1 It was just before the Passover Feast. Jesus knew that the time had come for him to leave this world and go to the Father. Having loved his own who were in the world, he now showed them the full extent of his love.
2 The evening meal was being served, and the devil had already prompted Judas Iscariot, son of Simon, to betray Jesus. 3 Jesus knew that the Father had put all things under his power, and that he had come from God and was returning to God; 4 so he got up from the meal, took off his outer clothing, and wrapped a towel around his waist. 5 After that, he poured water into a basin and began to wash his disciples' feet, drying them with the towel that was wrapped around him.
6 He came to Simon Peter, who said to him, "Lord, are you going to wash my feet?"
7 Jesus replied, "You do not realize now what I am doing, but later you will understand."
8 "No," said Peter, "you shall never wash my feet." Jesus answered, "Unless I wash you, you have no part with me."
9 "Then, Lord," Simon Peter replied, "not just my feet but my hands and my head as well!"
10 Jesus answered, "A person who has had a bath needs only to wash his feet; his whole body is clean. And you are clean, though not every one of you." 11 For he knew who was going to betray him, and that was why he said not every one was clean.
12 When he had finished washing their feet, he put on his clothes and returned to his place. "Do you understand what I have done for you?" he asked them. 13 "You call me 'Teacher' and 'Lord,' and rightly so, for that is what I am. 14 Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another's feet. 15 I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you. 16 I tell you the truth, no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him. 17 Now that you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them.
Ordinary Tragedy
John 13:1-17, 31b-35
Sermon
by Will Willimon
Eric Auerbach (Mimesis) notes that, in the whole of Greek literature there is nothing to compare with this scene--Simon Peter's confrontation with the maid in the courtyard tonight. In Greek literature, ordinary people--like fisherfolk and servants--are always low life, comic, buffoons. Tragedy is for kings, queens, for who cares deeply for the souls of common people? The power of great tragedy occurs when a great king, like Lear, falls a great way down, when the once proud monarch is turned out into the storm. Never, says Auerbach, would a Greek god be caught in some petty police action, hustled off to jail for interrogation, as happens to Jesus this night.
In our day, nobody writes tragedy. When our "heroes" (really anti-heroes) fall, it is not the gods (who as in Oedipus), strike them, down. It is disease, a bad break in the stock market, too much cholesterol. Modern miseries tend to be trivial rather than those "splendid calamities which in Shakespeare seems to reverberate through the universe"[1] The universe trembles not for us and our mere modern screw ups. Young prince Hamlet, tormented by his sense of being in a world of grandiose evil, large claims, monstrous crimes, contemplates what to do to set the whole world right. To Duke Sophomores, Hamlet's angst must seem comic. Our tragedies are more the scale of Willie Loman (The Death of a Salesman) whose death occasions not the howling of heaven, but rather a job opening in the Sales Department. Most of us shall end, not attached to some noble ideal, but rather hooked up to a machine. The reason for our demise will not be due to our too fervent commitment to a cause, but rather due to some tiny microbe eating at our gut.
Aristotle says that the chief requirement for tragedy is nobility. But our playwrights speak not of the fall of kings, but the death of salesmen whose fall, not due to the gods but to their own ineptitude, is more pathetic than tragic, not an occasion for homeric pondering of the ways of gods and men, but rather another opportunity to feel sorry for ourselves.
Yet not tonight, this night of nights. Not tonight. Thursday, he most ordinary night of the week, is being rendered dramatic. Look up at the light streaming from the open window in Pilate's palace. Therein Jesus is being interrogated by the authorities. Jesus stands up to Caesar and his legions and makes true confession, suffers the blow, stands serene amid the soldiers' taunts.
Down below, in the dark courtyard, another drama is taking place, tragedy. Peter, "the rock," the one who a short time earlier at the table, proudly asserted, "though all fall away, I will not deny you." Peter is being interrogated, not by Pilate, but by a maid, a woman working the night shift. While we worship, dozens of these maids clean the floors of this university. Nobody who's noble works the night shift.
Jesus plays out his own drama with Pilate, in the courtroom above. But down here, in the dark, hunched around a fire, in the cold courtyard, is our drama, our tragedy. Peter is no King Lear or Prince Hamlet. He is us. His fall from his perch will not be far, but it is a descent each of us knows and full well. It may not be much of a play, this exchange between Peter and the maid, not the stuff of Shakespeare or Euripides, but it is our play. Our tragedy of ordinary proportions.
How often have we marched forth with banners unfurled "though all fall away, I'll be with you Lord," to do good, to believe, heroically to stand up for Jesus, to set the world aright, with swords drawn in righteous indignation, only to nick off a piece of an ear and then scurry into the night? Here we are. We've found our place on stage. She was only a maid. One on the bottom of society, a nobody without a name. But oh the power of that woman! The chief of the disciples, the rock on which the church is built, trembles before her accusing word and blurts out, not once but thrice, "I never really knew the man."
It may not be much as high drama goes, the scene we witness tonight, but it is drama. Our tragedy. Ordinary, everyday people like Peter, like us, caught up in a vast pageant, where good and evil clash, lock in mortal combat, in words exchanged by a fisherman and a maid in the night. We know this play well. We have acted our part in it, dozens of times with a midnight dormitory room, a board room, a classroom as our stage. Only one line has been ours. But we delivered it with conviction. ''No, I never really knew him."
Tonight is Holy Thursday throughout the church. But don't be mislead by the name of the night. Thursday is still the most ordinary night of the week. The bread we shall break is the same bread you had for lunch in the CI. The wine we pour and bless is nothing but Gallo. And I, as your priest, under this robe, look a lot like you. It's all so--ordinary.
And that is as it should be, for that is the story that assembles us this night. Ordinary folk, caught red-handed in ordinary betrayal, holding out our ordinarily empty hands for the body and the blood, dying for a taste of ordinary grace.
1. Joseph Wood Krutch, The Modern Temper, 1929.
Duke University, Duke Chapel Sermons, by Will Willimon
The second half of John’s Gospel (13:1–20:31) focuses on Jesus’s final week and culminates in his glorification—the “hour” of his crucifixion, resurrection, and exaltation. Whereas the Book of Signs (John 2–12) was directed to all who would listen, often with a mixed reaction, the Book of Glory is addressed primarily to those who believe. John 13–20 doesn’t read like a cold, distant lecture but like final, personal words from a dear friend…
The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016
1 It was just before the Passover Feast. Jesus knew that the time had come for him to leave this world and go to the Father. Having loved his own who were in the world, he now showed them the full extent of his love.
2 The evening meal was being served, and the devil had already prompted Judas Iscariot, son of Simon, to betray Jesus. 3 Jesus knew that the Father had put all things under his power, and that he had come from God and was returning to God; 4 so he got up from the meal, took off his outer clothing, and wrapped a towel around his waist. 5 After that, he poured water into a basin and began to wash his disciples' feet, drying them with the towel that was wrapped around him.
6 He came to Simon Peter, who said to him, "Lord, are you going to wash my feet?"
7 Jesus replied, "You do not realize now what I am doing, but later you will understand."
8 "No," said Peter, "you shall never wash my feet." Jesus answered, "Unless I wash you, you have no part with me."
9 "Then, Lord," Simon Peter replied, "not just my feet but my hands and my head as well!"
10 Jesus answered, "A person who has had a bath needs only to wash his feet; his whole body is clean. And you are clean, though not every one of you." 11 For he knew who was going to betray him, and that was why he said not every one was clean.
12 When he had finished washing their feet, he put on his clothes and returned to his place. "Do you understand what I have done for you?" he asked them. 13 "You call me 'Teacher' and 'Lord,' and rightly so, for that is what I am. 14 Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another's feet. 15 I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you. 16 I tell you the truth, no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him. 17 Now that you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them.
13:1–20:31 Review · The Book of Glory: With chapter 13 we move to another major literary division in the Fourth Gospel, which contrasts directly with the Book of Signs (1:19–12:50). The contrast is chiefly one of perspective. In the Book of Signs, for instance, Jesus addresses a public audience. His teaching provokes a crisis of faith, as some believe while others reject him. Here, though, the audience is narrowed to the circle of disciples who follow him to the cross. We noted how in chapter 12 Jesus “hid himself” (12:36), indicating an end to his public self-disclosure. Now his focus is on “his own” (13:1; 17:6–19). We could also point out that, while the interest of the first half of John is on the signs of Jesus, now the Gospel will concentrate on the coming of “the hour” (12:23, 27; 13:1)—that is, the hour of his glorification (13:31–32). It is not an hour of tragedy in this Gospel but one of victory that involves Christ’s passion, crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension. Just as the many signs of Jesus were accompanied by discourses (cf. John 6, the feeding miracle and the bread-of-life discourse), so too this last sign of death and resurrection will be interpreted by lengthy teaching in the upper room (chaps. 13–16).
The Gospel imitates the arc of a pendulum: it begins at a high point, descends, and elevates again. The Johannine prologue reflects this too, as the Word is in God’s presence (1:1), experiences rejection (1:10–11), and then returns to places of glory (1:18). With the Book of Glory we are in the upward swing of the arc, the descent having been chronicled by those chapters that describe Jesus’s efforts to reveal himself (chaps. 1–12). The lowest point is reached when Judaism confirms Jesus’s death (11:50), and John is forced to explain Jewish disbelief (12:37–50). The highest point comes with the return from the grave of the glorified Lord. Here, echoing the prologue again, the disciples are the recipients of life-giving power (1:12–13; 20:22).
13:1–17 · The Synoptics record that, during his last week of ministry, during the Passover festival, Jesus enjoys a final meal with his disciples (Mark 14:12–25). Each Synoptic writer terms this “the Passover” (Matt. 26:17; Mark 14:12; Luke 22:7–9), which is ordinarily served after dusk on the Jewish date of 15 Nisan (in March-April). John mentions such a meal (13:2, 26) and indicates through mention of the betrayal of Judas (13:21–30) that this meal is the Passover from the Synoptics (cf. Mark 14:17–21).
However, John’s date seems not to be 15 Nisan (Passover), for later he will say that Jesus is crucified on 14 Nisan, when the temple lambs are being slaughtered (19:14). Hence John’s story shows the meal to be on the day of Preparation, one night prior to the Passover feast. Scholars have solved this riddle in a variety of ways. The easiest and most popular solution is simply to say that one Gospel tradition or the other is incorrect. But critics can find fault with each account: Would the Sanhedrin hold a trial on a feast day, as the Synoptics contend? Or has John moved the cross to 14 Nisan to develop a paschal emphasis for Jesus’s death (cf. 19:32–37)? Others have pointed to competing calendars in the first century. Still others think that Jesus was simply offering an irregular Passover meal one day early.
But there is another solution that deserves consideration. It is clear that John understands this meal to be the same one as in the Synoptics. The reference to Judas Iscariot (13:21–30; cf. Matt. 26:20–25) solidly links the two. John also implies that this is indeed a Passover meal: pilgrims must eat it in Jerusalem as the law requires (John 11:55; 12:12, 18, 20), it is a ceremonial meal with formal “reclining” (required at Passover), Jesus does not leave the precincts of Jerusalem after the meal (as the law required) but goes to Gethsemane, Passover alms are distributed (13:29), and the disciples are in a state of Levitical purity (13:10) required at Passover. Therefore John’s meal clearly suggests a Passover meal. But what do we do with the passages that imply Jesus is crucified on the “day of Preparation”?
The argument that, according to John, Jesus was crucified on 14 Nisan (the day of Preparation) is anchored to five texts that imply the Passover has not yet happened when Jesus is crucified.
1. “Now before the feast of the Passover, when Jesus knew that his hour had come to depart out of this world to the Father ... during supper ...” (13:1–2 RSV).
2. “Some thought that, because Judas had the money box, Jesus was telling him, ‘Buy what we need for the feast’...” (13:29 RSV).
3. “They themselves did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (18:28 RSV).
4. “Now it was the day of Preparation of the Passover; it was about the sixth hour” (19:14 RSV).
5. “Since it was the day of Preparation, in order to prevent the bodies from remaining on the cross on the sabbath (for that sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away” (19:31 RSV).
We shall look at these verses in turn later in the commentary, but for now note that they do not necessarily imply that the meal in John 13 was before Passover. In 13:1 “before the Passover Festival” probably describes when Jesus knew his hour had come, and the meal mentioned in 13:2 refers to the Passover itself, described in 13:1. John 13:29 records that Judas must make a purchase for the feast, but this may well be something they need at the moment—or something needed for the next day. In 18:28 the authorities fear defilement from Gentile contact, but such ritual uncleanness would expire at sundown (if it were 14 Nisan). These men likely refer to eating an afternoon meal (the Jewish hagigah) on the day following the night of Passover (15 Nisan). Finally, the “day of Preparation” referred to in 19:14 and 19:31 does not necessarily refer to preparation for the Passover. It may refer to preparation for the Sabbath. In fact, 19:31 makes the connection with the Sabbath explicit. Mark 15:42 refers to Jesus’s day of crucifixion (Friday) in this manner as well (“And when evening had come, since it was the day of Preparation, that is, the day before the Sabbath...” [RSV]). Furthermore, we have no extrabiblical evidence in Aramaic or Greek describing 14 Nisan as “the day of Preparation of the Passover.” Many scholars think the phrase may simply be an idiom meaning, “Friday of Passover week” (or, “the day of Sabbath preparation within the week of Passover”).
If this line of reasoning is correct, John’s chronology fits the Synoptic outline perfectly. Thursday evening begins the date 15 Nisan, when Jesus hosts a Passover meal; on Friday afternoon Jesus is crucified on the day of (Sabbath) Preparation during Passover. This explanation may appear complex, but it is important. In critical discussions of the historical reliability of John’s Gospel, the problem of chronology and the Johannine passion narrative always comes up for examination.
The Synoptic emphasis is found in the words of institution during the meal (Luke 22:14–23). While it comes as a surprise that the Fourth Gospel does not record this (but see 6:52–58), we find that another event, the foot washing, is prominent (13:1–20). The theme of servanthood so central to the narrative, however, does appear in Luke in the upper room: Jesus rebukes the disciples’ interest in greatness and authority as he instructs them about servanthood (Luke 22:24–27).
Foot washing was a common custom due to the wearing of sandals and the dry, dusty Palestinian roads. A good host would provide a servant who would work in this capacity, but if none were there he certainly would not take up the chore himself, as Jesus does (13:4–5). That which enables Jesus to serve like this may be described in 13:3. Jesus has perfect self-esteem: he knows of God’s love expressed in his origin and destiny and therefore can relinquish human status to become a servant.
A variety of themes runs through the narrative. First, foot washing speaks of Jesus’s death. Jesus’s dialogue with Peter (13:6–11) explains that an understanding of this will come about only after Jesus’s death (13:7; cf. 2:22; 12:16). Since this washing is the criterion for fellowship with Christ, Peter dare not object (13:7–8). Cleansing (through the cross; baptism?) speaks of cleansing from sin; hence it is not just any washing that is important: Jesus must cleanse his followers (13:8). As in other dialogues, misunderstanding follows. Peter’s zeal for Christ leads him astray: if he supplements Jesus’s provision, will he have more of Christ (13:9)? Verse 10 gives Jesus’s reply, but it is difficult to interpret. The reference to bathing (which is new) is often seen as an allusion to baptism (see Greek louō; Acts 22:16; 1Cor. 6:11; Eph. 5:26; Titus 3:5; Heb. 10:22), in which case Jesus may mean that once a disciple is cleansed of sin through conversion/baptism, only partial washing (confession) is needed for postbaptismal sin (cf. 1John 1:8–2:6). This is the patristic interpretation, which may be right but is now complicated by some important ancient manuscripts omitting the key phrase “except for his feet” (13:10 ESV).
