meals and festivals (see Acts 6:2).
Synagogueswere administered by local community leaders, including a presidentand a board (Acts 13:15). Synagogue leaders named in the NT includeJairus (Mark 5:22; Luke 8:41), Crispus (Acts 18:8), and Sosthenes(Acts 18:17). The role of the leader was to preside over services, torule as the judge in court cases, to represent the community, andoften to act as a patron. The board served in an advisory role andassisted with teaching. A scribe maintained community records andtaught.
Congregationsincluded Pharisees, who advocated strict adherence to the law,although they were chided by Jesus for their false piety (Luke11:42–44). Women participated in the synagogue along with themen, and in some cases they were financial donors (cf. Luke 8:3).God-fearing Gentiles were welcomed (Acts 17:17). In Jerusalem,synagogues included both Hebrews and Jews from the Diaspora (Acts6:1, 9).
Asynagogue could be a designated room in a house or a discretebuilding. Most of the better archaeological evidence is later thanthe first century and reveals more clearly religious intentionalityin design than may have been characteristic earlier. This evidenceincludes the door facing Jerusalem, artistic temple motifs, a nichefor the Torah scrolls, and perimeter bench seating around an opencentral hall.
TheSynagogue in the Bible
Sincesynagogues were institutions with a documented history no earlierthan the third century BC, they are not mentioned in the OT. TheGreek word from which the English one is derived does appearfrequently in the LXX, but always with a general reference to agathering, assembly, or meeting.
Rabbinichistory (but not Scripture) makes reference to the “GreatSynagogue,” meaning a group of men who transmitted traditionsfrom the prophets to the earliest named rabbinic teachers. It isloosely based on Neh. 8–10, which describes the prayers andactions of the Jewish leaders who had returned from exile.
Synagoguesfrequently were locations of the teaching and healing ministry ofJesus. He began preaching the kingdom of God, teaching, andperforming healing miracles in Galilean synagogues (Matt. 4:23; 9:35;12:9; 13:54; Mark 1:21–29, 39; 3:1; 6:2; Luke 4:15–38,44; 6:6–11; 13:10–17; John 6:59; 18:20). Later, theapostle Paul customarily initiated his mission work in the localsynagogue at each of his destinations (Acts 9:19–20; 13:5,14–15; 14:1; 17:1, 10, 17; 18:1–8; 19:8).
Thelast (and, from a twenty-first-century perspective, mostcontroversial) use of the word “synagogue” in Scriptureis the difficult phrase “synagogue of Satan” (Rev. 2:9;3:9), which must be read in its context. This was written in responseto the significant persecution in Asia Minor of the churches atSmyrna and Philadelphia by Jews who were in collusion with the Romanauthorities. They were falsely accusing Jewish and Gentile Christianbelievers, creating unspeakable suffering for them. This phrase,intended to encourage Christian perseverance, implies that thechurches in view represented true Israel, while their accusers werefalse Jews. Similar language was used by the covenant-keepingcommunity in Qumran when, in the DSS, it referred to apostate Jews asa “congregation of Belial” and an “assembly ofhypocrites” (1QHa 10:22; 15:34).
The KJV and RSV rendering of Jesus’ words in Mark 5:41to Jairus’s daughter. The NIV, following a different manuscripttradition, reads “Talitha koum.” The underlying Aramaicphrase, talyetha’ koumi, literally means “Little girl,get up!” Mark’s addition of “I say to you” inhis paraphrase accurately conveys the sense of the command. Matthewand Luke also record Jesus’ healing of Jairus’s daughter(Matt. 9:23–26; Luke 8:49–56), but only Mark includes theAramaic words that Jesus spoke.
The KJV and RSV rendering of Jesus’ words in Mark 5:41to Jairus’s daughter. The NIV, following a different manuscripttradition, reads “Talitha koum.” The underlying Aramaicphrase, talyetha’ koumi, literally means “Little girl,get up!” Mark’s addition of “I say to you” inhis paraphrase accurately conveys the sense of the command. Matthewand Luke also record Jesus’ healing of Jairus’s daughter(Matt. 9:23–26; Luke 8:49–56), but only Mark includes theAramaic words that Jesus spoke.
To communicate the meaning of a text (oral or written) fromone language in another. At the time of Ezra, Levites read from theHebrew “Book of the Law of God,” conveying the “sense”in Aramaic (Neh. 8:1–8). By the first century, Aramaic portionsof the Law and the Prophets (Targumim) were read in Palestiniansynagogues, and a larger collection, traditionally called the“Seventy” (Septuagint), was translated into Greek inAlexandria, Egypt. These translations range from literal toperiphrastic, but with the aim of fidelity to the original. TheGospels occasionally translate Jesus’ Aramaic sayings (e.g.,Mark 5:41; John 1:42).
Grief is great sadness or sorrow or the circ*mstances thatproduce such; mourning refers to expressions of grief. Grief andmourning are often thought of in conjunction with death, but they mayoccur with regard to any personal or national tragedy (2Sam.13:19), the impending prospect of tragedy (Esther 4:3; Isa. 37:1), orrepentance prompted by prophetic word of tragedy, sorrow over sin, orboth.
Theexpressions of mourning in the Bible include weeping (Gen. 23:2),wailing (Esther 4:3; Isa. 15:3; Mark 5:38), tearing clothes andwearing sackcloth (Gen. 37:34; 2Sam. 3:31), lying on the ground(2Sam. 13:31), putting dust and ashes on the head or sitting ondust and ashes (Ezek. 27:30), fasting (2Sam. 3:35; 12:16),singing songs of lament (2Sam. 1:17–27; 3:32–35),pulling hair out of one’s beard (Ezra 9:3), cutting the hair(Jer. 7:29), uncovering the head (Lev. 10:6), removing sandals (Ezek.24:17, 23), covering the lips or mouth (Ezek. 24:17, 22; Mic. 3:7),and employing professional mourners (Jer. 9:17; Matt. 9:23; Mark5:38). Some pagan mourning practices were prohibited, such asslashing the body, cutting patterns into the body (tattooing?), andthe somewhat obscure act of making the forehead bald (Lev. 19:28;Deut. 14:1; cf. 1Kings 18:28).
Thus,grief and mourning were anything but stoic and brief. Grief wasexpressed both physically and vocally, often loudly, with expressionsranging from inarticulate groaning to poetic compositions in song.Although women may have been prominent among professional mourners,expressing grief was not considered unmasculine. Several times Davidwas a leader in expressing grief. That the expression of grief shouldbe brief, relatively dispassionate, and primarily characteristic ofwomen was a Greek development that entered the church through peoplesuch as Augustine, who, for example, felt grieved that he had verybriefly grieved the loss of his mother.
Paul’sadmonition that believers should not grieve as do those who have nohope (1Thess. 4:13) should not be construed as a dictum that itis wrong to grieve. The thought of the resurrection is a comfort in,not a replacement for, grief. Even Jesus wept at the death ofLazarus, knowing full well that he would soon resurrect him (John11:25, 35, 40). Further, saints who have died and gone to heavenlament (Rev. 6:10). Grief is restricted for active-duty priests andonce for Ezekiel, but these are clearly special circ*mstances andillustrate the normalcy of giving expression to grief. Ezekiel was tomoan with a groaning for the dead (often misread as groaningsilently) when his wife died, but he was not to engage in anymourning rites (Ezek. 24:15–27). This illustrated to Judah thecirc*mstances that they would face, without opportunity to mournproperly for their dead. Ezekiel 8:14 indicts the women of Jerusalemfor “mourning for Tammuz,” a pagan ritual involving thecycle of life, death, and rebirth of the Babylonian god Dumuzi.
Songsof lament are common in the OT. David composed a song of lamenthonoring the deaths of Saul and Jonathan (2Sam. 1:17–27).After Joab’s unauthorized killing of Abner, David also sang alament for Abner and required Joab to participate in mourning rituals(3:31–37). David also mourned his own sons: the unnamed son ofBathsheba (12:16–18), Amnon (13:30–33), and Absalom(18:33–19:4). In the case of Bathsheba’s son, Davidmourned in advance of the boy’s death, which had beenprophetically proclaimed through Nathan. As the consequences of hissins continued, he progressively became undone in the mourning of hisother sons. Also, funeral songs are used as the form of someprophetic material (Ezek. 19:1–14; 26:17–18; 27:2–9,25–36; cf. Jer. 22:18; Amos 5:16). Not all laments are funeralsongs perse. Compare also the book of Lamentations and thepsalms of lament, also known as complaint psalms.
Expressionsof grief and mourning were called for as part of repentance,combining both fear of punishment and depth of sorrow over sin(2Chron. 34:19; Isa. 15:3; Joel 1:13).
Secondary Matches
The following suggestions occured because
Mark 5:21-43
is mentioned in the definition.
Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.
In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).
Articles of Clothing
A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.
In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).
Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).
The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).
In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).
Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).
Special Functions of Clothing
According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).
Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).
Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).
Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.
Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).
Every faithful translation of the Bible is the word of God.In this respect, Christianity is very different from Islam, whichconsiders the Arabic version of the Qur’an exclusively holy. Itis true that only the original versions of the biblical books, whichwere written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, were verbally inspired,and this means that individual translations, like copies, can containerrors. Translations also necessarily involve some degree ofinterpretation. However, all language is created by God, and in theincarnation the Word became fully human as well as fully divine. InGod’s hands, every human language is as capable as any other ofexpressing his truth.
SincePentecost, the Holy Spirit has been at work to reverse the effect ofhuman sin at Babel (Gen. 11:9), not by reducing all languages to one,but by redeeming the diversity and richness of the world’slanguages so that all can hear God speak to them in their own tongue(Acts 2:1–11). Indeed, translations of Scripture themselvestransform the languages and cultures in which they are written,endowing them with new or revised concepts of God, humanity, sin, andthe means of salvation.
TheHistory of Translation
Bibletranslation began long before the Bible as we know it was complete.In the fifth century BC the Israelites who returned from exile spokeAramaic. Thus, they needed the Levites to translate the Hebrew lawfor them (Neh. 8:8). This Levitical teaching was probably an earlyexample of a Targum, a translation into Aramaic with interpretationand expansion. We do not know exactly when the Targumim began to bewritten down, but some of the earliest fragments that have been foundare among the DSS.
Byabout the third century BC the dominant languages of Palestine wereGreek and Aramaic. Many NT quotations from the OT use an establishedGreek translation of the OT. This was known as the Septuagint (LXX),after the legend that it was translated by seventy-two men, six fromeach tribe of Israel, on the orders of Ptolemy Philadelphus of Egypt(285–247 BC). The NT was written in similar “common”(koinē) Greek, but in some places the Gospels and Acts translatewords that Jesus and Paul originally spoke in Aramaic (Mark 5:41;15:34; Acts 21:40; 22:2; 26:14; see also John 5:2; 19:13, 17, 20;20:16).
UntilPentecost, God’s revelation was translated only into thelanguages spoken by the Jewish people in their everyday life. AtPentecost, however, the coming of the Holy Spirit was marked by adisplay of miraculous linguistic gifts, and a new era of Bibletranslation had begun (Acts 2). As Christians obeyed Christ’scommand to take the word of God into all the world, they began totranslate it into all the languages used by the growing church.
Withinthree centuries, Scripture was translated from the original Hebrew,Aramaic, and Greek into Syriac, Coptic, and Latin. The earliesttranslations into these languages were then revised and improved inthe subsequent centuries until some, such as Jerome’s LatinVulgate and the Syriac Pesh*tta, emerged as acknowledged standards.Other early translations included Ethiopic, Armenian, Georgian, andOld Slavonic. Many of these languages were already written, but asmissionaries ventured further, they sometimes had to start byreducing spoken languages to writing. Ulfilas, missionary to theGoths, was the first to do this.
Allof the thirty-three translations prior to the Reformation had to becopied out by hand, and almost all were “secondarytranslations” made from the Latin. Moreover, despite theefforts of early reformers such as John Wycliffe (AD 1330–84),the Catholic Church continued to use the Latin text itself, which wasaccessible only to the educated. In the sixteenth century, however,the printing press was invented, Renaissance scholars rediscoveredthe value of consulting texts in the original Hebrew and Greek, andProtestantism realized that believers need the Bible in their mothertongue.
Themost influential sixteenth-century translator into English wasWilliam Tyndale (1494–1536). His work on the NT and parts ofthe OT was gradually expanded and revised by other scholars,culminating in the 1611 King James Version, which is still widelyused. Meanwhile, other European translations were produced in German(by Martin Luther), Spanish, Hungarian, Portuguese, and French.
TheReformation also gave new momentum to mission outside Europe, and bythe end of the eighteenth century the number of languages having theBible had roughly doubled. A much greater global achievement,however, began in the nineteenth century, when the newly formed Biblesocieties, with other mission agencies, were instrumental in thetranslation and publication of portions of Scripture in over fourhundred languages. Famous translators from this century includeWilliam Carey in India, John Robert Morrison in China, Henry Martynin Persia, and Adoniram Judson in Burma. About five hundred moretranslations were added in the first half of the twentieth century.Progress was, nevertheless, slow. Many languages were difficult toanalyze, and it was particularly hard to produce translations thatread smoothly, using the genres and idioms that a native speakerwould use.
Sincethe 1950s, linguistic science has revolutionized the way thattranslation is carried out, and organizations such as Wycliffe BibleTranslators have set themselves the task of giving every person inthe world the Scriptures in their everyday language. Increasingly,translation is carried out by linguistically trained native speakersof the target languages, working wherever possible from the originalHebrew and Greek. Translators understand better than before howextended discourses are constructed at levels above the sentence, andhow social and pragmatic factors affect meaning. The combination oflinguistics and technology has also greatly increased the speed withwhich translations can be produced; sometimes a first draft in a newlanguage can be generated from a closely related language using acomputer program.
Typesof Translation
Alltranslators aim for both accuracy and acceptability, but the work oftranslation constantly involves compromise between these two factors.There are, broadly speaking, two types of translation: formalcorrespondence and functional equivalence.
Ina formal correspondence translation (also called “literal”),the translator, as far as possible, preserves the word order andstructure of the original text and translates each word the same wayevery time it occurs, even if the result is slightly wooden. This ishelpful for word studies, and it preserves patterns of repetitionthat give structure to the text. There is always a danger, however,that the closest formal match to the original actually conveys ameaning different from the original in a particular context.Literalness is not the same as accuracy. Pushed to its extreme,formal correspondence produces the kind of semitranslation found ininterlinear texts (where the English is reproduced word for wordbelow a line of Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek); it is not grammaticallyacceptable, cannot be used on its own for public or private reading,and loses many of the nuances of the original. However, formalcorrespondence translations that avoid such extremes are importantfor detailed Bible study.
Ina functional equivalence translation (also called “dynamic,”“idiomatic equivalence,” or “meaning-based”),the translator aims to produce the same response in a modern readeras the original text would have done in an ancient reader. To achievethis, the syntactic structures and figures of speech of Greek andHebrew are replaced by their equivalents in the target language. Aword may be translated many different ways in different contexts,even when it has a single basic meaning in the original. While thispreserves some nuances, it loses others, obscuring structure and thedeliberate echo of one verse in another. In this case there is alwaysa danger that the translator has misunderstood the original meaningand the response that it would have produced. Pushed to its extreme,this type shades into paraphrase, and it may be overly subjective orjeopardize the historical particularity of the text. However, dynamicequivalence translations that avoid such pitfalls are valuable forevangelism, new readers, and public and devotional reading.
Inpractice most translations sit somewhere on the spectrum betweenthese two extremes. Some intermediate translations are a deliberatecompromise, aiming to keep as close as possible to the original whilecommunicating its meaning clearly in a common language that isaccessible to all. The NIV is a widely used example. One problem inusing such a translation is knowing when form has been preserved atthe expense of meaning, and when meaning has been preserved at theexpense of form. For serious study, therefore, it is useful tocompare intermediate translations with translations of the other twotypes, and to learn from the introductory material what translationprinciples have been used.
Toillustrate the differences between the types of translation, considerhow Rom. 3:21 is rendered by the NASB (formal correspondence), theNIV (intermediate), and the NLT (functional equivalence):
Butnow apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested,being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets. (NASB)
Butnow apart from the law the righteousness of God has been made known,to which the Law and the Prophets testify. (NIV)
Butnow God has shown us a way to be made right with him without keepingthe requirements of the law, as was promised in the writings of Mosesand the prophets long ago. (NLT)
FurtherChoices in Translation
Withinthis spectrum translators have further detailed decisions to make.
First,what are the best available Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts, asdetermined by the discipline of textual criticism?
Second,what style should be used? An elevated or archaic style is sometimespreferred in order to convey the dignity of the word; others use adeliberately colloquial style in order to maximize accessibility.Different books of the Bible themselves have different styles andgenres, ranging from vivid stories and evocative poems to precisedoctrinal formulations, and a translation may attempt to reflect thisdiversity. At the same time, the style and range of vocabulary chosenwill depend to some extent on the needs of the target audience.
Third,should the translation contain complexity and ambiguity when theoriginal does, or should it clarify and simplify? Some parts ofScripture were never easy reading even in the original (see 2 Pet.3:15–16). However, it is sometimes necessary to disambiguate inorder to produce grammatically acceptable text in the targetlanguage. In modern books it is also normal to divide text intoparagraphs and chapters, often with subheadings. Ancient texts,however, were written without any such breaks, so this too is aninterpretation of the text for the sake of clarity.
Fourth,what should the translator do when there is no equivalent word orphrase in the target language? Many people groups have never seen asheep! Sometimes a choice must be made between coining a new word andrefocusing the meaning of an existing word. This is particularlydifficult when deciding how to refer to God in a pagan culture.Translating gesture can also be challenging. For example, in Jer.31:19 the Hebrew is literally “I slapped my thigh,” whichis an indication of distress; but in Western culture slapping one’sthigh would probably mean enjoying a good joke, so the NIV translatesthe Hebrew as “beat my breast.” Footnotes may benecessary to ensure that the meaning is fully understood.
Finally,in cultures that have possessed the Bible for many generationstradition plays a role. A previous translation of a particular versemay be so well known that, unless it is seriously wrong, it ispreferable to let it stand than to “modernize” it.Conversely, tradition may so change the meaning of “biblical”words (such as “saint”) that verses containing them needto be retranslated.
Asa result of all these decisions, there is scope for many differenttranslations even in a single language. Where several translationsexist, serious study should always include comparison betweentranslations along with the use of commentaries. Where availableresources as yet permit only one translation in a language, the typeof translation to be produced must be chosen with great care. Ineither case, new translations will always be needed. On the one hand,although God’s word never changes, scholars can improve ourtextual, linguistic, and exegetical understanding of the Hebrew andGreek originals. On the other hand, the human languages into whichthe Bible is translated are in a process of constant change.
Gender-NeutralTranslations
RecentEnglish-language translations have grappled in particular with thequestion of gender neutrality. All languages differ in the way theydenote gender. Until recently, the masculine gender in English wasalso the inclusive gender; hence, “man” could simply mean“person” or “humanity.” In many cases, thebiblical languages work the same way, so that the older dynamictranslations could, like formal correspondence translations, mirrorthe original. Feminist concerns, however, have changed English usage.It is increasingly unacceptable to use the masculine genderinclusively, and everyday language now substitutes plurals (“person,”or “they” with singular meaning) or expansions (“manor woman,” “he or she”). This introduces adivergence between formal correspondence translations, which preservethe gender usage of the original, and functional equivalencetranslations, which prefer inclusive forms to masculine forms if themeaning of the original is entirely inclusive. To complicate mattersfurther, many careful readers of Scripture disagree on wheremasculine nuances exist and how important they are, in each specificinstance, to the meaning of the text.
In the OT, numerous Hebrew terms are translated as “chief”or describe a chief or leader. Although the noun ’ayilliterally means “ram” (the leader of a flock), it is usedfiguratively to refer to foreign rulers (Exod. 15:15; Josh. 13:21;1 Chron. 1:51). The basic meaning of ro’sh is “head,”but context often allows the term to be nuanced as “leader”(Exod. 18:25; Num. 14:4; 25:4; Josh. 23:2). The patriarch of thefamily was considered to be its ro’sh (Exod. 6:14; Num. 7:2),as was the chief priest in relation to the people (2 Kings25:18; 2 Chron. 19:11; Jer. 52:24). One such chief priest wasAmariah, who was involved in reformations during the rule ofJehoshaphat (2 Chron. 19:11). The most common designation,however, is sar, which can be used in construct to refer to numerousprofessions: “prison warden” (Gen. 39:21), “chiefcupbearer” (Gen. 40:2), “chief official” (Dan.1:7). The term nagid is used frequently as a designation for a(future) king (1 Sam. 9:16; 10:1; 13:14; 25:30; 1 Kings1:35). The term nasi’ is used in reference to tribal chiefs(Gen. 17:20; 23:6; 34:2) and aristocracy (Exod. 16:22; Josh. 9:15;1 Chron. 2:10).
Inthe NT, the Greek noun archōn belongs to an extended network ofwords that use the prefix arch- and generally convey the meaning of“rule” or “authority.” The noun archōnis used in reference to humans, demons, and divinity. Jesus spoke of“ruling officials” who assert their authority overGentiles, but he instructed his followers to seek the posture ofservitude to others (Matt. 20:25–26). Even though Satan iscalled the archōn of this world (John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11; cf.Eph. 2:2), Jesus is the true archōn over all the earth (Rev.1:5). Various individuals are referred to as “ruler of thesynagogue” (archisynagōgos) in the NT. These leaders werechiefly responsible for the physical upkeep of the building and thearrangements of worship in the Jewish synagogue. Among the namedleadership are Jairus in Galilee (Mark 5:21–43; Luke 8:40–56;cf. Matt. 9:18–26) and Crispus (Acts 18:8; cf. 1 Cor.1:14) and Sosthenes in Corinth (Acts 18:17). Other administrativeauthorities may be understood as “eminent rulers” or“officials” (cf. Acts 16:19; 17:6).
The quality of being shared by all, such as a “commonspeech” (Gen. 11:1) or the human condition (Ps. 73:5; Eccles.9:2), but also anything outside the sphere of the holy. God requiresIsrael to distinguish common from holy (Lev. 10:10; Ezek. 22:26;42:20). By the first century, many Jews (e.g., the Pharisees)attempted to extend this sphere, which radiated from the temple, totheir homes. They only ate tithed produce, used clean vessels, andshared their table with the ritually clean (Matt. 23:23; Mark 7:3–4;John 2:6; 4:9; Gal. 2:11–21; see m. Demai 1:2–3).Like the prophets (e.g., Isa. 1:16), Jesus emphasizes the quality ofthe heart (Matt. 5:8; Mark 7:14–23) and brings the common intothe sphere of the holy by sharing the indwelling Holy Spirit withthem (Mark 5:25–34). This practice anticipates the inclusion ofnon-Jews in the early church (Acts 10:9–16; 11:1–18; Gal.3:1–9).
Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.
In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).
Articles of Clothing
A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.
In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).
Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).
The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).
In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).
Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).
Special Functions of Clothing
According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).
Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).
Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).
Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.
Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).
In the Bible, gestures are made with either parts of the bodyor items, such as clothing and rings, directly connected to the body.For this reason, it makes sense to classify biblical gestures inrelation to the different body parts that are identified with thegestures. It is, however, challenging to know where to draw a line onclassifying a gesture. For example, a devious person is described inProv. 6:13 as one “who winks maliciously with his eye, signalswith his feet and motions with his fingers.” It is unclearwhether this is a single gesture or multiple ones, and whether allsignify different things or the same thing.
Head
Gesturesthat relate to the head range from simple head motions to semiviolentacts such as hair pulling. Simple head motions include lifting ofone’s head in honor (Gen. 40:13), bowing one’s head inmourning (Ps. 35:14), tossing one’s head in mockery andderision (2Kings 19:21), and shaking one’s head as insult(Ps. 22:7; Mark 15:29).
Acommon action is the shaving of the head, which can be forpurification (Lev. 14:8–9; Num. 6:9; 8:7 [includes all bodyhair]), mourning (Deut. 21:11–13; Job 1:20; Isa. 15:2; Jer.16:6; 47:5; 48:37; Ezek. 27:31; Amos 8:10; Mic. 1:16), remorse (Jer.41:5), or shaming (Jer. 2:16). However, priests are forbidden fromshaving their heads even in mourning (Lev. 21:5; Ezek. 44:20), whilethe high priest is to wear a turban on his head during sacrificialduties (Exod. 29:6).
Anointingof the head is done when a priest or king is installed (Exod. 29:7;Ps. 23:5) or simply as a sign of God’s goodness and blessing ona person (Eccles. 9:8). Blessing may also involve placing a hand onthe head of the person being blessed (Gen. 48:14–18; Exod.29:19), while the same gesture on the head of sacrificial animals isa symbolic means of transferring sin (Lev. 3:2, 8, 13; 4:4, 15, 24,29, 33; 8:18, 22).
Inthe OT, a woman’s head can be shaved in mourning (Deut.21:12–13; cf. Jer. 47:5), but in the NT, a shaved head can be acause for disgrace (1Cor. 11:5–6).
Face.Facial gestures range from expressions to actions such as touching orcovering the face. A face can be downcast in anger (Gen. 4:5–6)or bowed to the ground in honor (Gen. 48:12), in dejection (Josh.7:6), in humility (Ruth 2:10), in worship (2Chron. 20:18; Ps.138:2), in subjection, supplication, reverence (1Sam. 20:41;25:41; 28:14; 2Sam. 14:4, 22; 18:28; 24:20; 1Kings 1:23;1Chron. 21:20), or in dread (e.g., Moses before Yahweh [Exod.3:6]).
Theface can be covered or veiled as an indication of uncleanness (Lev.13:45), in grief/mourning (2Sam. 19:4; Ezek. 24:17), inresignation (1Kings 19:13), with intent to deceive in adultery(Job 24:15), or in horror of judgment (Esther 7:8; Ezek. 12:6, 12).It can also be buried in the dust in remorse (Lam. 3:29).
Godcan be described as hiding or turning away his face againstwickedness and evil (Deut. 31:18; 32:20; Ps. 34:16; Isa. 8:17; Jer.33:5; Ezek. 7:22; 15:7; 20:46; 21:2) or in an act of withholdingblessings (Job 13:15; Pss. 10:1; 13:1; 27:9; 30:7; 34:16; Isa. 54:8;59:2; 64:7). God can also turn his face toward a place in judgment(Ezek. 4:3, 7; 6:2). In 1Sam. 5:3–4 the idol of thePhilistine god Dagon falls facedown before the ark of the covenant,apparently overpowered by Yahweh.
Actsof humiliation or dishonor can involve spitting in the face (Num.12:14; Deut. 25:9; Job 17:6; 30:10; Isa. 50:6), slapping the face(1Kings 22:24; 2Chron. 18:23; Job 16:10; Lam. 3:30; Mic.5:1), pulling a skirt up over someone’s face in shamingjudgment (Jer. 13:26; Nah. 3:5), and hooking and dragging someone bythe nose (2Kings 19:28). Although being struck on the cheek ishumiliating, Jesus instructs his disciples to “turn the othercheek” as a sign of resistance to violence (Matt. 5:39; Luke6:29).
Onecan lift one’s face in worship (2Kings 20:2; Job 22:26;Isa. 38:2) or in confidence (Job 11:15) and can fail to lift it inshame and disgrace (Ezra 9:6). Although the shaving of beards inmourning is common practice (Ezra 9:3; Isa. 15:2; Jer. 41:5; 48:37),the forced shaving of beards is an act of shaming and insulting(2Sam. 10:4; 1Chron. 19:4–5; Isa. 7:20; 50:6).
Eyes.Winking the eye is perceived as an evil, deceptive, or malicious act(Ps. 35:19; Prov. 6:13; 16:30). Eyes can be lifted up in worship andexpectation (Pss. 121:1; 123:1).
Mouth.Pursed lips can characterize an evil person (Prov. 16:30), while ahand can be clapped over the mouth in awe and submission (Job 21:5;40:4). Psalm 72:9 looks to the righteous king before whom the deserttribes will bow and whose “enemies lick the dust” indefeat.
Ears.An Israelite slave for life is to have a hole punched through his orher earlobe, held against a doorpost, with an awl (Exod. 21:6; Deut.15:17). Blood is sprinkled on the lobe of the right ear forpurification (Exod. 29:20; Lev. 8:23–24; 14:17), whilesupplication can be described as asking for the turning of an ear(2Kings 19:16; Ps. 31:2). Turning one’s ear signifiespaying attention or taking something to heart (Ps. 49:4; Prov. 4:20;5:13).
Neck.The neck can be adorned (Song 1:10) as a sign of pride and honor(Gen. 41:42; Judg. 5:30; Prov. 1:9; Ezek. 16:11) or outstretched inarrogance (Ps. 75:5 TNIV: “Do not lift your horns againstheaven; do not speak with outstretched neck”). Jeremiah put ayoke on his neck as a prophetic sign of the approaching Babylonianconquest (Jer. 27–28). While putting someone’s neck in ayoke is an act of triumphal conquest (Ps. 105:18), stepping on theneck of a subdued enemy is an act of subjugation and humiliation(Josh. 10:24).
