Sermon and Worship Resources (2024)

The geographic center of Assyria consisted of a triangle between the Kurdish mountains, the Tigris River, and the Upper Zab River (which flows into the Tigris). This triangle sits within the modern-day country of Iraq and for the most part contained the four most important cities in the history of ancient Assyria: Ashur, Nineveh, Arbela, and Calah. At the height of its power, the Assyrian Empire stretched far beyond this geographical region, but this heartland served as the political and social base throughout its history.

Though Assyria had a significant history beforehand, this survey begins with the neo-Assyrian period since that is when interaction with Israel and the biblical record begins.

After the death of Tiglath-pileser, Assyria entered another period of decline due to the absence of a sufficient administrative structure to rule the enormous territory of the empire as well as the increasing pressure by the Arameans. However, Assyria again gained stability under Ashur-danII (c.934912 BC). He began to renew military campaigns to recover lands previously held and fortified the capital city of Ashur. His two successors, Adad-nirariII (911–891 BC) and Tukulti-NinurtaII (890–884 BC), continued the successful military campaigns and ambitious building projects. This revival of the Assyrian Empire under Ashur-danII marks the beginning of what historians call the Neo-Assyrian Empire, an era of power that would last for three hundred years and grow to supersede the accomplishments of all prior Assyrian reigns.

In 883 BC AshurnasirpalII came to power. Under him the Assyrian army became better organized and thus more efficient and engaged in military campaigns regularly instead of sporadically. There was also an increase in the brutality exercised by the Assyrian army in order to dissuade smaller states from attempting to resist Assyria’s expansion. AshurnasirpalII also built the small town of Calah into a major city and relocated the capital of Assyria there.

Shortly after inheriting the Assyrian empire in 858 BC, AshurnasirpalII’s son ShalmaneserIII turned his attention to the north and the west and began moving to assert Assyrian control over those territories. In 853 BC he dismantled a northern alliance and then proceeded southward. At Qarqar Shalmaneser’s forces clashed with the Damascus coalition, which consisted of a number of nations, including Israel under King Ahab, that had banded together to resist the Assyrian encroachment. This battle is not mentioned in the Bible, but the lopsided nature of the victory claimed by the Assyrians seems overstated, since Shalmaneser continued to fight against the Damascus coalition over the next decade. By 841 BC, Israel (under King Jehu), Tyre, and Sidon had voluntarily submitted to Assyrian control. As Shalmaneser grew old, he delegated more and more authority to those under him, creating friction among his subordinates and sons over the direction of the monarchy. Even though Shalmaneser’s son Shamshi-AdadV (823–811 BC) emerged as the monarch after his father’s death, instability within the kingdom and the rapidly increasing external threat of the Urar-tian Empire to the north resulted in a weakening of the Assyrian Empire that would last for almost a century until the rise of Tiglath-pileserIII in 744 BC.

With the ascension of Tiglath-pileserIII (744–727 BC) to the throne, the empire entered a hundred-year period that would be the golden age of Assyrian rule in the ancient Near East. In addition to reclaiming lands lost in the previous century to Urartu, he reasserted Assyrian control over Damascus, Hamath, Byblos, Tyre, and Samaria. Shortly afterward, King Pekah of Israel and King Rezin of Damascus banded together to resist Assyrian hegemony in what is called the “Syro-Ephraimite coalition.” When they tried to force King Ahaz of Judah to join them, he appealed to Tiglath-pileser for help in exchange for fealty, against the counsel of Isaiah (see 2Kings 16; 2Chron. 28; Isa. 7). In 734 BC Tiglath-pileser crushed the coalition, captured Gaza, and developed it into a trade center between Assyria and Egypt. In addition to improving the military and restructuring the administration of the empire, Tiglath-pileser instituted the policy of deporting and exiling subjects who rebelled against him, a policy that his successors would continue.

The next king over Assyria, ShalmaneserV, ruled for only about four years (726–722 BC). His chief importance is that he conquered Samaria, the capital of the northern kingdom of Israel (see 2Kings 17–18), though he was killed around the same time. The next king, SargonII (721–705 BC), exiled the northern Israelites and settled in their place peoples from Syria and Babylonia. Sargon also built an entirely new capital, Dur-Sharrukin, just a few miles north of Nineveh.

In 704 BC Sargon’s son Sennacherib came to the throne and established the Assyrian capital at Nineveh. The kingdom of Judah and its capital, Jerusalem, became a top priority for Sennacherib because Judah was not only refusing submission to Assyria but also allying itself with Egypt and Ethiopia against Assyria. In 701 BC Sennacherib invaded Palestine, and at Eltekeh the Assyrian forces clashed with a coalition of Egyptian and Ethiopian forces that had come to the aid of Hezekiah, king of Judah. After defeating these forces, Sennacherib marched toward Jerusalem. Along the way he laid waste to the Judean countryside and exiled the inhabitants. The brunt of the damage was done in the Shephelah region, especially the city of Lachish. Although Sennacherib is not named explicitly, these are the circ*mstances that seem to be reflected in Mic. 1:8–16. When Sennacherib’s army reached Jerusalem, it laid siege to the capital city. Although Sennacherib had gone to Libnah, he sent his Rabshakeh (a senior official in the Assyrian army) to press his claims. The account of the ensuing standoff between Hezekiah and the Rabshakeh is given in three places in the Bible: 2Kings 18–19; 2Chron. 32; and Isa. 36–37. According to the Bible, the angel of the Lord slaughtered much of the Assyrian army, forcing the survivors to retreat and thus delivering Jerusalem. Variant accounts are given by Josephus (Ant. 10.1.4–5) and Herodotus (Hist. 2.141).

After the death of Sennacherib in 681 BC, his son Esarhaddon took control of the Assyrian Empire until 669 BC. During his reign Assyria gained superficial control of Egypt. Before his death he appointed Ashurbanipal as his heir over Assyria (668–612 BC), but he made Shamash-shuma-ukin the king over Babylonia. This fateful move eventually led to the downfall of Assyria because it resulted in civil war. With its resources already depleted by the vast empire, Assyria crumbled in the late seventh century BC to a coalition of Babylonian, Median, and Scythian forces. The end came quickly, and in 612 BC Nineveh was sacked (see the book of Nahum) and the Neo-Babylonian Empire was born.

In Josh. 24 “beyond the River” (NRSV; NIV: “beyond the Euphrates River”) refers to the land of Abraham’s birth, east of the Euphrates. Because Israel’s ancestors worshiped other gods there, and God took Abraham from there to bring him to Canaan, it signified a threshold in redemptive history. Joshua invoked this place and memory when he called Israel to renew the covenant.

Israel under David defeated Aramean troops from there (2Sam. 10:1619; 1Chron. 19:16–19). Since prophets later said Israel would be exiled there (1Kings 14:15), and Judah’s punishment would come from there (Isa. 7:20), the place name came to imply threat.

In 522 BC DariusI reorganized the vast Persian Empire into twenty satrapies, each composed of provinces (Esther 1:1; 8:9). The satrapy of “Beyond the River” (Ezra 4:10–11 NRSV; NIV: “Trans-Euphrates”) extended from the Euphrates to the Mediterranean, and Yehud (Judah) was one of its provinces. In the mid-fifth century Persia built a network of fortresses there to maintain imperial control of local affairs and curtail rebellion.

Births in the ancient world were the domain of women. The women who bore children were often assisted in the birthing process by midwives (Gen. 35:17; 38:28; Exod. 1:1520).

Many women utilized a birthing stool (Exod. 1:16). Upon birth, the newborn often was washed with water, rubbed with salt, and wrapped in cloths (Ezek. 16:4; Luke 2:7, 12). The OT required women to undergo a rite of purification following childbirth (Exod. 13:2, 20; 34:20; Lev. 12:6–8; Luke 2:22–24). This purification lasted forty days after the birth of a son and eighty days after the birth of a daughter and concluded with the sacrifice of both a burnt offering and a sin offering.

Birthing was valued, and women who were considered to be infertile often faced great shame (1Sam. 1:10–11; Luke 1:25). Pain in childbirth was associated with the sin of Eve (Gen. 3:16), and conversely, absence of pain was interpreted as a sign that a woman was particularly righteous. According to Josephus, Moses was born with no pain to his mother, and the Protevangelium of James indicates the same about Mary’s labor with Jesus.

The Bible sometimes employs the language of birth as a spiritual metaphor. In John 3:3–6 Jesus instructs Nicodemus about the need for spiritual birth by explaining that he must be born again. In Rom. 8:22 Paul describes the whole of creation as experiencing the pain of childbirth as it awaits redemption, and in Gal. 4:19 he says that he is in labor for a second time with the Galatians as he desires the formation of Christ in them.

A major city in ancient Syria (Aram) and the capital of modern Syria. Damascus is located fifty miles inland from the Mediterranean, east of the Anti-Lebanon mountains, northeast of Mount Hermon, and west of the Syrian Desert.

During the united monarchy, David incorporated Damascus into his kingdom after the Arameans from the city unsuccessfully came to the aid of Hadadezer of Zobah and were defeated by David in battle (2Sam. 8:56; 1Chron. 18:5–6). Later, Solomon’s adversary Rezon son of Eliada, who had served under Hadadezer of Zobah, gathered a band of rebels, went to Damascus, and took control of the city (1Kings 11:23–25).

After the division of the kingdom around 928 BC, little is known of Damascus until the biblical report that Asa of Judah appealed to Ben-HadadI in Damascus for help in his war against Baasha of Israel. When Asa sent gifts of silver and gold and proposed a treaty, Ben-HadadI (also known as Bir-HadadI) complied with Asa’s request and sent his army to attack Israel’s northern cities (1Kings 15:16–22; 2Chron. 16:2).

Contacts between Ahab and Ben-HadadII of Damascus are recounted in 1Kings 20; 22. Chapter 20 notes that Ben-HadadII gathered a coalition of thirty-two kings to besiege Samaria, but Ahab was able to defeat them. A second encounter left Ben-HadadII requesting Ahab’s mercy, offering to restore previously captured Israelite towns and to give Ahab access to Damascus. A third engagement pitted Ahab of Israel and Jehoshaphat of Judah against the Arameans at Ramoth Gilead and resulted in Ahab’s death.

During and after Ahab’s reign, both Elijah and Elisha became involved in the political affairs of Damascus: Elijah traveled to Damascus after his encounter with God at Horeb in order to anoint Hazael as future king of Aram (1Kings 19:15). Later, Ben-HadadII, informed of Elisha’s presence in Damascus, sent his servant Hazael to inquire whether he would recover from an illness. However, Elisha used the opportunity to reluctantly predict Hazael’s rise to kingship in Aram (2Kings 8:7–15).

When he did rule as king (c. 842–806 BC), Hazael successfully expanded his empire into the territories of Israel and Judah during the reigns of Joram (2Kings 8:28–29; 9:14–15), Jehu (10:32–33), and Jehoahaz of Israel (13:1–9), as well as Joash of Judah, who paid tribute to Damascus (12:17–18; cf. 2Chron. 24:23).

After Hazael’s death the kingdom of Aram, ruled by his son Ben-HadadIII (also known as Bir-Hadad), no longer remained the dominant power of the region. Jehoash of Israel was able to recapture Israelite territory (2Kings 13:25), and the Assyrian king Adad-nirariIII besieged Damascus and made the king pay tribute (c. 796 BC). Aram’s weakened state was also apparent during the reign of JeroboamII of Israel, who expanded Israel’s border back to Damascus (2Kings 14:28).

Rezin, Aram’s last king (c. 740–732 BC), formed a coalition that included Pekah of Israel to fight Tiglath-pileserIII of Assyria. When Rezin and Pekah attacked Ahaz of Judah and tried to replace him with a procoalition puppet named “Tabeel” (Isa. 7:6), Ahaz appealed to Assyria for help by sending gifts. Tiglath-pileserIII complied with Ahaz’s requests and attacked Damascus, deporting its inhabitants, putting Rezin to death, and annexing Aram into the Assyrian Empire (2Kings 16:5–9). Although Damascus, with several surrounding cities, did attempt to rebel against Assyria in 720 BC, SargonII was able to defeat them. From that point on, Damascus remained under control of the Assyrians, then the Babylonians, and then served as a provincial capital under the Persians.

Damascus is notable in the NT as the city to which Paul (then Saul) was traveling to persecute Christians when he encountered the risen Christ. After his conversion Paul stayed in Damascus until he had to escape the city by night because Jews were plotting to kill him (Acts 9:1–27; 22:3–16; 26:12–23; 2Cor. 11:32–33). Paul also visited Damascus after his journey to Arabia (Gal. 1:17).

The second king of Israel (r. 1010970 BC), founder of a dynasty that continued with his son Solomon (r. 970–931 BC), who ruled all of Israel; subsequently the remaining “sons of David” ruled the southern kingdom, Judah, until 586 BC.

Human kingship is a late development in Israel, but a number of ancient texts anticipate the establishment of the institution (Gen. 17:6; Deut. 17:14–20) and specifically the rise of a king from Judah (Gen. 49:8–12; Num. 24:17). Thus, it is surprising that the first king of Israel is not from Judah, but from Benjamin. When the people ask Samuel for a king, he anoints Saul (1Sam. 8–12), who proves to be a tremendous disappointment. He forfeits the establishment of his dynasty when he shows a lack of confidence in God by rashly offering prebattle sacrifices (13:13–14). God then rejects Saul as king because he does not execute God’s full judgment against the Amalekites as he knows he should (15:23).

Eventually Saul’s moment of judgment comes. Saul’s final battle is against the Philistines, the major foreign force still inside the borders of the promised land. Both Saul and Jonathan meet their end on Mount Gilboa, and David sings songs that express his sadness over their deaths (1Sam. 31–2Sam. 1).

Even with Saul out of the way, David’s rise to kingship is not easy. He is immediately crowned king of Judah (2Sam. 2:1–7), but the northern tribes choose to follow Ish-Bosheth, the son of Saul. War erupts between the two kingdoms. Eventually, though, the powerful general Abner abandons his support of Saul’s son, sealing the end of that dynasty. Ish-Bosheth is killed by his own men, and soon David becomes king over all Israel (5:1–5).

David’s kingship leads to significant victories that, in essence, complete the conquest of Canaan by finally subduing all the internal enemies. His men take the city of Jerusalem from the Jebusites, and he makes it his capital (2Sam. 5:6–16). He also defeats the Philistines, who have been a thorn in the side of Israel for years (2Sam. 5:17–25; for other victories, see 8:1–14). In celebration, David brings the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem (2Sam. 6).

The David narrative reaches its apex when God enters into a covenant with him that establishes his dynasty (2Sam. 7; 1Chron. 17). After David dies, his son will succeed him, and indeed his dynasty lasts for many hundreds of years (see below).

David is a good king, but not a perfect king. A turning point in his reign comes in 2Sam. 11. Up to this point, David has been content with what God has given him. He does not grasp for anything that does not belong to him. However, when he sees the beautiful Bathsheba bathing, he sends messengers to bring her to his house, where the two have sexual intercourse and she becomes pregnant. In an attempt to conceal this sin of adultery, he orders the death of her husband, Uriah the Hittite. Thus, he adds the crime of murder to that of adultery.

David thinks that the sin is secret, but nothing is hidden from God, who sends his prophet Nathan to confront David (2Sam. 12; cf. Ps. 51). The difference between Saul and David is not that the latter is perfect but rather that David, as opposed to Saul, repents when he sins. Thus, God allows his reign to continue. Even so, David feels the consequences of his sin. First, the son that Bathsheba bears from her illicit union with David is struck with illness and dies. And ever afterward, David’s family life is troubled, with great impact on the political life of Israel. Son is pitted against son (Amnon and Absalom [2Sam. 13]), as well as son against father (Absalom and David [2Sam. 15–18]). Absalom temporarily deposes his father from the throne, but David eventually regains the kingship, though at the cost of the heartbreaking loss of his son.

Even at the very end, there is conflict within David’s house. When David has grown old, another son, Adonijah, attempts to take the throne, with support from powerful people such as Joab and Abiathar. At the instigation of Bathsheba and Nathan, however, David places the son of his choosing, Solomon, on the throne (1Kings 1). David then dies after a reign of forty-one years, seven in Hebron and the rest over all Israel (1Kings 2:10–12).

David’s greatest legacy is the dynasty that bears his name. Beginning with Solomon, however, his successors do not continue his spiritual legacy. Although a number of kings do some good, only Hezekiah (r. 727–698 BC) and Josiah (r. 639–609 BC) are given unqualified approval. Eventually, the Davidic rule comes to an end in Jerusalem at the hands of the Babylonians (586 BC). But God is not done with his redemptive purposes, and his promise to David is that he will have a ruler on the throne “forever” (2Sam. 7:16). The NT recognizes that Jesus Christ is the fulfillment of this promise. He is the greater son of David, the one who is the Christ or Messiah, the anointed king. Jesus is the one who reigns forever in heaven. The life and the rule of David foreshadow the messianic rule of Jesus Christ.

Egypt is one of the earliest ancient civilizations. The first development of writing took place simultaneously in both Egypt and ancient Sumer around 3000 BC.

Ancient Sumer and Egypt were river valley cultures. Sumer was located in Mesopotamia (southeast Iraq), Egypt in the Nile Valley (northeast Africa). The Nile Valley was well suited for long-term growth and cultural success for three reasons. First, the annual flooding of the Nile (July to October) brought sediment and nutrients from up river to the fields of the Nile Valley. The water also washed the salts out of the soil. These brought great fertility to the valley and allowed the same fields to be farmed year after year for millennia without exhausting the land. Second, the Nile provided a central highway for transporting people and goods across Egypt, thus facilitating internal trade and communication. Third, Egypt was surrounded by a buffer zone of desert regions to the east, west, and south, which hindered foreign invasion. Ancient Egyptians called the fertile land of the Nile Valley the “black land” and the desert regions the “red land.” They also divided the land into “upper” and “lower” Egypt. Upper Egypt (from the first cataract northward to Memphis) was in the higher southern elevations of the Nile River (the Nile flows from south to north). Lower Egypt was made up of the Nile Delta region. Only a pharaoh who controlled and unified both could take the epithet “king of upper and lower Egypt.”

Egypt had an ancient and long history, but the following summary will only address Egypt as it comes into contact with biblical history.

First Intermediate period (21342040 BC) and Middle Kingdom (2040–1640 BC). After the death of PepyII came economic collapse due to drought and falling tax revenues. These led to political collapse, and power was split among many competing factions. This time of instability is known as the First Intermediate period; it ended when the Eleventh Dynasty pharaoh MentuhotepII reunified Egypt and reestablished a strong central government. It is likely around the time of the end of the First Intermediate period (2134–2040 BC) and the beginning of the Middle Kingdom (2040–1640 BC) that Abraham visited Egypt and later Joseph, Jacob, and his family entered Egypt. The famous Beni Hasan tomb painting of this period shows a caravan of Semitic peoples moving into Egypt, wearing multicolored clothing. In this period the position of vizier (prime minister) grew to prominence. One vizier, Amenemhet, succeeded to the throne of Egypt. Joseph filled the role of vizier in the biblical account (Gen. 41:39–40). Also dating from this period are turquoise mines in the Sinai region that have the earliest known Semitic inscription. Written on the mine walls in Proto-Sinaitic, this inscription may be the earliest alphabetic script in existence.

Second Intermediate period (1640–1550 BC). At the end of the Middle Kingdom, Egypt again fell into a fractured political situation with the decline of the pharaoh’s power. A Semitic people, the Hyksos (Egyptian for “foreign rulers” or “shepherd kings”), invaded the Nile Delta region and established their capital at Avaris. The Seventeenth Dynasty continued to rule Upper Egypt in the south while the Hyksos were in power. Although the Israelites were servants of Pharaoh from the beginning (keeping his flocks), they were not enslaved until later. It may have been a Hyksos pharaoh or a New Kingdom pharaoh who enslaved them to hard labor.

New Kingdom (1550–1069 BC). The last king of the Seventeenth (Theban) Dynasty, Kamose, attacked the Hyksos, but it was his successor, Ahmose, who drove them out and reunified Egypt. Ahmose is considered the first pharaoh of the Eighteenth Dynasty. It may have been Ahmose or one of his successors who enslaved the Hebrews. During the first half of the New Kingdom, Egypt was at the height of its power and wealth. During this period Egyptians began to call their king “Pharaoh,” meaning “great house.” The Eighteenth Dynasty pharaoh ThutmoseIII and his son AmenhotepII are good candidates for an early-date exodus (c. 1446 BC). A later king of the Eighteenth Dynasty, Akhenaten, moved the capital to Amarna and shifted his allegiance from Amun-Re, the sun god, to sole worship of the god Aton (sun-disk). For this reason, many identify him as the first monotheist. Akhenaten may have made this move in order to defund the temples and priestly orders that had grown very wealthy and powerful over time. His reforms did not last, and the worship of Amun-Re was restored by his successor, Tutankhamen. The Nineteenth Dynasty warrior RamessesII is the likely pharaoh of a late-date Exodus (c. 1250 BC).

Third Intermediate period (1069–664 BC). This period was a time of weak and divided government, with capitals in the north and the south. Pharaoh Siamun has been conjectured to be King Solomon’s father-in-law, who conquered Gezer and gave it to Solomon as a dowry (c. 960 BC; 1Kings 9:16). Later, Sheshonq (biblical Shishak), a Libyan pharaoh of the Twenty-second Dynasty, came to the throne and campaigned against Solomon’s son Rehoboam, plundering Jerusalem in the process (1Kings 14:25; 2Chron. 12:2; cf. 1Kings 11:40). The African Cush*te pharaohs of the Twenty-fifth Dynasty (760–664 BC) ruled the north for a little more than a century but failed to defend against the waves of Assyrian conquest in the seventh century BC.

Late Kingdom period (664–525 BC). The Twenty-sixth (Saite) Dynasty (ruling from the Delta city of Sais) reunified Egypt under native Egyptian control. Pharaoh NechoII tried to support a declining Assyria as a buffer against the Babylonian onslaught but was unsuccessful (c. 609 BC). However, in the process Necho killed King Josiah of Judah in battle at Megiddo and placed one of Josiah’s sons, Jehoiakim, as a vassal upon the throne of Judah (2Kings 23:29–35; cf. 2Chron. 35:20–36:8; Jer. 46:2). After the Babylonian destruction of Judah/Jerusalem (587/586 BC) and the murder of their Jewish governor, Gedaliah, a group of Jewish exiles fled to Egypt. This group forced the prophet Jeremiah to go with them to Egypt (Jer. 40:1–43:7). A small group of Jewish exiles eventually found their way to a tiny island in the upper Nile, Elephantine, where they established a temple and community; there they worked as mercenaries.

Persian period (525–332 BC). CambysesII, king of Persia and son of Cyrus the Great, conquered Egypt in 525 BC. His successor, DariusI, ruled Egypt benevolently and resumed the construction of temples and canals. However, Egypt revolted against Persian rule several times, ultimately winning independence in 404 BC with the help of Greek allies. The last native Egyptian pharaoh was NectaneboII, who ruled in 359–343 BC. However, this period of Egyptian independence was short-lived, with Persia reestablishing control in 343 BC.

Hellenistic-Roman period (332–30 BC; 30 BC and beyond). Alexander the Great conquered Egypt in 332 BC. After Alexander’s death, his general Ptolemy took control of Egypt and ruled as pharaoh. From Alexander’s conquest to the death of Cleopatra, Egyptian rulers were of Greek descent. After Cleopatra’s death (30 BC), Rome annexed Egypt into its empire and governed the country until the fall of the Roman Empire. A large contingent of Jews lived and prospered in the Delta city of Alexandria in this period.

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.

Physiologically, the heart is an organ in the body, and in the Bible it is also used in a number of metaphors.

Metaphorically, the heart refers to the mind, the will, the seat of emotions, or even the whole person. It also refers to the center of something or its inner part. These metaphors come from the heart’s importance and location.

Mind. The heart refers to the mind, but not the brain, and in these cases does not involve human physiology. It is a metaphor, and while the neurophysiology of the heart may be interesting in its own right, it has no bearing on this use of language. Deuteronomy 6:5 issues the command to love God with all one’s heart, soul, and strength. When the command is repeated in the Gospels, it occurs in three variations (Matt. 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27). Common to all three is the addition of the word “mind.” The Gospel writers want to be sure that the audience hears Jesus adding “mind,” but this addition is based on the fact that the meaning of the Hebrew word for “heart” includes the mind.

The mental activities of the metaphorical heart are abundant. The heart is where a person thinks (Gen. 6:5; Deut. 7:17; 1Chron. 29:18; Rev. 18:7), where a person comprehends and has understanding (1Kings 3:9; Job 17:4; Ps. 49:3; Prov. 14:13; Matt. 13:15). The heart makes plans and has intentions (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Prov. 20:5; 1Chron. 29:18; Jer. 23:20). One believes with the heart (Luke 24:25; Acts 8:37; Rom. 10:9). The heart is the site of wisdom, discernment, and skill (Exod. 35:34; 36:2; 1Kings 3:9; 10:24). The heart is the place of memory (Deut. 4:9; Ps. 119:11). The heart plays the role of conscience (2Sam. 24:10; 1John 3:2021).

It is often worth the effort to substitute “mind” for “heart” when reading the Bible in order to grasp the mental dimension. For example, after telling the Israelites to love God with all their heart, Moses says, “These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts” (Deut. 6:6). Reading it instead as “be on your mind” changes our perspective, and in this case the idiom “on your mind” is clearer and more accurate. The following verses instruct parents to talk to their children throughout the day about God’s words. In order for parents to do this, God’s requirements and deeds need to be constantly on their minds, out of their love for him. Similarly, love for God and loyalty are expressed by meditation on and determination to obey his law (Ps. 119:11, 112). The law is not merely a list of rules; it is also a repository of a worldview in which the Lord is the only God. To live consistently with this truth requires careful, reflective thought.

Emotions and attitude. The heart, as the seat of emotion, is associated with a number of feelings and sentiments, such as gladness (Exod. 4:14; Acts 2:26), hatred (Lev. 19:17), pride (Deut. 8:14), resentment (Deut. 15:10), dread (Deut. 28:67), sympathy (Judg. 5:9), love (Judg. 16:15), sadness (1Sam. 1:8; John 16:6), and jealousy and ambition (James 3:14). The heart is also the frame of reference for attitudes such as willingness, courage, and desire.

The present abode of God and the final dwelling place of the righteous. The ancient Jews distinguished three different heavens. The first heaven was the atmospheric heavens of the clouds and where the birds fly (Gen. 1:20). The second heaven was the celestial heavens of the sun, the moon, and the stars. The third heaven was the present home of God and the angels. Paul builds on this understanding of a third heaven in 2Cor. 12:24, where he describes himself as a man who “was caught up to the third heaven” or “paradise,” where he “heard inexpressible things.” This idea of multiple heavens also shows itself in how the Jews normally spoke of “heavens” in the plural (Gen. 1:1), while most other ancient cultures spoke of “heaven” in the singular.

Although God is present everywhere, God is also present in a special way in “heaven.” During Jesus’ earthly ministry, the Father is sometimes described as speaking in “a voice from heaven” (Matt. 3:17). Similarly, Jesus instructs us to address our prayers to “Our Father in heaven” (6:9). Even the specific request in the Lord’s Prayer that “your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven” (6:10) reminds us that heaven is a place already under God’s full jurisdiction, where his will is presently being done completely and perfectly. Jesus also warns of the dangers of despising “one of these little ones,” because “their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven” (18:10). Jesus “came down from heaven” (John 6:51) for his earthly ministry, and after his death and resurrection, he ascended back “into heaven,” from where he “will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11).

Given this strong connection between heaven and God’s presence, there is a natural connection in Scripture between heaven and the ultimate hope of believers. Believers are promised a reward in heaven (“Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven” [Matt. 5:12]), and even now believers can “store up for [themselves] treasures in heaven” (6:20). Even in this present life, “our citizenship is in heaven” (Phil. 3:20), and our hope at death is to “depart and be with Christ, which is better by far” (1:23). Since Christ is currently in heaven, deceased believers are already present with Christ in heaven awaiting his return, when “God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him” (1Thess. 4:14).

The first of the Major Prophets in the canon, the book of Isaiah is one of the longest books in the Bible. This, coupled with the NT’s frequent use of Isaiah, has contributed to the book’s great importance in Christian tradition. Isaiah contains some of the most memorable passages in Scripture, with its majestic poetry and evocative sermons making it a literary masterpiece.

The authorship of Isaiah has been one of the most debated issues in biblical interpretation. Ancient tradition credited the eighth-century BC prophet Isaiah with the entire sixty-six chapters. However, an early Jewish tradition in the Talmud claims that “the men of Hezekiah” compiled Isaiah, showing their awareness that the book did not come entirely from Isaiah. Most scholars today, including many evangelical scholars, conclude that the book of Isaiah is the end result of a history of composition that began in the eighth century BC (so-called First Isaiah [139]), continued in the sixth century BC during the exile (Second Isaiah, chaps. 40–55), and then was completed after the exile (Third Isaiah, chaps. 56–66).

Isaiah has a literary structure similar to that of Ezekiel, Zephaniah, Joel, and the Greek translation of Jeremiah. The first section is concerned with judgment on Israel (chaps. 1–12), the second with judgment on foreign nations (chaps. 13–23), and the third records prophecies of hope and salvation (chaps. 24–27). This structure purposefully places hopeful oracles of comfort after the judgment oracles. Some view the entire book of Isaiah as following this pattern (chaps. 1–12, judgment on Israel; chaps. 13–35, judgment on other nations; chaps. 40–66, oracles of comfort). However, both of these schemes are somewhat forced, since each section is slightly mixed (there are oracles of salvation in chaps. 1–12, prophecies against Judah in chaps. 13–23, and judgment oracles in chaps. 56–66). However, in broad outline it is helpful to recognize this structure.

Isaiah 1–39

Structure and themes. The structure of chapters 1–39 is quite complex. However, the prophecies and historical narratives concerned with Isaiah’s day are roughly in chronological order (e.g., prophecies and events occurring during the reign of King Ahaz [6:1–8:22] precede those during Hezekiah’s reign [36:1–39:8]). The structure of these chapters alternates between threat and promise (e.g., chap. 1= threat; 2:1–4= promise of hope; 2:5–4:1= threat; 4:2–6= promise of hope). Analogously, the main themes of these chapters alternate between threat and promise.

Holiness. A major theme of Isaiah is God’s holiness, as evidenced in its favorite title for the Lord, “Holy One of Israel.” While the original idea underlying holiness was physical separation and did not have an ethical dimension (e.g., temple prostitutes in the ancient Near East were called “holy women”), a different concept of holiness emerges in chapter 6, the account of Isaiah’s call. Since 6:1–9:7 is the only part in the book with autobiographical narration, these chapters probably come from an original memoir of Isaiah himself. The memoir is surrounded by judgment oracles with a repeated element, “Yet for all this, his anger is not turned away, his hand is still upraised” (5:25; 9:12, 17, 21; 10:4), suggesting that the memoir as a whole was inserted between these oracles to explain God’s anger recorded in 1–12. God’s mandate to Israel was to “be holy, because I am holy” (Lev. 11:44–45), but Israel failed to follow this command. In the presence of the holy God, Isaiah realized his own sinfulness and the sinfulness of his people (6:5), connecting the concepts of holiness and righteousness.

The remnant. Already in the first chapter we see the emergence of two groups within Israel: the wicked, who will be punished, and a remnant, who will be redeemed (1:27–31). This focus on the remnant was one way in which Isaiah saw hope for Israel despite the coming judgment that he predicted. The remnant theme highlights the apparent tension between God as holy and God as redeemer: God’s holiness is upheld through the judgment on Israel, but God’s character as savior is witnessed through the remnant that is redeemed.

A coming messianic king. The section 6:1–9:7 dates from the time of the Syro-Ephraimite war, and it appears that Isaiah wrote it down (8:16) when Ahaz refused his counsel. The memoir emphasizes the rejection of the Davidic king Ahaz and predicts the birth of a royal son who would replace Ahaz and bring freedom from oppression (9:1–7). This dissatisfaction with the reigning Davidic king was the seedbed for messianic expectations and is the background for the messianic trilogy of 7:14–16; 9:2–7; 11:1–9. While some of these passages may have originally referred to Hezekiah, he falls short of these messianic expectations, leaving the community of faith awaiting another anointed one (messiah). Ominously, chapter 39 describes Hezekiah’s entertaining guests from Babylon, perhaps implying an alliance between the two nations. Hezekiah’s actions prompt Isaiah to predict the Babylonian exile (39:6–7), providing a fitting segue to chapters 40–66.

Isaiah 40–55

A message to the exiles. Second Isaiah was written near the end of the exilic period for those who were deported by Nebuchadnezzar to Babylon. Although the exiles in Babylon were settled in communities (Ezek. 3:15) and allowed to build houses and farm the land (Jer. 29:5–7), they had no temple for worship, and many of the exiles probably saw the destruction of Jerusalem and their temple as the end of God’s action on their behalf. The gods of Babylon appeared to have won the victory. The exiles’ faith was flagging, and even those who did not abandon worship of Israel’s God simply clung to the past and expected nothing new from him.

Contrary to these expectations, Second Isaiah proclaims that God is doing something new for his people and bringing an end to the exile (40:1; 55:12). The role of Cyrus in this deliverance is highlighted, with explicit and implicit reference made to the Persian king (41:2–3, 25; 44:28; 45:1–4, 13–14). However, amid the oracles of comfort there is also a challenge to Israel, which is somehow resistant to the message. To break down this resistance, the prophecy has a sustained rhetoric against idol worship, with some quite hilarious sections ridiculing idol makers (44:9–20). Israel needed to realize that only Yahweh is God and to trust that he will redeem Israel for his purposes. Chapters 1–39 allude to the redemption of Israel (1:27; 35:9), and chapters 40–66 reveal more of how this redemption will take place: the work of “the servant.”

The servant. Several poems featuring an anonymous “servant” (42:1–9; 49:1–12; 50:4–11; 52:13–53:12) are often referred to as the Servant Songs. As far back as the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:34), interpreters have struggled with how to identify “the servant.” At times, Israel is explicitly identified as the servant (Isa. 41:8–9; 42:19 [2×]; 43:10), yet the servant clearly also has individual features, suggesting that a person was to fill the role. Some have suggested Cyrus because 42:1 says that the servant “will bring justice to the nations,” and Cyrus is described as conquering nations (41:2, 25; 45:1). However, despite all the talk of Cyrus, the text never explicitly applies the term “servant” to him, which can hardly be by chance. Alternatively, the servant could be the prophet who speaks in these chapters (as the Ethiopian eunuch speculated), since he was destined for his mission before his birth (49:1) and equipped for a mission involving prophetic speech (49:2) and had received divinely revealed knowledge (50:4).

Yet the Servant Songs are also messianic and look forward to a future anointed one who will fulfill the role of the servant fully. In the NT, Jesus is presented as the new Israel (cf. Matt. 2:15 with Hos. 11:1) who truly fulfills the role of the servant (John 12:38, quoting Isa. 53:1; Matt. 8:17, quoting Isa. 53:4). However, Paul appears to hold to a collective interpretation of the songs, as he sees himself as the servant in some instances (Acts 13:47; Rom. 15:21; Gal. 1:15). Both the individual and the collective interpretations are legitimated in the NT, as both Jesus (individual) and the church (collective), which is Christ’s body, fulfill the role of the servant.

Isaiah 56–66

In 539 BC Cyrus allowed the exiles to return home to rebuild Jerusalem and its temple (Ezra 1:1–4). Despite many obstacles, the temple was finished in 515 BC. Even with this success, living in the land was challenging (see Malachi), with factions among the people, economic troubles, hypocritical worship (Isa. 58:1–14), and problems with corrupt leaders (56:9–57:13). It was for this postexilic community that Third Isaiah was written (probably before the reforms of Ezra and Nehemiah in 445 BC brought lasting change to the desperate situation).

Unlike in chapters 40–55, where Israel needs to be roused from its despair by the imminent actions of God, in chapters 56–66 the people are pleading with God to help them (59:11; 62:7). In chapter 59 the prophet declares that God’s delay in helping his people is due not to his inability but rather to the sins of the people, which are described, confessed, and lamented.

In many ways, Third Isaiah unites the themes of First Isaiah and Second Isaiah. Second Isaiah emphasizes the inbreaking of a new age that contrasts with the old. The former things are remembered, but the new thing that God was doing—the return from exile—is stressed. However, in Third Isaiah the deliverance from Babylon is seen as merely a foretaste of God’s promise, which is now identified as a new heaven and earth (chaps. 65–66). Third Isaiah looks forward to the new things that are still ahead.

First Isaiah predicts a Davidic messiah who would rule in righteousness (9:1–7; 11:1–9) and a faithful remnant that would respond in trust (10:20; 28:16). Second Isaiah does not continue with these themes, instead turning attention to the “servant” whose suffering and death would atone for Israel (53:4–5). However, Third Isaiah links First Isaiah’s faithful remnant with obedient “servants” who take on the mission of the Suffering Servant in Second Isaiah. This interpretation sets the direction for the NT’s identification of the royal messiah of chapters 1–39 as the servant of chapters 40–55 (Luke 24:26; Acts 8:32). Third Isaiah thus unites and reinterprets the book as a whole.

It is fitting that Jesus read the opening verses of Isa. 61 in the synagogue at the beginning of his ministry. Like Third Isaiah, he united prophecies of both the messianic Davidic ruler of First Isaiah and the Suffering Servant of Second Isaiah, taking on both roles himself. Third Isaiah ends with a glorious future pictured for the Jewish community as they function as priests in the world (61:6). Similarly, Christ’s body, the church, now functions in these same roles in the world (cf. Acts 13:47; Rev. 5:10).

The central city and capital of ancient Israel. Throughout its history, the city has also been referred to variously as Zion, Jebus, Mount Moriah, and the City of David.

The name “Jerusalem” occurs more than 650 times in the OT, particularly in the history of Israel, and in the NT more than 140 times. The OT prophets used the city as a symbol of God’s dealing with his people and his plan. Jerusalem is viewed collectively as God’s abode, his chosen place, and his sovereignty, while its destruction is also representative of God’s judgment on apostasy among his people (e.g., Jer. 7:115; 26:18–19; Mic. 3:12). The rebuilding of the city represents the hope and grace of God (e.g., Isa. 40:1–2; 52:1, 7–8; 60–62; Jer. 30:18–19; 31:38–39; Ezek. 5:5; Hag. 2:6–8; Zech. 8:3–8). Like the writers of the OT, the NT authors spoke of Jerusalem in metaphorical and eschatological terms. Paul used Jerusalem to contrast the old and the new covenants (Gal. 4:24–26), and the writer of Hebrews used it as the place of the new covenant, sealed through the blood of Jesus (Heb. 12:22–24). In Revelation the concept of a new Jerusalem is related to the future kingdom of God (Rev. 3:12; 21:1–22:5).

Jerusalem is located in the Judean hill country, about 2,700 feet above sea level. It borders the Judean desert to the east. The city expanded and contracted in size over various hills and valleys. There are two major ridges (Eastern and Western Hills) separated by the Tyropoeon Valley. The Eastern Hill contains a saddle, the Ophel Hill, and north of this is the traditional site of Mount Moriah, where later the temple was constructed. The Eastern Hill was always occupied, since the only water source is the Gihon spring, located in the Kidron Valley. Two other ridges were important for the city, as they were used for extramural suburbs, cemeteries, and quarries. To the east is the Mount of Olives, which is separated from the Eastern Hill by the Kidron Valley. To the west of the Western Hill is the Central Ridge Route, separated by the Hinnom Valley.

A kingdom signifies the reality and extent of a king’s dominion or rule (Gen. 10:10; 20:9; Num. 32:33; 2Kings 20:13; Esther 1:22). Some kingdoms were relatively small; others were concerted attempts to gain the whole world.

A kingdom presupposes monarchy, rule by an individual, human authority. Although kings only have as much authority as their armies and the general populace allow, they nevertheless exercise an almost absolute power, which invites either profound humility or hubris. Royal arrogance, unfortunately, is the primary motif characterizing kings in the Bible (e.g., Dan.3).

God originally intended Israel to be governed as a theocracy, ruled by the one, true, living God (but see Gen. 17:6; Deut. 17:1420). Israel was to be a “kingdom of priests” (Exod. 19:6), but the people demanded a king (1Sam. 8:1–22). However, even when God granted their request, God remained King over the king and even retained ownership of the land (Lev. 25:23, 42, 55). The Israelite king was nothing more than God’s viceroy, with delegated authority. With few exceptions, most of the kings of Israel and Judah were corrupted by authority and wealth and forgot God (1Sam. 13:13–14; 15:28; Matt. 14:6–11). But God made a covenant with David, so that one of his descendants would become a coregent in a restored theocracy, the kingdom of God (2Sam. 7:1–29; Pss. 89:3; 132:11). In contrast to David’s more immediate descendants, this coming king would return to Jerusalem humble and mounted on a donkey (Zech. 9:9; cf. Isa. 62:11). The Gospels present Jesus Christ as this king (Matt. 21:1–9 pars.). Those who are likewise humble will inherit the land with him (Matt. 5:5).

Israel shared the cosmology of its ancient Near Eastern neighbors. This worldview understood the earth as a “disk” upon the primeval waters (Job 38:13; Isa. 40:22), with the earth having four rims or “corners” (Ps. 135:7; Isa. 11:12). These rims were sealed at the horizon to prevent the influx of cosmic waters. God speaks to Job about the dawn grasping the edges of the earth and shaking the evil people out of it (Job 38:1213).

Israel’s promised land was built on the sanctuary prototype of Eden (Gen. 13:10; Deut. 6:3; 31:20); both were defined by divine blessing, fertility, legal instruction, secure boundaries, and were orienting points for the world. Canaan was Israel’s new paradise, “flowing with milk and honey” (Exod. 3:8; Num. 13:27). Conversely, the lack of fertile land was tantamount to insecurity and judgment. As Eden illustrated for Israel, any rupture of relationship with God brought alienation between humans, God, and the land; this could ultimately bring exile, as an ethically nauseated land “vomits” people out (Lev. 18:25, 28; 20:22; see also Deut. 4; 30).