Second, impurities speak of Judas (13:10–11). The metaphor of cleansing and impurity shifts from Peter to the larger group of apostles at the end of 13:10 (the final “you” in 13:10 is plural). Not only is Peter partially clean, but so are the disciples (13:11) since Judas Iscariot is among them. This will be developed at length in verses 21–30.
Third, foot washing is a symbol of mutual service (13:12–17). In this sense Jesus has modeled behavior he wishes his followers to emulate. If service on this order is possible for him, then it cannot be beneath us (13:16). Here disciples are pressed beyond a mere knowledge of Jesus’s will. Blessing follows faith expressed in deeds (13:17; cf. Matt. 7:24–27). But as in John 13:10–11, when Jesus’s thoughts are interrupted by the imminent betrayal of Judas, so here service on this order is not possible for anyone who is not called (cf. 6:44; 10:29). This applies to Judas in particular (13:18–19).
The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary by Gary M. Burge, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
The new division in John’s Gospel is marked by a long, loosely connected, almost breathless comment by the narrator (vv. 1–3) in which he tries to gather up the themes of chapters 1–12 and 13–17 alike and use them as his stage setting. The first element in this setting has to do with time and circumstances: The notice that it was just before the Passover Feast (v. 1a) brings the temporal notices of 11:55 (“it was almost time”), 12:1 (“six days before”), and 12:12 (“the next day”) up to date. The further indication that the evening meal was being served (v. 2a) is a necessary minimum for making sense of verses 4–5. On the basis of the synoptic Gospels, the evening meal is commonly assumed to be Jesus’ last meal with his disciples, a Passover meal at which he instituted the Lord’s Supper (Mark 14:12–26/Matt. 26:17–30/Luke 22:7–23; cf. vv. 21–30). But if this is the case, the author of John’s Gospel has ignored the institution of the Eucharist altogether (even though 6:52–58 suggests that he probably knew of it) and has focused instead on a different “sign” or symbolic act of Jesus. And instead of identifying the meal as a Passover, he has consciously placed it just before the Passover Feast (v. 1). It is unlikely, therefore, that the narrator attaches any particular significance to the meal itself (any more than to the “dinner” at Bethany [same word in Greek] mentioned in 12:2). It is simply the occasion for Jesus to “say … what the Father has told me to say” (12:50) both by sign and by word.
More important to the narrator than the external circumstances are the theological factors that go into his brief setting in verses 1–3, that is, what Jesus knew (vv. 1b, 3) and what the devil had done (v. 2b). The things Jesus knew (that the time had come for him to leave this world and go to the Father, that the Father had put all things under his power, and that he had come from God and was returning to God) will provide several of the major themes of Jesus’ farewell discourse (13:31–17:26). A postscript appended to the first of these (Having loved his own who were in the world, he now showed them the full extent of his love) centers attention on what is immediately to follow, the washing of the disciples’ feet (vv. 4–20), while the accompanying remark about the devil’s power over Judas (v. 2b) sets the stage for the subsequent designation of Judas as the betrayer and his exit into the night (vv. 21–30).
The procedure by which Jesus washed the feet of each of his disciples is described in very few words (vv. 4–5). Attention centers less on the act itself than on Jesus’ explanation of what it means. The interpretation is given in two parts: first, a somewhat confusing exchange with a somewhat confused Simon Peter (vv. 6–11), and second, a clearer and more complete explanation in a brief monologue addressed to the disciples as a group (vv. 12–20). Each part ends mysteriously with a reference to Jesus’ betrayal by Judas (vv. 11, 18–20), anticipating verses 21–30.
Simon Peter’s initial question (v. 6) highlights the fact that Jesus, by girding himself with a towel and washing the disciples’ feet, has reversed the customary practice. In the world of Jesus’ day, servants might wash the feet of their master on his return from a journey, a wife might wash her husband’s feet, or students the feet of their teacher, but not the other way around. Peter’s address to Jesus as Lord (v. 6), while customary among individual disciples in this Gospel (cf., e.g., 6:68; 11:21, 27, 32, 39; 13:36, 37; 14:5, 8, 22), has a special aptness here in accenting the incongruity of the situation. Why a Lord or master should act out the servant’s role toward those who are actually his servants is indeed hard to fathom, and for the moment Jesus provides no explanation. Though Peter and the other disciples do not realize now what his strange behavior means, later they will understand (v. 7). The expression later (Gr.: meta tauta; lit., “after these things”), when not used simply as part of a narrative (as in 5:1; 6:1; 7:1), can refer either to the future in a general sense or to future events mentioned in prophecies about the last days (e.g., Rev. 1:19). The promise of specific knowledge or belief or remembrance at some future time (usually after the resurrection) is a fairly common one in John’s Gospel (cf. 2:22; 12:16; 13:19, 29; 16:4, 25), and the immediate impression left by verse 7 is that the disciples will understand what the footwashing means after Jesus has been crucified and raised from the dead.
Peter, less than satisfied, still presses his question, this time in the form of a protest. For a teacher to wash his disciples’ feet is inappropriate, and Peter will not participate (v. 8). Jesus’ response is just as direct. If Peter does not let Jesus wash his feet, he is no disciple. Without explaining precisely what it means, Jesus here states unmistakably that footwashing (i.e., having one’s feet washed by Jesus) is not optional but a necessity for anyone desiring to follow him. To be a disciple, one must be clean. Peter grasps the point at last, and begs to be clean all over (v. 9), but Jesus makes a distinction based on the metaphor of someone returning home from the public baths (v. 10). Such a person is clean, except for the feet, which have picked up the dust of the road. What is needed is not a second bath, but only the routine washing of feet. Applying the metaphor to the disciples, Jesus tells them that, having bathed, they too are clean. They do not need a second bath (as Peter’s request implies), but only the washing of their feet.
Jesus’ metaphorical reply to Peter leaves behind more questions than it answers. In what sense are the disciples clean? What is their first bath that makes a second unnecessary? And there is still the question: What does the footwashing itself represent? Many commentators find here a reference to the once-and-for-all spiritual cleansing involved in Christian baptism, and it is easy to see how the first readers of the Gospel might have made this application. But though the Gospel offers glimpses of the disciples’ baptizing activity in the days of John the Baptist (3:22; 4:1–2), it shows no particular interest in their own baptism (presumably at the hands of John). More to the point is Jesus’ subsequent remark to them that “you are already clean because of the word I have spoken to you” (15:3). In the course of Jesus’ public ministry they were separated from the world and united to Jesus by their acceptance of his message. The unbelieving among them were in turn separated from their number, so that finally they were established as a community of faithful disciples (cf. esp. 6:60–71). In this sense they are now clean, and Jesus is almost ready to address them as the faithful community that will continue his work in the world. The key to their identity and their mission in the world is somehow represented in the symbolic act of footwashing, but Jesus defers his explanation of how that is so until verses 12–20. For the moment, one obstacle remains. It is not quite true that all of you are clean (v. 10). Jesus had spoken earlier of the ones that “did not believe” and also of one who “would betray him” (6:64). The former had been unmasked and had gone away (6:66), but the latter was still present (6:70–71). Before presenting Jesus’ interpretation of the footwashing, the narrator pauses momentarily to mention the betrayer and to underscore Jesus’ awareness of his presence (v. 11; cf. 6:64, 71). The brief aside anticipates a somewhat longer reflection on the betrayal theme in verses 18–20.
The entire conversation between Jesus and Peter takes place in the course of carrying out the procedure described in verses 4–5, and verse 12 takes up where verse 5 left off. But when Jesus asks the disciples Do you understand what I have done for you? (v. 12b), it comes as a surprise because he has already stated that they will only understand later (v. 7). More surprising still is the comment in verse 17 that concludes his explanation: Now that you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them. The assumption is that the later time mentioned in verse 7 has arrived! Now they understand what Jesus is doing (cf. 15:15). Though verse 7 in its context seemed to point beyond the resurrection, it turns out to have its fulfillment just a few moments later, around the same table and in the same chapter. In John’s Gospel, “postresurrection truths” (i.e., things that become true when Jesus is raised from the dead to rejoin the Father) have a way of making their appearance already within Jesus’ ministry, especially as the Passion draws near. The future is superimposed on the present.
But what is it here that differentiates nonunderstanding in verse 7 from understanding in verse 17? Only Jesus’ few simple words of explanation, built on an argument from the greater to the lesser. If Jesus, whom they rightly address as Teacher (cf. 1:38; 11:28) and Lord (cf. vv. 6, 9; 6:68; 11:21, 27, 32, 39) has humbled himself as a servant to wash their feet, how much more should they be willing to wash one another’s feet? Jesus’ act of menial service is meant as an example to be followed (vv. 13–15). The principle that no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him (v. 16), which refers elsewhere (15:20; cf. Matt. 10:24) to the inevitability of persecution, is used here to reinforce the logic of verses 13–15. If no servant is greater than his master, then they should not be too proud to do what Jesus has done; if no messenger is greater than the one who sent him, then the servant role that belongs to Jesus’ mission cannot be considered foreign to their own.
The heart of Jesus’ pronouncement is verse 14, which can be laid out in the form of a triangle, with the statement I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet represented by a vertical line pointed downward (indicating something bestowed from above, or from someone greater), and the statement you also should wash one another’s feet represented by a horizontal line pointed either way (indicating mutuality between or among human beings).
The point of such a “triangular” sentence is that God’s actions of grace toward humanity, through Jesus, find their completion and full realization in things that the recipients of this grace do for one another. This will be seen in other triangular statements in Jesus’ farewell discourses, centering on divine love: for example, 13:34b, “As I have loved you, so you must love one another,” and 15:12, “My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you” (cf. also 1 John 4:11, “Dear friends, since God so loved us, we also ought to love one another,” and Eph. 4:32, “Forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you”). For the author of John’s Gospel, footwashing is both a symbol and a concrete expression of self-giving love. To wash one another’s feet (v. 14) is to “love one another,” and because the imagery is that of cleansing, it is likely that the mutual forgiveness of sins is implied as well.
The initiative in love, in forgiveness, and specifically in the washing of the disciples’ feet, rests with Jesus. It is the initiative of the cross. The tone for the narrative (as well as for the discourse to follow) has been set in the first three verses of the chapter: He who loved … his own was about to leave this world and go to the Father, for he had come from God and was returning to God. The self-giving expressed in the washing of feet foreshadows the self-giving involved in Jesus’ death on the cross. The Teacher who washes the feet of his disciples corresponds to the Good Shepherd who lays down his life for his sheep (cf. 10:11, 15, 17; cf. 15:13). The extension of the latter principle can be seen in the triangular statement found in 1 John 3:16–18: “This is how we know what love is: Jesus Christ laid down his life for us. And we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers. If anyone has material possessions and sees his brother in need but has no pity on him, how can the love of God be in him? Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth.” Just as there is no one way in which disciples “lay down their lives” for each other, so there is no one way in which they wash one another’s feet. Mutual love is the key, but this love may express itself in material help, deeds of kindness, forgiveness of wrongs committed, protection from persecution, even death in another’s place—all the things that God himself provides for his children. This is what Jesus means by describing the footwashing as an example (v. 15). Not only is it absolutely essential to be “washed” in this sense by Jesus (v. 8); it is also necessary to “wash the feet” of others (cf. Matt. 10:8: “Freely you have received, freely give”). The should of verse 14 is a genuine obligation, not merely good advice. It is something that Jesus’ followers “owe” (Gr.: opheilete) to one another (cf. 1 John 4:11) and consequently, to everyone (Rom. 13:8; cf. 1 John 2:6, where the obligation is to “live just as Jesus Christ did”). Jesus allots one of this Gospel’s two beatitudes (i.e., expressions with the Greek word makarios, “blessed” or “happy,” akin to Matt. 5:3–12 and Luke 6:20–23) to those who faithfully pay their debt of love (v. 17, you will be blessed if you do them; cf. the beatitude in Luke 11:28).
The strong emphasis on “doing” or “putting into practice” the teaching of Jesus (vv. 15, 17) complements and balances the fourth Gospel’s characteristic accent on “believing” in him as the way to eternal life (contrast, e.g., the other Johannine beatitude, 20:29: “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed”). Jesus’ teaching in connection with the footwashing in John’s Gospel is thus surprisingly close to the teaching with which he concludes the Sermon on the Mount in the synoptic Gospels (Matt. 7:16–27/Luke 6:43–49): for example, “By their fruit you will recognize them” (Matt. 7:16a; cf. 7:20); “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 7:21); “Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock” (Matt. 7:24; cf. 7:26).
The scope of the disciples’ responsibility is not specified. Clearly, they have an obligation to one another (v. 14), but the reference in verse 16 to being sent hints at a wider mission as well. Strictly speaking, verse 16a (no servant is greater than his master) is sufficient to make the point that they must follow their master’s example in the way they treat each other. Verse 16b (nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him) appears at first to have been retained by the author simply because the two sayings were remembered and handed down in the church as a pair (like the pair found in Matt. 10:24). But on closer examination, verse 16b proves to have a function of its own. The word messenger (Gr.: apostolos) is literally “apostle” (the only occurrence of this word in John’s Gospel), and it may be that verse 16b serves as a subtle reminder that the group addressed so decisively in verses 12–17 were in fact “the Apostles” (elsewhere in this Gospel referred to as “the Twelve” (6:67, 70; 20:24). In any case, the emphasis on sending in verse 16b is not accidental, for it is reinforced in verse 20, a pronouncement with close parallels of its own in the synoptic Gospels (e.g., Matt. 10:40/Luke 10:16; Matt. 18:5). All of this suggests that, in washing the disciples’ feet, Jesus is preparing them for a mission to the world. Their servanthood to one another (v. 14) is not an end in itself but a means toward the greater end of continuing and extending Jesus’ own mission. Far from being merely parenthetical, verses 16 and 20 are crucial to the understanding of verses 1–20 as a whole. This will become clear as Jesus explains more fully in his farewell discourses the significance of what he has done and will do (cf., e.g., 15:16; 17:17–19).
The common theme of sending supports the view that verses 18–20, despite their apparent reference to the traitor Judas, belong with verses 1–17, not 21–30. In a sense, they serve the same function in relation to verses 12–17 that verse 11 serves in relation to verses 6–10. But it should be noted that the reference to Judas in verses 18–20 is not explicit (in v. 11 it became explicit only as a comment of the narrator). Jesus mentions Judas neither by name nor by such an expression as “he who betrays me” (cf. v. 11). His words do not even have to be understood as referring to one betrayer in particular. Verse 20 suggests that their most immediate application was to the mission of the disciples after Jesus had sent them forth. The three verses are a kind of prophetic oracle, warning of the danger of betrayal among those supposedly committed to Jesus and his mission. There are several New Testament examples of such oracles:
Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death (Matt. 10:21; cf. Mark 13:12).
I have come to turn “a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household” (Matt. 10:35–36; cf. Luke 12:52–53).
At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other (Matt. 24:10).
The behavior described in such pronouncements stands in total contrast to the behavior demonstrated in the footwashing.