Body
Nakednessin public is considered shameful (Gen. 9:22–23; Nah. 3:5; Rev.3:18), so that it is sometimes pictured as part of divine judgment(Deut. 28:48; Isa. 47:2–3; Lam. 1:8; Mic. 1:11) or as a sign ofpromiscuity (Isa. 57:8; Ezek. 16:36). An unkempt body can be a signof mourning, as it is for Mephibosheth (2Sam. 19:24). A certainkind of body covering is a sign of marriage proposal or protection(Ezek. 16:8; 23:18; Hos. 2:9). Body dismembering, even in war, is anact of humiliation (2Sam. 4:12).
Chest.In self-mortification, one can pound one’s chest in mourning(Ezek. 21:12) or in remorse (Jer. 31:19; Luke 18:13). The breasts ofsacrificial animals are waved before God as a “wave offering”before being eaten (Exod. 29:26; Lev. 7:30; Num. 6:20).
Hand,arm.Hand gestures include motions such as lifting hands in worship,clapping hands in joy, and clapping a hand over one’s mouth inawe. The expression “outstretched arm” (Exod. 6:6; Deut.4:34; 5:15; 7:19; 9:29; 11:2; 26:8; 1Kings 8:42; 2Kings17:36; 2Chron. 6:32; Ps. 136:12; Jer. 21:5; 27:5; 32:17, 21;Ezek. 20:33–34) indicates power, might, strength. It is oftenused of God to indicate his ability to defeat powerful armies andenemies. God is implored by the psalmist to lift his hand and act forthe sake of the righteous (Ps. 10:12).
Sincethe right hand is the hand of power, the act of sitting at the righthand indicates being favored (1Kings 2:19; Ps. 110:1; Matt.22:44; Mark 12:36; Luke 20:43; Acts 2:35; Heb. 1:3; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2;1Pet. 3:22). When taking an oath, one places a hand under thethigh/crotch (Gen. 24:2; 47:29), most likely the right hand (see Gen.48:14, 17–18; Lev. 8:23; 14:14).
Clappingthe hands can be a sign of awe (Ezek. 6:11), malice, or remorse(25:6), while a bared arm can be a sign of judgment (4:7). Job clapshis hand over his mouth in awe of God and in submission andrepentance (Job 40:4–5).
Handscan be lifted in worship (1Kings 8:22; 1Tim. 2:8), tobeseech (Ps. 28:2), to protect and bless (Ps. 10:12), in an oath(Deut. 32:40), or to harm (Exod. 24:11; 1Sam. 24:6, 10;2Sam.1:14; 18:12).
Pilatewashes his hands to proclaim his innocence over the death of Jesus(Matt. 27:24), while 1Pet. 5:6 urges believers to humblethemselves “under God’s mighty hand,” so that indue time they will be lifted up.
Buttocks.Exposure of the buttocks can serve as a humiliating insult andprovocation, as happens to David’s men (2Sam. 10:4;1Chron. 19:4) and Egyptian and Cush*te captives (Isa. 20:4).
Leg.The leg or thigh is often a euphemism for the male reproductiveorgans, so that putting one’s hand under a thigh in oath (Gen.24:2; 47:29) may involve actually grabbing the genitalia. Animalthighs are waved to God in offering before being consumed (Lev. 9:21;10:14; Num. 6:20), while oaths administered to uncover adultery causea guilty woman’s thighs to waste (Num. 5:2–27).
Themost common gesture involving the knee is bowing, in worship orreverence (Deut. 33:3; Isa. 45:23; Rom. 11:4; 14:11; Phil. 2:10), indefeat (2Sam. 22:40; Ps. 18:38; Isa. 60:14), in distress (Ps.57:6), or in respect (1Kings 1:31). In what seems to be asomewhat awkward position, Elijah puts his face between his knees inprayer (1Kings 18:42).
Feet.Gestures involving the feet are probably the most common gestures inthe Bible. Feet can be washed in hospitality (Gen. 18:4; 19:2; 24:32;43:24; 1Sam. 25:41), in ablution (Exod. 30:19, 21; 40:31), orin supplication (1Sam. 25:41). Feet can be bathed in oil as ablessing (Deut. 33:24), uncovered in marriage proposals (Ezek. 16:8;cf. Ruth 3:4, 7), and stamped in remorse (Ezek. 25:6), and sandalscan be removed from them in honor (Exod. 3:1–10) or disgrace(Deut. 25:9). The heavenly seraphs cover their feet in supplicationbefore the throne of God (Isa. 6:2), while the feet of humans cansignal deception (Prov. 6:13).
Enemiescan be placed under one’s feet in subjugation (1Kings5:3; Pss. 8:6; 18:39; 45:5; 47:3; 110:1; Mal. 4:3; Rom. 16:20), havetheir feet shackled or ensnared (Job 13:27; 33:11; Pss. 25:15;105:18), and be forced to lick the feet of victors in humiliation anddefeat (Isa. 49:23). The righteous will bathe their feet in the bloodof their enemies in revenge (Pss. 58:10; 68:23).
Thoseoverwhelmed can grovel at the feet of the powerful (2Kings4:27, 37; Esther 8:3; Matt. 28:9; Mark 5:33; 7:25; Acts 10:25), whilethose emboldened can rise to their feet in confidence (Ezek. 2:1–2;3:24; Dan. 8:18).
Inthe NT, dust can be shaken off one’s feet as an indication ofdivine judgment (Matt. 10:14; Mark 6:11; Luke 9:5), even as lying ata person’s feet is a recognition of authority/submission (Matt.15:30; Mark 5:33; Luke 8:28, 35, 41, 47; 10:39; 17:16; Acts 4:37;5:2). A woman publicly washes Jesus’ feet with her tears, wipesthem with her hair, and kisses and perfumes them in what seems an actof love and repentance; but Jesus indicates that she has prepared hisbody for burial (Luke 7:38–46; John 11:2; 12:3). Jesus washeshis disciples’ feet as instruction on servanthood anddiscipleship (John 13:5–14).
Fingers,Toes.Different fingers seem to have different roles assigned them. Afinger sprinkles blood in cleansing (Lev. 4:6, 17, 25, 30, 34; 8:15;9:9; 14:16; 16:14, 19; Num. 19:4), while blood on the tip of theright thumb and on the right big toe is for cleansing (Exod. 29:20;Lev. 8:23–24; 14:17, 25, 28).
Onewears a signet ring as a sign of power (Esther 3:10) or a gesture ofrestoration and forgiveness (Luke 15:22). But fingers can also motionin deception (Prov. 6:13) or point in blame (Isa. 58:9). Jesus writeswith his finger on the ground, apparently as a gesture ofindifference to those pointing accusing fingers (John 8:6).
Clothesand Shoes
Garments.Garments attain significance as they are related to specificemotions. Wearing sackcloth and ashes in mourning is common (Gen.37:34; Ezek. 7:18; 2Sam. 3:31), while ripping garments inmourning is also frequently attested (Gen. 37:34; 44:13; Lev. 10:6;21:10; Josh. 7:6; 2Sam. 1:11; 3:31; 13:31; 1Kings 21:27;2Kings 2:12; 19:1; Esther 4:1; Isa. 32:11; 37:1; Jer. 41:5).
Rippingsomeone’s clothing to expose nakedness (Ezek. 16:39; 2Sam.10:4) or pulling a person’s skirts up over the face (Jer.13:26) is an act of shaming or insulting. But tearing one’sclothes off can be a sign of fury (Matt. 26:65). Persons withdefiling diseases are expected to warn off others by wearing tornclothes and shouting, “Unclean! Unclean!” (Lev. 13:45).
Bylaying their clothes at Saul’s feet, the crowd may beacknowledging his authority in the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58).
Sandals.A woman can remove a man’s sandal in contempt (Deut. 25:5–10),while a sandal can be removed by a kinsman-redeemer to indicategiving up a right or as a transfer of property (Ruth 4:7–8). Asandal can also be removed in mourning (Ezek. 24:17) or be cast overa piece of land to claim ownership (Pss. 60:8; 108:9).
PropheticGestures
Propheticgestures in the OT are mostly concerned with the call to repentanceand approaching judgments upon failure to heed the warning. Jeremiahputs a yoke on his neck (Jer. 27–28; cf. Deut. 28:48), Ezekielcooks with dung (Ezek. 4:12) and sleeps on his left side for 390 daysand then on his right side for 40 days (4:5–6), Isaiah stripsoff his clothing (Isa. 20:2–3; 32:11), and Hosea marries anunfaithful wife (Hos. 1:1–3).
Inthe NT, Jesus cleanses the temple as an act of symbolic judgment(Matt. 21:12; Mark 11:15; John 2:15). He also breaks bread and drinkswine (Matt. 26:26; Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19; 24:30, 35; Acts 2:46;20:11; 27:35; 1Cor. 11:24–25) and washes his disciples’feet (John 13:1–13), thereby establishing symbolic Christianpractices.
Grief is great sadness or sorrow or the circ*mstances thatproduce such; mourning refers to expressions of grief. Grief andmourning are often thought of in conjunction with death, but they mayoccur with regard to any personal or national tragedy (2Sam.13:19), the impending prospect of tragedy (Esther 4:3; Isa. 37:1), orrepentance prompted by prophetic word of tragedy, sorrow over sin, orboth.
Theexpressions of mourning in the Bible include weeping (Gen. 23:2),wailing (Esther 4:3; Isa. 15:3; Mark 5:38), tearing clothes andwearing sackcloth (Gen. 37:34; 2Sam. 3:31), lying on the ground(2Sam. 13:31), putting dust and ashes on the head or sitting ondust and ashes (Ezek. 27:30), fasting (2Sam. 3:35; 12:16),singing songs of lament (2Sam. 1:17–27; 3:32–35),pulling hair out of one’s beard (Ezra 9:3), cutting the hair(Jer. 7:29), uncovering the head (Lev. 10:6), removing sandals (Ezek.24:17, 23), covering the lips or mouth (Ezek. 24:17, 22; Mic. 3:7),and employing professional mourners (Jer. 9:17; Matt. 9:23; Mark5:38). Some pagan mourning practices were prohibited, such asslashing the body, cutting patterns into the body (tattooing?), andthe somewhat obscure act of making the forehead bald (Lev. 19:28;Deut. 14:1; cf. 1Kings 18:28).
Thus,grief and mourning were anything but stoic and brief. Grief wasexpressed both physically and vocally, often loudly, with expressionsranging from inarticulate groaning to poetic compositions in song.Although women may have been prominent among professional mourners,expressing grief was not considered unmasculine. Several times Davidwas a leader in expressing grief. That the expression of grief shouldbe brief, relatively dispassionate, and primarily characteristic ofwomen was a Greek development that entered the church through peoplesuch as Augustine, who, for example, felt grieved that he had verybriefly grieved the loss of his mother.
Paul’sadmonition that believers should not grieve as do those who have nohope (1Thess. 4:13) should not be construed as a dictum that itis wrong to grieve. The thought of the resurrection is a comfort in,not a replacement for, grief. Even Jesus wept at the death ofLazarus, knowing full well that he would soon resurrect him (John11:25, 35, 40). Further, saints who have died and gone to heavenlament (Rev. 6:10). Grief is restricted for active-duty priests andonce for Ezekiel, but these are clearly special circ*mstances andillustrate the normalcy of giving expression to grief. Ezekiel was tomoan with a groaning for the dead (often misread as groaningsilently) when his wife died, but he was not to engage in anymourning rites (Ezek. 24:15–27). This illustrated to Judah thecirc*mstances that they would face, without opportunity to mournproperly for their dead. Ezekiel 8:14 indicts the women of Jerusalemfor “mourning for Tammuz,” a pagan ritual involving thecycle of life, death, and rebirth of the Babylonian god Dumuzi.
Songsof lament are common in the OT. David composed a song of lamenthonoring the deaths of Saul and Jonathan (2Sam. 1:17–27).After Joab’s unauthorized killing of Abner, David also sang alament for Abner and required Joab to participate in mourning rituals(3:31–37). David also mourned his own sons: the unnamed son ofBathsheba (12:16–18), Amnon (13:30–33), and Absalom(18:33–19:4). In the case of Bathsheba’s son, Davidmourned in advance of the boy’s death, which had beenprophetically proclaimed through Nathan. As the consequences of hissins continued, he progressively became undone in the mourning of hisother sons. Also, funeral songs are used as the form of someprophetic material (Ezek. 19:1–14; 26:17–18; 27:2–9,25–36; cf. Jer. 22:18; Amos 5:16). Not all laments are funeralsongs perse. Compare also the book of Lamentations and thepsalms of lament, also known as complaint psalms.
Expressionsof grief and mourning were called for as part of repentance,combining both fear of punishment and depth of sorrow over sin(2Chron. 34:19; Isa. 15:3; Joel 1:13).
The desire to harmonize the differences between the canonicalGospels can be traced back to the second century, when Tatian (asecond-century apologist) combined the four Gospels into one documentknown as the Diatessaron (Greek for “out of four”). Thiscombined Gospel was used in the Syrian churches in the third andfourth centuries until it was replaced by the four canonical Gospelsin the fifth century.
MaterialCommon to More than One Gospel
Allfour Gospels portray Jesus as leading a group of disciples,preaching, healing, performing miracles, being crucified, and beingraised from the dead. Matthew was written for a Jewish or JewishChristian audience, reminding them that Jesus fulfills the HebrewScriptures. Mark was written for a Gentile audience, focusing more onnarrative than on teaching and portraying Jesus as a man ofmiraculous, powerful action. Luke shows Jesus as one who isespecially concerned for the poor and those on the fringes ofsociety. John explains that Jesus, the eternal Word of God, is not asecond god, but rather the one true God, sent by the Father to renewIsrael.
Peoplewho are familiar with the content of the Gospel stories often confusethe information from different accounts. For example, there isactually no single story in the Bible about a “rich youngruler”: only Matthew describes the man as young (Matt. 19:20),and only Luke mentions that the man was a ruler (Luke 18:18).
Somematerial is found in all four Gospels, including information aboutJohn the Baptist, the miracle of the feeding of the five thousand,and the story of the crucifixion and the resurrection (although theindividual accounts of the resurrection differ). Some materialappears in three Gospels, especially in Matthew, Mark, and Luke.These three Gospels have therefore been labeled the “SynopticGospels” (syn= together, optic= view). Storiesfound in all three Synoptic Gospels include the transfiguration(Matt. 17:1–13; Mark 9:2–13; Luke 9:28–36); thehealing of Jairus’s daughter and of a woman with a flow ofblood (Matt. 9:18–26; Mark 5:21–43; Luke 8:41–56);and the rich young ruler (Matt. 19:16–30; Mark 10:17–31;Luke 18:18–30). The details do not agree in every respect ineach account, but clearly they represent the same story and exhibitlinguistic dependence on the same source(s).
Asignificant amount of material appears in two of the four canonicalGospels. Matthew and Mark have the story of a Syrophoenician woman(Matt. 15:21–28; Mark 7:24–30), and both Mark and Luketell the story of a widow’s offering to the temple treasury(Mark 12:41–44; Luke 21:1–4). The most significant bodyof teachings and sayings found in two Gospels is the material sharedby Matthew and Luke. Each of the Gospels contains material that doesnot appear in any other Gospel. Mark has the smallest amount of suchmaterial, John the largest.
TheGospel of John and the Synoptic Gospels
Basedon a study of the material common to more than one Gospel, and thematerial unique to one Gospel, John’s Gospel usually is seen asdistinct from the other three. The most likely explanation for thisis that John was written later, with knowledge of the other Gospels,and therefore the author saw no need to repeat most of this material(except what was central to his purposes). Some of the distinctivefeatures of John’s Gospel are the use of terminology such as“love,” “light,” “life,” “truth,”“abide,” “knowledge,” “world,”and the “I am” statements. Furthermore, certain Synopticterms are either rare or absent—for example, “kingdom,”“demons,” “power,” “pity,”“gospel,” “preach,” “repent,”“parable,” “tax collector.” More so than theSynoptics, John is written from the vantage point of the resurrectionand with the aid of hindsight as well as the Spirit. This is why theauthor of John’s Gospel does not refrain from adding commentaryto Jesus’ words (e.g., 2:21–22; 7:39; 11:51–52;12:16).
TheSynoptic Gospels are more interrelated. In passages that appear inthese three Gospels, there is often very close verbal agreementbetween them (e.g., the healing of the leper [Matt. 8:2; Mark1:40–44; Luke 5:12–14]; the question of Jesus’authority [Matt. 21:23–27; Mark 11:27–33; Luke 20:1–8]),implying a common source. In many sections that are found in allthree Synoptic Gospels, two agree extensively and the third diverges(e.g., Matt. 20:24–28 and Mark 10:41–45 against Luke22:24–27). When two Gospels agree and one disagrees, Matthewand Mark often agree against Luke, and Luke and Mark often agreeagainst Matthew; but Matthew and Luke do not often agree against Markand never do so in regard to the order of material. At other points,the Gospel accounts diverge quite significantly when referring to thesame events. The infancy narratives in Matthew are quite differentfrom those in Luke. The two accounts of the parable of the weddingbanquet (Matt. 22:2–14; Luke 14:16–24) differ sosignificantly that it is difficult to decide whether they are twoversions of the same parable or two different stories. Reports on theresurrection diverge across all four Gospels.
Itis possible that these similarities and differences can be tracedback to the oral presentation of the gospel. Apostolic preachingwould have formed itself into set ways of retelling the events ofJesus’ ministry through repetition. These accounts may havebeen told originally in Aramaic before being translated into Greek tofacilitate the Gentile mission. The authors of Matthew, Mark, andLuke could have been drawing from this common tradition in writingtheir Gospels. There is probably a degree of truth to this theory,but it cannot explain all the data. The theory does not account forsimilarities and differences in the order of events, nor does itexplain why Matthew and Luke always return to Mark’s orderafter they deviate from it. A common oral tradition does notadequately explain similar editorial comments (e.g., cf. Matt. 24:15with Mark 13:14), which suggest a common written source.
Somehave argued that the apostles or others wrote records of the words ofJesus (memorabilia), which were collected and written down topically,from which the Synoptic Gospels were composed. As the church grewnumerically and geographically, various collections of thesememorabilia were made. Again, this is not beyond the realm ofpossibility; however, working against this theory is the completeabsence of any reference to such records. Furthermore, as with theoral theory, it does not explain agreement in the order of material.It does, however, highlight the probability that the evangelists wereusing written sources.
MarkanPriority and Q
Onthe assumption that the writers of the Synoptic Gospels employed awritten source(s), several scholars have tried to reconstruct thisoriginal written Gospel from the material in the Synoptic Gospels.This document, which scholars call the Urevangelium (German for“original Gospel”), ended up bearing very closesimilarities with the Gospel of Mark. This is not surprising, sincenearly all of Mark is repeated in Matthew and Luke. This led to thebelief that Mark was the most primitive Synoptic Gospel, and that itwas a common source for Matthew and Luke.
Thisbelief in Markan priority, which has gained increasing popularitysince the nineteenth century, has helped explain the similaritiesamong the Synoptic Gospels. Traditionally, Matthew was thought to bethe first Gospel to be written, hence the order of the Gospels in ourNT. This belief in Matthean priority was upheld by several earlychurch writers such as Augustine, who saw Mark as an abridgement ofMatthew (Cons. 1.2). Augustine may have been more influenced by thetraditional ordering of the Gospels than by an analysis of theGospels themselves. Mark’s Gospel does not read like anabridgement; it is the shortest Gospel, but individual sections of ittypically are longer and more detailed than in Matthew.
Thereare many reasons why the priority of Mark is probable. It is theshortest Gospel, containing 661 verses, whereas Matthew contains1,068 and Luke contains 1,149. When their content is compared,97.2percent of Mark is paralleled in Matthew, and 88.4percentof Mark is paralleled in Luke. It is easier to understand Matthew andLuke as using Mark and choosing to add additional material to it thanto think of Mark as using Matthew, Luke, or both and deciding to omitmaterial such as the birth narratives and the Sermon on the Mount.Mark has simpler Greek, which includes an extensive use of thepresent tense, redundancies (e.g., Mark 1:32: “that eveningafter sunset”; cf. Matt. 8:16: “when evening came”;Luke 4:40: “at sunset”), and various colloquialisms(e.g., the word for “mat” in Mark 2:4). Mark alone amongthe Gospels uses Aramaic terms such as abba (14:36), talitha koum(5:41), and ephphatha (7:34), although Matthew also mentions Eloi,Eloi, lama sabachthani (Matt. 27:46; Mark 15:34). It is easier to seehow Luke and Matthew would have “improved” Mark than thereverse.
Ifwe accept the priority of Mark, and Luke and Matthew’sdependence upon it, there are still the sections of Matthew and Lukethat bear strong similarities with each other. From an analysis ofthe text of Matthew and Luke, it appears that these two evangelistsdid not know each other’s works. If one knew of the other’swork, why the divergence in some material such as the birthnarratives? Alongside this, however, there are close similarities inother material: Matthew has 4,290 words that have parallels in Lukebut not in Mark, and Luke has 3,559 words that have parallels inMatthew but not in Mark. The solution appears to be that Matthew andLuke were dealing with some material that they held in common, andthat each of them also had other material that he drew onindependently. The material held in common is commonly called “Q”(from the German word Quelle, meaning “source”); thematerial unique to Matthew is called “M” and that whichis unique to Luke, “L.” Whether Q was a document isunknown, although it is more likely to be a collection of sources, asis also the case with MandL.
Manyscholars argue that Q was a written rather than an oral source, basedon the exact word parallels in the Greek text (e.g., Matt. 6:24 andLuke 16:13, where 27 of the 28 words are exactly the same). Thepresence of doublets (double accounts of the same incident) inMatthew and Luke may show dependence by the respective evangelists onboth a Markan and a Q source (e.g., Luke 8:16; cf. Mark 4:21; Luke11:33; cf. Matt. 5:15). Some scholars have tried to explain thesources geographically: Markan material originated in Rome, Qmaterial in Antioch, M in Jerusalem, and L in Caesarea, but suchspeculations are far from proven.
Summary
Withinall of this, in seeking to understand the harmony of the Gospels, itis important to be aware of what we do not know. Many of thesolutions focus on a history behind the text to which we do not haveaccess. Modern literary critics have tended to focus more on the textit*elf than its prehistory. There is merit in this because it affirmsthe priority of the text and allows the reader to understand how apart of the text functions within the larger literary unit. It alsoallows the evangelists to be more than collectors of sources, to havewritten distinctive theological accounts. Their different emphasesmay explain some of the differences between the Gospels. Thisapproach, however, also has its dangers. Some who focus on the textover its original intent distance the text from the author’spurpose and therefore open the door for subjective interpretationsthat deny the difference between a correct and an incorrect readingof the text. It also raises the danger of reading an ancient textthrough modern eyes, losing sight of the original context.
Thechurch has been well served by four Gospel traditions. The fact thatesteem for the text has stopped overharmonization has been of greatbenefit, as the readers of the Gospels can appreciate various huesand emphases between the different accounts of the ministry of Jesus.
(1)Inthe Bible, usually the bottom of a robe. For example, the highpriest’s robe had a hem that included golden bells andpomegranates sewn onto it so that they made noise when the highpriest moved, presumably to let people know that the priest was stillalive when he entered the holy of holies (Exod. 28:33–35;39:24–26). Often, touching the hem of a robe was considered asign of submission (such as Saul grabbing Samuel’s in 1Sam.15:27). Similarly, it could be an act of entreaty by an inferiortoward a superior, as in Zech. 8:23: “In those days ten peoplefrom all languages and nations will take firm hold of one Jew by thehem of his robe and say, ‘Let us go with you, because we haveheard that God is with you.’ ” The Gospelsdescribe a woman who was healed simply by touching the hem of Jesus’robe (Matt. 9:20 // Mark 5:27 // Luke 8:44).
(2)Averb to describe the action of surrounding or trapping someone (Ps.139:5; Hab. 1:4).
The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesusfollowers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christembodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in humanhistory.
Introduction
Name.Early Christians combined the name “Jesus” with the title“Christ” (Acts 5:42; NIV: “Messiah”). Thename “Jesus,” from the Hebrew Yehoshua or Yeshua, was acommon male name in first-century Judaism. The title “Christ”is from the Greek christos, a translation of the Hebrew mashiakh(“anointed one, messiah”). Christians eventually werenamed after Jesus’ title (Acts 11:26). During the ministry ofJesus, Peter was the first disciple to recognize Jesus as the Messiah(Matt. 16:16; Mark 9:29; Luke 9:20).
Sources.From the viewpoint of Christianity, the life and ministry of Jesusconstitute the turning point in human history. From a historicalperspective, ample early source materials would be expected. Indeed,both Christian and non-Christian first-century and earlysecond-century literary sources are extant, but they are few innumber. In part, this low incidence is due to society’s initialresistance to the Jesus followers’ movement. The ancient Romanhistorian Tacitus called Christianity “a superstition,”since its beliefs did not fit with the culture’s prevailingworldview and thus were considered antisocial. Early literary sourcestherefore are either in-group documents or allusions in non-Christiansources.
TheNT Gospels are the principal sources for the life and ministry ofJesus. They consist of Matthew, Mark, Luke (the Synoptic Gospels),and John. Most scholars adhere to the so-called Four SourceHypothesis. In this theory, Mark was written first and was used as asource by Matthew and Luke, who also used the sayings source Q (fromGerman Quelle, meaning “source”) as well as their ownindividual sources M (Matthew) and L (Luke). John used additionalsources.
Theearly church tried to put together singular accounts, so-calledGospel harmonies, of the life of Jesus. The Gospel of the Ebionitesrepresents one such attempt based on the Synoptic Gospels. Anotherharmony, the Diatessaron, based on all four Gospels, was producedaround AD 170 by Tatian. Additional source materials concerning thelife of Christ are provided in the NT in texts such as Acts, thePauline Epistles, the General Epistles, and the Revelation of John.Paul wrote to the Galatians, “But when the time had fully come,God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law” (Gal. 4:4).The first narrative about Jesus by the Christian community was apassion narrative, the account of his death and resurrection. Thefirst extant references to this tradition are found in Paul’sletters (1Cor. 2:2; Gal. 3:1). The resurrection was recognizedfrom the beginning as the cornerstone of the Christian faith (1Cor.15:13–14).
Amongnon-Christian sources, the earliest reference to Jesus is found in aletter written circa AD 112 by Pliny the Younger, the Roman governorof Bithynia-Pontus (Ep. 10.96). The Roman historian Tacitus mentionsChristians and Jesus around AD 115 in his famous work about thehistory of Rome (Ann. 15.44). Another Roman historian, Suetonius,wrote around the same time concerning unrest among the Jews in Romebecause of a certain “Chrestos” (Claud. 25.4). Somescholars conclude that “Chrestos” is a misspelling of“Christos,” a reference to Jesus.
TheJewish author Josephus (first century AD) mentions Jesus in a storyabout the Jewish high priest Ananus and James the brother of Jesus(Ant. 20.200). A controversial reference to Jesus appears in adifferent part of the same work, where Josephus affirms that Jesus isthe Messiah and that he rose from the dead (Ant. 18.63–64). Themajority of scholars consider this passage to be authentic butheavily edited by later Christian copyists. Another Jewish source,the Talmud, also mentions Jesus in several places, but thesereferences are very late and of little historical value.
NoncanonicalGospels that mention Jesus include, for example, the Infancy Gospelof Thomas, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel ofJames, the Gospel of Judas Iscariot, the Gospel of the Hebrews, theEgerton Gospel, and the Gospel of Judas. Although some of these maycontain an occasional authentic saying or event, for the most partthey are late and unreliable.
Jesus’Life
Birthand childhood. TheGospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehemduring the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesuswas probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’sdeath (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of avirginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18;Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governorQuirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place inBethlehem (2:1–5). Both the census and the governorship at thetime of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars.Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to eitherconfirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must bedetermined on the basis of one’s view regarding the generalreliability of the Gospel tradition.
Onthe eighth day after his birth, Jesus was circumcised, in keepingwith the Jewish law, at which time he officially was named “Jesus”(Luke 2:21). He spent his growing years in Nazareth, in the home ofhis parents, Joseph and Mary (2:40). Of the NT Gospels, the Gospel ofLuke contains the only brief portrayal of Jesus’ growth instrength, wisdom, and favor with God and people (2:40, 52). Luke alsocontains the only account of Jesus as a young boy (2:41–49).