For Israel, land involved both God’s covenant promise (Gen. 15:18–21; 35:9–12) and the nation’s faithful obedience (Gen. 17:1; Exod. 19:5; 1Kings 2:1–4). Yahweh was the earth’s Lord (Ps. 97:5), Judge (Gen. 18:25), and King (Ps. 47:2, 7). Both owner and giver, he was the supreme landlord, who gifted the land to Israel (Exod. 19:5; Lev. 25:23; Josh. 22:19; Ps. 24:1). The land was God’s “inheritance” to give (1Sam. 26:19; 2Sam. 14:16; Ps. 79:1; Jer. 2:7). The Levites, however, did not receive an allotment of land as did the other tribes, since God was their “portion” (Num. 18:20; Ps. 73:26). Israel’s obedience was necessary both to enter and to occupy the land (Deut. 8:1–3; 11:8–9; 21:1; 27:1–3). Ironically, the earth swallowed rebellious Israelites when they accused Moses of bringing them “up out of a land flowing with milk and honey” (Num. 16:13). As the conquest shows, however, no tribe was completely obedient, taking its full “inheritance” (Josh. 13:1).

The eighteenth king of Israel. He came to power by assassinating Pekahiah and was assassinated by Hoshea. Since he is assigned twenty years of rule (2Kings 15:27), it is possible that he actually began ruling part of Israel as a rival to Menahem before consolidating his power by murdering Pekahiah, since his sole rule of Israel was from 735 to 733 BC.

After gaining power over all of Israel, Pekah formed a coalition with King Rezin of Syria, and they attacked Judah (2Kings 15:37). Isaiah prophesied to Ahaz of Judah that the threat of Rezin and Pekah would be averted, and that both Syria and Israel (Ephraim) would be conquered by Assyria (Isa. 7). This was fulfilled when Tiglath-pileserIII conquered Syria and invaded part of Israel (2Kings 15:29).

Eden’s rivers. Genesis 2:10 14 describes the garden in Eden as the source of an unnamed river that subsequently divided into four “headwaters”: the Pishon, the Gihon, the Tigris, and the Euphrates. This description defies any attempt to locate the purported site of Eden in terms of historical geography. The Tigris and the Euphrates do not diverge from a common source, but instead converge before emptying into the Persian Gulf. Moreover, the Gihon, if it is to be identified with the sacred spring of the same name in Jerusalem (1Kings 1:45), is several hundred miles away from the Tigris and the Euphrates. The Pishon is otherwise unknown. If, as various commentators since antiquity have suggested, the Gihon and the Pishon are to be identified with other great rivers in the same class of importance as the Tigris and the Euphrates (the Nile, the Ganges, etc.), then this would further confound any attempt to understand Gen. 2:10–14 in terms of historical geography.

The Nile River. The Nile (Heb. ye’or) is fed by two major tributaries: the White Nile, which begins at Lake Victoria, and the Blue Nile, which begins in Ethiopia. At over four thousand miles, the Nile is the longest river in the world. The ancient civilization of Egypt depended entirely on the flow of the Nile and upon its annual flood (the “gift of the Nile”) for irrigation of crops. Even today, arable land along the Nile is confined in some places to an area no more than a few miles from its banks.

Two of the plagues sent by God upon the Egyptians took place at the Nile, an appropriate setting for a confrontation between the God of Israel and the Egyptian pharaoh, himself a living representation of the Egyptian pantheon. God told Moses to confront Pharaoh at the Nile (Exod. 7:15), and the first plague with which God afflicted the Egyptians consisted of turning the Nile into blood, causing its fish to die and rendering its water unsuitable for drinking. The Egyptians were forced to dig wells along its banks (7:20–21). The second plague involved the multiplication of frogs in the Nile, to the point of great inconvenience (8:3).

Isaiah continues the theme of God punishing the Egyptians by attacking the Nile: “The waters of the river will dry up, and the riverbed will be parched and dry. The canals will stink; the streams of Egypt will dwindle and dry up. The reeds and rushes will wither, also the plants along the Nile” (Isa. 19:5–7).

The Euphrates River. The Euphrates is the westernmost of the two great rivers of Mesopotamia (along with the Tigris [see below]), the land “between the rivers.” As mentioned above, the Euphrates was one of the four rivers flowing from the garden of Eden, according to Gen. 2:14. Along the Euphrates were located the ancient cities of Carchemish, Emar (Tell Meskeneh), Mari, Babylon, and Ur. The Euphrates runs over seventeen hundred miles from northwest to southeast, beginning in the mountains of eastern Turkey before joining with the Tigris and entering the Persian Gulf.

In the Bible, the Euphrates represents the northern boundary of the territory granted to Abraham (Gen. 15:18; see also Exod. 23:31). David extended his territory as far as the Euphrates when he fought the Aramean king Hadadezer (2Sam. 8:3), and so the dimensions of Israel at its apex under Solomon are described as controlling all the kingdoms “from the Euphrates River to the land of the Philistines, as far as the border of Egypt [i.e., the southern limit of his realm]” (1Kings 4:21).

The Tigris River. Along with the Euphrates, the Tigris (Heb. khiddeqel) was one of the two rivers of ancient Mesopotamia. The Tigris lies east of the Euphrates and runs over a course of approximately 1,150 miles from northwest to southeast, finally joining with the Euphrates and emptying into the Persian Gulf. In antiquity, the cities of Calah, Nineveh, and Asshur lay along the Tigris. The Tigris is mentioned twice in the Bible: first, as one of the four headwaters emanating from the garden of Eden (Gen. 2:14) and, second, as the location of Daniel’s visionary experience (Dan. 10:4).

The Jordan River. The Jordan (Heb. yarden) runs southward from the Hula Valley into the Sea of Galilee (also known as the Sea of Tiberias; modern Lake Kinneret) and from there through a river valley (the “plain of the Jordan” [see Gen. 13:10]) to the Dead Sea.

In the OT, several memorable stories are set near the Jordan. In addition to Joshua’s dramatic crossing of the Jordan (Josh. 3:1–17), the “fords of the Jordan” were strategic locations, and it was there that the Gileadites slaughtered forty-two thousand Ephraimites as they attempted to return to their territory on the western side of the Jordan (Judg. 12:5). Elisha instructed Naaman, the leprous Aramean general, to bathe seven times in the Jordan for the healing of his condition (2Kings 5:10). When Elisha’s companions wished to build shelters for themselves, they went to the Jordan, where they knew they would find abundant vegetation and poles (2Kings 6:2; cf. Zech. 11:3). When one of them dropped an iron ax head into the water, Elisha caused it to float to the surface (2Kings 6:6–7).

In the NT, the Jordan was the site of much of John the Baptist’s ministry (Matt. 3:5–6; Mark 1:5; Luke 3:3). John 1:28 specifies that John was on the eastern bank (also John 3:26; 10:40). It was in the waters of the Jordan that he baptized those who came to him, including Jesus (Matt. 3:13; Mark 1:9; Luke 3:21).

The wadi of Egypt. In a number of texts the “wadi of Egypt” (or “brook of Egypt”) represents the far southern limit of Israelite territory. Some ancient interpreters understood this as referring to the Pelusian branch of the Nile River delta, while most modern scholars favor the Besor River, farther east, in present-day Israel. Several biblical passages refer to the Shihor River as marking a boundary between Egypt and Israelite territory (Josh. 13:3; 19:26; 1Chron. 13:5; Isa. 23:3; Jer. 2:18).

The Orontes River. Although it is not mentioned in the Bible, the Orontes marked an important international boundary in the biblical world. The Orontes begins in the Bekaa Valley in present-day Lebanon, then flows northward between the Lebanon and the Anti-Lebanon mountain ranges before turning sharply westward to empty into the Mediterranean Sea. Along the Orontes lay the kingdom of Hamath (see, e.g., 2Sam. 8:9; 2Chron. 8:3; Jer. 39:5).

Samaria was the capital city of the northern kingdom of Israel. After the fall of JeroboamI’s dynasty, and the rules of Baasha, Elah, and Zimri, the ruling center of the northern kingdom moved from Tirzah to Samaria during the rule of Omri (r. 882871 BC), the first king of northern Israel’s third dynasty.

Samaria remained the capital of the northern kingdom of Israel until it fell to the Assyrians under SargonII in 721 BC, when he deported most of the population to other areas of the Assyrian Empire (2Kings 17:6). According to Sargon’s annals, he improved the city and populated it with peoples deported from other countries that he had conquered. The report of the fall of Samaria in 2Kings 17:24 generally agrees with this. The populace of Samaria worshiped its own gods and the God of Israel as well.

Besides being the name of the capital city of the northern kingdom of Israel, “Samaria” was a name for the northern kingdom itself. The northern kingdom was always politically and economically more prosperous than Judah.

In the NT, Samaria is the region between Galilee and Judea through which Jews avoided traveling. By this time, there had been great animosity between the Jews and Samaritans for centuries. Luke lists Samaria as one of the regions to which Jesus’ disciples would be witnesses (Acts 1:8). The archaeological ruins of Samaria lie eight miles northwest of the modern city of Nablus. The town of Sabastia is located there today. See also Samaritans.

In the OT, an underworld place to which all were destined after death. The Hebrew word she’ol is generally translated as “the grave” in modern versions of the Bible, including the NIV. Sheol appears in the OT most frequently in songs and prayers (David’s song [2Sam. 22:6]; Hannah’s prayer [1Sam. 2:6]; many references in Psalms), as well as in the wisdom books of Job and Proverbs. The ancient Israelites visualized the cosmos as composed of three distinct realms: heaven, the realm of the divine; earth, the realm of humanity and God’s creation; and Sheol, a place underneath the earth and the seas, the realm of the dead (Job 11:8; 26:57).

When the OT was translated into Greek for Hellenized Jewish readers, “Sheol” was translated as “Hades,” importing a similar Greek concept of the underworld into the biblical text. The NT uses the words “Hades” and “hell” interchangeably; however, the distinction between the grave and hell is maintained.

Signs are visible, typically being an object, a mark, an event, or a custom. In addition, signs are symbolic, pointing to things not seen. Signs often reveal or share some quality with the unseen reality to which they point, and so they are a token of that reality. In the Bible, signs typically are caused or instituted by God, and in many cases they are miraculous. However, in a few cases signs are set forth as the work of other gods (as in Deut. 13:12) or as being instituted by merely human design (as in Num. 2:2). In summary, a sign may be defined as something seen that points to something unseen, and that is instituted or created to do so by someone’s intention.

Several examples support this definition. Keeping the Sabbath is a sign of God’s rest after creating the world (Exod. 31:15); the Sabbath rest itself imitates God’s rest. Circumcision is a sign of God’s promise to both Abraham and his descendants; circumcision is also a physical mark that is related to human fertility (Gen. 17:11). The rainbow is a sign of God’s promise not to destroy the world by water and rain; rainbows appear only with rain (Gen. 9:13). (In the original Hebrew text, both the custom of circumcision and the rainbow that appears after the great flood are called “signs.”) The early Passover plagues both bring and warn of judgment, while the healing miracles of Jesus both bring and promise blessing. While signs point to unseen realities, these realities do not diminish the value or importance of the visible world. Instead, the unseen realities themselves are ultimately expressed in the visible world.

Also known as Azariah, he was the king of Judah from approximately 783 to 742 BC. The account of his rule is in 2Kings 14:2122; 15:1–7; 2Chron. 26:1–23. He likely ruled as coregent with his father, Amaziah, starting in 792 BC, before he was sole ruler. He became king at the age of sixteen, when his father was assassinated. Much of his reign overlapped with that of JeroboamII of Israel, and both kingdoms prospered economically during this time.

Uzziah was a relatively faithful king. He was also successful, maintaining a robust building program and achieving victory over the Philistines. His reign and life turned in a negative direction, however, when he pridefully presumed to offer incense in a holy area of the temple. Such actions were permitted only for the priests. The priests tried to stop him, but he continued, and so God caused him to become leprous for the rest of his life and thus excluded from the temple. Thereafter, his son Jotham discharged the kingly duties. When Uzziah died, he was buried with his fathers, but at some distance because of his condition (2Chron. 26:23).

Although their messages were directed to the northern kingdom, the superscriptions to the books of Amos and Hosea indicate that these two prophets ministered during Uzziah’s reign (Hos. 1:1; Amos 1:1). Isaiah was called to be a prophet in the year Uzziah died (Isa. 1:1; 6:1), and Zech. 14:5 records an earthquake that took place during his rule.

Water is mentioned extensively in the Bible due to its prevalence in creation and its association with life and purity. The cosmic waters of Gen. 1 are held back by the sky (Gen. 1:67; cf. Pss. 104:6, 13; 148:4). God is enthroned on these waters in his cosmic temple (Pss. 29:10; 104:3, 13; cf. Gen. 1:2; Ps. 78:69; Isa. 66:1). These same waters were released in the time of Noah (Gen. 7:10–12; Ps. 104:7–9).

Water is also an agent of life and fertility and is therefore associated with the presence of God. Both God himself and his temple are described as the source of life-giving water (Jer. 2:13; 17:13; Joel 3:18; cf. Isa. 12:2–3). Ezekiel envisions this water flowing from beneath the temple and streaming down into the Dead Sea, where it brings life and fecundity (Ezek. 47:1–12; cf. Zech. 14:8). The book of Revelation, employing the same image, describes “the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb” (22:1). This imagery is also illustrated in archaeological remains associated with temples. Cisterns are attested beneath the Dome of the Rock (presumably the location of the Jerusalem temple) and beneath the Judahite temple at Arad. Other temples, such as the Israelite high place at Tel Dan, are located close to freshwater springs. The Gihon spring in the City of David may also be associated with the Jerusalem temple (Ps. 46:4; cf. Gen. 2:13).

This OT imagery forms the background for Jesus’ teaching regarding eternal life in the writings of the apostle John. Jesus claims to be the source of living water, and he offers it freely to everyone who thirsts (John 4:10–15; 7:37; Rev. 21:6; 22:17; cf. Rev. 7:17). This water, which produces “a spring of water welling up to eternal life” (John 4:14), is the work of the Holy Spirit in the believer (John 7:38–39).

Water is also described in the Bible as an agent of cleansing. It is extensively employed in purification rituals in the OT. In the NT, the ritual of water baptism signifies the purity and new life of the believer (Matt. 3:11, 16; Mark 1:8–10; Luke 3:16; John 1:26, 31–33; 3:23; Acts 1:5; 8:36–39; 10:47; 11:16; 1Pet. 3:20–21; cf. Eph. 5:26; Heb. 10:22).

Finally, the NT also reveals Jesus as the Lord of water. He walks on water (Matt. 14:28–29; John 6:19), turns water into wine (John 2:7–9; 4:46), and controls water creatures (Matt. 17:27; John 21:6). Most important, Jesus commands “the winds and the water, and they obey him” (Luke 8:25; cf. Ps. 29:3).

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.

(1) Son ofJotham, king of Judah, and father of Hezekiah. His reign is describedin 2 Kings 16 and 2 Chron. 28, and his confrontation by theprophet Isaiah in Isa. 7:1–17. Isaiah’s oracle againstthe Philistines is dated the year of Ahaz’s death (Isa. 14:28).Hosea and Micah prophesied during his reign (Hos. 1:1; Mic. 1:1).Ahaz reigned for sixteen years (743–727 BC). He followed thesyncretistic pagan practices of the Israelite kings. When besieged bythe Syrian and Israelite kings, with the aim of replacing him with apuppet ruler (734 BC), he sent a massive tribute to elicit Assyrianprotection (2 Kings 16:5–9). This resulted in pro-Assyrianreligious compromise (16:10–18). The goal of Isaiah’sembassy to the fearful Ahaz was to encourage a response of faith(Isa. 7:9). Though Isaiah offered him any sign of his choosing, Ahazmasked his refusal in a facade of piety about not testing God(Isa.7:10–12; cf. Deut. 6:16). The hypocritical Ahaz did notwant a sign because he had no intention of trusting God in thisnational crisis. The exasperated prophet responded by announcing thesign of Immanuel.

(2) ABenjamite, a descendant of Saul (1 Chron. 8:35–36;9:41–42).

A conduit used to transport water from one place to another.It could be either a trough cut into rock or soil, or pipes made fromstone or other materials. Aqueducts were used in OT times totransport water into cities from nearby springs. The “aqueductof the Upper Pool” in Jerusalem is mentioned in 2 Kings18:17; Isa. 7:3; 36:2. Its location is uncertain, though it is saidto be “on the road to the Washerman’s Field.”Hezekiah’s tunnel was an underground aqueduct that took waterfrom the Gihon Spring to the Pool of Siloam (2 Kings 20:20). Theconduit was in existence prior to Hezekiah, but he fortified andimproved it in preparation for an imminent attack by the Assyriansinstigated by his rebellion against them (2 Chron. 32:1–3,30). (See also Tunnel.)

InNT times, the Romans built many aqueducts to carry water from springsand mountain streams to cities. Often these were undergroundconduits, but also they were constructed as large, arched structuresmade of stone and mortar that gradually sloped downward. The remainsof an impressive Roman aqueduct that transported water from theCarmel Mountains to the coast can still be seen in the ruins ofCaesarea Maritima. The reference in Rev. 3:14–22 to the“lukewarm” church at Laodicea likely alludes to the tepidwater that arrived via aqueduct from springs five miles south of thecity.

Descendants of Shem (Gen. 10:22) and Nahor (Gen. 22:21)identified in the LXX and English translations as “Syrians.”According to the patriarchal narratives in Genesis, Arameansoriginated from Upper Mesopotamia in the early second millennium.Abraham is referred to as a “wandering Aramean” (Deut.26:5), which suggests that the Hebrews descended from Arameans.

TheArameans gradually grew until increasing numbers, famine, drought, orother agents forced them to spread east and west. Their easternexpansion faced opposition by the Assyrian Empire, whose sourcesrecord numerous conflicts between their kings and the “Ahlamu”(the Assyrian reference to the Arameans).

Thewestern expansion impacted ancient Israel as early as the days ofSaul (1 Sam. 14:47). David defeated the alliance of theAmmonites with the Aramean king Hadadezer (2 Sam. 8:3–8;10–12). King Asa of Judah made a treaty with an Aramean king inhis war against Baasha of Israel (1 Kings 15:16–22). KingAhab was defeated and killed in his battles with the Arameans(1 Kings 22:1–38). Later, God provided a “deliverer”(possibly an Assyrian king or officer), which relieved Arameanpressures upon Israel (2 Kings 13:3–5). This allowedJehoash of Israel to defeat the Arameans and regain previously lostterritories. In the eighth century BC the Aramean king Rezin, inalliance with Israel and Tyre, attempted to force Ahaz of Judah intotheir league to oppose the growing Assyrian threat (2 Kings16:5–9; Isa. 7:1–9). By the end of the eighth century,all Aramean territories had become provinces in the Assyrian Empire.

Verylittle is known about Aramean society. They were nomadic pastoralistswho established tribal states throughout Mesopotamia. By the ninthcentury BC, these states developed into monarchies, their kingscompeting for power and greater territories. There was never anAramean empire. Although the Arameans were polytheistic, Hadad wasthe most prominent deity and the patron of the kings. The Aramaiclanguage had a long-lasting influence in the ancient world. It wasadopted as the official language of international diplomacy duringthe time of the Persian Empire and remained so even into theHellenistic era.

Geographyand Origins

Thegeographic center of Assyria consisted of a triangle between theKurdish mountains, the Tigris River, and the Upper Zab River (whichflows into the Tigris). This triangle sits within the modern-daycountry of Iraq and for the most part contained the four mostimportant cities in the history of ancient Assyria: Ashur, Nineveh,Arbela, and Calah. At the height of its power, the Assyrian Empirestretched far beyond this geographical region, but this heartlandserved as the political and social base throughout its history.

Althoughthere were some individual city-states such as Ashur and Nineveh inthis heartland during the third millennium BC, Assyria as a unifiedpolitical entity did not arise until the mid-second millennium. Otherthan a brief alliance of some of the city-states under Shamshi-Adad Iin the eighteenth century BC, which was not called Assyria, the firstAssyrian political state began with Ashur-uballit I (c.1364–1329 BC). From the earliest times the lack of certainresources in the heartland and the location of these city-statesalong major trading routes made commerce a central component of theAssyrian economy.

Politicaland Military History

TheMiddle Assyrian Period (1364–934 BC).The first great ruler of Assyria was Ashur-uballit I, who ruledfor thirty-five years. During his reign, he controlled Babylon to thesouth, but during the fifty years following his death, hisdescendants lost control of Babylon due to the rise of the Kassitedynasty there. In 1273 BC, with the rise of Ashur-uballit’sgreat-grandson Shalmaneser I, Assyria began to grow into anempire that dominated the ancient Near East. He defeated the Hittitesand the Arameans and annexed the territory of Mitanni, to the west.The brutal method of warfare and treatment of captives for whichAssyria would become famous can already be seen in Shalmaneser’sdescriptions of his military campaigns.

Afterthe death of Shalmaneser I, his son Tukulti-Ninurta I (c.1243–1207 BC) expanded the Assyrian state even more through aseries of successful military campaigns. He defeated the resurgingHittites to the west and a number of people groups in the mountainsto the north and east. But most important, he conquered and reclaimedBabylon to the south. This had two significant implications. WithBabylon now subdued, the only major check on Assyrian power waseliminated, leaving the Assyrians free to expand. Second, elements ofBabylonian culture were more easily appropriated into Assyrianculture. It even appears that the statue of the god Marduk wascarried from Babylon back to Assyria. Eventually Tukulti-Ninurta wasassassinated in a palace revolt led by his son. The internal strifeof the empire (which came to fruition in this coup), coupled withexternal factors that resulted in an increased threat from the west,resulted in a period of decline for the Assyrian Empire that wouldlast a little less than a century.

AlthoughAssyria regained internal stability and prosperity underAshur-resha-ishi I (c. 1132–1115 BC), the next resurgenceof Assyrian power came with the ascension of Tiglath-pileser I(1114–1076 BC) to the throne. At the very beginning of hisreign, Tiglath-pileser successfully countered an attack from the westby the Mushku. His successful campaign against the Mushku began anexpansion to the west that brought territory and spoils to theAssyrian Empire but also resulted in conflict with the Arameans, whowere based in Syria but interested in expanding into Mesopotamia.When Tiglath-pileser’s troops clashed with Aramean forces atJebel Bishri in central Syria, the Assyrian victory resulted in theacquisition of all of Syria and allowed Tiglath-pileser to press theborders of the Assyrian Empire all the way to the Mediterranean Sea.To the south Tiglath-pileser also led successful campaigns thatresulted in the capture of major Babylonian cities such as Babylonand Sippar. By the time of his death in 1076 BC, the Assyrian Empirestretched from the Mediterranean Sea in the west to the Arabian Gulfin the southeast, a dominance unrivaled in the previous history ofthe ancient Near East. This sweeping success of Tiglath-pileser alsoresulted in cultural developments, including substantial buildingprojects and the compilation of legislation and edicts byprofessional scribes.

TheNeo-Assyrian Empire (934–612 BC).After the death of Tiglath-pileser, Assyria entered another period ofdecline due to the absence of a sufficient administrative structureto rule the enormous territory of the empire as well as theincreasing pressure by the Arameans. However, Assyria again gainedstability under Ashur-dan II (c. 934–912 BC). He began to renewmilitary campaigns to recover lands previously held and fortified thecapital city of Ashur. His two successors, Adad-nirari II(911–891 BC) and Tukulti-Ninurta II (890–884 BC),continued the successful military campaigns and ambitious buildingprojects. This revival of the Assyrian Empire under Ashur-dan IImarks the beginning of what historians call the Neo-Assyrian Empire,an era of power that would last for three hundred years and grow tosupersede the accomplishments of all prior Assyrian reigns.

In883 BC Ashurnasirpal II came to power. Under him the Assyrianarmy became better organized and thus more efficient and engaged inmilitary campaigns regularly instead of sporadically. There was alsoan increase in the brutality exercised by the Assyrian army in orderto dissuade smaller states from attempting to resist Assyria’sexpansion. Ashurnasirpal II also built the small town of Calahinto a major city and relocated the capital of Assyria there.

Shortlyafter inheriting the Assyrian empire in 858 BC, Ashurnasirpal II’sson Shalmaneser III turned his attention to the north and thewest and began moving to assert Assyrian control over thoseterritories. In 853 BC he dismantled a northern alliance and thenproceeded southward. At Qarqar Shalmaneser’s forces clashedwith the Damascus coalition, which consisted of a number of nations,including Israel under King Ahab, that had banded together to resistthe Assyrian encroachment. This battle is not mentioned in the Bible,but the lopsided nature of the victory claimed by the Assyrians seemsoverstated, since Shalmaneser continued to fight against the Damascuscoalition over the next decade. By 841 BC, King Jehu of Israel, Tyre,and Sidon had voluntarily submitted to Assyrian control. AsShalmaneser grew old, he delegated more and more authority to thoseunder him, creating friction among his subordinates and sons over thedirection of the monarchy. Even though Shalmaneser’s sonShamshi-Adad V (823–811 BC) emerged as the monarch afterhis father’s death, instability within the kingdom and therapidly increasing external threat of the Urartian Empire to thenorth resulted in a weakening of the Assyrian Empire that would lastfor almost a century until the rise of Tiglath-pileser III in744 BC.

Withthe ascension of Tiglath-pileser III (744–727 BC) to thethrone, the empire entered a hundred-year period that would be thegolden age of Assyrian rule in the ancient Near East. In addition toreclaiming lands lost in the previous century to Urartu, hereasserted Assyrian control over Damascus, Hamath, Byblos, Tyre, andSamaria. Shortly afterward, King Pekah of Israel and King Rezin ofDamascus banded together to resist Assyrian hegemony in what iscalled the “Syro-Ephraimite coalition.” When they triedto force King Ahaz of Judah to join them, he appealed toTiglath-pileser for help in exchange for fealty, against the counselof Isaiah (see 2 Kings 16; 2 Chron. 28; Isa. 7). In 734 BCTiglath-pileser crushed the coalition, captured Gaza, and developedit into a trade center between Assyria and Egypt. In addition toimproving the military and restructuring the administration of theempire, Tiglath-pileser instituted the policy of deporting andexiling subjects who rebelled against him, a policy that hissuccessors would continue.

Thenext king over Assyria, Shalmaneser V, ruled for only about fouryears (726–722 BC). His chief importance is that he conqueredSamaria, the capital of the northern kingdom of Israel (see 2 Kings17–18), though he was killed around the same time. The nextking, Sargon II (721–705 BC), exiled the northernIsraelites and settled in their place peoples from Syria andBabylonia. Sargon also built an entirely new capital, Dur-Sharrukin,just a few miles north of Nineveh.

In704 BC Sargon’s son Sennacherib came to the throne andestablished the Assyrian capital at Nineveh. The kingdom of Judah andits capital, Jerusalem, became a top priority for Sennacherib becauseJudah was not only refusing submission to Assyria but also allyingitself with Egypt and Ethiopia against Assyria. In 701 BC Sennacheribinvaded Palestine, and at Eltekeh the Assyrian forces clashed with acoalition of Egyptian and Ethiopian forces that had come to the aidof Hezekiah, king of Judah. After defeating these forces, Sennacheribmarched toward Jerusalem. Along the way he laid waste to the Judeancountryside and exiled the inhabitants. The brunt of the damage wasdone in the Shephelah region, especially the city of Lachish.Although Sennacherib is not named explicitly, these are thecirc*mstances that seem to be reflected in Mic. 1:8–16. WhenSennacherib’s army reached Jerusalem, it laid siege to thecapital city. Although Sennacherib had gone to Libnah, he sent hisRabshakeh (a senior official in the Assyrian army) to press hisclaims. The account of the ensuing standoff between Hezekiah and theRabshakeh is given in three places in the Bible: 2 Kings 18–19;2 Chron. 32; and Isa. 36–37. According to the Bible, theangel of the Lord slaughtered much of the Assyrian army, forcing thesurvivors to retreat and thus delivering Jerusalem. Variant accountsare given by Josephus (Ant. 10.1.4–5) and Herodotus (Hist.2.141).

Afterthe death of Sennacherib in 681 BC, his son Esarhaddon took controlof the Assyrian Empire until 669 BC. During his reign Assyria gainedsuperficial control of Egypt. Before his death he appointedAshurbanipal as his heir over Assyria (668–612 BC), but he madeShamash-shuma-ukin the king over Babylonia. This fateful moveeventually led to the downfall of Assyria because it resulted incivil war. With its resources already depleted by the vast empire,Assyria crumbled in the late seventh century BC to a coalition ofBabylonian, Median, and Scythian forces. The end came quickly, and in612 BC Nineveh was sacked (see the book of Nahum) and theNeo-Babylonian Empire was born.

Cultureand Religion

Akey characteristic of Assyrian culture was militarism. War was notsimply a means of survival but also lay at the heart of the entireAssyrian social structure, from the king down to the poorest peasant.Assyrian inscriptions are replete with boasting about militarycampaigns and victories, which were a central requirement for aking’s reign to be considered successful. Among the generalpopulation, the duty of a warrior was held in high esteem, and allmen were viewed as potential soldiers.

Becauseof the militaristic and imperial bent of the culture, the societyenjoyed a high standard of living under successful monarchs. Inaddition to the natural bounty of the Assyrian heartland, the controlover a large area of subjected vassal states resulted in enrichmentthrough taxes and tributes. The militaristic character of the cultureis also evident in the Assyrian’s favorite forms of recreation:hunting, archery, and javelin throwing, among others.

However,even though Assyrian culture could be quite prosperous, there waslittle literary production. Instead, the Assyrians were largelycontent to borrow from the Babylonians for works on science,religion, and history. During his reign Ashurbanipal sent servantsthroughout Babylonia to collect as much Babylonian literature ascould be found. He then assembled a library in Nineveh to house thesetexts. The library contained a large number of reference works on thepractice of divination and lexical works. There are also literaryworks such as myths and epics, hymns and prayers, and some historicalaccounts.

Assyrianreligion was also influenced by Babylonian beliefs and practices.Both cultures were polytheistic, though there are lists that give ahierarchical order of certain gods. The principal god of the Assyrianculture was Ashur, but the goddess Ishtar and the gods Ninurta,Shamash, Adad, and Sin were also important. The Babylonian deitiesMarduk, Enlil, and Nebo also found their way into Assyrian religiouspractice, and the most important religious festival in Assyria, theNew Year’s festival, was heavily influenced by Babylonianreligion. Each god or goddess had a cultic center with a ziggurat andpriests and a schedule of religious rituals. In Assyrian religion theking played an especially prominent role because he was the chiefpriest and, though not actually divine, was considered to be therepresentative of the deity, and his presence was required at somereligious ceremonies such as the New Year’s festival.

Bythe time of the Neo-Assyrian period, divination played an importantrole in Assyrian religion because it was believed that one could readthe will of the gods, including the events of the future, throughhighly developed rituals. Those who had been trained in divination,frequently Babylonians, could discern the signs through extispicy(examining the entrails of sacrificial animals), hepatoscopy (readinganimal livers), astrology (studying the stars), or other unusualevents such as dreams or birth defects. This religious environmentalso produced widespread use of witchcraft and magic, which providedan avenue of religious involvement for the commoner not available inthe official cults.

In Josh. 24 “beyond the River” (NRSV; NIV:“beyond the Euphrates River”) refers to the land ofAbraham’s birth, east of the Euphrates. Because Israel’sancestors worshiped other gods there, and God took Abraham from thereto bring him to Canaan, it signified a threshold in redemptivehistory. Joshua invoked this place and memory when he called Israelto renew the covenant.

Israelunder David defeated Aramean troops from there (2 Sam. 10:16–19;1 Chron. 19:16–19). Since prophets later said Israel wouldbe exiled there (1 Kings 14:15), and Judah’s punishmentwould come from there (Isa. 7:20), the place name came to implythreat.

In522 BC Darius I reorganized the vast Persian Empire into twentysatrapies, each comprised of provinces (Esther 1:1; 8:9). The satrapyof “Beyond the River” (Ezra 4:10–11 NRSV; NIV:“Trans-Euphrates”) extended from the Euphrates to theMediterranean, and Yehud (Judah) was one of its provinces. In themid-fifth century Persia built a network of fortresses there tomaintain imperial control of local affairs and curtail rebellion.

A conduit used to transport water from one place to another.It could be either a trough cut into rock or soil, or pipes made fromstone or other materials. Aqueducts were used in OT times totransport water into cities from nearby springs. The “aqueductof the Upper Pool” in Jerusalem is mentioned in 2 Kings18:17; Isa. 7:3; 36:2. Its location is uncertain, though it is saidto be “on the road to the Washerman’s Field.”Hezekiah’s tunnel was an underground aqueduct that took waterfrom the Gihon Spring to the Pool of Siloam (2 Kings 20:20). Theconduit was in existence prior to Hezekiah, but he fortified andimproved it in preparation for an imminent attack by the Assyriansinstigated by his rebellion against them (2 Chron. 32:1–3,30). (See also Tunnel.)

InNT times, the Romans built many aqueducts to carry water from springsand mountain streams to cities. Often these were undergroundconduits, but also they were constructed as large, arched structuresmade of stone and mortar that gradually sloped downward. The remainsof an impressive Roman aqueduct that transported water from theCarmel Mountains to the coast can still be seen in the ruins ofCaesarea Maritima. The reference in Rev. 3:14–22 to the“lukewarm” church at Laodicea likely alludes to the tepidwater that arrived via aqueduct from springs five miles south of thecity.

A major city in ancient Syria (Aram) and the capital of modern Syria. Damascus is located fifty miles inland from the Mediterranean, east of the Anti-Lebanon mountains, northeast of Mount Hermon, and west of the Syrian Desert. It sits on a well-watered plateau 2,200 feet above sea level, near the Ghouta oasis and the Barada River (biblical Abana). Strategically located on main trade routes from Egypt, Arabia, and Mesopotamia, Damascus is considered one of the oldest continuously occupied cities in the Near East. Because the site of the ancient city lies under the modern “Old City,” few archaeological excavations have been carried out, and no remains prior to the Roman period have been found. However, some Roman columns still stand along Straight Street (likely the same street mentioned in Acts 9:11), and remains of a Roman arch and gateway, a temple of Jupiter Damascenus, and several Greek inscriptions have been identified.

Although no information about ancient Damascus has yet been provided by archaeological excavations, much can be learned about the city from its mention in historical sources from neighboring cultures. Probably the earliest reference to Damascus is in a list of cities whose kings were defeated by ThutmoseIII at Megiddo (c. 1482 BC). Damascus is also mentioned in the Amarna letters as a town of the land of Upi, in connection with a Hittite attempt to gain control of the area from Egyptian domination (fourteenth century BC). The city is first mentioned in the Bible when Abraham’s pursuit of four kings who kidnapped Lot took him past Damascus to Hobah (Gen. 14:15). Damascus is also noted as the hometown of Abraham’s servant Eliezer (15:2).

Old Testament Narrative and Prophetic Literature

During the Iron Age (1200–586 BC), Damascus became a prominent Aramean city-state that played a significant role in the political events of Israel’s united and divided monarchies, and in this light it receives frequent mention in OT narrative and prophetic literature.

Narrative literature. During the united monarchy, David incorporated Damascus into his kingdom after the Arameans from the city unsuccessfully came to the aid of Hadadezer of Zobah and were defeated by David in battle (2Sam. 8:5–6; 1Chron. 18:5–6). Later, Solomon’s adversary Rezon son of Eliada, who had served under Hadadezer of Zobah, gathered a band of rebels, went to Damascus, and took control of the city (1Kings 11:23–25).

After the division of the kingdom around 928 BC, little is known of Damascus until the biblical report that Asa of Judah appealed to Ben-HadadI in Damascus for help in his war against Baasha of Israel. When Asa sent gifts of silver and gold and proposed a treaty, Ben-HadadI (also known as Bir-HadadI) complied with Asa’s request and sent his army to attack Israel’s northern cities (1Kings 15:16–22; 2Chron. 16:2).

In 853 BC the Assyrian king ShalmaneserIII tried to invade Syria and was met north of Damascus at Qarqar by a coalition of twelve states led by Ben-HadadII of Damascus (also known as Hadadezer or Adad-idri). Although Shalmaneser’s Monolith Inscription reports that he was victorious, the fact that he was unable to advance farther into Syria and that he returned immediately homeward likely indicates that the coalition successfully repelled him. According to the Monolith Inscription, Ahab of Israel was a member of this coalition.

Additional contacts between Ahab and Ben-HadadII of Damascus are recounted in 1Kings 20; 22. Chapter 20 notes that Ben-HadadII gathered a coalition of thirty-two kings to besiege Samaria, but Ahab was able to defeat them. A second encounter left Ben-HadadII requesting Ahab’s mercy, offering to restore previously captured Israelite towns and to give Ahab access to Damascus. A third engagement pitted Ahab of Israel and Jehoshaphat of Judah against the Arameans at Ramoth Gilead and resulted in Ahab’s death. However, some scholars identify the Ben-Hadad referred to in these chapters (as well as in 2Kings 5–7) as Ben-HadadIII and place these events during the time of Jehoash of Israel rather than during Ahab’s reign.

During and after Ahab’s reign, both Elijah and Elisha became involved in the political affairs of Damascus. Elijah traveled to Damascus after his encounter with God at Horeb in order to anoint Hazael as future king of Aram (1Kings 19:15). Later, Ben-HadadII, informed of Elisha’s presence in Damascus, sent his servant Hazael to inquire whether he would recover from an illness. However, Elisha used the opportunity to reluctantly predict Hazael’s rise to kingship in Aram (2Kings 8:7–15).

When he did rule as king (c. 842–806 BC), Hazael successfully expanded his empire into the territories of Israel and Judah during the reigns of Joram (2Kings 8:28–29; 9:14–15), Jehu (10:32–33), and Jehoahaz of Israel (13:1–9), as well as Joash of Judah, who paid tribute to Damascus (12:17–18; cf. 2Chron. 24:23).

After Hazael’s death the kingdom of Aram, ruled by his son Ben-HadadIII (also known as Bir-Hadad), no longer remained the dominant power of the region. Jehoash of Israel was able to recapture Israelite territory (2Kings 13:25), and the Assyrian king Adad-nirariIII besieged Damascus and made the king pay tribute (c. 796 BC). Aram’s weakened state was also apparent during the reign of JeroboamII of Israel, who expanded Israel’s border back to Damascus (2Kings 14:28).

Rezin, Aram’s last king (c. 740–732 BC), formed a coalition that included Pekah of Israel to fight Tiglath-pileserIII of Assyria. When Rezin and Pekah attacked Ahaz of Judah and tried to replace him with a procoalition puppet named “Tabeel” (Isa. 7:6), Ahaz appealed to Assyria for help by sending gifts. Tiglath-pileserIII complied with Ahaz’s requests and attacked Damascus, deporting its inhabitants, putting Rezin to death, and annexing Aram into the Assyrian Empire (2Kings 16:5–9). Although Damascus, with several surrounding cities, did attempt to rebel against Assyria in 720 BC, SargonII was able to defeat them. From that point on, Damascus remained under control of the Assyrians, then the Babylonians, and then served as a provincial capital under the Persians.

Prophetic literature. In light of the significant involvement of Damascus in international affairs during the period of the divided monarchies, it is not surprising to find frequent mention of the city in the prophetic literature. Amos, for example, proclaims judgment against the rulers of Damascus for their brutality and predicts exile for the city’s inhabitants in the first of his oracles against the nations (Amos 1:3–5). Isaiah also speaks of Damascus, assuring Ahaz that the plot by Rezin and Pekah to overthrow Jerusalem would not be successful, and that Damascus would soon be conquered by Assyria (Isa. 7–8; 17:1–3). Jeremiah’s oracle against Damascus may also refer to these events, since what Jeremiah describes is not known to have taken place during his lifetime (Jer. 49:23–27). Ezekiel notes, in passing, Damascus as a customer of the wares of Tyre and in connection with the description of Israel’s future boundaries (Ezek. 27:18; 47:16–18; 48:1). Finally, Zechariah includes Damascus in his oracle concerning some of the city-states in Syria-Palestine (Zech. 9:1).

Hellenistic Period and New Testament

During the Hellenistic period (322–37 BC), Damascus was conquered by Parmenio, a general under Alexander the Great, and then it came under the rule of SeleucusI Nicator. Control over the city fluctuated during the conflicts between the Seleucids and the Ptolemies, and in 63 BC General Pompey annexed the area for Rome, although he allowed the Nabateans to control the city.

Damascus is notable in the NT as the city to which Paul (then Saul) was traveling to persecute Christians when he encountered the risen Christ. After his conversion Paul stayed in Damascus until he had to escape the city by night because Jews were plotting to kill him (Acts 9:1–27; 22:3–16; 26:12–23; 2Cor. 11:32–33). Paul also visited Damascus after his journey to Arabia (Gal. 1:17).

A number of Hebrew and Greek words are used in the Bible torefer to hair and hairstyles. Most of the references are to humanhair (e.g., Lev. 19:27), but occasionally animal hair is intended(Matt. 3:4; Rev. 6:12). God numbers the hairs of our head (Matt.10:30); not one hair will perish if God is the protector (Isa. 46:4;Luke 21:18).

Hairstylesvaried throughout the ancient Near East according to place andperiod. For example, the Egyptians shaved their heads, but Semiticmen and women generally wore their hair long and admired black hair(2Sam. 14:26; see also Song 5:11, where hair is described aswavy). Ancient Near Eastern tomb paintings and reliefs depict Semiticmen with thick black hair and pointed beards and women with theirlong, black hair tied and hanging down the back. As a sign of age,white hair was regarded with great respect (Lev. 19:32; Prov. 16:31).Much later, at the time of the apostle Paul, long hair on men wasconsidered shameful (1Cor. 11:14), while for women long hairwas the ideal (11:15).

Beardsand hair were dressed, adorned, anointed with oil, perfumed, andcurled (2Kings 9:30; Eccles. 9:8; Isa. 3:18–24; Matt.26:7). The NT, however, advises moderation in hairstyles (1Tim.2:9; 1Pet. 3:3–6). Barbers used razors to cut hair andbeards (Ezek. 5:1; cf. Isa. 7:20). To shave or pluck out anotherperson’s hair was a grave insult (2Sam. 10:4–5;Isa. 50:6). It was also uncommon to untie a woman’s hair inpublic (Num. 5:18; cf. Luke 7:38).