Jesus ties his oracle to a biblical text, Psalm 41:9, which he says is to be fulfilled in his experience and in that of the disciples (v. 18; an allusion to Micah 7:6 in Matthew 10:35–36 accomplishes the same purpose, but without the fulfillment formula). The text deals with betrayal within a family or close-knit community (i.e., among those who eat at the same table). Though the narrator surely thinks of Judas as the prime historical example of such betrayal (vv. 21–30), there is no reason to assume that he (or Jesus) has Judas exclusively in mind. The pain of discord and treachery is to be just as real an experience within the Christian community as the pain of persecution, and Jesus wants his disciples to be prepared. When professed believers “betray and hate each other” (Matt. 24:10), Jesus wants it known that he has warned of these very things in advance (cf. 16:4a, where he makes the same point about persecution). Those who remember his warnings (cf. Mark 13:23/Matt. 24:25) will maintain, in the face of every disappointment, their faith in Jesus as all that he claimed to be (i.e., that I am he, v. 19), and in so doing find their faith vindicated. They are the ones who prove themselves truly “apostles” or “sent ones,” and to them the promise of verse 20 is given. The brief mission oracle ends appropriately with a prophetic guarantee of the authority of the messengers (cf. the placement of Matt. 10:40–42 and Luke 10:16 at the end of substantially longer missionary discourses).
Jesus is thus vindicated as God, the I am and the giver of life (cf. 8:58), in the mission of his disciples, with its setbacks as well as its triumphs, not (despite 18:5–8) in his personal betrayal by Judas. But now, having spoken generally of betrayal in the context of his disciples’ impending mission, Jesus is ready to address the specific betrayal (and betrayer) immediately at hand.
Additional Notes
13:1 Just before (or simply before). The vague expression makes it impossible to extract an exact chronology of Passion week from John’s Gospel. All that is clear is that this is not the Passover meal (cf. 19:14).
His own who were in the world: There are echoes here of the prologue: “He was in the world … the world did not recognize him. He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. Yet to all who received him …” (1:10–12). In the present passage, the “some” who received him are identified as his own, for now they have displaced “his own” who rejected him. Still Jews, they belong to the new Israel that Jesus began almost immediately to gather around himself (cf. 1:31, 47–51; 2:11). The statement that they are in the world is not as redundant as it may sound to the casual reader, but hints at the fact that they will have a mission to the world after Jesus’ departure (cf. 17:11).
He now showed them the full extent of his love. Some translations tend to connect this statement with the footwashing in particular (e.g., NIV; BDF par. 207[3]: “he gave them the perfect love-token”), but it is more likely that the phrase, the full extent (Gr.: eis telos) has a temporal as well as a qualitative sense, and that the statement points beyond the footwashing to what the footwashing itself represents, Jesus’ death on the cross.
13:2 The evening meal was being served: Some ancient manuscripts read “when supper was finished.” This reading, while quite well attested, probably rests on a copyist’s error (perhaps an error of hearing), for the supper was by no means finished (cf. vv. 21–30).
The devil had already prompted Judas Iscariot, son of Simon, to betray Jesus: lit., “the devil having already put it into the heart that Judas would betray him.” The question is whether the devil puts the thought into Judas’ heart to betray Jesus or whether the devil puts it into his own heart (a Semitic idiom meaning “to decide”) that the betrayal should take place. The former is more plausible, for it is unlikely that the narrator would reflect on the thought processes of the devil. Some ancient manuscripts tried to make this meaning more obvious by actually putting Judas in the genitive case (“the heart of Judas,” GNB, which is equivalent to prompted Judas). But the best manuscripts have Judas as nominative; the reference is simply to “the heart,” but since the narrator’s purpose is to make a comment about Judas’ motivation (cf. v. 27; 6:71), “the heart” is implicitly the heart of Judas.
13:6 Lord, are you going to wash my feet? No readable English can convey the emphasis of the Greek (lit. “Lord, you? of me? wash the feet?”). The placement of Lord and the two pronouns together at the beginning of the sentence strongly accents the incongruity of the situation as Peter saw it.
13:8 You have no part with me. A part (Gr.: meros) with Jesus refers to a place in the community of believers and a share in the unique destiny they enjoy of being with Jesus forever (cf. 14:3). Other NT uses of meros refer to an eternal destiny, whether of punishment or blessing (Matt. 24:51 /Luke 12:45; Rev. 20:6; 21:8).
13:10 Only … his feet: These words are omitted in one ancient Greek manuscript, but the vast majority of manuscripts, including the most ancient, preserve the longer reading. If the shorter variant is adopted (as many commentators suggest), either: (a) the bath referred to is not the footwashing, in which case the point of the pronouncement is that no footwashing is necessary; or (b) the bath referred to is the footwashing, in which case Jesus is saying that the disciples’ whole body is clean by virtue of the footwashing itself. But a contradicts the whole thrust of the passage (v. 8 in particular), while b is rendered (at least) difficult by the assertion in 15:3 that the disciples are clean by virtue of Jesus’ teaching. It is better to follow the lead of the best manuscripts (as NIV has done) and adopt the longer reading, with its implication that the footwashing represents not the initial bath but a second cleansing (i.e., the practice of love and forgiveness by the community of faith.) It is possible, though by no means certain, that the narrator has in mind baptism as the accompaniment to receiving Jesus’ teaching in the church of his own day and is making the point that baptism is not to be repeated. The emphasis of the passage as a whole, however, is not on the once-and-for-all character of baptism but on the absolute necessity of footwashing, however the latter is understood.
And you are clean, though not every one of you: lit., “but not all.” The words attributed here to Jesus do not refer explicitly to one person. It is the narrator (in v. 11) who makes the connection with Judas explicit. Although Jesus’ literal words allow an application to Judas, they also allow (if you is understood as looking beyond the Twelve to the entire Christian community) a wider application as well. The phrase “though not every one of you” anticipates v. 18 (“I am not referring to all of you”) and the warning given there that betrayal—and betrayers—will be a continual thorn in the side of those chosen by Jesus and sent into the world.
13:15 An example that you should do: The context shows that Jesus has in mind primarily a moral example. But a liturgical example (i.e., that the disciples in their worship should literally act out the symbolism of the footwashing) is by no means excluded. This is especially true in light of the fact that, in this Gospel, the symbolic act of footwashing replaces the symbolic act of the institution of the Lord’s Supper. Possibly John either knows of, or is advocating, the practice of footwashing in the Christian communities with which he is familiar. Such a practice would be a way for the Christian community to dramatize the responsibility of its members to be servants to one another and so bring to full realization in the world the forgiveness and love of Jesus. It is not likely, however, that John intends an “ordinance” or “sacrament” of footwashing to displace the Lord’s Supper at the center of Christian worship. His omission of the Lord’s Supper is probably to be explained by the earlier inclusion of the synagogue discourse on the bread of life (esp. 6:52–58), which made an account of the institution superfluous. If John envisioned footwashing as a liturgical practice, he probably viewed it as part of what happened around the Lord’s table, perhaps as a preparation for the Eucharist proper.
13:17 Now that you know: lit., “if you know.” The translation is justified because the first class conditional clause in Greek assumes reality, i.e., that in fact they do know the truth Jesus speaks. The conditional clause in the same verse, if you do them, is a different grammatical construction referring to something that may or may not take place in the future rather than to something already true in the present.
13:18 I know those I have chosen. These words must be understood as qualifying 6:70. Jesus chose the Twelve as a group, but Judas will shortly be seen not to have been truly chosen as an individual.
He who shares my bread has lifted up his heel against me. Some commentators have noticed that shares my bread (lit., “ate my bread”) uses the same unusual Greek word for “eat” found in 6:54, 56–58 and have proposed that John has chosen this word (instead of the common word found in the LXX of Ps. 41:10) for the sake of supposed eucharistic implications. More likely it is either a word he was in the habit of using purely as a matter of style, or else the LXX manuscripts with which he was familiar had it in their texts of Ps. 41:10. It is true, however, that what was violated, both by Judas and by subsequent betrayers in the ancient church, was (at least at one level) the fellowship of the Lord’s table (cf. Mark 14:18, “one of you will betray me—one who is eating with me”).
The phrase lifted up his heel against me rests on an ancient gesture of contempt probably carrying the connotation of trampling someone underfoot, or perhaps shaking the dust of his city from one’s feet. Such a gesture is to this day regarded by Arabs as an insult (cf. E. F. F. Bishop, Expository Times 70 [1958–59], pp. 331–32.
Jesus Predicts His Betrayal
Verse 21 marks a solemn and troubling moment for both Jesus and the disciples. The words after he had said this (Gr.: tauta eipōn) terminate the mini-discourse of verses 12–20 and introduce a new sequence of events (cf. 18:1, where the same expression terminates the farewell discourses as a whole). The reference to Jesus being troubled in spirit recalls his anguish at the tomb of Lazarus (11:33) and again at the prospect of the “hour” of his death (12:27). The betrayal of which he is about to speak is a betrayal to death, and (as before) it is the nearness of death and of the devil that agitates his spirit. He makes his declaration both openly and solemnly, as one bringing a formal testimony: I tell you the truth, one of you is going to betray me. The narrator has kept this betrayal ever before the eyes of his readers (cf. 6:64, 71; 12:4, 6; 13:11), but to the disciples it comes as a shock: Who can the traitor be? (v. 22).
At this tense moment a new character comes into the story, a disciple never identified by name, but only as the disciple whom Jesus loved (v. 23; cf. 19:26–27; 20:2–8; 21:7, 20–24). Just as the identity of all the disciples rests on the fact that Jesus “showed them the full extent of his love” (v. 1), so this disciple’s identity as an individual rests on Jesus’ love for him. His position at the table, next to Jesus, was regarded by the disciples as a place of special honor (cf. Mark 10:35–40). Not even Simon Peter sat as close to Jesus as he (v. 24). Though the identification of this disciple with John, the son of Zebedee, is as plausible as any that has been proposed (see Introduction) the fact remains that, as the Gospel’s author (21:24), he has chosen to remain anonymous, and the commentator has no choice but to respect his anonymity.
As soon as he has been introduced, the disciple whom Jesus loved becomes the recipient of a revelation (vv. 24–30). Simon Peter asks him to find out from Jesus the traitor’s identity, and Jesus arranges a private signal for him by which to recognize who it is: It is the one to whom I will give this piece of bread when I have dipped it in the dish (v. 26). When the bread is dipped and given to Judas, the beloved disciple (but apparently no one else) knows that Judas is the betrayer. The narrator remarks that as soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him, almost as if he remembers actually seeing it happen. If the signal was indeed for him, his fascination with Judas as an instrument of Satan through much of his Gospel (cf. 6:70–71; 13:2; 17:12) is understandable.
Whether the narrator is himself the beloved disciple or whether he is drawing on eyewitness material that comes from this person, he seems to assume the beloved disciple’s place at the table and to write from his standpoint. The ignorance of the rest of the disciples is illustrated by their misunderstanding of Jesus’ last words to Judas, What you are about to do, do quickly (v. 27). The statement that No one at the meal understood why Jesus said this to him (v. 28) gives evidence of being written from the beloved disciple’s point of view. The narrator seems, by making him the observer, to exclude the beloved disciple from the generalization that no one at the table knew what was going on. The narrator sees the action through the beloved disciple’s eyes. Though this does not prove the two are the same person, nothing in the narrative is inconsistent with that supposition. The beloved disciple is the one person seated at the table other than Jesus and Judas himself who understands the significance of Judas’ departure. Whether he even shared his insight with Peter, whose request first drew him into the situation, the reader is not told. As the one disciple with insight into what had just transpired, he is also the appropriate one to preserve and put in perspective Jesus’ last revelations and instructions.
Verse 30 picks up the flow of external dramatic action from verse 26, after the significant interpretive aside represented by verses 27–29. As soon as Judas had taken the bread, he went out, in apparent obedience to Jesus’ command in verse 27: What you are about to do, do quickly. The narrator adds that it was night, probably as a dramatic comment on Judas’ fate. In his last pronouncement to the religious authorities, Jesus had said, “You are going to have the light just a little while longer. Walk while you have the light, before darkness overtakes you. The man who walks in the dark does not know where he is going” (12:35). For Judas, the curtain of night had now fallen; having left the circle of the disciples to do his evil work, he was walking in darkness.
Additional Notes
13:23 Was reclining next to him: The reclining posture was characteristic of formal meals in the Greek world, and among Jews was optional (except at Passover when it was obligatory; the Jewish Passover Haggadah says, “on all other nights we eat and drink either sitting or reclining, but on this night we all recline”). John’s choice of words here suggests to some commentators that he is describing a Passover meal (other details, such as the dipping of bread in v. 26 and the mention in v. 30 that the meal took place at night also support such a theory). If it is a Passover meal, however, it is obviously a private one celebrated at least one day in advance (cf. v. 1). The author clearly does not regard it as the Passover in a literal, chronological sense. Possibly it is a solemn meal held in lieu of the Passover one precisely because “Jesus knew that the time had come for him to leave this world” (v. 1); by the time the official meal was to be eaten, he would be gone. Yet the disciples, at any rate, were still expecting to celebrate the official Passover with him (v. 29).
The word for “next to” (lit., at Jesus’ “side,” Gr.: kolpos) is the same word used in the statement in the prologue that Jesus was “at the Father’s side” (1:18), and may have been chosen here to accent the intimacy that existed between Jesus and the disciple whom he loved.
13:25 Leaning back against: The Greek text (at least several of the most important ancient manuscripts) has the adverb houtōs (“thus” or “like this,” left untranslated in NIV), which captures something of the storyteller’s excitement about his narrative, and perhaps also the graphic recollection of an eyewitness (i.e., the beloved disciple himself?). See note on 4:6.
13:26 This piece of bread when I have dipped it in the dish: lit., “dip the morsel.” A morsel for dipping in broth or sauce was normally a piece of bread, but according to the Passover Haggadah, a small wad of bitter herbs was used for dipping in a sauce at the Passover meal. The question whether the morsel here is bread or bitter herbs is therefore tied in with the question of whether Jesus regarded this as a Passover meal (note, however, that NIV supplies the word bread even in Mark 14:20). Some have argued from v. 18 (lit., “he who ate my bread”) that bread is meant here, but the connection is precarious. Bread is probably meant, but in any case the narrator’s emphasis is on the ritual act of dipping and giving, not on the menu.
13:27 As soon as Judas took the bread: lit., “after the morsel.” Though Judas’ acceptance of the morsel is implied here, it is not explicit until v. 30.
Jesus told him: The untranslated Greek particle oun allows the possibility that Jesus said this as he offered the morsel of bread to Judas (v. 26). The intervening statement that “after the morsel, Satan entered him” despite being woven skillfully into the narrative as if seen by an eyewitness, is essentially a theological judgment, whether made on the spot by the beloved disciple or (more likely) in retrospect as the story was told and written down.
13:29 To buy what was needed for the Feast, or to give something to the poor: The first of these suppositions reinforces the impression given by v. 1 that the Passover Feast had not yet begun, that the meal described in this chapter was not a proper Passover, and that the disciples still expected that they would all celebrate the Passover together (see note on 13:23). The reference to the poor recalls 12:5–6 and, in light of that exchange, strikes a note of irony: The disciples who thought Judas was collecting for the poor could hardly have been more mistaken.
13:30 As soon as Judas had taken: The Greek particle oun is again left untranslated in NIV (cf. note on v. 27); like the oun of v. 27, it is probably meant to resume the thought of v. 26. V. 30 would follow smoothly after v. 26 with nothing in between. This resumptive oun could be appropriately translated “so.”
Understanding the Bible Commentary Series by J. Ramsey Michaels, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
Direct Matches
The metrological systems employed in biblical times span the same concepts as our own modern-day systems: weight, linear distance, and volume or capacity. However, the systems of weights and measurements employed during the span of biblical times were not nearly as accurate or uniform as the modern units employed today.
Weights
Weights in biblical times were carried in a bag or a satchel (Deut. 25:13; Prov. 16:11; Mic. 6:11) and were stones, usually carved into various animal shapes for easy identification. Their side or flat bottom was inscribed with the associated weight and unit of measurement. Thousands of historical artifacts, which differ by significant amounts, have been discovered by archaeologists and thus have greatly complicated the work of determining accurate modern-day equivalents.