Jesuswas born in a lower socioeconomic setting. His parents offered atemple sacrifice appropriate for those who could not afford tosacrifice a sheep (Luke 2:22–24; cf. Lev. 12:8). Joseph, Jesus’earthly father, was a carpenter or an artisan in wood, stone, ormetal (Matt. 13:55). From a geographical perspective, Nazareth wasnot a prominent place for settling, since it lacked fertile ground.Jesus’ disciple Nathanael expressed an apparently commonfirst-century sentiment concerning Nazareth: “Nazareth! Cananything good come from there?” (John 1:46).
Jesuswas also born in a context of scandal. Questions of illegitimacy weresurely raised, since his mother Mary was discovered to be pregnantbefore her marriage to Joseph. According to Matthew, only theintervention of an angel convinced Joseph not to break his betrothal(Matt. 1:18–24). Jesus’ birth took place in Bethlehem,far from his parents’ home in Nazareth. According to kinshiphospitality customs, Joseph and Mary would have expected to stay withdistant relatives in Bethlehem. It is likely that they were unwelcomebecause of Jesus’ status as an illegitimate child; thus Maryhad to give birth elsewhere and place the infant Jesus in a feedingtrough (Luke 2:7). A similar response was seen years later inNazareth when Jesus was identified as “Mary’s son”(Mark 6:3) rather than through his paternal line, thereby shaming himas one who was born an illegitimate child. Jesus was likewiserejected at the end of his life as the crowds cried, “Crucifyhim!” (Matt. 27:22–23; Mark 15:13–14; Luke 23:21;John 19:6, 15). When Jesus was arrested, most of his followers fled(Matt. 26:56; Mark 14:50–52), and a core disciple, Peter,vehemently denied knowing him (Matt. 26:69–74; Mark 14:66–71;Luke 22:55–60; John 18:15–17, 25–27). His ownsiblings did not believe in him (John 7:5) and were evidently ashamedof his fate, since from the cross Jesus placed the care of his motherinto the hands of “the disciple whom he loved” (19:26–27)rather than the next brother in line, as was customary.
Baptism,temptation, and start of ministry.After Jesus was baptized by the prophet John the Baptist (Luke3:21–22), God affirmed his pleasure with him by referring tohim as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22).Jesus’ baptism did not launch him into fame and instantministry success; instead, Jesus was led by the Spirit into thewilderness, where he was tempted for forty days (Matt. 4:1–11;Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). Mark stresses that thetemptations immediately followed the baptism. Matthew and Lukeidentify three specific temptations by the devil, though their orderfor the last two is reversed. Both Matthew and Luke agree that Jesuswas tempted to turn stones into bread, expect divine interventionafter jumping off the temple portico, and receive all the world’skingdoms for worshiping the devil. Jesus resisted all temptation,quoting Scripture in response.
Matthewand Mark record that Jesus began his ministry in Capernaum inGalilee, after the arrest of John the Baptist (Matt. 4:12–13;Mark 1:14). Luke says that Jesus started his ministry at about thirtyyears of age (3:23). This may be meant to indicate full maturity orperhaps correlate this age with the onset of the service of theLevites in the temple (cf. Num. 4:3). John narrates the beginning ofJesus’ ministry by focusing on the calling of the disciples andthe sign performed at a wedding at Cana (1:35–2:11).
Jesus’public ministry: chronology.Jesus’ ministry started in Galilee, probably around AD 27/28,and ended with his death around AD 30 in Jerusalem. The temple hadbeen forty-six years in construction (generally interpreted as thetemple itself and the wider temple complex) when Jesus drove out themoney changers (John 2:20). According to Josephus, the rebuilding andexpansion of the second temple had started in 20/19 BC, during theeighteenth year of Herod’s reign (Ant. 15.380). The ministry ofJohn the Baptist had commenced in the fifteenth year of Tiberius(Luke 3:1–2), who had become a coregent in AD 11/12. From thesedates of the start of the temple building and the correlation of thereign of Tiberius to John the Baptist’s ministry, the onset ofJesus’ ministry can probably be dated to AD 27/28.
TheGospel of John mentions three Passovers and another unnamed feast inJohn 5:1. The length of Jesus’ ministry thus extended overthree or four Passovers, equaling about three or three and a halfyears. Passover, which took place on the fifteenth of Nisan, came ona Friday in AD 30 and 33. The year of Jesus’ death wastherefore probably AD 30.
Jesus’ministry years may be divided broadly into his Galilean and hisJudean ministries. The Synoptic Gospels describe the ministry inGalilee from various angles but converge again as Jesus enters Judea.
Galileanministry.The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and aroundGalilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that thekingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment ofprophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ firstteaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30);the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for hiscalling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection andsuffering.
AllGospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in hisGalilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioningof the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers isrecorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministryis the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, inparticular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synopticsfocus on healings and exorcisms.
DuringJesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with hisidentity. However, evil spirits knew him to be of supreme authority(Mark 3:11). Jesus was criticized by outsiders and by his own family(3:21). The scribes from Jerusalem identified him as a partner ofBeelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesustold parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growingkingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humblebeginnings (4:1–32).
TheSynoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful.No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority orability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized manydemons (Mark 5:1–13), raised the dead (Mark 5:35–42), fedfive thousand (Mark 6:30–44), and walked on water (Mark6:48–49).
Inthe later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew andtraveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are notwritten with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns toGalilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey toJerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fearresolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee,where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ discipleswith lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed thePharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents(7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demandinga sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, whoconfessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus didprovide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).
Jesuswithdrew from Galilee to Tyre and Sidon, where a Syrophoenician womanrequested healing for her daughter. Jesus replied, “I was sentonly to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Galileans hadlong resented the Syrian provincial leadership partiality thatallotted governmental funds in ways that made the Jews receive mere“crumbs.” Consequently, when the woman replied, “Eventhe dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table,”Jesus applauded her faith (Matt. 15:27–28). Healing a deaf-muteman in the Decapolis provided another example of Jesus’ministry in Gentile territory (Mark 7:31–37). Peter’sconfession of Jesus as the Christ took place during Jesus’travel to Caesarea Philippi, a well-known Gentile territory. The citywas the ancient center of worship of the Hellenistic god Pan.
Judeanministry.Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry ashe resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually ledto his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem intothree phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27).The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of thejourney. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, andthe demands on discipleship intensified as Jesus approached Jerusalem(Matt. 20:17–19, 26–28; Mark 10:38–39, 43–45;Luke 14:25–35). Luke presents the second phase of the journeytoward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvationand judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase ofthe journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are themain themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).
Socialconflicts with religious leaders increased throughout Jesus’ministry. These conflicts led to lively challenge-riposteinteractions concerning the Pharisaic schools of Shammai and Hillel(Matt. 19:1–12; Mark 10:1–12). Likewise, socioeconomicfeathers were ruffled as Jesus welcomed young children, who hadlittle value in society (Matt. 19:13–15; Mark 10:13–16;Luke 18:15–17).
PassionWeek, death, and resurrection. Eachof the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with thecrowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Lukedescribes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during whichJesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).
InJerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17).Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because thewhole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “beganlooking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segmentof Jerusalem’s temple leadership inquired about Jesus’authority (11:27–33). Jesus replied with cunning questions(12:16, 35–36), stories (12:1–12), denunciation(12:38–44), and a prediction of Jerusalem’s owndestruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, JudasIscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’arrest (14:10–11).
Atthe Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a newcovenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29;Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned thedisciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and laterhe prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agonyand submissiveness in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–42;Mark 14:32–42; Luke 22:39–42). His arrest, trial,crucifixion, death, and resurrection followed (Matt. 26:46–28:15;Mark 14:43–16:8; Luke 22:47–24:9; John 18:1–20:18).Jesus finally commissioned his disciples to continue his mission bymaking disciples of all the nations (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 1:8)and ascended to heaven with the promise that he will one day return(Luke 24:50–53; Acts 1:9–11).
TheIdentity of Jesus Christ
Variousaspects of Jesus’ identity are stressed in the four NT Gospels,depending on their target audiences. In the Gospels the witnesses toJesus’ ministry are portrayed as constantly questioning andexamining his identity (Matt. 11:2–5; 12:24; 26:63; 27:11; Mark3:22; 8:11; 11:28; 14:61; Luke 7:18–20; 11:15; 22:67, 70;23:39; John 7:20, 25–27; 18:37). Only beings of the spiritualrealm are certain of his divinity (Mark 1:34; 3:11; Luke 4:41). AtJesus’ baptism, God referred to him as his Son, whom he loved(Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Likewise, when Jesus wastransfigured in the presence of Peter, James, and John, a voiceaffirmed, “This is my Son, whom I love” (Matt. 17:5; Mark9:7). At the moment of his death, the questioning of Jesus’identity culminated in a confession by a Roman centurion and otherguards: “Surely he was the Son of God!” (Matt. 27:54; cf.Mark 15:39).
Miracleworker.In the first-century setting, folk healers and miracle workers werepart of the fabric of society. Jesus, however, performed signs andmiracles in order to demonstrate the authority of the kingdom of Godover various realms: disease, illness, the spiritual world, nature,and even future events. Especially in the Gospel of John, Jesus’signs and miracles are used to show his authority and thus hisidentity.
Nochallenge superseded Jesus’ authority. Among his ample miraclesand signs, he changed water into wine (John 2:7–9), calmed astorm in the sea (Matt. 8:23–27; Mark 4:35–39; Luke8:22–25), exorcized demons (Matt. 9:32–34; Mark 5:1–13;Luke 9:42–43), healed the sick (Mark 1:40–44), raised thedead (Matt. 9:23–25; Mark 5:35–42; Luke 7:1–16;8:49–54; John 11:17, 38–44), performed miraculousfeedings (Matt. 14:17–21; 15:34–38; Mark 6:30–44;8:5–9; Luke 9:10–17; John 6:8–13), and walked onwater (Matt. 14:25–26; Mark 6:48–49; John 6:19).
ThePharisees requested miracles as evidence of his authority (Mark8:11–12). Jesus refused, claiming that a wicked and adulterousgeneration asks for a miraculous sign (Matt. 12:38–39; 16:1–4).The only sign that he would give was the sign of Jonah—hisdeath and resurrection three days later—a personal sacrifice,taking upon himself the judgment of the world (Matt. 12:39–41).
Rabbi/teacher.Jesus’ teaching style was similar to other first-century rabbisor Pharisees (Mark 9:5; 10:51; John 1:38; 3:2). What distinguishedhim was that he spoke with great personal authority (Matt. 5:22, 28,32, 39, 44; Mark 1:22). Like other rabbis of his day, Jesus gathereddisciples. He called these men to observe his lifestyle and to joinhim in his ministry of teaching, healing, and exorcism (Matt. 10:1–4;Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16).
Jesusused a variety of teaching methods. He frequently spoke in parables(Matt. 6:24; 13:24–52; 18:10–14, 23–35;21:28–22:14; 24:32–36, 45–51; 25:14–30; Mark4:1–34; 12:1–12; 13:28–34; Luke 8:4–18;12:41–46; 13:18–21; 14:15–24; 15:1–16:15,19–31; 18:1–14; 19:11–27; 20:9–19; 21:29–33),used figures of speech (John 10:9), hyperbole (Matt. 19:24; Mark10:25; Luke 18:25), argumentation (Matt. 26:11), object lessons(Matt. 24:32), frequent repetition (Matt. 13:44–47; Luke13:18–21), practical examples, and personal guidance.
Majorthemes in Jesus’ teaching include the kingdom of God, the costof discipleship, internal righteousness, the end of the age, hisidentity, his mission, and his approaching death. In his teachings,observance of Torah was given new context and meaning because God’skingdom had “come near” (Matt. 3:2). Jesus had come tofulfill the law (Matt. 5:17).
Jesus’teaching ministry often took place amid social conflict. Theseconflicts were couched in so-called challenge-riposte interactions inwhich the honor status of those involved was at stake. Jesus usedthese interactions as teachable moments. When questioned, Jesus gavereplies that reveal omniscience or intimate knowledge of God’swill, especially in the Gospel of John. In the Synoptic Gospels,Jesus’ answers are both ethical and practical in nature. TheSynoptics portray Jesus as challenged repeatedly with accusations ofviolating customs specified in the Jewish law. Jesus’ answersto such accusations often echoed the essence of 1Sam. 15:22,“To obey is better than sacrifice,” phrased by Jesus as“I desire mercy, not sacrifice” (Matt. 9:13; 12:7). Anoverall “better than” ethic was common in Jesus’public teaching.
TheSermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7) contains a “better than”ethic in which internal obedience is better than mere outwardobedience. For example, Jesus said that anger without cause is equalto murder (Matt. 5:21–22), that looking at a woman lustfullyamounts to adultery (Matt. 5:28), and that instead of revengingwrongs one must reciprocate with love (Matt. 5:38–48). Jesusvalued compassion above traditions and customs, even those containedwithin the OT law. He desired internal obedience above the letter ofthe law.
Jesus’teachings found their authority in the reality of God’simminent kingdom (Matt. 3:2; 10:7; Mark 1:15; Luke 10:9),necessitating repentance (Matt. 3:2), belief (Mark 1:15), dependence(Matt. 18:3–5; Mark 10:15), and loyalty to a new community—thefamily of Jesus followers (Mark 3:34; 10:29–30). Jesus urged,“Seek first [God’s] kingdom and his righteousness”(Matt. 6:33). Preaching with such urgency was common among propheticteachers of the intertestamental period. Jesus, however, had his owngrounds for urgency. He held that God deeply valued all humans (Matt.10:31) and would bring judgment swiftly (Matt. 25:31–46).
Examplesof a “greater good” ethic in the Synoptics include theoccasions when Jesus ate with sinners (Mark 2:16–17). Jesusused an aphorism in response to accusations about his associationswith sinners, saying, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor,but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners”(Mark 2:17). He advocated harvesting and healing on the Sabbath (Mark2:23–28; 3:1–6), and when he was accused of breaking thelaw, he pointed to an OT exception (1Sam. 21:1–6) todeclare compassion appropriate for the Sabbath. Jesus also appliedthe “greater good” ethic in the case of divorce, sincewomen suffered the societal stigma of adultery and commonly becameoutcasts following divorce (Matt. 19:8–9; Mark 10:5–9).
Jesus’kingdom teachings were simultaneously spiritual, ethical, andeschatological in application. The teachings were aimed at internaltransformation (Matt. 5:3–9; 18:3; Mark 10:15) and spurring onlove (Matt. 5:44; 7:21). The Spirit of the Lord had called Jesus tobless the hurting ones as they aspired to a godly character. Jesustaught, “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father isperfect” (Matt. 5:48), and “Be merciful, just as yourFather is merciful” (Luke 6:36). The “blessed” onesin Jesus’ teachings are poor of spirit, peace driven, mournful,and hungry for righteousness, consumed with emulating godlycharacter.
Somescholars believe that Jesus promoted an “interim ethic”for the kingdom, intended only for a short period prior to the end oftime. However, he was explicit regarding the longevity of histeachings: “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words willnever pass away” (Matt. 24:35; Luke 16:17).
Messiah.The concept of an anointed one, a messiah, who would restore theglories of David’s kingdom and bring political stability wascommon in Jewish expectation. Both before and after the Babyloniancaptivity, many Jews longed for one who would bring peace andprotection. Israel’s prophets had spoken of a coming deliverer,one who would restore David’s kingdom and reign in justice andrighteousness (2Sam. 7:11–16; Isa. 9:1–7; 11:1–16;Jer. 23:5–6; 33:15–16; Ezek. 37:25; Dan. 2:44; Mic. 5:2;Zech. 9:9). Isaiah’s description of the servant (Isa. 53) whosesuffering healed the nation provided a slightly different angle ofexpectation in terms of a deliverer.
Jesus’authority and popularity as a miracle worker called up messianicimages in first-century Jewish minds. On several occasions hearerscalled him “Son of David,” hoping for the Messiah (Matt.12:23; 21:9). Simon Peter was the first follower who confessed Jesusas the Christ, the “Messiah” (Matt. 16:16; Mark 8:29). Inline with Isaiah’s model of the Suffering Servant, Jesusfocused not on political ends but rather on spiritual regenerationthrough his own sacrificial death (Mark 10:45).
Eschatologicalprophet.Many scholars claim that Jesus is best understood as a Jewishapocalypticist, an eschatological prophet who expected God tointervene in history, destroy the wicked, and bring in the kingdom ofGod. Central in this understanding are Jesus’ propheciesconcerning the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem (Matt. 24:1–2,15–22; Mark 13:1; Luke 21:5–24; John 2:19; Acts 6:14). Inaddition, it is noted that Jesus had twelve disciples, representativeof the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:2–28; Luke 22:23–30).Certain of Jesus’ parables, those with apocalyptic images ofcoming judgment, present Jesus as an eschatological prophet (Matt.24:45–25:30; Luke 12:41–46; 19:11–27).
SufferingSon of God.Jesus’ first recorded teaching in a synagogue in Nazareth wasparadigmatic (Luke 4:16–21). He attributed the reading, Isa.61:1–2, to his personal calling to serve, and in doing so herevealed a trajectory of suffering. The Gospel of Mark likewise aptlyportrays Jesus as the suffering Son of God. Jesus’ ownteachings incorporated his upcoming suffering (Mark 8:31; 9:12–13,31; 10:33–34). He summarized his mission by declaring, “TheSon of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give hislife as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). His earthly careerended with a trial in Jerusalem consisting of both Roman and Jewishcomponents (Matt. 26:57–68; 27:1–31; Mark 14:53–65;15:1–20; Luke 22:54–23:25; John 18:19–24;18:28–19:16). He was insulted, scourged, mocked, and crucified.
Jesus’suffering culminated in his humiliating death by crucifixion (Matt.27:33–50; Mark 15:22–37; Luke 23:33–46; John19:16–30). Crucifixion was a death of unimaginable horror,bringing shame and humiliation to the victim and his family. Anyonehanging on a tree was considered cursed (Deut. 21:23; Gal. 3:13).Thus, especially in a Jewish society, anyone associated with acrucified person bore the shame of following one who was executed asa lowly slave and left as a cursed corpse. The apostle Paul referredto this shame of the cross when he stated, “I am not ashamed ofthe gospel” (Rom. 1:16).
ExaltedLord.Jesus had prophesied that he would rise again (Matt. 16:21; 17:9, 23;20:19; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:34; Luke 9:22; 18:33; 24:7, 46).The testimony of the Synoptics is that the resurrection of JesusChrist indeed occurred on the third day, Christ having died on Friday(Mark 15:42–45; Luke 23:52–54; John 19:30–33) andrisen again on Sunday (Matt. 28:1–7; Mark 16:2–7; Luke24:1–7; John 20:1–16). The resurrected Jesus waswitnessed by the women (Matt. 28:8–9), the eleven disciples(Matt. 28:16–17; Luke 24:36–43), and travelers on theroad to Emmaus (Luke 24:31–32). According to Paul, he appearedto as many as five hundred others (1Cor. 15:6). He appeared inbodily form, spoke, showed his scars, and ate (Luke 24:39–43;John 20:27; Acts 1:4). After forty postresurrection days, Jesusascended into the heavenly realm (Acts 1:9).
Asmuch as Jesus’ death was the epitome of shame, his victory overdeath was his ultimate exaltation (Phil. 2:5–11). At Pentecost,Peter proclaimed that in the resurrection God fulfilled OT promises(Ps. 16:10) by raising his Son from the grave (Acts 2:30–31).Furthermore, Christ provided freedom from the law through hisresurrection (Rom. 5:13–14), God’s approval of his lifeand work (Phil. 2:8–9), and God’s designation of him asLord over all the earth, the living and the dead (Acts 17:30–31;Phil. 2:10; Heb. 1:3), and over all his enemies (Eph. 1:20–23).
Jesus’exaltation commenced the beginning of forgiveness and justification(Luke 24:46–47; Acts 13:30–39; Rom. 4:25) and hisintercession for the people of God (Rom. 8:34). His ascensionsignaled the coming of the Holy Spirit as comforter and teacher (John14:26; Acts 2:33) and was accompanied by the promise of his return inglory (Luke 24:51), at which time he will render judgment (Matt.19:28; 24:31; Rev. 20:11–15) and establish his eternal kingdom(1Cor. 15:24; 2Tim. 4:1; Rev. 11:15; 22:5).
Jesus’Purpose and Community
Inthe Gospel of Matthew, Jesus is the long-awaited Messiah, whopreaches the good news of the kingdom, urging people to repent(4:17–23). Repentance and belief allow one to enter thekingdom. The call into the kingdom is a call into a new covenant, onemade in Jesus’ blood (26:28).
Inthe prologue to the Gospel of Mark, the narrator reveals the identityof Jesus (1:1). Jesus is presented as the one who brings good tidingsof salvation (cf. Isa. 40:9; 52:7; 61:1). The centrality of thegospel, the good news (Mark 1:14–15), is evident.
Lukelikewise presents the preaching of the good news as a main purpose ofJesus’ ministry (4:43). The content of this good news is thekingdom of God (4:43; 8:1; 16:16). When the disciples of John theBaptist asked Jesus if he was the one who was to come (7:20), Jesusanswered, “Go back and report to John what you have seen andheard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosyare cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good newsis proclaimed to the poor” (7:22). The kingdom of God, aspresented in Luke, brings freedom for the prisoners, recovery ofsight for the blind, and release for the oppressed (4:18). Jesus’healings and exorcisms announce the coming kingdom of God alreadypresent in the ministry of Jesus (4:40–44; 6:18–20;8:1–2; 9:2; 10:8–9).
Inthe Gospel of John, Jesus testifies to the good news by way of signsthroughout his ministry. These signs point to Jesus’ glory, hisidentity, and the significance of his ministry. Jesus is the Messiah,the Son of God, who offers eternal and abundant life. This abundantlife is lived out in community.
Inthe Gospel of John, the disciples of Jesus represent the community ofGod (17:21). The disciples did not belong to the world, but theycontinued to live in the world (17:14–16). Throughout hisministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a callto loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38;Luke 9:23–26), a call to the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50;Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock Iwill build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call tocommunity. Jesus’ presence as the head of the community wasreplaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18).
Jesus’ministry continued in the community of Jesus’ followers, God’sfamily—the church. Entrance into the community was obtained byadopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and through theinitiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26;Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–62; John 1:12; 3:16;10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9).
TheQuests for the Historical Jesus
Thequest for the historical Jesus, or seeking who Jesus was from ahistorical perspective, is a modern phenomenon deemed necessary byscholars who claim that the NT Gospels were written long after Jesus’death and were heavily influenced by the post-Easter understanding ofthe church.
Thebeginning of this quest is often dated to 1770, when the lecturenotes of Hermann Samuel Reimarus were published posthumously.Reimarus had launched an inquiry into the identity of Jesus thatrejected as inauthentic all supernatural elements in the Gospels. Heconcluded that the disciples invented Jesus’ miracles,prophecies, ritualistic religion, and resurrection. Reimarus’sconclusions were not widely accepted, but they set off a flurry ofrationalistic research into the historical Jesus that continuedthroughout the nineteenth century. This became known as the “firstquest” for the historical Jesus.
In1906 German theologian Albert Schweit-zer published The Quest of theHistorical Jesus (German title: Von Reimarus zu Wrede: EineGeschichte der Leben-Jesu-Forschung), a scathing indictment of thefirst quest. Schweitzer’s work showed that nineteenth-centuryresearchers re-created Jesus in their own image, transforming thehistorical Jesus into a modern philanthropist preaching aninoffensive message of love and brotherhood. Schweitzer’sconclusions marked the beginning of the end for this first quest.Schweitzer himself concluded that the historical Jesus was aneschatological prophet whose purposes failed during his last days inJerusalem.
Withthe demise of the first quest, some NT scholars, such as RudolfBultmann, rejected any claim to being able to discover the historicalJesus. This trend continued until 1953, when some of Bultmann’sformer students launched what has come to be known as the “newquest” for the historical Jesus (1953–c. 1970). Thisquest created new interest in the historical Jesus but was stilldominated by the view that the portrait of Jesus in the Gospels islargely a creation of the church in a post-Easter setting.
Asthe rebuilding years of the post–World WarII era wanedand scholars started to reap academic fruit from major archaeologicalfinds such as the DSS, research on the historical Jesus moved on towhat has been called the “third quest.” This quest seeksespecially to research and understand Jesus in his social andcultural setting.
John, along with his brother James, was a son of Zebedee anda fisherman, and a disciple of Jesus. He was first called to be adisciple when Jesus passed along the shore of Galilee (Matt. 4:21;Mark 1:19–20; Luke 5:10). The fishing boat belonging to John’sfamily contained hired men, indicating that he left behind aprofitable fishing trade (Mark 1:20). Jesus surnamed John and hisbrother James “Boanerges,” meaning “sons ofthunder” (Mark 3:17), likely a reflection of their boisteroustemperament.
John’spassionate temperament may be reflected in the Gospels in his attemptto confront potential opposition (Mark 9:38–41; Luke 9:49–50)and his desire to bring heavenly fire down upon those who rejectedJesus (Luke 9:54). James and John requested seats of honor in Jesus’kingdom (Mark 10:37–40). Matthew clarified this event by namingJames and John’s mother as the one voicing the request,something befitting the cultural setting (Matt. 20:20–22). Aspart of Jesus’ inner group of disciples, along with James andPeter, John was allowed to witness Jesus’ actions on certaincritical occasions: raising a child from the dead (Mark 5:37–43),his transfiguration (Matt. 17:1–2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28–30),and his agony in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–38; Mark14:32–34; Luke 22:39–40).
Inits account of Jesus’ passion, the Gospel of John highlightsthe actions of an unnamed disciple “whom Jesus loved.”John is the likeliest candidate. This disciple leaned on Jesus at thefinal supper (John 13:23), was given care of Jesus’ mother(19:26), arrived first at the empty tomb (20:2–4), firstrecognized the resurrected Jesus (21:7), was prophesied to live along life (21:23), and was an eyewitness of events in the Gospel(21:24).
Johnwas among the disciples who stayed in Jerusalem in the upper roomprior to Pentecost (Acts 1:13–14). John next was seen afterPentecost with Peter in accounts of the healing of a crippled beggar(3:1–11) and the two of them being arrested for proclaiming thegospel (4:1–23).
Johnis said to have authored the Fourth Gospel (John 21:20–24). TheGospel of John was written with a purpose stated explicitly by itsauthor: “That you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, theSon of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name”(20:31). This “believing” encapsulates several keyconvictions that the author sought to convey. First, Jesus is onewith God as preexistent and operative in creation (1:1–4, 10,18). Second, Jesus is the messianic Savior to God’s chosenpeople (1:41; 11:27) and all humankind (4:42). In the JohannineGospel, salvation is conceived in God’s love (3:16), formalizedby the sacrifice of his Son (1:29; 3:16), and received by thoseholding orthodox belief in Jesus’ divine identity (8:24) andorigin (12:44; 17:21). Finally, believing includes the convictionthat Jesus is one with God, expressed through sonship (1:19–2:11).In the Johannine Gospel, sonship is conveyed literarily andbuttresses the certainty that Jesus is sufficient to provide eternallife. Messianic realities mingled with sonship distinguish Jesus asthe ultimate revelation of God, thus complementing, whilesubordinating, previous Jewish religious convictions. In addition tothe Gospel of John, tradition attributes the Johannine Letters and,in some cases, the Revelation of John to the apostle John.
Johnthe apostle is understood in his older days to have been a member ofa community with disciples of his own, commonly known as theJohannine Community. Within this community the teachings of Johnabout Jesus were preserved and written down. In addition, hiscorrespondence was preserved—1John, 2John, and3John.
Grief is great sadness or sorrow or the circ*mstances thatproduce such; mourning refers to expressions of grief. Grief andmourning are often thought of in conjunction with death, but they mayoccur with regard to any personal or national tragedy (2Sam.13:19), the impending prospect of tragedy (Esther 4:3; Isa. 37:1), orrepentance prompted by prophetic word of tragedy, sorrow over sin, orboth.
Theexpressions of mourning in the Bible include weeping (Gen. 23:2),wailing (Esther 4:3; Isa. 15:3; Mark 5:38), tearing clothes andwearing sackcloth (Gen. 37:34; 2Sam. 3:31), lying on the ground(2Sam. 13:31), putting dust and ashes on the head or sitting ondust and ashes (Ezek. 27:30), fasting (2Sam. 3:35; 12:16),singing songs of lament (2Sam. 1:17–27; 3:32–35),pulling hair out of one’s beard (Ezra 9:3), cutting the hair(Jer. 7:29), uncovering the head (Lev. 10:6), removing sandals (Ezek.24:17, 23), covering the lips or mouth (Ezek. 24:17, 22; Mic. 3:7),and employing professional mourners (Jer. 9:17; Matt. 9:23; Mark5:38). Some pagan mourning practices were prohibited, such asslashing the body, cutting patterns into the body (tattooing?), andthe somewhat obscure act of making the forehead bald (Lev. 19:28;Deut. 14:1; cf. 1Kings 18:28).