Cuttingor shaving hair often had social or religious significance. Duringtimes of mourning and affliction, hair on the head and beard wasshaved or plucked out (Ezra 9:3; Isa. 15:2; Jer. 16:6). Sometimes thebeard was left untrimmed (2Sam. 19:24). A Nazirite was not tocut his hair during the days of his vow (Num. 6:5). At the conclusionof the vow, his hair was offered with a sacrifice (Num. 6:18).Offering hair for the dead and cutting the corners of the beard wasprohibited in the law (Deut. 14:1; Lev. 19:27). Priests were not toshave their heads or allow their hair to grow long (Lev. 21:5; Ezek.44:20). Prophets may have marked themselves by a partial shaving ofthe head (1Kings 20:35–43; 2Kings 2:23).

Hunting for food is a postdiluvian activity. In the originalcreation, humankind was allowed to eat only of plant life (Gen.1:29); it was only with the re-creation of the earth that humans wereexplicitly permitted to eat animals: “Everything that lives andmoves about will be food for you. Just as I gave you the greenplants, I now give you everything” (9:3). Therefore, it may beconcluded that hunting as a means of survival had no significance forprediluvian humanity.

Nimrodwas “a mighty hunter before the Lord; that is why it is said,‘Like Nimrod, a mighty hunter before the Lord’ ”(Gen. 10:9). However, for many ancient interpreters, the proverbialsaying was viewed with suspicion and was interpreted negatively asopposition against God (Philo, QG 2.82; L.A.B. 4:7; 6:13; Josephus,Ant. 1.113–14; Tg.Neof. 10:9; Frg.Tg. 10:9;Augustine, Civ. 16.4; Jerome, Qu. hebr. Gen. 10.18). Anothermemorable hunter is Esau, “a skillful hunter, a man of the opencountry” (Gen. 25:27). Before Esau could receive a blessing,his father requested that he go hunt game for him; however, the oldand blind Isaac was tricked into blessing the wrong son (27:1–40).

Inancient times, hunting was not an activity limited to providing foodor acquiring other resources such as materials for clothing. There isevidence of hunting as a royal sport. The Assyrian kings were famoushunters of lions, wild bulls, elephants, and other animals. By theseventh century BC, Assyrian kings hunted in special game reserves.For the Assyrians, the killing of wild beasts such as lionssymbolized the duty of the king as a guardian of civilization. Royalhunting does not appear to have been a practice in Israel, althoughsuch a possibility may not be completely ruled out. The young David’sencounter with lion and bear is cited to some extent forself-exaltation purposes and even more so to portray him as afearless shepherd worthy of shepherding Israel (1Sam.17:34–37).

Huntersused various methods to catch or kill their prey: weapons such asquiver, bow, spear, sling, and club (Gen. 27:3; cf. Isa. 7:24), pitsand various snares and gins (Pss. 35:7; 91:3; 2Sam. 23:20; Isa.24:17; Jer. 48:43; Amos 3:5). Bird hunting was also a commonpractice, and snares often were used to make a catch (Pss. 91:3;124:7; Prov. 1:17; 6:5; Eccles. 9:12; Amos 3:5).

A transliteration of the Hebrew phrase ’immanu’el, which means “God is with us.” This name is a reminder of God’s presence, and although the name “Immanuel” appears in the Bible only a few times (Isa. 7:14; 8:8; Matt. 1:23; cf. Isa. 8:10), the theme of God’s presence is one of the most prevalent in Scripture.

In Isa. 7 the prophet Isaiah tells King Ahaz not to fear the two kings who threaten him, but to trust in God. In fact, Isaiah proclaims, God will give a sign to Ahaz. An unnamed “virgin” (Heb. ’almah, which normally means “young, unmarried woman”) will conceive and give birth to a child, whose name will be “Immanuel” (Isa. 7:14). Interestingly, there is no mention of a father. Before this child grows old enough to know right from wrong, Isaiah continues, God will destroy both of the kings who threaten Ahaz (7:15–16). At this point, the sign of Immanuel appears to refer to a child born during the time of Ahaz as a sign to him of God’s power and ability to deliver.

Yet, this promised child seems to be rather unusual. In Isa. 8:8 God declares that Immanuel owns all the land of Judah, indicating that he is no mere unknown or obscure child. Furthermore, in 8:10 victory is declared for Judah because “God is with us [’immanu’el].” The use of this phrase is a wordplay on the name “Immanuel,” suggesting that the sign of a child named “Immanuel” may point to something beyond just a child in Ahaz’s time.

In the LXX, the word used for the young, unmarried woman in Isa. 7:14, parthenos, explicitly meant “virgin.” Using this Greek word, Matthew declares that the virgin birth of Jesus Christ was a fulfillment of Isa. 7:14 (Matt. 1:23). Thus, it appears that Isa. 7:14 was fulfilled twice, or at least that the prophecy contained a dual aspect. It was fulfilled first in a minimal way during the reign of Ahaz and then ultimately by the virgin birth of Jesus.

Matthew, of course, is saying much more than that Jesus fulfills the prophecy of Isa. 7:14: Jesus embodies the presence of God. The presence of God is a major theological theme running throughout the Bible. Matthew opens his Gospel with the proclamation that Jesus fulfills Isaiah’s prophecy of Immanuel, “God is with us” (1:23), and he closes with Jesus’ statement “I am with you always” (28:20), a promise of Jesus Christ’s empowering presence. The Gospel of John opens with the same theme, stating, “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us” (1:14). Frequently in the NT, Jesus is connected to the powerful presence of God. At the climactic end of the biblical story the focus is once again on presence, as the “Lord God Almighty and the Lamb” once again dwell with God’s people in the garden (Rev. 21–22), the ultimate example of “God is with us.”

An eighth-century BC prophet who prophesied during the periodjust before and after the fall of the northern kingdom of Israel tothe Assyrians in 722 BC. Isaiah lived in Judah, specifically inJerusalem.

Isaiahbegan his prophetic work in the year that King Uzziah died,approximately 733 BC (Isa. 6:1). His ministry continued through thereigns of Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. The latter began his rule in727 BC and ended in 698 BC, but since Isaiah was with him during theAssyrian incursion of 701 BC (see below), the prophet was activeuntil late in his reign. He may have lived into the reign ofHezekiah’s wicked son Manasseh. Tradition states that he diedas a martyr, being sawn in half.

Isaiahwas married to a prophetess and had at least two sons (Isa. 7:3;8:3). His sons had names with symbolic import. The first was“Shear-Jashub,” meaning “a remnant will return”;the second was “Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz,” meaning “quickto the plunder, swift to the spoil.”

Apartfrom such glimpses, readers do not learn as much about Isaiah theperson as they do about Jeremiah or even Ezekiel. But his propheciesare clearly connected to the big events of his day. Many of hisprophecies have the Syro-Ephraimite war as their background. The kingof Syria, Rezin, and the king of Israel, Pekah, tried to enlist thehelp of the king of Judah, Ahaz, against the encroachment of theAssyrian king Tiglath-pileserIII in the middle of the eighthcentury BC. Ahaz refused, and Isaiah supported that decision.However, Ahaz did not really trust God in this matter, for againstthe wishes of Isaiah he wrote to Tiglath-pileser asking for helpagainst Rezin and Pekah, since they had decided to try to replace himwith a more amenable person. As a result of his appeal,Tiglath-pileser took Syria, and his successors eventually took thenorthern kingdom in 722 BC. Ahaz and the kings of Judah who followedhim were forced to become vassals.

In701 BC the current Assyrian king, Sennacherib, moved militarilyagainst Judah to incorporate it into his empire. Isaiah again was atthe side of the Judean king, now Hezekiah, encouraging him to dependon God and not submit. In contrast to Ahaz, Hezekiah did not submit,and God delivered him from the Assyrians.

Theseevents are the background and the situations into which Isaiah spoke,but his prophetic vision extended far beyond his lifetime. He saw notonly the future defeat of Judah and Jerusalem at the hands of theBabylonians but also their restoration (see esp. Isa. 40–66).The NT cites Isaiah more frequently than any other OT book, findingthe ultimate fulfillment of many of his oracles in the person andwork of Jesus Christ.

A staple of the Hebrew diet, milk is one of the thingsconsidered essential for life by Jesus benSira, a Jewish writerof the Second Temple period (Sir. 39:26). In the ancient Near Easthumans consumed the milk not just from cows but also from goats,sheep, and even camels (Gen. 32:15; Deut. 32:14; Isa. 7:21–22).Since there was no process of pasteurization or refrigeration, milkoften was processed to create curds, cheese, butter, or slightlysoured and fermented milk. The souring process was done inside ananimal skin used to hold the liquid until it was needed (Judg. 4:19).

Withthe prominent place that milk held in the life of the people ofIsrael, it is no surprise that it appears in the Bible in manycontexts. The land of Canaan is frequently described as a land“flowing with milk and honey,” a metaphor for prosperityand a promise of abundant pasturelands (Exod. 3:8; Lev. 20:24; Num.13:27; Deut. 6:3). Milk sometimes is associated with honey or wine,and it may have been consumed in such combinations (Gen. 49:12; Isa.55:1; Joel 3:18). Milk (like wine and honey) is a heavy liquid thatleaves a pleasant aftertaste, and it may suggest the pleasures ofkissing in Song of Songs (see, e.g., Song 4:11). The OT lawproclaims, “Do not cook a young goat in its mother’smilk” (Exod. 23:19; Deut. 14:21). This mysterious prohibitionprobably refers to a Canaanite custom in which a young goat wascooked in its mother’s milk as part of a pagan religiousritual. This prohibition was later interpreted by Jewish scholars toindicate a total prohibition on eating meat and dairy productstogether in the same meal, which is a major aspect of kosherregulations. In the NT, milk is used metaphorically for nourishingspiritual teaching (1Pet. 2:2). Paul reworks this image toindicate that believers, like growing infants, must move beyond themere milk of basic principles to mature spiritual instruction (1Cor.3:2; cf. Heb. 5:12–13).

The names of God given in the Bible are an important means ofrevelation about his character and works. The names come from threesources: God himself, those who encounter him in the biblical record,and the biblical writers. This article is concerned mainly with thenames that occur in the OT, though the NT will be referenced whenhelpful.

Inthe Bible the meaning of names is often significant and points to thecharacter of the person so named. As might be expected, this isespecially true for God. The names that he gives to himself alwaysare a form of revelation; the names that humans give to God often area form of testimony.

Yahweh:The Lord

Pronunciation.Unquestionably, for OT revelation the most important name is “(the)Lord.” In English Bibles this represents the name declared byGod to Moses at the burning bush (“I am who I am” [Exod.3:13–15]) and the related term used elsewhere in the OT; inHebrew this term consists of the four consonants YHWH and istherefore known as the Tetragrammaton (“four letters”).Hebrew does not count vowels as part of its alphabet; in biblicaltimes one simply wrote the consonants of a word and the readersupplied the correct vowels by knowing the vocabulary, grammar, andcontext. However, to avoid violating the commandment in the Decaloguethat prohibits the misuse of God’s name (Exod. 20:7; Deut.5:11), the Jews stopped pronouncing it. Consequently, no one todayknows its correct original pronunciation, but the best evidenceavailable suggests “Yahweh,” which has become theconventional pronunciation (consider the Hebrew word “hallelujah,”which actually is “hallelu-Yah,” hence “praise theLord”). In ancient Jewish tradition, “Adonai” (“myLord”) was substituted for “Yahweh.” In fact, whenHebrew eventually developed a vowel notation system, instead of thevowels for “Yahweh,” the vowels for “Adonai”were indicated whenever YHWH appeared in the biblical text, as areminder. Combining the consonants YHWH with the vowels of “Adonai”yields something like “Yehowah,” which is the origin ofthe familiar (but mistaken and nonexistent) “Jehovah.”English Bibles typically use “Lord” (small capitalletters) for “Yahweh,” and “Lord” (regularletters) for “Adonai,” which distinguishes thetwo.

Meaning.More vital than the matter of the pronunciation of YHWH is thequestion of its meaning. There seem to be two main opinions. One seesYHWH as denoting eternal self-existence, partly because it issuggested by the grammar of Exod. 3:14 (the words “I am”use a form of the Hebrew verb that suggests being without beginningor end) and partly because that is the meaning Jesus apparentlyascribes to it in John 8:58. The other opinion, suggested by usage,is that YHWH indicates dynamic, active, divine presence: God’sbeing present in a special way to act on someone’s behalf(e.g., Gen. 26:28; 39:2–3; Josh. 6:27; 1Sam. 18:12–14).This idea also appears in the episode of the burning bush (Exod.3:12): when Moses protests his inadequacy to confront Pharaoh, Godassures him of his presence, a reality noted with other prophets(1Sam. 3:19; Jer. 1:8).

Perhapsthe best points of reference for understanding the meaning of YHWHare God’s own proclamations. In addition to Exod. 3:13–15,at least two other passages in Exodus give God’s commentary (asit were) about the meaning of his name. An important one is Exod.34:5–7. A key passage in the theology proper of ancient Israel,its themes echo in later OT Scripture (Num. 14:18–19; Ps.103:7–12; Jon. 4:2). What is noteworthy about the texts citedis that all of them say something remarkable about the grace of God.This fits, for the revelation of Exod. 34:5–7 is given in thecontext of covenant renewal after the incident of the golden calf.Moses invokes God’s name in the Numbers text to avoidcatastrophic judgment when the Israelites refuse to enter thepromised land. The psalm text picks up this theme and connects itwith God’s revelation of his ways to the chosen people. Jonah,remarkably, affirms that the same grace extends even toward a wickedGentile city such as Nineveh.

Anothersuch passage is Exod. 6:2–8.Here God reaffirms hisredemptive purpose for captive Israel, despite the fact that Moses’first encounter with Pharaoh has not gone well. God assures theprophet that he has remembered his covenant with the patriarchs, whomhe says did not know him as “Yahweh,” which probablymeans that the patriarchs did not experience him in the way orcharacter that their descendants would in the exodus event (though itis possible to translate the Hebrew here as a rhetorical questionwith an affirmative idea: “And indeed, by my name Yahweh did Inot make myself known to them?”). God then proceeds to outlinethe redemptive experience in its fullness: deliverance from bondage,reception into a covenant relationship, and possession of the landpromised to their ancestors (vv. 6–8). The statement isbracketed with this declaration: “I am the Lord” (vv. 2,8). One stated purpose of this redemptive work is that Israel mightcome to understand this (v.7). This is important to notebecause a central theme of Exodus as a book is the identity of theGod of Israel. This concern prompts Moses to ask for God’s nameat the burning bush (3:13), and this contempt for the God of theenslaved Hebrews causes Pharaoh to be dismissive at his first meetingwith Moses and Aaron (5:2). Moses asks with the concern of a seekerand receives one of the most profound declarations of God’sidentity in the Bible. Pharaoh asks with the contempt of a scornerand receives one of the most powerful displays of God’sidentity in the Bible (the plagues). The contrast is both strikingand instructive. The meaning of God’s name, then, is revealedin works as well as words, and his purpose is that not just hispeople but all peoples may come to understand who he is. Yet anothermajestic statement in the book of Exodus (9:13–16) makes thisabundantly clear.

Basedon this pattern of usage, the name “Yahweh” seems tosignify especially the active presence of God to bless, deliver, orotherwise aid his people. Where this presence is absent, there is nosuccess, victory, protection, or peace (Num. 14:39–45; Josh.7:10–12; Judg. 16:20; 1Sam. 16:13–14). The messagethat God not only is but also is present to save and deliver may wellbe the most important truth communicated in the OT, and it is onlynatural to see its ultimate embodiment in the person and work ofChrist (Isa. 7:14; cf. Matt. 1:21–23).

Nameused in combination.The name “Yahweh” also is used in combination with otherterms. After God grants a military victory to Israel over theAmalekites, Moses names a commemorative altar “Yahweh Nissi,”meaning “the Lord is my Banner” (Exod. 17:15). InEzekiel’s temple vision Jerusalem is called “YahwehShammah,” meaning “the Lord is there” (Ezek.48:35). A familiar expression is “the Lord of hosts,”which is generally comparable to the expression “commander inchief” used in American culture (cf. 1Kings 22:19–23).

Elohim

Thisis the first term for God encountered in the Bible, right in theopening verse. It is a more generic term, denoting deity in contrastto humans or angels. “Elohim” is a plural form; thesingular terms “El” and “Eloah” are usedoccasionally, particularly in poetic texts. “El” is acommon term in the biblical world; in fact, it is the name for thefather of Baal in the Canaanite religion. This may explain why theBible commonly uses the plural form, to distinguish the one true God,the God of Israel, from his pagan rivals. Others explain the pluralform as a “plural of majesty” or “plural ofintensity,” though it is uncertain just what this would mean.Some see the foundation for NT revelation of the Trinity (Gen.1:26–27; 11:6–7; cf. John 17:20–22), but this isunlikely. The plural form also can serve simply as a common noun,referring to pagan deities (Exod. 12:12), angels (Ps. 97:7,arguably), or even human authorities (Exod. 22:28, possibly).

“El”also occurs in combination with other descriptive terms. The bestknown is “El Shaddai,” meaning “God Almighty”(Gen. 17:1). The precise meaning of “Shaddai” isuncertain, but it seems to have the notion of “great/powerfulone.” The distressed Hagar, caught, comforted, and counseled bythe mysterious personage at a well, calls God “El Roi,”which means “the God who sees me” (Gen. 16:13). One ofthe most exalted expressions to describe God is “El Elyon,”meaning “God Most High.” This title seems to haveparticular reference to God as the owner and master of creation (Gen.14:18–20).

Adonai

Asnoted above, this common word meaning simply “(my) lord/master”is used regularly in place of the personal name of God revealed toMoses in Exod. 3:14. And in the OT of most English Bibles this isindicated by printing “Lord” as opposed to “Lord”(using small capital letters). However, “Adonai” is usedof God in some noteworthy instances, such as Isaiah’s loftyvision of God exalted in Isa. 6 and the prophecy of Immanuel in Isa.7:14. In time, this became the preferred term for referring to God,and the LXX reflected this by using the Greek word kyrios (“lord”)for Yahweh. This makes the ease with which NT writers transfer theuse of the term to Jesus (e.g., 1Cor. 12:3) a strong indicationof their Christology.

The names of God given in the Bible are an important means ofrevelation about his character and works. The names come from threesources: God himself, those who encounter him in the biblical record,and the biblical writers. This article is concerned mainly with thenames that occur in the OT, though the NT will be referenced whenhelpful.

Inthe Bible the meaning of names is often significant and points to thecharacter of the person so named. As might be expected, this isespecially true for God. The names that he gives to himself alwaysare a form of revelation; the names that humans give to God often area form of testimony.

Yahweh:The Lord

Pronunciation.Unquestionably, for OT revelation the most important name is “(the)Lord.” In English Bibles this represents the name declared byGod to Moses at the burning bush (“I am who I am” [Exod.3:13–15]) and the related term used elsewhere in the OT; inHebrew this term consists of the four consonants YHWH and istherefore known as the Tetragrammaton (“four letters”).Hebrew does not count vowels as part of its alphabet; in biblicaltimes one simply wrote the consonants of a word and the readersupplied the correct vowels by knowing the vocabulary, grammar, andcontext. However, to avoid violating the commandment in the Decaloguethat prohibits the misuse of God’s name (Exod. 20:7; Deut.5:11), the Jews stopped pronouncing it. Consequently, no one todayknows its correct original pronunciation, but the best evidenceavailable suggests “Yahweh,” which has become theconventional pronunciation (consider the Hebrew word “hallelujah,”which actually is “hallelu-Yah,” hence “praise theLord”). In ancient Jewish tradition, “Adonai” (“myLord”) was substituted for “Yahweh.” In fact, whenHebrew eventually developed a vowel notation system, instead of thevowels for “Yahweh,” the vowels for “Adonai”were indicated whenever YHWH appeared in the biblical text, as areminder. Combining the consonants YHWH with the vowels of “Adonai”yields something like “Yehowah,” which is the origin ofthe familiar (but mistaken and nonexistent) “Jehovah.”English Bibles typically use “Lord” (small capitalletters) for “Yahweh,” and “Lord” (regularletters) for “Adonai,” which distinguishes thetwo.

Meaning.More vital than the matter of the pronunciation of YHWH is thequestion of its meaning. There seem to be two main opinions. One seesYHWH as denoting eternal self-existence, partly because it issuggested by the grammar of Exod. 3:14 (the words “I am”use a form of the Hebrew verb that suggests being without beginningor end) and partly because that is the meaning Jesus apparentlyascribes to it in John 8:58. The other opinion, suggested by usage,is that YHWH indicates dynamic, active, divine presence: God’sbeing present in a special way to act on someone’s behalf(e.g., Gen. 26:28; 39:2–3; Josh. 6:27; 1Sam. 18:12–14).This idea also appears in the episode of the burning bush (Exod.3:12): when Moses protests his inadequacy to confront Pharaoh, Godassures him of his presence, a reality noted with other prophets(1Sam. 3:19; Jer. 1:8).

Perhapsthe best points of reference for understanding the meaning of YHWHare God’s own proclamations. In addition to Exod. 3:13–15,at least two other passages in Exodus give God’s commentary (asit were) about the meaning of his name. An important one is Exod.34:5–7. A key passage in the theology proper of ancient Israel,its themes echo in later OT Scripture (Num. 14:18–19; Ps.103:7–12; Jon. 4:2). What is noteworthy about the texts citedis that all of them say something remarkable about the grace of God.This fits, for the revelation of Exod. 34:5–7 is given in thecontext of covenant renewal after the incident of the golden calf.Moses invokes God’s name in the Numbers text to avoidcatastrophic judgment when the Israelites refuse to enter thepromised land. The psalm text picks up this theme and connects itwith God’s revelation of his ways to the chosen people. Jonah,remarkably, affirms that the same grace extends even toward a wickedGentile city such as Nineveh.

Anothersuch passage is Exod. 6:2–8.Here God reaffirms hisredemptive purpose for captive Israel, despite the fact that Moses’first encounter with Pharaoh has not gone well. God assures theprophet that he has remembered his covenant with the patriarchs, whomhe says did not know him as “Yahweh,” which probablymeans that the patriarchs did not experience him in the way orcharacter that their descendants would in the exodus event (though itis possible to translate the Hebrew here as a rhetorical questionwith an affirmative idea: “And indeed, by my name Yahweh did Inot make myself known to them?”). God then proceeds to outlinethe redemptive experience in its fullness: deliverance from bondage,reception into a covenant relationship, and possession of the landpromised to their ancestors (vv. 6–8). The statement isbracketed with this declaration: “I am the Lord” (vv. 2,8). One stated purpose of this redemptive work is that Israel mightcome to understand this (v.7). This is important to notebecause a central theme of Exodus as a book is the identity of theGod of Israel. This concern prompts Moses to ask for God’s nameat the burning bush (3:13), and this contempt for the God of theenslaved Hebrews causes Pharaoh to be dismissive at his first meetingwith Moses and Aaron (5:2). Moses asks with the concern of a seekerand receives one of the most profound declarations of God’sidentity in the Bible. Pharaoh asks with the contempt of a scornerand receives one of the most powerful displays of God’sidentity in the Bible (the plagues). The contrast is both strikingand instructive. The meaning of God’s name, then, is revealedin works as well as words, and his purpose is that not just hispeople but all peoples may come to understand who he is. Yet anothermajestic statement in the book of Exodus (9:13–16) makes thisabundantly clear.

Basedon this pattern of usage, the name “Yahweh” seems tosignify especially the active presence of God to bless, deliver, orotherwise aid his people. Where this presence is absent, there is nosuccess, victory, protection, or peace (Num. 14:39–45; Josh.7:10–12; Judg. 16:20; 1Sam. 16:13–14). The messagethat God not only is but also is present to save and deliver may wellbe the most important truth communicated in the OT, and it is onlynatural to see its ultimate embodiment in the person and work ofChrist (Isa. 7:14; cf. Matt. 1:21–23).

Nameused in combination.The name “Yahweh” also is used in combination with otherterms. After God grants a military victory to Israel over theAmalekites, Moses names a commemorative altar “Yahweh Nissi,”meaning “the Lord is my Banner” (Exod. 17:15). InEzekiel’s temple vision Jerusalem is called “YahwehShammah,” meaning “the Lord is there” (Ezek.48:35). A familiar expression is “the Lord of hosts,”which is generally comparable to the expression “commander inchief” used in American culture (cf. 1Kings 22:19–23).

Elohim

Thisis the first term for God encountered in the Bible, right in theopening verse. It is a more generic term, denoting deity in contrastto humans or angels. “Elohim” is a plural form; thesingular terms “El” and “Eloah” are usedoccasionally, particularly in poetic texts. “El” is acommon term in the biblical world; in fact, it is the name for thefather of Baal in the Canaanite religion. This may explain why theBible commonly uses the plural form, to distinguish the one true God,the God of Israel, from his pagan rivals. Others explain the pluralform as a “plural of majesty” or “plural ofintensity,” though it is uncertain just what this would mean.Some see the foundation for NT revelation of the Trinity (Gen.1:26–27; 11:6–7; cf. John 17:20–22), but this isunlikely. The plural form also can serve simply as a common noun,referring to pagan deities (Exod. 12:12), angels (Ps. 97:7,arguably), or even human authorities (Exod. 22:28, possibly).

“El”also occurs in combination with other descriptive terms. The bestknown is “El Shaddai,” meaning “God Almighty”(Gen. 17:1). The precise meaning of “Shaddai” isuncertain, but it seems to have the notion of “great/powerfulone.” The distressed Hagar, caught, comforted, and counseled bythe mysterious personage at a well, calls God “El Roi,”which means “the God who sees me” (Gen. 16:13). One ofthe most exalted expressions to describe God is “El Elyon,”meaning “God Most High.” This title seems to haveparticular reference to God as the owner and master of creation (Gen.14:18–20).

Adonai

Asnoted above, this common word meaning simply “(my) lord/master”is used regularly in place of the personal name of God revealed toMoses in Exod. 3:14. And in the OT of most English Bibles this isindicated by printing “Lord” as opposed to “Lord”(using small capital letters). However, “Adonai” is usedof God in some noteworthy instances, such as Isaiah’s loftyvision of God exalted in Isa. 6 and the prophecy of Immanuel in Isa.7:14. In time, this became the preferred term for referring to God,and the LXX reflected this by using the Greek word kyrios (“lord”)for Yahweh. This makes the ease with which NT writers transfer theuse of the term to Jesus (e.g., 1Cor. 12:3) a strong indicationof their Christology.

Patience is a moral attribute that God possesses and thathumans may possess. One who has patience allows time to pass whilemaintaining a positive disposition, often in the face of suffering(Hab. 3:16; 2Tim. 3:10–11; James 5:10), as the KJVtranslation “longsuffering” implies (cf. Prov. 14:29NASB: “slow to anger”). The Scriptures universally speakof patience as an admirable quality and associate patience with othervirtues, such as inner peace (Ps. 37:7), wisdom (Prov. 19:11),persuasiveness (Prov. 25:15), humility (Eccles. 7:8), and kindness(Rom. 2:4; 1Cor. 13:4).

Numerouspassages praise God’s patience. Humans try (Isa. 7:13) and showcontempt for (Rom. 2:4) God’s patience, sometimes by refusingto be patient with others even though they themselves have receivedmercy from God (Matt. 18:23–35). Nonetheless, God displays hispatience by granting them eternal life through faith in Christ(1Tim. 1:16). In fact, God has patiently delayed destroying theworld because he is compassionate and wants all to come to repentance(2Pet. 3:9). God’s patience is evident even toward thosewho are destined for destruction (Rom. 9:22; 1Pet. 3:20).

Justas God is patient, he imparts patience to the Christian through hisHoly Spirit (Gal. 5:22). Like Abraham, the prophets, and any farmer,Christians are to exhibit patience, bearing with people both insideand outside the church (Eph. 4:2; 1Thess. 5:14–15) asthey wait eagerly for Christ’s return (Heb. 6:12–15;James 5:7–10). Those in Christian leadership must modelpatience and encourage others with patience (2Tim. 3:10; 4:2).

The eighteenth king of Israel. He came to power byassassinating Pekahiah and was assassinated by Hoshea. Since he isassigned twenty years of rule (2Kings 15:27), it is possiblethat he actually began ruling part of Israel as a rival to Menahembefore consolidating his power by murdering Pekahiah, since his solerule of Israel was from 735 to 733 BC.

Aftergaining power over all of Israel, Pekah formed a coalition with KingRezin of Syria, and they attacked Judah (2Kings 15:37). Isaiahprophesied to Ahaz of Judah that the threat of Rezin and Pekah wouldbe averted, and that both Syria and Israel (Ephraim) would beconquered by Assyria (Isa. 7). This was fulfilled whenTiglath-pileserIII conquered Syria and invaded part of Israel(2Kings 15:29).

In the OT, “pool” has three basic meanings: (1)areservoir for containing and conserving water for a community;typically rectangular or round, and if constructed, either hewn fromrock or created by damming a dry streambed; it may be fed by anaqueduct (2Sam. 2:13; 4:12; 1Kings 22:38; 2Kings3:16; 18:17; 20:20; Neh. 2:14; 3:15–16; Eccles. 2:6; Song 7:4;Isa. 7:3; 22:9, 11; 36:2; Nah. 2:8); (2)a naturally occurringpond, lake, lagoon, or marsh characterized by still or slow-movingwater and the presence of reeds and other water plants (Exod. 7:19;8:5; Pss. 107:35; 114:8; Isa. 14:23; 35:7; 41:18; 42:15); (3)aditch filled with water (2 Kings 3:16). Elsewhere in the OT, someEnglish translators use “pool” in rendering a metaphor orphrase that could be expressed another way (Deut. 8:7; Ps. 84:6; Song5:12; Jer. 41:12).

Inthe NT, “pool” occurs only in John’s Gospel, whereit refers to two constructed reservoirs or bathing places inJerusalem: the Pool of Bethesda (once associated with an asclepeion,or pagan healing temple) and the rock-cut Pool of Siloam. Jesusperformed healing miracles in both places (John 5:2, 7; 9:7, 11). Seealso Bethesda; King’s Pool; Siloam.

Many examples of metal razors with sharp cutting blades forthe removal of hair have survived from ancient Israel. Because of thesharpness of the blade, the razor was an appropriate metaphor for thedestructive power of the tongue (Ps. 52:2).

Razorsare most commonly referred to in the Bible in the terms of theNazirite vow (Num. 6:5), which separated a person as holy to God. Oneway in which that holiness was symbolized was the refusal to allow arazor to come near the hair of one’s head. Following thecompletion of the vow, the head could once again be shaved (Num.6:18). Samson was born under a Nazirite vow (Judg. 13:5) and enjoyedgreat strength as long as he kept the vow. When Delilah causedSamson’s head to be shaved, the vow was broken, and God’spresence left him (Judg. 16:19–20).

Inother circ*mstances, shaving was a necessary part of the cleanlinessrituals of the Israelite community (Lev. 14:8–9), althoughpriests were required not to shave (21:5). The Assyrian king and hisarmy are described as a razor that will shave the people of Israel(Isa. 7:20). The image indicates the cleansing of the people throughthe experience of defeat and exile.

In the OT, the “rock” (sela’,tsur)is an image of inaccessibility and so of refuge from danger (Isa.7:19), but rocks will not provide refuge on the day of God’swrath (Isa. 2:10, 19, 21; Rev. 6:15–16). A great rock providingneeded shade (Isa. 32:2) is a variation on this theme of protection.By extension, the image is applied to God himself in poetry (e.g.,2Sam. 22:2; Ps. 31:3, in both cases parallel with “fortress”).God as the “Rock” is the object of trust (2Sam.22:3). This quality is an aspect of his incomparability: “Andwho is the Rock except our God?” (2Sam. 22:32).

Repeatedreferences in the OT to the incident in Num. 20 in which God broughtwater from the rock in the wilderness (e.g., Deut. 8:15; Neh. 9:15;Ps. 78:16) form the background to Paul’s typologicalidentification of Christ with this rock (1Cor. 10:4). The waterfrom the rock was “spiritual drink” that pointed forwardto the later spiritual realities of the Lord’s Supper.

Isaiah8:14 turns what is usually a positive image of God’s protectioninto a negative picture of destruction (“a rock that makes themfall”). This verse, together with Isa. 28:16; Ps. 118:22, liesbehind the “stone” sayings of Jesus (e.g., Luke 20:18;NIV: “stone”), Paul (Rom. 9:33; NIV: “stone”),and Peter (1Pet. 2:8) in which Jesus is described as a rockthat people stumble over in unbelief.

Inthe NT, “rock” (Gk. petra)as a solid foundation for a house (as in Jesus’ parable ofMatt. 7:24–25) is the idea behind something that Jesus said toSimon, whom he named “Peter” (Gk. petros): Peter’sconfession of Jesus as “the Messiah, the Son of the living God”would be the unshakable foundation of the church that Jesus wouldbuild (Matt. 16:16–18).

Many examples of metal razors with sharp cutting blades forthe removal of hair have survived from ancient Israel. Because of thesharpness of the blade, the razor was an appropriate metaphor for thedestructive power of the tongue (Ps. 52:2).

Razorsare most commonly referred to in the Bible in the terms of theNazirite vow (Num. 6:5), which separated a person as holy to God. Oneway in which that holiness was symbolized was the refusal to allow arazor to come near the hair of one’s head. Following thecompletion of the vow, the head could once again be shaved (Num.6:18). Samson was born under a Nazirite vow (Judg. 13:5) and enjoyedgreat strength as long as he kept the vow. When Delilah causedSamson’s head to be shaved, the vow was broken, and God’spresence left him (Judg. 16:19–20).

Inother circ*mstances, shaving was a necessary part of the cleanlinessrituals of the Israelite community (Lev. 14:8–9), althoughpriests were required not to shave (21:5). The Assyrian king and hisarmy are described as a razor that will shave the people of Israel(Isa. 7:20). The image indicates the cleansing of the people throughthe experience of defeat and exile.

The traditional designation “virgin birth” refersto the supernatural conception of Jesus Christ by the Holy Spirit,apart from sexual relations. Technically, one should speak of a“virginal conception,” since Jesus was virginallyconceived but was born normally. The virgin “birth” isconsidered by some theologians to be the means by which the twonatures of Jesus Christ are preserved: his humanity stems from thefact that he was born of the virgin Mary, while his deity proceedsfrom the reality that God was his father and he was conceived by theHoly Spirit. The later Apostles’ Creed formulates the matterthis way: Jesus Christ “was conceived by the Holy Spirit andborn of the Virgin Mary.” Here, three aspects of the virginbirth are discussed: (1)the virgin birth and Isa. 7:14; (2)thevirgin birth in the NT; (3)the historicity of the virgin birth.

Isaiah7:14. Isaiah7:14 reads, “The virgin shall conceive and bear a son, andshall call his name Immanuel” (ESV). Two key issues areinvolved in Isaiah’s prophecy. First, should the Hebrew word’almahbe translated as “virgin” or as “young woman”?While the Hebrew term does not necessarily mean a virgin, but only ayoung woman of marriageable age, the Greek term parthenos used in theLXX of Isa. 7:14 and quoted in Matt. 1:23 has stronger connotationsof virginity. Second, when was Isa. 7:14 fulfilled? Most likely theOT text was partially fulfilled in Isaiah’s day (with referenceto King Ahaz’s unnamed son or to Isaiah’s sonMaher-Shalal-Hash-Baz [Isa. 8:1]) but found its ultimate fulfillmentin Jesus, as Matt. 1:23 points out.

NewTestament. Theinfancy narratives recorded in Matt. 1–2 and in Luke 1–2provide the story line for Jesus’ virginal conception: (1)Marywas a virgin engaged to Joseph (Matt. 1:18; Luke 1:27, 34; 2:5);(2)she was found to be pregnant while still engaged to Joseph,a conception produced by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18, 20; Luke 1:35;cf. Matt. 1:18–25; Luke 1:34); (3)only after Jesus wasborn did Mary and Joseph have sexual relations (Matt. 1:24–25).Even though there is nothing in these narratives like the hypostaticunion formulated in the later church creeds, it is clear that Matthewand Luke in some way associate Jesus’ deity and humanity withthe virginal conception. Other NT texts are considered by some aspossible references to the virgin birth. John 1:14 states that “theWord became flesh,” which certainly highlights Jesus’ twonatures—deity and humanity—but does not therebyexplicitly mention the virgin birth. Paul does something similar inRom. 1:3 (“[God’s] Son, who as to his earthly life was adescendant of David”), Gal. 4:4 (“God sent his Son, bornof a woman”), and Phil. 2:6–11 (Jesus existed in the formof God but took on human likeness). Beyond these passages, there islittle else regarding the virgin birth stated or alluded to in theNT.

Historicity.Twoimportant considerations indicate that the virgin birth of Jesus wasa historical event and not a mythic legend. First, the simplicity ofthe descriptions of the birth narratives in Matthew and Luke, whencompared with the fantastic details found in contemporary accounts ofGreco-Roman and Jewish supernatural births, bespeak the authenticityof the NT documents. For example, one can cite the stories of thesupernatural birth of Alexander the Great in Greek sources and ofNoah in extrabiblical Jewish sources. In addition, secondary detailssuch as the mention of Anna’s father, Phanuel (Luke 2:36), addnothing significant to the account and thus appear to bematter-of-fact reporting by an eyewitness. Second, the commonalitiesbetween Matthew and Luke regarding the virgin birth of Jesus attestto its historicity.

Inconclusion, while the NT does not contain extensive informationconcerning the virgin birth of Jesus, there is sufficient evidence tosupport its historicity.

(1) Son ofJotham, king of Judah, and father of Hezekiah. His reign is describedin 2 Kings 16 and 2 Chron. 28, and his confrontation by theprophet Isaiah in Isa. 7:1–17. Isaiah’s oracle againstthe Philistines is dated the year of Ahaz’s death (Isa. 14:28).Hosea and Micah prophesied during his reign (Hos. 1:1; Mic. 1:1).Ahaz reigned for sixteen years (743–727 BC). He followed thesyncretistic pagan practices of the Israelite kings. When besieged bythe Syrian and Israelite kings, with the aim of replacing him with apuppet ruler (734 BC), he sent a massive tribute to elicit Assyrianprotection (2 Kings 16:5–9). This resulted in pro-Assyrianreligious compromise (16:10–18). The goal of Isaiah’sembassy to the fearful Ahaz was to encourage a response of faith(Isa. 7:9). Though Isaiah offered him any sign of his choosing, Ahazmasked his refusal in a facade of piety about not testing God(Isa.7:10–12; cf. Deut. 6:16). The hypocritical Ahaz did notwant a sign because he had no intention of trusting God in thisnational crisis. The exasperated prophet responded by announcing thesign of Immanuel.

(2) ABenjamite, a descendant of Saul (1 Chron. 8:35–36;9:41–42).

The first of the Major Prophets in the canon, the book of Isaiah is one of the longest books in the Bible. This, coupled with the NT’s frequent use of Isaiah, has contributed to the book’s great importance in Christian tradition. Isaiah contains some of the most memorable passages in Scripture, with its majestic poetry and evocative sermons making it a literary masterpiece. Nevertheless, it has also been characterized as a difficult book to comprehend and make sense of as a whole because the connections between different paragraphs and sections appear to be haphazard at times and are difficult to understand. However, some knowledge of the way the book was formed can aid in interpretation.

Authorship

The authorship of Isaiah has been one of the most debated issues in biblical interpretation. Ancient tradition credited the eighth-century BC prophet Isaiah with the entire sixty-six chapters. However, an early Jewish tradition in the Talmud claims that “the men of Hezekiah” compiled Isaiah, showing their awareness that the book did not come entirely from Isaiah.

Literary evidence. Isaiah son of Amoz is referred to as author in three sections of the book (1:1; 2:1; 13:1) and is featured in both third-person (chaps. 7; 20; 36–39) and first-person (chaps. 6; 8) narratives. However, chapters 40–66 have no such headings and do not even mention Isaiah. While references to Isaiah as author in specific sections may suggest that he actually did write the whole book, they may also indicate that he did not write sections that are not ascribed to him. Similarly, historical narratives referring to the prophet in the third person may suggest that someone else wrote them, although the intimate information in them (e.g., 7:3) could point to Isaianic authorship.

Another possible indication of multiple authorship is the marked difference in literary style and vocabulary found in different sections of Isaiah. While such judgments are quite subjective, both sides of the authorship debate acknowledge these stylistic differences.

Historical settings. The debate regarding the authorship of Isaiah really centers on the diverse historical settings within different sections of the book. Chapters 1–39 clearly are set during the late eighth century BC, the period when Assyria is threatening Judah. Assyria is frequently mentioned (e.g., 7:17; 8:4; 10:12; 11:11; 19:23; 20:1; 27:13; 36:1), as are Judean kings (e.g., 1:1; 6:1; 7:1; 14:28; 36:1) and the prophet Isaiah himself (e.g., 1:1; 2:1; 13:1; 20:2; 37:5).

In contrast, the historical setting of chapters 40–55 is not eighth-century BC Judah. Israel is described as in captivity and Jerusalem is referred to as ruined and deserted (44:26, 28; 52:9); there is frequent allusion to the sufferings of the exile (42:22, 25; 43:28; 47:6; 51:17; 52:5); and the coming return from exile is described as close at hand (40:2; 46:13; 48:20). Furthermore, in chapters 40–55 Babylon is Israel’s enemy, even though in Isaiah’s day they were allies. Also, Cyrus the Great, the Persian king who conquered Babylon in 539 BC (ending the exile), is mentioned with no introduction or explanation (44:28; 45:1), even though he lived 150 years after Isaiah. In sum, chapters 40–55 appear to be addressed to Judeans in Babylonian exile.

Conversely, chapters 56–66 appear to come from yet another historical period. Unlike in chapters 40–55, where the temple was destroyed and out of operation, in chapters 56–66 the temple (66:6), along with sacrifices (56:7; 66:3), offerings (57:6; 65:3; 66:3), and Sabbaths (56:2; 58:13; 66:23), is referred to. Also, Jerusalem and its walls are standing (62:6), unlike in chapters 40–55, where it is predicted that Jerusalem will be rebuilt (44:26). This seems to indicate that it addresses those who have returned to Jerusalem after the exile.