Beka. Approximately 1⁄5 ounce, or 5.6 grams. Equivalent to 10 gerahs or ½ the sanctuary shekel (Exod. 38:26). Used to measure metals and goods such as gold (Gen. 24:22).
Gerah. 1⁄50 ounce, or 0.56 grams. Equivalent to 1⁄10 beka, 1⁄20 shekel (Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25).
Mina. Approximately 1¼ pounds, or 0.56 kilograms. Equivalent to 50 shekels. Used to weigh gold (1Kings 10:17; Ezra 2:69), silver (Neh. 7:71 72), and other goods. The prophet Ezekiel redefined the proper weight: “The shekel is to consist of twenty gerahs. Twenty shekels plus twenty-five shekels plus fifteen shekels equal one mina” (Ezek. 45:12). Before this redefinition, there were arguably 50 shekels per mina. In Jesus’ parable of the servants, he describes the master entrusting to his three servants varying amounts—10 minas, 5 minas, 1 mina—implying a monetary value (Luke 19:11–24), probably of either silver or gold. One mina was equivalent to approximately three months’ wages for a laborer.
Pim. Approximately 1⁄3 ounce, or 9.3 grams. Equivalent to 2⁄3 shekel. Referenced only once in the Scriptures (1Sam. 13:21).
Shekel. Approximately 2⁄5 ounce, or 11 grams. Equivalent to approximately 2 bekas. The shekel is the basic unit of weight measurement in Israelite history, though its actual weight varied significantly at different historical points. Examples include the “royal shekel” (2Sam. 14:26), the “common shekel” (2Kings 7:1), and the “sanctuary shekel,” which was equivalent to 20 gerahs (e.g., Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25; Num. 3:47). Because it was used to weigh out silver or gold, the shekel also functioned as a common monetary unit in the NT world.
Talent. Approximately 75 pounds, or 34 kilograms. Equivalent to approximately 60 minas. Various metals were weighed using talents: gold (Exod. 25:39; 37:24; 1Chron. 20:2), silver (Exod. 38:27; 1Kings 20:39; 2Kings 5:22), and bronze (Exod. 38:29). This probably is derived from the weight of a load that a man could carry.
Litra. Approximately 12 ounces, or 340 grams. A Roman measure of weight. Used only twice in the NT (John 12:3; 19:39). The precursor to the modern British pound.
Linear Measurements
Linear measurements were based upon readily available natural measurements such as the distance between the elbow and the hand or between the thumb and the little finger. While convenient, this method of measurement gave rise to significant inconsistencies.
Cubit. Approximately 18 inches, or 45.7 centimeters. Equivalent to 6 handbreadths. The standard biblical measure of linear distance, as the shekel is the standard measurement of weight. The distance from the elbow to the outstretched fingertip. Used to describe height, width, length (Exod. 25:10), distance (John 21:8), and depth (Gen. 7:20). Use of the cubit is ancient. For simple and approximate conversion into modern units, divide the number of cubits in half for meters, then multiply the number of meters by 3 to arrive at feet.
1 cubit = 2 spans = 6 handbreadths = 24 fingerbreadths
Day’s journey. An approximate measure of distance equivalent to about 20–25 miles, or 32–40 kilometers. Several passages reference a single or multiple days’ journey as a description of the distance traveled or the distance between two points: “a day’s journey” (Num. 11:31; 1Kings 19:4), “a three-day journey” (Gen. 30:36; Exod. 3:18; 8:27; Jon. 3:3), “seven days” (Gen. 31:23), and “eleven days” (Deut. 1:2). After visiting Jerusalem for Passover, Jesus’ parents journeyed for a day (Luke 2:44) before realizing that he was not with them.
Fingerbreadth. The width of the finger, or ¼ of a handbreadth, approximately ¾ inch, or 1.9 centimeters. The fingerbreadth was the beginning building block of the biblical metrological system for linear measurements. Used only once in the Scriptures, to describe the bronze pillars (Jer. 52:21).
Handbreadth. Approximately 3 inches, or 7.6 centimeters. Equivalent to 1⁄6 cubit, or four fingerbreadths. Probably the width at the base of the four fingers. A short measure of length, thus compared to a human’s brief life (Ps. 39:5). Also the width of the rim on the bread table (Exod. 25:25) and the thickness of the bronze Sea (1Kings 7:26).
Milion. Translated “mile” in Matt. 5:41. Greek transliteration of Roman measurement mille passuum, “a thousand paces.”
Orguia. Approximately 5 feet 11 inches, or 1.8 meters. Also translated as “fathom.” A Greek unit of measurement. Probably the distance between outstretched fingertip to fingertip. Used to measure the depth of water (Acts 27:28).
Reed/rod. Approximately 108 inches, or 274 centimeters. This is also a general term for a measuring device rather than a specific linear distance (Ezek. 40:3, 5; 42:16–19; Rev. 11:1; 21:15).
Sabbath day’s journey. Approximately ¾ mile, or 1.2 kilometers (Acts 1:12). About 2,000 cubits.
Stadion. Approximately 607 feet, or 185 meters. Equivalent to 100 orguiai. Used in the measurement of large distances (Matt. 14:24; Luke 24:13; John 6:19; 11:18; Rev. 14:20; 21:16).
Span. Approximately 9 inches, or 22.8 centimeters. Equivalent to three handbreadths, and ½ cubit. The distance from outstretched thumb tip to little-finger tip. The length and width of the priest’s breastpiece (Exod. 28:16).
Land Area
Seed. The size of a piece of land could also be measured on the basis of how much seed was required to plant that field (Lev. 27:16; 1Kings 18:32).
Yoke. Fields and lands were measured using logical, available means. In biblical times, this meant the amount of land a pair of yoked animals could plow in one day (1Sam. 14:14; Isa. 5:10).
Capacity
Cab. Approximately ½ gallon, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1 omer. Mentioned only once in the Scriptures, during the siege of Samaria (2Kings 6:25).
Choinix. Approximately ¼ gallon, or 0.9 liters. A Greek measurement, mentioned only once in Scripture (Rev. 6:6).
Cor. Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equal to the homer, and to 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularly of flour and grains (1Kings 4:22; 5:11; 2Chron. 2:10; 27:5; Ezra 7:22). In the LXX, cor is also a measure of liquid volume, particularly oil (1Kings 5:11; 2Chron. 2:10; Ezra 45:14).
Ephah. Approximately 3⁄5 bushel (6 gallons, or 22.7 liters). Equivalent to 10 omers, or 1⁄10 homer. Used for measuring flour and grains (e.g., Exod. 29:40; Lev. 6:20). Isaiah prophesied a day of reduced agricultural yield, when a homer of seed would produce only an ephah of grain (Isa. 5:10). The ephah was equal in size to the bath (Ezek. 45:11), which typically was used for liquid measurements.
Homer. Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equivalent to 1 cor, or 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularly of various grains (Lev. 27:16; Isa. 5:10; Ezek. 45:11, 13–14; Hos. 3:2). This is probably a natural measure of the load that a donkey can carry, in the range of 90 kilograms. There may have existed a direct link between capacity and monetary value, given Lev. 27:16: “fifty shekels of silver to a homer of barley seed.” A logical deduction of capacity and cost based on known equivalences might look something like this:
1 homer = 1 mina; 1 ephah = 5 shekels; 1omer = 1 beka
Koros. Approximately 10 bushels (95 gallons, or 360 liters). A Greek measure of grain (Luke 16:7).
Omer. Approximately 2 quarts, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄10 ephah, 1⁄100 homer (Ezek. 45:11). Used by Israel in the measurement and collection of manna in the wilderness (Exod. 16:16–36) and thus roughly equivalent to a person’s daily food ration.
Saton. Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1 seah. The measurement of flour in Jesus’ parable of the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:21).
Seah. Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄3 ephah, or 1 saton. Used to measure flour, grain, seed, and other various dry goods (e.g., 2Kings 7:1; 1Sam. 25:18).
Liquid Volume
Bath. Approximately 6 gallons, or 22.7 liters. Equivalent to 1 ephah, which typically was used for measurements of dry capacity. Used in the measurement of water (1Kings 7:26), oil (1Kings 5:11), and wine (2Chron. 2:10; Isa. 5:10).
Batos. Approximately 8 gallons, or 30.3 liters. A Greek transliteration of the Hebrew word bath (see above). A measure of oil (Luke 16:6).
Hin. Approximately 4 quarts (1gallon, or 3.8 liters). Equivalent to 1⁄6 bath and 12 logs. Used in the measurement of water (Ezek. 4:11), oil (Ezek. 46:5), and wine (Num. 28:14).
Log. Approximately 1⁄3 quart, or 0.3 liter. Equivalent to 1⁄72 bath and 1⁄12 hin. Mentioned five times in Scripture, specifically used to measure oil (Lev. 14:10–24).
Metretes. Approximately 10 gallons, or 37.8 liters. Used in the measurement of water at the wedding feast (John 2:6).
A holy God wants a holy people. He had described the nation of Israel as holy (cf. Exod. 19:56) but also wanted them to live holy lives and grow increasingly holy. Holiness came, in part, by keeping the law; an important part of the law was the concept of cleanness.
Cleanness does not refer to good hygiene, nor is it synonymous with morality, since a person could be unclean and still righteous. Cleanness allowed the OT believer to live a holy life and enabled that person to be made increasingly holy by “Yahweh, your sanctifier” (NIV: “the Lord, who makes you holy,” Lev. 20:8; cf. 21:8, 15, 23; 22:9, 16, 32; 31:13). Impurity traveled along four channels: sexuality (various discharges; e.g., nocturnal emission, menstruation, childbirth), diet (e.g., eating certain types of animals), disease (e.g., skin diseases, mildew), and death (i.e., contact with animal or human corpses). Impurities occurring naturally and unavoidably in the course of life (e.g., menstruation) were tolerated, representing no danger to the person or community as long as they were promptly addressed. Other impurities had to be avoided at all costs or else grave consequences would result to the person and community.
One prohibited impurity arose from eating food declared off-limits by God. All meat had to be thoroughly bled before being eaten (Gen. 9:3–4; Lev. 17:10–14; Deut. 12:16, 23). Edible land animals must both have a completely divided hoof and chew the cud (Lev. 11:3; Deut. 14:6), while water creatures had to have both fins and scales (Lev. 11:9; Deut. 14:9). Most birds were acceptable for food (exceptions are given in Lev. 11:13–19; Deut. 14:11–18), as were most insects (Lev. 11:20–23; Deut. 14:19–20) and some crawling animals (Lev. 11:29–31, 41–42).
Why did God declare certain things clean and others unclean? Some suggest that the distinction is arbitrary; the rules are given as a test of obedience. Others argue that the original audience knew of reasons now lost to us. Still others believe that God was protecting his people from disease. It is true that certain kinds of meat improperly prepared can transmit disease, but not all laws can be explained this way. Some believe that God identified things as clean because they represented a state of normalcy (e.g., fish normally propel themselves with fins, so those lacking fins are abnormal and thus unclean). A related view considers things as clean or unclean based on what they symbolized. So, for example, God identified objects as unclean if they were associated with death (e.g., vultures, corpses) because he is for life. Here again, it is difficult to explain all the laws by appeal to normalcy or symbolism.
Ceremonial cleansing is not just a topic in the OT; it appears in the opening chapters of the Gospels. Mary underwent the required purification rituals after Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:22–24), and Jesus “cleansed” people from leprosy, instructing them to carry out the Mosaic purification rituals (Matt. 8:2–4; Mark 1:40–42; Luke 5:12–14; 17:11–19; cf. Matt. 10:8; 11:5; Luke 4:27; 7:22).
In one of his confrontations with the Pharisees, Jesus signaled a departure from how these laws had been practiced. He announced, “Nothing outside a person can defile them by going into them. Rather, it is what comes out of a person that defiles them” (Mark 7:15), to which Mark adds an explanation: “In saying this, Jesus declared all foods ‘clean’” (7:19). Peter’s rooftop vision in Acts 10 reflects this same perspective, as do the church’s decision regarding Gentile conversion (Acts 15) and Paul’s comments to the church at Rome (Rom. 14:14, 20–21).
In Gen. 3 the serpent entices humankind to sin. Not until Rev. 12:9 are we told explicitly that the serpent is Satan.
In the OT, “evil spirit” may be a heavenly being sent by God (1Sam. 16:1423; 18:10; 19:9; cf. 1Kings 22:22–23). The OT engages in extensive rebuke of the superstitions of the surrounding nations that included belief in demons (Deut. 32:17; Ps. 106:37; perhaps Isa. 13:21; cf. Rev. 18:2).
Jesus’ encounter with the devil in the wilderness recalls Adam and Eve’s encounter with the serpent in Eden. The setting, significantly, is now a wasteland. The second man to walk the earth with no sin claims the right to take back the dominion that Adam passed to the serpent. Jesus can have the whole world (without the cross) if only he will submit to the devil’s rule (Luke 4:5–7). Jesus rejects the offer. Later, he sees Satan’s fall from heaven to earth (Luke 10:18; cf. Rev. 12:5–12). Whereas once the devil had access to God’s courtroom, now his case is lost. His only recourse is murderous persecution. Between the ascension of the Son of Man (Acts 1:9) and the final judgment, this is understood to be the experience of Christ’s people (Dan. 7:25; Rev. 12:17; cf. 1Pet. 5:8).
Whereas the OT provides sparse information about Satan and his angels/demons, the NT opens with an intensity of activity. Demons are also called “evil spirits,” and they are associated with physical illness, madness, and fortune-telling. In Acts 17:22 Paul describes his pagan Athenian listeners as “demon-fearers” (NIV: “religious”). Jesus’ miracles demonstrate his lordship over Satan’s regime as the demons flee in terror before him (Mark 1:23–26; 5:1–15). According to Paul, Christians are temples of the Holy Spirit (1Cor. 6:19), and John urges believers to “test the spirits to see whether they are from God” (1John 4:1), assuring them that they need not fear Satan or his forces, “because the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world.” (1John 4:4). On judgment day Satan will be cast into the lake of fire (Rev. 20:14–15) along with all of God’s enemies.
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.
An epithet or appellation for the disciple named “Judas” who betrayed Jesus (Matt. 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). A word of uncertain derivation, it may signify “man of Kerioth,” a city in southern Judea (so the alternate textual readings at John 6:71; 12:4; 13:2, 26; 14:22: “from Kerioth”), the plural of “city,” or an Aramaic adaptation of the Latin sicarius, “assassin” or “terrorist.” The latter would place him with the Sicarii, a group of terrorists who murdered Roman sympathizers with curved swords (Acts 21:3738; Josephus, J.W. 2.254; Ant. 20.186).
(1)One of the apostles identified as “Judas son of James” (Luke 6:16; Acts 1:13) and “Judas (not Judas Iscariot)” (John 14:22), probably the same person as Thaddaeus (Matt. 10:3; Mark 3:18). (2)A leading Jerusalem believer and prophet, “Judas called Barsabbas” (i.e., “son of the Sabbath” or “son of Sabbas”; possibly a relative of “Joseph called Barsabbas” in Acts 1:23). Along with Silas, he was sent with Paul and Bar-nabas to add verbal testimony to the letter to the Gentile Christians from the apostles and elders after the Jerusalem council (Acts 15:22, 27, 32). (3)One of the twelve disciples chosen by Jesus, he betrayed Jesus. See Judas Iscariot.
One of the twelve disciples chosen by Jesus (Matt. 10:4). He is identified beforehand as the one who would betray Jesus (Mark 3:19) and is noted as having a devil (John 6:6671). John further attributes his betrayal of Jesus to Satan (John 13:2, 27), and Luke asserts that before the betrayal Satan entered into Judas (Luke 22:3).