Thus,grief and mourning were anything but stoic and brief. Grief wasexpressed both physically and vocally, often loudly, with expressionsranging from inarticulate groaning to poetic compositions in song.Although women may have been prominent among professional mourners,expressing grief was not considered unmasculine. Several times Davidwas a leader in expressing grief. That the expression of grief shouldbe brief, relatively dispassionate, and primarily characteristic ofwomen was a Greek development that entered the church through peoplesuch as Augustine, who, for example, felt grieved that he had verybriefly grieved the loss of his mother.
Paul’sadmonition that believers should not grieve as do those who have nohope (1Thess. 4:13) should not be construed as a dictum that itis wrong to grieve. The thought of the resurrection is a comfort in,not a replacement for, grief. Even Jesus wept at the death ofLazarus, knowing full well that he would soon resurrect him (John11:25, 35, 40). Further, saints who have died and gone to heavenlament (Rev. 6:10). Grief is restricted for active-duty priests andonce for Ezekiel, but these are clearly special circ*mstances andillustrate the normalcy of giving expression to grief. Ezekiel was tomoan with a groaning for the dead (often misread as groaningsilently) when his wife died, but he was not to engage in anymourning rites (Ezek. 24:15–27). This illustrated to Judah thecirc*mstances that they would face, without opportunity to mournproperly for their dead. Ezekiel 8:14 indicts the women of Jerusalemfor “mourning for Tammuz,” a pagan ritual involving thecycle of life, death, and rebirth of the Babylonian god Dumuzi.
Songsof lament are common in the OT. David composed a song of lamenthonoring the deaths of Saul and Jonathan (2Sam. 1:17–27).After Joab’s unauthorized killing of Abner, David also sang alament for Abner and required Joab to participate in mourning rituals(3:31–37). David also mourned his own sons: the unnamed son ofBathsheba (12:16–18), Amnon (13:30–33), and Absalom(18:33–19:4). In the case of Bathsheba’s son, Davidmourned in advance of the boy’s death, which had beenprophetically proclaimed through Nathan. As the consequences of hissins continued, he progressively became undone in the mourning of hisother sons. Also, funeral songs are used as the form of someprophetic material (Ezek. 19:1–14; 26:17–18; 27:2–9,25–36; cf. Jer. 22:18; Amos 5:16). Not all laments are funeralsongs perse. Compare also the book of Lamentations and thepsalms of lament, also known as complaint psalms.
Expressionsof grief and mourning were called for as part of repentance,combining both fear of punishment and depth of sorrow over sin(2Chron. 34:19; Isa. 15:3; Joel 1:13).
On several occasions Jesus commanded demons or individuals torefrain from announcing his identity or making known a miracle thathe performed. These commands to keep silent are found in Luke andMatthew, but more frequently in Mark (1:25, 34, 44; 3:12; 5:43; 7:36;8:26, 30; 9:9). Since Jesus came to reveal himself as Israel’strue Messiah, these prohibitions against the public proclamation ofhis identity and certain miracles that he performed are puzzling.This feature in Mark’s Gospel has been called the “messianicsecret.” Several examples are as follows:
Mark1:24–25: Jesus silenced an evil spirit that identified him asthe “Holy One of God.”
Mark1:34: Jesus prohibited demons from speaking because they knew who hewas (see also 3:12).
Mark1:44: Jesus commanded a leper whom he healed not to tell anyone.
Mark5:43: Jesus commanded those present at the healing of Jairus’sdaughter not to tell anyone.
Mark7:36: After healing a deaf and mute man, Jesus ordered those presentnot to tell anyone.
Mark8:30: When Peter confessed Jesus to be the Christ, Jesus commandedhim not to tell anyone.
Mark9:9: After the transfiguration, Jesus commanded Peter, James, andJohn not to tell anyone what they saw until after his resurrection.
Severalexplanations have been proposed concerning the motive behind theso-called messianic secret and the commands to keep silent. Oneinterpretation, proposed by William Wrede in 1901 in his book TheMessianic Secret, attempted to explain why Jesus was not accepted asthe Messiah during his earthly ministry. Wrede argued that Jesusnever conceived of himself as the Messiah. Rather, the early churchdesignated him as such after the resurrection. Thus Mark, writing forthe church, fashioned his Gospel, inserting these passages to make itappear that Jesus privately taught the disciples that he really wasthe Messiah, even though he prohibited this proclamation in public.Others have proposed that Mark was actually attempting to softenJesus’ claims to be the Messiah.
Thereare, however, better explanations of why Jesus sometimes instructedindividuals not to broadcast his identity or tell of a miracle thathe performed. In each case or context the reason for silence isprobably slightly different. A frequent explanation is that Jesus didnot want to encourage false messianic expectations. Many Jewsimagined the Messiah to be a political and/or military figure whowould deliver the nation from its Gentile oppressors. Most Jews didnot expect or welcome a suffering Christ. From God’sperspective, hailing him as Messiah while rejecting or being ignorantof his redemptive plans would have been counterproductive to hispurpose. In light of this, some interpreters maintain that the veilof secrecy was lifted as Jesus neared Passion Week (Mark 10:47–48;12:6–7; 14:62).
Asecond reason for silence, regarding those cases where demonsproclaimed his identity, was that God had sovereignly chosen men andwomen to be his witnesses, not wicked spirits. Even in the caseswhere demonic announcements concerning Jesus were accurate, theiradvertisem*nt surely would skew the character of the message andhinder its reception.
Third,Jesus withheld further revelation of his identity and messianic powerfrom those who were rejecting his claims (Matt. 13:16; Mark 4:24–25).
Fourth,miracles sometimes conjured up the wrong kind of faith. Multitudessought miracles without embracing the Messiah (Mark 1:32–38;John 6:2, 14–15, 26).
Fifth,sometimes Jesus’ prohibitions against identifying him weredisobeyed, and in most cases the command to silence did not hinderthe amazement and wonder at what had taken place (Mark 1:27, 45;5:42; 7:36–37). This inability to keep quiet regarding whoJesus was and what he did reinforced the uniqueness of his identityand emphasized how remarkable the Messiah and his miracles were.
Finally,an overly zealous response to Jesus endangered his purpose ofcompleting his earthly ministry according to God’s timetable.This is most clearly stated in John’s Gospel (2:4; 7:6, 8, 30;8:20; 12:23, 27; 13:1; 16:32; 17:1). Jesus needed to fully proclaimhis message to the nation and prepare his disciples before his death(Mark 1:38). A premature arrest and trial would have defeated thispurpose.
Grief is great sadness or sorrow or the circ*mstances thatproduce such; mourning refers to expressions of grief. Grief andmourning are often thought of in conjunction with death, but they mayoccur with regard to any personal or national tragedy (2Sam.13:19), the impending prospect of tragedy (Esther 4:3; Isa. 37:1), orrepentance prompted by prophetic word of tragedy, sorrow over sin, orboth.
Theexpressions of mourning in the Bible include weeping (Gen. 23:2),wailing (Esther 4:3; Isa. 15:3; Mark 5:38), tearing clothes andwearing sackcloth (Gen. 37:34; 2Sam. 3:31), lying on the ground(2Sam. 13:31), putting dust and ashes on the head or sitting ondust and ashes (Ezek. 27:30), fasting (2Sam. 3:35; 12:16),singing songs of lament (2Sam. 1:17–27; 3:32–35),pulling hair out of one’s beard (Ezra 9:3), cutting the hair(Jer. 7:29), uncovering the head (Lev. 10:6), removing sandals (Ezek.24:17, 23), covering the lips or mouth (Ezek. 24:17, 22; Mic. 3:7),and employing professional mourners (Jer. 9:17; Matt. 9:23; Mark5:38). Some pagan mourning practices were prohibited, such asslashing the body, cutting patterns into the body (tattooing?), andthe somewhat obscure act of making the forehead bald (Lev. 19:28;Deut. 14:1; cf. 1Kings 18:28).
Thus,grief and mourning were anything but stoic and brief. Grief wasexpressed both physically and vocally, often loudly, with expressionsranging from inarticulate groaning to poetic compositions in song.Although women may have been prominent among professional mourners,expressing grief was not considered unmasculine. Several times Davidwas a leader in expressing grief. That the expression of grief shouldbe brief, relatively dispassionate, and primarily characteristic ofwomen was a Greek development that entered the church through peoplesuch as Augustine, who, for example, felt grieved that he had verybriefly grieved the loss of his mother.
Paul’sadmonition that believers should not grieve as do those who have nohope (1Thess. 4:13) should not be construed as a dictum that itis wrong to grieve. The thought of the resurrection is a comfort in,not a replacement for, grief. Even Jesus wept at the death ofLazarus, knowing full well that he would soon resurrect him (John11:25, 35, 40). Further, saints who have died and gone to heavenlament (Rev. 6:10). Grief is restricted for active-duty priests andonce for Ezekiel, but these are clearly special circ*mstances andillustrate the normalcy of giving expression to grief. Ezekiel was tomoan with a groaning for the dead (often misread as groaningsilently) when his wife died, but he was not to engage in anymourning rites (Ezek. 24:15–27). This illustrated to Judah thecirc*mstances that they would face, without opportunity to mournproperly for their dead. Ezekiel 8:14 indicts the women of Jerusalemfor “mourning for Tammuz,” a pagan ritual involving thecycle of life, death, and rebirth of the Babylonian god Dumuzi.
Songsof lament are common in the OT. David composed a song of lamenthonoring the deaths of Saul and Jonathan (2Sam. 1:17–27).After Joab’s unauthorized killing of Abner, David also sang alament for Abner and required Joab to participate in mourning rituals(3:31–37). David also mourned his own sons: the unnamed son ofBathsheba (12:16–18), Amnon (13:30–33), and Absalom(18:33–19:4). In the case of Bathsheba’s son, Davidmourned in advance of the boy’s death, which had beenprophetically proclaimed through Nathan. As the consequences of hissins continued, he progressively became undone in the mourning of hisother sons. Also, funeral songs are used as the form of someprophetic material (Ezek. 19:1–14; 26:17–18; 27:2–9,25–36; cf. Jer. 22:18; Amos 5:16). Not all laments are funeralsongs perse. Compare also the book of Lamentations and thepsalms of lament, also known as complaint psalms.
Expressionsof grief and mourning were called for as part of repentance,combining both fear of punishment and depth of sorrow over sin(2Chron. 34:19; Isa. 15:3; Joel 1:13).
Grief is great sadness or sorrow or the circ*mstances thatproduce such; mourning refers to expressions of grief. Grief andmourning are often thought of in conjunction with death, but they mayoccur with regard to any personal or national tragedy (2Sam.13:19), the impending prospect of tragedy (Esther 4:3; Isa. 37:1), orrepentance prompted by prophetic word of tragedy, sorrow over sin, orboth.
Theexpressions of mourning in the Bible include weeping (Gen. 23:2),wailing (Esther 4:3; Isa. 15:3; Mark 5:38), tearing clothes andwearing sackcloth (Gen. 37:34; 2Sam. 3:31), lying on the ground(2Sam. 13:31), putting dust and ashes on the head or sitting ondust and ashes (Ezek. 27:30), fasting (2Sam. 3:35; 12:16),singing songs of lament (2Sam. 1:17–27; 3:32–35),pulling hair out of one’s beard (Ezra 9:3), cutting the hair(Jer. 7:29), uncovering the head (Lev. 10:6), removing sandals (Ezek.24:17, 23), covering the lips or mouth (Ezek. 24:17, 22; Mic. 3:7),and employing professional mourners (Jer. 9:17; Matt. 9:23; Mark5:38). Some pagan mourning practices were prohibited, such asslashing the body, cutting patterns into the body (tattooing?), andthe somewhat obscure act of making the forehead bald (Lev. 19:28;Deut. 14:1; cf. 1Kings 18:28).
Thus,grief and mourning were anything but stoic and brief. Grief wasexpressed both physically and vocally, often loudly, with expressionsranging from inarticulate groaning to poetic compositions in song.Although women may have been prominent among professional mourners,expressing grief was not considered unmasculine. Several times Davidwas a leader in expressing grief. That the expression of grief shouldbe brief, relatively dispassionate, and primarily characteristic ofwomen was a Greek development that entered the church through peoplesuch as Augustine, who, for example, felt grieved that he had verybriefly grieved the loss of his mother.
Paul’sadmonition that believers should not grieve as do those who have nohope (1Thess. 4:13) should not be construed as a dictum that itis wrong to grieve. The thought of the resurrection is a comfort in,not a replacement for, grief. Even Jesus wept at the death ofLazarus, knowing full well that he would soon resurrect him (John11:25, 35, 40). Further, saints who have died and gone to heavenlament (Rev. 6:10). Grief is restricted for active-duty priests andonce for Ezekiel, but these are clearly special circ*mstances andillustrate the normalcy of giving expression to grief. Ezekiel was tomoan with a groaning for the dead (often misread as groaningsilently) when his wife died, but he was not to engage in anymourning rites (Ezek. 24:15–27). This illustrated to Judah thecirc*mstances that they would face, without opportunity to mournproperly for their dead. Ezekiel 8:14 indicts the women of Jerusalemfor “mourning for Tammuz,” a pagan ritual involving thecycle of life, death, and rebirth of the Babylonian god Dumuzi.
Songsof lament are common in the OT. David composed a song of lamenthonoring the deaths of Saul and Jonathan (2Sam. 1:17–27).After Joab’s unauthorized killing of Abner, David also sang alament for Abner and required Joab to participate in mourning rituals(3:31–37). David also mourned his own sons: the unnamed son ofBathsheba (12:16–18), Amnon (13:30–33), and Absalom(18:33–19:4). In the case of Bathsheba’s son, Davidmourned in advance of the boy’s death, which had beenprophetically proclaimed through Nathan. As the consequences of hissins continued, he progressively became undone in the mourning of hisother sons. Also, funeral songs are used as the form of someprophetic material (Ezek. 19:1–14; 26:17–18; 27:2–9,25–36; cf. Jer. 22:18; Amos 5:16). Not all laments are funeralsongs perse. Compare also the book of Lamentations and thepsalms of lament, also known as complaint psalms.
Expressionsof grief and mourning were called for as part of repentance,combining both fear of punishment and depth of sorrow over sin(2Chron. 34:19; Isa. 15:3; Joel 1:13).
Grief is great sadness or sorrow or the circ*mstances thatproduce such; mourning refers to expressions of grief. Grief andmourning are often thought of in conjunction with death, but they mayoccur with regard to any personal or national tragedy (2Sam.13:19), the impending prospect of tragedy (Esther 4:3; Isa. 37:1), orrepentance prompted by prophetic word of tragedy, sorrow over sin, orboth.
Theexpressions of mourning in the Bible include weeping (Gen. 23:2),wailing (Esther 4:3; Isa. 15:3; Mark 5:38), tearing clothes andwearing sackcloth (Gen. 37:34; 2Sam. 3:31), lying on the ground(2Sam. 13:31), putting dust and ashes on the head or sitting ondust and ashes (Ezek. 27:30), fasting (2Sam. 3:35; 12:16),singing songs of lament (2Sam. 1:17–27; 3:32–35),pulling hair out of one’s beard (Ezra 9:3), cutting the hair(Jer. 7:29), uncovering the head (Lev. 10:6), removing sandals (Ezek.24:17, 23), covering the lips or mouth (Ezek. 24:17, 22; Mic. 3:7),and employing professional mourners (Jer. 9:17; Matt. 9:23; Mark5:38). Some pagan mourning practices were prohibited, such asslashing the body, cutting patterns into the body (tattooing?), andthe somewhat obscure act of making the forehead bald (Lev. 19:28;Deut. 14:1; cf. 1Kings 18:28).
Thus,grief and mourning were anything but stoic and brief. Grief wasexpressed both physically and vocally, often loudly, with expressionsranging from inarticulate groaning to poetic compositions in song.Although women may have been prominent among professional mourners,expressing grief was not considered unmasculine. Several times Davidwas a leader in expressing grief. That the expression of grief shouldbe brief, relatively dispassionate, and primarily characteristic ofwomen was a Greek development that entered the church through peoplesuch as Augustine, who, for example, felt grieved that he had verybriefly grieved the loss of his mother.
Paul’sadmonition that believers should not grieve as do those who have nohope (1Thess. 4:13) should not be construed as a dictum that itis wrong to grieve. The thought of the resurrection is a comfort in,not a replacement for, grief. Even Jesus wept at the death ofLazarus, knowing full well that he would soon resurrect him (John11:25, 35, 40). Further, saints who have died and gone to heavenlament (Rev. 6:10). Grief is restricted for active-duty priests andonce for Ezekiel, but these are clearly special circ*mstances andillustrate the normalcy of giving expression to grief. Ezekiel was tomoan with a groaning for the dead (often misread as groaningsilently) when his wife died, but he was not to engage in anymourning rites (Ezek. 24:15–27). This illustrated to Judah thecirc*mstances that they would face, without opportunity to mournproperly for their dead. Ezekiel 8:14 indicts the women of Jerusalemfor “mourning for Tammuz,” a pagan ritual involving thecycle of life, death, and rebirth of the Babylonian god Dumuzi.
Songsof lament are common in the OT. David composed a song of lamenthonoring the deaths of Saul and Jonathan (2Sam. 1:17–27).After Joab’s unauthorized killing of Abner, David also sang alament for Abner and required Joab to participate in mourning rituals(3:31–37). David also mourned his own sons: the unnamed son ofBathsheba (12:16–18), Amnon (13:30–33), and Absalom(18:33–19:4). In the case of Bathsheba’s son, Davidmourned in advance of the boy’s death, which had beenprophetically proclaimed through Nathan. As the consequences of hissins continued, he progressively became undone in the mourning of hisother sons. Also, funeral songs are used as the form of someprophetic material (Ezek. 19:1–14; 26:17–18; 27:2–9,25–36; cf. Jer. 22:18; Amos 5:16). Not all laments are funeralsongs perse. Compare also the book of Lamentations and thepsalms of lament, also known as complaint psalms.
Expressionsof grief and mourning were called for as part of repentance,combining both fear of punishment and depth of sorrow over sin(2Chron. 34:19; Isa. 15:3; Joel 1:13).
The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesusfollowers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christembodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in humanhistory.
Introduction
Name.Early Christians combined the name “Jesus” with the title“Christ” (Acts 5:42; NIV: “Messiah”). Thename “Jesus,” from the Hebrew Yehoshua or Yeshua, was acommon male name in first-century Judaism. The title “Christ”is from the Greek christos, a translation of the Hebrew mashiakh(“anointed one, messiah”). Christians eventually werenamed after Jesus’ title (Acts 11:26). During the ministry ofJesus, Peter was the first disciple to recognize Jesus as the Messiah(Matt. 16:16; Mark 9:29; Luke 9:20).
Sources.From the viewpoint of Christianity, the life and ministry of Jesusconstitute the turning point in human history. From a historicalperspective, ample early source materials would be expected. Indeed,both Christian and non-Christian first-century and earlysecond-century literary sources are extant, but they are few innumber. In part, this low incidence is due to society’s initialresistance to the Jesus followers’ movement. The ancient Romanhistorian Tacitus called Christianity “a superstition,”since its beliefs did not fit with the culture’s prevailingworldview and thus were considered antisocial. Early literary sourcestherefore are either in-group documents or allusions in non-Christiansources.
TheNT Gospels are the principal sources for the life and ministry ofJesus. They consist of Matthew, Mark, Luke (the Synoptic Gospels),and John. Most scholars adhere to the so-called Four SourceHypothesis. In this theory, Mark was written first and was used as asource by Matthew and Luke, who also used the sayings source Q (fromGerman Quelle, meaning “source”) as well as their ownindividual sources M (Matthew) and L (Luke). John used additionalsources.
Theearly church tried to put together singular accounts, so-calledGospel harmonies, of the life of Jesus. The Gospel of the Ebionitesrepresents one such attempt based on the Synoptic Gospels. Anotherharmony, the Diatessaron, based on all four Gospels, was producedaround AD 170 by Tatian. Additional source materials concerning thelife of Christ are provided in the NT in texts such as Acts, thePauline Epistles, the General Epistles, and the Revelation of John.Paul wrote to the Galatians, “But when the time had fully come,God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law” (Gal. 4:4).The first narrative about Jesus by the Christian community was apassion narrative, the account of his death and resurrection. Thefirst extant references to this tradition are found in Paul’sletters (1Cor. 2:2; Gal. 3:1). The resurrection was recognizedfrom the beginning as the cornerstone of the Christian faith (1Cor.15:13–14).
Amongnon-Christian sources, the earliest reference to Jesus is found in aletter written circa AD 112 by Pliny the Younger, the Roman governorof Bithynia-Pontus (Ep. 10.96). The Roman historian Tacitus mentionsChristians and Jesus around AD 115 in his famous work about thehistory of Rome (Ann. 15.44). Another Roman historian, Suetonius,wrote around the same time concerning unrest among the Jews in Romebecause of a certain “Chrestos” (Claud. 25.4). Somescholars conclude that “Chrestos” is a misspelling of“Christos,” a reference to Jesus.
TheJewish author Josephus (first century AD) mentions Jesus in a storyabout the Jewish high priest Ananus and James the brother of Jesus(Ant. 20.200). A controversial reference to Jesus appears in adifferent part of the same work, where Josephus affirms that Jesus isthe Messiah and that he rose from the dead (Ant. 18.63–64). Themajority of scholars consider this passage to be authentic butheavily edited by later Christian copyists. Another Jewish source,the Talmud, also mentions Jesus in several places, but thesereferences are very late and of little historical value.
NoncanonicalGospels that mention Jesus include, for example, the Infancy Gospelof Thomas, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel ofJames, the Gospel of Judas Iscariot, the Gospel of the Hebrews, theEgerton Gospel, and the Gospel of Judas. Although some of these maycontain an occasional authentic saying or event, for the most partthey are late and unreliable.
Jesus’Life
Birthand childhood. TheGospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehemduring the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesuswas probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’sdeath (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of avirginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18;Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governorQuirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place inBethlehem (2:1–5). Both the census and the governorship at thetime of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars.Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to eitherconfirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must bedetermined on the basis of one’s view regarding the generalreliability of the Gospel tradition.
Onthe eighth day after his birth, Jesus was circumcised, in keepingwith the Jewish law, at which time he officially was named “Jesus”(Luke 2:21). He spent his growing years in Nazareth, in the home ofhis parents, Joseph and Mary (2:40). Of the NT Gospels, the Gospel ofLuke contains the only brief portrayal of Jesus’ growth instrength, wisdom, and favor with God and people (2:40, 52). Luke alsocontains the only account of Jesus as a young boy (2:41–49).
Jesuswas born in a lower socioeconomic setting. His parents offered atemple sacrifice appropriate for those who could not afford tosacrifice a sheep (Luke 2:22–24; cf. Lev. 12:8). Joseph, Jesus’earthly father, was a carpenter or an artisan in wood, stone, ormetal (Matt. 13:55). From a geographical perspective, Nazareth wasnot a prominent place for settling, since it lacked fertile ground.Jesus’ disciple Nathanael expressed an apparently commonfirst-century sentiment concerning Nazareth: “Nazareth! Cananything good come from there?” (John 1:46).
Jesuswas also born in a context of scandal. Questions of illegitimacy weresurely raised, since his mother Mary was discovered to be pregnantbefore her marriage to Joseph. According to Matthew, only theintervention of an angel convinced Joseph not to break his betrothal(Matt. 1:18–24). Jesus’ birth took place in Bethlehem,far from his parents’ home in Nazareth. According to kinshiphospitality customs, Joseph and Mary would have expected to stay withdistant relatives in Bethlehem. It is likely that they were unwelcomebecause of Jesus’ status as an illegitimate child; thus Maryhad to give birth elsewhere and place the infant Jesus in a feedingtrough (Luke 2:7). A similar response was seen years later inNazareth when Jesus was identified as “Mary’s son”(Mark 6:3) rather than through his paternal line, thereby shaming himas one who was born an illegitimate child. Jesus was likewiserejected at the end of his life as the crowds cried, “Crucifyhim!” (Matt. 27:22–23; Mark 15:13–14; Luke 23:21;John 19:6, 15). When Jesus was arrested, most of his followers fled(Matt. 26:56; Mark 14:50–52), and a core disciple, Peter,vehemently denied knowing him (Matt. 26:69–74; Mark 14:66–71;Luke 22:55–60; John 18:15–17, 25–27). His ownsiblings did not believe in him (John 7:5) and were evidently ashamedof his fate, since from the cross Jesus placed the care of his motherinto the hands of “the disciple whom he loved” (19:26–27)rather than the next brother in line, as was customary.
Baptism,temptation, and start of ministry.After Jesus was baptized by the prophet John the Baptist (Luke3:21–22), God affirmed his pleasure with him by referring tohim as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22).Jesus’ baptism did not launch him into fame and instantministry success; instead, Jesus was led by the Spirit into thewilderness, where he was tempted for forty days (Matt. 4:1–11;Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). Mark stresses that thetemptations immediately followed the baptism. Matthew and Lukeidentify three specific temptations by the devil, though their orderfor the last two is reversed. Both Matthew and Luke agree that Jesuswas tempted to turn stones into bread, expect divine interventionafter jumping off the temple portico, and receive all the world’skingdoms for worshiping the devil. Jesus resisted all temptation,quoting Scripture in response.
Matthewand Mark record that Jesus began his ministry in Capernaum inGalilee, after the arrest of John the Baptist (Matt. 4:12–13;Mark 1:14). Luke says that Jesus started his ministry at about thirtyyears of age (3:23). This may be meant to indicate full maturity orperhaps correlate this age with the onset of the service of theLevites in the temple (cf. Num. 4:3). John narrates the beginning ofJesus’ ministry by focusing on the calling of the disciples andthe sign performed at a wedding at Cana (1:35–2:11).
Jesus’public ministry: chronology.Jesus’ ministry started in Galilee, probably around AD 27/28,and ended with his death around AD 30 in Jerusalem. The temple hadbeen forty-six years in construction (generally interpreted as thetemple itself and the wider temple complex) when Jesus drove out themoney changers (John 2:20). According to Josephus, the rebuilding andexpansion of the second temple had started in 20/19 BC, during theeighteenth year of Herod’s reign (Ant. 15.380). The ministry ofJohn the Baptist had commenced in the fifteenth year of Tiberius(Luke 3:1–2), who had become a coregent in AD 11/12. From thesedates of the start of the temple building and the correlation of thereign of Tiberius to John the Baptist’s ministry, the onset ofJesus’ ministry can probably be dated to AD 27/28.
TheGospel of John mentions three Passovers and another unnamed feast inJohn 5:1. The length of Jesus’ ministry thus extended overthree or four Passovers, equaling about three or three and a halfyears. Passover, which took place on the fifteenth of Nisan, came ona Friday in AD 30 and 33. The year of Jesus’ death wastherefore probably AD 30.
Jesus’ministry years may be divided broadly into his Galilean and hisJudean ministries. The Synoptic Gospels describe the ministry inGalilee from various angles but converge again as Jesus enters Judea.
Galileanministry.The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and aroundGalilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that thekingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment ofprophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ firstteaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30);the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for hiscalling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection andsuffering.
AllGospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in hisGalilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioningof the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers isrecorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministryis the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, inparticular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synopticsfocus on healings and exorcisms.
DuringJesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with hisidentity. However, evil spirits knew him to be of supreme authority(Mark 3:11). Jesus was criticized by outsiders and by his own family(3:21). The scribes from Jerusalem identified him as a partner ofBeelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesustold parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growingkingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humblebeginnings (4:1–32).
TheSynoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful.No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority orability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized manydemons (Mark 5:1–13), raised the dead (Mark 5:35–42), fedfive thousand (Mark 6:30–44), and walked on water (Mark6:48–49).
Inthe later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew andtraveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are notwritten with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns toGalilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey toJerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fearresolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee,where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ discipleswith lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed thePharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents(7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demandinga sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, whoconfessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus didprovide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).
Jesuswithdrew from Galilee to Tyre and Sidon, where a Syrophoenician womanrequested healing for her daughter. Jesus replied, “I was sentonly to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Galileans hadlong resented the Syrian provincial leadership partiality thatallotted governmental funds in ways that made the Jews receive mere“crumbs.” Consequently, when the woman replied, “Eventhe dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table,”Jesus applauded her faith (Matt. 15:27–28). Healing a deaf-muteman in the Decapolis provided another example of Jesus’ministry in Gentile territory (Mark 7:31–37). Peter’sconfession of Jesus as the Christ took place during Jesus’travel to Caesarea Philippi, a well-known Gentile territory. The citywas the ancient center of worship of the Hellenistic god Pan.
Judeanministry.Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry ashe resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually ledto his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem intothree phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27).The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of thejourney. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, andthe demands on discipleship intensified as Jesus approached Jerusalem(Matt. 20:17–19, 26–28; Mark 10:38–39, 43–45;Luke 14:25–35). Luke presents the second phase of the journeytoward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvationand judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase ofthe journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are themain themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).