This evidence suggests that the book of Isaiah was written by several authors from different time periods. Alternatively, these diverse historical settings could be explained by supposing that Isaiah spoke to audiences in the distant future through divine inspiration. While skeptical scholars holding antisupernatural worldviews have denied this possibility, those who believe in an almighty God believe that he can reveal the distant future to his prophets. However, the question is whether that is in fact the case with Isaiah. It is significant that in chapters 40–55 Babylonian oppression is not predicted as something to come in the future but rather is presupposed as the present conditions under which the writer is living—only the release from exile is predicted. Logically, it would seem that the author lived in the situation that he presupposes and before the situation that he predicts.

Arguments for the unity of Isaiah. Some scholars still hold to the unity of Isaiah on the following grounds: (1)no ancient manuscripts show that the book ever existed in another form; (2)differences in style and vocabulary can be explained by different subject matter (besides which, the title “Holy One of Israel” unites all sections of Isaiah, as it is used thirteen times in chapters 1–39, sixteen times in chapters 40–66, and only seven times in the rest of the Bible); (3)it seems unlikely that an author as great as the one who wrote chapters 40–55 should remain anonymous; and (4)although it is logical to assume that a prophet is contemporary with what he presupposes, once a prophet makes a prediction, that prediction can become a presupposition for another prediction. Therefore, Isaiah’s prediction of exile in 39:6–7 could become the basis or presupposition on which he continued to prophesy the end to the exile.

However, these arguments are not compelling. Although no manuscripts attest to earlier versions of the book, we possess so few manuscripts from before the time of Christ (and none dating to the time during which the three sections of Isaiah are thought to have been combined) that this is insignificant. Also, the differences in subject matter do not seem great enough to explain the very different style and language in the various sections. Regarding the unlikelihood that the writer of chapters 40–55 could remain anonymous, the fact is that many biblical books are indeed anonymous (e.g., Judges, 1–2Kings, 1–2Chronicles). However, most significant are the different historical settings of the major sections of Isaiah. If Isaiah was addressing an audience in the distant future, not only would it be a situation unparalleled in the biblical prophets, but also the message would have been largely unintelligible to Isaiah’s contemporaries (especially references to Cyrus). Moreover, the text does not claim to predict these situations but only presupposes them. However, the reality of prophetic inspiration is underscored, as a later author predicts not only the end of the exile but also a suffering messiah.

First, Second, and Third Isaiah. For convenience (and not to imply that each author was named “Isaiah”), the three major sections are often referred to as First Isaiah (chaps. 1–39), Second Isaiah (chaps. 40–55), and Third Isaiah (chaps. 56–66). In light of the purposeful connections between the different sections, it is probable that the book was the product of a “school” of Isaiah’s disciples (cf. 8:16) who collected and organized Isaiah’s words and added to them over a long period of time.

In the end, the involvement of multiple authors in the composition of Isaiah does not undermine its authority as Scripture. Its authority derives not from the namesake prophet but rather from God, who inspired its writing (2Tim. 3:16).

Plan of the Book

Isaiah has a literary structure similar to that of Ezekiel, Zephaniah, Joel, and the Greek translation of Jeremiah. The first section is concerned with judgment on Israel (chaps. 1–12), the second with judgment on foreign nations (chaps. 13–23), and the third records prophecies of hope and salvation (chaps. 24–27). This structure purposefully places hopeful oracles of comfort after the judgment oracles. Some view the entire book of Isaiah as following this pattern (chaps. 1–12, judgment on Israel; chaps. 13–35, judgment on other nations; chaps. 40–66, oracles of comfort). However, both of these schemes are somewhat forced, since each section is slightly mixed (there are oracles of salvation in chaps. 1–12, prophecies against Judah in chaps. 13–23, and judgment oracles in chaps. 56–66). However, in broad outline it is helpful to recognize this structure.

Outline

I. Judgment on Judah (1–12)

II. Judgment on the Nations (13–27)

III. Warnings to Trust in the Lord (28–35)

IV. The Assyrian Crisis (36–39)

V. The Second Exodus (40–48)

VI. The Restoration of Jerusalem (49–55)

VII. The Earthly and New Jerusalem (56–66)

First Isaiah (Isa. 1–39)

Key historical events. This section of Isaiah comes from the period when the nation of Assyria was aggressively expanding its territory and terrorizing weaker nations, such as Israel and Judah. Two key historical events form the background for many oracles in chapters 1–39 and are the prominent focus there: the Syro-Ephraimite war of 734 BC and the 701 BC Assyrian invasion of Judah.

The Syro-Ephraimite war. The nations of Aram (Syria) and Israel (Ephraim) allied together against Assyria and tried to coerce Judah into joining them. They planned to replace King Ahaz with a king of their choice (7:6), which would end the Davidic dynasty. In the end, Ahaz rejected Isaiah’s advice to simply trust God (7:9) and instead appealed to the king of Assyria for aid. The Assyrians conquered Aram (732 BC) and Israel (722 BC) and assimilated them into the Assyrian empire. Judah survived but had to pay tribute to Assyria from that point onward.

The Assyrian invasion of Judah. The Assyrian king Sennacherib invaded Judah when Hezekiah, Ahaz’s son, reigned in Jerusalem. The invasion devastated Judah; however, when Jerusalem was threatened, Hezekiah, in contrast to his father, trusted God to save them, and the Assyrian army suffered massive losses and failed to take Jerusalem (37:36).

Structure and themes. The structure of chapters 1–39 is quite complex. However, the prophecies and historical narratives concerned with Isaiah’s day are roughly in chronological order (e.g., prophecies and events occurring during the reign of King Ahaz [6:1–8:22] precede those during Hezekiah’s reign [36:1–39:8]). The structure of these chapters alternates between threat and promise (e.g., chap. 1= threat; 2:1–4= promise of hope; 2:5–4:1= threat; 4:2–6= promise of hope). Analogously, the main themes of these chapters alternate between threat and promise.

Holiness. A major theme of Isaiah is God’s holiness, as evidenced in its favorite title for the Lord, “Holy One of Israel.” While the original idea underlying holiness was physical separation and did not have an ethical dimension (e.g., temple prostitutes in the ancient Near East were called “holy women”), a different concept of holiness emerges in chapter 6, the account of Isaiah’s call. Since 6:1–9:7 is the only part in the book with autobiographical narration, these chapters probably come from an original memoir of Isaiah himself. The memoir is surrounded by judgment oracles with a repeated element, “Yet for all this, his anger is not turned away, his hand is still upraised” (5:25; 9:12, 17, 21; 10:4), suggesting that the memoir as a whole was inserted between these oracles to explain God’s anger recorded in 1–12. God’s mandate to Israel was to “be holy, because I am holy” (Lev. 11:44–45), but Israel failed to follow this command. In the presence of the holy God, Isaiah realized his own sinfulness and the sinfulness of his people (6:5), connecting the concepts of holiness and righteousness.

The remnant. Already in the first chapter we see the emergence of two groups within Israel: the wicked, who will be punished, and a remnant, who will be redeemed (1:27–31). This focus on the remnant was one way in which Isaiah saw hope for Israel despite the coming judgment that he predicted. The remnant theme highlights the apparent tension between God as holy and God as redeemer: God’s holiness is upheld through the judgment on Israel, but God’s character as savior is witnessed through the remnant that is redeemed.

A coming messianic king. The section 6:1–9:7 dates from the time of the Syro-Ephraimite war, and it appears that Isaiah wrote it down (8:16) when Ahaz refused his counsel. The memoir emphasizes the rejection of the Davidic king Ahaz and predicts the birth of a royal son who would replace Ahaz and bring freedom from oppression (9:1–7). This dissatisfaction with the reigning Davidic king was the seedbed for messianic expectations and is the background for the messianic trilogy of 7:14–16; 9:2–7; 11:1–9. While some of these passages may have originally referred to Hezekiah, he falls short of these messianic expectations, leaving the community of faith awaiting another anointed one (messiah). Ominously, chapter 39 describes Hezekiah’s entertaining guests from Babylon, perhaps implying an alliance between the two nations. Hezekiah’s actions prompt Isaiah to predict the Babylonian exile (39:6–7), providing a fitting segue to chapters 40–66.

Second Isaiah (Isa. 40–55)

A message to the exiles. Second Isaiah was written near the end of the exilic period for those who were deported by Nebuchadnezzar to Babylon. Although the exiles in Babylon were settled in communities (Ezek. 3:15) and allowed to build houses and farm the land (Jer. 29:5–7), they had no temple for worship, and many of the exiles probably saw the destruction of Jerusalem and their temple as the end of God’s action on their behalf. The gods of Babylon appeared to have won the victory. The exiles’ faith was flagging, and even those who did not abandon worship of Israel’s God simply clung to the past and expected nothing new from him.

Contrary to these expectations, Second Isaiah proclaims that God is doing something new for his people and bringing an end to the exile (40:1; 55:12). The role of Cyrus in this deliverance is highlighted, with explicit and implicit reference made to the Persian king (41:2–3, 25; 44:28; 45:1–4, 13–14). However, amid the oracles of comfort there is also a challenge to Israel, which is somehow resistant to the message. To break down this resistance, the prophecy has a sustained rhetoric against idol worship, with some quite hilarious sections ridiculing idol makers (44:9–20). Israel needed to realize that only Yahweh is God and to trust that he will redeem Israel for his purposes. Chapters 1–39 allude to the redemption of Israel (1:27; 35:9), and chapters 40–66 reveal more of how this redemption will take place: the work of “the servant.”

The servant. Several poems featuring an anonymous “servant” (42:1–9; 49:1–12; 50:4–11; 52:13–53:12) are often referred to as the Servant Songs. As far back as the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:34), interpreters have struggled with how to identify “the servant.” At times, Israel is explicitly identified as the servant (Isa. 41:8–9; 42:19 [2×]; 43:10), yet the servant clearly also has individual features, suggesting that a person was to fill the role. Some have suggested Cyrus because 42:1 says that the servant “will bring justice to the nations,” and Cyrus is described as conquering nations (41:2, 25; 45:1). However, despite all the talk of Cyrus, the text never explicitly applies the term “servant” to him, which can hardly be by chance. Alternatively, the servant could be the prophet who speaks in these chapters (as the Ethiopian eunuch speculated), since he was destined for his mission before his birth (49:1) and equipped for a mission involving prophetic speech (49:2) and had received divinely revealed knowledge (50:4).

Yet the Servant Songs are also messianic and look forward to a future anointed one who will fulfill the role of the servant fully. In the NT, Jesus is presented as the new Israel (cf. Matt. 2:15 with Hos. 11:1) who truly fulfills the role of the servant (John 12:38, quoting Isa. 53:1; Matt. 8:17, quoting Isa. 53:4). However, Paul appears to hold to a collective interpretation of the songs, as he sees himself as the servant in some instances (Acts 13:47; Rom. 15:21; Gal. 1:15). Both the individual and the collective interpretations are legitimated in the NT, as both Jesus (individual) and the church (collective), which is Christ’s body, fulfill the role of the servant.

Third Isaiah (Isa. 56–66)

In 539 BC Cyrus allowed the exiles to return home to rebuild Jerusalem and its temple (Ezra 1:1–4). Despite many obstacles, the temple was finished in 515 BC. Even with this success, living in the land was challenging (see Malachi), with factions among the people, economic troubles, hypocritical worship (Isa. 58:1–14), and problems with corrupt leaders (56:9–57:13). It was for this postexilic community that Third Isaiah was written (probably before the reforms of Ezra and Nehemiah in 445 BC brought lasting change to the desperate situation).

Unlike in chapters 40–55, where Israel needs to be roused from its despair by the imminent actions of God, in chapters 56–66 the people are pleading with God to help them (59:11; 62:7). In chapter 59 the prophet declares that God’s delay in helping his people is due not to his inability but rather to the sins of the people, which are described, confessed, and lamented.

In many ways, Third Isaiah unites the themes of First Isaiah and Second Isaiah. Second Isaiah emphasizes the inbreaking of a new age that contrasts with the old. The former things are remembered, but the new thing that God was doing—the return from exile—is stressed. However, in Third Isaiah the deliverance from Babylon is seen as merely a foretaste of God’s promise, which is now identified as a new heaven and earth (chaps. 65–66). Third Isaiah looks forward to the new things that are still ahead.

First Isaiah predicts a Davidic messiah who would rule in righteousness (9:1–7; 11:1–9) and a faithful remnant that would respond in trust (10:20; 28:16). Second Isaiah does not continue with these themes, instead turning attention to the “servant” whose suffering and death would atone for Israel (53:4–5). However, Third Isaiah links First Isaiah’s faithful remnant with obedient “servants” who take on the mission of the Suffering Servant in Second Isaiah. This interpretation sets the direction for the NT’s identification of the royal messiah of chapters 1–39 as the servant of chapters 40–55 (Luke 24:26; Acts 8:32). Third Isaiah thus unites and reinterprets the book as a whole.

It is fitting that Jesus read the opening verses of Isa. 61 in the synagogue at the beginning of his ministry. Like Third Isaiah, he united prophecies of both the messianic Davidic ruler of First Isaiah and the Suffering Servant of Second Isaiah, taking on both roles himself. Third Isaiah ends with a glorious future pictured for the Jewish community as they function as priests in the world (61:6). Similarly, Christ’s body, the church, now functions in these same roles in the world (cf. Acts 13:47; Rev. 5:10).

Jesus Christ is the centerpiece of the Christian Scriptures. The meaning and interpretation of both Testaments is properly grasped only in light of the person and work of Jesus Christ. That is not to say that the Testaments testify to Jesus Christ in the exact same way; they obviously do not, but both Testaments are part of the inscripturated revelation that, in light of the incarnation, proclaims Jesus Christ to be the fullest manifestation of God given to humankind.

Old Testament

According to the Scriptures. The early Christians were adamant that the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ happened “according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:3–4), which meant that these events lined up with Israel’s sacred traditions. On the road to Emmaus the risen Jesus explained to the two travelers the things concerning himself “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” in relation to the death and glorification of the Messiah (Luke 24:27). In one of the major Johannine discourses, Jesus tells the Pharisees that the Scriptures “testify about me” (John 5:39). Early Christian authors could find certain key texts that demonstrated the conformity of the Christ-event to the pattern of Israel’s Scriptures, such as Pss. 2; 110; 118; Isa. 53. Yet much of the OT can be understood without mention of Jesus Christ in relation to its own historical context, and there is the danger of overly allegorizing OT texts in order to make them say something about Jesus Christ and the church.

The relationship between the Testaments. The way that the NT authors echo, allude to, quote, and interpret the OT is a complex matter, but at least two points need to be made about the relationship between the two Testaments.

First, the OT anticipates and illuminates the coming of Jesus Christ. “Anticipate” does not mean “predict,” but the law and the prophets foreshadow the offices and identity of Jesus Christ. The offices of prophet, priest, and king in the OT prefigure the ministry of Christ, who is the one who reveals God, intercedes on behalf of humankind, and is the Messiah and Lord. The sacrificial cultus, with the necessity of shedding blood for the removal of sin, prefigures the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ. This is why the law is a “shadow” of the one who was to come (Col. 2:17; Heb. 10:1). “Illuminate” means that certain OT texts, though not referring to Jesus in their historical or literary context, explain aspects of his person and work. This is seen most clearly in the way that the psalms are used in the NT. Texts such as Pss. 2:7; 110:1–4 provided biblical categories that explained the nature of Jesus’ sonship, the quality of his priestly ministry, and his installation as God’s vice-regent.

Second, we should differentiate between prophecy and typology. The prophetic promises in Ezek. 37; Amos 9; and Mic. 4 about a future Davidic king whom God will use to save and restore Israel are genuine prophecies that look forward to a future event yet to be fulfilled. These texts set forth the job description of the Messiah as the renewal and restoration of Israel from bondage and exile. It is unsurprising then that in Acts, James the brother of Jesus could cite Amos 9:11–12 as proof that Gentiles should be accepted into the people of God with the coming of the Messiah (Acts 15:15–18).

Typological interpretation, on the other hand, sees OT persons, places, or events as prototypes or patterns of NT persons, places, or events. For example, in Rom. 5:14 Paul says that Adam is a “type” or “pattern” of the one to come. Similarly, Matthew’s use of Isa. 7:14 in Matt. 1:23 is also typological rather than prophetic. In the context of Isaiah, the promise refers to a child born during the reign of King Ahaz as a sign that the Judean kingdom will survive the Assyrian onslaught. Matthew’s citation does not demand an exact correspondence of events as much as it postulates a correlation of patterns or types between Isaiah’s narrative and the Matthean birth story. The coming of God’s Son, the manifestation of God’s presence, and the rescue of Israel through a child born to a young girl bring to Matthew’s mind Isa. 7 as an obvious prophetic precedent, repeated at a new juncture of redemptive history.

A Christology of the Old Testament. The NT authors interpreted the OT in search of answers to questions pertaining to the identity and ministry of Jesus Christ, the nature of the people of God, and the arrival of the new age. They detected patterns in the OT that were repeated or recapitulated in Jesus’ own person. They proclaimed that the prophetic promises made to Israel had been made good in Jesus Christ, and they found allusions to the various events of his life, death, and exaltation. Jesus and Israel’s Scriptures became a mutually interpretive spiral whereby the Christians began to understand the OT in light of Jesus and understood Jesus in light of the OT. In this canonical setting we can legitimately develop a “Christology of the Old Testament.”

New Testament

The Gospels. The canonical Gospels are four ancient biographies that pay attention to the history and significance of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. They represent a testimony to Jesus and embody the collective memory of his person and actions as they were transmitted and interpreted by Christians in the Greco-Roman world of the mid- to late first century.

All four Gospels follow the same basic outline by variably detailing Jesus’ ministry, passion, and exaltation, and all of them place the story of Jesus in the context of the fulfillment of the story of Israel. At the same time, each Gospel in its plot and portrayal of Jesus remains distinctive in its own right. Yet they are not four different Jesuses, but rather four parallel portraits of Jesus, much like four stained-glass windows or four paintings depict the same person in different ways.

The Gospel of Matthew portrays Jesus as the long-awaited Davidic Messiah of Israel, with a focus on his teaching authority as a type of new Moses. The Gospel of Mark describes Jesus as the powerful Son of God and concurrently as the suffering Son of Man, whose cross reveals the reality of his identity and mission. The Gospel of Luke emphasizes Jesus’ role as an anointed prophet with a special concern for the poor and outcasts and his role as dispenser of the Holy Spirit. Without flattening the distinctive christological shape of each of the Synoptic Gospels, we could say that they focus on Jesus as the proclaimer of the kingdom of God and as king of the very same kingdom.

The Gospel of John has its own set of characteristic emphases in which Jesus’ consciousness of his divine nature and purpose is heightened. Programmatic for the entirety of John’s Gospel is the prologue in 1:1–18 about the “Word [who] became flesh,” which gives a clear theology of incarnation and revelation associated with Jesus’ coming. There is also much material unique to John’s Gospel, such as the “I am” statements that further exposit the nature of Jesus’ person and the climactic confession by Thomas that Jesus is “my Lord and my God” (20:28).

The Gospels indicate that mere knowledge that Jesus died for the purpose of salvation is an insufficient understanding of him. What is also needed, and what they provide, is an understanding of his teachings and his mission in light of Israel’s Scriptures and in view of the sociopolitical situation of Palestine. Jesus came to redeem and renew Israel so that a transformed Israel would transform the world.

Acts. The book of Acts contains the story of the emergence of the early church from Jerusalem to Rome. Even though Acts is a repository of apostolic preaching and plots the beginnings of the Gentile mission, it is the sequel to Luke’s Gospel and is very much the story of Jesus in perfect tense (i.e., a past event with ongoing significance). The most succinct summary of the Christology of Acts is in Peter’s speech in Jerusalem, where he states that “this Jesus” whom they crucified has been made both “Lord and Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” by God (2:36). In the succeeding narratives emphasis is given to “Jesus is the Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” (e.g., 9:22; 17:3; 18:5), which is a message pertinent to Jews and Gentiles (20:21).

Paul’s Letters. The Pauline Epistles, although they are situational, pastoral, and not given primarily to christological exposition, still exhibit beliefs about Jesus held by Paul and his Christian contemporaries. The high points of Paul’s Christology can be detected in his use of traditional material such as Col. 1:15–20, which exposits the sufficiency and the supremacy of Christ. Philippians 2:5–11 narrates the story of the incarnation as an example of self-giving love. In 1 Cor. 8:6 Paul offers a Christianized version of the Shema of Deut. 6:4. There is a petition to Jesus as “Come, Lord!” in 1 Cor. 16:22. Paul can also refer to Jesus as God in Rom. 9:5 (although the grammar is ambiguous). For Paul, Jesus is both the “heavenly man” (1 Cor. 15:47–49) and the Son to come from heaven (1 Thess. 1:10). This interest in the divine Son of God does not mean that Paul was ignorant of or disinterested in the life and teachings of Jesus. Elsewhere he implies knowledge of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Rom. 14:14; 1 Cor. 7:10–11) and refers to the incarnation (e.g., 2 Cor. 8:9; Col. 2:9).

A number of titles are used to describe Jesus in Paul’s letters, including “Lord” and “Christ/Messiah” (and variations such as “Lord Jesus Christ” and “Christ Jesus”), “Savior,” and “Seed of David” (Rom. 1:3). But probably the most apt expression of Jesus’ nature according to Paul is “Son of God” (e.g., Rom. 1:4; 2 Cor. 1:19; Gal. 2:20). This language of sonship suggests that Jesus is the means of God’s salvation and glory and is the special agent through whom the Father acts. Referring to Jesus as “Son” also underscores Jesus’ unique relationship to God the Father and his unique role in executing the ordained plan of salvation for the elect.

We might also add that Paul provides the building blocks of what would later become a full-blown trinitarian theology, such as in the benediction of 2 Cor. 13:14 and in general exhortations about the gospel (1 Cor. 2:1–5). It must be emphasized that Paul’s Christology cannot be separated from his eschatology, soteriology, and ecclesiology. The sending of God’s Son (see Rom. 8:3; Gal. 4:4–5) into the world marks the coming of redemption and salvation through the cross and resurrection of the Son, and these are appropriated by faith. Those who believe become members of the restored Israel, the renewed Adamic race, and constituent members of the body of Christ. To that we might add the experiential element of Paul’s Christology as Jesus is known in the experience of salvation, prayer, and worship (e.g., Gal. 2:19–20).

The General Letters. The General Letters (also called the Catholic Epistles) provide a further array of images and explorations into the person and work of Jesus Christ and how they relate to the community of faith. The message of Hebrews is essentially “Jesus is better!” He is better than the angels and better than Moses; he is a better high priest; he offers a better sacrifice, establishes a better law, and instigates a better covenant. This letter is a sermonic exhortation against falling away from the faith (e.g., 2:1–4), and toward that end the author sets before his readers the magnificence of Jesus Christ, who is “the same yesterday and today and forever” (13:8).

James has little christological content and focuses instead on exhortations that bear remarkable resemblance to the teachings of Jesus from the Gospels. Even so, the letter makes passing reference to the “glorious Lord Jesus Christ” (2:1; cf. 1:1).

Central to 1 Peter is the glory and salvation that will be manifested at the revelation of Jesus Christ at his second coming (1:5, 7, 9, 13; 4:13; 5:1). Much attention is given to Jesus’ sacrificial death as a lamb (1:19), the example of his suffering (2:21–23; 4:1–2, 13), and the substitutionary nature of his death (2:24; 3:18). He is the Shepherd and Overseer of the souls of Christians (2:25). Peter writes this to encourage congregations in Asia Minor living under adverse conditions, and he sets before them the pattern of Jesus as a model for their own journey.

In 2 Peter we find a mix of Jewish eschatological concepts and Hellenistic religious language, with the author seeking to defend the apostolic gospel in a pagan culture. Jesus is the source of knowledge (1:2, 8; 2:20) and righteousness (1:1). Much emphasis is given to the coming kingdom of Jesus Christ (1:11, 16; 3:10). Jesus is the sustainer and renewer of the church and also the coming judge of the entire world.

Similar themes can be found in Jude, which is addressed to a group of believers who have been infiltrated by false teachers promoting licentiousness. Jude declares the infiltrators to be condemned and calls on the believers to hold fast to the faith. Jesus is the “Sovereign and Lord” (v. 4), Jesus saved people out of Egypt during the exodus (v. 5 [but see marginal notes on the variant reading “Lord”]), the second coming of Jesus will mark the revelation of his “mercy” (v. 21), and the benediction ascribes “glory, majesty, power and authority” to God through Jesus (v. 25). Most characteristic of all is the emphasis upon Jesus/God as the one who keeps the believers in the grip of his saving power (vv. 1, 21, 23).

The Letters of John take up where the Gospel of John left off, focusing on Jesus as the incarnate Word of God. The first of the three Johannine Epistles appears to have been written in a context where a community of Christians was being pressured by Jews to deny that Jesus is the Messiah (2:22) and also by dissident docetists to deny that Jesus had a physical body (4:2; 5:6). The major focus, however, is on Jesus as the Son of God (1:3, 7; 2:23; 3:8, 23; 4:9–10, 15; 5:11) and the incarnation of God’s very own truth and love (3:16; cf. 2 John 3).

Revelation. The Christology of the book of Revelation is best summed up in the opening description of Jesus as “him who is, and who was, and who is to come,” which underscores the lordship of Jesus over the past, present, and future. John then describes Jesus with the threefold titles “the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth” (1:4–5). In many ways, the story and Christology of Revelation are paradoxical. Jesus is both the victim of Roman violence and the victor over human evil. Jesus is the suffering “Lamb of God” and the powerful “Lion of the tribe of Judah.” In Rev. 4–5 we are given a picture of the worship in heaven and the enthronement of Jesus, and yet the realities on earth are a dearth of heavenly goodness, with persecution and apostasy rampant (Rev. 1–3). This tension continues until the final revelation of Jesus, when the heavenly Lord returns to bring the goodness and power of heaven to transform the perils of the earth and bring his people into the new Jerusalem.

Summary

The primary fixtures of a biblical Christology are (1) Jesus Christ is the promised deliverer intimated in Israel’s Scriptures, whose identity and mission are anticipated and illuminated by the law and the prophets; (2) the man Jesus of Nazareth is identified with the risen and exalted Lord Jesus Christ; and (3) Jesus participates in the very identity and being of God. See also Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ is the centerpiece of the Christian Scriptures. The meaning and interpretation of both Testaments is properly grasped only in light of the person and work of Jesus Christ. That is not to say that the Testaments testify to Jesus Christ in the exact same way; they obviously do not, but both Testaments are part of the inscripturated revelation that, in light of the incarnation, proclaims Jesus Christ to be the fullest manifestation of God given to humankind.

Old Testament

According to the Scriptures. The early Christians were adamant that the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ happened “according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:3–4), which meant that these events lined up with Israel’s sacred traditions. On the road to Emmaus the risen Jesus explained to the two travelers the things concerning himself “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” in relation to the death and glorification of the Messiah (Luke 24:27). In one of the major Johannine discourses, Jesus tells the Pharisees that the Scriptures “testify about me” (John 5:39). Early Christian authors could find certain key texts that demonstrated the conformity of the Christ-event to the pattern of Israel’s Scriptures, such as Pss. 2; 110; 118; Isa. 53. Yet much of the OT can be understood without mention of Jesus Christ in relation to its own historical context, and there is the danger of overly allegorizing OT texts in order to make them say something about Jesus Christ and the church.

The relationship between the Testaments. The way that the NT authors echo, allude to, quote, and interpret the OT is a complex matter, but at least two points need to be made about the relationship between the two Testaments.

First, the OT anticipates and illuminates the coming of Jesus Christ. “Anticipate” does not mean “predict,” but the law and the prophets foreshadow the offices and identity of Jesus Christ. The offices of prophet, priest, and king in the OT prefigure the ministry of Christ, who is the one who reveals God, intercedes on behalf of humankind, and is the Messiah and Lord. The sacrificial cultus, with the necessity of shedding blood for the removal of sin, prefigures the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ. This is why the law is a “shadow” of the one who was to come (Col. 2:17; Heb. 10:1). “Illuminate” means that certain OT texts, though not referring to Jesus in their historical or literary context, explain aspects of his person and work. This is seen most clearly in the way that the psalms are used in the NT. Texts such as Pss. 2:7; 110:1–4 provided biblical categories that explained the nature of Jesus’ sonship, the quality of his priestly ministry, and his installation as God’s vice-regent.

Second, we should differentiate between prophecy and typology. The prophetic promises in Ezek. 37; Amos 9; and Mic. 4 about a future Davidic king whom God will use to save and restore Israel are genuine prophecies that look forward to a future event yet to be fulfilled. These texts set forth the job description of the Messiah as the renewal and restoration of Israel from bondage and exile. It is unsurprising then that in Acts, James the brother of Jesus could cite Amos 9:11–12 as proof that Gentiles should be accepted into the people of God with the coming of the Messiah (Acts 15:15–18).

Typological interpretation, on the other hand, sees OT persons, places, or events as prototypes or patterns of NT persons, places, or events. For example, in Rom. 5:14 Paul says that Adam is a “type” or “pattern” of the one to come. Similarly, Matthew’s use of Isa. 7:14 in Matt. 1:23 is also typological rather than prophetic. In the context of Isaiah, the promise refers to a child born during the reign of King Ahaz as a sign that the Judean kingdom will survive the Assyrian onslaught. Matthew’s citation does not demand an exact correspondence of events as much as it postulates a correlation of patterns or types between Isaiah’s narrative and the Matthean birth story. The coming of God’s Son, the manifestation of God’s presence, and the rescue of Israel through a child born to a young girl bring to Matthew’s mind Isa. 7 as an obvious prophetic precedent, repeated at a new juncture of redemptive history.

A Christology of the Old Testament. The NT authors interpreted the OT in search of answers to questions pertaining to the identity and ministry of Jesus Christ, the nature of the people of God, and the arrival of the new age. They detected patterns in the OT that were repeated or recapitulated in Jesus’ own person. They proclaimed that the prophetic promises made to Israel had been made good in Jesus Christ, and they found allusions to the various events of his life, death, and exaltation. Jesus and Israel’s Scriptures became a mutually interpretive spiral whereby the Christians began to understand the OT in light of Jesus and understood Jesus in light of the OT. In this canonical setting we can legitimately develop a “Christology of the Old Testament.”

New Testament

The Gospels. The canonical Gospels are four ancient biographies that pay attention to the history and significance of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. They represent a testimony to Jesus and embody the collective memory of his person and actions as they were transmitted and interpreted by Christians in the Greco-Roman world of the mid- to late first century.

All four Gospels follow the same basic outline by variably detailing Jesus’ ministry, passion, and exaltation, and all of them place the story of Jesus in the context of the fulfillment of the story of Israel. At the same time, each Gospel in its plot and portrayal of Jesus remains distinctive in its own right. Yet they are not four different Jesuses, but rather four parallel portraits of Jesus, much like four stained-glass windows or four paintings depict the same person in different ways.

The Gospel of Matthew portrays Jesus as the long-awaited Davidic Messiah of Israel, with a focus on his teaching authority as a type of new Moses. The Gospel of Mark describes Jesus as the powerful Son of God and concurrently as the suffering Son of Man, whose cross reveals the reality of his identity and mission. The Gospel of Luke emphasizes Jesus’ role as an anointed prophet with a special concern for the poor and outcasts and his role as dispenser of the Holy Spirit. Without flattening the distinctive christological shape of each of the Synoptic Gospels, we could say that they focus on Jesus as the proclaimer of the kingdom of God and as king of the very same kingdom.

The Gospel of John has its own set of characteristic emphases in which Jesus’ consciousness of his divine nature and purpose is heightened. Programmatic for the entirety of John’s Gospel is the prologue in 1:1–18 about the “Word [who] became flesh,” which gives a clear theology of incarnation and revelation associated with Jesus’ coming. There is also much material unique to John’s Gospel, such as the “I am” statements that further exposit the nature of Jesus’ person and the climactic confession by Thomas that Jesus is “my Lord and my God” (20:28).

The Gospels indicate that mere knowledge that Jesus died for the purpose of salvation is an insufficient understanding of him. What is also needed, and what they provide, is an understanding of his teachings and his mission in light of Israel’s Scriptures and in view of the sociopolitical situation of Palestine. Jesus came to redeem and renew Israel so that a transformed Israel would transform the world.

Acts. The book of Acts contains the story of the emergence of the early church from Jerusalem to Rome. Even though Acts is a repository of apostolic preaching and plots the beginnings of the Gentile mission, it is the sequel to Luke’s Gospel and is very much the story of Jesus in perfect tense (i.e., a past event with ongoing significance). The most succinct summary of the Christology of Acts is in Peter’s speech in Jerusalem, where he states that “this Jesus” whom they crucified has been made both “Lord and Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” by God (2:36). In the succeeding narratives emphasis is given to “Jesus is the Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” (e.g., 9:22; 17:3; 18:5), which is a message pertinent to Jews and Gentiles (20:21).

Paul’s Letters. The Pauline Epistles, although they are situational, pastoral, and not given primarily to christological exposition, still exhibit beliefs about Jesus held by Paul and his Christian contemporaries. The high points of Paul’s Christology can be detected in his use of traditional material such as Col. 1:15–20, which exposits the sufficiency and the supremacy of Christ. Philippians 2:5–11 narrates the story of the incarnation as an example of self-giving love. In 1 Cor. 8:6 Paul offers a Christianized version of the Shema of Deut. 6:4. There is a petition to Jesus as “Come, Lord!” in 1 Cor. 16:22. Paul can also refer to Jesus as God in Rom. 9:5 (although the grammar is ambiguous). For Paul, Jesus is both the “heavenly man” (1 Cor. 15:47–49) and the Son to come from heaven (1 Thess. 1:10). This interest in the divine Son of God does not mean that Paul was ignorant of or disinterested in the life and teachings of Jesus. Elsewhere he implies knowledge of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Rom. 14:14; 1 Cor. 7:10–11) and refers to the incarnation (e.g., 2 Cor. 8:9; Col. 2:9).

A number of titles are used to describe Jesus in Paul’s letters, including “Lord” and “Christ/Messiah” (and variations such as “Lord Jesus Christ” and “Christ Jesus”), “Savior,” and “Seed of David” (Rom. 1:3). But probably the most apt expression of Jesus’ nature according to Paul is “Son of God” (e.g., Rom. 1:4; 2 Cor. 1:19; Gal. 2:20). This language of sonship suggests that Jesus is the means of God’s salvation and glory and is the special agent through whom the Father acts. Referring to Jesus as “Son” also underscores Jesus’ unique relationship to God the Father and his unique role in executing the ordained plan of salvation for the elect.

We might also add that Paul provides the building blocks of what would later become a full-blown trinitarian theology, such as in the benediction of 2 Cor. 13:14 and in general exhortations about the gospel (1 Cor. 2:1–5). It must be emphasized that Paul’s Christology cannot be separated from his eschatology, soteriology, and ecclesiology. The sending of God’s Son (see Rom. 8:3; Gal. 4:4–5) into the world marks the coming of redemption and salvation through the cross and resurrection of the Son, and these are appropriated by faith. Those who believe become members of the restored Israel, the renewed Adamic race, and constituent members of the body of Christ. To that we might add the experiential element of Paul’s Christology as Jesus is known in the experience of salvation, prayer, and worship (e.g., Gal. 2:19–20).

The General Letters. The General Letters (also called the Catholic Epistles) provide a further array of images and explorations into the person and work of Jesus Christ and how they relate to the community of faith. The message of Hebrews is essentially “Jesus is better!” He is better than the angels and better than Moses; he is a better high priest; he offers a better sacrifice, establishes a better law, and instigates a better covenant. This letter is a sermonic exhortation against falling away from the faith (e.g., 2:1–4), and toward that end the author sets before his readers the magnificence of Jesus Christ, who is “the same yesterday and today and forever” (13:8).

James has little christological content and focuses instead on exhortations that bear remarkable resemblance to the teachings of Jesus from the Gospels. Even so, the letter makes passing reference to the “glorious Lord Jesus Christ” (2:1; cf. 1:1).

Central to 1 Peter is the glory and salvation that will be manifested at the revelation of Jesus Christ at his second coming (1:5, 7, 9, 13; 4:13; 5:1). Much attention is given to Jesus’ sacrificial death as a lamb (1:19), the example of his suffering (2:21–23; 4:1–2, 13), and the substitutionary nature of his death (2:24; 3:18). He is the Shepherd and Overseer of the souls of Christians (2:25). Peter writes this to encourage congregations in Asia Minor living under adverse conditions, and he sets before them the pattern of Jesus as a model for their own journey.

In 2 Peter we find a mix of Jewish eschatological concepts and Hellenistic religious language, with the author seeking to defend the apostolic gospel in a pagan culture. Jesus is the source of knowledge (1:2, 8; 2:20) and righteousness (1:1). Much emphasis is given to the coming kingdom of Jesus Christ (1:11, 16; 3:10). Jesus is the sustainer and renewer of the church and also the coming judge of the entire world.

Similar themes can be found in Jude, which is addressed to a group of believers who have been infiltrated by false teachers promoting licentiousness. Jude declares the infiltrators to be condemned and calls on the believers to hold fast to the faith. Jesus is the “Sovereign and Lord” (v. 4), Jesus saved people out of Egypt during the exodus (v. 5 [but see marginal notes on the variant reading “Lord”]), the second coming of Jesus will mark the revelation of his “mercy” (v. 21), and the benediction ascribes “glory, majesty, power and authority” to God through Jesus (v. 25). Most characteristic of all is the emphasis upon Jesus/God as the one who keeps the believers in the grip of his saving power (vv. 1, 21, 23).

The Letters of John take up where the Gospel of John left off, focusing on Jesus as the incarnate Word of God. The first of the three Johannine Epistles appears to have been written in a context where a community of Christians was being pressured by Jews to deny that Jesus is the Messiah (2:22) and also by dissident docetists to deny that Jesus had a physical body (4:2; 5:6). The major focus, however, is on Jesus as the Son of God (1:3, 7; 2:23; 3:8, 23; 4:9–10, 15; 5:11) and the incarnation of God’s very own truth and love (3:16; cf. 2 John 3).

Revelation. The Christology of the book of Revelation is best summed up in the opening description of Jesus as “him who is, and who was, and who is to come,” which underscores the lordship of Jesus over the past, present, and future. John then describes Jesus with the threefold titles “the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth” (1:4–5). In many ways, the story and Christology of Revelation are paradoxical. Jesus is both the victim of Roman violence and the victor over human evil. Jesus is the suffering “Lamb of God” and the powerful “Lion of the tribe of Judah.” In Rev. 4–5 we are given a picture of the worship in heaven and the enthronement of Jesus, and yet the realities on earth are a dearth of heavenly goodness, with persecution and apostasy rampant (Rev. 1–3). This tension continues until the final revelation of Jesus, when the heavenly Lord returns to bring the goodness and power of heaven to transform the perils of the earth and bring his people into the new Jerusalem.

Summary

The primary fixtures of a biblical Christology are (1) Jesus Christ is the promised deliverer intimated in Israel’s Scriptures, whose identity and mission are anticipated and illuminated by the law and the prophets; (2) the man Jesus of Nazareth is identified with the risen and exalted Lord Jesus Christ; and (3) Jesus participates in the very identity and being of God. See also Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ is the centerpiece of the Christian Scriptures. The meaning and interpretation of both Testaments is properly grasped only in light of the person and work of Jesus Christ. That is not to say that the Testaments testify to Jesus Christ in the exact same way; they obviously do not, but both Testaments are part of the inscripturated revelation that, in light of the incarnation, proclaims Jesus Christ to be the fullest manifestation of God given to humankind.

Old Testament

According to the Scriptures. The early Christians were adamant that the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ happened “according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:3–4), which meant that these events lined up with Israel’s sacred traditions. On the road to Emmaus the risen Jesus explained to the two travelers the things concerning himself “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” in relation to the death and glorification of the Messiah (Luke 24:27). In one of the major Johannine discourses, Jesus tells the Pharisees that the Scriptures “testify about me” (John 5:39). Early Christian authors could find certain key texts that demonstrated the conformity of the Christ-event to the pattern of Israel’s Scriptures, such as Pss. 2; 110; 118; Isa. 53. Yet much of the OT can be understood without mention of Jesus Christ in relation to its own historical context, and there is the danger of overly allegorizing OT texts in order to make them say something about Jesus Christ and the church.

The relationship between the Testaments. The way that the NT authors echo, allude to, quote, and interpret the OT is a complex matter, but at least two points need to be made about the relationship between the two Testaments.

First, the OT anticipates and illuminates the coming of Jesus Christ. “Anticipate” does not mean “predict,” but the law and the prophets foreshadow the offices and identity of Jesus Christ. The offices of prophet, priest, and king in the OT prefigure the ministry of Christ, who is the one who reveals God, intercedes on behalf of humankind, and is the Messiah and Lord. The sacrificial cultus, with the necessity of shedding blood for the removal of sin, prefigures the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ. This is why the law is a “shadow” of the one who was to come (Col. 2:17; Heb. 10:1). “Illuminate” means that certain OT texts, though not referring to Jesus in their historical or literary context, explain aspects of his person and work. This is seen most clearly in the way that the psalms are used in the NT. Texts such as Pss. 2:7; 110:1–4 provided biblical categories that explained the nature of Jesus’ sonship, the quality of his priestly ministry, and his installation as God’s vice-regent.

Second, we should differentiate between prophecy and typology. The prophetic promises in Ezek. 37; Amos 9; and Mic. 4 about a future Davidic king whom God will use to save and restore Israel are genuine prophecies that look forward to a future event yet to be fulfilled. These texts set forth the job description of the Messiah as the renewal and restoration of Israel from bondage and exile. It is unsurprising then that in Acts, James the brother of Jesus could cite Amos 9:11–12 as proof that Gentiles should be accepted into the people of God with the coming of the Messiah (Acts 15:15–18).