Peter notes that Judas’s punishment, death, and abandonment of office were predicted by David in the psalms (Acts 1:15–20). Speaking euphemistically, Peter remarks that Judas went to his own place, no doubt a reference to hell (1:25).
The Israelites gathered regularly to celebrate their relationship with God. Such festivals were marked by communal meals, music, singing, dancing, and sacrifices. They celebrated, conscious that God had graciously brought them into a relationship with him. Within this covenant he had committed himself to act on their behalf both in regular ways, such as the harvest, and in exceptional ways, such as deliverance from Egypt. At the festivals, Israel celebrated God’s work in its past, present, and future and reaffirmed its relationship with this covenant God.
We know of Israel’s festivals from several calendars in the Mosaic legislation (Exod. 23:1417; 34:18–23; Lev. 23; Num. 28–29; Deut. 16:1–17), calendars further clarified by the prophets (e.g., Ezek. 45:18–25; Zech. 14), and narrative material (e.g., 2Kings 23:21–23).
Passover and the Festival of Unleavened Bread. Israel’s religious calendar began with Passover, the day set aside to commemorate deliverance from Egypt. Occurring in spring, this single day was joined with a weeklong celebration known as the Festival of Unleavened Bread, during which all males were required to make a pilgrimage to the sanctuary and offer the firstfruits of the barley harvest (Lev. 23:9–14). Israel observed Passover with rituals that reactualized the night God’s destroyer spared the Israelites in Egypt. A lamb was killed, and its blood was put on the doorposts of the homes and on the bronze altar in the sanctuary. The lamb was roasted and served with unleavened bread and bitter herbs while those partaking—dressed in their traveling clothes—listened to the retelling of the exodus story. No yeast was to be found anywhere among them, no work was to be done on the first and last days of the festival, and offerings were to be brought to the sanctuary (Num. 9:1–5; Josh. 5:10–11; 2Kings 23:21–23; 2Chron. 30; 35:1–19).
Early Christians associated Jesus’ death with that of the Passover (Paschal) lamb (1Cor. 5:7–8), encouraged by Jesus’ comments at the Last Supper (described by the Synoptic Gospels as a Passover meal [e.g., Matt. 26:17–30]). Perhaps Jesus meant to emphasize that just as Passover and the Festival of Unleavened Bread reminded God’s people of his deliverance and provision, his followers would find true freedom and full provision in him.
The Festival of Weeks. Also known as the Festival of Harvest, the Day of Firstfruits, or Pentecost (because it occurred fifty days after Passover), the Festival of Weeks took place on the sixth day of the third month (corresponding to our May or June). This marked another occasion when all Jewish men were required to come to the sanctuary. They were to bring an offering of the firstfruits of the wheat harvest, abstain from work, and devote themselves to rejoicing in God’s goodness.
Early in the NT period, if not before, this festival also became associated with the giving of the law on Mount Sinai. The Jews who assembled in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost as described in Acts 2 came to celebrate not only God’s provision but also the revelation of his nature and will. Significantly, God chose this day to send the Holy Spirit, the One who would produce a harvest of believers and reveal God more fully to the world.
The Festival of Tabernacles. So important was the Festival of Tabernacles (also known as the Festival of Ingathering or the Festival of Booths) that Israel sometimes referred to it as “the festival of the Lord” (Judg. 21:19) or simply “the festival” (cf. 1Kings 8:65). Held from the fifteenth to the twenty-first of the seventh month (September–October), this was the third of the three pilgrimage festivals. For that week, Israel lived in booths to remind them of their ancestors’ time in the wilderness. They also celebrated the fruit harvest. They were to “take the fruit of majestic trees, branches of palm trees, boughs of leafy trees, and willows of the brook; and you shall rejoice” before God for seven days (Lev. 23:40 NRSV). Avoiding all work on the first and last days of the festival, they were to mark the week with sacrifices, celebration, and joy. Also, every seventh year the law was to be read at this festival (Deut. 31:10–11).
John 7 records Jesus’ secretive departure to Jerusalem for the Festival of Tabernacles, where he spent several days teaching in the temple courts. It was on the last and greatest day of the festival when Jesus invited those thirsty to come to him and drink.
The Festival of Trumpets. Occurring on the first day of the seventh month (September–October), this feast marked the beginning of the civil and agricultural year for the Jews; it was also referred to as Rosh Hashanah (lit., “head/beginning of the year”). Observed as a Sabbath with sacrifices and trumpet blasts, this day was intended for rest and to begin preparations for the coming Day of Atonement. The Mishnah makes this connection more explicit by identifying the Festival of Trumpets as the day when “all that come into the world pass before [God] like legions of soldiers” or flocks of sheep to be judged (m.Ros.HaSh. 1:2).
The Day of Atonement. Some festivals, like Passover, looked back to what God had done or was doing for his people; other festivals, like Trumpets and the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur), focused on the relationship itself. The latter was marked by repentance and rituals designed to remove the nation’s sins and restore fellowship with God. Coming ten days after the Festival of Trumpets, this was a solemn occasion during which the Israelites abstained from eating, drinking, and other activities. This was the only prescribed annual fast in the Jewish calendar, though other fasts were added in the fourth, fifth, seventh, and tenth months to mourn the Babylonian exile (Zech. 7:3, 5; 8:19).
In Leviticus, God clarified the purpose of this day: “On this day atonement will be made for you, to cleanse you. Then, before the Lord, you will be clean from all your sins” (16:30). Not only would the people be purified but so also would the sanctuary, so that God could continue to meet his people there. Sacrifices were offered for both priest and people, and the blood was taken into the most holy place. Only on Yom Kippur could this room be entered, and only by the high priest, who sprinkled blood on the cover of the ark of the covenant. Leaving that room, he also sprinkled blood in the holy place (16:14–17) and then on the bronze altar in the courtyard.
Yom Kippur was marked by another ritual that symbolized the removal of Israel’s sins, this one involving two goats. One goat, chosen by lot, was offered as a sacrifice to God. The high priest placed his hands on the other goat and transferred to it the sins of the nation. He then released the goat into the wilderness, for “the goat will carry on itself all their sins to a remote place” (Lev. 16:22).
The book of Hebrews uses the symbols of Yom Kippur to describe Jesus’ death. As the high priest entered the most holy place, so Jesus entered God’s presence, carrying not the blood of bull and goat but his own. His once-for-all death at the “culmination of the ages” (Heb. 9:26) not only allows him to remain in God’s presence (10:12) but also gives us access to God’s presence as well (10:19–22).
Sabbath Year. Every seven years, the Israelites were to observe a “Sabbath of the land” (Lev. 25:6 ESV), a time for the land to rest. They could not sow fields or prune vineyards, but they could eat what grew of itself (25:1–7). Deuteronomy 15:1–11 speaks of all debts being canceled (some would say deferred) every seventh year, presumably the same year the land was to lie fallow. When Israel was gathered at the Festival of Tabernacles during this Sabbath Year, the law of Moses was to be read aloud. The Chronicler described the seventy years of Babylonian exile as “sabbaths” for the land, perhaps alluding to the neglect of the Sabbath Year (2Chron. 36:21; cf. Lev. 26:43). Those returning from exile expressed their intent to keep this provision (Neh. 10:31), and it appears to have been observed in the intertestamental period (see 1Macc. 6:48–53; Josephus, Ant. 14.202–10).
This year seems intended to maintain the fertility of the land and to allow Israel’s economy to “reset,” equalizing wealth and limiting poverty. Observing such a provision took great faith and firm allegiance, for they had to trust God for daily bread and put obedience above profit. Rereading the law at the Festival of Tabernacles reminded the Israelites of God’s gracious covenant and their required response.
Jubilee. God instructed Israel to count off seven “sevens” of years and in the fiftieth year, beginning on the Day of Atonement, to sound a trumpet marking the Jubilee Year. As in the Sabbath Year, there was to be no sowing and reaping. Further, the land was released from its current owners and returned to those families to whom it originally belonged. Individual Israelites who had become indentured through economic distress were to be freed. The assumption underlying the Jubilee Year was that everything belonged to God. He owned the land and its occupants; the Israelites were only tenants and stewards (Lev. 25:23, 55). As their covenant Lord, he would provide for their needs even during back-to-back Sabbath Years (Lev. 25:21). The year began on the Day of Atonement, perhaps to emphasize that the best response to God’s redemptive mercy is faith in his provision and mercy to others. Although the Jubilee Year is commanded in the Mosaic law and spoken about by the prophets (Isa. 61:1–2; Ezek. 46:17), rabbis, and Jesus (Luke 4:18–19), Scripture is silent on how or if Israel observed this year.
New Moon. The beginning of each month was marked with the sounding of trumpets, rejoicing, and sacrifices (Num. 10:10; 28:11–15). There is some indication that work was to be suspended on this day, as on the Sabbath (Amos 8:5), and that people gathered for a meal (1Sam. 20:5, 18, 24, 27). By faithfully observing this day, Israel was in a position to properly observe the remaining days, set up, as they were, on the lunar calendar. Paul learned of some in Colossae who were giving undue attention to New Moon celebrations (Col. 2:16).
Purim. Beyond the festivals commanded in the law of Moses, the Jews added two more to their sacred calendar, one during the postexilic period and one between the Testaments. Both commemorated God’s deliverance of his people from their enemies. A wave of anti-Semitic persecution swept over the Jews living in Persia during the reign of Xerxes (486–465 BC). God delivered his people through Esther, and the Jews celebrated this deliverance with the festival of Purim. Their enemies determined when to attack by casting lots, so the Jews called this festival “Purim,” meaning “lots.” It was celebrated on the fourteenth and fifteenth days of the twelfth month (February–March) with “feasting and joy and giving presents of food to one another and gifts to the poor” (Esther 9:22).
Festival of Dedication. During the inter-testamental period, the Jews came under great persecution from the Seleucids, who outlawed the practice of Judaism and desecrated the Jerusalem temple. After recapturing the temple, the Jews began the process of purification. On the twenty-fifth day of their ninth month, in the year 164 BC, the Jews rose at dawn and offered a lawful sacrifice on the new altar of burnt offering which they had made. The altar was dedicated, to the sound of hymns, zithers, lyres and cymbals, at the same time of year and on the same day on which the gentiles had originally profaned it. The whole people fell prostrate in adoration and then praised Heaven who had granted them success. For eight days they celebrated the dedication of the altar, joyfully offering burnt offerings, communion and thanksgiving sacrifices.... Judas [Maccabees], with his brothers and the whole assembly of Israel, made it a law that the days of the dedication of the altar should be celebrated yearly at the proper season, for eight days beginning on the twenty-fifth of the month of Chislev [December], with rejoicing and gladness. (1Macc. 4:52–56, 59 NJB)
This festival is also called “Hanukkah” (from the Hebrew word for “dedicate”) or the Festival of Lights, to recall the lighting of the lamps in the temple. The rabbis told how these lamps were lit from a small quantity of oil that miraculously lasted eight days until more could be consecrated. John 10:22–39 describes events from Jesus’ life that took place at the Festival of Dedication.
Simon Peter is the best-known and the most colorful of Jesus’ twelve disciples. The name “Peter” means “rock” in Greek. In some biblical texts, he is also called “Cephas,” which is the Aramaic word for “rock” (see esp. John 1:42). Despite the ups and downs of Peter’s spiritual life, God was able to use him as the foundational apostle for the establishment of the NT church.
“Salvation” is the broadest term used to refer to God’s actions to solve the plight brought about by humankind’s sinful rebellion and its consequences. It is one of the central themes of the entire Bible, running from Genesis through Revelation.
In many places in the OT, salvation refers to being rescued from physical rather than spiritual trouble. Fearing the possibility of retribution from his brother Esau, Jacob prays, “Save me, I pray, from the hand of my brother Esau” (Gen. 32:11). The actions of Joseph in Egypt saved many from famine (45:57; 47:25; 50:20). Frequently in the psalms, individuals pray for salvation from enemies that threaten one’s safety or life (Pss. 17:14; 18:3; 70:1–3; 71:1–4; 91:1–3).
Related to this usage are places where the nation of Israel and/or its king were saved from enemies. The defining example of this is the exodus, whereby God delivered his people from their enslavement to the Egyptians, culminating in the destruction of Pharaoh and his army (Exod. 14:1–23). From that point forward in the history of Israel, God repeatedly saved Israel from its enemies, whether through a judge (e.g., Judg. 2:16; 3:9), a king (2Kings 14:27), or even a shepherd boy (1Sam. 17:1–58).
But these examples of national deliverance had a profound spiritual component as well. God did not save his people from physical danger as an end in itself; it was the necessary means for his plan to save them from their sins. The OT recognizes the need for salvation from sin (Pss. 39:8; 51:14; 120:2) but, as the NT makes evident, does not provide a final solution (Heb. 9:1–10:18). One of the clearest places that physical and spiritual salvation come together is Isa. 40–55, where Judah’s exile from the land and prophesied return are seen as the physical manifestation of the much more fundamental spiritual exile that resulted from sin. To address that far greater reality, God announces the day when the Suffering Servant would once and for all take away the sins of his people (Isa. 52:13–53:12).
As in the OT, the NT has places where salvation refers to being rescued from physical difficulty. Paul, for example, speaks of being saved from various physical dangers, including execution (2Cor. 1:8–10; Phil. 1:19; 2Tim. 4:17). In the midst of a fierce storm, Jesus’ disciples cry out, “Lord, save us! We’re going to drown!” (Matt. 8:25). But far more prominent are the places in the Gospels and Acts where physical healings are described with the verb sōzō, used to speak of salvation from sin. The healing of the woman with the hemorrhage (Mark 5:25–34), the blind man along the road (Luke 18:35–43), and even the man possessed by a demon (Luke 8:26–39), just to name a few, are described with the verb sōzō. The same verb, however, is also used to refer to Jesus forgiving someone’s sins (Luke 7:36–50) and to his mission to save the lost from their sins (Luke 19:10). Such overlap is a foretaste of the holistic salvation (physical and spiritual) that will be completed in the new heaven and earth (Rev. 21–22). The NT Epistles give extensive descriptions of how the work of Jesus Christ saves his people from their sins.
There are numerous relationships in the OT that could be characterized as following a servant-master model. These included service to the monarchy (2Sam. 9:2), within households (Gen. 16:8), in the temple (1Sam. 2:15), or to God himself (Judg. 2:8). We also see extensive slavery laws in passages such as Exod. 21:111; Lev. 25:39–55; Deut. 15:12–18. The slavery laws were concerned with the proper treatment of Hebrew slaves and included guidelines for their eventual release and freedom. For example, Hebrew slaves who had sold themselves to others were to serve for a period of six years. On the seventh year, known also as the Sabbath Year, they were to be released. Once released, they were not to be sent away empty-handed, but rather were to be supported from the owner’s “threshing floor” and “winepress.” Slaves also had certain rights that gave them special privileges and protection from their masters. Captured slaves, for example, were allowed rest on the Sabbath (Exod. 20:10) and during special holidays (Deut. 16:11, 14). They could also be freed if their master permanently hurt or crippled them (Exod. 21:26–27). Also, severe punishment was imposed on a person who beat a slave to death (Exod. 21:20–21).
Slavery was very common in the first century AD, and there were many different kinds of slaves. For example, slaves might live in an extended household (oikos) in which they were born, or they might choose to sell themselves into this situation (1Pet. 2:18–25). Although slavery was a significant part of society in the first century AD, we never see Jesus or the apostles encourage slavery. Instead, both Paul and Peter encouraged godly character and obedience for slaves within this system (Eph. 6:5–8; Col. 3:22–25; 1Tim. 6:1–2; Philemon; 1Pet. 2:18–21). Likewise, masters were encouraged to be kind and fair to their slaves (Eph. 6:9; Col. 4:1). Later in the NT, slave trading was condemned by the apostle Paul as contrary to “sound doctrine” and “the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God” (1Tim. 1:10–11).