Socialconflicts with religious leaders increased throughout Jesus’ministry. These conflicts led to lively challenge-riposteinteractions concerning the Pharisaic schools of Shammai and Hillel(Matt. 19:1–12; Mark 10:1–12). Likewise, socioeconomicfeathers were ruffled as Jesus welcomed young children, who hadlittle value in society (Matt. 19:13–15; Mark 10:13–16;Luke 18:15–17).
PassionWeek, death, and resurrection. Eachof the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with thecrowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Lukedescribes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during whichJesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).
InJerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17).Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because thewhole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “beganlooking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segmentof Jerusalem’s temple leadership inquired about Jesus’authority (11:27–33). Jesus replied with cunning questions(12:16, 35–36), stories (12:1–12), denunciation(12:38–44), and a prediction of Jerusalem’s owndestruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, JudasIscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’arrest (14:10–11).
Atthe Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a newcovenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29;Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned thedisciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and laterhe prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agonyand submissiveness in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–42;Mark 14:32–42; Luke 22:39–42). His arrest, trial,crucifixion, death, and resurrection followed (Matt. 26:46–28:15;Mark 14:43–16:8; Luke 22:47–24:9; John 18:1–20:18).Jesus finally commissioned his disciples to continue his mission bymaking disciples of all the nations (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 1:8)and ascended to heaven with the promise that he will one day return(Luke 24:50–53; Acts 1:9–11).
TheIdentity of Jesus Christ
Variousaspects of Jesus’ identity are stressed in the four NT Gospels,depending on their target audiences. In the Gospels the witnesses toJesus’ ministry are portrayed as constantly questioning andexamining his identity (Matt. 11:2–5; 12:24; 26:63; 27:11; Mark3:22; 8:11; 11:28; 14:61; Luke 7:18–20; 11:15; 22:67, 70;23:39; John 7:20, 25–27; 18:37). Only beings of the spiritualrealm are certain of his divinity (Mark 1:34; 3:11; Luke 4:41). AtJesus’ baptism, God referred to him as his Son, whom he loved(Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Likewise, when Jesus wastransfigured in the presence of Peter, James, and John, a voiceaffirmed, “This is my Son, whom I love” (Matt. 17:5; Mark9:7). At the moment of his death, the questioning of Jesus’identity culminated in a confession by a Roman centurion and otherguards: “Surely he was the Son of God!” (Matt. 27:54; cf.Mark 15:39).
Miracleworker.In the first-century setting, folk healers and miracle workers werepart of the fabric of society. Jesus, however, performed signs andmiracles in order to demonstrate the authority of the kingdom of Godover various realms: disease, illness, the spiritual world, nature,and even future events. Especially in the Gospel of John, Jesus’signs and miracles are used to show his authority and thus hisidentity.
Nochallenge superseded Jesus’ authority. Among his ample miraclesand signs, he changed water into wine (John 2:7–9), calmed astorm in the sea (Matt. 8:23–27; Mark 4:35–39; Luke8:22–25), exorcized demons (Matt. 9:32–34; Mark 5:1–13;Luke 9:42–43), healed the sick (Mark 1:40–44), raised thedead (Matt. 9:23–25; Mark 5:35–42; Luke 7:1–16;8:49–54; John 11:17, 38–44), performed miraculousfeedings (Matt. 14:17–21; 15:34–38; Mark 6:30–44;8:5–9; Luke 9:10–17; John 6:8–13), and walked onwater (Matt. 14:25–26; Mark 6:48–49; John 6:19).
ThePharisees requested miracles as evidence of his authority (Mark8:11–12). Jesus refused, claiming that a wicked and adulterousgeneration asks for a miraculous sign (Matt. 12:38–39; 16:1–4).The only sign that he would give was the sign of Jonah—hisdeath and resurrection three days later—a personal sacrifice,taking upon himself the judgment of the world (Matt. 12:39–41).
Rabbi/teacher.Jesus’ teaching style was similar to other first-century rabbisor Pharisees (Mark 9:5; 10:51; John 1:38; 3:2). What distinguishedhim was that he spoke with great personal authority (Matt. 5:22, 28,32, 39, 44; Mark 1:22). Like other rabbis of his day, Jesus gathereddisciples. He called these men to observe his lifestyle and to joinhim in his ministry of teaching, healing, and exorcism (Matt. 10:1–4;Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16).
Jesusused a variety of teaching methods. He frequently spoke in parables(Matt. 6:24; 13:24–52; 18:10–14, 23–35;21:28–22:14; 24:32–36, 45–51; 25:14–30; Mark4:1–34; 12:1–12; 13:28–34; Luke 8:4–18;12:41–46; 13:18–21; 14:15–24; 15:1–16:15,19–31; 18:1–14; 19:11–27; 20:9–19; 21:29–33),used figures of speech (John 10:9), hyperbole (Matt. 19:24; Mark10:25; Luke 18:25), argumentation (Matt. 26:11), object lessons(Matt. 24:32), frequent repetition (Matt. 13:44–47; Luke13:18–21), practical examples, and personal guidance.
Majorthemes in Jesus’ teaching include the kingdom of God, the costof discipleship, internal righteousness, the end of the age, hisidentity, his mission, and his approaching death. In his teachings,observance of Torah was given new context and meaning because God’skingdom had “come near” (Matt. 3:2). Jesus had come tofulfill the law (Matt. 5:17).
Jesus’teaching ministry often took place amid social conflict. Theseconflicts were couched in so-called challenge-riposte interactions inwhich the honor status of those involved was at stake. Jesus usedthese interactions as teachable moments. When questioned, Jesus gavereplies that reveal omniscience or intimate knowledge of God’swill, especially in the Gospel of John. In the Synoptic Gospels,Jesus’ answers are both ethical and practical in nature. TheSynoptics portray Jesus as challenged repeatedly with accusations ofviolating customs specified in the Jewish law. Jesus’ answersto such accusations often echoed the essence of 1Sam. 15:22,“To obey is better than sacrifice,” phrased by Jesus as“I desire mercy, not sacrifice” (Matt. 9:13; 12:7). Anoverall “better than” ethic was common in Jesus’public teaching.
TheSermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7) contains a “better than”ethic in which internal obedience is better than mere outwardobedience. For example, Jesus said that anger without cause is equalto murder (Matt. 5:21–22), that looking at a woman lustfullyamounts to adultery (Matt. 5:28), and that instead of revengingwrongs one must reciprocate with love (Matt. 5:38–48). Jesusvalued compassion above traditions and customs, even those containedwithin the OT law. He desired internal obedience above the letter ofthe law.
Jesus’teachings found their authority in the reality of God’simminent kingdom (Matt. 3:2; 10:7; Mark 1:15; Luke 10:9),necessitating repentance (Matt. 3:2), belief (Mark 1:15), dependence(Matt. 18:3–5; Mark 10:15), and loyalty to a new community—thefamily of Jesus followers (Mark 3:34; 10:29–30). Jesus urged,“Seek first [God’s] kingdom and his righteousness”(Matt. 6:33). Preaching with such urgency was common among propheticteachers of the intertestamental period. Jesus, however, had his owngrounds for urgency. He held that God deeply valued all humans (Matt.10:31) and would bring judgment swiftly (Matt. 25:31–46).
Examplesof a “greater good” ethic in the Synoptics include theoccasions when Jesus ate with sinners (Mark 2:16–17). Jesusused an aphorism in response to accusations about his associationswith sinners, saying, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor,but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners”(Mark 2:17). He advocated harvesting and healing on the Sabbath (Mark2:23–28; 3:1–6), and when he was accused of breaking thelaw, he pointed to an OT exception (1Sam. 21:1–6) todeclare compassion appropriate for the Sabbath. Jesus also appliedthe “greater good” ethic in the case of divorce, sincewomen suffered the societal stigma of adultery and commonly becameoutcasts following divorce (Matt. 19:8–9; Mark 10:5–9).
Jesus’kingdom teachings were simultaneously spiritual, ethical, andeschatological in application. The teachings were aimed at internaltransformation (Matt. 5:3–9; 18:3; Mark 10:15) and spurring onlove (Matt. 5:44; 7:21). The Spirit of the Lord had called Jesus tobless the hurting ones as they aspired to a godly character. Jesustaught, “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father isperfect” (Matt. 5:48), and “Be merciful, just as yourFather is merciful” (Luke 6:36). The “blessed” onesin Jesus’ teachings are poor of spirit, peace driven, mournful,and hungry for righteousness, consumed with emulating godlycharacter.
Somescholars believe that Jesus promoted an “interim ethic”for the kingdom, intended only for a short period prior to the end oftime. However, he was explicit regarding the longevity of histeachings: “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words willnever pass away” (Matt. 24:35; Luke 16:17).
Messiah.The concept of an anointed one, a messiah, who would restore theglories of David’s kingdom and bring political stability wascommon in Jewish expectation. Both before and after the Babyloniancaptivity, many Jews longed for one who would bring peace andprotection. Israel’s prophets had spoken of a coming deliverer,one who would restore David’s kingdom and reign in justice andrighteousness (2Sam. 7:11–16; Isa. 9:1–7; 11:1–16;Jer. 23:5–6; 33:15–16; Ezek. 37:25; Dan. 2:44; Mic. 5:2;Zech. 9:9). Isaiah’s description of the servant (Isa. 53) whosesuffering healed the nation provided a slightly different angle ofexpectation in terms of a deliverer.
Jesus’authority and popularity as a miracle worker called up messianicimages in first-century Jewish minds. On several occasions hearerscalled him “Son of David,” hoping for the Messiah (Matt.12:23; 21:9). Simon Peter was the first follower who confessed Jesusas the Christ, the “Messiah” (Matt. 16:16; Mark 8:29). Inline with Isaiah’s model of the Suffering Servant, Jesusfocused not on political ends but rather on spiritual regenerationthrough his own sacrificial death (Mark 10:45).
Eschatologicalprophet.Many scholars claim that Jesus is best understood as a Jewishapocalypticist, an eschatological prophet who expected God tointervene in history, destroy the wicked, and bring in the kingdom ofGod. Central in this understanding are Jesus’ propheciesconcerning the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem (Matt. 24:1–2,15–22; Mark 13:1; Luke 21:5–24; John 2:19; Acts 6:14). Inaddition, it is noted that Jesus had twelve disciples, representativeof the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:2–28; Luke 22:23–30).Certain of Jesus’ parables, those with apocalyptic images ofcoming judgment, present Jesus as an eschatological prophet (Matt.24:45–25:30; Luke 12:41–46; 19:11–27).
SufferingSon of God.Jesus’ first recorded teaching in a synagogue in Nazareth wasparadigmatic (Luke 4:16–21). He attributed the reading, Isa.61:1–2, to his personal calling to serve, and in doing so herevealed a trajectory of suffering. The Gospel of Mark likewise aptlyportrays Jesus as the suffering Son of God. Jesus’ ownteachings incorporated his upcoming suffering (Mark 8:31; 9:12–13,31; 10:33–34). He summarized his mission by declaring, “TheSon of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give hislife as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). His earthly careerended with a trial in Jerusalem consisting of both Roman and Jewishcomponents (Matt. 26:57–68; 27:1–31; Mark 14:53–65;15:1–20; Luke 22:54–23:25; John 18:19–24;18:28–19:16). He was insulted, scourged, mocked, and crucified.
Jesus’suffering culminated in his humiliating death by crucifixion (Matt.27:33–50; Mark 15:22–37; Luke 23:33–46; John19:16–30). Crucifixion was a death of unimaginable horror,bringing shame and humiliation to the victim and his family. Anyonehanging on a tree was considered cursed (Deut. 21:23; Gal. 3:13).Thus, especially in a Jewish society, anyone associated with acrucified person bore the shame of following one who was executed asa lowly slave and left as a cursed corpse. The apostle Paul referredto this shame of the cross when he stated, “I am not ashamed ofthe gospel” (Rom. 1:16).
ExaltedLord.Jesus had prophesied that he would rise again (Matt. 16:21; 17:9, 23;20:19; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:34; Luke 9:22; 18:33; 24:7, 46).The testimony of the Synoptics is that the resurrection of JesusChrist indeed occurred on the third day, Christ having died on Friday(Mark 15:42–45; Luke 23:52–54; John 19:30–33) andrisen again on Sunday (Matt. 28:1–7; Mark 16:2–7; Luke24:1–7; John 20:1–16). The resurrected Jesus waswitnessed by the women (Matt. 28:8–9), the eleven disciples(Matt. 28:16–17; Luke 24:36–43), and travelers on theroad to Emmaus (Luke 24:31–32). According to Paul, he appearedto as many as five hundred others (1Cor. 15:6). He appeared inbodily form, spoke, showed his scars, and ate (Luke 24:39–43;John 20:27; Acts 1:4). After forty postresurrection days, Jesusascended into the heavenly realm (Acts 1:9).
Asmuch as Jesus’ death was the epitome of shame, his victory overdeath was his ultimate exaltation (Phil. 2:5–11). At Pentecost,Peter proclaimed that in the resurrection God fulfilled OT promises(Ps. 16:10) by raising his Son from the grave (Acts 2:30–31).Furthermore, Christ provided freedom from the law through hisresurrection (Rom. 5:13–14), God’s approval of his lifeand work (Phil. 2:8–9), and God’s designation of him asLord over all the earth, the living and the dead (Acts 17:30–31;Phil. 2:10; Heb. 1:3), and over all his enemies (Eph. 1:20–23).
Jesus’exaltation commenced the beginning of forgiveness and justification(Luke 24:46–47; Acts 13:30–39; Rom. 4:25) and hisintercession for the people of God (Rom. 8:34). His ascensionsignaled the coming of the Holy Spirit as comforter and teacher (John14:26; Acts 2:33) and was accompanied by the promise of his return inglory (Luke 24:51), at which time he will render judgment (Matt.19:28; 24:31; Rev. 20:11–15) and establish his eternal kingdom(1Cor. 15:24; 2Tim. 4:1; Rev. 11:15; 22:5).
Jesus’Purpose and Community
Inthe Gospel of Matthew, Jesus is the long-awaited Messiah, whopreaches the good news of the kingdom, urging people to repent(4:17–23). Repentance and belief allow one to enter thekingdom. The call into the kingdom is a call into a new covenant, onemade in Jesus’ blood (26:28).
Inthe prologue to the Gospel of Mark, the narrator reveals the identityof Jesus (1:1). Jesus is presented as the one who brings good tidingsof salvation (cf. Isa. 40:9; 52:7; 61:1). The centrality of thegospel, the good news (Mark 1:14–15), is evident.
Lukelikewise presents the preaching of the good news as a main purpose ofJesus’ ministry (4:43). The content of this good news is thekingdom of God (4:43; 8:1; 16:16). When the disciples of John theBaptist asked Jesus if he was the one who was to come (7:20), Jesusanswered, “Go back and report to John what you have seen andheard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosyare cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good newsis proclaimed to the poor” (7:22). The kingdom of God, aspresented in Luke, brings freedom for the prisoners, recovery ofsight for the blind, and release for the oppressed (4:18). Jesus’healings and exorcisms announce the coming kingdom of God alreadypresent in the ministry of Jesus (4:40–44; 6:18–20;8:1–2; 9:2; 10:8–9).
Inthe Gospel of John, Jesus testifies to the good news by way of signsthroughout his ministry. These signs point to Jesus’ glory, hisidentity, and the significance of his ministry. Jesus is the Messiah,the Son of God, who offers eternal and abundant life. This abundantlife is lived out in community.
Inthe Gospel of John, the disciples of Jesus represent the community ofGod (17:21). The disciples did not belong to the world, but theycontinued to live in the world (17:14–16). Throughout hisministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a callto loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38;Luke 9:23–26), a call to the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50;Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock Iwill build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call tocommunity. Jesus’ presence as the head of the community wasreplaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18).
Jesus’ministry continued in the community of Jesus’ followers, God’sfamily—the church. Entrance into the community was obtained byadopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and through theinitiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26;Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–62; John 1:12; 3:16;10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9).
TheQuests for the Historical Jesus
Thequest for the historical Jesus, or seeking who Jesus was from ahistorical perspective, is a modern phenomenon deemed necessary byscholars who claim that the NT Gospels were written long after Jesus’death and were heavily influenced by the post-Easter understanding ofthe church.
Thebeginning of this quest is often dated to 1770, when the lecturenotes of Hermann Samuel Reimarus were published posthumously.Reimarus had launched an inquiry into the identity of Jesus thatrejected as inauthentic all supernatural elements in the Gospels. Heconcluded that the disciples invented Jesus’ miracles,prophecies, ritualistic religion, and resurrection. Reimarus’sconclusions were not widely accepted, but they set off a flurry ofrationalistic research into the historical Jesus that continuedthroughout the nineteenth century. This became known as the “firstquest” for the historical Jesus.
In1906 German theologian Albert Schweit-zer published The Quest of theHistorical Jesus (German title: Von Reimarus zu Wrede: EineGeschichte der Leben-Jesu-Forschung), a scathing indictment of thefirst quest. Schweitzer’s work showed that nineteenth-centuryresearchers re-created Jesus in their own image, transforming thehistorical Jesus into a modern philanthropist preaching aninoffensive message of love and brotherhood. Schweitzer’sconclusions marked the beginning of the end for this first quest.Schweitzer himself concluded that the historical Jesus was aneschatological prophet whose purposes failed during his last days inJerusalem.
Withthe demise of the first quest, some NT scholars, such as RudolfBultmann, rejected any claim to being able to discover the historicalJesus. This trend continued until 1953, when some of Bultmann’sformer students launched what has come to be known as the “newquest” for the historical Jesus (1953–c. 1970). Thisquest created new interest in the historical Jesus but was stilldominated by the view that the portrait of Jesus in the Gospels islargely a creation of the church in a post-Easter setting.
Asthe rebuilding years of the post–World WarII era wanedand scholars started to reap academic fruit from major archaeologicalfinds such as the DSS, research on the historical Jesus moved on towhat has been called the “third quest.” This quest seeksespecially to research and understand Jesus in his social andcultural setting.
Christ’s resurrection is the foundational event for theChristian faith. Paul goes so far as to say that if Christ did notrise, then the Christian faith is futile and Christians are to bepitied more than all others (1Cor. 15:17–19).Resurrection’s climaxing position in all four Gospel narrativesyields the same understanding. Christ came not merely to die, as someclaim, but to conquer death. Resurrection gives everything thatChrist did before his death an “of God” significance, andit establishes everything that follows as a guarantee of God’seschatological promises. Without the resurrection, Jesus would havebeen just another “prophet hopeful” who died a tragicpeasant death in Jerusalem. However, as it is, evidenced by theresurrection, he is the Son of God. According to the NT, theresurrection is the triumphant cry that God indeed did come to visithis creation and conquer the power of sin and death.
OldTestament
Resurrectionhope is poorly attested by the OT, especially in earlier sections.References are made to death that seem to indicate that the dead havenot ceased to exist, but such passages refer (at best) to death as ashadowy, nonlife existence (Job 26:5; Ps. 88:10; Ezek. 32:21). Whenearly OT texts suggest that certain individuals experienceeverlasting life, they do so by escaping death altogether. Enoch(Gen. 5:24) walked with God and was simply taken away, while Goddramatically picked up Elijah in a chariot of fire (2Kings2:11). Saul’s attempt at Endor to reawaken Samuel from death toreceive his counsel (1Sam. 28:3–14) speaks more to thesuperstition and disobedience of Saul than it does to Israel’sfaith in life after death.
SomeOT prophetic texts hint at a corporate restoration of life beyond thegrave. It is a promise not of resurrection from death to life for theindividual but of God’s unceasing love for corporate Israelthat ultimately results in the redemption of his people from thesnares of death (Hos. 6:1–3; 13:14). Although these texts aredifficult to separate from Israel’s vision of postexilicnational restoration, as in the vision of the valley of dry bones(Ezek. 37:1–14), they do indicate a growing sense of hope thatGod will restore Israel to renewed life in his presence after death.A similar trend may lie behind Job 14:14, where Job, after affirmingthe finality of individual death (14:12), still raises the questionof a possible life after death. The basis for this notion rests onthe affirmation that the living God, Job’s gracious redeemer,has power over death and will allow Job to see life after death (Job19:25–26; cf. Ps. 16:10).
Daniel12:2, which on the surface looks like a full-fledged teaching onindividual resurrection, still falls short as a beneficial comparisonto the teaching of Jesus. Although the Pharisees (along with a numberof modern interpreters looking for OT foundations for individualresurrection) later used this as a proof text for individualresurrection, its context (Dan. 11) clearly suggests a strugglebetween nations, to which God eventually will reveal his eternaljudgment. God will vindicate his people. Notwithstanding, OT languageof eternal awakening to a new reality, good or bad, opens the doorfor further reflection on God’s eternal purpose and how itrelates to human experience beyond death.
IntertestamentalPeriod
Thespeculations of the intertestamental period portray a vast array ofphilosophical influences that affected the thinking of Second TempleJudaism. The conservative Sadducees, who may have accepted only theTorah as Scripture, understood Sheol (the state or abode of the dead)to be a place of unending sleep and thus denied resurrection (cf.Sir. 17:27–28; 30:17; Acts 23:8). Other groups, such as thePharisees and the Essenes, were to a greater or lesser extentinfluenced by Hellenistic thinking on the relationship between spiritand matter. The lack of unity among these groups, especially thePharisees, created a plethora of understandings concerningresurrection. Some, influenced by the Platonic idea that thesoul/spirit is immortal and will be released at the death of thebody, turned reflections on the afterlife into an issue ofimmortality (4Macc. 14:5; 18:23). Others seem to have affirmeda physical resurrection but restricted it to either Israel or arighteous remnant thereof. This latter perspective easily connectedto the view that all would be raised, the unrighteous for punishment,the righteous for reward and bliss.
Itproves impossible, therefore, to determine to what extent Christianreflections during the first century influenced Jewish writers ratherthan vice versa. Sociologically speaking, the early Christians wereone of the many parties of Judaism developing during that period. Asthe Gospels seem to suggest, they interacted, maybe especially, withthe Pharisees.
NewTestament
TheOT’s relative silence on the issue of resurrection stands instark contrast to the central position that it holds in the NT. Allfour Gospels build their narrative portrayal of Jesus’ ministrytoward this climaxing event, and Jesus himself argued against theview of the Sadducees (Mark 12:18–27). Beyond the Gospelnarratives, Paul makes resurrection the very heart of the Christianfaith (1Cor. 15); Hebrews understands resurrection as part ofChristian elementary teaching (Heb. 6:1–2); James plays on theword “raise” as he explains the connection between faithand strength of life (James 5:15); Peter sees resurrection as thebasis for Christian hope (1Pet. 1:3); Revelation details thequality of the resurrected life (Rev. 21–22). In short, everypart of the NT affirms the reality of a resurrection after death. Itis the climactic evidence that God’s kingdom now dwells amongpeople. God brings life; death will no longer have the last word.
TheGospels.The Gospels give four accounts of raisings from the dead. Strictlyspeaking, these are not resurrections but resuscitations. The peoplein question are not raised to eternal life but rather are broughtback to life in their historical circ*mstances; they will later dieagain. The Gospels’ intertwining of the raising of Jairus’sdaughter with the healing of the hemorrhaging woman (Mark 5:21–43pars.) underscores the conceptual connection between life and God’spresence. First-century Judaism had come up bankrupt and could donothing to help a woman whose bleeding made worship of Godimpossible. Now, however, life could be restored after death. Eventhe leader of the worship center, who could do nothing to help thiswoman, now saw his own daughter raised from the dead.
Theraising of the widow’s son from Nain (Luke 7:11–17)similarly indicates that the days of the prophet Elijah had returned(1Kings 17:8–24). God was again visiting his people andbringing life after death. Most spectacularly, Lazarus’sraising after four days in the grave (John 11:1–44) speaksdirectly to God’s power to bring life out of death inconnection with OT understandings of the afterlife. The emphasis onthe four days in the grave, along with Jesus’ pronouncement ofhimself as “resurrection and life” and his application ofGod’s revelatory name (“I am”) to himself, makethis event stand out as anticipating what is soon to come in full.The same holds true in the unleashing of power at Jesus’ death,when graves spring open and the dead are raised (Matt. 27:51–53).
Paul’sletters.Paul’s teaching on resurrection anchors in eschatology, or viceversa. The reality and finality of death, introduced by Adam’sdisobedience, are now overcome by Christ through his resurrection(1Cor. 15:21–22). Christ’s resurrection evidencesthat God has ended death’s reign; it heralds the imminentcoming of the end, a time when all who belong to Christ will beraised in like manner, and death will be no more (15:23–24).
Althoughat times Paul uses the language of body, soul, and spirit, he neverfalls prey to a Platonic dualism that separates body from soul,claiming that only the body dies while the soul remains immortal(1Tim. 6:15b–16a). Rather, following Hebraic thinking, heunderstands resurrection as total transformation of the whole person,comparing it to what happens to a seed put in the ground. It must diebefore something completely new comes up (1Cor. 15:36). Thepromise of resurrection is the promise that the death-marked humanwho is buried will, at thetime of resurrection, be transformedand suited to live eternally in God’s presence. What is nowperishable will become imperishable (1Cor. 15:42–44). ToPaul, this is not about getting rid of matter (the body) that iscreated by God, but about Christ’s restoration of what Adamdestroyed (1Cor. 15:49). It is the same understanding expressedin Rev. 21:1–5a, where John prophesies the transformation ofboth heaven and earth when God reestablishes his covenantrelationship with his people.
Summary.Although the Gospels’ presentations of Jesus’resurrection vary in some detail (probably due to purpose andaudience), all of them treat the event as the theological centerpieceof the Gospel narrative. The resurrection story launches God’seschatological work and opens the door, as the postresurrectionappearances show, for a connection between the Jesus story and thechurch story. It is the foundation both for the Great Commission(Matt. 28:18–20) and for Pentecost (Luke 24:49). All people ofall nations can now meet the living Christ.
The term “salvation” is the broadest one used torefer to God’s actions to solve the plight brought about byhumankind’s sinful rebellion and its consequences. It is one ofthe central themes of the entire Bible, running from Genesis throughRevelation.
OldTestament
Inmany places in the OT, salvation refers to being rescued fromphysical rather than spiritual trouble. Fearing the possibility ofretribution from his brother Esau, Jacob prays, “Save me, Ipray, from the hand of my brother Esau” (Gen. 32:11). Theactions of Joseph in Egypt saved many from famine (45:5–7;47:25; 50:20). Frequently in the psalms, individuals pray forsalvation from enemies that threaten one’s safety or life (Pss.17:14; 18:3; 70:1–3; 71:1–4; 91:1–3).
Relatedto this usage are places where the nation of Israel and/or its kingwere saved from enemies. The defining example of this is the exodus,whereby God delivered his people from their enslavement to theEgyptians, culminating in the destruction of Pharaoh and his army(Exod. 14:1–23). From that point forward in the history ofIsrael, God repeatedly saved Israel from its enemies, whether througha judge (e.g., Judg. 2:16; 3:9), a king (2Kings 14:27), or evena shepherd boy (1Sam. 17:1–58).
Butthese examples of national deliverance had a profound spiritualcomponent as well. God did not save his people from physical dangeras an end in itself; it was the necessary means for his plan to savethem from their sins. The OT recognizes the need for salvation fromsin (Pss. 39:8; 51:14; 120:2) but, as the NT makes evident, does notprovide a final solution (Heb. 9:1–10:18). One of the clearestplaces that physical and spiritual salvation come together is Isa.40–55, where Judah’s exile from the land and prophesiedreturn are seen as the physical manifestation of the much morefundamental spiritual exile that resulted from sin. To address thatfar greater reality, God announces the day when the Suffering Servantwould once and for all take away the sins of his people (Isa.52:13–53:12).
NewTestament
Asin the OT, the NT has places where salvation refers to being rescuedfrom physical difficulty. Paul, for example, speaks of being savedfrom various physical dangers, including execution (2Cor.1:8–10; Phil. 1:19; 2Tim. 4:17). In the midst of a fiercestorm, Jesus’ disciplescry out, “Lord, save us! We’re going to drown!”(Matt. 8:25). But far more prominent are the places in the Gospelsand Acts where physical healings are described with the verb sōzō,used to speak of salvation from sin. The healing of the woman withthe hemorrhage (Mark 5:25–34), the blind man along the road(Luke 18:35–43), and even the man possessed by a demon (Luke8:26–39), just to name a few, are described with the verb sōzō.The same verb, however, is also used to refer to Jesus forgivingsomeone’ssins (Luke 7:36–50) and to his mission to save the lost fromtheir sins (Luke 19:10). Such overlap is a foretaste of the holisticsalvation (physical and spiritual) that will be completed in the newheaven and earth (Rev. 21–22). The NT Epistles give extensivedescriptions of how the work of Jesus Christ saves his people fromtheir sins (see below).