Typological interpretation, on the other hand, sees OT persons, places, or events as prototypes or patterns of NT persons, places, or events. For example, in Rom. 5:14 Paul says that Adam is a “type” or “pattern” of the one to come. Similarly, Matthew’s use of Isa. 7:14 in Matt. 1:23 is also typological rather than prophetic. In the context of Isaiah, the promise refers to a child born during the reign of King Ahaz as a sign that the Judean kingdom will survive the Assyrian onslaught. Matthew’s citation does not demand an exact correspondence of events as much as it postulates a correlation of patterns or types between Isaiah’s narrative and the Matthean birth story. The coming of God’s Son, the manifestation of God’s presence, and the rescue of Israel through a child born to a young girl bring to Matthew’s mind Isa. 7 as an obvious prophetic precedent, repeated at a new juncture of redemptive history.

A Christology of the Old Testament. The NT authors interpreted the OT in search of answers to questions pertaining to the identity and ministry of Jesus Christ, the nature of the people of God, and the arrival of the new age. They detected patterns in the OT that were repeated or recapitulated in Jesus’ own person. They proclaimed that the prophetic promises made to Israel had been made good in Jesus Christ, and they found allusions to the various events of his life, death, and exaltation. Jesus and Israel’s Scriptures became a mutually interpretive spiral whereby the Christians began to understand the OT in light of Jesus and understood Jesus in light of the OT. In this canonical setting we can legitimately develop a “Christology of the Old Testament.”

New Testament

The Gospels. The canonical Gospels are four ancient biographies that pay attention to the history and significance of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. They represent a testimony to Jesus and embody the collective memory of his person and actions as they were transmitted and interpreted by Christians in the Greco-Roman world of the mid- to late first century.

All four Gospels follow the same basic outline by variably detailing Jesus’ ministry, passion, and exaltation, and all of them place the story of Jesus in the context of the fulfillment of the story of Israel. At the same time, each Gospel in its plot and portrayal of Jesus remains distinctive in its own right. Yet they are not four different Jesuses, but rather four parallel portraits of Jesus, much like four stained-glass windows or four paintings depict the same person in different ways.

The Gospel of Matthew portrays Jesus as the long-awaited Davidic Messiah of Israel, with a focus on his teaching authority as a type of new Moses. The Gospel of Mark describes Jesus as the powerful Son of God and concurrently as the suffering Son of Man, whose cross reveals the reality of his identity and mission. The Gospel of Luke emphasizes Jesus’ role as an anointed prophet with a special concern for the poor and outcasts and his role as dispenser of the Holy Spirit. Without flattening the distinctive christological shape of each of the Synoptic Gospels, we could say that they focus on Jesus as the proclaimer of the kingdom of God and as king of the very same kingdom.

The Gospel of John has its own set of characteristic emphases in which Jesus’ consciousness of his divine nature and purpose is heightened. Programmatic for the entirety of John’s Gospel is the prologue in 1:1–18 about the “Word [who] became flesh,” which gives a clear theology of incarnation and revelation associated with Jesus’ coming. There is also much material unique to John’s Gospel, such as the “I am” statements that further exposit the nature of Jesus’ person and the climactic confession by Thomas that Jesus is “my Lord and my God” (20:28).

The Gospels indicate that mere knowledge that Jesus died for the purpose of salvation is an insufficient understanding of him. What is also needed, and what they provide, is an understanding of his teachings and his mission in light of Israel’s Scriptures and in view of the sociopolitical situation of Palestine. Jesus came to redeem and renew Israel so that a transformed Israel would transform the world.

Acts. The book of Acts contains the story of the emergence of the early church from Jerusalem to Rome. Even though Acts is a repository of apostolic preaching and plots the beginnings of the Gentile mission, it is the sequel to Luke’s Gospel and is very much the story of Jesus in perfect tense (i.e., a past event with ongoing significance). The most succinct summary of the Christology of Acts is in Peter’s speech in Jerusalem, where he states that “this Jesus” whom they crucified has been made both “Lord and Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” by God (2:36). In the succeeding narratives emphasis is given to “Jesus is the Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” (e.g., 9:22; 17:3; 18:5), which is a message pertinent to Jews and Gentiles (20:21).

Paul’s Letters. The Pauline Epistles, although they are situational, pastoral, and not given primarily to christological exposition, still exhibit beliefs about Jesus held by Paul and his Christian contemporaries. The high points of Paul’s Christology can be detected in his use of traditional material such as Col. 1:15–20, which exposits the sufficiency and the supremacy of Christ. Philippians 2:5–11 narrates the story of the incarnation as an example of self-giving love. In 1 Cor. 8:6 Paul offers a Christianized version of the Shema of Deut. 6:4. There is a petition to Jesus as “Come, Lord!” in 1 Cor. 16:22. Paul can also refer to Jesus as God in Rom. 9:5 (although the grammar is ambiguous). For Paul, Jesus is both the “heavenly man” (1 Cor. 15:47–49) and the Son to come from heaven (1 Thess. 1:10). This interest in the divine Son of God does not mean that Paul was ignorant of or disinterested in the life and teachings of Jesus. Elsewhere he implies knowledge of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Rom. 14:14; 1 Cor. 7:10–11) and refers to the incarnation (e.g., 2 Cor. 8:9; Col. 2:9).

A number of titles are used to describe Jesus in Paul’s letters, including “Lord” and “Christ/Messiah” (and variations such as “Lord Jesus Christ” and “Christ Jesus”), “Savior,” and “Seed of David” (Rom. 1:3). But probably the most apt expression of Jesus’ nature according to Paul is “Son of God” (e.g., Rom. 1:4; 2 Cor. 1:19; Gal. 2:20). This language of sonship suggests that Jesus is the means of God’s salvation and glory and is the special agent through whom the Father acts. Referring to Jesus as “Son” also underscores Jesus’ unique relationship to God the Father and his unique role in executing the ordained plan of salvation for the elect.

We might also add that Paul provides the building blocks of what would later become a full-blown trinitarian theology, such as in the benediction of 2 Cor. 13:14 and in general exhortations about the gospel (1 Cor. 2:1–5). It must be emphasized that Paul’s Christology cannot be separated from his eschatology, soteriology, and ecclesiology. The sending of God’s Son (see Rom. 8:3; Gal. 4:4–5) into the world marks the coming of redemption and salvation through the cross and resurrection of the Son, and these are appropriated by faith. Those who believe become members of the restored Israel, the renewed Adamic race, and constituent members of the body of Christ. To that we might add the experiential element of Paul’s Christology as Jesus is known in the experience of salvation, prayer, and worship (e.g., Gal. 2:19–20).

The General Letters. The General Letters (also called the Catholic Epistles) provide a further array of images and explorations into the person and work of Jesus Christ and how they relate to the community of faith. The message of Hebrews is essentially “Jesus is better!” He is better than the angels and better than Moses; he is a better high priest; he offers a better sacrifice, establishes a better law, and instigates a better covenant. This letter is a sermonic exhortation against falling away from the faith (e.g., 2:1–4), and toward that end the author sets before his readers the magnificence of Jesus Christ, who is “the same yesterday and today and forever” (13:8).

James has little christological content and focuses instead on exhortations that bear remarkable resemblance to the teachings of Jesus from the Gospels. Even so, the letter makes passing reference to the “glorious Lord Jesus Christ” (2:1; cf. 1:1).

Central to 1 Peter is the glory and salvation that will be manifested at the revelation of Jesus Christ at his second coming (1:5, 7, 9, 13; 4:13; 5:1). Much attention is given to Jesus’ sacrificial death as a lamb (1:19), the example of his suffering (2:21–23; 4:1–2, 13), and the substitutionary nature of his death (2:24; 3:18). He is the Shepherd and Overseer of the souls of Christians (2:25). Peter writes this to encourage congregations in Asia Minor living under adverse conditions, and he sets before them the pattern of Jesus as a model for their own journey.

In 2 Peter we find a mix of Jewish eschatological concepts and Hellenistic religious language, with the author seeking to defend the apostolic gospel in a pagan culture. Jesus is the source of knowledge (1:2, 8; 2:20) and righteousness (1:1). Much emphasis is given to the coming kingdom of Jesus Christ (1:11, 16; 3:10). Jesus is the sustainer and renewer of the church and also the coming judge of the entire world.

Similar themes can be found in Jude, which is addressed to a group of believers who have been infiltrated by false teachers promoting licentiousness. Jude declares the infiltrators to be condemned and calls on the believers to hold fast to the faith. Jesus is the “Sovereign and Lord” (v. 4), Jesus saved people out of Egypt during the exodus (v. 5 [but see marginal notes on the variant reading “Lord”]), the second coming of Jesus will mark the revelation of his “mercy” (v. 21), and the benediction ascribes “glory, majesty, power and authority” to God through Jesus (v. 25). Most characteristic of all is the emphasis upon Jesus/God as the one who keeps the believers in the grip of his saving power (vv. 1, 21, 23).

The Letters of John take up where the Gospel of John left off, focusing on Jesus as the incarnate Word of God. The first of the three Johannine Epistles appears to have been written in a context where a community of Christians was being pressured by Jews to deny that Jesus is the Messiah (2:22) and also by dissident docetists to deny that Jesus had a physical body (4:2; 5:6). The major focus, however, is on Jesus as the Son of God (1:3, 7; 2:23; 3:8, 23; 4:9–10, 15; 5:11) and the incarnation of God’s very own truth and love (3:16; cf. 2 John 3).

Revelation. The Christology of the book of Revelation is best summed up in the opening description of Jesus as “him who is, and who was, and who is to come,” which underscores the lordship of Jesus over the past, present, and future. John then describes Jesus with the threefold titles “the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth” (1:4–5). In many ways, the story and Christology of Revelation are paradoxical. Jesus is both the victim of Roman violence and the victor over human evil. Jesus is the suffering “Lamb of God” and the powerful “Lion of the tribe of Judah.” In Rev. 4–5 we are given a picture of the worship in heaven and the enthronement of Jesus, and yet the realities on earth are a dearth of heavenly goodness, with persecution and apostasy rampant (Rev. 1–3). This tension continues until the final revelation of Jesus, when the heavenly Lord returns to bring the goodness and power of heaven to transform the perils of the earth and bring his people into the new Jerusalem.

Summary

The primary fixtures of a biblical Christology are (1) Jesus Christ is the promised deliverer intimated in Israel’s Scriptures, whose identity and mission are anticipated and illuminated by the law and the prophets; (2) the man Jesus of Nazareth is identified with the risen and exalted Lord Jesus Christ; and (3) Jesus participates in the very identity and being of God. See also Jesus Christ.

The Bible is full of teeming creatures and swarming things.These creatures, insects, often play significant roles in the storiesand the events described in them. From the first chapter of the Bibleto the very last book, these flying, creeping, hopping, and crawlingthings are prominent.

Termsfor Insects

Insectsare described in the Bible with both general and specific terms. Inthe OT, there are three general terms for insects and twenty termsused to refer to specific types of insects. In the NT, two differenttypes of insects are referenced: gnats and locusts.

Thetwo most common general terms for insects are variously translated.Terms and phrases used to describe them include “livingcreatures” (Gen. 1:20), “creatures that move along theground” (Gen. 1:24–26; 6:7, 20; 7:8, 14, 23; 8:17, 19;Lev. 5:2; Ezek. 38:20; Hos. 2:18), that which “moves”(Gen. 9:3), “swarming things” (Lev. 11:10), “flyinginsects” (Lev. 11:20–21, 23; Deut. 14:19), “creatures”(Lev. 11:43), “crawling things” (Lev. 22:5; Ezek. 8:10),“reptiles” (1Kings 4:33), “teeming creatures”(Ps. 104:25), “small creatures” (Ps. 148:10), and “seacreatures” (Hab. 1:14). The other general term for insects isused with reference to swarms of insects, typically flies (Exod.8:21–22, 24, 29; Pss. 78:45; 105:31). Specific insects named inScripture are listed below.

Ants.Ants are used in Proverbs as an example of and encouragement towardwisdom. In 6:6 ants serve as an example for sluggards to reform theirslothful ways. Also, in 30:25 ants serve as an example of creaturesthat, despite their diminutive size, are wise enough to make advancepreparations for the long winter.

Bees.Beesare used both literally and figuratively in Scripture. Judges 14:8refers to honeybees, the product of which becomes the object ofSamson’s riddle. The other three uses of bees in the OT arefigurative of swarms of enemies against God’s people (Deut.1:44; Ps. 118:12; Isa. 7:18).

Fleas.Fleasare referenced in the OT only by David to indicate his insignificancein comparison with King Saul (1Sam. 24:14; 26:20). The irony ofthe comparison becomes clear with David’s later ascendancy.

Flies.The plague of flies follows that of gnats on Egypt (Exod. 8:20–31).Although the gnats are never said to have left Egypt, the flies areremoved upon Moses’ prayer. In Eccles. 10:1 the stench of deadflies is compared to the impact that folly can have on the wise. InIsa. 7:18 flies represent Egypt being summoned by God as his avengingagents on Judah’s sin. In addition, one of the gods in Ekronwas named “Baal-Zebub,” which means “lord of theflies” (2Kings 1:2–3, 6, 16). The reference toSatan in the NT using a similar name is likely an adaptation of theOT god of Ekron (Matt. 10:25; 12:24, 27; Mark 3:22; Luke 11:15,18–19).

Gnats.Gnats are distinguished from flies in the OT, though the distinctionis not always apparent. Gnats are employed by God in the third plagueon Egypt (Exod. 8:16–19), while flies form the means ofpunishment in the fourth plague. The two are listed together in Ps.105:31 and appear parallel, though the former may be a reference to aswarm. Gnats were also used by Jesus to illustrate the hypocrisy ofthe Pharisees and the scribes (Matt. 23:24).

Hornets.TheBible uses hornets in Scripture as an agent of God’sdestruction. The term occurs three times in the OT. In eachoccurrence these stinging insects refer to God’s expulsion ofthe Canaanites from the land that God promised to his people. Thefirst two times, Exod. 23:28 and Deut. 7:20, hornets are used inreference to a promise of what God will do; the third time, Josh.24:12, they illustrate what God did.

Locusts.Of particular interest is the use of locusts in the Bible. The termor a similar nomenclature occurs close to fifty times in the NIV.Locusts demonstrate a number of characteristics in Scripture. First,they are under God’s control (Exod. 10:13–19). As such,they have no king (Prov. 30:27). They serve God’s purposes.Second, locusts often occur in very large numbers or swarms (Judg.6:5; Jer. 46:23; Nah. 3:15). At times, their numbers can be so largeas to cause darkness in the land (Exod. 10:15). Third, in largenumbers these insects have been known to ravage homes, devour theland, devastate fields, and debark trees (Exod. 10:12–15; Deut.28:38; 1Kings 8:37; 2Chron. 7:13; Pss. 78:46; 105:34;Isa. 33:4; Joel 1:4–7). Due to their fierceness, they werecompared to horses (Rev. 9:7). Fourth, locusts hide at night (Nah.3:17). Finally, certain types of locusts were used as food.

Moths.Mothsare referred to seven times in the OT and four times in the NT. Jobuses moths to illustrate the fragility of the unrighteous before God(4:19) and the impermanence of their labors (27:18). The otherreferences to moths in Scripture present them as the consumers of thewealth (garments) and pride of humankind as a means of God’sjudgment (Job 13:28; Ps. 39:11; Isa. 50:9; 51:8; Hos. 5:12; Matt.6:19–20; Luke 12:33; James 5:2).

Functionsof Insects in Scripture

Asagents in God’s judgment.Insects serve a variety of functions in Scripture. Most notably,insects serve as agents of judgment from God. The OT indicates howinsects were used as judgment on both Israel and their enemies.

Moseswarned of God’s judgment for Israel’s violation of thecovenant. He advised Israel that as a consequence of their sin, theywould expend much labor in the field but harvest little, because thelocusts would consume them (Deut. 28:38).

Solomon,in his prayer of dedication at the temple, beseeched God regardingjudgment that he might send in the form of grasshoppers to besiegethe land. He asked that when the people of God repent and pray, Godwould hear and forgive (2Chron. 6:26–30). God similarlyresponded by promising that when he “command[s] locusts todevour the land” as judgment for sin, and his people humblethemselves and pray, he will heal and forgive (2Chron. 7:13–14;cf. 1Kings 8:37).

Thepsalmist reminded Israel of God’s wonderful works in theirpast, one of which was his use of insects as a means of his judgment(Ps. 78:45–46; cf. 105:34).

Joel1:4 and 2:25 describe God’s judgment on Israel for theirunfaithfulness in successive waves of intensity (cf. Deut. 28:38, 42;2Chron. 6:28; Amos 4:9–10; 7:1–3). The devastationled to crop failure, famine, destruction of vines and fig trees, andgreat mourning. The severity of the judgment is described as beingunlike anything anyone in the community had ever experienced (Joel1:2–3).

Locustsare the subject of one of the visions of the prophet Amos. In thevision, God showed him the destructive power of these insects as ameans of judgment. Upon seeing the vision, the prophet interceded forthe people, and God relented (Amos 7:1–3).

Insectswere also used as judgments on Israel’s enemies. In the plagueson Egypt, insects were the agents of the third, fourth, and eighthplagues. The third plague (Exod. 8:16–19) was gnats.Interestingly, this was the first of Moses’ signs that themagicians of Pharaoh could not reproduce. Their response to theEgyptian king was that this must be the “finger of God.”There is no record of the gnats ever leaving Egypt, unlike the otherplagues.

Thefourth plague was flies (Exod. 8:20–32). Here the Biblespecifically indicates a distinction between the land of Goshen,where the Israelites dwelled, and the rest of the land of Egypt. Theflies covered all of Egypt except Goshen. This plague led toPharaoh’s first offer of compromise. Once Moses prayed and theflies left Egypt, Pharaoh hardened his heart.

Theeighth plague was in the form of locusts (Exod. 10:1–20). Inresponse to this plague, Pharaoh’s own officials complained tohim, beseeching him to let Israel leave their country lest it beentirely destroyed. The threat of this plague led to Pharaoh’ssecond offer of compromise. Once the locusts began to devastate theland of Egypt, Pharaoh confessed his sin before God, but as soon asthe locusts were removed, his heart again became hardened. Thus,three of the ten plagues on Egypt were in the form of insects.

Atthe end of a series of “woe” passages, the prophet Isaiahproclaimed God’s judgment against the enemies of his peoplebecause of their oppression. In the end, those who plundered willthemselves be plundered, as if by a “swarm of locusts”(Isa. 33:1–4; cf. Jer. 51:14, 27).

Insectswere also used as judgment on people who dwelled in the land ofIsrael prior to Israel’s occupation. Both before and after theevent took place, the Bible describes how God sent hornets to helpdrive out the occupants of the land of Canaan in preparation forIsrael’s arrival. This is described as part of God’sjudgment on these nations for their sins against him (Exod. 23:28;Deut. 7:20; Josh. 24:12).

Asfood.Insects also are mentioned in Scripture as food. Certain types oflocusts are listed as clean and eligible for consumption. The NTdescribes the diet of John the Baptist, which consisted of locustsand wild honey—a diet entirely dependent on insects (Matt. 3:4;Mark 1:6). The OT also notes Samson enjoying the labor of bees asfood (Judg. 14:8–9).

Usedfiguratively.Most often, insects are used figuratively in Scripture. They are usedin the proverbs of Scripture to illustrate wisdom. The sages wroteabout ants (Prov. 6:6; 30:25), locusts (Prov. 30:27), and even deadflies (Eccles. 10:1) both to extol wisdom and to encourage itsdevelopment in humankind.

Anotherfigurative use of insects is in the riddle about bees and honey posedby Samson to the Philistines (Judg. 14:12–18). As noted above,Samson ate honey (Judg. 14:8–9; cf. 1Sam. 14:25–29,43). Also, Scripture describes the promised land as a place of “milkand honey.”

Insectsalso are used to symbolize pursuing enemies (Deut. 1:44; Ps. 118:12;Isa. 7:18), innumerable forces (Judg. 6:5; 7:12; Ps. 105:34; Jer.46:23; Joel 2:25), insignificance (Num. 13:33; 1Sam. 24:14;26:20; Job 4:19; 27:18; Ps. 109:23; Eccles. 12:5; Isa. 40:22),vulnerability (Job 4:19), God’s incomparable nature (Job39:20), the brevity of life (Ps. 109:23), wisdom and organization(Prov. 30:27), and an invading army (Isa. 7:18; Jer. 51:14, 27), andthey are employed in a taunt against Israel’s enemies (Nah.3:15–17), a lesson on hypocrisy (Matt. 23:24), and an image ofeschatological judgment (Rev. 9:4–11).

ScripturalTruths about Insects

1.Insectsare part of God’s creation.Inview of all the uses of insects in Scripture, several key truthsemerge. First, insects are a part of the totality of God’screation. The very first chapter of the Bible uses one of the generalterms for insects as part of God’s creative activity on thesixth day of creation (Gen. 1:24). After God reviewed the creation onthat day, his assessment of it, including the insects, was that itwas “good” (1:25).

2.Insectsare under God’s control.Asecond scriptural truth related to insects in the Bible is that theyare under God’s control. In Deut. 7:20 God promised to sendhornets ahead of the children of Israel to prepare the promised landfor their arrival. Also, in Joel 2:25, when God promised to repairthe damage to the land caused by the locusts, he described them as“my great army that I sent.” Thus, the picture emergesthat what God has created, he alone reserves the authority tocontrol.

3.Insectsare cared for by God. A final truth regarding insects in Scripture isthat God takes care of them. Just as Jesus explained God’s carefor the birds of the air (Matt. 7:26), the psalmist explained thatall of God’s creation, specifically insects, “look to youto give them their food at the proper time” (Ps. 104:25–27).The conclusion of the psalmist is appropriate for all of God’screation: “When you hide your face, they are terrified; whenyou take away their breath, they die and return to the dust. When yousend your Spirit, they are created, and you renew the face of theground” (104:29–30). Thus, in the end, God creates, Godcontrols, and God cares—a lesson that all of God’screation shares.

Jesus Christ is the centerpiece of the Christian Scriptures. The meaning and interpretation of both Testaments is properly grasped only in light of the person and work of Jesus Christ. That is not to say that the Testaments testify to Jesus Christ in the exact same way; they obviously do not, but both Testaments are part of the inscripturated revelation that, in light of the incarnation, proclaims Jesus Christ to be the fullest manifestation of God given to humankind.

Old Testament

According to the Scriptures. The early Christians were adamant that the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ happened “according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:3–4), which meant that these events lined up with Israel’s sacred traditions. On the road to Emmaus the risen Jesus explained to the two travelers the things concerning himself “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” in relation to the death and glorification of the Messiah (Luke 24:27). In one of the major Johannine discourses, Jesus tells the Pharisees that the Scriptures “testify about me” (John 5:39). Early Christian authors could find certain key texts that demonstrated the conformity of the Christ-event to the pattern of Israel’s Scriptures, such as Pss. 2; 110; 118; Isa. 53. Yet much of the OT can be understood without mention of Jesus Christ in relation to its own historical context, and there is the danger of overly allegorizing OT texts in order to make them say something about Jesus Christ and the church.

The relationship between the Testaments. The way that the NT authors echo, allude to, quote, and interpret the OT is a complex matter, but at least two points need to be made about the relationship between the two Testaments.

First, the OT anticipates and illuminates the coming of Jesus Christ. “Anticipate” does not mean “predict,” but the law and the prophets foreshadow the offices and identity of Jesus Christ. The offices of prophet, priest, and king in the OT prefigure the ministry of Christ, who is the one who reveals God, intercedes on behalf of humankind, and is the Messiah and Lord. The sacrificial cultus, with the necessity of shedding blood for the removal of sin, prefigures the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ. This is why the law is a “shadow” of the one who was to come (Col. 2:17; Heb. 10:1). “Illuminate” means that certain OT texts, though not referring to Jesus in their historical or literary context, explain aspects of his person and work. This is seen most clearly in the way that the psalms are used in the NT. Texts such as Pss. 2:7; 110:1–4 provided biblical categories that explained the nature of Jesus’ sonship, the quality of his priestly ministry, and his installation as God’s vice-regent.

Second, we should differentiate between prophecy and typology. The prophetic promises in Ezek. 37; Amos 9; and Mic. 4 about a future Davidic king whom God will use to save and restore Israel are genuine prophecies that look forward to a future event yet to be fulfilled. These texts set forth the job description of the Messiah as the renewal and restoration of Israel from bondage and exile. It is unsurprising then that in Acts, James the brother of Jesus could cite Amos 9:11–12 as proof that Gentiles should be accepted into the people of God with the coming of the Messiah (Acts 15:15–18).

Typological interpretation, on the other hand, sees OT persons, places, or events as prototypes or patterns of NT persons, places, or events. For example, in Rom. 5:14 Paul says that Adam is a “type” or “pattern” of the one to come. Similarly, Matthew’s use of Isa. 7:14 in Matt. 1:23 is also typological rather than prophetic. In the context of Isaiah, the promise refers to a child born during the reign of King Ahaz as a sign that the Judean kingdom will survive the Assyrian onslaught. Matthew’s citation does not demand an exact correspondence of events as much as it postulates a correlation of patterns or types between Isaiah’s narrative and the Matthean birth story. The coming of God’s Son, the manifestation of God’s presence, and the rescue of Israel through a child born to a young girl bring to Matthew’s mind Isa. 7 as an obvious prophetic precedent, repeated at a new juncture of redemptive history.

A Christology of the Old Testament. The NT authors interpreted the OT in search of answers to questions pertaining to the identity and ministry of Jesus Christ, the nature of the people of God, and the arrival of the new age. They detected patterns in the OT that were repeated or recapitulated in Jesus’ own person. They proclaimed that the prophetic promises made to Israel had been made good in Jesus Christ, and they found allusions to the various events of his life, death, and exaltation. Jesus and Israel’s Scriptures became a mutually interpretive spiral whereby the Christians began to understand the OT in light of Jesus and understood Jesus in light of the OT. In this canonical setting we can legitimately develop a “Christology of the Old Testament.”

New Testament

The Gospels. The canonical Gospels are four ancient biographies that pay attention to the history and significance of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. They represent a testimony to Jesus and embody the collective memory of his person and actions as they were transmitted and interpreted by Christians in the Greco-Roman world of the mid- to late first century.

All four Gospels follow the same basic outline by variably detailing Jesus’ ministry, passion, and exaltation, and all of them place the story of Jesus in the context of the fulfillment of the story of Israel. At the same time, each Gospel in its plot and portrayal of Jesus remains distinctive in its own right. Yet they are not four different Jesuses, but rather four parallel portraits of Jesus, much like four stained-glass windows or four paintings depict the same person in different ways.

The Gospel of Matthew portrays Jesus as the long-awaited Davidic Messiah of Israel, with a focus on his teaching authority as a type of new Moses. The Gospel of Mark describes Jesus as the powerful Son of God and concurrently as the suffering Son of Man, whose cross reveals the reality of his identity and mission. The Gospel of Luke emphasizes Jesus’ role as an anointed prophet with a special concern for the poor and outcasts and his role as dispenser of the Holy Spirit. Without flattening the distinctive christological shape of each of the Synoptic Gospels, we could say that they focus on Jesus as the proclaimer of the kingdom of God and as king of the very same kingdom.

The Gospel of John has its own set of characteristic emphases in which Jesus’ consciousness of his divine nature and purpose is heightened. Programmatic for the entirety of John’s Gospel is the prologue in 1:1–18 about the “Word [who] became flesh,” which gives a clear theology of incarnation and revelation associated with Jesus’ coming. There is also much material unique to John’s Gospel, such as the “I am” statements that further exposit the nature of Jesus’ person and the climactic confession by Thomas that Jesus is “my Lord and my God” (20:28).

The Gospels indicate that mere knowledge that Jesus died for the purpose of salvation is an insufficient understanding of him. What is also needed, and what they provide, is an understanding of his teachings and his mission in light of Israel’s Scriptures and in view of the sociopolitical situation of Palestine. Jesus came to redeem and renew Israel so that a transformed Israel would transform the world.

Acts. The book of Acts contains the story of the emergence of the early church from Jerusalem to Rome. Even though Acts is a repository of apostolic preaching and plots the beginnings of the Gentile mission, it is the sequel to Luke’s Gospel and is very much the story of Jesus in perfect tense (i.e., a past event with ongoing significance). The most succinct summary of the Christology of Acts is in Peter’s speech in Jerusalem, where he states that “this Jesus” whom they crucified has been made both “Lord and Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” by God (2:36). In the succeeding narratives emphasis is given to “Jesus is the Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” (e.g., 9:22; 17:3; 18:5), which is a message pertinent to Jews and Gentiles (20:21).

Paul’s Letters. The Pauline Epistles, although they are situational, pastoral, and not given primarily to christological exposition, still exhibit beliefs about Jesus held by Paul and his Christian contemporaries. The high points of Paul’s Christology can be detected in his use of traditional material such as Col. 1:15–20, which exposits the sufficiency and the supremacy of Christ. Philippians 2:5–11 narrates the story of the incarnation as an example of self-giving love. In 1 Cor. 8:6 Paul offers a Christianized version of the Shema of Deut. 6:4. There is a petition to Jesus as “Come, Lord!” in 1 Cor. 16:22. Paul can also refer to Jesus as God in Rom. 9:5 (although the grammar is ambiguous). For Paul, Jesus is both the “heavenly man” (1 Cor. 15:47–49) and the Son to come from heaven (1 Thess. 1:10). This interest in the divine Son of God does not mean that Paul was ignorant of or disinterested in the life and teachings of Jesus. Elsewhere he implies knowledge of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Rom. 14:14; 1 Cor. 7:10–11) and refers to the incarnation (e.g., 2 Cor. 8:9; Col. 2:9).

A number of titles are used to describe Jesus in Paul’s letters, including “Lord” and “Christ/Messiah” (and variations such as “Lord Jesus Christ” and “Christ Jesus”), “Savior,” and “Seed of David” (Rom. 1:3). But probably the most apt expression of Jesus’ nature according to Paul is “Son of God” (e.g., Rom. 1:4; 2 Cor. 1:19; Gal. 2:20). This language of sonship suggests that Jesus is the means of God’s salvation and glory and is the special agent through whom the Father acts. Referring to Jesus as “Son” also underscores Jesus’ unique relationship to God the Father and his unique role in executing the ordained plan of salvation for the elect.

We might also add that Paul provides the building blocks of what would later become a full-blown trinitarian theology, such as in the benediction of 2 Cor. 13:14 and in general exhortations about the gospel (1 Cor. 2:1–5). It must be emphasized that Paul’s Christology cannot be separated from his eschatology, soteriology, and ecclesiology. The sending of God’s Son (see Rom. 8:3; Gal. 4:4–5) into the world marks the coming of redemption and salvation through the cross and resurrection of the Son, and these are appropriated by faith. Those who believe become members of the restored Israel, the renewed Adamic race, and constituent members of the body of Christ. To that we might add the experiential element of Paul’s Christology as Jesus is known in the experience of salvation, prayer, and worship (e.g., Gal. 2:19–20).

The General Letters. The General Letters (also called the Catholic Epistles) provide a further array of images and explorations into the person and work of Jesus Christ and how they relate to the community of faith. The message of Hebrews is essentially “Jesus is better!” He is better than the angels and better than Moses; he is a better high priest; he offers a better sacrifice, establishes a better law, and instigates a better covenant. This letter is a sermonic exhortation against falling away from the faith (e.g., 2:1–4), and toward that end the author sets before his readers the magnificence of Jesus Christ, who is “the same yesterday and today and forever” (13:8).

James has little christological content and focuses instead on exhortations that bear remarkable resemblance to the teachings of Jesus from the Gospels. Even so, the letter makes passing reference to the “glorious Lord Jesus Christ” (2:1; cf. 1:1).

Central to 1 Peter is the glory and salvation that will be manifested at the revelation of Jesus Christ at his second coming (1:5, 7, 9, 13; 4:13; 5:1). Much attention is given to Jesus’ sacrificial death as a lamb (1:19), the example of his suffering (2:21–23; 4:1–2, 13), and the substitutionary nature of his death (2:24; 3:18). He is the Shepherd and Overseer of the souls of Christians (2:25). Peter writes this to encourage congregations in Asia Minor living under adverse conditions, and he sets before them the pattern of Jesus as a model for their own journey.

In 2 Peter we find a mix of Jewish eschatological concepts and Hellenistic religious language, with the author seeking to defend the apostolic gospel in a pagan culture. Jesus is the source of knowledge (1:2, 8; 2:20) and righteousness (1:1). Much emphasis is given to the coming kingdom of Jesus Christ (1:11, 16; 3:10). Jesus is the sustainer and renewer of the church and also the coming judge of the entire world.

Similar themes can be found in Jude, which is addressed to a group of believers who have been infiltrated by false teachers promoting licentiousness. Jude declares the infiltrators to be condemned and calls on the believers to hold fast to the faith. Jesus is the “Sovereign and Lord” (v. 4), Jesus saved people out of Egypt during the exodus (v. 5 [but see marginal notes on the variant reading “Lord”]), the second coming of Jesus will mark the revelation of his “mercy” (v. 21), and the benediction ascribes “glory, majesty, power and authority” to God through Jesus (v. 25). Most characteristic of all is the emphasis upon Jesus/God as the one who keeps the believers in the grip of his saving power (vv. 1, 21, 23).

The Letters of John take up where the Gospel of John left off, focusing on Jesus as the incarnate Word of God. The first of the three Johannine Epistles appears to have been written in a context where a community of Christians was being pressured by Jews to deny that Jesus is the Messiah (2:22) and also by dissident docetists to deny that Jesus had a physical body (4:2; 5:6). The major focus, however, is on Jesus as the Son of God (1:3, 7; 2:23; 3:8, 23; 4:9–10, 15; 5:11) and the incarnation of God’s very own truth and love (3:16; cf. 2 John 3).

Revelation. The Christology of the book of Revelation is best summed up in the opening description of Jesus as “him who is, and who was, and who is to come,” which underscores the lordship of Jesus over the past, present, and future. John then describes Jesus with the threefold titles “the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth” (1:4–5). In many ways, the story and Christology of Revelation are paradoxical. Jesus is both the victim of Roman violence and the victor over human evil. Jesus is the suffering “Lamb of God” and the powerful “Lion of the tribe of Judah.” In Rev. 4–5 we are given a picture of the worship in heaven and the enthronement of Jesus, and yet the realities on earth are a dearth of heavenly goodness, with persecution and apostasy rampant (Rev. 1–3). This tension continues until the final revelation of Jesus, when the heavenly Lord returns to bring the goodness and power of heaven to transform the perils of the earth and bring his people into the new Jerusalem.

Summary

The primary fixtures of a biblical Christology are (1) Jesus Christ is the promised deliverer intimated in Israel’s Scriptures, whose identity and mission are anticipated and illuminated by the law and the prophets; (2) the man Jesus of Nazareth is identified with the risen and exalted Lord Jesus Christ; and (3) Jesus participates in the very identity and being of God. See also Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ is the centerpiece of the Christian Scriptures. The meaning and interpretation of both Testaments is properly grasped only in light of the person and work of Jesus Christ. That is not to say that the Testaments testify to Jesus Christ in the exact same way; they obviously do not, but both Testaments are part of the inscripturated revelation that, in light of the incarnation, proclaims Jesus Christ to be the fullest manifestation of God given to humankind.

Old Testament

According to the Scriptures. The early Christians were adamant that the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ happened “according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:3–4), which meant that these events lined up with Israel’s sacred traditions. On the road to Emmaus the risen Jesus explained to the two travelers the things concerning himself “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” in relation to the death and glorification of the Messiah (Luke 24:27). In one of the major Johannine discourses, Jesus tells the Pharisees that the Scriptures “testify about me” (John 5:39). Early Christian authors could find certain key texts that demonstrated the conformity of the Christ-event to the pattern of Israel’s Scriptures, such as Pss. 2; 110; 118; Isa. 53. Yet much of the OT can be understood without mention of Jesus Christ in relation to its own historical context, and there is the danger of overly allegorizing OT texts in order to make them say something about Jesus Christ and the church.

The relationship between the Testaments. The way that the NT authors echo, allude to, quote, and interpret the OT is a complex matter, but at least two points need to be made about the relationship between the two Testaments.

First, the OT anticipates and illuminates the coming of Jesus Christ. “Anticipate” does not mean “predict,” but the law and the prophets foreshadow the offices and identity of Jesus Christ. The offices of prophet, priest, and king in the OT prefigure the ministry of Christ, who is the one who reveals God, intercedes on behalf of humankind, and is the Messiah and Lord. The sacrificial cultus, with the necessity of shedding blood for the removal of sin, prefigures the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ. This is why the law is a “shadow” of the one who was to come (Col. 2:17; Heb. 10:1). “Illuminate” means that certain OT texts, though not referring to Jesus in their historical or literary context, explain aspects of his person and work. This is seen most clearly in the way that the psalms are used in the NT. Texts such as Pss. 2:7; 110:1–4 provided biblical categories that explained the nature of Jesus’ sonship, the quality of his priestly ministry, and his installation as God’s vice-regent.

Second, we should differentiate between prophecy and typology. The prophetic promises in Ezek. 37; Amos 9; and Mic. 4 about a future Davidic king whom God will use to save and restore Israel are genuine prophecies that look forward to a future event yet to be fulfilled. These texts set forth the job description of the Messiah as the renewal and restoration of Israel from bondage and exile. It is unsurprising then that in Acts, James the brother of Jesus could cite Amos 9:11–12 as proof that Gentiles should be accepted into the people of God with the coming of the Messiah (Acts 15:15–18).

Typological interpretation, on the other hand, sees OT persons, places, or events as prototypes or patterns of NT persons, places, or events. For example, in Rom. 5:14 Paul says that Adam is a “type” or “pattern” of the one to come. Similarly, Matthew’s use of Isa. 7:14 in Matt. 1:23 is also typological rather than prophetic. In the context of Isaiah, the promise refers to a child born during the reign of King Ahaz as a sign that the Judean kingdom will survive the Assyrian onslaught. Matthew’s citation does not demand an exact correspondence of events as much as it postulates a correlation of patterns or types between Isaiah’s narrative and the Matthean birth story. The coming of God’s Son, the manifestation of God’s presence, and the rescue of Israel through a child born to a young girl bring to Matthew’s mind Isa. 7 as an obvious prophetic precedent, repeated at a new juncture of redemptive history.

A Christology of the Old Testament. The NT authors interpreted the OT in search of answers to questions pertaining to the identity and ministry of Jesus Christ, the nature of the people of God, and the arrival of the new age. They detected patterns in the OT that were repeated or recapitulated in Jesus’ own person. They proclaimed that the prophetic promises made to Israel had been made good in Jesus Christ, and they found allusions to the various events of his life, death, and exaltation. Jesus and Israel’s Scriptures became a mutually interpretive spiral whereby the Christians began to understand the OT in light of Jesus and understood Jesus in light of the OT. In this canonical setting we can legitimately develop a “Christology of the Old Testament.”

New Testament

The Gospels. The canonical Gospels are four ancient biographies that pay attention to the history and significance of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. They represent a testimony to Jesus and embody the collective memory of his person and actions as they were transmitted and interpreted by Christians in the Greco-Roman world of the mid- to late first century.

All four Gospels follow the same basic outline by variably detailing Jesus’ ministry, passion, and exaltation, and all of them place the story of Jesus in the context of the fulfillment of the story of Israel. At the same time, each Gospel in its plot and portrayal of Jesus remains distinctive in its own right. Yet they are not four different Jesuses, but rather four parallel portraits of Jesus, much like four stained-glass windows or four paintings depict the same person in different ways.

The Gospel of Matthew portrays Jesus as the long-awaited Davidic Messiah of Israel, with a focus on his teaching authority as a type of new Moses. The Gospel of Mark describes Jesus as the powerful Son of God and concurrently as the suffering Son of Man, whose cross reveals the reality of his identity and mission. The Gospel of Luke emphasizes Jesus’ role as an anointed prophet with a special concern for the poor and outcasts and his role as dispenser of the Holy Spirit. Without flattening the distinctive christological shape of each of the Synoptic Gospels, we could say that they focus on Jesus as the proclaimer of the kingdom of God and as king of the very same kingdom.

The Gospel of John has its own set of characteristic emphases in which Jesus’ consciousness of his divine nature and purpose is heightened. Programmatic for the entirety of John’s Gospel is the prologue in 1:1–18 about the “Word [who] became flesh,” which gives a clear theology of incarnation and revelation associated with Jesus’ coming. There is also much material unique to John’s Gospel, such as the “I am” statements that further exposit the nature of Jesus’ person and the climactic confession by Thomas that Jesus is “my Lord and my God” (20:28).

The Gospels indicate that mere knowledge that Jesus died for the purpose of salvation is an insufficient understanding of him. What is also needed, and what they provide, is an understanding of his teachings and his mission in light of Israel’s Scriptures and in view of the sociopolitical situation of Palestine. Jesus came to redeem and renew Israel so that a transformed Israel would transform the world.

Acts. The book of Acts contains the story of the emergence of the early church from Jerusalem to Rome. Even though Acts is a repository of apostolic preaching and plots the beginnings of the Gentile mission, it is the sequel to Luke’s Gospel and is very much the story of Jesus in perfect tense (i.e., a past event with ongoing significance). The most succinct summary of the Christology of Acts is in Peter’s speech in Jerusalem, where he states that “this Jesus” whom they crucified has been made both “Lord and Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” by God (2:36). In the succeeding narratives emphasis is given to “Jesus is the Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” (e.g., 9:22; 17:3; 18:5), which is a message pertinent to Jews and Gentiles (20:21).

Paul’s Letters. The Pauline Epistles, although they are situational, pastoral, and not given primarily to christological exposition, still exhibit beliefs about Jesus held by Paul and his Christian contemporaries. The high points of Paul’s Christology can be detected in his use of traditional material such as Col. 1:15–20, which exposits the sufficiency and the supremacy of Christ. Philippians 2:5–11 narrates the story of the incarnation as an example of self-giving love. In 1 Cor. 8:6 Paul offers a Christianized version of the Shema of Deut. 6:4. There is a petition to Jesus as “Come, Lord!” in 1 Cor. 16:22. Paul can also refer to Jesus as God in Rom. 9:5 (although the grammar is ambiguous). For Paul, Jesus is both the “heavenly man” (1 Cor. 15:47–49) and the Son to come from heaven (1 Thess. 1:10). This interest in the divine Son of God does not mean that Paul was ignorant of or disinterested in the life and teachings of Jesus. Elsewhere he implies knowledge of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Rom. 14:14; 1 Cor. 7:10–11) and refers to the incarnation (e.g., 2 Cor. 8:9; Col. 2:9).