Jesus embodied the idea of a servant in word and deed. He fulfilled the role of the “Servant of the Lord,” the Suffering Servant predicted by the prophet Isaiah (Isa. 42:1–4; 50:4–9; 52:13–53:12). He also took on the role of a servant in the Gospels, identifying himself as the Son of Man who came to serve (Mark 10:45) and washing the disciples’ feet (John 13:4–5). Paul says that in the incarnation Jesus took on “the very nature of a servant” (Phil. 2:7).
The special relationship between Jesus and his followers is captured in the servant-master language of the NT Epistles, especially in Paul’s letters (Rom. 1:1; Phil. 1:1; Titus 1:1). This language focuses not so much on the societal status of these servants as on the allegiance and honor owed to Christ Jesus.
(1)One of the original twelve apostles (Matt. 10:2), also called “Peter.” Simon Peter was the brother of Andrew and a fisherman by trade (Matt. 4:18). (See also Peter.) (2)The Zealot, one of the original twelve apostles (Matt. 10:4). (3)One of the brothers of Jesus, along with James, Joseph, and Judas (Matt. 13:55; Mark 6:3). (4)A leper who lived in Bethany. In his house the precious bottle of ointment was poured upon Jesus in preparation for his burial (Matt. 26:6). (5)A man from Cyrene who carried Jesus’ cross on the way to crucifixion (Matt. 27:32). (6)A Pharisee who invited Jesus for a meal (Luke 7:40). Jesus was anointed with ointment in his house. He perhaps is the same individual as in Matt. 26:6. (7)The father of Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Jesus (John 6:71). (8)A sorcerer who believed the gospel and was baptized. However, he became enamored with the miraculous power of Philip and with the ability of the apostles to impart the Holy Spirit, and he offered them money to give him that ability (Acts 8:925). (9)A tanner with whom Peter stayed in Joppa before traveling to the house of Cornelius (Acts 9:43).
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).
Unlike a spring, a well allows access to subterranean water through a shaft that has been dug into the ground. Wells typically were deep and lined with stone or baked brick for stability, often capped with heavy stone to prevent exploitation. In an arid environment, wells were invaluable to the community. Here, livestock were watered and conversations were held (Gen. 24:10 27; 29:1–14; John 4:6–8). Figuratively, the well is used of a lover (Song 4:15), an adulteress (Prov. 23:27), and a city (Jer. 6:7). Wells commonly were named (Gen. 21:25–31 [Beersheba, “well of an oath”]) and often fought over (Gen. 21:25–30; 26:18).
Three kinds of “well encounters” can be seen in Scripture: (1)human being with deity (Gen. 16:7–14), (2)clan with clan (26:20), and (3)man with woman (29:1–14). The latter became highly developed as a betrothal-type scene that included standard elements: stranger’s arrival (=otherness), meeting (=bond), paternal announcement (=hospitality), and domestic invitation (=acceptance) (see Rebekah [Gen. 24]; Jacob and Rachel [Gen. 29:1–14]; Moses and Zipporah [Exod. 2:15–22]).
Jesus’ encounter with the Samaritan woman (John 4:1–42) draws on multiple aspects of a well encounter: divine (Jesus) with human (the woman), Jew and Samaritan, a traveler, foreign (i.e., hostile) land, refreshment, announcement, invitation, and so on. However, now Jacob’s well (4:6) hosts Jesus’ presentation of himself as the groom whom she has been seeking (4:26). The patriarch’s well becomes a symbol of salvation, just as water becomes a metaphor for transformation (4:14–15). What could have been another “well of nationality” conflict (John 4:9, 11–12 [cf. Gen. 26:20: “Esek= argument”]) was elevated to a “living water” conversion (John 4:10, 13–15 [cf. Gen. 16:14: “Beer Lahai Roi= well of the Living One who sees me”]). Her plea “Come, see a man” (John 4:29) echoes an earlier “outcast,” Hagar, who exclaimed, “I have now seen the One who sees me” (Gen. 16:13).
Direct Matches
Various kinds and sizes of hollow bowls were used in biblical times. Common vessels were made of clay, but more luxurious basins were made from brass (Exod. 27:3), silver (Num. 7:13), or gold (1 Kings 7:38). Basins were used for food and wine (Judg. 5:25; Prov. 23:30), for washing (Exod. 30:18; John 13:5), and for collecting the blood from sacrificed animals (Exod. 12:22). The basins in the temple were large vessels that could hold around four hundred liters of water (1 Kings 7:38), whereas the sprinkling bowls were much smaller so that they could be used by a single person (Num. 7:13).
In the apocalyptic literature, bowls indicate something stored up to be distributed later. The twenty-four elders hold golden bowls of incense in the presence of the Lamb, which represent the prayers of believers (Rev. 5:8). The seven angels have golden bowls of God’s wrath, which will be plagues poured out on the earth (16:1; 21:9).
An epithet or appellation for the disciple named “Judas”who betrayed Jesus (Matt. 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). A word ofuncertain derivation, it may signify “man of Kerioth,” acity in southern Judea (so the alternate textual readings at John6:71; 12:4; 13:2, 26; 14:22: “from Kerioth”), the pluralof “city,” or an Aramaic adaptation of the Latinsicarius, “assassin” or “terrorist.” Thelatter would place him with the Sicarii, a group of terrorists whomurdered Roman sympathizers with curved swords (Acts 21:37–38;Josephus, J.W. 2.254; Ant. 20.186).
One of the twelve disciples chosen by Jesus (Matt. 10:4). Heis identified beforehand as the one who would betray Jesus (Mark3:19) and is noted as having a devil (John 6:66–71). Johnfurther attributes his betrayal of Jesus to Satan (John 13:2, 27),and Luke asserts that before the betrayal Satan entered into Judas(Luke 22:3).
Muchhas been written about his motive for betraying Jesus, but a simplelook at the biblical text reveals Judas’s interest in gain.John notes that as the group’s treasurer, Judas regularly stolefrom the money box. His apparent concern for the poor at theanointing of Jesus was in fact self-serving (John 12:1–8). Itwas for gain that Judas betrayed Jesus to the chief priests. Afteragreeing to thirty pieces of silver, Judas sought an occasion tobetray Jesus, especially when there was no crowd (Matt. 26:14–16;Luke 22:3–5).
Atthe table on the night before the crucifixion, Jesus predicted hisbetrayal. After the disciples questioned who the betrayer might be,Jesus pronounced a woe on the betrayer and noted it would have beenbetter if that one had not been born. Jesus identified Judas as thebetrayer, though only Judas understood (Matt. 26:21–25; Mark14:17–21). John makes it clear that none of the other disciplesunderstood the real reason why Judas was leaving the upper room (John13:28–30).
SinceJudas knew that Jesus would later be in the garden of Gethsemane, heled the soldiers and religious leaders there (Luke 22:48). Jesusnoted the irony of Judas using a kiss, a sign of friendship, tobetray him (Mark 14:43–52).
Subsequently,Judas regretted the betrayal and proclaimed Jesus’ innocence tothe chief priests. The religious leaders had no concern for hisregrets. After casting the money to the floor, Judas left. Theleaders thought it unlawful to keep the money, so they bought a fieldfor the burial of strangers. Because the people knew that blood moneybought the “potter’s field,” that field wasthereafter called the “Field of Blood.” Matthew notesthis as fulfillment of prophecy (Matt. 27:9–10). As for Judas,he hanged himself; falling headlong, his body burst open and hisintestines gushed out (Matt. 27:3–10; Acts 1:18).
Peternotes that Judas’s punishment, death, and abandonment of officewere predicted by David in the psalms (Acts 1:15–20). Speakingeuphemistically, Peter remarks that Judas went to his own place, nodoubt a reference to hell (1:25).
According to the Gospels and Paul, Jesus had a final mealwith his closest followers the night before his crucifixion, which isremembered as the “Last Supper” (Matt. 26:26–29;Mark 14:22–25; Luke 22:15–20; 1Cor. 11:23–26;cf. John 13:1–30, which mentions the meal but describes andfocuses on Jesus washing his disciples’ feet and elaborates onthe betrayal by Judas Iscariot). The Synoptic and Pauline accounts ofthe meal fit into two distinct groups according to theirrepresentation in the NT: Matthew/Mark and Luke/1Corinthians.The unique aspects of Luke/1Corinthians include “do thisin remembrance of me,” the “new covenant in my blood,”and “which is poured out for you.” Matthew/Mark includeJesus’ command to “take” the bread, his giving“thanks” before taking up the cup, and his referring tothe cup as “my blood of the covenant” and his bloodpoured out for “many.”
Twofurther issues involve when this meal took place and whether it was aPassover meal. According to the Gospels, Jesus was crucified on aFriday (Matt. 27:62; Mark 15:42; Luke 23:54; John 19:31, 42).However, in the Synoptic Gospels the supper was a Passover meal(Matt. 26:17–19; Mark 14:12–16; Luke 22:7–15), butJohn 13:1, 29; 18:28; 19:31 imply that the trial and crucifixion tookplace before Passover. It may be that John is correct, and Jesus hada quasi-Passover meal ahead of the actual Passover because he knewthat he would not live long enough to celebrate it. Or perhaps theSynoptics are correct, and John altered the chronology in order tohave Jesus crucified on the same day the Passover lambs weresacrificed, thus making a theological point about Jesus as the Lambof God. In any event, the meal was symbolic of the new exodus, therenewal of the covenant, and the atonement that Jesus would achievethrough his death.
Inthe early church this commemorative meal became an integral part ofthe fellowship and worship of the first Christians. It was variouslyreferred to as giving thanks (lit., “Eucharist,” [fromthe Greek word for “thanks”]) (Matt. 26:27; Mark 14:23;Luke 22:17, 19; 1Cor. 11:24), “the breaking of bread”(Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7, 11), “communion” (1Cor. 10:16KJV), the “Lord’s table” (1Cor. 10:21), the“Lord’s Supper” (1Cor. 11:20), and a “lovefeast” (Jude 12). See also Lord’s Supper.
OldTestament
TheHebrew word for “Lord,” yhwh (usually pronounced“Yahweh”), occurs more than 6,800 times in the OT and isin every book except Ecclesiastes and Esther. “Yahweh” isGod’s personal name and is revealed as such in Exod. 3:13–14.God tells Moses to declare to the Israelites in Egypt, “I amhas sent me to you” (3:14). The Hebrew behind “I am”connotes active being; the Lord is the one who is there for hispeople and, in the book of Exodus, does so through miraculous events(14:13–14). This demonstrates the close association betweenone’s name and one’s character in the ancient world.Yahweh is one who is with his people (Exod. 3:12; 6:2, 4; Isa. 26:4).Although the divine name is used before the exodus (Gen. 12:1; 15:1),it is not until the time of Moses that God reveals its redemptivesignificance. Nonetheless, the divine name is used in Genesis incontexts where the immanence of God is evident. In Gen. 3:8 “theLord God ... was walking in the garden in the cool of theday.” Further, the Lord makes a covenant with Abraham (Gen. 12;15; 17), and the Lord will remain faithful to his covenants for athousand generations (Deut. 7:9). Later in Israel’s history,Micah, in the face of those who worship other gods, reassures thepeople of Israel that Yahweh is distinct from all others, and thatthey will walk in his name because he will one day act to effectjustice for all (Mic. 4:3–5).
Thedivine name also occurs as a form of address in various prayersthroughout the OT (Gen. 15:2, 8; Exod. 5:22; 2Sam. 7:18;2Kings 6:17), most notably in the psalms, where it occurs overtwo hundred times. In the psalms an abbreviated form of the name isoften seen in an exclamation of praise, halleluyah, “praiseYah[weh]” (e.g., Pss. 149:1; 150:1).
Itis interesting to note the origin of the pronunciation of yhwh as“Jehovah.” To avoid breaking the third commandment,against misusing the name of God, pious Jews did not pronounce thedivine name yhwh, substituting the word ’adonay (“mymaster”) in its place. In medieval times Jewish scholars addedvowels to the consonantal text of the Hebrew Bible to aid in correctpronunciation. For yhwh, they used the vowels of ’adonay,which, when pronounced, creates a name unknown to the biblicalauthors, “Jehovah.”
Inthe postexilic period the appellation “Yahweh” occurs farless frequently, being replaced by adonay (Hebrew) or kyrios (Greek).The latter is used for Yahweh over six thousand times in the LXX. InHellenistic literature kyrios is used to describe various gods andgoddesses. The Roman emperors were also called kyrios, often withimplications of deity. Some argue that the early Christians employedthe title polemically to refer to Christ, the true kyrios. A clearexample is found in Phil. 2:11, where it is said that every tonguewill confess that “Jesus Christ is Lord” (cf. 1Cor.8:5–8). Kyrios was also used nonreligiously to refer to a“master” of a slave and as a term of respect to addresssomeone of superior status (“sir”). Peter addresses Jesusas “lord” when he washes Peter’s feet (John 13:6).
NewTestament
Inthe NT, the majority of occurrences of “Lord” (kyrios)appear in Luke-Acts and the writings of Paul, perhaps due to thepredominantly Hellenistic audiences of these texts, who would knowwell its Greco-Roman connotations. As for Paul, the use of “Lord”by Luke may point to the deity of Jesus. In the Lukan birthnarrative, Elizabeth wonders why “the mother of my Lord shouldcome to me?” (Luke 1:43; cf. 7:19; 10:1). In Acts 1:21 the name“Jesus” is preceded by the definite form of “Lord,”reflecting an oft-repeated confessional title in Acts and Paul (Acts15:11; 20:35; 2Cor. 1:2). According to some, if Matthew intendsa divine connotation by his use of the term “Lord,” it ismore oblique. For instance, in Matt. 4:7 Jesus quotes Deut. 6:16,where “the Lord” is Yahweh and not Jesus (cf. Matt.9:38). There are occasions in Mark where “lord,” althoughappearing to function in a nonreligious sense, does seem to point toYahweh. In Mark 2:28 Jesus claims that “the Son of Man is lordeven of the sabbath” (NRSV). Since the Sabbath belongs toYahweh and falls under his sovereign authority (Exod. 20:8–11),it is quite probable that Mark’s readers would now ascribe thatdominion to the Son of Man. This is not unlike his authority toforgive sins (Mark 2:10), which, as the scribes rightfully point out,is something that only Yahweh can do. In light of these usages, onecannot help but think that the use of the term in Mark 11:3, at thetriumphal entry, also carries divine significance. In John, there areexamples of both the nonreligious use of “lord,” as areverent form of address (5:7; 9:36), and the religious, divinesense, particularly after the resurrection (20:28; 21:7).
Itis quite likely that Jewish Christians, even before Paul, regardedJesus as one who shares in Yahweh’s divinity. In his letter tothe Corinthians, a Greek-speaking congregation, Paul uses theexpression maranatha (1Cor. 16:22), a Greektransliteration of an Aramaic phrase that means “Our Lord,come!” This term likely was a part of an early Jewish Christianliturgy. Further, there are places where Paul refers to Jesus simplyas “the Lord,” suggesting a common understanding of theappellation among the early Christians (Rom. 14:6; 1Cor. 3:5).In addition to Phil. 2:11, Paul expresses the divinity of Jesus byalluding to Deut. 6:4, the Shema, in 1Cor. 8:6: “Yet forus there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came andfor whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, throughwhom all things came and through whom we live.” In the book ofRevelation divine status is ascribed to Jesus. While in the vision ofGod in Rev. 4 the title is used of God (4:8, 11), at the conclusionof the book appears the invocation “Come, Lord Jesus”(22:20; cf. 22:21).