Components
Inseveral passages (e.g., Rom. 5:1–11; Eph. 2:1–10; Titus3:4–7) “salvation” is clearly a summary term forthe totality of what God has done for his people in and throughChrist. Salvation is such a rich and multifaceted work of God that ittakes a variety of terms to bring out its fullness. “Regeneration”refers to the new life that God imparts, bringing a person fromspiritual death to spiritual life (John 3:3–8; Eph. 2:4–7;Titus 3:4–7). “Justification” speaks of Goddeclaring a person not guilty in his court of law on the basis ofChrist’s sacrificial death and life of perfect obedience (Rom.3:21–5:12; Gal. 2:14–21). “Atonement”describes Christ’s payment for sin and resulting forgiveness(Rom. 3:21–26; Heb. 2:17). “Redemption” capturesthe reality of God paying the price to bring his people out of theirslavery to sin and into the freedom of the Spirit (Gal. 4:1–7;5:1). “Reconciliation” refers to God turning hardenedrebels and enemies into his friends (Rom. 5:10–11; 2Cor.5:18–21; Col. 1:20–22). “Adoption” extendsthat reality into the astonishing truth that God makes those whom hereconciles not just his friends but his sons and daughters (Rom.8:14–25; Gal. 4:1–7). In “sanctification” Godsets his people apart for his special purposes and progressivelychanges them into the image of Christ (1Cor. 1:30 ESV, NRSV,NASB; cf. Rom. 8:29). The final component is “glorification,”when God brings to completion the work of salvation by granting hispeople resurrection bodies, removing every last stain of sin, death,and the curse and placing them in a new heaven and earth (Rom. 8:30;1Cor. 15:35–57; Rev. 21–22).
Prepositionsof Salvation
Anotherway that the Bible fills out the nature of salvation is through thevarious prepositions connected to it. The prepositions in thefollowing list are among the more significant.
From.Since the basic idea of salvation is rescue from danger, it is notsurprising that Scripture describes that from which believers aresaved. David cries out to God, “Save me from all mytransgressions” (Ps. 39:8). Salvation from sin is possible onlythrough Jesus, for it is he who “will save his people fromtheir sins” (Matt. 1:21). Reflecting on the work of Jesus onthe cross, Paul claims that because of the sacrificial death ofChrist believers are saved from God’s wrath (Rom. 5:9–10).At the same time, the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus savedpeople from their slavery to sin (Rom. 6:1–11). As a result ofthese and other things from which Christ has saved people, on the dayof Pentecost Peter exhorts his audience to be saved “from thiscorrupt generation” (Acts 2:40). Thus, the unanimous testimonyof Scripture is that believers have been saved from their sin and itsconsequences.
To/into.Believers are saved not merely from something; they are saved to/intocertain states or conditions. Whereas they were once slaves,believers have now been saved “into the freedom and glory ofthe children of God” (Rom. 8:21 [cf. Gal. 5:1]). Through thecross God “has rescued us from the dominion of darkness andbrought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves” (Col. 1:13).Another way of stating this reality is to speak of the peace intowhich believers now have been brought as a result of Christ’swork on their behalf (John 14:27).
By.Scripture frequently uses the preposition “by” to expressthe instrument of salvation. Stated negatively, “It is not bysword or spear that the Lord saves” (1Sam. 17:47). In thebroadest sense, believers are saved from their sins by the gospel(1Cor. 15:1–2). More specifically, salvation is by thegrace of God (Eph. 2:5, 8). The preposition “by” can alsoexpress the agent of salvation. A distinguishing feature of Israelwas that it was saved from its enemies by God (Deut. 33:29; Isa.45:17). The same thing is meant when Scripture speaks of God savinghis people by his right hand (Ps. 17:7) or his name (Ps. 54:1).
Through.The consistent testimony of the Bible is that salvation comes throughfaith (e.g., Eph. 2:8–9). Through faith, believers have beenjustified (Rom. 3:22; 5:1–2) and made children of God (Gal.3:26). It is not righteousness based on the law that matters, “butthat which is through faith in Christ” (Phil. 3:9). Theremarkable actions of God’s people throughout history have beenaccomplished through faith (Heb. 11:1–40).
In.Especially in Paul’s writings the various components ofsalvation (see above) are modified with the phrase “in Christ”or “in him.” Believers are chosen (Eph. 1:4), redeemed(Eph. 1:7), justified (Gal. 2:17), and sanctified (1Cor. 1:2)in Christ. Indeed, God has blessed believers “in the heavenlyrealms with every spiritual blessing in Christ” (Eph. 1:3).
With.Many of the components of salvation that believers experience aresaid to happen “with Christ.” Believers are united withChrist in his death, burial, and resurrection (Rom. 6:4–11;Gal. 2:20). With Christ, believers have been made alive, raised up,and seated in the heavenly realms (Eph. 2:4–6; Col. 2:13).Because of their union with Christ, believers share in hisinheritance (Rom. 8:16–17; Gal. 3:29; 1Pet. 1:4). Eventhe very life of the believer is said to be currently “hiddenwith Christ in God” (Col. 3:3).
Tensesof Salvation
TheBible speaks of salvation in the past, present, and future tenses.Pointing to a definitive experience in the past, Paul tells believersthat “in this hope we were saved” (Rom. 8:24). Yet he canalso speak of himself and other believers as those “who arebeing saved” (1Cor. 1:18; 2Cor. 2:15), pointing toa process that is ongoing. Just a few sentences after assuringbelievers that they have been justified already (Rom. 5:1–2),he can still say that believers will “be saved from God’swrath” through Christ (Rom. 5:9–10).
Theuse of these three tenses reflects the “already and not yet”dynamic of salvation. Through the obedience, death, resurrection, andascension of Jesus, God has rescued his people from their sins. Butthe final and complete realization of all the benefits of salvationmust still await the return of Christ and the establishment of a newheaven and earth (Rev. 19–22).
Conclusion
Withouta proper understanding of humankind’s plight as a result of itsrebellion, the Bible’s repeated emphasis on salvation makeslittle sense. Because sin is humanity’s greatest problem,salvation is humanity’s greatest need. Given the breadth,width, and depth of what God has done to save his people from theirsins through Jesus Christ, it is no wonder that the author of Hebrewsasks, “How shall we escape if we ignore so great a salvation?”(2:3).
Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.
In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).
Articles of Clothing
A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.
In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).
Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).
The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).
In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).
Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).
Special Functions of Clothing
According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).
Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).
Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).
Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.
Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).
Leviticus 15:1–33 provides regulations concerningbodily discharges causing ritual impurity, including emissions ofsem*n, menstruation, and other discharges of blood or fluids (onchildbirth, see Lev. 12:7). Such discharges contaminated not only theperson with the discharge but also any object that such a persontouched, including beds, clothing, seats, and clay and woodenvessels. The impurity could be reversed by waiting for a specifiedperiod, washing, and offering a small sacrifice of birds. Impuritycould spread to anyone who contacted the impure persons or objects.Discharges disqualified men from serving as priests (Lev. 22:4).Jesus healed a woman who had been bleeding for twelve years, whichhad made her impure under the law of Lev. 15:25 (Mark 5:25–29pars.).
Both the OT and the NT use several words that fall into thecategory of sorrow. Sorrow may be felt to different degrees as fitsthe severity of the circ*mstances. Likewise, it may be expressed inmany ways, such as crying or weeping (Jer. 4:8; Joel 1:18), hiringprofessional mourners (Jer. 9:17; Mark 5:38), tearing one’sclothes (2Sam. 13:19), wearing sackcloth (2Sam. 3:31;Jer. 4:8), sitting in dust and ashes (Job 2:8; Luke 10:13), throwingdust over one’s head (Job 2:12), fasting (Esther 4:3), shavingone’s head or beard (Job 1:20; Jer. 41:5), and beating one’schest (Isa. 32:12; Luke 18:13).
Becauseof sin and the curse, pain is inescapable and sorrow appropriate.Although people may respond negatively, sorrow can be a positive partof repentance, developing character (2Cor. 7:10–11) ordemonstrating sympathy to others (Rom. 12:15) as a response to theirdifficulties. The reality of pain highlights joy and anticipation ofChrist’s return (John 16:19–22; Rev. 21:4; cf. Jer.31:13).
Whilesorrow may first come from the circ*mstances or threat of punishment,it is an important component of repentance, as regret over wrongdoingcan lead one to change behavior.
In NT studies, “Synoptic” refers to the Gospelsof Matthew, Mark, and Luke, which, due to their similarities, can becompared side by side (synoptic= seeing together). Althoughcoined earlier, the term “Synoptic” did not become thecommonly used reference to the first three Gospels until thenineteenth century.
Synopticalcomparisons reveal texts that are similar in wording (e.g., Matt.19:13–18// Mark 10:13–16// Luke 18:15–17),order (e.g., Matt. 12:46–13:58// Mark 3:31–6:6a//Luke 8:19–56), and parenthetical material (e.g., Matt. 9:6//Mark 2:10// Luke 5:20). Most interestingly, the Synoptics agreein their quotation of the OT even when they differ from the Hebrew OTtext itself (compare Matt. 3:3// Mark 1:3// Luke 3:4 toIsa. 40:3). Beyond such similarities, significant differences prevailthat raise difficult questions. How, for example, could Mark escapeany reference to the Sermon on the Mount (including the Lord’sPrayer), which holds such a prominent position in Matthew?
Relationshipsamong the three Gospels.Due to these and other factors, multiple theories on the SynopticGospels’ relationship to one another have arisen. Yet none havefound universal acceptance. Historically, based primarily onAugustine’s claim, the church affirmed Matthew as the firstGospel, with Mark as his abridgment and Luke as employing both. TheGerman text critic J.J. Griesbach developed this thesis ofMatthean priority in his 1774 Synopsis, arguing that Luke was thefirst to use Matthew, and Mark was drawing from both. The GriesbachHypothesis continues to have advocates.
Matthewcovers the substance of 97.2percent of Mark’s 661 verses,while 88.4percent reappear in Luke. Although such statisticscould be explained as Mark’s combination and abbreviation ofMatthew and Luke, in fact Matthew generally shortens Mark where theycover the same material. In search of explanations that bettervalidate the evidence, NT scholars proposed the Two SourceHypothesis, arguing that Mark wrote first, and that Matthew and Lukedrew from Mark and from another, unknown source (which scholars call“Q,” from German Quelle, meaning “source”).H.J. Holzmann gave significant credence to this theory in 1863,and after B.H. Streeter’s persuasive publication in 1924it became the leading theory. Rather than the reverse, it seemseasier to understand Matthew and Luke as expansions of Mark’snarrative, just as evidence suggests that they “cleaned up”Mark’s poorer Greek and more difficult readings. Furthermore,although Matthew and Luke often disagree with each other bothverbally and in their order of events, they rarely agree with oneanother against Mark. This suggests that in the triple tradition(passages in all three Synoptic Gospels), Matthew and Luke are notborrowing from each other but are independently using Mark.
Thesuggestion of the unknown source Q (which could be either written ororal) proved necessary to make sense of the significant agreementsbetween Matthew and Luke in material not covered by Mark. Streetersuggested further that the material that was unique to Matthew andLuke respectively came from sources designated as “M” and“L.”
Althoughthe Two Source Hypothesis remains the working theory preferred bymost scholars, others claim that the issue is far from unresolved. Toreconstruct the precise development of the Synoptic Gospels hasproven extremely difficult. Each Gospel may have been influenced by avariety of sources. Rather than being well defined, the processlikely was fluid, bringing together commonly known and acceptedmemorizations of specific Jesus sayings, repeated retellings ofspecific sequences of events (shorter and longer) that had turnedinto strings of established tradition among early churches, writtenrecords made by disciples such as Matthew, oral preaching of apostlessuch as Peter, accounts possibly from Mary the mother of Jesus (cf.Luke 2:19), and other things.
Mark’sGospel has historically been considered a written condensation ofPeter’s preaching, but as C.H. Dodd showed in his 1936Apostolic Preaching and Its Developments, Mark shaped his Gospelaccording to a common apostolic pattern observable in the speeches inActs. Except for a few parables and the action-filled apocalypse inchapter 13, Mark’s Gospel consists almost exclusively ofdescriptive narrative that delineates the power and purpose of Jesus,the Son of God. Mark is kerygma, preaching about Jesus. Q, or thematerial common to Matthew and Luke absent in Mark, consists almostexclusively of teaching material, Jesus sayings.It is didachē, teaching from Jesus.
Distinctivesof each Gospel.Griesbach’s “synoptic” approach of placing thesethree Gospels side by side for comparison has prompted new scholarlyapproaches such as redaction criticism and has provided beginningstudents with a helpful way to recognize specific emphases of eachGospel. As noted above, Mark is a fast-paced narrative (“immediately”occurs nine times in chap. 1 alone) with vivid picturesque detail(e.g., 14:51–52). Matthew writes for a Jewish audience. Heweaves his narrative around five major teaching discourses (chaps.5–7; 10; 13; 18; 24–25) while highlighting Jesus’relationship to Abraham (chap. 1), his mission to “the lostsheep of Israel” (chaps. 10; 15), and his birth and death asthe “King of the Jews” (chaps. 2; 27) and using theJewish expression “kingdom of heaven.” Luke, whileportraying the comprehensive scope of Jesus’ mission byrelating Jesus directly to Adam and God (3:38) and placing the eventsin secular history (chap. 2), reveals a special interest in thedowntrodden (women, poor, children, Samaritans), prayer (nineprayers), the Holy Spirit, and joyfulness.
Grief is great sadness or sorrow or the circ*mstances thatproduce such; mourning refers to expressions of grief. Grief andmourning are often thought of in conjunction with death, but they mayoccur with regard to any personal or national tragedy (2Sam.13:19), the impending prospect of tragedy (Esther 4:3; Isa. 37:1), orrepentance prompted by prophetic word of tragedy, sorrow over sin, orboth.
Theexpressions of mourning in the Bible include weeping (Gen. 23:2),wailing (Esther 4:3; Isa. 15:3; Mark 5:38), tearing clothes andwearing sackcloth (Gen. 37:34; 2Sam. 3:31), lying on the ground(2Sam. 13:31), putting dust and ashes on the head or sitting ondust and ashes (Ezek. 27:30), fasting (2Sam. 3:35; 12:16),singing songs of lament (2Sam. 1:17–27; 3:32–35),pulling hair out of one’s beard (Ezra 9:3), cutting the hair(Jer. 7:29), uncovering the head (Lev. 10:6), removing sandals (Ezek.24:17, 23), covering the lips or mouth (Ezek. 24:17, 22; Mic. 3:7),and employing professional mourners (Jer. 9:17; Matt. 9:23; Mark5:38). Some pagan mourning practices were prohibited, such asslashing the body, cutting patterns into the body (tattooing?), andthe somewhat obscure act of making the forehead bald (Lev. 19:28;Deut. 14:1; cf. 1Kings 18:28).
Thus,grief and mourning were anything but stoic and brief. Grief wasexpressed both physically and vocally, often loudly, with expressionsranging from inarticulate groaning to poetic compositions in song.Although women may have been prominent among professional mourners,expressing grief was not considered unmasculine. Several times Davidwas a leader in expressing grief. That the expression of grief shouldbe brief, relatively dispassionate, and primarily characteristic ofwomen was a Greek development that entered the church through peoplesuch as Augustine, who, for example, felt grieved that he had verybriefly grieved the loss of his mother.
Paul’sadmonition that believers should not grieve as do those who have nohope (1Thess. 4:13) should not be construed as a dictum that itis wrong to grieve. The thought of the resurrection is a comfort in,not a replacement for, grief. Even Jesus wept at the death ofLazarus, knowing full well that he would soon resurrect him (John11:25, 35, 40). Further, saints who have died and gone to heavenlament (Rev. 6:10). Grief is restricted for active-duty priests andonce for Ezekiel, but these are clearly special circ*mstances andillustrate the normalcy of giving expression to grief. Ezekiel was tomoan with a groaning for the dead (often misread as groaningsilently) when his wife died, but he was not to engage in anymourning rites (Ezek. 24:15–27). This illustrated to Judah thecirc*mstances that they would face, without opportunity to mournproperly for their dead. Ezekiel 8:14 indicts the women of Jerusalemfor “mourning for Tammuz,” a pagan ritual involving thecycle of life, death, and rebirth of the Babylonian god Dumuzi.
Songsof lament are common in the OT. David composed a song of lamenthonoring the deaths of Saul and Jonathan (2Sam. 1:17–27).After Joab’s unauthorized killing of Abner, David also sang alament for Abner and required Joab to participate in mourning rituals(3:31–37). David also mourned his own sons: the unnamed son ofBathsheba (12:16–18), Amnon (13:30–33), and Absalom(18:33–19:4). In the case of Bathsheba’s son, Davidmourned in advance of the boy’s death, which had beenprophetically proclaimed through Nathan. As the consequences of hissins continued, he progressively became undone in the mourning of hisother sons. Also, funeral songs are used as the form of someprophetic material (Ezek. 19:1–14; 26:17–18; 27:2–9,25–36; cf. Jer. 22:18; Amos 5:16). Not all laments are funeralsongs perse. Compare also the book of Lamentations and thepsalms of lament, also known as complaint psalms.
Expressionsof grief and mourning were called for as part of repentance,combining both fear of punishment and depth of sorrow over sin(2Chron. 34:19; Isa. 15:3; Joel 1:13).
Showing
1
to
50
of280
results
1. The Hour of Death
Illustration
Harold H. Lentz
Have you ever been in a situation where you thought you would die? Several years ago a veteran missionary was in a plane that was circling over Detroit and unable to land because of fog. As the plane's fuel ran low and the danger of a crash landing became more apparent, the missionary got out paper and pencil and jotted down his last will and testament. He wrote: "There is peace, perfect peace in my heart and soul. Life with Christ is the way to live. Now in this hour there is assurance that God is underneath all the uncertainties of human experience. So I rest in God."
We must all face the possibility of death. It is certain. Have we found the way to face this prospect peacefully?
2. Your God Is Too Small
Illustration
Harold H. Lentz
The woman with the issue of blood was filled with faith. She really believed that by simply touching the hem of Christ's garment a miracle could be effected. She is an example to us of great faith, and how it is rewarded.
We may be committed and praying Christians, but do we think large enough thoughts about God? Do we really believe that God can do anything? Year's ago there was a book titled: Your God Is Too Small. That title is a wake-up challenge to all of us. If we believe in an all-powerful God, it should be reflected in the confidence with which we turn to God in prayer. "Ask and you shall receive," Jesus urged. Yet we often wonder whether or not God can really help us. Wake up to the power which God possesses, power he has promised to use on our behalf.
3. A Father's Love
Illustration
Harold H. Lentz
Jairus represents a father's love for his children. He was a devout Jew, the leader of his synagogue, and Jesus was considered a religious outcast. But Jairus did not hesitate to seek out Christ and implore his help for his dying daughter. He would do anything to save her life.
Recently the newspapers carried an account of a fire that destroyed a home. The father woke up to a smoke-filled house and hurried his family to safety. But while standing in his front yard he realized that one child was missing and apparently was still in the burning home. It was very dangerous to reenter the flaming building and firemen tried to dissuade him from going back into the home. But he went anyway and was badly burned, he did rescue his son. When asked about his actions, the father said he would rather die than live and know that he had not attempted to save his little son.
God is our Father and his love for us is very great. He was willing to make the great sacrifice of his only begotten Son in order to save the world, to save you and me. How thankful we should be that we have a heavenly Father who knows us, loves us, and watches over us. Even death cannot separate us from his love. Christ, with his heavenly power, brought back to life the daughter of Jairus. God will bring us safely through the valley of the shadow of death, into the kingdom of everlasting life.
4. Reach Out
Illustration
Harold H. Lentz
The woman with the issue of blood was healed because she reached out to Christ, reached to touch his garment. We, too, can reach out to Christ and as a result receive innumerable blessings. In fact, throughout our life there are so many things that we can possess if we only reach out to secure them. Many of the greatest names in history would have remained unknown if they had failed to reach out when opportunity presented itself. Examples of this include William Shakespeare, who was the son of a bankrupt butcher and a mother who could not even spell her own name. The great musician, Beethoven, was not born to international acclaim;his father was a well-known drunkard and his mother was sickly, afflicted with tuberculosis. Michael Faraday was born over a stable where his father carried on the trade of a blacksmith, and his mother earned money as acleaning woman. With only a second grade education Michael Faraday became one of the most productive and famous scientists of all time. His discoveries in the field of electricity are considered the basis for all modern progress.
We have so much within reach if we only seek it. This is especially true when one reaches out to accept the offer of abundant living which Christ offers to everyone.
5. The Healing Power Of Faith
Illustration
Harold H. Lentz
The woman with the issue of blood had faith that by contact with Christ she could be cured. All around us in daily life are examples of people who, by faith, are overcoming life's difficulties.
A telephone linesman was up a pole when the pole, which was held in place only by cables, fell over him and he was dashed to the ground. His insides were badly crushed and as he was rushed to the hospital; there was little hope that he could survive. A pastor learned of the accident when the man's wife called from the hospital. She said that the very best surgeons in the community had operated but found that he was beyond repair and they had given up all hope. She had been informed that her husband would die within the hour. She asked the pastor to hurry to the hospital to baptize her husband before he died. The pastor entered the sickroom to find a patient with the color of death, too weak to speak. Quickly the pastor explained that God loved the patient. In a few words he explained that baptism makes one a child of God whose sins are forgiven through Christ's death on the cross. Then he asked the patient if he wished to be baptized. The man was too weak to do more than slightly shake his head in consent.
As the pastor left he asked the wife to call him when death came. The pastor got no call that day, nor through the following night. So the next morning he called the wife, who told him that her husband was still alive and some of his color had returned. He fell asleep after the pastor's visit, something he had not done since the accident, and he even ate some food for the first time. The man recovered completely and in a few months was once again climbing telephone poles. All medical help had proven of no avail, but evidently the introduction of faith, and the spiritual dimension, had caused the man to rally. It has been well said, that "more things are wrought by prayer than this world dreams of."
6. All That Is Required
Illustration
Sarah Jackson Shelton
Kenneth Fearing, the poet, describes a particularly long and wearisome day in one woman's life. (William Dols,Just Because It Didn't Happen...,"I Say to You, 'Arise!'") Evening finally comes. The house is quiet at last. The children have been tucked into bed and are asleep. She sits in the family room with her husband and they lose themselves in the blur of the images on the television. They talk a little, but not enough. They try to make time pass with a drink. Then the eleven o'clock news is over, and she says she will go up to bed. She asks, "Are you coming soon?" He replies with, "In a minute." But as she heads toward the stairs, she hears him switch the channel to a late show and she knows that it will be another hour or so of watching, and she will drop off to sleep alone again. As she climbs the stairs in the dark, she does a silly thing that she did as a child when she was afraid. She counts the number of steps. And, then, not really wanting to and wishing that she had not, she asks herself:Did you sometime or somewhere have a different idea? She pauses for an instant. Should she go upstairs alone or return downstairs alone? And the reality of her soul's death causes her to wonder for the first time in her life:Is this what I was born to feel and to do and to be?
It is at these moments that the power of the gospel has opportunity to shine. Robert Capon has said, "Jesus came to raise the dead. The only qualification for the gift of the Gospel is to be dead. You do not have to be smart. You do not have to be good. You do not have to be wise. You do not have to be wonderful. You do not have to be anything...you just have to be dead. That's it."
7. Amazing Grace
Illustration
David Belgum
Amazing Grace was written by John Newton, who was part of the revival of the Church of England in the late eighteenth century. He was a self-educated man, who had gone to sea and at one time had been the captain of a ship in the African slave trade. After his conversion, he became an ordained minister of the Church of England, finally serving as rector of a church in London. It could well be that this personal testimony referred to his time of blindness to the awful exploitation and forced transport of the wretched slaves. He was indeed a spiritual wretch, just as the slaves were physical wretches in the stinking hold of his ship. Through an amazing grace his eyes were opened and he could see clearly God's will for his life, and it was not to haul slaves.
8. The Wounded Healers
Illustration
Ron Lavin
With all its imperfections, sins, blemishes, and warts, the Church of Jesus Christ is the intended healer of the world's wounds. Christians are called to be compassionate, wounded healers.
Perhaps, Henri Nouwen, the Roman Catholic theologian, has said this better than anyone else. The author of many books, Nouwen speaks of Christians as "wounded healers" who have compassion.
Compassion is not pity. Pity lets us stay at a distance. It is condescending.
Compassion is not sympathy. Sympathy is for superiors over inferiors.
Compassion is not charity. Charity is for the rich to continue in their status over the poor.
Compassion is born of God. It means entering into the other person's problems. It means taking on the burdens of the other. It means standing in the other person's shoes. It is the opposite of professionalism. It is the humanizing way to deal with people. "Just as bread without love can bring war instead of peace, professionalism without compassion will turn forgiveness into a gimmick."
9. Priorities
Illustration
Jerry Goebel
What is at about human nature that makes us put off the most important things until a crisis looms? So often we coast in our relationships until they skid into a crisis. We think nothing of spending thousands on a car and blindly drive it by the homeless shelter everyday. We think nothing of a sixty-hour workweek but can't find time for dinner as a family.
We live lives of loneliness and sorrow because those things that could build our friendships, family, and faith get our leftover time.
Then, one day it is too late, we have waited too long. We are like the Rabbi who did not run to Jesus until his daughter was "at the point of death [eschatos]."
Take a moment to examine your life today. What is at the "eschatos"—the point of death — in your life right now? What part of your spiritual or relational life is barely breathing? Find ways to make those areas (family, friendships and faith) a higher priority than career and income. Do something different this week. Before scheduling anything else, book time with God, schedule an appointment with those in your own family. Then, after prioritizing God and your family, then set up the rest of the week.
10. Never Ever Give Up!
Illustration
James W. Moore
One of the most beloved and colorful sports personalities of our time was a man named Jim Valvano-"Jimmy V," as sports fans around the country affectionately knew him. Valvano died on April 16, 1993, after a year-long battle with cancer. He was forty-seven years old. He will he remembered as a great basketball coach. His North Carolina State team won the national championship in 1983, upsetting that great Houston Cougar team that featured Hakeem Olajuwon and Clyde Drexler. Valvano also will he remembered as an outstanding TV analyst, an eloquent inspirational speaker, and a lovable, wisecracking humorist. But most of all, he will be remembered for the courageous way he faced a debilitating illness.
A few weeks before he died, Valvano was honored on national television, and to that vast viewing audience, he said this:
Today, I fight a different battle. You see, I have trouble walking and I have trouble standing for a long period of time. Cancer has taken away a lot of my physical abilities. Cancer is attacking and destroying my body. But what cancer cannot touch is my mind, my heart and my soul. I have faith in God and hope that things might get better for me. But even if they don't I promise you this. I will never ever give up. I will never ever quit. And if cancer gets me then I'll just try my best to go to heaven and I'll try my best to be the best coach they've ever seen up there. [Then, pointing to his 1983 Championship team, he said,] I learned a great lesson from these guys; they amazed me! They did things I wasn't sure they could do because they absolutely refused to give up! That was the theme of our championship season: "Never ever give up!" That's the lesson I learned from them and that's the message I leave with you: "Never give up. Never ever give up!"
11. Our Relationship with God
Illustration
John P. Jewell
One of the reasons people tend to see faith as a religionaboutGod instead of a relationshipwithGod is the sense that they are not worthy of the attention of an Almighty God."My problems are too small for God to care about."or"With all the pain and suffering in this world, why would God care about me?"are a couple of ways people give expression to this sense of insignificance. The sense is the one expressed by our theme title today,"How can one so great care for one so small."
Have you ever felt that sense of insignificance? There have been times when I've gazed into the incredible expanse of a starlit sky and felt ever so small and insignificant. Even our planet is hardly a speck of dust in the vast cosmos.
And yet, the heart of the lesson for today says that God is attentive to the heartache and suffering of all persons, no matter how insignificant they may seem to the world around them.
Religion can get in the way of a relationship with God. Faith is not about rules, regulations and religion. It is about we human beings reaching out to a God who reaches out to us through Jesus Christ who reaches into the pain and anguish of our living. The good news for the people in our scripture lesson is that the barriers all fall away. For the woman, for Jairus and for the little girl - the greatness of God and the good news of Jesus Christ eliminate all obstacles to health and life.
And aren't you glad that Christ cares more about our wholeness and our living than he does about the niggling details of religious convention? When I am in anguish and wish for the presence of Christ, I do not need to worry that I am too great a sinner or that some folks would consider me to be unacceptable I know that Jesus cared for a woman who was a social reject and for a little girl that was not among the children of his followers.
12. The Healing of Jairus' Daughter and the Hemorrhaging Woman - Sermon Opener
Illustration
James W. Moore
A business executive became depressed. Things were not going well at work, and he was bringing his problems home with him every night. Every evening he would eat his dinner in silence, shutting out his wife and five-year-old daughter. Then he would go into the den and read the paper using the newspaper to wall his family out of his life.