A number of titles are used to describe Jesus in Paul’s letters, including “Lord” and “Christ/Messiah” (and variations such as “Lord Jesus Christ” and “Christ Jesus”), “Savior,” and “Seed of David” (Rom. 1:3). But probably the most apt expression of Jesus’ nature according to Paul is “Son of God” (e.g., Rom. 1:4; 2 Cor. 1:19; Gal. 2:20). This language of sonship suggests that Jesus is the means of God’s salvation and glory and is the special agent through whom the Father acts. Referring to Jesus as “Son” also underscores Jesus’ unique relationship to God the Father and his unique role in executing the ordained plan of salvation for the elect.

We might also add that Paul provides the building blocks of what would later become a full-blown trinitarian theology, such as in the benediction of 2 Cor. 13:14 and in general exhortations about the gospel (1 Cor. 2:1–5). It must be emphasized that Paul’s Christology cannot be separated from his eschatology, soteriology, and ecclesiology. The sending of God’s Son (see Rom. 8:3; Gal. 4:4–5) into the world marks the coming of redemption and salvation through the cross and resurrection of the Son, and these are appropriated by faith. Those who believe become members of the restored Israel, the renewed Adamic race, and constituent members of the body of Christ. To that we might add the experiential element of Paul’s Christology as Jesus is known in the experience of salvation, prayer, and worship (e.g., Gal. 2:19–20).

The General Letters. The General Letters (also called the Catholic Epistles) provide a further array of images and explorations into the person and work of Jesus Christ and how they relate to the community of faith. The message of Hebrews is essentially “Jesus is better!” He is better than the angels and better than Moses; he is a better high priest; he offers a better sacrifice, establishes a better law, and instigates a better covenant. This letter is a sermonic exhortation against falling away from the faith (e.g., 2:1–4), and toward that end the author sets before his readers the magnificence of Jesus Christ, who is “the same yesterday and today and forever” (13:8).

James has little christological content and focuses instead on exhortations that bear remarkable resemblance to the teachings of Jesus from the Gospels. Even so, the letter makes passing reference to the “glorious Lord Jesus Christ” (2:1; cf. 1:1).

Central to 1 Peter is the glory and salvation that will be manifested at the revelation of Jesus Christ at his second coming (1:5, 7, 9, 13; 4:13; 5:1). Much attention is given to Jesus’ sacrificial death as a lamb (1:19), the example of his suffering (2:21–23; 4:1–2, 13), and the substitutionary nature of his death (2:24; 3:18). He is the Shepherd and Overseer of the souls of Christians (2:25). Peter writes this to encourage congregations in Asia Minor living under adverse conditions, and he sets before them the pattern of Jesus as a model for their own journey.

In 2 Peter we find a mix of Jewish eschatological concepts and Hellenistic religious language, with the author seeking to defend the apostolic gospel in a pagan culture. Jesus is the source of knowledge (1:2, 8; 2:20) and righteousness (1:1). Much emphasis is given to the coming kingdom of Jesus Christ (1:11, 16; 3:10). Jesus is the sustainer and renewer of the church and also the coming judge of the entire world.

Similar themes can be found in Jude, which is addressed to a group of believers who have been infiltrated by false teachers promoting licentiousness. Jude declares the infiltrators to be condemned and calls on the believers to hold fast to the faith. Jesus is the “Sovereign and Lord” (v. 4), Jesus saved people out of Egypt during the exodus (v. 5 [but see marginal notes on the variant reading “Lord”]), the second coming of Jesus will mark the revelation of his “mercy” (v. 21), and the benediction ascribes “glory, majesty, power and authority” to God through Jesus (v. 25). Most characteristic of all is the emphasis upon Jesus/God as the one who keeps the believers in the grip of his saving power (vv. 1, 21, 23).

The Letters of John take up where the Gospel of John left off, focusing on Jesus as the incarnate Word of God. The first of the three Johannine Epistles appears to have been written in a context where a community of Christians was being pressured by Jews to deny that Jesus is the Messiah (2:22) and also by dissident docetists to deny that Jesus had a physical body (4:2; 5:6). The major focus, however, is on Jesus as the Son of God (1:3, 7; 2:23; 3:8, 23; 4:9–10, 15; 5:11) and the incarnation of God’s very own truth and love (3:16; cf. 2 John 3).

Revelation. The Christology of the book of Revelation is best summed up in the opening description of Jesus as “him who is, and who was, and who is to come,” which underscores the lordship of Jesus over the past, present, and future. John then describes Jesus with the threefold titles “the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth” (1:4–5). In many ways, the story and Christology of Revelation are paradoxical. Jesus is both the victim of Roman violence and the victor over human evil. Jesus is the suffering “Lamb of God” and the powerful “Lion of the tribe of Judah.” In Rev. 4–5 we are given a picture of the worship in heaven and the enthronement of Jesus, and yet the realities on earth are a dearth of heavenly goodness, with persecution and apostasy rampant (Rev. 1–3). This tension continues until the final revelation of Jesus, when the heavenly Lord returns to bring the goodness and power of heaven to transform the perils of the earth and bring his people into the new Jerusalem.

Summary

The primary fixtures of a biblical Christology are (1) Jesus Christ is the promised deliverer intimated in Israel’s Scriptures, whose identity and mission are anticipated and illuminated by the law and the prophets; (2) the man Jesus of Nazareth is identified with the risen and exalted Lord Jesus Christ; and (3) Jesus participates in the very identity and being of God. See also Jesus Christ.

The economic life of the biblical world rested on theprecepts of improvement of one’s standing, stable interactionbetween individuals and nations, and the fact that all of lifebelonged first to God. The ability to create a stable economy wasdriven by international standing, military strength, andenvironmental conditions. As a state, Israel was far more successfulin creating and sustaining wealth during periods with little upheavalin the monarchy and when there was little threat from outside forces.The reign of Solomon in the united monarchy and the coterminousreigns of Uzziah in Judah and JeroboamII in Israel, therefore,represent the periods with the most favorable economic conditions,and indeed these two periods are generally considered to be goldenages of economic and cultural strength.

TheEconomy of Israel

Beforethe monarchy.The economic life of the Bible begins with the creation account andthe reflections communicated there about humankind’sstewardship of that which belongs to God. Humankind is placed in theworld as the caregiver and protector of the rest of creation. Thispurpose will have ramifications for the remainder of the biblicalstory. Throughout the Bible, God expresses a deep concern foreconomic justice and economic well-being among his people. The lawgiven by God sets out an economic and political framework that buildson this idea of justice and human stewardship of God’screation, including some rather striking passages meant to assure ajust distribution and maintenance of resources and equality (Lev.25:1–55; Deut. 10:17–18; 15:1–11). The emphasis oneconomic and social justice is closely related to spiritualfaithfulness throughout the prophetic texts. Isaiah speaks ofeconomic prosperity and peace as an integral part of God’sdesire for Israel. Amos, Jeremiah, and Micah denounce the economicinjustices within Israel. This attitude and emphasis continue intothe NT, where Jesus talks as much about economics in his teachings ashe does about the rest of the Christian life. Jesus’ primaryemphases in discussing economic matters suggest a need to recognizeboth the priority of the heavenly economy over the earthly and thefact that one’s economic activities must communicate a sense ofjustice and mercy as well.

Thelack of a centralized government and industry in the early years ofIsrael’s existence meant that much of the economy revolvedaround private ownership and agrarian realities. In conquering theland of Canaan, the Israelites were transformed from seminomads intoagriculturists, but they were still largely on their own in economicmatters. They dwelled in villages and towns and lived off of whatthey raised in their fields and the milk and meat of their livestock.There was limited trade during this period, primarily existing onlythrough opportunities provided by traveling merchants from Phoeniciaand elsewhere. The modifications that took place in the Canaanitematerial culture when they were assumed by Israel were slight innature in this early period. The period of the judges reveals abrutal culture, and the people would have remained somewhatconstrained economically in the days prior to the monarchy. As statedabove, the laws certainly are important in understanding how Israelviewed itself before God; however, it must be admitted that therewere relatively few requisites concerning business contained in itsprecepts (Lev. 19:35–36; 25:36–37, 44–45; Deut.15:2; 23:20). This may in fact reflect the more individualized natureof the early economic systems of Israel.

Themonarchy.With the beginning of the monarchy, and especially the reign ofSolomon, signs of extensive external trade begin to manifestthemselves within Israel. The primary exports seem still to have beenagricultural in nature, as Solomon is said to have sent grains andoil to Tyre in exchange for their timber and workers (1Kings5). Horses were a significant sign of wealth in the ancient world,and during his reign, Solomon apparently was able to import quite afew from Egypt (1Kings 10:28–29). Solomon is even said tohave sent ships to the far reaches of the known world to acquiregold, silver, iron, apes, and peaco*cks (1Kings 10:22). Solomonalso saw the development of an extensive system of internal economicprosperity through division of the land into districts and throughestablishing firm control of the major arteries of travel withinIsrael (1Kings 4). Unfortunately, Solomon’s successorslacked his economic acumen. Due to inner turmoil and outside forces,Israel was unable to regain the standing that it held under Solomon,except for a brief period during the reign of Uzziah. Interestingly,the prophets often equated merchants with the Canaanites (Hos. 12:7;Zeph. 1:11; Zech. 14:21). The kings of the northern kingdom of Israelseem to have fared slightly better in economic matters than did thekings of Judah. Ahab obtained a special standing in the markets ofDamascus (1Kings 20:34), and JeroboamII raised Israel topowerful status in the world’s economic perspectives.

Afterthe exile.Following the return from the exile, the Jewish community wasseverely impoverished and had very little business activity except inits larger cities (Neh. 3:31–32). Hellenism brought with it arenewal of trade capabilities, and Josephus reports that by themid-second century BC, Athenian merchants came regularly to Judea.The Maccabees captured Joppa, and Herod built Caesarea, whichultimately improved the economic standing of the Jews because theythen controlled port locations.

Lifein the NT seems not to have varied much from that in the OT, the mostimportant exception being the stability and ease of transportresulting from Roman control of the region. This stability was oftenoffset, however, by the imposition of high taxes. The NT relates thevast disparity of economic lifestyle between the enormously wealthyand the severely impoverished. There were also political andreligious ramifications to be found in the struggle to find a properresponse to taxation. This dilemma is reflected in the two opposingviewpoints among the twelve apostles, including the views of a taxcollector and of a Zealot. The early church seems to have dealt witheconomic matters with various degrees of success (Rev. 2:9; 3:17).

Coinage

Themonetary system of Israel seems to have always been based primarilyon gold and silver. In fact, the Hebrew word most often translated“money,” kesep, is the word for “silver.” Itis unclear exactly when coinage started in Israel. Opinions vary fromthe period just before the exile to several years after the exile. Upuntil that point, worth was assessed not by the value of the coin butrather by the weight of the metal. People carried their own weightsin a bag that were used to determine the value of an exchange (Deut.25:13; 2Sam. 18:12); thus, the focus for ensuring fair tradewas almost always on guarding against the use of false weights andscales (Lev. 19:36). The precursors to coinage seem to have beenpieces of silver and gold that were considered to be a certainweight, though the emphasis was still on the weight of the product(Josh. 7:21; 1Sam. 9:8). The basic standard of weight was theshekel.

ThePersians developed a more fixed system of coinage. Darius firstintroduced a reformed currency system around 520–480 BC. Thebasic standard was the daric, which was comparable to a Babylonianshekel in weight. Because of the inherent value of coins, the purityof the metals used became more important. This resulted in a slightshift in monetary imagery related to purity versus fair weight. Inthe Roman era, the denarius was the basic unit of money.

Villagesand Cities

TheOT distinguished in size between villages and cities. The smallestmeasure of communal living seems to have been farming settlements orhomesteads (Exod. 8:9; Neh. 11:25; Ps. 10:8). Larger settlements werereferred to as villages (Gen. 25:16; 1Sam. 6:18) or cities(Gen. 4:17; 19:25, 29). Cities were usually built along a lake orriver (Tiberius and Beth Shan) or where natural springs weresufficient to sustain a large population (Jerusalem and Jericho).Streets in the cities seemed to have been named after the place towhich they led or by the industry represented on them (Neh. 11:35;Isa. 7:3; Jer. 37:21). Open squares were found mainly at the gates ofthe city, where most of the commerce took place and which tended tobe the centers of city life. The gate and the adjoining open areaconstituted the marketplace, hence, names such as “Sheep Gate”(Neh. 3:1, 3, 32; 12:39; Zeph. 1:10). The wells sometimes weresituated here (2Sam. 23:15–16). News from the outside wasannounced first at the gate (1Sam. 4:18). Finally, court andcouncil sessions were held at the gate (Deut. 13:17; Ruth 4:11;2Kings 7:1; Job 29:7; cf. Gen. 19:7).

EconomicIssues Addressed in the Bible

Slavery.Slavery was considered legitimate in various circ*mstances, but sinceindividual possession of a slave was somewhat rare, it never became acenterpiece of the Israelite economic structures. It was a capitaloffense to kidnap people for the purpose of enslaving them (Exod.20:10–16; Deut. 24:7). When held by individual families, slaveswere to be treated as part of an extended family, and they werepermitted to partake in important festivals and to observe theSabbath (Exod. 20:10; Deut. 16:14). Ideally, slaves in debt bondageand Israelite slaves owned by foreign residents were automaticallyfreed at the Jubilee. If they had not already purchased theirfreedom, male Israelite slaves were automatically freed once they hadworked for six years (Exod. 21:2; Lev. 25:39–55); however, theprophet Jeremiah’s denunciation of the permanent enslavement ofHebrew men and women by their masters (Jer. 34:8–22) suggeststhat these practices were not faithfully executed within Israel’shistory.

Death,marriage, and redemption.The economic impact of death is addressed to some degree in thebiblical texts. Daughters who received an inheritance of land becauseof the lack of a male heir were required to marry within the tribe inorder to preserve the tribal allotments outlined by God in his giftof land to the people (Num. 27:7–8; 36:6–9). If thedeceased had no children of his own, his closest male relative wouldreceive the land (Num. 27:9–11). The levirate and go’el(“redeemer”) systems seem to have been enacted in orderto protect both widows and the property rights of the family.Marriage with a brother’s widow was forbidden as a general rule(Lev. 20:21), but when no male heir was present, the act wasconsidered obligatory (Deut. 25:5–10). Although there is somedisagreement, most would consider the case of Ruth to be not one oflevirate marriage, but instead an expression of the go’el (Lev.25:25; Jer. 32:6–9). The two systems apparently are related,with the latter being an extension of the former. But the importantdistinction is that the go’el’s duties includedredemption in much broader terms, including redemption from slavery(Lev. 25:47–55) and vengeance in the case of wrongful death(Deut. 19:6). One clear case of levirate marriage is found in theattempts of Tamar to bear a child with the brother of Er, herdeceased husband, and then eventually with Er’s father(Gen.38).

Tithing.Tithing one’s possessions was a very ancient custom thatactually predates the law codes and is found in the time of thepatriarchs. Abraham gave Melchizedek “a tenth of everything”(Gen. 14:20), and Jacob made a vow that if he returned to hisfather’s house in safety, he would acknowledge Yahweh as hisLord and would give him a tenth of all that he possessed (Gen.28:20–22). The tithe that was applied to the seed of the landor to the fruit of the tree was redeemable. The tithe of cattle, onthe other hand, was not redeemable. Determining which animal was thetithe involved counting each animal singly, and every tenth one thatpassed under the rod became the tithe animal (Lev. 27:30–33).There is apparently some disparity in the biblical texts relating toa tithe. Nehemiah 10:37–38 seems to clearly indicate that therewas only one prescribed tithe taken in the OT era. However, there arethree texts regulating the tithe in the OT (Lev. 27:30–33; Num.18:21–32; Deut. 14:22–29). It would seem, then, that eachlaw gives only a partial picture of the regulations involving thetithe, as each assumes both the presence and the regulations of theothers. The practice of the tithe in Israel involved a yearly gift tothe temple, with the gifts of every third year kept in the communityfor the care of the poor and oppressed. These laws, then, were areminder of Israel’s holy status before God and that itsenjoyment of the rewards of that status was a consequence of theirelection. Consequently, the tithe demanded recognition of God’sownership of all the land. Furthermore, by being allowed to consumepart of the tithe (Deut. 14:23), participants were reminded of thepriority of God in their economy and lives.

The names of God given in the Bible are an important means ofrevelation about his character and works. The names come from threesources: God himself, those who encounter him in the biblical record,and the biblical writers. This article is concerned mainly with thenames that occur in the OT, though the NT will be referenced whenhelpful.

Inthe Bible the meaning of names is often significant and points to thecharacter of the person so named. As might be expected, this isespecially true for God. The names that he gives to himself alwaysare a form of revelation; the names that humans give to God often area form of testimony.

Yahweh:The Lord

Pronunciation.Unquestionably, for OT revelation the most important name is “(the)Lord.” In English Bibles this represents the name declared byGod to Moses at the burning bush (“I am who I am” [Exod.3:13–15]) and the related term used elsewhere in the OT; inHebrew this term consists of the four consonants YHWH and istherefore known as the Tetragrammaton (“four letters”).Hebrew does not count vowels as part of its alphabet; in biblicaltimes one simply wrote the consonants of a word and the readersupplied the correct vowels by knowing the vocabulary, grammar, andcontext. However, to avoid violating the commandment in the Decaloguethat prohibits the misuse of God’s name (Exod. 20:7; Deut.5:11), the Jews stopped pronouncing it. Consequently, no one todayknows its correct original pronunciation, but the best evidenceavailable suggests “Yahweh,” which has become theconventional pronunciation (consider the Hebrew word “hallelujah,”which actually is “hallelu-Yah,” hence “praise theLord”). In ancient Jewish tradition, “Adonai” (“myLord”) was substituted for “Yahweh.” In fact, whenHebrew eventually developed a vowel notation system, instead of thevowels for “Yahweh,” the vowels for “Adonai”were indicated whenever YHWH appeared in the biblical text, as areminder. Combining the consonants YHWH with the vowels of “Adonai”yields something like “Yehowah,” which is the origin ofthe familiar (but mistaken and nonexistent) “Jehovah.”English Bibles typically use “Lord” (small capitalletters) for “Yahweh,” and “Lord” (regularletters) for “Adonai,” which distinguishes thetwo.

Meaning.More vital than the matter of the pronunciation of YHWH is thequestion of its meaning. There seem to be two main opinions. One seesYHWH as denoting eternal self-existence, partly because it issuggested by the grammar of Exod. 3:14 (the words “I am”use a form of the Hebrew verb that suggests being without beginningor end) and partly because that is the meaning Jesus apparentlyascribes to it in John 8:58. The other opinion, suggested by usage,is that YHWH indicates dynamic, active, divine presence: God’sbeing present in a special way to act on someone’s behalf(e.g., Gen. 26:28; 39:2–3; Josh. 6:27; 1Sam. 18:12–14).This idea also appears in the episode of the burning bush (Exod.3:12): when Moses protests his inadequacy to confront Pharaoh, Godassures him of his presence, a reality noted with other prophets(1Sam. 3:19; Jer. 1:8).

Perhapsthe best points of reference for understanding the meaning of YHWHare God’s own proclamations. In addition to Exod. 3:13–15,at least two other passages in Exodus give God’s commentary (asit were) about the meaning of his name. An important one is Exod.34:5–7. A key passage in the theology proper of ancient Israel,its themes echo in later OT Scripture (Num. 14:18–19; Ps.103:7–12; Jon. 4:2). What is noteworthy about the texts citedis that all of them say something remarkable about the grace of God.This fits, for the revelation of Exod. 34:5–7 is given in thecontext of covenant renewal after the incident of the golden calf.Moses invokes God’s name in the Numbers text to avoidcatastrophic judgment when the Israelites refuse to enter thepromised land. The psalm text picks up this theme and connects itwith God’s revelation of his ways to the chosen people. Jonah,remarkably, affirms that the same grace extends even toward a wickedGentile city such as Nineveh.

Anothersuch passage is Exod. 6:2–8.Here God reaffirms hisredemptive purpose for captive Israel, despite the fact that Moses’first encounter with Pharaoh has not gone well. God assures theprophet that he has remembered his covenant with the patriarchs, whomhe says did not know him as “Yahweh,” which probablymeans that the patriarchs did not experience him in the way orcharacter that their descendants would in the exodus event (though itis possible to translate the Hebrew here as a rhetorical questionwith an affirmative idea: “And indeed, by my name Yahweh did Inot make myself known to them?”). God then proceeds to outlinethe redemptive experience in its fullness: deliverance from bondage,reception into a covenant relationship, and possession of the landpromised to their ancestors (vv. 6–8). The statement isbracketed with this declaration: “I am the Lord” (vv. 2,8). One stated purpose of this redemptive work is that Israel mightcome to understand this (v.7). This is important to notebecause a central theme of Exodus as a book is the identity of theGod of Israel. This concern prompts Moses to ask for God’s nameat the burning bush (3:13), and this contempt for the God of theenslaved Hebrews causes Pharaoh to be dismissive at his first meetingwith Moses and Aaron (5:2). Moses asks with the concern of a seekerand receives one of the most profound declarations of God’sidentity in the Bible. Pharaoh asks with the contempt of a scornerand receives one of the most powerful displays of God’sidentity in the Bible (the plagues). The contrast is both strikingand instructive. The meaning of God’s name, then, is revealedin works as well as words, and his purpose is that not just hispeople but all peoples may come to understand who he is. Yet anothermajestic statement in the book of Exodus (9:13–16) makes thisabundantly clear.

Basedon this pattern of usage, the name “Yahweh” seems tosignify especially the active presence of God to bless, deliver, orotherwise aid his people. Where this presence is absent, there is nosuccess, victory, protection, or peace (Num. 14:39–45; Josh.7:10–12; Judg. 16:20; 1Sam. 16:13–14). The messagethat God not only is but also is present to save and deliver may wellbe the most important truth communicated in the OT, and it is onlynatural to see its ultimate embodiment in the person and work ofChrist (Isa. 7:14; cf. Matt. 1:21–23).

Nameused in combination.The name “Yahweh” also is used in combination with otherterms. After God grants a military victory to Israel over theAmalekites, Moses names a commemorative altar “Yahweh Nissi,”meaning “the Lord is my Banner” (Exod. 17:15). InEzekiel’s temple vision Jerusalem is called “YahwehShammah,” meaning “the Lord is there” (Ezek.48:35). A familiar expression is “the Lord of hosts,”which is generally comparable to the expression “commander inchief” used in American culture (cf. 1Kings 22:19–23).

Elohim

Thisis the first term for God encountered in the Bible, right in theopening verse. It is a more generic term, denoting deity in contrastto humans or angels. “Elohim” is a plural form; thesingular terms “El” and “Eloah” are usedoccasionally, particularly in poetic texts. “El” is acommon term in the biblical world; in fact, it is the name for thefather of Baal in the Canaanite religion. This may explain why theBible commonly uses the plural form, to distinguish the one true God,the God of Israel, from his pagan rivals. Others explain the pluralform as a “plural of majesty” or “plural ofintensity,” though it is uncertain just what this would mean.Some see the foundation for NT revelation of the Trinity (Gen.1:26–27; 11:6–7; cf. John 17:20–22), but this isunlikely. The plural form also can serve simply as a common noun,referring to pagan deities (Exod. 12:12), angels (Ps. 97:7,arguably), or even human authorities (Exod. 22:28, possibly).

“El”also occurs in combination with other descriptive terms. The bestknown is “El Shaddai,” meaning “God Almighty”(Gen. 17:1). The precise meaning of “Shaddai” isuncertain, but it seems to have the notion of “great/powerfulone.” The distressed Hagar, caught, comforted, and counseled bythe mysterious personage at a well, calls God “El Roi,”which means “the God who sees me” (Gen. 16:13). One ofthe most exalted expressions to describe God is “El Elyon,”meaning “God Most High.” This title seems to haveparticular reference to God as the owner and master of creation (Gen.14:18–20).

Adonai

Asnoted above, this common word meaning simply “(my) lord/master”is used regularly in place of the personal name of God revealed toMoses in Exod. 3:14. And in the OT of most English Bibles this isindicated by printing “Lord” as opposed to “Lord”(using small capital letters). However, “Adonai” is usedof God in some noteworthy instances, such as Isaiah’s loftyvision of God exalted in Isa. 6 and the prophecy of Immanuel in Isa.7:14. In time, this became the preferred term for referring to God,and the LXX reflected this by using the Greek word kyrios (“lord”)for Yahweh. This makes the ease with which NT writers transfer theuse of the term to Jesus (e.g., 1Cor. 12:3) a strong indicationof their Christology.

A transliteration of the Hebrew phrase ’immanu’el, which means “God is with us.” This name is a reminder of God’s presence, and although the name “Immanuel” appears in the Bible only a few times (Isa. 7:14; 8:8; Matt. 1:23; cf. Isa. 8:10), the theme of God’s presence is one of the most prevalent in Scripture.

In Isa. 7 the prophet Isaiah tells King Ahaz not to fear the two kings who threaten him, but to trust in God. In fact, Isaiah proclaims, God will give a sign to Ahaz. An unnamed “virgin” (Heb. ’almah, which normally means “young, unmarried woman”) will conceive and give birth to a child, whose name will be “Immanuel” (Isa. 7:14). Interestingly, there is no mention of a father. Before this child grows old enough to know right from wrong, Isaiah continues, God will destroy both of the kings who threaten Ahaz (7:15–16). At this point, the sign of Immanuel appears to refer to a child born during the time of Ahaz as a sign to him of God’s power and ability to deliver.

Yet, this promised child seems to be rather unusual. In Isa. 8:8 God declares that Immanuel owns all the land of Judah, indicating that he is no mere unknown or obscure child. Furthermore, in 8:10 victory is declared for Judah because “God is with us [’immanu’el].” The use of this phrase is a wordplay on the name “Immanuel,” suggesting that the sign of a child named “Immanuel” may point to something beyond just a child in Ahaz’s time.

In the LXX, the word used for the young, unmarried woman in Isa. 7:14, parthenos, explicitly meant “virgin.” Using this Greek word, Matthew declares that the virgin birth of Jesus Christ was a fulfillment of Isa. 7:14 (Matt. 1:23). Thus, it appears that Isa. 7:14 was fulfilled twice, or at least that the prophecy contained a dual aspect. It was fulfilled first in a minimal way during the reign of Ahaz and then ultimately by the virgin birth of Jesus.

Matthew, of course, is saying much more than that Jesus fulfills the prophecy of Isa. 7:14: Jesus embodies the presence of God. The presence of God is a major theological theme running throughout the Bible. Matthew opens his Gospel with the proclamation that Jesus fulfills Isaiah’s prophecy of Immanuel, “God is with us” (1:23), and he closes with Jesus’ statement “I am with you always” (28:20), a promise of Jesus Christ’s empowering presence. The Gospel of John opens with the same theme, stating, “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us” (1:14). Frequently in the NT, Jesus is connected to the powerful presence of God. At the climactic end of the biblical story the focus is once again on presence, as the “Lord God Almighty and the Lamb” once again dwell with God’s people in the garden (Rev. 21–22), the ultimate example of “God is with us.”

Types of Food

In the biblical era, food consisted primarily of meats, cereals, vegetables, and fruits, though cereals and vegetables made up the bulk of the diet of people in the ancient Near East. Grains generally were ground into either coarse or fine flour. With or without leaven, the flour was made into a loaf of sorts, baked, and consumed. Usually, one grain was used for any particular bread, though in difficult times multiple types of grains could be combined to create a loaf large enough for consumption (Ezek. 4:9).

Vegetables and fruits were not as varied in the ancient cultures as they are today. Generally, among vegetables, the consumer was limited to various types of lentils, cucumbers, onions, and leeks. These were eaten raw or cooked. Fruits were limited to dates, grapes, melons, olives, and figs. Fruits generally were dried, but they were also eaten raw and prepared in various ways. Nuts, including almonds and pistachios, also were consumed (Gen. 43:11), as were pulses such as lentils and legumes such as beans (2Sam. 17:28).

Meat consumption usually was reserved for festivals and special occasions. The most important animals used for consumption were sheep, goats, and cattle. Lamb was much more common as a dietary element than beef because it was less costly and more common. As prescribed by Scripture, the blood could not be consumed when eating meat (Lev. 17:10–11). Meat generally was boiled when prepared, though it could be roasted on a spit (1Sam. 2:15). On a rare occasion, game meat was consumed, but this was considered a delicacy (Gen. 27:5–7). In order to be considered clean and capable of being consumed, the animal from which the meat was acquired had to have chewed a cud and have a divided hoof (Lev. 11:2–8).

Fish were consumed in good quantity but are mentioned much less often in the OT than in the NT, especially the Gospels. There is mention of the Fish Gate in Jerusalem (2Chron. 33:14; Neh. 3:3; Zeph. 1:10), which suggests that fish were sufficiently available to merit their own marketplace in the city. Fish were salted and dried before their consumption and seem to have been primarily an import item in Israel’s early history (Neh. 13:16), though by the time of the NT, Israel had obviously developed its own thriving fishing industry. To be ceremonially clean and fit for consumption, fish had to possess both fins and scales (thus shellfish were unclean; Lev. 11:9–12).

Animal by-products, such as honey, milk, and cheese, were a staple in Israelite diets (Deut. 32:14; Prov. 30:33; Isa. 7:15). These were stored in skins or in wooden vessels and sometimes were mixed to create a sweet milk or cheese. Milk was also used as a cooking element, though it was forbidden to cook a young goat in its mother’s milk (Exod. 34:26).

Meals and Dietary Issues

A formal dinner or banquet typically consisted of an appetizer (usually something pickled), the meal proper, and a dessert. Wine was consumed, sometimes flavored with spices or honey. The people consuming the meal reclined at the table with their feet away from the food, thus allowing servants to continue to wash feet as necessary. Some sort of entertainment usually took place, including music, reading, or dialogue on some significant matter.

The early church struggled with various dietary issues. The first of these was the matter of the consumption of unclean animals. The events of Acts 10; 15 suggest that for the early church, these dietary laws were abandoned. In fact, of the OT regulations, only the one prohibiting the eating of meat with blood in it was enforced by the Jerusalem council (Acts 15:29). Paul seems to go further than this in stating that no food is unclean in and of itself (Rom. 14:14; cf. Mark 7:19). The second dietary issue centered not on the food itself, but rather on the prior use of that food, in this case meat, in pagan rituals and worship (see Food Sacrificed to Idols). Like most ancient Near Eastern cultures, the Greeks acquired some of their meat from the temples, which had a ready supply of it following religious rites and festivals. Most meat used for consumption had already been offered to an idol, and Christians debated whether it was appropriate to eat such meat. Paul responds to this question in 1Corinthians, arguing that believers are free to eat such meat if their conscience is clear in doing so, but not if doing so offends or troubles the faith of fellow believers (1Cor. 8; 10:23–11:1).

The various Hebrew and Greek words that express the idea of fulfillment occur hundreds of times in the Bible, and the concept often is present even when the specific word is not. At the basic level, fulfillment indicates a relationship between two (or more) things in which the second is said to “fill up” the significance of the first. Frequently this takes the form of a specific promise that is said to be fulfilled when the person, object, or event referred to comes to pass. There are countless examples of this type of fulfillment, some of which even quote the specific promise that is being fulfilled. The seventy years of Babylonian captivity prophesied by Jeremiah (Jer. 29:10) are said to be fulfilled when Cyrus permits the Jews to return to the land (Ezra 1:1–4). Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem (Matt. 2:1–6) fulfills the promise of a ruler who will shepherd Israel (Mic. 5:2).

But the concept of fulfillment goes beyond specific promises that are then said to be fulfilled in a particular person, object, or event. In the broadest sense of the term, one can say that the NT fulfills what the OT promises. After his resurrection, Jesus reminds his disciples, “Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms” (Luke 24:44). He then provides a summary of the entire OT message: “The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance for the forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem” (Luke 24:46–47).

Although all four Gospels describe Jesus as the fulfillment of the OT hope, Matthew places special emphasis on this by his use of the term “fulfill” when introducing OT quotes. He does so eleven times (1:22; 2:15, 17, 23; 4:14; 8:17; 12:17; 13:14, 35; 21:4; 27:9), most of which have no direct parallel in the other Gospels. In some of these examples the passage quoted from the OT specifically points forward to a future fulfillment, such as the promise in Isa. 7:14 of a child being born finding its fulfillment in the birth of Jesus (Matt. 1:23). But in other cases the OT passage said to be fulfilled does not appear to be a prediction at all in its original context. Commenting on Joseph, Mary, and the baby Jesus leaving Egypt to eventually settle in Nazareth, Matthew notes that this departure took place to fulfill “what the Lord had said through the prophet: ‘Out of Egypt I called my son’ ” (2:15). The quotation comes from Hos. 11:1, which says, “When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.” In its original context, Hos. 11:1 is a straightforward statement of God leading the people of Israel out of their Egyptian captivity in the exodus. There is no indication that the prophet is predicting anything at all; he is instead recounting historical fact. But in that historical event Matthew sees an anticipation of Jesus’ own exodus out of Egypt. The correspondence between the two events rests in recognizing that just as Israel was God’s son (cf. Exod. 4:22), so too Jesus is the Son of God (Matt. 3:17), albeit in a much more profound way.

Fulfillment often takes place in stages. An example of this is seen in the numerous promises surrounding the day of the Lord. On the one hand, the prophets speak of the day of the Lord in a way that anticipates a catastrophic event in the near future (Isa. 13:6–9; Joel 1:15; Amos 5:18–19). But the language used is applied to multiple events, from the destruction of Jerusalem (Ezek. 13:5) to the crucifixion (Matt. 27:45–54) to the return of Christ (Matt. 24:29–31). In one sense all the promises of the OT find their initial fulfillment in Christ (2Cor. 1:20) but await their consummation in the new heaven and new earth (Rev. 21–22). Thus, the claim that a promise has been fulfilled does not automatically imply that the promise has been exhausted. There may be additional “fulfillments” to the original promise.

The various Hebrew and Greek words that express the idea of fulfillment occur hundreds of times in the Bible, and the concept often is present even when the specific word is not. At the basic level, fulfillment indicates a relationship between two (or more) things in which the second is said to “fill up” the significance of the first. Frequently this takes the form of a specific promise that is said to be fulfilled when the person, object, or event referred to comes to pass. There are countless examples of this type of fulfillment, some of which even quote the specific promise that is being fulfilled. The seventy years of Babylonian captivity prophesied by Jeremiah (Jer. 29:10) are said to be fulfilled when Cyrus permits the Jews to return to the land (Ezra 1:1–4). Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem (Matt. 2:1–6) fulfills the promise of a ruler who will shepherd Israel (Mic. 5:2).

But the concept of fulfillment goes beyond specific promises that are then said to be fulfilled in a particular person, object, or event. In the broadest sense of the term, one can say that the NT fulfills what the OT promises. After his resurrection, Jesus reminds his disciples, “Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms” (Luke 24:44). He then provides a summary of the entire OT message: “The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance for the forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem” (Luke 24:46–47).

Although all four Gospels describe Jesus as the fulfillment of the OT hope, Matthew places special emphasis on this by his use of the term “fulfill” when introducing OT quotes. He does so eleven times (1:22; 2:15, 17, 23; 4:14; 8:17; 12:17; 13:14, 35; 21:4; 27:9), most of which have no direct parallel in the other Gospels. In some of these examples the passage quoted from the OT specifically points forward to a future fulfillment, such as the promise in Isa. 7:14 of a child being born finding its fulfillment in the birth of Jesus (Matt. 1:23). But in other cases the OT passage said to be fulfilled does not appear to be a prediction at all in its original context. Commenting on Joseph, Mary, and the baby Jesus leaving Egypt to eventually settle in Nazareth, Matthew notes that this departure took place to fulfill “what the Lord had said through the prophet: ‘Out of Egypt I called my son’ ” (2:15). The quotation comes from Hos. 11:1, which says, “When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.” In its original context, Hos. 11:1 is a straightforward statement of God leading the people of Israel out of their Egyptian captivity in the exodus. There is no indication that the prophet is predicting anything at all; he is instead recounting historical fact. But in that historical event Matthew sees an anticipation of Jesus’ own exodus out of Egypt. The correspondence between the two events rests in recognizing that just as Israel was God’s son (cf. Exod. 4:22), so too Jesus is the Son of God (Matt. 3:17), albeit in a much more profound way.

Fulfillment often takes place in stages. An example of this is seen in the numerous promises surrounding the day of the Lord. On the one hand, the prophets speak of the day of the Lord in a way that anticipates a catastrophic event in the near future (Isa. 13:6–9; Joel 1:15; Amos 5:18–19). But the language used is applied to multiple events, from the destruction of Jerusalem (Ezek. 13:5) to the crucifixion (Matt. 27:45–54) to the return of Christ (Matt. 24:29–31). In one sense all the promises of the OT find their initial fulfillment in Christ (2Cor. 1:20) but await their consummation in the new heaven and new earth (Rev. 21–22). Thus, the claim that a promise has been fulfilled does not automatically imply that the promise has been exhausted. There may be additional “fulfillments” to the original promise.

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.

Author

Althoughstrictly anonymous, the first Gospel has always been known as“according to Matthew,” and no evidence exists that itever circulated without this name. The author is traditionally theapostle Matthew, a former tax collector (9:9). Mark (2:14) and Luke(5:27) identify him as “Levi,” probably his earlier name.This may be further established by the noticeable references to moneyin the first Gospel: the parables of the unmerciful servant (18:23)and of the daily pay of workers (20:1), the bribe paid to the guardsat the tomb to get them to lie (28:12), and Judas’s return ofthe thirty silver coins (27:5). These stories, unique to Matthew,relate the morality of money in an unequivocal way, indicatingMatthew’s own interests from his former life.

Matthew’sGospel appears first in almost every extant witness to the NT, and itwas considered the preeminent Gospel by the early church. It is theGospel most quoted by the early church fathers. Of the four Gospels,Matthew’s is most oriented toward a Jewish audience.

Sources

Acursory reading of the Gospels reveals that the first three, Matthew,Mark, and Luke (the Synoptic Gospels), share much of the samematerial. Yet each has its own collection and order of events,reflecting its own theological emphasis. This is quite to ourbenefit: by examining the differences between the three Gospels, notonly do we see different facets of Jesus, but also we can discern andfilter the idiosyncrasies of each writer. If Matthew records an eventlater in his Gospel, there must be a reason consistent with hispurposes.

Mostcurrent research holds that Mark was written first and providedmaterial for both Matthew and Luke. Matthew tends to smooth out the“rough” Greek of Mark; he also compresses many of thestories, and in a few places he “fixes” passages in Markthat might have seemed unclear or offensive. Material from Mark usedby Matthew is generally narrative of Jesus’ life.

Matthewand Luke also contain similar material not found in Mark, theso-called Q material (“Q” is from the German Quelle,which means “source”). No Q document is extant. If itever existed, it may represent an oral tradition. The Q material inMatthew has strong ethical content, such as the Sermon on the Mount,many of the parables, and the Olivet Discourse. Additionally, Matthewand Luke contain material unique to their own Gospels: M in Matthew,L in Luke. The M material includes the birth and infancy narratives,some of the stories surrounding Jesus’ death and resurrection,and a few of the parables.

Theuse of Mark (not an apostle) by the apostle Matthew is not assurprising as it may seem. Papias reported that Mark wrote thereminiscences of Peter, a member of Jesus’ inner circle and theleader of the apostolic group. Surely Matthew would have no problemusing Mark’s Gospel as a starting point for his own.

Date

Datingthe Gospels is difficult. If Matthew borrowed from Mark, then thedate of Mark and how long it would have taken to circulate to Mattheware important in the discussion. The first convincing use of Matthewby an external author is Ignatius, early in the second century. Thisplaces Matthew in the period between the early 60s to the early 90s.

Internalevidence includes, as in most NT literature dating, Matthew’srelationship to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. If Matthewwrote after this date, we might expect to see this reflected in somepassages, especially in the Olivet Discourse, Jesus’ prophecyof the Jewish war. The mention of a city being burned in retributionin 22:7 is casual enough to suggest that Matthew did not know of thishappening to Jerusalem. There also are many references to the templethat might have merited a mention of its subsequent loss.

Themention of the temple tax in 17:24 is important. Before AD 70, payingthe tax supported the Jewish temple and showed solidarity withIsrael. After AD 70, the revenue was diverted to the temple ofJupiter in Rome. Jews were required to continue paying under duressand considered it support of idolatry. Had this been Matthew’sworld, he likely would have explained this critical point to hisreaders.

Argumentsfor a late date include references to the church (Matthew alone amongthe Gospel writers uses the term ekklēsia), possibly indicatingan interest in church orderthat developed later; historical tensions between the church and theJews, which only peaked in AD 85; and thoughts of a later date forMark. For some, Matthew’s account of Jesus’ predictionsof the destruction of Jerusalem is so vivid that it would have tohave been written afterward. Many consider the theology of Matthew sosophisticated that it would require a later date.

Externalevidence includes the early church tradition that Matthew was writtenearly, though part of this thinking is that Matthew was written firstof the Synoptics. Still, an early date for Matthew seems the best,though the evidence is far from conclusive.

Structure

Matthew’sliterary pointers do not necessarily align with his themes, makingfor a rich, complex structure that is hard to outline. The followingare some of the structures that scholars have proposed.

Bydiscourse.Matthew has five clear sections of Jesus’ discourses, set apartby a concluding phrase along the lines of “when Jesus hadfinished saying these things” (7:28; 11:1; 13:53; 19:1; 26:1).The five discourses alternate with related narratives of Jesus’deeds. These discourses should not be thought of as intact, recordedsermons; they are compilations of Jesus’ teachings assembled byMatthew. The parallels in the other Gospels of this material differ:some of it is together as Matthew has it, but much of it is scatteredin the other accounts. Matthew organized his material into types ofstories and types of ministry by Jesus. Early on, Jesus is theethical teacher; later, he is the stern lecturer warning Israel ofimpending judgment.

Bystory line.Another proposed structure concerns the story line of the Gospel.Matthew twice uses the concluding phrase “from that time onJesus began to...” (4:17; 16:21). But thesetwo instances, particularly 16:21, are in the middle of the narrativeline and cannot be thought of as major literary structural markers.It is likely that Matthew uses this phrase to notify his readers of anew phase of the story, and possibly of a new approach in ministry byJesus.