ForPaul, a particularly important component of the lordship of Jesus ishis resurrection, through which he becomes “the Lord of boththe dead and the living” (Rom. 14:9; cf. 1:4), and his returnmarks the “day of the Lord,” which in the OT was the dayof Yahweh (1Thess. 5:2; cf. 5:23). Exactly how JewishChristians could attribute such a status to Jesus and yet maintain astrict monotheism remains a matter of considerable debate. Is Christincluded in the identity of the Godhead, or is he an intermediaryfigure (of which Second Temple Judaism had many), possessing aquasi-divine status? If Jesus is an intermediary figure, then hisauthority to do that which only Yahweh can (such as forgiving sinsand fulfilling roles originally referring to God) suggests a veryclose identification between Yahweh and Jesus himself. See also Namesof God; YHWH.
Slavery and servanthood were part of everyday life in theancient world. There were many different kinds of circumstancesthrough which a person might become a slave. Some were coerced intoservitude after being captured in war; others were born into slavery;others served as slaves as a sentence for a crime; still othersserved by personal choice as an apprentice. Slavery was not based onrace. Furthermore, there was an enormous range of social and economicclasses among slaves, from the brutal life of a galley slave to thatof a wealthy servant of a king who might likewise own property andslaves.
Insome cases, manumission, or the freeing of slaves, was possibleduring Roman times. This could be accomplished if the master died orif the master’s will allowed for their freedom, and in somecases slaves could even purchase their own freedom. In the firstcentury AD, there were many such manumitted slaves. Acts 6:9 speaksof a Synagogue of the Freedmen, which probably means that it was madeup of former slaves.
OldTestament
Thereare numerous relationships in the OT that could be characterized asfollowing a servant-master model. These included service to themonarchy (2Sam. 9:2), within households (Gen. 16:8), in thetemple (1Sam. 2:15), or to God himself (Judg. 2:8). We also seeextensive slavery laws in passages such as Exod. 21:1–11; Lev.25:39–55; Deut. 15:12–18. The slavery laws were concernedwith the proper treatment of Hebrew slaves and included guidelinesfor their eventual release and freedom. For example, Hebrew slaveswho had sold themselves to others were to serve for a period of sixyears. On the seventh year, known also as the Year of Jubilee, theywere to be released. Once released, they were not to be sent awayempty-handed, but rather were to be supported from the owner’s“threshing floor” and “winepress.” Slavesalso had certain rights that gave them special privileges andprotection from their masters. Captured slaves, for example, wereallowed rest on the Sabbath (Exod. 20:10) and during special holidays(Deut. 16:11, 14). They could also be freed if their masterpermanently hurt or crippled them (Exod. 21:26–27). Also,severe punishment was imposed on a person who beat a slave to death(Exod. 21:20–21).
Someslaves chose freely to stay with their owner. Deuteronomy 15:16–17speaks of a slave who might say to a master, “I do not want toleave you,” out of love for the master and his family. Thiscommitment was sealed by piercing the earlobe of the slave with anawl. This symbolized a lifelong commitment to the master.
NewTestament
Slaverywas very common in the first century AD, and there were manydifferent kinds of slaves. For example, slaves might live in anextended household (oikos) in which they were born, or they mightchoose to sell themselves into this situation (1Pet. 2:18–25).Although slavery was a significant part of society in the firstcentury AD, we never see Jesus or the apostles encourage slavery.Instead, both Paul and Peter encouraged godly character and obediencefor slaves within this system (Eph. 6:5–8; Col. 3:22–25;1Tim. 6:1–2; Philemon; 1Pet. 2:18–21).Likewise, masters were encouraged to be kind and fair to their slaves(Eph. 6:9; Col. 4:1). Later in the NT, slave trading was condemned bythe apostle Paul as contrary to “sound doctrine” and “thegospel concerning the glory of the blessed God” (1Tim.1:10–11).
Jesusembodied the idea of a servant in word and deed. He fulfilled therole of the “Servant of the Lord,” the Suffering Servantpredicted by the prophet Isaiah (Isa. 42:1–4; 50:4–9;52:13–53:12). He also took on the role of a servant in theGospels, identifying himself as the Son of Man who came to serve(Mark 10:45) and washing the disciples’ feet (John 13:4–5).Paul says that in the incarnation Jesus took on “the verynature of a servant” (Phil. 2:7).
Thespecial relationship between Jesus and his followers is captured inthe servant-master language of the NT Epistles, especially in Paul’sletters (Rom. 1:1; Phil. 1:1; Titus 1:1). This language focuses notso much on the societal status of these servants as on the allegianceand honor owed to Christ Jesus.
Theimagery of slavery is also used metaphorically in the NT in both anegative and a positive manner. In Rom. 6 the apostle Paul discusseshow slavery and obedience to former and latter masters is anessential part of the changed Christian life. Prior to knowingChrist, we were “slaves to sin” and obeyed its power(Rom. 6:16–17); after following Christ, we were freed from thepower of sin and death and became “slaves to righteousness”(Rom. 6:18) and “slaves of God” (Rom. 6:22).
Slavery and servanthood were part of everyday life in theancient world. There were many different kinds of circumstancesthrough which a person might become a slave. Some were coerced intoservitude after being captured in war; others were born into slavery;others served as slaves as a sentence for a crime; still othersserved by personal choice as an apprentice. Slavery was not based onrace. Furthermore, there was an enormous range of social and economicclasses among slaves, from the brutal life of a galley slave to thatof a wealthy servant of a king who might likewise own property andslaves.
Insome cases, manumission, or the freeing of slaves, was possibleduring Roman times. This could be accomplished if the master died orif the master’s will allowed for their freedom, and in somecases slaves could even purchase their own freedom. In the firstcentury AD, there were many such manumitted slaves. Acts 6:9 speaksof a Synagogue of the Freedmen, which probably means that it was madeup of former slaves.
OldTestament
Thereare numerous relationships in the OT that could be characterized asfollowing a servant-master model. These included service to themonarchy (2Sam. 9:2), within households (Gen. 16:8), in thetemple (1Sam. 2:15), or to God himself (Judg. 2:8). We also seeextensive slavery laws in passages such as Exod. 21:1–11; Lev.25:39–55; Deut. 15:12–18. The slavery laws were concernedwith the proper treatment of Hebrew slaves and included guidelinesfor their eventual release and freedom. For example, Hebrew slaveswho had sold themselves to others were to serve for a period of sixyears. On the seventh year, known also as the Year of Jubilee, theywere to be released. Once released, they were not to be sent awayempty-handed, but rather were to be supported from the owner’s“threshing floor” and “winepress.” Slavesalso had certain rights that gave them special privileges andprotection from their masters. Captured slaves, for example, wereallowed rest on the Sabbath (Exod. 20:10) and during special holidays(Deut. 16:11, 14). They could also be freed if their masterpermanently hurt or crippled them (Exod. 21:26–27). Also,severe punishment was imposed on a person who beat a slave to death(Exod. 21:20–21).
Someslaves chose freely to stay with their owner. Deuteronomy 15:16–17speaks of a slave who might say to a master, “I do not want toleave you,” out of love for the master and his family. Thiscommitment was sealed by piercing the earlobe of the slave with anawl. This symbolized a lifelong commitment to the master.
NewTestament
Slaverywas very common in the first century AD, and there were manydifferent kinds of slaves. For example, slaves might live in anextended household (oikos) in which they were born, or they mightchoose to sell themselves into this situation (1Pet. 2:18–25).Although slavery was a significant part of society in the firstcentury AD, we never see Jesus or the apostles encourage slavery.Instead, both Paul and Peter encouraged godly character and obediencefor slaves within this system (Eph. 6:5–8; Col. 3:22–25;1Tim. 6:1–2; Philemon; 1Pet. 2:18–21).Likewise, masters were encouraged to be kind and fair to their slaves(Eph. 6:9; Col. 4:1). Later in the NT, slave trading was condemned bythe apostle Paul as contrary to “sound doctrine” and “thegospel concerning the glory of the blessed God” (1Tim.1:10–11).
Jesusembodied the idea of a servant in word and deed. He fulfilled therole of the “Servant of the Lord,” the Suffering Servantpredicted by the prophet Isaiah (Isa. 42:1–4; 50:4–9;52:13–53:12). He also took on the role of a servant in theGospels, identifying himself as the Son of Man who came to serve(Mark 10:45) and washing the disciples’ feet (John 13:4–5).Paul says that in the incarnation Jesus took on “the verynature of a servant” (Phil. 2:7).
Thespecial relationship between Jesus and his followers is captured inthe servant-master language of the NT Epistles, especially in Paul’sletters (Rom. 1:1; Phil. 1:1; Titus 1:1). This language focuses notso much on the societal status of these servants as on the allegianceand honor owed to Christ Jesus.
Theimagery of slavery is also used metaphorically in the NT in both anegative and a positive manner. In Rom. 6 the apostle Paul discusseshow slavery and obedience to former and latter masters is anessential part of the changed Christian life. Prior to knowingChrist, we were “slaves to sin” and obeyed its power(Rom. 6:16–17); after following Christ, we were freed from thepower of sin and death and became “slaves to righteousness”(Rom. 6:18) and “slaves of God” (Rom. 6:22).
Secondary Matches
The following suggestions occured because
John 13:1-17
is mentioned in the definition.
Traditionally identified with John the son of Zebedee, theGospel of John depicts him as the ideal eyewitness to Jesus and asthe ideal author. He first explicitly appears in John 13–21. Inrepresenting the Beloved Disciple as the author of the Gospel of John(John 21:24–25), the author thus claims a privileged place forits revelation about Jesus, perhaps in relation to the Gospel ofMark, which many in the early church considered to have Peter as itsprimary source of testimony.
Bible Texts and VersionsThe NT and the OT have considerably different but partiallyoverlapping textual histories. For clarity, it is best to begin witha survey of the NT manuscripts and versions.
Greektexts.Although no autographs of the NT books survive, there exist more thanfive thousand Greek texts covering anywhere from a portion of a fewverses up to the complete NT. Traditionally, these texts have beenclassified into five groups: papyri, uncials, minuscules,lectionaries, and quotations in patristic texts. The most importantmanuscripts are listed below.
Theearliest texts of the NT are those written on papyrus. Ninety-eightof these manuscripts have been identified, and they are representedby a “P” with a numerical superscript. The earliest ofthese papyri is P52, which contains parts of four verses in John 18and dates to the early second century. For substantial portions ofthe NT text, the most important papyri are found in the ChesterBeatty and Bodmer collections. P45, P46, and P47, all from theChester Beatty collection, are from the third century and containlarge sections of the four Gospels, eight of the Pauline Epistles,Hebrews, and Revelation. Within the Bodmer collection in Geneva arefour very important codices. P66 dates to around AD 200 and preservesmost of the Gospel of John. P72 dates to the third century andcontains the earliest copies of 1–2 Peter and Jude, which arepreserved in their entirety, as well as Greek translations of Pss.33–34. P74 dates to the seventh century and contains portionsof Acts, James, 1–2 Peter, 1–3 John, and Jude. Finally,P75, which dates to the early third century, contains most of Lukeand John 1–15. It is the oldest extant copy of Luke. Among theremaining papyri, forty-three have been dated to the early fourthcentury or before.
Thesecond category of manuscripts is the uncials, which usually werewritten on parchment and span the fourth through the tenth centuries.About 270 uncials are known, and they range from a few verses up tocomplete copies of the NT or even the entire Bible. Uncialsoriginally were denoted by capital letters, but when the number ofmanuscripts grew beyond these limits, a new system was employedwhereby each manuscript was given a number always beginning withzero. However, the most important uncials are still usually known bytheir letter. Among the most important uncials are the following fivemanuscripts. Codex Sinaiticus (designated by the Hebrew letter à)dates to the fourth century and is the only uncial that contains theentire NT. It also has almost all of the OT as well as the earlyChristian writings the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd ofHermas. Dating from the fifth century, Codex Alexandrinus (designatedas A) contains the OT, most of the NT—lacking only portions ofMatthew, John, and 2 Corinthians—and 1–2 Clement.Along with Sinaiticus, the most important uncial is Codex Vaticanus(designated as B), which dates to the fourth century. It containsalmost all of the OT and the complete NT, except for substantialportions between Hebrews and Revelation. It has been in the Vatican’slibrary for over five hundred years. The fourth important uncial isCodex Bezae Cantabrigiensis (designated as D), which contains Greekand Latin copies of the four Gospels, most of Acts, and a few versesfrom 3 John. It dates from the late fourth or early fifthcentury. The fifth important uncial is Codex Washingtonianus(designated as W), which dates to the early fifth century andcontains virtually all of the four Gospels.
Thethird category of NT manuscripts is minuscules. These texts date fromthe ninth century and later and comprise approximately 2,800manuscripts, which are denoted by a number not beginning with zero.Among the more important minuscules are Codex 1, Codex 13, and Codex33, which, along with their relatives, are considered reliablewitnesses to early families of texts such as the Caesarean (1) or theAlexandrian (33). Codex 13 and its relatives are noteworthy forhaving the story of the adulterous woman at the end of Luke 21instead of in John 8. The final two groups of NT manuscripts, thelectionaries and quotations in patristic sources, are not manuscriptsin the strict sense of the term, but their use of portions of the NTpresents important witnesses for the practice of textual criticism.
Versions.With the spread of Christianity during the time of the Roman Empire,the NT was translated into the language of the native peoples. Theseversions of the NT are important both for textual criticism of the NTand for the interpretive decisions that are reflected in how the textwas rendered into a new language. Among the most important earlyversions of the NT are the following.
AsLatin began to displace Greek as the dominant language of the empire,there was a need for a Latin version of the Bible. The earliesttranslation, known as the Old Latin or Itala, was made probably inthe late second century, though the oldest manuscript (CodexVercellensis) is from the fourth century. With the proliferation ofLatin texts a standardized Latin translation became desirable, and inAD 382 Jerome was commissioned by Pope Damasus to provide a newtranslation known as the Vulgate.
Anotherfamily of NT versions is the Syriac texts. Around the late secondcentury the four Gospels were translated into a version known as theOld Syriac. It is extant in two incomplete manuscripts that areprobably fifth century. The translation that became the standardSyriac text is the Peshitta, which was produced in the early fifthcentury. It does not contain 2 Peter, 2–3 John, Jude, orRevelation because these were not considered canonical among theSyriac churches.
Otherimportant versions of the NT from antiquity are the Coptic, Armenian,Georgian, and Ethiopic translations.
OldTestament
Hebrewtexts.The text that has served as the basis for most modern editions andtranslations of the Hebrew OT is the Masoretic Text (MT), named afterthe Masoretes, the Jewish scribes who transmitted the text and addedvocalization, accentuation, and notes to the consonantal text. Themost important Masoretic manuscripts date from the end of the ninthcentury to the early eleventh century. Notable among these is theLeningrad Codex (AD 1008), denoted as L, which is the earliestMasoretic manuscript of the entire OT. Also important are the AleppoCodex (c. AD 925), denoted as A, which preserves all of the OT exceptfor most of the Pentateuch; the British Museum MS Or. 4445 (c. AD925), denoted as B, which contains most of the Pentateuch; and theCairo Codex (c. AD 896), denoted C, which contains Joshua throughKings and also the Prophets.