After several nights of this, one evening his daughter took her little hand and pushed the newspaper down. She then jumped into her father's lap, wrapped her arms around his neck and hugged him strongly. The father said abruptly, "Honey, you are hugging me to death!" "No, Daddy," the little girl said, "I'm hugging you to life!"
This was the greatness of Jesus. He took people where they were and hugged them to life. That is precisely what we see Jesus doing here in this dramatic passage in Mark 5. He is loving needy and hurting people, hugging them to life. This passage is a fascinating one because here we have a story within a story, or two healing stories rolled into one and the people involved could not be more different.
On the one hand, the family of Jairus represented the "upper crust" of society. Jairus was the ruler of the synagogue. He was a man of substance, rich and powerful and religiously prominent. In the synagogue, he called the shots. He decided who would preach, what scripture would be read, and what hymns would be sung. He represented the Elite of Society, especially the religious world, but this day Jairus was troubled. His 12-year-old daughter was dying.
On the other hand, the hemorrhaging woman in the crowd was a social outcast. She was considered unclean as one who was under the judgment of God and therefore not allowed to set foot in the synagogue. In this magnificent passage, these two vastly different people, the down and out hemorrhaging woman and the upper-crust daughter of Jairus, are loved into life by our Lord.
Now, of course, there are many beautiful lessons here in Mark 5 in these two dramatic stories of healing, and we could go off now in any number of directions. But for the moment, let's look closely together at the power of love and the amazing, incredible things love can accomplish when it is given and when it is received.
1. Love Has the Power to Heal.
2. Love Has the Power to Reconcile.
3. Love Has the Power to Redeem.
13. How Do You Measure Success?
Illustration
James W. Moore
Some years ago, Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote these powerful words. Listen…
"How do you measure success?
To laugh often and much;
To win the respect of intelligent people and the affection of children;
To earn the appreciation of honest critics
and endure the betrayal of false friends;
To appreciate beauty;
To find the best in others;
To leave the world a bit better
whether by a healthy child,
a redeemed social condition,
or a job well done;
To know that even one life has
breathed because you lived…
that is to have succeeded."
I like that very much. It's a beautiful statement… but, somehow I want to add one more ingredient to the mix, namely... compassion! The spirit of compassion… the touch of compassion.
14. Changing the Color-Tags
Illustration
Billy D. Strayhorn
In the war years, triage (sorting out) referred to the policy by which medical assistance was given. It was up to the doctors to "color-tag" the wounded, placing them in one of three categories according to their condition. One color meant hopeless - nothing we can do will save them. Another tag meant they'd make it whether they get help or not. The third color-tag indicated a doubtful prognosis - a chance to live only if medical assistance is given. Since there were severely limited medical supplies . . . assistance was being given only to this last group.
Lou was badly blown apart, including one leg severely wounded. The doctor who examined him made the decision that Lou was a hopeless case and tagged him as such, leaving him to die. But a nurse noticed Lou was conscious and began to talk with him. They discovered they were both from Ohio. Getting to know Lou as a person, the nurse just couldn't let him die. She broke all the rules and changed his color-tag.
There followed a two-day trip in the back of a truck and months in a hospital. But Lou made it. He met a girl in the hospital who he later married. Even minus one leg he has led a full happy life, all because a nurse broke the rules of triage and changed a tag.
Maybe the task of the church is going around changing the tags. Maybe that's what Jesus meant to tell us when he healed the woman and helped Jairus. Jesus IS the Friend of the hopeless. He came to befriend and save the hopeless from despair. He gave His life on the cross and was raised from the dead for that very reason.
15. Jesus Brings Life
Illustration
Will Willimon
With whom do you most identify in today's gospel? There are plenty of characters here who are being stung by death. There is a woman whose whole life has been caught, dominated by a terrible, life-demanding illness. There is a distraught father. A little girl whose young life is being cut short. There are the baffled disciples, the crowd who doesn't know what to think of all this. Where are you?
And yet, intruding into the story is another face, the strong, live-giving face of Jesus. Mark says that Jesus was forever intruding into fixed, settled, hopeless situations and bringing life. Hear his strong voice speaking over the laments and dirges in today's gospel? Hear him as he calls to the little girl, "Get up!"
I think he may be calling to you. "Get up!" His voice is strong, commanding, vital. "Get up!" You have perhaps heard his comforting, soft voice before, stilling the waves of the storm, bringing peace to troubled waters. Now hear his other voice, that strong, shattering, enlivening voice. Evoking "fear and trembling" (verse 33) in all who heard it that day, it may do the same for us. Life is frightening, when it intrudes into the realm of death. Hear his voice now. I think it is a shout. There is so much death. We are asleep with death so it takes a loud voice to wake us.
The great tower of the CastleChurch in Wittenberg overlooks the church where Luther preached and is today buried.
On the anniversary of the Reformation the Socialist government took it upon itself to paint, in large, tasteless letters, a quote for the first line of Luther's famous hymn, "A Mighty Fortress is Our God, a bulwark never failing."
Believers in Wittenberg, for whom the words were more than an advertising slogan, whispered among themselves "The communists should have quoted from the first line of the second verse of the hymn, 'If we on our own strength confide, our striving would be loosing.'"
And it's true. Left to our own devices, we are caught, trapped, dead. Face facts. There's a lot of deadness out there and in here.
But Jesus does not leave us be. In this story, we don't have to wait to Easter for life to intrude and death to be defeated. Get up! he says. In the name of Jesus Christ, the victor over pain and death, enslavement and despair, Get up!
16. The Power of Believing
Illustration
Edward F. Markquart
Dr. Robert Schullertold the story of a Ph. D. student in mathematics who was going to take his final test for his PhD. Unfortunately, the student arrived late for that test. Everybody else in the classroom had already started the test. On the blackboard were three math problems. The late student sat down immediately to do them. He worked feverously for an hour and a half but everybody else had finished the test and left. He felt to himself, "What an idiot I am, for I am the last one here taking the test. I must be MUCH slower than any other students in this class." He had finished only two problems and he knew that he was going to flunk his math test. You can't leave a third of the test unanswered and not flunk. He was very upset. He came up to the professor and said, "Professor, I didn't finish the last problem. Would you please let me finish the third problem and bring it into you later tonight? Please, I'll get the third problem done and bring it to you." The professor said that was permissible. The math student turned in to his math professor the calculations for the two problems and went to work on that third problem. He worked all afternoon. He worked into the night. He worked until 11:00 that night and he finally finished the third math problem. He rushed it over the math professor's office which, of course, was closed. He slipped the test of the third math problem underneath the door and went home exhausted. Early the next morning, his telephone rang and it was his professor who excitedly said to him, "Young man, you are a genius. You are brighter than bright. I have never seen anything like it." The young man said, "What do you mean?" The professor responded, "The first two problems on the board were the test. The third problem was a mind teaser. I have never had a student EVER finish that problem. No student of mine has ever gotten that right. You have done something that no other student has ever done before."
The student had come in late to the test and never heard that the third problem was impossible to solve. He never heard that it was a mind teaser, an impossible challenge.
The power of believing. If you believe that the pill can cure you, it can really help. If you believe that you can really solve a very difficult problem, chances are increased that you can solve it. There is a power to faith. We all know that. We all experience that in our daily lives. We read all kinds of signs that simply say, "Believe." We know the power of belief.
17. This Is Where I Found Christ
Illustration
James W. Moore
There is a beautiful old story about Zacchaeus, the tax collector. It tells how in later years, he rose early every morning and left his house. His wife, curious, followed him one morning. At the town well he filled a bucket? and he walked until he came to a sycamore tree. There, setting down the bucket, he began to clean away the stones, the branches, and the rubbish from around the base of the tree. Having done that, he poured water on the roots and stood there in silence, gently caressing the trunk with both of his hands. When his amazed wife came out of hiding and asked what he was doing, Zacchaeus replied simply, "This is where I found Christ."
I can just imagine that for the rest of their lives, that woman who touched the hem of Jesus' robe that day on the street and the daughter of Jairus who was raised up in that room in her home, continually brought people back to those sacred spots and said, "This is where I found Christ! This is where Christ loved me into life!"
Do you have a sacred spot like that? This is the Good News of our Christian faith, isn't it? Love has the power to heal, to reconcile, and to redeem.
18. Healing on an Emotional Level
Illustration
Charles R. Leary
Dr Bernie S. Siegel, says in his book Love, Medicine and Miracles, "miracles happen to exceptional patients every day." Listen how he defines an exceptional patient. "Do you want to live to be a hundred?" If you can answer that by an immediate visceral "Yes!" with no ifs, ands or buts, you are exceptional. That doesn't mean that you expect to have all your pains relieved, your crooked bones made straight, and all your warts made smooth. It means you are willing to accept the risks and challenges to live life to the fullest where God has you right now. Dr. Siegel says that when he asks that question, fifteen to twenty percent from an average audience show their hands. However, he says, "it is a tragedy" that only five percent show their hands in a roomful of doctors. Dr. Siegel thinks all doctors should be required to attend healing services as a part of their training. They should not be allowed to prescribe medications or consider operations during those training sessions. He is convinced that doctors need to "learn that they can help by touching, praying, or simply sharing on an emotional level."
19. A Tale of Two Faiths
Illustration
J. David Hoke
In the story of the dead girl and the sick woman, we have a tale of two faiths. Faith can eitherbe for yourself, as in the case of the woman with the hemorrhage of blood, or faith can be for others, to impart blessing to them, as in the case of Jairus' daughter. This is the kind of faith which imparts. It is the kind of faith which enables others to be what they can be in Jesus Christ.
Lloyd John Ogilvie, pastor of the First Presbyterian Church in Hollywood, California, tells the story of sitting on the platform with Billy Graham at a celebration of the twenty-fifth anniversary of his crusades. Billy said to him, "I could not preach with power nor lead anyone to Christ if it were not for the positive prayers for the blessing of God by thousands of believing people." Just before Billy got up to preach Ogilvie said to him, "I'm praying for you, Billy!" Graham responded with a flash in his clear blue eyes, "I need that more than anything in all the world!"
20. Beneath the Three Trees
Illustration
Kristin Borsgard Wee
There is a marvelous miracle described in Willa Cather's book,Death Comes for the Archbishop. In the story, FatherJuniperoand his friend, Father Andrea, set out on a journey through a Mexican desert with bread and water for one day. On the second day, they are beginning to lose heart when, near sunset, they see in the distance three very tall cottonwood trees. They rush toward the trees and see a little house. An old Mexican comes out of the house, greets them kindly, and asks them to stay the night. Inside the little house the man's young wife is stirring porridge by the fire. Her young son isbesideher playing with a pet lamb. The family shares their supper with the priests,thengives them sheepskins to use for sleeping on the floor. The next morning when they awake, the family is gone, presumably caring for their sheep. Food was set out on the table. The priests eat and continue on their way.
When the brothers at the monastery hear FatherJunipero'sstory, they say they know of the place with the three tall cottonwoods, but insist there is no house there. So Father Junipero and Father Andrea take some of the brothers and travel back to the place. The three tall trees are there, shedding their cotton, but there is no house and no family. The two priests sink down on their knees and kiss the earth, for they know it was the Holy Family that had entertained them there. FatherJuniperorecalled how he had bent to bless the child after evening prayers. The little boy had lifted his hand and with a tiny finger had made the sign of the cross on Father Junipero'sforehead.
Beneath the three trees,there is restfor the weary.
21. A Drink of Water to a Thirsty Soul
Illustration
James W. Moore
For those conducting Communion this Sunday this illustration offers some strong tie-ins for a conclusion:
Have you heard the legend of the Fisher King? When the Fisher King was a boy, he was sent out to spend the night alone in the forest, as a test of his courage to be king. During the night, he had a vision of the Holy Grail—the cup used by our Lord at the last supper. He saw it surrounded by great flames of fire, and he immediately became excited by the prospect of the wealth and glory that would be his by possessing such a great prize.
Greedily, he reached into the flames to grab it, but the flames were too hot, and he was severely wounded. As the years went by, the Fisher King became more despondent and alone, and his wound grew deeper. One day, feeling sad and depressed and in pain, he went for a walk in the forest and came upon a court jester.
"Are you all right?" the jester asked. "Is there anything I can do for you?
Anything at all?"
"Well, I am very thirsty," the Fisher King replied. The jester took an old dilapidated cup from his bag, filled it with water from a nearby stream, and gave it to the Fisher King. As he drank, he suddenly felt his wound healing for the first time. And incredibly, the old cup he was drinking from had turned into the Holy Grail.
"What wonderful magic do you possess?" the Fisher King asked the jester. The jester just shrugged and said, "I know no magic. I only gave a drink of water to a thirsty soul."
This oldlegendunderscores a great truth that is written large inthescriptures, namely this… Greed and selfishness bring pain and suffering, but love brings healing and life. We see it here in Mark 5 as Jesus reaches out tothehemorrhaging woman andthedaughterofJairus…love hasthepower to heal.
22. Where There's Death, There's Hope
Illustration
Robert Deffinbaugh
One woman in the crowd is singled out by the gospel writers. She was a woman who had suffered from some kind of hemorrhage for twelve years. Her suffering was much more than physical, though that would have been enough. She suffered as much from her ‘cures' as she did from her case of bleeding. From various sources we are informed as to the nature of some of these ‘cures.'
Pliny's Natural History reveals the generally low condition of medical science in the world at that time. Physicians were accustomed to prescribe doses of curious concoctions made from ashes of burnt wolf's skull, stags' horns, heads of mice, the eyes of crabs, owl's brains, the livers of frogs and other like elements. For dysentery powdered horses' teeth were administered, and a cold in the head was cured by kissing a mule's nose.
From Jewish writings, such as the Talmud, we learn of some of these ‘cures':
"One remedy consisted of drinking a goblet of wine containing a powder compounded from rubber, alum and garden crocuses. Another treatment consisted of a dose of Persian onions cooked in wine administered with the summons, ‘Arise out of your flow of blood!' Other physicians prescribed sudden shock, or the carrying of the ash of an ostrich's egg in a certain cloth."
To add insult to injury (literally) this woman was also subjected to tremendous social pressures. The nature of this woman's illness fell under the stipulations of Leviticus 15, whereby she would have to be pronounced unclean. As such she had been an outcast for twelve years. She could not take part in any religious observances, nor could she have any public contact without defiling those whom she touched. Apparently, she was also forced to be separated from her husband.
Last of all, this pathetic woman has lost all of her financial resources. Mark tells us that she had spent all of her money on doctor bills, with no relief — indeed, with added affliction. And in those days, there was no such thing as a malpractice suit.
23. Protected from the Big and Small
Illustration
Tom Rietveld
In May 1995, a 34 year old construction worker by the name of Randy Reid, was doing some final welding on top of a nearly completed water tower in one of Chicago's suburbs. At one point, Randy unhooked his safety belt so he could reach for some pipes. But at that same moment, a metal beam slipped off a nearby crane, and bumped the scaffolding Randy was standing on. The scaffolding tipped, and Randy lost his balance. He fell 110 feet to the ground below. In landing, he just missed a pile of rocks and construction debris on the ground. Instead he landed face down on a pile of dirt. A fellow worker saw the whole accident and immediately called 911. When paramedics arrived, they couldn't believe their eyes. They found Randy completely conscious, moving, and complaining that he had a sore back.
Even though he went through such a horrendous fall, Randy still maintained his sense of humor. Because as paramedics carried him on a backboard to the ambulance, Randy asked one thing. He said, "Hey guys, be careful, will you? Don't drop me." When he arrived at the hospital and was examined by the doctors, and they discovered that the only injury he suffered was a bruised lung.
Friends, I think sometimes our faith resembles Randy. God protects us from harm in a 110-foot fall, but we're still nervous about three-foot heights. By that I mean, we have faith that God will save us from hell and death, but we're afraid that He won't be able to protect us from the smaller difficulties we are going to face this coming week.
24. Do Not Touch
Illustration
Despite the "Do Not Touch" signs, a museum was having no success in keeping patrons from touching and soiling priceless furniture and art. But the problem evaporated overnight when a clever museum employee replaced the signs with ones that read: "Caution: Wash Hands After Touching!"
25. Making Babies Cry
Illustration
Brett Blair
The Menninger Institute in Topeka, Kansas once had a fascinating experiment. They identified a group of crib babies who did not cry. Let me explain. It seems that babies cry because they instinctively know that this is the way to get attention. Crying is their way of calling out. These babies, however, had been in abusive situations. Their parents let hem cry for hours on end and never responded. Do you know what happened? The babies eventually quit crying. It is almost as if they had learned that it was not worth trying.
So the Menninger Institute came in for an experiment. They got some people from retirement and from nursing homes, and every day these people held these babies and rocked them. The object was to get these babies to start crying again. And you know, it worked. Physical touch had made the difference.
As important as physical touch is there is another kind of touch that is even more important. It is spiritual touch. This is that special touch that influences and impacts the lives of people. The telephone company some years ago had a slogan that you may recall: "Reach out and touch someone." They were, of course, referring to a meaningful relationship.
26. They Grow in Clusters
Illustration
Brett Blair
Though I have never seen the Sequoia trees of California, known as Redwoods, I am told they are spectacular. Towering as much as 300 feet above the ground. Strangely, these towering trees have unusually shallow root systems that spider out just under the surface of the ground to catch as much of the surface moisture they can. And this is their vulnerability. Storms with heavy winds would almost always bring these giants crashing to the ground but this rarely happens because they grow in clusters and their intertwining roots provide support for one another against the storms.
When we are together, either as a family or a church, we provide this same support. Pain and suffering come to all of us. But, just like those giant Sequoia trees, we can be supported in those difficult times by the touch of one another's lives. The knowledge that we have someone; that we are not alone; that there is someone who is willing to touch us, hold us, keeps us from being destroyed.
27. The Healing Power of Touch - Sermon Starter
Illustration
Brett Blair
As Matthew's story begins this morning, Jesus, the great physician, is on his way to make an emergency house call. There was a little girl who was in a grave state and her father implored Jesus to come. We are told that a large crowd of the curious followed Jesus. Some were hoping he would succeed, others that he would fail; most probably got caught up in the excitement of the parade.
In this throng was one woman who was there for quite a different reason. We are told that for twelve years she had been suffering from a bleeding hemorrhage. Some modern scholars have theorized that this was a bleeding cancer. If this were the case she was, of course, beyond all medical help. Mark tell us that she had already been to all of the doctors and she had only gotten worse, and beside that they had taken all her money. Interestingly, Luke, who was a physician, tells this story as well, but he could not bring himself to tell that side of story. Call it professional pride but he is not about to say that she was taken for all her money by a long string of doctors.
How could she get the attention of Jesus? Her problem was of a very personal nature and she did not want to discuss the issue publicly. According to Levitic Law, a woman who was bleeding was considered unclean and under law could touch no one. There were many ancient taboos. She did not want to have to go through the disciples to see Jesus. She wanted the doctor and not the nurse.
She thus devised a plan. Having heard the stories of Jesus' power, she declared: If I but touch the hem of his garment I will be healed." We smile at that and say: How innocent, how naive.
She reached out from the crowd and touched the garment of Jesus. Immediately he stopped, bolted upright, and asked: "Who touched me?" The disciples were taken aback. Was this some kind of rhetorical question? Who touched you? Why master, look around, everyone is touching you. The New English version quotes their words as being: "What is the purpose in asking?"
Jesus replied with one of the most mysterious lines in the Bible. He said: "I felt power flow from me." For years I have been mesmerized with that verse. What exactly happened in that moment? Did the lady drain his battery? It sounds as though he is almost describing a power surge. "I felt power flow from me." Whatever happened the important matter of course is that in the midst of the crowd, Christ felt the touch of a single person. Don't ever say that in the enormity of the cosmos God cannot care about my concerns and me. Not only does God care, he actually solicits our concerns "Come unto me all ye who labor and are heavy laden and I will give you peace."
Daughter, said Jesus (and I might add parenthetically at this point that that is the only recorded time in scripture that Jesus used that term) daughter, your faith has made you well. And, we are told, she was immediately healed. The desperation of her faith thus became the channel that led to her healing. The story is saying there are two kinds of touch:
1. The first being physical touch.
2. The other is spiritual touch.
28. There Is a Time to Touch
Illustration
Brett Blair
There are two kinds of touch, the first being physical touch. So often when Jesus wanted to transmit His power of love, he physically touched people the man born blind and the children in Jerusalem being two examples. An embrace, a kiss, an arm on the shoulder, a pat on the back all of these are ways of expressing a love which goes beyond words.
It is lamentable that we are so paranoid on this subject in America. We have grown touchy about touching. In other parts of the world they do not seem to have this hang-up. To me, the guideline that we can use for this is from the 3rd chapter of Ecclesiastes. You recall the familiar verses that read: There is a time to live and a time to die, a time to plant and a time to pluck up that which has been planted, a time for peace and a time for war, a time to touch and a time to refrain from touching. A sage person will appreciate the difference.
29. Miracle of Jairus’ Daughter
Illustration
Michael P. Green
Ray Stedman has told the story of a time when he and his wife were driving through Oregon with his little daughter, Susan. She had developed a fever the night before, when they were staying in a motel, but it didn’t seem serious. As they drove along, all of a sudden the little girl went into convulsions. Her eyes turned up, her body began to jerk, and she obviously was in great danger. Stedman’s heart clutched. He stopped the car, grabbed Susan, and stumbled across the road to a farmhouse that happened to be visible nearby. It was about six in the morning, but the frantic father thundered on the door. When a woman appeared, he cried out, “My daughter is very sick—she’s in convulsions. Do you have a bathtub where we can put her in warm water?”
The lady was so taken aback she hardly knew what to say. She motioned down the hall, and without waiting for any words, Stedman pushed the front door open, went down the hall, and started running water in the tub. Later he called a doctor and arranged to take his daughter to him for an examination.
It all turned out all right, but Stedman never forgot that moment when it looked as though his daughter was going to die. Later he found out this farm family had the only bathtub and the only phone for miles around!
This is the same emotion that drove Jairus, that agonized father, to Jesus—the fear that his little one, who had blessed their home and filled it with sunshine for twelve years, was to be taken from them.
30. Get the Ball to Me
Illustration
King Duncan
Whether you are a basketball fan or not, you are probably familiar with the name Larry Bird, the former basketball great of the Boston Celtics. During a retirement party for Larry Bird in Boston Garden, former Celtics Coach K.C. Jones told of diagramming a play on the sidelines, only to have Bird dismiss it, saying: "Get the ball to me and get everyone out of my way."
Jones responded: "I'm the coach, and I will call the plays." Then Jones turned to the other players and said: "Get the ball to Larry, and get out of his way."
That is basically our message for today. When those times of terror come - when it seems the light will never come and you have no where else to turn - give the ball to Jesus and get out of the way. You will discover, as did Jairus, that Christ will not let you down.
31. Birth and Death
Illustration
Editor James S. Hewett
It seems to me that a good analogy for death is birth. The child, before birth, must certainly feel secure and safe. The environment, however limited, is warm and comfortable. The unborn infant knows what to count on in its existence. Birth must seem like death to the child, being thrust in such a traumatic way out of the comfortable and known. We would say to the child, if it were possible, that it is all a part of the plan. We would assure the child that there was even more love, and even grander existence awaiting him/her than could be imagined. We would say, "You can't believe the world that awaits!" But we cannot give those encouraging words. The child must pass through before finding out. Death is like that. We have to leave all that we have known. There has been security in our existence, in spite of its limitations. We know what we can count on. Death takes us from the comfort and safety, ending the only life we can imagine. For the person of God, however, there is awaiting an even greater existence. There is more love and the possibility of service and life than is beyond our imagination. It is all a part of the plan. God would say to us, "You can't believe the world that awaits!"
32. You're Not Alone
Illustration
Hugh Salisbury
Death is no respecter of persons, or families.There is an Eastern legend about a Hindu woman whose only child had died. She went to a prophet to ask for her child back. The prophet told her to go and obtain a handful of rice from a house into which death had not come. If she could obtain the rice in this way, he promised to give her the child back. From door to door she asked the question, "Are you all here around the table fathers, mothers, children...none missing?" But always the answer came back that there were empty chairs in each house. As she continued on, her grief and sorrow softened as she found that death had visited all families. Yes, death is universal; our painful experience is not the only one of its kind. Because God is faithful, because Jesus Christ is alive, so is your loved one and mine.
33. No More Tears
Illustration
Richard A. Jensen
Can you imagine a four-year-old boy falling to his death from the 53rd floor of a New York City apartment building? Unimaginable as it seems, that is precisely what happened to the son of British rock star, Eric Clapton. Clapton's life was filled with tears of grief as the result of this shocking event. His son's death haunted him so much that he finally wrote a song about it. He called it, "Tears in Heaven." In February of 1993 this song of Clapton's won the Grammy as the "Song of the Year." Mr. Clapton himself won the Grammy as Male Vocalist of the Year. Eric Clapton, however, would have given up all the success of these Grammys in an instant if he could just have had his son back. Clapton's song begins with these words: "Would you know my name, if I saw you in heaven? Would it be the same, if I saw you in heaven?" Mr. Clapton's separation from his son is real. His son is gone forever. As with others who grieve the loss of loved ones, however, Clapton desperately wants to communicate with him again. Clapton's song continues. He envisions heaven for a moment. He knows that heaven is a place that he does not belong. That means that he must somehow find the strength to carry on when he knows, "I don't belong here in heaven." The singer gets a glimpse of heaven, a glimpse of hope. But in heaven he does not belong.
Verse two of "Tears in Heaven" returns to the same theme. He wonders if his son would hold his hand if he saw him in heaven? He wonders, further, whether his son would help him stand if he saw him in heaven? Clapton does not know the answers to his questions. He just believes that if he could get a glimpse of his son again his grief might be lightened. In his grief he cries out for some kind of contact with his son. But it is not to be. So, he sings, "I will have to find my own way, because I just can't stay, here in heaven." The burden of grief rests squarely on his shoulders. Heaven is of no help. Heaven is beyond his grasp. His son is beyond his grasp. He'll just have to make do as best he can. He'll have to "find his own way through night and day." Clapton's song is a very sad song! The grief is so real and the hope so illusory. Clapton knows he doesn't belong in heaven for whatever reason. Therefore, he will have to carry his own grief and his grief is a terribly heavy load.
Clapton sings of this heavy load in the next verse of his song. "Time can bring you down," he sings. Time can be devastating when you are locked in grief. Time can bend your knees; it has you "beggin' please." Such is Clapton's plight. He is reduced to begging. Surely he has begged God to give him a reason for his son's death. Why, God, Why? Surely he has begged God to bring his son back again. Surely he has begged God to lighten his load in life. There is a lot of begging going on in the midst of human tears of grief. Clapton sees one bright ray of hope in the midst of his grief. He is sure that in heaven there are no tears. That's the source of the song's title: "Tears in Heaven." Tears are for the earth. Tears are grief's constant companion. Tears are grief's way of showing us the pit of emptiness that tugs so heavily upon us in our time of loss. Tears are vital to the healing process. Through the ears, however, Clapton sees a vision of a place where tears shall be no more. "There will be no more tears in heaven," he sings. "There will be no more tears in heaven." "
34. Where Is God Now?
Illustration
Staff
Elie Wiesel was a fifteen-year old prisoner in the Nazi death camp at Buna. A cache of arms belonging to a Dutchman had been discovered at the camp. The Dutchman was promptly shipped to Auschwitz. But he had a young servant boy, a pipel as they were called, a child with a refined and beautiful face, unheard of in the camps. He had the face of a sad angel. The little servant, like his Dutch master, was cruelly tortured, but would not reveal any information. So the SS sentenced the child to death, along with two other prisoners who had been discovered with arms.
Wiesel tells the story: One day when we came back from work, we saw three gallows rearing up in the assembly place, three black crows. Roll call. SS all around us; machine guns trained: the traditional ceremony. Three victims in chains and one of them, the little servant, the sad-eyed angel. The SS seemed more preoccupied, more disturbed than usual. To hang a young boy in front of thousands of spectators was no light matter. The head of the camp read the verdict. All eyes were on the child. He was lividly pale, almost calm, biting his lips. The gallows threw its shadow over him. This time the Lagercapo, which was the name for the head of a camp, refused to act as executioner. Three SS replaced him. The three victims mounted together onto the chairs. The three necks were placed at the same moment within the nooses. "Long live liberty!" cried the two adults. But the child was silent.
"Where is God? Where is He?" someone behind me asked. Total silence throughout the camp. On the horizon, the sun was setting. "Bare your heads!" yelled the head of the camp. His voice was raucous. We were weeping. "Cover your heads!" Then the march past began -- we inmates were made to walk past the gallows.The two adults were no longer alive. Their tongues hung swollen, blue-tinged,but the third rope was still moving; being so light, the child was still alive...For more than half an hour he stayed there, struggling between life and death, dying in slow agony under our eyes. And we had to look him full in the face. He was still alive when I passed in front of him. His tongue was still red, his eyes were not yet glazed. Behind me, I heard the same man asking: "Where is God now?" And I heard a voice within me answer him: "Where is He? Here He is. He is hanging here on this gallows." That night the soup tasted of corpses.