Bygeography.This concept revolves around the geography and movement of Jesus fromhis birth, through the ministry in Galilee, around Galilee, and toJerusalem.

Outline

Thefollowing outline offers a thematic organization of Matthew’sGospel:

I.The Miraculous Beginnings of Jesus (1:1–4:11)

II.Ethical Teachings and Miracles (4:12–10:42)

III.Confrontation and Reactions (11:1–16:20)

IV.The Messiah Must Suffer (16:21–20:28)

V.Jesus Claims Authority and Receives Praise (20:29–25:46)

VI.The Death of Jesus (26:1–27:66)

VII.The Resurrection of Jesus (28:1–28:20)

I.The miraculous beginnings of Jesus (1:1–4:11).Jesus’ genealogy and childhood show him to be the fulfillmentof OT prophecy. His baptism demonstrates this fulfillment; his fortydays of testing in the desert identify him with Israel.

II.Ethical teachings and miracles (4:12–10:42).This section begins with a geographical change, as Jesus returns toGalilee. Having instructed his disciples, he sends them out as anextension of his own mission.

III.Confrontation and reactions (11:1–16:20).This section also involves a change of geography. Jesus first isquestioned by John’s disciples, then by the Pharisees, andfinally by the people in his own town. The questions are resolved byPeter’s confession.

IV.The messiah must suffer (16:21–20:28).This is the third section that begins “from that time on Jesusbegan to....” Jesus explains to his disciplesthat he will die at the hands of the Jews but be raised on the thirdday. This section includes the transfiguration and many parablesconcerning judgment and reward. The climax is at the end, when Jesusdeclares that he has come “to give his life as a ransom formany.”

V.Jesus claims authority and receives praise (20:29–25:46).Another geographical shift occurs, as Jesus and his disciples leaveJericho. Jesus acknowledges the title “Lord, Son of David,”cleanses the temple, and argues with the Pharisees about the sourceof his authority. The parables concern sonship and responses toauthority. The Pharisees try to entrap Jesus. Jesus teaches aboutauthority, then rebukes the Pharisees. Chapter 24 describes theconsequences of the ultimate rejection of authority. The climax isthe parable of the sheep and the goats.

VI.The death of Jesus (26:1–27:66). Matthew’sGospel has built-in intensity up to the passion narrative. Thissection builds again within itself, from the anointing of Jesus inBethany to the hush as the tomb is closed and sealed.

VII.The resurrection of Jesus (28:1–28:20).The accounts of the resurrection and postresurrection appearances arebrief but significant and contain several details not found in theother Synoptics.

TheUnique Contributions of Matthew

Amongthe unique contributions of Matthew are his genealogy of Jesus (whichdiffers significantly from Luke’s); the birth/infancy narrativeof 1:18–2:23, which includes the rec-ord of the angel appearingto Joseph, the magi from the East, the slaughter of the innocents,and the flight to Egypt; the Great Commission, where Jesus commandshis followers to “go and make disciples of all nations,baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son andofthe Holy Spirit” (28:19); and the Sermon on the Mount (chaps.5–7), the largest block of the teachings of Jesus in the NT(Matthew contains large blocks of Jesus’ teaching in the otherdiscourses as well).

Useof the Old Testament

Matthew’suse of the OT is remarkable. Matthew is concerned with showing Jesusas the fulfillment of the OT and God’s salvation history. Thiscan be seen in the so-called fulfillment quotations (1:22–23;2:15, 17–18, 23; 4:14–16; 8:17; 12:17–21; 13:35;21:4–5; 27:9–10; see also 2:5–6; 13:14; 26:54, 56,and 3:3; 22:31–32) as well as in the narrative portions of thebook, particularly in the sweeping statement of 26:56: “Thishas all taken place that the writings of the prophets might befulfilled.”

Matthewimmediately appeals to the OT in recounting the genealogy of Jesus.He divides the history of Israel into three eras: the firstculminates in David, the second with the exile—clearly two ofthe most significant turning points in Israel’s history—thethird in Jesus, the Christ.

Thequote “Out of Egypt I called my son” (2:15), from Hos.11:1, is an excellent example of Matthew’s commitment tofulfillment. The passage in Hosea clearly is not looking forward tothis verse, but Matthew employs this short sentence to identify Jesusas the fulfillment of Israel and uses the return from Egypt of theholy family to illustrate the parallels in Jesus’ life with theexperience of the Jews. Matthew’s use of the OT here, and ingeneral, follows ancient, particularly Jewish, interpretiveconventions.

Matthewcontains a number of OT quotations not found in the other Synoptics.These appear generally as asides from Matthew himself—his ownreflections, as it were, not the words of Jesus. Matthew clearly seesthe relationship between Jesus and the OT in both directions: Jesusis the total fulfillment of the OT, and the OT is deeply concernedwith pointing the way to Jesus.

Matthewthen applies OT passages to the life of Jesus: Jesus is the virgin’sson in Isa. 7:14 (Matt. 1:22–23), the one coming from Bethlehemto rule over Israel in Mic. 5:2 (Matt. 2:5–6), and the soncalled out of Egypt in Hos. 11:1 (Matt. 2:15); the slaughter ofinfants reflects the fall of Judah seen in Jer. 31:15 (Matt.2:17–18); and Jesus is the great light on Zebulun and Naphtaliof Isa. 9:1–2 (Matt. 4:13–16).

Jesus’Relationship to Jewish Leaders

Matthew’sGospel is almost universally negative toward the religious leaders,even where parallel passages do not reflect this antagonism (compareMatt. 23:37 with Luke 13:31). Matthew records many groups of leaders:teachers of the law (scribes), Pharisees, Sadducees, chief priests,and elders; he often combines terms, “scribes and Pharisees”being his favorite combination. Matthew portrays the Pharisees as themost hostile to Jesus, identifying them as a “brood of vipers”(3:7).

Yet,the Gospel of Matthew is far from being an anti-Jewish work. Jesus isthe fulfillment of the OT; he was sent “only to the lost sheepof Israel” (15:24); people praise the God of Israel for hishealing demonstrations. Matthew’s point is that it is Israel’sleaders and those who reject their Messiah who are bringing judgmentupon themselves.

The KJV translation for a young girl, an unmarried woman orvirgin, or a female servant. At least five Hebrew words are used torefer to such women. Betulah refers to an unmarried virgin or a youngwoman who has had no sexual experience (Gen. 24:16; Job 31:1; Exod.22:16–17). A man who forcefully lay with such a woman wasexpected to marry her (Deut. 22:13–19). When David was old, avirgin was found to lie at his side to keep him warm (1Kings1:2). Israel as a nation is identified as a young virgin (Jer. 31:4).The second term is ’amah, translated “bondwoman,”“maidservant,” “maid,” “bondmaid,”“servant,” or “female servant” (Gen. 20:17;Exod. 2:5). The third is shipkhah, which refers to a female slave whois of close kinship to her master (Gen. 29:24). The fourth isna’arah, which is translated “unmarried girl”(Esther 2:4 [NIV: “young woman”]) or “servant”(Esther 4:4 [NIV: “female attendant”]; Ruth 2:23). Thefifth is ’almah, which is translated “girl” (Exod.2:8), “virgin” (Isa. 7:14), or “maiden”(Prov. 30:19 [NIV: “young woman”]).

Inthe NT, several Greek words are sometimes translated as “maiden”in the KJV. Parthenos refers to a “virgin,” male orfemale (Matt. 1:23; Acts 21:9; Rev. 14:4). Pais generally means “ayoung girl,” “maiden,”or “child” (Luke 8:51, 54). Paidiskē refers to a“female slave,” “servant maid,” or “servantgirl” (Mark 14:66; Luke 12:45). The word korasion refers to a“girl” or “little girl” (Matt. 9:24–25).Nymphē refersto a “young wife” or “bride” (Luke 12:53;Rev. 21:2).

Hunting for food is a postdiluvian activity. In the originalcreation, humankind was allowed to eat only of plant life (Gen.1:29); it was only with the re-creation of the earth that humans wereexplicitly permitted to eat animals: “Everything that lives andmoves about will be food for you. Just as I gave you the greenplants, I now give you everything” (9:3). Therefore, it may beconcluded that hunting as a means of survival had no significance forprediluvian humanity.

Nimrodwas “a mighty hunter before the Lord; that is why it is said,‘Like Nimrod, a mighty hunter before the Lord’ ”(Gen. 10:9). However, for many ancient interpreters, the proverbialsaying was viewed with suspicion and was interpreted negatively asopposition against God (Philo, QG 2.82; L.A.B. 4:7; 6:13; Josephus,Ant. 1.113–14; Tg.Neof. 10:9; Frg.Tg. 10:9;Augustine, Civ. 16.4; Jerome, Qu. hebr. Gen. 10.18). Anothermemorable hunter is Esau, “a skillful hunter, a man of the opencountry” (Gen. 25:27). Before Esau could receive a blessing,his father requested that he go hunt game for him; however, the oldand blind Isaac was tricked into blessing the wrong son (27:1–40).

Inancient times, hunting was not an activity limited to providing foodor acquiring other resources such as materials for clothing. There isevidence of hunting as a royal sport. The Assyrian kings were famoushunters of lions, wild bulls, elephants, and other animals. By theseventh century BC, Assyrian kings hunted in special game reserves.For the Assyrians, the killing of wild beasts such as lionssymbolized the duty of the king as a guardian of civilization. Royalhunting does not appear to have been a practice in Israel, althoughsuch a possibility may not be completely ruled out. The young David’sencounter with lion and bear is cited to some extent forself-exaltation purposes and even more so to portray him as afearless shepherd worthy of shepherding Israel (1Sam.17:34–37).

Huntersused various methods to catch or kill their prey: weapons such asquiver, bow, spear, sling, and club (Gen. 27:3; cf. Isa. 7:24), pitsand various snares and gins (Pss. 35:7; 91:3; 2Sam. 23:20; Isa.24:17; Jer. 48:43; Amos 3:5). Bird hunting was also a commonpractice, and snares often were used to make a catch (Pss. 91:3;124:7; Prov. 1:17; 6:5; Eccles. 9:12; Amos 3:5).

The Bible is full of teeming creatures and swarming things.These creatures, insects, often play significant roles in the storiesand the events described in them. From the first chapter of the Bibleto the very last book, these flying, creeping, hopping, and crawlingthings are prominent.

Termsfor Insects

Insectsare described in the Bible with both general and specific terms. Inthe OT, there are three general terms for insects and twenty termsused to refer to specific types of insects. In the NT, two differenttypes of insects are referenced: gnats and locusts.

Thetwo most common general terms for insects are variously translated.Terms and phrases used to describe them include “livingcreatures” (Gen. 1:20), “creatures that move along theground” (Gen. 1:24–26; 6:7, 20; 7:8, 14, 23; 8:17, 19;Lev. 5:2; Ezek. 38:20; Hos. 2:18), that which “moves”(Gen. 9:3), “swarming things” (Lev. 11:10), “flyinginsects” (Lev. 11:20–21, 23; Deut. 14:19), “creatures”(Lev. 11:43), “crawling things” (Lev. 22:5; Ezek. 8:10),“reptiles” (1Kings 4:33), “teeming creatures”(Ps. 104:25), “small creatures” (Ps. 148:10), and “seacreatures” (Hab. 1:14). The other general term for insects isused with reference to swarms of insects, typically flies (Exod.8:21–22, 24, 29; Pss. 78:45; 105:31). Specific insects named inScripture are listed below.

Ants.Ants are used in Proverbs as an example of and encouragement towardwisdom. In 6:6 ants serve as an example for sluggards to reform theirslothful ways. Also, in 30:25 ants serve as an example of creaturesthat, despite their diminutive size, are wise enough to make advancepreparations for the long winter.

Bees.Beesare used both literally and figuratively in Scripture. Judges 14:8refers to honeybees, the product of which becomes the object ofSamson’s riddle. The other three uses of bees in the OT arefigurative of swarms of enemies against God’s people (Deut.1:44; Ps. 118:12; Isa. 7:18).

Fleas.Fleasare referenced in the OT only by David to indicate his insignificancein comparison with King Saul (1Sam. 24:14; 26:20). The irony ofthe comparison becomes clear with David’s later ascendancy.

Flies.The plague of flies follows that of gnats on Egypt (Exod. 8:20–31).Although the gnats are never said to have left Egypt, the flies areremoved upon Moses’ prayer. In Eccles. 10:1 the stench of deadflies is compared to the impact that folly can have on the wise. InIsa. 7:18 flies represent Egypt being summoned by God as his avengingagents on Judah’s sin. In addition, one of the gods in Ekronwas named “Baal-Zebub,” which means “lord of theflies” (2Kings 1:2–3, 6, 16). The reference toSatan in the NT using a similar name is likely an adaptation of theOT god of Ekron (Matt. 10:25; 12:24, 27; Mark 3:22; Luke 11:15,18–19).

Gnats.Gnats are distinguished from flies in the OT, though the distinctionis not always apparent. Gnats are employed by God in the third plagueon Egypt (Exod. 8:16–19), while flies form the means ofpunishment in the fourth plague. The two are listed together in Ps.105:31 and appear parallel, though the former may be a reference to aswarm. Gnats were also used by Jesus to illustrate the hypocrisy ofthe Pharisees and the scribes (Matt. 23:24).

Hornets.TheBible uses hornets in Scripture as an agent of God’sdestruction. The term occurs three times in the OT. In eachoccurrence these stinging insects refer to God’s expulsion ofthe Canaanites from the land that God promised to his people. Thefirst two times, Exod. 23:28 and Deut. 7:20, hornets are used inreference to a promise of what God will do; the third time, Josh.24:12, they illustrate what God did.

Locusts.Of particular interest is the use of locusts in the Bible. The termor a similar nomenclature occurs close to fifty times in the NIV.Locusts demonstrate a number of characteristics in Scripture. First,they are under God’s control (Exod. 10:13–19). As such,they have no king (Prov. 30:27). They serve God’s purposes.Second, locusts often occur in very large numbers or swarms (Judg.6:5; Jer. 46:23; Nah. 3:15). At times, their numbers can be so largeas to cause darkness in the land (Exod. 10:15). Third, in largenumbers these insects have been known to ravage homes, devour theland, devastate fields, and debark trees (Exod. 10:12–15; Deut.28:38; 1Kings 8:37; 2Chron. 7:13; Pss. 78:46; 105:34;Isa. 33:4; Joel 1:4–7). Due to their fierceness, they werecompared to horses (Rev. 9:7). Fourth, locusts hide at night (Nah.3:17). Finally, certain types of locusts were used as food.

Moths.Mothsare referred to seven times in the OT and four times in the NT. Jobuses moths to illustrate the fragility of the unrighteous before God(4:19) and the impermanence of their labors (27:18). The otherreferences to moths in Scripture present them as the consumers of thewealth (garments) and pride of humankind as a means of God’sjudgment (Job 13:28; Ps. 39:11; Isa. 50:9; 51:8; Hos. 5:12; Matt.6:19–20; Luke 12:33; James 5:2).

Functionsof Insects in Scripture

Asagents in God’s judgment.Insects serve a variety of functions in Scripture. Most notably,insects serve as agents of judgment from God. The OT indicates howinsects were used as judgment on both Israel and their enemies.

Moseswarned of God’s judgment for Israel’s violation of thecovenant. He advised Israel that as a consequence of their sin, theywould expend much labor in the field but harvest little, because thelocusts would consume them (Deut. 28:38).

Solomon,in his prayer of dedication at the temple, beseeched God regardingjudgment that he might send in the form of grasshoppers to besiegethe land. He asked that when the people of God repent and pray, Godwould hear and forgive (2Chron. 6:26–30). God similarlyresponded by promising that when he “command[s] locusts todevour the land” as judgment for sin, and his people humblethemselves and pray, he will heal and forgive (2Chron. 7:13–14;cf. 1Kings 8:37).

Thepsalmist reminded Israel of God’s wonderful works in theirpast, one of which was his use of insects as a means of his judgment(Ps. 78:45–46; cf. 105:34).

Joel1:4 and 2:25 describe God’s judgment on Israel for theirunfaithfulness in successive waves of intensity (cf. Deut. 28:38, 42;2Chron. 6:28; Amos 4:9–10; 7:1–3). The devastationled to crop failure, famine, destruction of vines and fig trees, andgreat mourning. The severity of the judgment is described as beingunlike anything anyone in the community had ever experienced (Joel1:2–3).

Locustsare the subject of one of the visions of the prophet Amos. In thevision, God showed him the destructive power of these insects as ameans of judgment. Upon seeing the vision, the prophet interceded forthe people, and God relented (Amos 7:1–3).

Insectswere also used as judgments on Israel’s enemies. In the plagueson Egypt, insects were the agents of the third, fourth, and eighthplagues. The third plague (Exod. 8:16–19) was gnats.Interestingly, this was the first of Moses’ signs that themagicians of Pharaoh could not reproduce. Their response to theEgyptian king was that this must be the “finger of God.”There is no record of the gnats ever leaving Egypt, unlike the otherplagues.

Thefourth plague was flies (Exod. 8:20–32). Here the Biblespecifically indicates a distinction between the land of Goshen,where the Israelites dwelled, and the rest of the land of Egypt. Theflies covered all of Egypt except Goshen. This plague led toPharaoh’s first offer of compromise. Once Moses prayed and theflies left Egypt, Pharaoh hardened his heart.

Theeighth plague was in the form of locusts (Exod. 10:1–20). Inresponse to this plague, Pharaoh’s own officials complained tohim, beseeching him to let Israel leave their country lest it beentirely destroyed. The threat of this plague led to Pharaoh’ssecond offer of compromise. Once the locusts began to devastate theland of Egypt, Pharaoh confessed his sin before God, but as soon asthe locusts were removed, his heart again became hardened. Thus,three of the ten plagues on Egypt were in the form of insects.

Atthe end of a series of “woe” passages, the prophet Isaiahproclaimed God’s judgment against the enemies of his peoplebecause of their oppression. In the end, those who plundered willthemselves be plundered, as if by a “swarm of locusts”(Isa. 33:1–4; cf. Jer. 51:14, 27).

Insectswere also used as judgment on people who dwelled in the land ofIsrael prior to Israel’s occupation. Both before and after theevent took place, the Bible describes how God sent hornets to helpdrive out the occupants of the land of Canaan in preparation forIsrael’s arrival. This is described as part of God’sjudgment on these nations for their sins against him (Exod. 23:28;Deut. 7:20; Josh. 24:12).

Asfood.Insects also are mentioned in Scripture as food. Certain types oflocusts are listed as clean and eligible for consumption. The NTdescribes the diet of John the Baptist, which consisted of locustsand wild honey—a diet entirely dependent on insects (Matt. 3:4;Mark 1:6). The OT also notes Samson enjoying the labor of bees asfood (Judg. 14:8–9).

Usedfiguratively.Most often, insects are used figuratively in Scripture. They are usedin the proverbs of Scripture to illustrate wisdom. The sages wroteabout ants (Prov. 6:6; 30:25), locusts (Prov. 30:27), and even deadflies (Eccles. 10:1) both to extol wisdom and to encourage itsdevelopment in humankind.

Anotherfigurative use of insects is in the riddle about bees and honey posedby Samson to the Philistines (Judg. 14:12–18). As noted above,Samson ate honey (Judg. 14:8–9; cf. 1Sam. 14:25–29,43). Also, Scripture describes the promised land as a place of “milkand honey.”

Insectsalso are used to symbolize pursuing enemies (Deut. 1:44; Ps. 118:12;Isa. 7:18), innumerable forces (Judg. 6:5; 7:12; Ps. 105:34; Jer.46:23; Joel 2:25), insignificance (Num. 13:33; 1Sam. 24:14;26:20; Job 4:19; 27:18; Ps. 109:23; Eccles. 12:5; Isa. 40:22),vulnerability (Job 4:19), God’s incomparable nature (Job39:20), the brevity of life (Ps. 109:23), wisdom and organization(Prov. 30:27), and an invading army (Isa. 7:18; Jer. 51:14, 27), andthey are employed in a taunt against Israel’s enemies (Nah.3:15–17), a lesson on hypocrisy (Matt. 23:24), and an image ofeschatological judgment (Rev. 9:4–11).

ScripturalTruths about Insects

1.Insectsare part of God’s creation.Inview of all the uses of insects in Scripture, several key truthsemerge. First, insects are a part of the totality of God’screation. The very first chapter of the Bible uses one of the generalterms for insects as part of God’s creative activity on thesixth day of creation (Gen. 1:24). After God reviewed the creation onthat day, his assessment of it, including the insects, was that itwas “good” (1:25).

2.Insectsare under God’s control.Asecond scriptural truth related to insects in the Bible is that theyare under God’s control. In Deut. 7:20 God promised to sendhornets ahead of the children of Israel to prepare the promised landfor their arrival. Also, in Joel 2:25, when God promised to repairthe damage to the land caused by the locusts, he described them as“my great army that I sent.” Thus, the picture emergesthat what God has created, he alone reserves the authority tocontrol.

3.Insectsare cared for by God. A final truth regarding insects in Scripture isthat God takes care of them. Just as Jesus explained God’s carefor the birds of the air (Matt. 7:26), the psalmist explained thatall of God’s creation, specifically insects, “look to youto give them their food at the proper time” (Ps. 104:25–27).The conclusion of the psalmist is appropriate for all of God’screation: “When you hide your face, they are terrified; whenyou take away their breath, they die and return to the dust. When yousend your Spirit, they are created, and you renew the face of theground” (104:29–30). Thus, in the end, God creates, Godcontrols, and God cares—a lesson that all of God’screation shares.

Patience is a moral attribute that God possesses and thathumans may possess. One who has patience allows time to pass whilemaintaining a positive disposition, often in the face of suffering(Hab. 3:16; 2Tim. 3:10–11; James 5:10), as the KJVtranslation “longsuffering” implies (cf. Prov. 14:29NASB: “slow to anger”). The Scriptures universally speakof patience as an admirable quality and associate patience with othervirtues, such as inner peace (Ps. 37:7), wisdom (Prov. 19:11),persuasiveness (Prov. 25:15), humility (Eccles. 7:8), and kindness(Rom. 2:4; 1Cor. 13:4).

Numerouspassages praise God’s patience. Humans try (Isa. 7:13) and showcontempt for (Rom. 2:4) God’s patience, sometimes by refusingto be patient with others even though they themselves have receivedmercy from God (Matt. 18:23–35). Nonetheless, God displays hispatience by granting them eternal life through faith in Christ(1Tim. 1:16). In fact, God has patiently delayed destroying theworld because he is compassionate and wants all to come to repentance(2Pet. 3:9). God’s patience is evident even toward thosewho are destined for destruction (Rom. 9:22; 1Pet. 3:20).

Justas God is patient, he imparts patience to the Christian through hisHoly Spirit (Gal. 5:22). Like Abraham, the prophets, and any farmer,Christians are to exhibit patience, bearing with people both insideand outside the church (Eph. 4:2; 1Thess. 5:14–15) asthey wait eagerly for Christ’s return (Heb. 6:12–15;James 5:7–10). Those in Christian leadership must modelpatience and encourage others with patience (2Tim. 3:10; 4:2).

The names of God given in the Bible are an important means ofrevelation about his character and works. The names come from threesources: God himself, those who encounter him in the biblical record,and the biblical writers. This article is concerned mainly with thenames that occur in the OT, though the NT will be referenced whenhelpful.

Inthe Bible the meaning of names is often significant and points to thecharacter of the person so named. As might be expected, this isespecially true for God. The names that he gives to himself alwaysare a form of revelation; the names that humans give to God often area form of testimony.

Yahweh:The Lord

Pronunciation.Unquestionably, for OT revelation the most important name is “(the)Lord.” In English Bibles this represents the name declared byGod to Moses at the burning bush (“I am who I am” [Exod.3:13–15]) and the related term used elsewhere in the OT; inHebrew this term consists of the four consonants YHWH and istherefore known as the Tetragrammaton (“four letters”).Hebrew does not count vowels as part of its alphabet; in biblicaltimes one simply wrote the consonants of a word and the readersupplied the correct vowels by knowing the vocabulary, grammar, andcontext. However, to avoid violating the commandment in the Decaloguethat prohibits the misuse of God’s name (Exod. 20:7; Deut.5:11), the Jews stopped pronouncing it. Consequently, no one todayknows its correct original pronunciation, but the best evidenceavailable suggests “Yahweh,” which has become theconventional pronunciation (consider the Hebrew word “hallelujah,”which actually is “hallelu-Yah,” hence “praise theLord”). In ancient Jewish tradition, “Adonai” (“myLord”) was substituted for “Yahweh.” In fact, whenHebrew eventually developed a vowel notation system, instead of thevowels for “Yahweh,” the vowels for “Adonai”were indicated whenever YHWH appeared in the biblical text, as areminder. Combining the consonants YHWH with the vowels of “Adonai”yields something like “Yehowah,” which is the origin ofthe familiar (but mistaken and nonexistent) “Jehovah.”English Bibles typically use “Lord” (small capitalletters) for “Yahweh,” and “Lord” (regularletters) for “Adonai,” which distinguishes thetwo.

Meaning.More vital than the matter of the pronunciation of YHWH is thequestion of its meaning. There seem to be two main opinions. One seesYHWH as denoting eternal self-existence, partly because it issuggested by the grammar of Exod. 3:14 (the words “I am”use a form of the Hebrew verb that suggests being without beginningor end) and partly because that is the meaning Jesus apparentlyascribes to it in John 8:58. The other opinion, suggested by usage,is that YHWH indicates dynamic, active, divine presence: God’sbeing present in a special way to act on someone’s behalf(e.g., Gen. 26:28; 39:2–3; Josh. 6:27; 1Sam. 18:12–14).This idea also appears in the episode of the burning bush (Exod.3:12): when Moses protests his inadequacy to confront Pharaoh, Godassures him of his presence, a reality noted with other prophets(1Sam. 3:19; Jer. 1:8).

Perhapsthe best points of reference for understanding the meaning of YHWHare God’s own proclamations. In addition to Exod. 3:13–15,at least two other passages in Exodus give God’s commentary (asit were) about the meaning of his name. An important one is Exod.34:5–7. A key passage in the theology proper of ancient Israel,its themes echo in later OT Scripture (Num. 14:18–19; Ps.103:7–12; Jon. 4:2). What is noteworthy about the texts citedis that all of them say something remarkable about the grace of God.This fits, for the revelation of Exod. 34:5–7 is given in thecontext of covenant renewal after the incident of the golden calf.Moses invokes God’s name in the Numbers text to avoidcatastrophic judgment when the Israelites refuse to enter thepromised land. The psalm text picks up this theme and connects itwith God’s revelation of his ways to the chosen people. Jonah,remarkably, affirms that the same grace extends even toward a wickedGentile city such as Nineveh.

Anothersuch passage is Exod. 6:2–8.Here God reaffirms hisredemptive purpose for captive Israel, despite the fact that Moses’first encounter with Pharaoh has not gone well. God assures theprophet that he has remembered his covenant with the patriarchs, whomhe says did not know him as “Yahweh,” which probablymeans that the patriarchs did not experience him in the way orcharacter that their descendants would in the exodus event (though itis possible to translate the Hebrew here as a rhetorical questionwith an affirmative idea: “And indeed, by my name Yahweh did Inot make myself known to them?”). God then proceeds to outlinethe redemptive experience in its fullness: deliverance from bondage,reception into a covenant relationship, and possession of the landpromised to their ancestors (vv. 6–8). The statement isbracketed with this declaration: “I am the Lord” (vv. 2,8). One stated purpose of this redemptive work is that Israel mightcome to understand this (v.7). This is important to notebecause a central theme of Exodus as a book is the identity of theGod of Israel. This concern prompts Moses to ask for God’s nameat the burning bush (3:13), and this contempt for the God of theenslaved Hebrews causes Pharaoh to be dismissive at his first meetingwith Moses and Aaron (5:2). Moses asks with the concern of a seekerand receives one of the most profound declarations of God’sidentity in the Bible. Pharaoh asks with the contempt of a scornerand receives one of the most powerful displays of God’sidentity in the Bible (the plagues). The contrast is both strikingand instructive. The meaning of God’s name, then, is revealedin works as well as words, and his purpose is that not just hispeople but all peoples may come to understand who he is. Yet anothermajestic statement in the book of Exodus (9:13–16) makes thisabundantly clear.

Basedon this pattern of usage, the name “Yahweh” seems tosignify especially the active presence of God to bless, deliver, orotherwise aid his people. Where this presence is absent, there is nosuccess, victory, protection, or peace (Num. 14:39–45; Josh.7:10–12; Judg. 16:20; 1Sam. 16:13–14). The messagethat God not only is but also is present to save and deliver may wellbe the most important truth communicated in the OT, and it is onlynatural to see its ultimate embodiment in the person and work ofChrist (Isa. 7:14; cf. Matt. 1:21–23).

Nameused in combination.The name “Yahweh” also is used in combination with otherterms. After God grants a military victory to Israel over theAmalekites, Moses names a commemorative altar “Yahweh Nissi,”meaning “the Lord is my Banner” (Exod. 17:15). InEzekiel’s temple vision Jerusalem is called “YahwehShammah,” meaning “the Lord is there” (Ezek.48:35). A familiar expression is “the Lord of hosts,”which is generally comparable to the expression “commander inchief” used in American culture (cf. 1Kings 22:19–23).

Elohim

Thisis the first term for God encountered in the Bible, right in theopening verse. It is a more generic term, denoting deity in contrastto humans or angels. “Elohim” is a plural form; thesingular terms “El” and “Eloah” are usedoccasionally, particularly in poetic texts. “El” is acommon term in the biblical world; in fact, it is the name for thefather of Baal in the Canaanite religion. This may explain why theBible commonly uses the plural form, to distinguish the one true God,the God of Israel, from his pagan rivals. Others explain the pluralform as a “plural of majesty” or “plural ofintensity,” though it is uncertain just what this would mean.Some see the foundation for NT revelation of the Trinity (Gen.1:26–27; 11:6–7; cf. John 17:20–22), but this isunlikely. The plural form also can serve simply as a common noun,referring to pagan deities (Exod. 12:12), angels (Ps. 97:7,arguably), or even human authorities (Exod. 22:28, possibly).

“El”also occurs in combination with other descriptive terms. The bestknown is “El Shaddai,” meaning “God Almighty”(Gen. 17:1). The precise meaning of “Shaddai” isuncertain, but it seems to have the notion of “great/powerfulone.” The distressed Hagar, caught, comforted, and counseled bythe mysterious personage at a well, calls God “El Roi,”which means “the God who sees me” (Gen. 16:13). One ofthe most exalted expressions to describe God is “El Elyon,”meaning “God Most High.” This title seems to haveparticular reference to God as the owner and master of creation (Gen.14:18–20).

Adonai

Asnoted above, this common word meaning simply “(my) lord/master”is used regularly in place of the personal name of God revealed toMoses in Exod. 3:14. And in the OT of most English Bibles this isindicated by printing “Lord” as opposed to “Lord”(using small capital letters). However, “Adonai” is usedof God in some noteworthy instances, such as Isaiah’s loftyvision of God exalted in Isa. 6 and the prophecy of Immanuel in Isa.7:14. In time, this became the preferred term for referring to God,and the LXX reflected this by using the Greek word kyrios (“lord”)for Yahweh. This makes the ease with which NT writers transfer theuse of the term to Jesus (e.g., 1Cor. 12:3) a strong indicationof their Christology.

The KJV translation for a young girl, an unmarried woman orvirgin, or a female servant. At least five Hebrew words are used torefer to such women. Betulah refers to an unmarried virgin or a youngwoman who has had no sexual experience (Gen. 24:16; Job 31:1; Exod.22:16–17). A man who forcefully lay with such a woman wasexpected to marry her (Deut. 22:13–19). When David was old, avirgin was found to lie at his side to keep him warm (1Kings1:2). Israel as a nation is identified as a young virgin (Jer. 31:4).The second term is ’amah, translated “bondwoman,”“maidservant,” “maid,” “bondmaid,”“servant,” or “female servant” (Gen. 20:17;Exod. 2:5). The third is shipkhah, which refers to a female slave whois of close kinship to her master (Gen. 29:24). The fourth isna’arah, which is translated “unmarried girl”(Esther 2:4 [NIV: “young woman”]) or “servant”(Esther 4:4 [NIV: “female attendant”]; Ruth 2:23). Thefifth is ’almah, which is translated “girl” (Exod.2:8), “virgin” (Isa. 7:14), or “maiden”(Prov. 30:19 [NIV: “young woman”]).

Inthe NT, several Greek words are sometimes translated as “maiden”in the KJV. Parthenos refers to a “virgin,” male orfemale (Matt. 1:23; Acts 21:9; Rev. 14:4). Pais generally means “ayoung girl,” “maiden,”or “child” (Luke 8:51, 54). Paidiskē refers to a“female slave,” “servant maid,” or “servantgirl” (Mark 14:66; Luke 12:45). The word korasion refers to a“girl” or “little girl” (Matt. 9:24–25).Nymphē refersto a “young wife” or “bride” (Luke 12:53;Rev. 21:2).

The KJV translation for a young girl, an unmarried woman orvirgin, or a female servant. At least five Hebrew words are used torefer to such women. Betulah refers to an unmarried virgin or a youngwoman who has had no sexual experience (Gen. 24:16; Job 31:1; Exod.22:16–17). A man who forcefully lay with such a woman wasexpected to marry her (Deut. 22:13–19). When David was old, avirgin was found to lie at his side to keep him warm (1Kings1:2). Israel as a nation is identified as a young virgin (Jer. 31:4).The second term is ’amah, translated “bondwoman,”“maidservant,” “maid,” “bondmaid,”“servant,” or “female servant” (Gen. 20:17;Exod. 2:5). The third is shipkhah, which refers to a female slave whois of close kinship to her master (Gen. 29:24). The fourth isna’arah, which is translated “unmarried girl”(Esther 2:4 [NIV: “young woman”]) or “servant”(Esther 4:4 [NIV: “female attendant”]; Ruth 2:23). Thefifth is ’almah, which is translated “girl” (Exod.2:8), “virgin” (Isa. 7:14), or “maiden”(Prov. 30:19 [NIV: “young woman”]).

Inthe NT, several Greek words are sometimes translated as “maiden”in the KJV. Parthenos refers to a “virgin,” male orfemale (Matt. 1:23; Acts 21:9; Rev. 14:4). Pais generally means “ayoung girl,” “maiden,”or “child” (Luke 8:51, 54). Paidiskē refers to a“female slave,” “servant maid,” or “servantgirl” (Mark 14:66; Luke 12:45). The word korasion refers to a“girl” or “little girl” (Matt. 9:24–25).Nymphē refersto a “young wife” or “bride” (Luke 12:53;Rev. 21:2).

Although essentially characterized by bearing offspring, amother is associated with much more in the Bible. Especiallyprominent are the characteristic ways in which a mother relates toher children: she tends to their needs (1Thess. 2:7), looksafter their welfare (1Kings 3:16–27), comforts them (Ps.131:2), and instructs them (Prov. 1:8; 31:1).

Motherhoodis held in high regard. Bearing a child is an occasion for rejoicing(Gen. 4:1; Ps. 113:9). A virtuous and industrious mother is praisedby her children and husband alike (Prov. 31:28). The Bible describesa mother both crowning a king (Song 3:11) and sitting beside histhrone (1Kings 2:19). The death of a mother brings extremesorrow (Gen. 24:67; Ps. 35:14). Furthermore, God’s promises areoften associated with the birth of a child (e.g., Gen. 3:15; 12:2–3;Judg. 13:3; Isa. 7:14). Mary is blessed among women as the mother ofJesus Christ (Luke 1:42–45). Finally, the Bible protects thedignity of a mother as it does that of the father. The law requireshonor and reverence for both father and mother (Exod. 20:12; Lev.19:3; Deut. 5:16) and condemns to death those who strike or curseeither parent (Exod. 21:15, 17; Lev. 20:9).

Thereis also great concern that adult children look after the welfare oftheir parents as a means of honoring them. David makes provisions forhis parents as he flees from Saul (1Sam. 22:3–4). Jesuscondemns the Pharisees and the scribes for taking the resources duetheir parents and offering them as a gift to God instead (Matt.15:4–6). Even Jesus’ final act upon the cross is toensure the welfare of his mother by defining her relationship withthe Beloved Disciple as mother and son (John 19:26–27). On theother hand, Jesus makes clear that concern for one’s family issubordinate to discipleship to him (Matt. 10:37; Mark 3:35; Luke14:26).

Theword “mother” also carries symbolic or metaphoricalsenses. Sometimes the “mother” is a fitting example ofother things or persons like it, such as Babylon the Great as themother of prostitutes and earthly abominations (Rev. 17:5). In theextended analogy between Hosea’s marriage and God’srelationship to Israel, the nation is called a “mother,”and its inhabitants are her “children” (Hos. 2:4; 4:5;cf. Isa. 50:1; Jer. 50:12). The image of a mother may also refer to alarge city (2Sam. 20:19; Gal. 4:26).

The Nile River is the lifeblood of Egypt and was pivotal forthe life and culture of the ancient Egyptians. Annual flooding beganduring late June or August, inundating the land with water, bringingin nutrient-rich silts, and washing away salts from the soil. Theannual flooding made the Nile Valley a fertile region, especiallysuited for growing cereal grains. The Nile floods also replenishedthe marshes, an important habitat for fish and birds and anotherimportant resource to the ancient Egyptians. Because of the meagerannual rainfall in the region, agriculture was virtually impossibleoutside the Nile floodplains. Therefore, Egyptian settlement patternstended to cling close to the river. However, fluctuations in theNile’s flood levels could bring devastation. An unusually lowflood would mean poor crop yields for the year, and an unusually highflood could destroy homes, livestock, and property. Such variationsin flood levels are alluded to as the cause for the seven years offamine foreboded in the pharaoh’s dream in Gen. 41:1–4,17–21.

TheNile is fed by three main tributaries. The Blue Nile and the Atbaraoriginate in Ethiopia, while the White Nile carries its waters fromLake Victoria in northern Tanzania. All three rivers converge beforethe fifth of six cataracts, or rapids, along the Nile. Thesecataracts, numbered from north to south, acted as a natural barrieragainst hostile incursions from the south.

TheNile flows from south to north, but a prevailing wind along the Nileflows from north to south. These two factors mean that transportationnorth of the cataracts, where the Nile is calm for about 530 miles,was possible in both directions. Travelers could float without asail, using the current to bring them northward (downstream), or ridethe prevailing winds by use of the sail in order to travel southward(upstream). In Egyptian hieroglyphics, northward travel wasillustrated via a symbol of a boat with a folded sail and a steeringoar, while southward travel was shown as a boat with its sailunfurled.

Tothe ancient Egyptians, the Nile Valley was thought of as two halves.“Upper Egypt” referred to the part of the Nile south ofthe Nile Delta, while “Lower Egypt” referred to the NileDelta itself. The ancient Egyptians oriented their world with regardto the Nile, not, as moderns do, by compass directions.

TheNile is mentioned frequently within the Bible, especially concerningJoseph and Moses, but also within the prophecies of Isaiah, Jeremiah,Ezekiel, Amos, and Zechariah. Apart from the aforementioned referencein Gen. 41, the Nile is also referenced as the river into whichPharaoh ordered the Israelite infant boys be thrown, which led toMoses’ fortuitous float into the arms of Pharaoh’sdaughter (Exod. 1:22; 2:3, 5–6, 10; Acts 7:22). Several plaguesare also associated with the Nile (Exod. 4:9; 7:15–24; 8:3–11,20; 17:5; Ps. 78:44–45). In 2Kings 19:24 Sennacheribbrags that he dried up the streams of Egypt. Prophetic references tothe Nile occur in Isa. 7:18; 19:5–8; 23:3, 10; Jer. 46:7–8;Ezek. 29:3–10; Amos 7:8; 9:5; Zech. 10:11.

Divine pronouncements given to humankind that are eitherunsolicited (Isa. 7:3–9; Hag. 1:2–11; Zech. 12:1) or aresponse to an inquiry (2Kings 8:8). It was common practicethroughout the ancient Near East to seek pronouncements from deitiesand to identify holy sites where sacred individuals could query thedeities (e.g., the shrine of Apollo at Delphi). How much time elapsedbetween the transmission of an oracle and its inscription isuncertain. Inscriptions from the surrounding Near Eastern milieuattest that messages received from a deity often were transcribedimmediately upon reception, with the prophet’s name attached.

Receptionand Delivery of Oracles

TheHebrew word massa’ (derived from nasa’, “to lift,take, carry”), variously translated “oracle” (Isa.17:1; 19:1; 21:1; 30:6), “burden” (Isa. 17:1 JPS, KJV),or “prophecy” (Prov. 30:1; 31:1 KJV), is used in thisfigurative sense primarily in prophetic speech (Prov. 30:1; 31:1 arethe exceptions) to refer to threatening pronouncements against Israel(Hab. 1:1; Zech. 12:1; Mal. 1:1), its neighbors (Isa. 13:1; 14:28;15:1; Nah. 1:1), or an individual (2Kings 9:25; 2Chron.24:27). Although the word itself is used infrequently, the propheticactivity of delivering divine pronouncements was prevalent throughoutIsrael’s history, rising in prominence during the monarchy andceasing at the beginning of the intertestamental period.

Priests,judges (Deut. 17:9), and prophets (1Sam. 9:9) could be therecipients and deliverers of divine oracles, although as the dutiesof these offices became more differentiated over time, delivery oforacles became more the province of the prophet (2Kings22:11–14; Jer. 21:2). A few oracles found in the OT areattributed to non-Israelites (Balaam [Num. 22–24]; Agur [Prov.30:1]; King Lemuel [Prov. 31:1]). The Israelites were commanded toseek Yahweh (Isa. 55:6; Hos. 10:12), and they (Isa. 9:13) and theirleaders (Jer. 10:21) were condemned both for failure to do so and fortheir dismissive response to a prophetic oracle once it had beendelivered, whether solicited (Ezek. 33:30–32) or not (Zech.7:12).