Italics added for clarification. From Elie Wiesel, Night, Bantam, 1982, p. 75-6, quoted in W. Aldrich, Multnomah, When God Was Taken Captive, 1989, p. 39-41.
35. A Cluster of Adjustments
Illustration
Charles Swindoll
Author Edgar Jackson poignantly describes grief: Grief is a young widow trying to raise her three children, alone. Grief is the man so filled with shocked uncertainty and confusion that he strikes out at the nearest person. Grief is a mother walking daily to a nearby cemetery to stand quietly and alone a few minutes before going about the tasks of the day. She knows that part of her is in the cemetery, just as part of her is in her daily work. Grief is the silent, knife-like terror and sadness that comes a hundred times a day, when you start to speak to someone who is no longer there. Grief is the emptiness that comes when you eat alone after eating with another for many years.
Grief is teaching yourself to go to bed without saying good night to the one who had died. Grief is the helpless wishing that things were different when you know they are not and never will be again. Grief is a whole cluster of adjustments, apprehensions, and uncertainties that strike life in its forward progress and make it difficult to redirect the energies of life.
36. Waiting
Illustration
Eric Ritz
I read recently of a survey taken by a doctor who polled 3,000 people and asked them this simple question: "What are you living for?" The survey revealed that over 90 percent of the people were WAITING for something significant to change or happen in their lives and in the lives of those with whom they were involved. Let me share a few examples:
A. A middle-aged couple was waiting for their parents to die before they went on to the next stage of their lives.
B. Another couple was waiting for their children to get married.
C. A younger couple was waiting to have a child.
D. A younger child said he was waiting for the day when his Dad no longer had to sleep on the couch and could sleep in the bedroom. Maybe his Dad would be in a better mood.
A character in T. S. Eliot's play, "The Elder Statesman," shares this insight on waiting: "If I had the energy to work myself to death how gladly would I face death! However, waiting, simple waiting with no desire to act, yet a loathing of inaction. It is like sitting in an empty waiting room in a railroad station on a branch line after the last train, after all the other passengers have left, and the booking office is closed and the porters have gone."
37. Before and After We Exist
Illustration
Michael P. Green
A child does not begin to exist when he (or she) is born. The child has already existed for nine months prior to this in the mother’s womb. At the point of birth, only the conditions in which the child exists change. Before, he lived internally; now, he lives externally. Before, he was fed internally; now, he feeds externally. He does not begin to live at birth: he has lived all the time since conception, but conditions change at birth.
So also can the believer view death. At the point of death, the conditions of our eternal life change—but not the fact that we do indeed have eternal life.
38. Sometimes Love Does Not Count The Cost of Its Commitment
Illustration
William Gladstone, in announcing the death of Princess Alice to the House of Commons, told a touching story. The little daughter of the Princess was seriously ill with diphtheria. The doctors told the princess not to kiss her little daughter and endanger her life by breathing the child's breath. Once when the child was struggling to breathe, the mother, forgetting herself entirely, took the little one into her arms to keep her from choking to death. Rasping and struggling for her life, the child said, "Momma, kiss me!" Without thinking of herself the mother tenderly kissed her daughter. She got diphtheria and some days thereafter she died. Real love forgets self. Real love knows no danger. Real love doesn't count the cost. The Bible says, "Many waters cannot quench love, neither can the floods drown it."
39. Jerry's Faith
Illustration
John E. Sumwalt
In the Lutheran parochial school I attended as a child I was taught to fear God, and that I risked punishment for sin. When I was 17 years old, my younger sister died of a brain tumor, and I began to question everything that I had been taught. I could not understand how God could allow this. Her death left me confused and angry. I became more of a doubter than a believer. I came to the conclusion that I could only believe in myself. I pushed myself, I worked hard; I became an over-achiever and eventually a workaholic. This program propelled me to financial success, but it was accompanied by personal failure. I learned that the love of money can bring financial gains that are accompanied by personal loss.
I became an empty person. I couldn't stand success and began to self-destruct. I lost everything, my friends, those who had pretended to be my friends and my family. It was all like an unbelievable soap opera -- and before it was over I learned quite a bit about the judicial system, the Mafia, extortion and revenge. There were times when I feared for my life and for the lives of the members of my family. It was the kind of situation that causes one to think about taking his own life.
But I wasn't ready for that option. The love I had for my children gave me courage and made me determined to try again. I wanted to be a believer in something bigger than myself, but it was difficult. It would take a miracle. I carefully planned a comeback. I wanted to be successful again and not make some of the same mistakes. The task seemed monumental.
In the process I met an independent preacher named Andy. He worked for me on a part-time basis and we soon became friends. He wasn't pushy with his religion, so I decided to go to one of his church services on a Wednesday night. It was quite unusual to say the least. Wednesday night was testimony night. The opening song service was quite an experience. The songs had beautiful melodies and were easy to sing. When they sang songs like "He Touched Me" and "O, How I Love Jesus," I noticed that many had tears in their eyes as they sang with great feeling. I felt touched by this, and quite uncomfortable. The testimonies that followed were as impressive to me as the song service. People spoke about what God had done for them, how God answered prayer and healed them. Was this real? Do they know a different God than I do, I wondered? It was all so confusing.
I didn't know if I could believe it, but I went back to observe more. I knew these people had something I didn't have. I guess it was a simple faith in God. It seemed like a good way to live, but I still wondered if it was real. If there was no God, I think we would have to invent one to keep our sanity. I tried to keep an open mind on the subject. I found myself reading the Bible because I was hungry for truth.
One Saturday night my mother called to tell me that my grandmother was gravely ill. I needed strength to face this so I went to church the next morning before going to the hospital to see her. That morning Andy spoke of the healing power of Jesus. I cornered him after church and said, "Andy, are you sure he heals today?" He was sure. I marked several of the healing promises in my Bible and then I went to the hospital. As I entered the waiting room, I saw that many of my relatives were there to pay their last visit to Grandma. The pastor of her church was about to get on the elevator after praying with her. I stopped him for a brief talk. I said, "Don't you believe God has the ability to heal people?" He assured me he believed that God does have the power to heal, but he added that we all have a time to die. I knew he was right, but a voice in the back of my mind said, "Prove me and know that I am God."
I followed my cousin and his wife into Grandma's room in the intensive care unit. When I spoke to Grandma she regained consciousness, and her smile told me that she was pleased to see her oldest grandson. I got right to the point. "Grandma, do you want me to pray that God will heal you?" She agreed. The four of us held hands and I prayed for her healing. It was a special moment. The nurses and other members of the hospital staff who were present stood with tears in their eyes. When I finished I had a feeling that Grandma was healed. My cousin's wife knew it, also. Grandma fell into a deep sleep. When we went out to the waiting room, my relatives were talking about Grandma being ready to pass away. The doctor had told them that she would not live through the day. I said, "Grandma is not going to die today. She is healed." I went home and then back to the church for the Sunday evening service.
On Monday morning my mother called to tell me that Grandma had made a complete recovery. I said, "What did the doctor have to say about this recovery?" She answered, "He said it was a miracle." I believe God knew just what I needed. I had the audacity to take God at his word, and God cared enough not to let me make a fool of myself.
Author's Note: Gerald Wagner shared this story of his grandmother's healing with a new member class in our church in the Spring of 1990. It is printed here in his own words. Mr. Wagner, an independent semi-truck driver, lives in Kenissha, Wisconsin.
40. The Boy Jesus
Illustration
Brett Blair
You will recall when the old man Simeon held the Christ child in his arms he said, "This child is destined to cause the rising and the falling of many in Israel, and he will be a sign that will be spoken against, so that the hearts of many will be revealed."
There are two well-known pictures, each with the same title, "The Shadow of the Cross." One by Holeman Hunt depicts the interior of a carpenter's shop, with Joseph and the Boy Jesus at work. Mary is also present. The Boy Jesus pauses in his work, and as he stretches his arms the shadow of the cross is cast on the wall.
The other picture is a popular engraving which depicts the boy Jesus running with outstretched arms to his mother, the shadow of the cross being cast on the ground by his form as he runs. Both pictures are fanciful in form, but their underlying message is true. If we read the Gospels just as they stand, it is clear that the death of Jesus Christ was really in view almost from the outset of his earthly appearance. At first sight there seems little in them about his death, but as we look deeper we see more. It was part of the divine purpose and plan for him from the first, and very early we have a hint of the cross.
41. Eyes on the Unseen
Illustration
Larry Powell
The first scripture selectionrelates the healing of a man "who was deaf and had an impediment in his speech." Although nothing is mentioned regarding the faith of the man who was healed, faith was yet an active ingredient in the healing as exhibited by those who resolutely brought the man to Jesus. In verse 34, the phrase "looking up to heaven," underscores the intimate relationship with God that Jesus brought to that moment. Similarly, I have read that when Francis of Assisi preached, he never looked at his hearers, but instead fixed his eyes upon the sky as if expecting Christ to appear before he had completed the next sentence. Jesus, "looking up to heaven," apparently sought to acknowledge and intensify the power of God in his life for this moment of healing.
In our second passage, faith again is important to the healing, but this time it is the faith of the person to be healed, Bartimaeus. By faith, Bartimaeus cried out to Jesus even after being rebuked by those around him: "but he cried out all the more, Son of David, have mercy on me" (v. 48). Although blind, he threw off his cloak and ran to where Jesus was standing. Jesus said, "What do you want me to do for you?" and by faith Bartimaeus replied, "Master, let me receive my sight" (v. 51). Jesus’ reply underscores the point; "Go your way; your FAITH has made you well" (v. 52).
A congregation I once served included a young man who had been deaf from birth. He was a big, robust, handsome fellow whose sweet spirit enabled him to smile easily. During worship, he stood for the hymns and responsive readings, and participated as best he could in the entire service. During the sermon, his eyes were steadily fixed upon my lips, and in those few times when he was unable to lip-read what I was saying, he would turn to the young lady beside him and "sign" for clarification. I remember the day that he and the young lady came to my study to make plans for their wedding. She asked such questions as necessary and signed to him at intervals. As I spoke, she continued to interpret, even though he seemed already to understand. During the wedding ceremony, they held written copies of the vows and signed their pledges to each other. Before I left that congregation to acccept another appointment, the young man underwent an operation which enabled him to hear his first sounds. That was the first step. By God’s grace, one day, perhaps even now, he will be able to listen to all those things which you and I have grown accustomed to. Although different than the deaf man who was brought to Jesus, it will be a genuine miracle of healing, and it will have been done for one who has cried out from the silence in faith.
We are far removed in time and space from ancient Jericho where our Scriptures relate two of our Lord’s healings. However, as a society and as individuals, we yet stand in need of the healing touch.
Charles H. Scott’s familiar hymn says it well; "Open my eyes that I may see, glimpses of truth Thou hast for me ... Open my ears that I may hear voices of truth Thou sendest clear." And then the all-important third verse concludes, "Open my mouth and let me bear gladly the warm truth everywhere."
42. The Lonely in the Crowd
Illustration
Editor James S. Hewett
Years ago, the press carried a heartrending story of a young father who shot himself in a tavern telephone booth. James Lee had called a Chicago newspaper and told a reporter he had sent the paper a manila envelope outlining his story. The reporter frantically tried to trace the call, but was too late. When the police arrived the young man was slumped in the booth with a bullet through his head.
In his pockets they found a child's crayon drawing, much folded and worn. On it was written, "Please leave in my coat pocket. I want to have it buried with me." The drawing was signed in childish print by his daughter, Shirley Lee, who had perished in a fire just five months before. Lee was so grief-stricken he had asked total strangers to attend his daughter's funeral so she would have a nice service. He said there was no family to attend, since Shirley's mother had been dead since the child was two.
Speaking to the reporter before his death, the heartbroken father said that all he had in life was gone and he felt so alone. He gave his modest estate to the church Shirley had attended and said, "Maybe in ten or twenty years, someone will see one of the plagues and wonder who Shirley Ellen Lee was and say, 'Someone must have loved her very, very much."' The grieving father could not stand loneliness or the loss so he took his own life He felt it better to be dead than live in an impersonal world.
How many James Lees are there in this world? They don't wear signs saying "I'm lonely…will you help me?" Lee's discover these in His name.
43. HAVING A REALLY GOOD FIGHT
Illustration
John H. Krahn
I believe it was the Mills Brothers who made popular the song, "You Always Hurt the One You Love." Fighting is one of the realities of married life. Unfortunately, most of us do not handle it well. Fighting is a negative way of communicating some very strong feelings. If we accept the premise that the point of all communication is to get closer to each other, then we might seek more constructive and positive ways of communicating our strong feelings rather than destructive fighting. Although space doesn’t permit us to consider all the suggestions for what I call "good fighting," let me mention just a few. Discover what you are really fighting about. What’s really underneath it all, then stick to the subject, don’t bring up past history. No name calling. Remember you are fighting with the one you love - hurt her and you are hurting yourself and your marriage.
Back to the Mills Brothers ... if we are able to hurt the one we love more than anyone else, then we, as a spouse, have the greatest ability to bring healing to our relationship. If we really want to heal the other person, we can. Healing not only after fights but throughout life. Healing comes through a gentle touch or by saying "I’m sorry" and really meaning it. Healing also comes through forgiving one another and accepting each other’s limitations.
Jesus Christ is the greatest facilitator of healing in marriage. He gives us the power to forgive our spouse - not because he/she deserves it but because he/she needs it. We forgive not only for his sake but for our sake and for our marriage’s sake. For marriage is something that we are in together, and when one or the other is hurting, both of us are hurting, and our marriage is hurting.
Those who are wise, work hard at their marriages. Those who are wiser work hard too, but they also invite God’s help in loving each other. If God wants your marriage to work, and he certainly does, then he is anxious to give you whatever you need to make it work. Both of you must keep strong in the Lord. There is a little Christian saying that goes, "When I try, I fail. When I trust, He succeeds." The best thing we can do in our marriage is not try so hard but to trust even harder.
As people, there will be those moments when we cannot help but express negative feelings to our spouse. Be careful not to try to hurt the person, but rather attempt to express how his/her actions are hurting you. Tell it like it is. Don’t hold back. But let the Lord help you share your strong communication in a loving manner. When you have a fight, have a good one.
44. Consider the Impossible
Illustration
Dwight Gunter
This is a story of impossibilities. Consider the impossibilities Mary faced in this story: She is a virgin and pregnant—she is having a child while she is a virgin. Impossible! No way! Won't happen! Joseph has to follow through on the marriage after he discovers Mary is pregnant. Impossible! Mary must avoid being stoned to death when the neighbors hear the news. Impossible!
Consider the impossibility Elizabeth faced. She was well past the childbearing age, and yet God says she is going to conceive and bear a child. This impossible news left old Zechariah speechless. Impossible! No way! Won't happen!
This is a story of biblical impossibilities. But, what are the impossibilities in our world? What would you label "impossible" in your life? Peace in our world. Impossible! No way! Won't happen! Christian values returning to our nation, morality becoming the norm? Impossible! Our church reaching our surrounding community and making our world different? Impossible! Restoring relationships, healing past hurts in our lives. A relative or friend entering a relationship with Christ. Breaking an addiction and overcoming past hurts and disappointments? Impossible!
We find ourselves with the same troubled mind as Mary, wondering over the impossible (v. 29). We even ask the same question Mary asked, "How will this be?" (v. 34). To us it seems impossible! No way! Won't happen! The real question for people today is "How can the impossible become possible?"
45. A Reminder Where Our Hearts Belong
Illustration
Wm. McCord
Since Thanksgiving, the shopping malls have been telling us that "It's the most wonderful time of the year." And it is - for them. For many others, however, it is a mixed bag. Christmas isn't what it was when I was a child and never will be again. I'm an adult; it's different; it just is. In this economically difficult time, many have lost jobs or seen their investments and securities dwindle unsure of what the future holds.
Perhaps we have not been able to do what we might have liked to have done for Christmas. Many husbands and wives, sons and daughters, fathers and mothers, are serving in harm's way and are not able to be with family this Christmas. There are those living with illness or with grief at the death of a loved one sorrow intensified during this season of memories of Christmases past and high, perhaps unrealistic, expectations of what Christmas is supposed to be. There might be those who are just as happy to have the celebration done with and over.
In this season of gift giving and all that pulls and tugs on our hearts, may we remember the good gifts that the Creator has given us, the sun and the moon, this good earth with all its blessings of sky and water, plants and animals, this incredible gift of life, of flesh and blood, of breath and memory, this day, this moment, and all those who people our lives, both joy and sorrow, and all that it means for us to be fully human, fully alive. And, above all, may we remember the gift of the Word made flesh sent to save us, to heal us, to bring us joy, to bring us back to God's own self.
46. Dealing With the Pain of Rejection - Sermon Opener
Illustration
James W. Moore
There is no pain in the world quite like it: the awful pain of feeling rejected. It hurts! It crushes the spirit and breaks the heart. Let me show you what I mean with a true story.
Pastor James Moore tells a story about a girl named Jessica. She was a tall, slender, sixteen-year-old blonde girl, who looked like she might grow up to be a model or president of the P.T.A., or a corporate executive. She was attractive, outgoing, personable, radiant, and happy. She was an only child and her parents were devoted to her and so proud of her. A member of his church she did a youth "speak-out" in an evening worship service. Her words were inspired and thoughtful from the pulpit that night. She was so wholesome, so clean-cut, so full of life.
But, the next morning, an urgent ringing of the telephone. It was Jessica's mother alarmed, concerned, frightened saying that Jessica had been taken to the emergency room during the night and had been admitted into the hospital as a patient. When Moore got there and walked into that hospital room, it was a stark, gloomy situation. The drapes were closed, the room was dark, heavy despair was in the air we breathed. There was Jessica only hours before happy, radiant, full of life but now, laying there in a hospital bed, weak, pale, listless, almost the picture of death. She was emotionally drained, completely wrung out, so much so that she literally did not have the strength to lift her arms, she could not walk, she could hardly hold up her head. They talked for a moment, prayed together and then he left the room. Jessica's mother came out into the hallway. Her mother said, "After we got home from church last night, Jessica had a phone call. Just as she hung up the receiver she fainted and when we revived her, she was physically unable to walk… she was so weak. We called an ambulance and brought her here to the hospital." Moore asked, "Do you know of anything that might have caused this?" The mother blinked as tears flooded into her eyes, she looked away and said, "Well, yes, that telephone call last night was to notify Jessica that she had been "black-balled" by the sorority she wanted to join."
Now, here was a young girl, sixteen years old, an only child, who for all of her life had had almost everything she wanted. At that particular moment what she wanted more than anything was to be accepted into that sorority and somebody had rejected her. One person for some unknown reason had "black-balled" her and the trauma of that blatant rejection was too much for her. She couldn't handle it. She was not faking. The doctors were sure of that. She was just so hurt that it crushed her emotionally, physically, and spiritually.
Here we see dramatically the awful pain of feeling rejected. Now I want to leave Jessica in the hospital for just a moment. We are going to get her out later, but right now the point is clear. The pain of feeling rejected can be devastating.
Sometimes we "feel" rejected when we really aren't being rejected. We only think we are. Have you heard about the man who had to quit going to football games because every time the team went into a huddle he thought they were talking about him! Now, he wasn't being rejected, but he thought he was. Let me hurry to say though, that even when imagined the pain is just as real!
That's what happens in Jesus' parable. Remember how the younger brother runs away to the far country, squanders his money in riotous living, but then ashamed and penitent he returns home. The father is so overjoyed. He had feared the worst that his young son might be dead! But here he is alive and well and home, safe and sound. The father is so happy that he calls for a great celebration. But when the elder brother hears of it. He is hurt, jealous, confused, and angry. He feels sorry for himself, but more than that and worse, he feels that the father has rejected him! Of course, we know better! We know that the father has not rejected him at all. In fact, the parable is misnamed. Instead of the Parable of the Prodigal Son, it should be called the Parable of the Gracious Father! Because, you see, the theme of the parable is not the revelry of the Prodigal, nor is it the bitterness of the elder brother, no; the theme here is the goodness of the father, the faithfulness of God. The message here is that God cares and that He wants both of His sons (all of His children) to come and be a part of the celebration.
But the elder brother missed it. He mistakenly felt rejected and it deflated and crushed him and left him spiritually bankrupt. The feeling of rejection can do that to us. But the Christian faith has good news for those who feel rejected, the good news of healing and wholeness. So when you feel rejected, here are a few simple guidelines to remember.
1. Feelings are temporary, so go and talk to somebody
2. The person rejecting you is the one with the problem
3. Remember how to laugh and don't take yourself too seriously
4. Remember that God accepts you.
47. A Child's Version of the Meaning of Easter
Illustration
Editor James S. Hewett
A three-year-old girl was as anxious for Easter to come as she had been for Christmas to come. Her mom was expecting her third child in just a few weeks, and many persons were giving the family baby gifts. The toddler girl had picked out a new dress and Mom had given her a new white bonnet. As they stopped at a store to buy her a new pair of shoes to go with her outfit, she once again said, "I can't wait for Easter!" Her parents asked her, "Do you know what Easter means, honey?" She replied, "Yes." "Well, what does Easter mean?" In her own sweet three-year-old way, with arms raised, a smile on her face, and at the top of her voice she said, "Surprise!" What better word could sum up the meaning of Easter!
Surprise, death! Surprise, sin! Surprise, mourning disciples! Surprise, modern man! Surprise, He's alive!
48. Defining Moments
Illustration
John P. Jewell
Did you ever play the game "Freeze" as a child? The group is running and playing as though everything were normal and then the one who is "it" yells, "Freeze!" Everyone has to freeze exactly as they are when they hear the word. The first person to stumble or move from their "frozen position" are "it" for the next round.
There are moments in all of our lives that are frozen in time and frozen in our memories. They can be good moments, or bad moments. Moments of utter joy and moments of profound grief. Whatever else they may be, these are moments that are locked in our hearts and minds because of the power they hold.
That first kiss.
The time she said, "Yes."
The first date.
A look on the doctor's face.
The day a child was born.
The time your mortgage was approved on the first house.
The time you lost the person you loved most.
These are momentslocked in place andtime. Westopwhen these frozen moments are called to mind. The most dramatic of them all are those moments of life and death that make up the greatest most wonderful, and the worstmost devastating events of our living.
"Defining" moments some folks might call them. As we gather on this Easter Sunday we celebrate the single most important defining moment of our Christian faith - the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. Without this moment, none of the other defining moments of our lives would ever make sense.
49. A Bent Over Woman
Illustration
Richard A. Jensen
The woman with the battered face. Several years back that battered face was splashed all over the media. The woman's name was Hedda Nussbaum. She came to public attention as a dramatic witness for the prosecution in the death of her adopted daughter, Lisa.
Hedda Nussbaum was a vulnerable person already in her early years. She says that when she was a child, "I just went where I was taken." She just obeyed orders. Not surprisingly, she fell in love with a man who loved to give orders. His name was Joel Steinberg. He was an attorney. "I just loved to hear him talk," Hedda said of Joel. "Basically, I worshipped him. He was the most wonderful man I had ever met. I believed he had supernatural, godlike power." Friends of Hedda Nussbaum described her as a person in search of a god. She thought she had found a god in Joel Steinberg.
Hedda moved in with Joel! Two years later the beatings began. Joel Steinberg was an abusive person. The system that was created in the pairing of Hedda Nussbaum and Joel Steinberg was a very sick system. Hedda needed a god. Joel was a controlling and manipulative man. They chose each other. It was to be a fatal choice!
Joel Steinberg had Hedda Nussbaum totally under his control. He told her where she could go, whom she could talk to, what she should do at work and so on. He forbade her to see her parents. And, he beat her. She reported finally that he hit her violently time and time again. Her spleen was ruptured by one of his blows and she had to have it removed. Her knee was damaged, she was burned, her sexual organs were beaten with a broomstick, some of her teeth were knocked out, her hair was pulled out. A New York City doctor described Hedda's case as, "absolutely the worst case of wife battering I've ever seen. She was a slave," he said, "totally submissive to this man, with no ability or will to save her own daughter."
Hedda Nussbaum was a nobody. She was a thoroughly "bent over" woman. "I'm a piece of ----," Joel made her write over and over. She wrote it and she believed it.
The tragedy that brought Hedda Nussbaum and Joel Steinberg to the courtroom and to public knowledge was the death of their daughter, Lisa. Mr. Steinberg was going out one evening. Lisa wondered if he was going to take her with him. Hedda told her to go to the bathroom and ask him. She did. Joel Steinberg proceeded to knock her unconscious. Hedda didn't know what to do with this lifeless body. "Don't worry," Joel said, "just let her sleep. I will get her up when I get back."
Hedda waited. She was confused. She was so dependent on Joel's every command, so convinced of his healing power, that she did nothing for Lisa. She was simply paralyzed. Consequently, Lisa died three days later. Hedda could have saved her. But to act on her own would have been an act of disloyalty to Steinberg. She was not a free person. She was not free to act. She was, indeed, a "bent over" woman with not an ounce of self-esteem left in her.
And Hedda is not alone in this world. In the United States alone 1.8 million women are battered every year. Some form of violence occurs in 25 percent of all marriages. On and on the statistics roll. There are "bent over" women everywhere. Who shall stand them straight again?
50. What Is Grief?
Illustration
Dr. Wright
Dr. Wright defines the following terms so we can get a grasp the nature and the impact of grief on our lives:
Griefis defined as Intense emotional suffering caused by loss, disaster, misfortune, etc. Acute sorrow - deep sadness. The word is derived from the Latin verb meaning to burden. Indeed, you do feel burdened. You are carrying a heavy load of feelings.
Mournis defined as to feel or express sorrow. Mourning is the expression of grief. The word is derived from a Gothic verb meaning to be anxious, and it comes ultimately from an Indo-European base meaning to remember; to think of. Mourning involves remembering and thinking of the deceased, and this makes you feel anxious or uncomfortable.
Showing
1
to
50
of
280
results
- ‘A feat of diplomacy’: Biden hails Russia-US prisoner swap
- Female Olympic boxer quits, reduced to tears after 46-second fight against male competitor
- Irish woman fights prosecution for praying outside abortion clinic: 'Very dark'
- Lutherans, Orthodox Church reach agreement on 1,000-year debate over Nicene Creed
- Black preachers condemn Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood: 'Nothing is more racist in America'
- Murder of 13-year-old budding preacher ‘never supposed to happen,’ suspect says
- Founding elder exits Gateway Church as attendance falls in wake of Robert Morris scandal
- America's youngest Olympic athlete cites Isaiah 40:31 after winning gold medal
- Trump pressed on calls for police 'immunity from prosecution' after Sonya Massey killing
- Liberty University faces civil rights lawsuit after firing trans-identified employee
- Choctaw Bibles Connect Christians with Lost Heritage
- An Assassination Attempt in Brazil Brought Politics into Churches
- In Asian American Churches, Generational Differences Deter Young Leaders
- What Wrestling Taught an Olympic Gold Medalist About God
- O Say Can You See God in These 5 National Anthems?
- Nigerian Church Watches, Prays as Ocean Rises
- New Alliance Aims to Unite Chinese Churches Divided by Geopolitics
- Americans Are Still Inviting People to Church
- ERLC Retracts Announcement Firing President Brent Leatherwood
- Homelessness Hits Record High, Straining Rescue Missions
- Auron Mein Kahan Dum Tha Review: Ajay- Tabu's Chemistry Is Nowhere To Be Seen, Shantanu And Saiee Hold The Fort
- The Last Supper Or Feast Of Dionysus: What We Actually Witnessed At The Olympics
- Go Ahead And Vote For Trump, But Do It With Your Eyes Wide Open
- Indian and Black, Hindu and Baptist: The multiplicities of Kamala Harris
- Don’t hate, don’t rejoice, but be sad but grateful when an evil leader dies
- Kurram clashes: How a Pakistani land dispute led to a deadly tribal battle
- Khel Khel Mein Trailer: Akshay Kumar Returns To Comedy With A Group Of Friends Playing An Unusual Game
- Sean Hannity Tries To Resurrect Racist Jeremiah Wright Propaganda By Attacking Kamala Harris' Black Pastor
- Salmon Nicoise salad in a bread boule
- Haniyeh’s Top 5 ‘Moderate’ Moments That the Media Chose to Omit
- Trump's 'Beautiful Christians' are Not Only Ones Whose Values Matter
- Being Good Is as Important as Being Right
- Blasphème & Olympiques
- Drag Queen in Olympic Opening Ceremony has No Regrets
- Is Hindu Nationalism Friendly to Christianity?
- Where Lynchings Still Happen
- Vatican II: For Better or For Worse
- After the Fall: A Christian's Confession of His Role in Afghanistan
- Art Center Founded By Fr. Rupnik Pushes Back on Removal of Artwork
- The Trad Family