Prophetswere often sought to inquire about obtaining an oracle (1Sam.9:9; 2Kings 3:11; 22:13) during times of crisis or need. Suchoracles were for the benefit of either an individual (Exod. 18:15;2Kings 8:8) or the nation (1Kings 22:5; 2Kings3:11; 2Chron. 18:6) and were sought by commoners (Gen. 25:22;Exod. 18:15; Ezek. 33:30), elders (Ezek. 14:1–3; 20:1; see also8:1), royalty (1Kings 14:5; 22:5–8; 2Kings 22:18;2Chron. 26:5), army officials (Jer. 42:1–3), andforeigners (2Kings 8:7; Isa. 14:32). Prophetic response tooracular inquiry was not automatic. Deliverance of an oracle after aninquiry could be immediate (Jer. 37:17), delayed for an extendedperiod of time (Jer. 42:7 [ten days]), or the prophet could refuse todeliver an oracle (Jer. 23:33; Ezek. 14:1). A previous oracle couldbe superseded (Isa. 38 [compare v.1 with vv. 4–6]).Various commodities could be used for payment, including silver(1Sam. 9:7–8), food (1Kings 14:3), and foreigngoods (2Kings 8:7–9).

Oraclescould be pronounced publicly in various places, including the palace(2Kings 20:4–5), the temple (Jer. 7:2; 26:2), the citygates (1Kings 22:10; 2Chron. 18:9), the roadside (1Kings20:38–43), or privately to individuals, including royalty (Jer.37:17), officials (Isa. 22:15), and foreigners (Jer. 39:15–17).There are several mentions in Scripture of oracles that are not partof the canonical record (e.g., 2Chron. 24:27).

Oracularpronouncements could be brief (1Kings 17:1) or lengthy (thebooks of Nahum and Malachi), and they consisted of a variety ofgenres, including satire (Isa. 44:9–20), parable (2Sam.12:1–14), and lament (Jer. 9:20; Ezek. 19; Amos 5:1), toproduce the desired rhetorical effect. The prophetic introductory orconcluding oracular formulas “thus says the Lord” and“declares the Lord” echo the messenger terminology of thebroader culture, in which a similar introductory “thus saysX”was used by messengers delivering public proclamations on behalf ofthe one who commissioned them (2Chron. 36:23). In this way, theprophet presented an oracle as God’s message to the people, nothis own.

NominalIsrael was condemned for seeking pronouncements from false gods(2Kings 1:3–4, 6, 16; 2Chron. 25:15; Hos. 4:12),necromancy (Isa. 8:19), and failure to inquire of the true God ofIsrael (Zeph. 1:6). False prophets could also claim to have receivedcommunication from God (Deut. 13:1–11; 18:20; Ezek. 13), butthey were indicted for delivering their own message without divinesanction (Jer. 23:34–39; 28; Lam. 2:14; Ezek. 13), turning thepeople away from the true God to worship false gods (Deut. 13:1–11)and delivering oracular pronouncements in order to enjoy personalpleasure (Mic. 2:11) and gain (Jer. 6:13–15; 8:10–12).

OftenScripture simply notes that a prophet received a “word of theLord” (Jer. 1:2; Hos. 1:1; Joel 1:1; cf. Isa. 14:28; Hab. 1:1)without explicitly stating the means by which the divinepronouncement was received. The prophetic witness mentions bothseeing (Isa. 1:1; 13:1; Amos 8:1; Hab. 1:1) and hearing (Ezek.1:24–25, 28) divine communication, but what actually happenedto the prophet is not easily determined. The references to the Spiritcoming upon an individual (Num. 11:25; 24:2; 1Sam. 10:6, 10;Ezek. 8:1; 11:5; 37:1) point to some sort of divine intervention thatseized the prophet’s consciousness in such a way as to preparethe prophet for a revelation from God.

Prophetswere known to have ecstatic or visionary experiences that marked themas operating under divine influence. In addition, several of theprophets (Isa. 20; Jer. 13:1–11; Ezek. 5:1–4) acted outdemonstrations (sign-acts) as part of their oracular ministry. Theseecstatic experiences and peculiar actions offended many of theircontemporaries (2Kings 9:11; Jer. 29:26; Hos. 9:7). Thesephenomena were concentrated around the two great crises faced byIsrael: the demise of the northern kingdom in 722 BC and of thesouthern kingdom in 586 BC. Having been given warning that nationaljudgment was imminent, these prophets were led to augment theirpreaching with dramatizations in order to convey more persuasively tothe audience the urgency of heeding their message (Ezek. 12:8–11).

Typesof Oracles

Formcritics have identified three main types of prophetic oracles:oracles of salvation, judgment, and repentance. The first is furtherdivided into subcategories: individual salvation oracles (1Kings17:8–16) and community salvation oracles (1Sam. 7:3–15).The prophets, however, were not tightly bound to the traditionalforms, and they demonstrated great creativity in modifying the formsto fit their personal style and the situation before them.

Thesevarious types of oracles were not arbitrary pronouncements; they werefounded on Israel’s covenantal relationship with Yahweh (Jer.34:18). The prophets served as covenant prosecutors, and theiroracles were part of the prosecution’s case on behalf of Yahwehagainst the people. Behavior, whether an individual’s or thenation’s, was evaluated in light of the demands of thecovenant. So too, Yahweh’s response—judgment orsalvation—was cast in terms of his faithfulness to thecovenant(s) that he made with Israel.

Salvationoracles announced Yahweh’s glorious deliverance andrestoration, mostly in response to the catastrophe of 586 BC (Ezek.11:16–21; 36:24–38; 37:15–28; Amos 9:11–15;Zeph. 3:14–20), and they could include in thesalvificpronouncement the destruction of the enemy (Zeph. 3:19). They oftenopen with the formulaic “in that day” (Amos 9:11; Mic.4:6), focusing Israel’s attention on a future time when all itsenemies would be subdued and covenantal blessings would beestablished and enjoyed by the redeemed community.

Judgmentoracles typically were introduced with an interjection, oftentranslated into English as “woe,” followed by a formaladdress and accusation accompanied by an announcement of thepunishment to be inflicted (Isa. 1:4; 5:8, 11, 18, 20, 21, 22; Jer.22:13; Ezek. 34:2). These oracles could take the form of a lawsuit.In Isa. 1:2 “heaven and earth” are summoned as witnesses,harking back to Deut. 30:19; 31:28; 32:1, where these elements ofnature were invoked by Moses to be witnesses of God’s covenantwith Israel. Some oracles state explicitly that a case has beenbrought against the people (Isa. 3:13; Jer. 2:9; Hos. 4:1; 12:2; Mic.6:1–2).

Repentanceoracles specifically summon the addressee to repentance and arecommitment to the covenant in order to avoid destruction (Isa.31:6; Jer. 4:1; Hos. 12:6).

Meansof Oracles

Variousobjects were sanctioned for use in discerning God’s will.Scripture is silent on many of the details regarding the manipulationof these objects, but the validity of their use for discerning thedivine will is not questioned. The mysterious Urim and Thummim, twostonelike objects kept in the high priest’s breastpiece, appearto have operated to give a “yes or no” response (Exod.28:30; Lev. 8:8; Deut. 33:8; 1Sam. 14:41), though sometimesthere is no response at all (1Sam. 28:6). The ephod, some sortof two-piece linen apron or loin cloth worn by priests under thebreastpiece (Exod. 28:4, 6; 1Sam. 23:9–12; 1Sam.30:7–8; but note that Samuel was wearing one as he assisted thehigh priest Eli [1Sam. 2:18], and David, as he led theprocession returning the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem [2Sam.6:14]), was also pressed into service for discerning God’swill. Another method, the casting of lots, is shrouded in mystery.This method was used to determine the scapegoat on the Day ofAtonement (Lev. 16:8–10), the guilty party in the loss at Ai(Josh. 7:14), land allotment in Canaan (Josh. 14–19; 21),priestly assignments in the temple (1Chron. 24:5; 25:8; 26:13),residency in Jerusalem in the postexilic community (Neh. 11:1), theday to massacre the Jews in Persia as plotted by Haman (Esther 3:7;9:24), and dividing the Messiah’s clothing (Ps. 22:18; cf. John19:24).

Oraclesagainst the Foreign Nations

Aspecial group of oracles are those addressed to Israel’shistoric enemies, commonly referred to as “oracles against the[foreign] nations.” Blocks of these oracles are found in Amos1–2; Isa. 13–23; Jer. 46–51; Ezek. 25–32 andthe entire books of Nahum and Obadiah. These oracles were addressedto a specific foreign nation (the putative audience) but were heardby Israel. During a time when most people’s conception of deitywas tied to a specific land, these oracles maintained that Yahweh wassovereign over the whole earth, and that his purposes included allhumankind. All the nations do his bidding. These oracles were to beunderstood against the backdrop of Israel’s infidelity toYahweh and its futile reliance on the support of foreign nations. Theoracles demonstrated that Yahweh would bring down all that washaughty and would order events so that he alone would be high andexalted in the day of his coming. Those nations that cursed Israelwould themselves be cursed (Gen. 12:1–3; 27:29).

NewTestament Usage

Inthe NT, “oracle” (Gk. logion) occurs four times, alwaysin the plural (logia [NIV: “words”]). It refers to theMosaic law (Acts 7:38) and unspecified portions of revelation (Rom.3:2; Heb. 5:12; 1Pet. 4:11).

Patience is a moral attribute that God possesses and thathumans may possess. One who has patience allows time to pass whilemaintaining a positive disposition, often in the face of suffering(Hab. 3:16; 2Tim. 3:10–11; James 5:10), as the KJVtranslation “longsuffering” implies (cf. Prov. 14:29NASB: “slow to anger”). The Scriptures universally speakof patience as an admirable quality and associate patience with othervirtues, such as inner peace (Ps. 37:7), wisdom (Prov. 19:11),persuasiveness (Prov. 25:15), humility (Eccles. 7:8), and kindness(Rom. 2:4; 1Cor. 13:4).

Numerouspassages praise God’s patience. Humans try (Isa. 7:13) and showcontempt for (Rom. 2:4) God’s patience, sometimes by refusingto be patient with others even though they themselves have receivedmercy from God (Matt. 18:23–35). Nonetheless, God displays hispatience by granting them eternal life through faith in Christ(1Tim. 1:16). In fact, God has patiently delayed destroying theworld because he is compassionate and wants all to come to repentance(2Pet. 3:9). God’s patience is evident even toward thosewho are destined for destruction (Rom. 9:22; 1Pet. 3:20).

Justas God is patient, he imparts patience to the Christian through hisHoly Spirit (Gal. 5:22). Like Abraham, the prophets, and any farmer,Christians are to exhibit patience, bearing with people both insideand outside the church (Eph. 4:2; 1Thess. 5:14–15) asthey wait eagerly for Christ’s return (Heb. 6:12–15;James 5:7–10). Those in Christian leadership must modelpatience and encourage others with patience (2Tim. 3:10; 4:2).

Jesus Christ is the centerpiece of the Christian Scriptures. The meaning and interpretation of both Testaments is properly grasped only in light of the person and work of Jesus Christ. That is not to say that the Testaments testify to Jesus Christ in the exact same way; they obviously do not, but both Testaments are part of the inscripturated revelation that, in light of the incarnation, proclaims Jesus Christ to be the fullest manifestation of God given to humankind.

Old Testament

According to the Scriptures. The early Christians were adamant that the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ happened “according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:3–4), which meant that these events lined up with Israel’s sacred traditions. On the road to Emmaus the risen Jesus explained to the two travelers the things concerning himself “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” in relation to the death and glorification of the Messiah (Luke 24:27). In one of the major Johannine discourses, Jesus tells the Pharisees that the Scriptures “testify about me” (John 5:39). Early Christian authors could find certain key texts that demonstrated the conformity of the Christ-event to the pattern of Israel’s Scriptures, such as Pss. 2; 110; 118; Isa. 53. Yet much of the OT can be understood without mention of Jesus Christ in relation to its own historical context, and there is the danger of overly allegorizing OT texts in order to make them say something about Jesus Christ and the church.

The relationship between the Testaments. The way that the NT authors echo, allude to, quote, and interpret the OT is a complex matter, but at least two points need to be made about the relationship between the two Testaments.

First, the OT anticipates and illuminates the coming of Jesus Christ. “Anticipate” does not mean “predict,” but the law and the prophets foreshadow the offices and identity of Jesus Christ. The offices of prophet, priest, and king in the OT prefigure the ministry of Christ, who is the one who reveals God, intercedes on behalf of humankind, and is the Messiah and Lord. The sacrificial cultus, with the necessity of shedding blood for the removal of sin, prefigures the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ. This is why the law is a “shadow” of the one who was to come (Col. 2:17; Heb. 10:1). “Illuminate” means that certain OT texts, though not referring to Jesus in their historical or literary context, explain aspects of his person and work. This is seen most clearly in the way that the psalms are used in the NT. Texts such as Pss. 2:7; 110:1–4 provided biblical categories that explained the nature of Jesus’ sonship, the quality of his priestly ministry, and his installation as God’s vice-regent.

Second, we should differentiate between prophecy and typology. The prophetic promises in Ezek. 37; Amos 9; and Mic. 4 about a future Davidic king whom God will use to save and restore Israel are genuine prophecies that look forward to a future event yet to be fulfilled. These texts set forth the job description of the Messiah as the renewal and restoration of Israel from bondage and exile. It is unsurprising then that in Acts, James the brother of Jesus could cite Amos 9:11–12 as proof that Gentiles should be accepted into the people of God with the coming of the Messiah (Acts 15:15–18).

Typological interpretation, on the other hand, sees OT persons, places, or events as prototypes or patterns of NT persons, places, or events. For example, in Rom. 5:14 Paul says that Adam is a “type” or “pattern” of the one to come. Similarly, Matthew’s use of Isa. 7:14 in Matt. 1:23 is also typological rather than prophetic. In the context of Isaiah, the promise refers to a child born during the reign of King Ahaz as a sign that the Judean kingdom will survive the Assyrian onslaught. Matthew’s citation does not demand an exact correspondence of events as much as it postulates a correlation of patterns or types between Isaiah’s narrative and the Matthean birth story. The coming of God’s Son, the manifestation of God’s presence, and the rescue of Israel through a child born to a young girl bring to Matthew’s mind Isa. 7 as an obvious prophetic precedent, repeated at a new juncture of redemptive history.

A Christology of the Old Testament. The NT authors interpreted the OT in search of answers to questions pertaining to the identity and ministry of Jesus Christ, the nature of the people of God, and the arrival of the new age. They detected patterns in the OT that were repeated or recapitulated in Jesus’ own person. They proclaimed that the prophetic promises made to Israel had been made good in Jesus Christ, and they found allusions to the various events of his life, death, and exaltation. Jesus and Israel’s Scriptures became a mutually interpretive spiral whereby the Christians began to understand the OT in light of Jesus and understood Jesus in light of the OT. In this canonical setting we can legitimately develop a “Christology of the Old Testament.”

New Testament

The Gospels. The canonical Gospels are four ancient biographies that pay attention to the history and significance of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. They represent a testimony to Jesus and embody the collective memory of his person and actions as they were transmitted and interpreted by Christians in the Greco-Roman world of the mid- to late first century.

All four Gospels follow the same basic outline by variably detailing Jesus’ ministry, passion, and exaltation, and all of them place the story of Jesus in the context of the fulfillment of the story of Israel. At the same time, each Gospel in its plot and portrayal of Jesus remains distinctive in its own right. Yet they are not four different Jesuses, but rather four parallel portraits of Jesus, much like four stained-glass windows or four paintings depict the same person in different ways.

The Gospel of Matthew portrays Jesus as the long-awaited Davidic Messiah of Israel, with a focus on his teaching authority as a type of new Moses. The Gospel of Mark describes Jesus as the powerful Son of God and concurrently as the suffering Son of Man, whose cross reveals the reality of his identity and mission. The Gospel of Luke emphasizes Jesus’ role as an anointed prophet with a special concern for the poor and outcasts and his role as dispenser of the Holy Spirit. Without flattening the distinctive christological shape of each of the Synoptic Gospels, we could say that they focus on Jesus as the proclaimer of the kingdom of God and as king of the very same kingdom.

The Gospel of John has its own set of characteristic emphases in which Jesus’ consciousness of his divine nature and purpose is heightened. Programmatic for the entirety of John’s Gospel is the prologue in 1:1–18 about the “Word [who] became flesh,” which gives a clear theology of incarnation and revelation associated with Jesus’ coming. There is also much material unique to John’s Gospel, such as the “I am” statements that further exposit the nature of Jesus’ person and the climactic confession by Thomas that Jesus is “my Lord and my God” (20:28).

The Gospels indicate that mere knowledge that Jesus died for the purpose of salvation is an insufficient understanding of him. What is also needed, and what they provide, is an understanding of his teachings and his mission in light of Israel’s Scriptures and in view of the sociopolitical situation of Palestine. Jesus came to redeem and renew Israel so that a transformed Israel would transform the world.

Acts. The book of Acts contains the story of the emergence of the early church from Jerusalem to Rome. Even though Acts is a repository of apostolic preaching and plots the beginnings of the Gentile mission, it is the sequel to Luke’s Gospel and is very much the story of Jesus in perfect tense (i.e., a past event with ongoing significance). The most succinct summary of the Christology of Acts is in Peter’s speech in Jerusalem, where he states that “this Jesus” whom they crucified has been made both “Lord and Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” by God (2:36). In the succeeding narratives emphasis is given to “Jesus is the Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” (e.g., 9:22; 17:3; 18:5), which is a message pertinent to Jews and Gentiles (20:21).

Paul’s Letters. The Pauline Epistles, although they are situational, pastoral, and not given primarily to christological exposition, still exhibit beliefs about Jesus held by Paul and his Christian contemporaries. The high points of Paul’s Christology can be detected in his use of traditional material such as Col. 1:15–20, which exposits the sufficiency and the supremacy of Christ. Philippians 2:5–11 narrates the story of the incarnation as an example of self-giving love. In 1 Cor. 8:6 Paul offers a Christianized version of the Shema of Deut. 6:4. There is a petition to Jesus as “Come, Lord!” in 1 Cor. 16:22. Paul can also refer to Jesus as God in Rom. 9:5 (although the grammar is ambiguous). For Paul, Jesus is both the “heavenly man” (1 Cor. 15:47–49) and the Son to come from heaven (1 Thess. 1:10). This interest in the divine Son of God does not mean that Paul was ignorant of or disinterested in the life and teachings of Jesus. Elsewhere he implies knowledge of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Rom. 14:14; 1 Cor. 7:10–11) and refers to the incarnation (e.g., 2 Cor. 8:9; Col. 2:9).

A number of titles are used to describe Jesus in Paul’s letters, including “Lord” and “Christ/Messiah” (and variations such as “Lord Jesus Christ” and “Christ Jesus”), “Savior,” and “Seed of David” (Rom. 1:3). But probably the most apt expression of Jesus’ nature according to Paul is “Son of God” (e.g., Rom. 1:4; 2 Cor. 1:19; Gal. 2:20). This language of sonship suggests that Jesus is the means of God’s salvation and glory and is the special agent through whom the Father acts. Referring to Jesus as “Son” also underscores Jesus’ unique relationship to God the Father and his unique role in executing the ordained plan of salvation for the elect.

We might also add that Paul provides the building blocks of what would later become a full-blown trinitarian theology, such as in the benediction of 2 Cor. 13:14 and in general exhortations about the gospel (1 Cor. 2:1–5). It must be emphasized that Paul’s Christology cannot be separated from his eschatology, soteriology, and ecclesiology. The sending of God’s Son (see Rom. 8:3; Gal. 4:4–5) into the world marks the coming of redemption and salvation through the cross and resurrection of the Son, and these are appropriated by faith. Those who believe become members of the restored Israel, the renewed Adamic race, and constituent members of the body of Christ. To that we might add the experiential element of Paul’s Christology as Jesus is known in the experience of salvation, prayer, and worship (e.g., Gal. 2:19–20).

The General Letters. The General Letters (also called the Catholic Epistles) provide a further array of images and explorations into the person and work of Jesus Christ and how they relate to the community of faith. The message of Hebrews is essentially “Jesus is better!” He is better than the angels and better than Moses; he is a better high priest; he offers a better sacrifice, establishes a better law, and instigates a better covenant. This letter is a sermonic exhortation against falling away from the faith (e.g., 2:1–4), and toward that end the author sets before his readers the magnificence of Jesus Christ, who is “the same yesterday and today and forever” (13:8).

James has little christological content and focuses instead on exhortations that bear remarkable resemblance to the teachings of Jesus from the Gospels. Even so, the letter makes passing reference to the “glorious Lord Jesus Christ” (2:1; cf. 1:1).

Central to 1 Peter is the glory and salvation that will be manifested at the revelation of Jesus Christ at his second coming (1:5, 7, 9, 13; 4:13; 5:1). Much attention is given to Jesus’ sacrificial death as a lamb (1:19), the example of his suffering (2:21–23; 4:1–2, 13), and the substitutionary nature of his death (2:24; 3:18). He is the Shepherd and Overseer of the souls of Christians (2:25). Peter writes this to encourage congregations in Asia Minor living under adverse conditions, and he sets before them the pattern of Jesus as a model for their own journey.

In 2 Peter we find a mix of Jewish eschatological concepts and Hellenistic religious language, with the author seeking to defend the apostolic gospel in a pagan culture. Jesus is the source of knowledge (1:2, 8; 2:20) and righteousness (1:1). Much emphasis is given to the coming kingdom of Jesus Christ (1:11, 16; 3:10). Jesus is the sustainer and renewer of the church and also the coming judge of the entire world.

Similar themes can be found in Jude, which is addressed to a group of believers who have been infiltrated by false teachers promoting licentiousness. Jude declares the infiltrators to be condemned and calls on the believers to hold fast to the faith. Jesus is the “Sovereign and Lord” (v. 4), Jesus saved people out of Egypt during the exodus (v. 5 [but see marginal notes on the variant reading “Lord”]), the second coming of Jesus will mark the revelation of his “mercy” (v. 21), and the benediction ascribes “glory, majesty, power and authority” to God through Jesus (v. 25). Most characteristic of all is the emphasis upon Jesus/God as the one who keeps the believers in the grip of his saving power (vv. 1, 21, 23).

The Letters of John take up where the Gospel of John left off, focusing on Jesus as the incarnate Word of God. The first of the three Johannine Epistles appears to have been written in a context where a community of Christians was being pressured by Jews to deny that Jesus is the Messiah (2:22) and also by dissident docetists to deny that Jesus had a physical body (4:2; 5:6). The major focus, however, is on Jesus as the Son of God (1:3, 7; 2:23; 3:8, 23; 4:9–10, 15; 5:11) and the incarnation of God’s very own truth and love (3:16; cf. 2 John 3).

Revelation. The Christology of the book of Revelation is best summed up in the opening description of Jesus as “him who is, and who was, and who is to come,” which underscores the lordship of Jesus over the past, present, and future. John then describes Jesus with the threefold titles “the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth” (1:4–5). In many ways, the story and Christology of Revelation are paradoxical. Jesus is both the victim of Roman violence and the victor over human evil. Jesus is the suffering “Lamb of God” and the powerful “Lion of the tribe of Judah.” In Rev. 4–5 we are given a picture of the worship in heaven and the enthronement of Jesus, and yet the realities on earth are a dearth of heavenly goodness, with persecution and apostasy rampant (Rev. 1–3). This tension continues until the final revelation of Jesus, when the heavenly Lord returns to bring the goodness and power of heaven to transform the perils of the earth and bring his people into the new Jerusalem.

Summary

The primary fixtures of a biblical Christology are (1) Jesus Christ is the promised deliverer intimated in Israel’s Scriptures, whose identity and mission are anticipated and illuminated by the law and the prophets; (2) the man Jesus of Nazareth is identified with the risen and exalted Lord Jesus Christ; and (3) Jesus participates in the very identity and being of God. See also Jesus Christ.

This term occurs in the KJV of Rom. 9:29; James 5:4 (NIV:“Almighty”). In both cases the word in the Greek text(sabaōth)is a transliteration of the Hebrew term tseba’ot.This word occurs approximately five hundred times in the OT and isvariously rendered. Among English translations, the NIV ispractically alone in translating it as “Almighty,” but indoing so it follows the practice of the LXX. Most translations renderit as “hosts” or “armies.” The underlyingthought is that Israel’s God is “Yahweh of hosts”or “Yahweh of armies” (a phrase occurring approximately280 times), the God who commands all the armies of both heaven andearth.

Theterm is grounded in the Israelite understanding of God as a warrior(Exod. 15:3) who fights alongside and for Israel against its enemies(holy war). In doing so he commands the armies of the heavens (theangels) as well as Israelite soldiers. It is also important to notethat when Israel forsakes its God to serve other deities, “Yahwehof armies” will become the unseen commander of the armies ofIsrael’s enemies (e.g., the Assyrians or Babylonians) to fightagainst Israel (see, e.g., Isa. 7:18–20).

Implements utilized for the purpose of craftsmanship in somemanner, whether in agriculture, commerce, or artistry.

Materials

Itcan be assumed that early Israelites used tools made of wood, bones,and ivory for the handles, and stone for the working part of thetool. Stone tools were utilized for pounding, grinding, and cutting.Many examples of stone tools have been discovered throughout theancient Near East. Early farmers and workers used some of the morebasic tools, such as hammers, pestles, knives, and chisels.

Sometools were used almost exclusively for the construction of othertools. Spherical instruments made out of diorite or some other veryhard substance were used to fashion an instrument into a usableshape. Thanks to their hardness and round shape, they rarelysplintered and could be used with reasonable force.

Onlycertain types of stone could be turned into a cutting utensil. Thestone had to have both a requisite hardness and a crystalline natureto be transformed into a blade. Only chert and flint meet suchcriteria, but only flint was readily available to the nomad, beingfound in the form of nodules and small cobbles in deposits oflimestone. Because of flint’s brittleness, the artisan had totake great care in the amount of pressure applied in making a knife.The fact that so many examples of flint knives are no larger than afew centimeters suggests that this was easier said than done. Flintknives were used by the Israelites in sacred rituals, includingcircumcision (Josh. 5:2).

Metalsbegan to be used for utensils at roughly the same time Israel enteredthe promised land. Bronze, an alloy of copper and tin, was used forweaponry and for everyday utensils. The molten alloy was poured intomolds made from stone and then shaped and formed by a smith. Asimilar process was used for iron in the periods following theinstitution of the monarchy. Early Israel apparently had few if anyblacksmiths capable of such work, since the Scriptures record thatthe Israelites went to the Philistines for production of their irontools (1Sam. 13:19). Even after the advent of alloys, however,there seems to have been a preference for the more primitive flintknives, especially in sacred ceremonies, possibly because flintmaintained a sharper edge longer, or perhaps because there was acertain taboo associated with the mixing of metals. The applicationof the profane to the sacred would have rendered the ceremony unfitfor God.

Typesof Tools

Knives.Kniveswere made in various sizes. The smallest version is referred to inJehoiakim’s destruction of Jeremiah’s manuscript in Jer.36:23 (some English versions distinguish it as a “scribe’sknife” [NIV] or “penknife” [NRSV]). This same knife(Heb. ta’ar) also was used for shaving (Num. 6:5) and appearsin imagery related to sharpness or exactness (Ps. 52:2; Isa. 7:20).Between six inches and a foot long would have been the more normallength of knives used for everyday tasks such as butchering (Gen.22:6).

Agriculturaltools. Theplow came in various sizes and forms. In the more fertile areas,plowshares were unnecessary, and a smaller utensil similar to a hoewas used simply to break up the topsoil (1Sam. 13:21). Theinstrument also was used on more uneven terrain, where a typicalanimal-drawn plowshare would not work. It was actually thisinstrument that would have been turned into a weapon of war or, inthe case of everlasting peace, transformed back into a farmingutensil (Isa. 2:4; Mic. 4:3). In more arid regions, where the soilwas more hardened and difficult to break up, the larger plowshare wasused. In a fashion well known in the Western world, the largerplowshare was harnessed to a beast of burden and guided through thefarmer’s field to prepare the land for sowing.

Harvestinginvolved the utilization of various tools. Grain was first cut with asickle (Jer. 50:16). In the ancient Near East, the sickle handletypically was short and could be held in one hand. The blade usuallywas composed ofa jawbone or curved shaft fitted with pieces offlint or other sharp objects. As an instrument of harvest, the sicklealso became a picture of judgment and ingathering (Joel 3:13; Mark4:29). For harvesting grapes, a pruning hook, which was very similarin appearance to a sickle but smaller, was used (Isa. 2:4).

Handtools. Severalsmall hand tools were similar to their modern expressions but wereused for different purposes. An awl is used to bore holes. In theancient Near East, this tool was made of stone, bone, or metal. Oneof the more distinctive uses for this tool in ancient times was topierce ears (Exod. 21:6; Deut. 15:17). Saws were made with a woodenhandle on either one end or both ends. An ancient tradition says thatIsaiah was sawn in two (cf. Heb. 11:37). Axes were used for fellingtrees (Deut. 19:5; Matt. 3:10) but also for cutting stones andremoving them from quarries (1Kings 6:7). Early models werecrafted from stone, but by the time of Israel’s nationhood theimplement was almost always made of iron. This is demonstrated atplaces where an ax head is referred to with barzel,the Hebrew word for “iron” (Deut. 19:5; 2Kings6:5).

Constructionand craftsmanship tools.When it came to building and craftsmanship, the Israelites again usedinstruments quite similar to those employed by modern counterparts.The Israelites used hammers (Isa. 44:12) made of stone, with woodenhandles, for large construction jobs. They also had several types ofchisels and other carving utensils (Exod. 32:4; Deut. 15:17). Forhammering these chisels and carving utensils, a large wooden mallet,similar to those used by craftspeople today, probably was used. Aplumb line was used for ensuring that walls were straight. Thissimple device consisted of a length of string with a weight tied tothe end. The plumb line was held up against a wall as it was beingbuilt in order to determine if the wall was consistently vertical. Assuch, it served as an appropriate image for whether Israel wasstraight in relation to its covenant with God (Amos 7:7–9).Potters used a pottery wheel (Jer. 18:3), and weavers used a loomwith a web in order to create intricate patterns of cloth (Judg.16:13–14). Blacksmiths used bellows, tongs, and hammersdesigned especially for their work (Isa. 44:12).

Bythe time of the NT, artisans were far more dependent on iron for mostof their tools. Advances in smelting and in the manipulation of thealloys allowed the crude iron of previous eras to begin approachingthe tempered steel of the Middle Ages. This permitted moreflexibility in how utensils such as hammers could be used and allowedfor more effective chisels to be created. As a result, craftsmanshipin stone, marble, and other hard surfaces became more prevalent, andossuaries, statues, and building facades became more ornate andintricate in design. Multiple examples of such craftwork have beenunearthed in archaeological digs.

The biblical writers proclaim that only one God exists, yetthey also refer to three persons as “God.” The Father,the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all God. Furthermore, these threepersons relate to one another as self-conscious individuals. Jesusprays to the Father (John 17). The Father speaks from heavenconcerning the Son (Matt. 3:17; Luke 3:22). Jesus vows to send theSpirit as “Advocate” after his ascension, and he will dowhat Jesus himself did while he was among us (John 16:7–8). Thechallenge of Christian theology, therefore, is to formulate adoctrine of God that captures all these elements, each of whichsurfaces in both Testaments.

OldTestament

Inthe OT, evidence for the Trinity appears mostly at the implicitlevel. Yahweh is called “Father” in Isaiah (63:16; 64:8),Jeremiah (3:4, 19; 31:9), and Malachi (2:10). Isaiah declares, “Butyou are our Father, though Abraham does not know us or Israelacknowledge us; you, Lord, are our Father, our Redeemer from of oldis your name” (Isa. 63:16). Yahweh identifies himself as“Father” implicitly when he claims Israel as his “son”(Hos. 11:1), and the same principle applies to Ps. 2:7, where Goddeclares to his anointed, “You are my son; today I have becomeyour father.” These cases do not compare in numbers with the NTevidence, but a person thought of as “God the Father”certainly appears in the OT.

Messianictexts of the OT introduce us to God the Son. In Isa. 9:6 a “childis born” who will be called “Wonderful Counselor, MightyGod, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” The day of“Immanuel,” or “God with us,” is foreshadowedin Isa. 7:14 (cf. Matt. 1:22), while Isa. 40:3–5 anticipatesthe appearance of the Lord “in the wilderness” (cf. Matt.3:3). Daniel sees “one like a son of man, coming with theclouds of heaven” being given “authority, glory andsovereign power” (Dan. 7:13–14). In Ps. 110:1 Yahweh saysto David’s “Lord,” “Sit at my right handuntil I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.”

Similarly,the OT seems to distinguish the Spirit of God from Yahweh whileimplying the Spirit’s own personality. Genesis 1:2 makes thatcase, as does Exod. 31:3, where Yahweh fills Bezalel with the “Spiritof God” (cf. Exod. 35:31; Num. 11:29). In 1Sam. 16:14 acontrast is made between the “Spirit of the Lord” thatleaves Saul and an “evil spirit from the Lord” thattorments him; also we find a repentant David pleading that God wouldnot take away his “Holy Spirit” (Ps. 51:11). The Spiritcan be put on persons by God, with the result that they prophesy(Isa. 61:1; Joel 2:28–29) and do what pleases him (Ezek.36:26–27). In the OT, therefore, we see two persons (the Sonand the Holy Spirit) who are both God and also distinguishable fromone to whom they answer and by whom they are sent.

NewTestament

TheNT contains abundant evidence for “God the Father,” oftenbecause of Jesus’ teaching. The “Father” appearsseveral times in the Sermon on the Mount (e.g., Matt. 5:16; 6:6–9,14, 18, 26, 32; 7:11). Matthew 7:21 stands out because of Jesus’reference to “my Father who is in heaven,” by which heidentifies himself as the Son (see also Matt. 15:13; 16:17; 18:10;and Luke 24:49). Paul’s greetings normally come from God theFather and the Lord Jesus Christ, as seen in Rom. 1:7: “Graceand peace to you from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ”(also 1Cor. 1:3; 2Cor. 1:2; Gal. 1:1–3; 1Tim.1:2; 2Tim. 1:2). Paul introduces the Father and the Son in1Cor. 8:6: “For us there is but one God, the Father, fromwhom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord,Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live”(see also 1Cor. 15:24; 2Cor. 11:31; Eph. 1:3; Phil.2:22). Other significant texts include Heb. 1:5; 1Pet. 1:2–3;in the latter, the scattered believers are those “who have beenchosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through thesanctifying work of the Spirit, to be obedient to Jesus Christ andsprinkled with his blood.... Praise be to the Godand Father of our Lord Jesus Christ!” The NT evidence for “Godthe Father” is clear.

Biblicaltexts that point to the deity of Christ supply evidence for thesecond claim: the Son is God. Some of the texts listed above say asmuch, but one can take this case further. In context, John’sprologue refers to Jesus as the “Word” and proclaims thathe was “with God” and “was God” (John 1:1).Jesus also relates to the Father in ways that imply his own deity, ashe declares in John 10:30, “I and the Father are one.”After significant doubting, Thomas confesses the deity of Christ inJohn 20:28: “My Lord and my God!” NT passages thatidentify Jesus as the “Son of God” point to his deity, asPeter does in Matt. 16:16: “You are the Messiah, the Son of theliving God.” Even demons identify Jesus as the Son. They callout, “What do you want with us, Son of God? ...Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?”(Matt. 8:29; cf. Mark 5:7). The so-called Christ Hymn of Phil. 2:6–11puts Jesus on the level with God, saying that he did not consider“equality with God something to be used to his own advantage.”The author of Hebrews declares that Jesus is “the radiance ofGod’s glory and the exact representation of his being”(1:3). Colossians 1:15–16 says that Jesus is the “imageof the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation” and theone by whom “all things were created,” and Col. 1:19states that “God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell inhim.” According to Titus 2:13, Jesus is “our great Godand Savior.” The entire sequence of Rev. 4–5 highlightsthe deity of Christ, culminating in the praise “To him who sitson the throne and to the Lamb be praise and honor and glory andpower, for ever and ever!” as both the Enthroned One and theLamb are worshiped as God (5:13–14).

TheNT writers underscore both the deity and the distinctive personalityof the Holy Spirit. Jesus is conceived in Mary’s womb by theSpirit’s power (Matt. 1:18–20), and when Jesus isbaptized, the Spirit descends upon him as a dove (Matt. 3:16; Mark1:10). Jesus drives out demons by the Spirit, and one dare not speakagainst the Spirit when he does so (Matt. 12:28–32). Luke’sGospel puts added emphasis on the ministry of the Spirit, as we alsosee in Acts. He empowers various people to praise and prophesy (Luke1:41, 67) and to be witnesses for Christ (Acts 1:8; 2:4, 17–18,38). Sinners can lie to the Holy Spirit (Acts 5:3, 9), and the HolySpirit bears witness along with the apostles to the risen Christ(5:32). In John’s Gospel, the Spirit becomes the counselor andteacher of the disciples, reminding them of their Lord’sinstructions (John 14:26; 16:13). The Spirit brings assurance ofsonship (Rom. 8:16) and helps disciples when they pray (8:26). Thisperson even knows the very thoughts of God (1Cor. 2:11).Accordingly, the Great Commission requires baptism in the name of theFather, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Matt. 28:19). All three membersof the Trinity have a part in the advancement of the kingdom, theSpirit no less than the Father and the Son.

Relationshipsbetween Father, Son, and Spirit

Theevidence considered thus far demonstrates that three persons arecalled “God” in Scripture: the Father, the Son, and theHoly Spirit. But the Scriptures also point to a chain of command intheir relationship to one another. The Son obeys the Father, and theSpirit proceeds from the Father and the Son to apply the work of thecross to the church. This “functional subordination” ofthe Son to the Father, some might argue, would follow simply from theanalogy chosen by God to reveal himself to us. The “Son”would obey his “Father,” not vice versa, though theyshare a common dignity as God, just as a human father and son share acommon humanity. But the NT writers expressly tell us that theyrelate to each other in this way. In Matt. 11:27 (cf. Luke 10:22)Jesus announces, “All things have been committed to me by myFather” (cf. John 3:35; 5:22). The latter transfers authorityto the former as his subordinate. The Father even (for a season)knows more than the Son regarding the last days: “About thatday or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son,but only the Father” (Matt. 24:36), though he also dignifiesthe Son: “For the Father loves the Son and shows him all hedoes” (John 5:20). The Son’s commitment to please hisheavenly Father is a prominent theme of the NT, as Jesus declares inJohn 5:19: “The Son can do nothing by himself; he can do onlywhat he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does theSon also does.” No text brings out this dependence of the Sonupon the Father more clearly than Heb. 5:7–8, where the Son issaid to have “offered up prayers and petitions with ferventcries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he washeard because of his reverent submission. Son though he was, helearned obedience from what he suffered.” It is debated bytheologians whether this functional subordination relates only to theperiod of the Son’s earthly ministry, or whether it is aneternal subordination.

TheSpirit, though equal in personality and dignity with the Father andthe Son, proceeds from them to apply the work of the cross andempower the church for ministry. In John 14:26 Jesus says, “TheAdvocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, willteach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said toyou.” In John 15:26 Jesus announces that he also sends theSpirit out: “When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to youfrom the Father—the Spirit of truth who goes out from theFather—he will testify about me.” The Spirit only conveyswhat he has received: “He will not speak on his own; he willspeak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come”(John 16:13). The same “chain of command” appears in John16:15, where Jesus says, “All that belongs to the Father ismine. That is why I said the Spirit will receive from me what he willmake known to you.”

TrinitarianHeresies

TheFather, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are God, while beingdistinguishable persons. The Son obeys the Father; and these twopersons of the Trinity send out the Holy Spirit to implement ourdeliverance from sin. A defensible explanation of the Trinity willrespect all these dynamics, taking special care not to illustratethem with misleading images or simply lapse into various forms ofpolytheism. One of the earliest heresies of the church came fromMarcion, a second-century theologian who distinguished the Father ofJesus from the supposedly vindictive God of the OT, which leaves uswith more than one God. Later came the heresies of modalism andsubordinationism (or Arianism). Modalists claimed that the persons ofthe Trinity are no more than guises worn by the one person of God.One minute God is the Father, the next he is the Son or the HolySpirit. Subordinationists such as Arius (died AD 336) went beyond thefunctionality of the NT’s chain of command, arguing that theSon and the Holy Spirit are not themselves God but are essentiallysubordinate to him. Jehovah’s Witnesses have fallen into thislatter error, suggesting that Jesus is “a god” but notthe Creator God.

Theseearly heresies pressed the church to refine its understanding of theTrinity. In his response to Marcion’s error, Tertullian coinedprecise language to describe the persons of the Godhead, so thatGod’s “threeness” and “oneness” arepreserved. He used the Latin term trinitas to describe the ChristianGod and argued that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit sharethe same “substance.” The Son (also, then, the HolySpirit) is not simply of “like substance” (Gk.hom*oiousios) with God the Father, but rather is “consubstantial”(Gk. hom*oousios) with him: the Son is God, and so is the Holy Spirit.The Nicene Creed of AD 325 incorporated this explanation and, in sodoing, also set aside the idea that either the Son or the Holy Spiritwas created by God, as the Arian heresy requires. Nicaea alsorejected adoptionism, which regards Jesus as a man whom God promotedby endowing him with supernatural powers.

Eachof these heresies—plus, say, the strict monotheism ofIslam—attempts to relieve the tension seen among the claimsthat constitute the Trinity; however, orthodox Christians willremember that tensions and paradoxes are not automaticcontradictions. No philosopher or theologian has ever expresslydemonstrated that the Trinity entails logical nonsense, andChristianity’s detractors carry the burden of proof in thiscase. It is one thing to allege that an idea is contradictory, andquite another thing to show with an argument that it is so. On thepositive side, the Trinity must remain a central doctrine of thechurch because it affects all the others, especially the entire workof redemption. If God is not triune, then Jesus is not God; and if heis not God, then he cannot save us, nor can we worship him as ourLord. The sacrifice that he offers for our sin would not, in thatcase, be supremely valuable. Consider also the application to us ofwhat Christ has done. If the Holy Spirit is not God, then he cannotspeak for God as one who knows perfectly his thoughts and gives usthe word of God, our Bible. Scripture indicates that God is triune,and sinners need him to be so.