Althoughthese manuscripts are much later than the biblical period, theirreliability was largely confirmed with the discovery of the DSSbeginning in 1947. Among the Qumran library are many manuscripts ofbiblical books as well as biblical commentaries, apocrphyal andpseudepigraphal works, and sectarian literature. All the OT books arerepresented among the scrolls that were found except Esther andNehemiah, though the latter is usually presumed to have been at theend of Ezra but has not survived. The books with the most manuscriptsare, in order, Psalms, Deuteronomy, and Isaiah. One of the strikingcharacteristics of these scrolls is that they reflect a diversity oftext types. For example, there is a copy of Jeremiah that is close tothe Masoretic version, but also a manuscript of Jeremiah similar tothe much shorter version found in the Septuagint (the Greektranslation of the OT).
AnotherHebrew text of the OT is that of the Samaritan Pentateuch, which isthe text transmitted by the Samaritans. It is similar to the MT insome respects but also has differences that reflect theologicalinterests. The main manuscripts for the Samaritan Pentateuch are fromthe twelfth century.
Versions.Between the third and first centuries BC, the entire OT wastranslated into Greek. This version, known as the Septuagint(designated by the abbreviation LXX), became the main version of theOT used by the early church. Due to its adoption by the church, theLXX has been preserved in numerous manuscripts, including Sinaiticus,Alexandrinus, and Vaticanus. By the late first century BC or earlyfirst century AD, there were two revisions of the Greek text: theProto-Lucianic version and the Kaige recension. The latter aimed torevise the Greek toward closer conformity with the Hebrew text andderives its name from its peculiar tendency to translate the Hebrewword gam (“also”) with the Greek work kaige. In thesecond century AD three other Greek translations were made by Aquila,Theodotion, and Symmachus, all of which revised the Kaige recensionback toward the MT.
Anotherimportant early version of the OT consists of the Targumim, which areAramaic translations or paraphrases (and sometimes extensiveelaborations) of OT books. The official Targumim for Judaism areTargum Onqelos for the Pentateuch (c. second century AD), which isquite literal, and Targum Pseudo-Jonathan for the Prophets (sometimebefore the fourth century AD), which ranges from being quite literalto somewhat paraphrastic. Unofficial Targumim for the Pentateuchinclude Targum Neofiti and Targum Pseudo-Jonathan. There are alsovarious unofficial Targumim for the Writings section of the OT,except for Daniel and Ezra-Nehemiah (which are already written partlyin Aramaic).
Besidesthe Greek and Aramaic translations, there are other importantversions of the OT. Sometime in either the third or fourth centuryAD, the Peshitta of the OT was produced, though there is evidencethat there were earlier Syriac translations of some books alreadycirculating. Also important is a group of Latin translations knowncollectively as the Old Latin. These versions were produced sometimeduring the second century AD and were primarily made from alreadyexisting Greek translations rather than Hebrew texts. As with the NT,a later Latin translation was made by Jerome for the Vulgate.
Bible Texts and VersionsThe NT and the OT have considerably different but partiallyoverlapping textual histories. For clarity, it is best to begin witha survey of the NT manuscripts and versions.
Greektexts.Although no autographs of the NT books survive, there exist more thanfive thousand Greek texts covering anywhere from a portion of a fewverses up to the complete NT. Traditionally, these texts have beenclassified into five groups: papyri, uncials, minuscules,lectionaries, and quotations in patristic texts. The most importantmanuscripts are listed below.
Theearliest texts of the NT are those written on papyrus. Ninety-eightof these manuscripts have been identified, and they are representedby a “P” with a numerical superscript. The earliest ofthese papyri is P52, which contains parts of four verses in John 18and dates to the early second century. For substantial portions ofthe NT text, the most important papyri are found in the ChesterBeatty and Bodmer collections. P45, P46, and P47, all from theChester Beatty collection, are from the third century and containlarge sections of the four Gospels, eight of the Pauline Epistles,Hebrews, and Revelation. Within the Bodmer collection in Geneva arefour very important codices. P66 dates to around AD 200 and preservesmost of the Gospel of John. P72 dates to the third century andcontains the earliest copies of 1–2 Peter and Jude, which arepreserved in their entirety, as well as Greek translations of Pss.33–34. P74 dates to the seventh century and contains portionsof Acts, James, 1–2 Peter, 1–3 John, and Jude. Finally,P75, which dates to the early third century, contains most of Lukeand John 1–15. It is the oldest extant copy of Luke. Among theremaining papyri, forty-three have been dated to the early fourthcentury or before.
Thesecond category of manuscripts is the uncials, which usually werewritten on parchment and span the fourth through the tenth centuries.About 270 uncials are known, and they range from a few verses up tocomplete copies of the NT or even the entire Bible. Uncialsoriginally were denoted by capital letters, but when the number ofmanuscripts grew beyond these limits, a new system was employedwhereby each manuscript was given a number always beginning withzero. However, the most important uncials are still usually known bytheir letter. Among the most important uncials are the following fivemanuscripts. Codex Sinaiticus (designated by the Hebrew letter à)dates to the fourth century and is the only uncial that contains theentire NT. It also has almost all of the OT as well as the earlyChristian writings the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd ofHermas. Dating from the fifth century, Codex Alexandrinus (designatedas A) contains the OT, most of the NT—lacking only portions ofMatthew, John, and 2 Corinthians—and 1–2 Clement.Along with Sinaiticus, the most important uncial is Codex Vaticanus(designated as B), which dates to the fourth century. It containsalmost all of the OT and the complete NT, except for substantialportions between Hebrews and Revelation. It has been in the Vatican’slibrary for over five hundred years. The fourth important uncial isCodex Bezae Cantabrigiensis (designated as D), which contains Greekand Latin copies of the four Gospels, most of Acts, and a few versesfrom 3 John. It dates from the late fourth or early fifthcentury. The fifth important uncial is Codex Washingtonianus(designated as W), which dates to the early fifth century andcontains virtually all of the four Gospels.
Thethird category of NT manuscripts is minuscules. These texts date fromthe ninth century and later and comprise approximately 2,800manuscripts, which are denoted by a number not beginning with zero.Among the more important minuscules are Codex 1, Codex 13, and Codex33, which, along with their relatives, are considered reliablewitnesses to early families of texts such as the Caesarean (1) or theAlexandrian (33). Codex 13 and its relatives are noteworthy forhaving the story of the adulterous woman at the end of Luke 21instead of in John 8. The final two groups of NT manuscripts, thelectionaries and quotations in patristic sources, are not manuscriptsin the strict sense of the term, but their use of portions of the NTpresents important witnesses for the practice of textual criticism.
Versions.With the spread of Christianity during the time of the Roman Empire,the NT was translated into the language of the native peoples. Theseversions of the NT are important both for textual criticism of the NTand for the interpretive decisions that are reflected in how the textwas rendered into a new language. Among the most important earlyversions of the NT are the following.
AsLatin began to displace Greek as the dominant language of the empire,there was a need for a Latin version of the Bible. The earliesttranslation, known as the Old Latin or Itala, was made probably inthe late second century, though the oldest manuscript (CodexVercellensis) is from the fourth century. With the proliferation ofLatin texts a standardized Latin translation became desirable, and inAD 382 Jerome was commissioned by Pope Damasus to provide a newtranslation known as the Vulgate.
Anotherfamily of NT versions is the Syriac texts. Around the late secondcentury the four Gospels were translated into a version known as theOld Syriac. It is extant in two incomplete manuscripts that areprobably fifth century. The translation that became the standardSyriac text is the Peshitta, which was produced in the early fifthcentury. It does not contain 2 Peter, 2–3 John, Jude, orRevelation because these were not considered canonical among theSyriac churches.
Otherimportant versions of the NT from antiquity are the Coptic, Armenian,Georgian, and Ethiopic translations.
OldTestament
Hebrewtexts.The text that has served as the basis for most modern editions andtranslations of the Hebrew OT is the Masoretic Text (MT), named afterthe Masoretes, the Jewish scribes who transmitted the text and addedvocalization, accentuation, and notes to the consonantal text. Themost important Masoretic manuscripts date from the end of the ninthcentury to the early eleventh century. Notable among these is theLeningrad Codex (AD 1008), denoted as L, which is the earliestMasoretic manuscript of the entire OT. Also important are the AleppoCodex (c. AD 925), denoted as A, which preserves all of the OT exceptfor most of the Pentateuch; the British Museum MS Or. 4445 (c. AD925), denoted as B, which contains most of the Pentateuch; and theCairo Codex (c. AD 896), denoted C, which contains Joshua throughKings and also the Prophets.
Althoughthese manuscripts are much later than the biblical period, theirreliability was largely confirmed with the discovery of the DSSbeginning in 1947. Among the Qumran library are many manuscripts ofbiblical books as well as biblical commentaries, apocrphyal andpseudepigraphal works, and sectarian literature. All the OT books arerepresented among the scrolls that were found except Esther andNehemiah, though the latter is usually presumed to have been at theend of Ezra but has not survived. The books with the most manuscriptsare, in order, Psalms, Deuteronomy, and Isaiah. One of the strikingcharacteristics of these scrolls is that they reflect a diversity oftext types. For example, there is a copy of Jeremiah that is close tothe Masoretic version, but also a manuscript of Jeremiah similar tothe much shorter version found in the Septuagint (the Greektranslation of the OT).
AnotherHebrew text of the OT is that of the Samaritan Pentateuch, which isthe text transmitted by the Samaritans. It is similar to the MT insome respects but also has differences that reflect theologicalinterests. The main manuscripts for the Samaritan Pentateuch are fromthe twelfth century.
Versions.Between the third and first centuries BC, the entire OT wastranslated into Greek. This version, known as the Septuagint(designated by the abbreviation LXX), became the main version of theOT used by the early church. Due to its adoption by the church, theLXX has been preserved in numerous manuscripts, including Sinaiticus,Alexandrinus, and Vaticanus. By the late first century BC or earlyfirst century AD, there were two revisions of the Greek text: theProto-Lucianic version and the Kaige recension. The latter aimed torevise the Greek toward closer conformity with the Hebrew text andderives its name from its peculiar tendency to translate the Hebrewword gam (“also”) with the Greek work kaige. In thesecond century AD three other Greek translations were made by Aquila,Theodotion, and Symmachus, all of which revised the Kaige recensionback toward the MT.
Anotherimportant early version of the OT consists of the Targumim, which areAramaic translations or paraphrases (and sometimes extensiveelaborations) of OT books. The official Targumim for Judaism areTargum Onqelos for the Pentateuch (c. second century AD), which isquite literal, and Targum Pseudo-Jonathan for the Prophets (sometimebefore the fourth century AD), which ranges from being quite literalto somewhat paraphrastic. Unofficial Targumim for the Pentateuchinclude Targum Neofiti and Targum Pseudo-Jonathan. There are alsovarious unofficial Targumim for the Writings section of the OT,except for Daniel and Ezra-Nehemiah (which are already written partlyin Aramaic).
Besidesthe Greek and Aramaic translations, there are other importantversions of the OT. Sometime in either the third or fourth centuryAD, the Peshitta of the OT was produced, though there is evidencethat there were earlier Syriac translations of some books alreadycirculating. Also important is a group of Latin translations knowncollectively as the Old Latin. These versions were produced sometimeduring the second century AD and were primarily made from alreadyexisting Greek translations rather than Hebrew texts. As with the NT,a later Latin translation was made by Jerome for the Vulgate.
The Bible contains two kinds of statements related to properconduct. Some of them describe the nature of God, the sort of worldhe created, and what he has done for particular groups of people. Italso contains statements telling us what we ought to do, both ascreatures of this God and, in some instances, as the uniquebeneficiaries of his redemptive activity. Consequently, the Biblesets forth a moral viewpoint or ethical system, supported by reasonsthat justify its content and urgency. The writers of Scripture werenot moral philosophers, outlining their position in technical detail;nevertheless, they intended to reveal what pleases our God andSavior, so that the saints are “thoroughly equipped for everygood work” (2Tim. 3:16–17). The Bible, therefore,is the foundational resource for moral discernment, the definitivestatement of what Christians must do and who they must become.
TheSources of Moral Knowledge
Scriptureidentifies two sources of moral knowledge. First, all human beingshave the law of God “written on their hearts” (Rom.2:15). We have a conscience, a God-given awareness of right and wrongthat acquits or convicts us, depending on how we respond to it. Thefall of humankind has damaged this source of knowledge, and ourconsciences can become “seared” through chronicdisobedience and doctrinal treason (1Tim. 4:2). We do not,therefore, see infallibly what our duties are. Nevertheless, theapostle Paul argues that every human being knows enough of God’slaw—and indeed, enough about his nature as God—toeliminate every defense on judgment day (Rom. 1:18–20). No onewill be able to say to God in that hour, “I had no idea who youwere and no hint of what you expected ofme.”
Second,as noted above, we have the Bible as a source of knowledge, this onebeing fully adequate and sufficiently clear to guide our choices.Knowing Scripture is necessary for Christian ethics because it offersa high-definition view of what conscience can (even in its bestmoments) scarcely grasp. The Bible proclaims not only what the churchmust do, often in straightforward, concrete terms, but also (atleast, in many cases) why God’s will has its particular contentand why obedience is an emergency, not a safely deferred, improvementproject. The Bible does not, and really could not, answer everyethical question put to it in unambiguous detail. New technologiesand cultural shifts have created dilemmas unimagined in the firstcentury or any previous age. But the church can be assured that afaithful reading of and response to Scripture will, by the grace ofGod, please him even today, whatever our particular circumstances.
TheLogic of Biblical Morality
Themoral teaching of Scripture has an identifiable structure consistingof duties and final objectives. When we obey God’scommandments, which is our duty, his ultimate goals or objectives increating us are realized. In this sense, biblical morality iscomplete and informative compared to systems derived from otherworldviews. It explains what life is all about, but also what we mustdo from day to day. This entire picture emerges from Scripturebecause its theological statements are always practically applied andnever presented with merely theoretical interest.
Theobjectives of biblical morality.The objectives of an ethical system are its final ends or purposes:the results that obedience is supposed to yield. In the Bible, twoobjectives have this ultimate significance, one being the anticipatedside effect of the other.
Toglorify God.The biblical writers proclaim the spectacular goodness of God. He ismaximally excellent in all ways as the Creator, including wisdom,power, justice, and love. He is the holy God who, almost in spite ofthat fact, loves us and gave his Son, Jesus, to suffer for our sinsso that we might live eternally in his presence. In these respects,God stands alone, not simply in experience but necessarily so. No oneever has, and no one ever could, be like him. Thus, the finalobjective of all human striving must be to glorify this God—toknow him, to praise him, and to value what he values. Our actionsmust testify to his excellence, honoring him and encouraging othersto do likewise. Obedience treasures what God treasures, shuns what heabhors, and allows his power to work in our lives, causing us to livein unity with our fellow believers. These patterns of behavior definewhat it means to glorify God.
Tobe happy in God’s presence.The second goal or objective of biblical morality is to be happy inways that are proper for God’s creatures. In this sense, theChristian system of ethics differs from moral theories that eitherreject happiness altogether, viewing it as an unworthy goal, or elsereduce it to a merely practical necessity—that is, we sinnersneed our incentives. On the contrary, the God of Scripture plainlydesires our happiness and often presents himself as the final sourceof it when calling his people to obedience. This tendency followsfrom the perfect goodness of God and his freedom in creating allthings. He did not have to make anything else, but he did so; andbecause he has no needs, his purposes must have been selfless ratherthan selfish. He created in order to give rather than to get, and thevery best he desires for any of us is the happiness that results fromour glorifying him together, as one body in Christ. Likewise, then,biblical morality differs from ethical systems that make humanhappiness an intrinsic good, so that any means to it is acceptable.God wants us to be happy, but our happiness must come from bringinghim glory. All other forms of happiness are deceptive and transitory.The heavenly scenes of the book of Revelation show the church whathappiness God has in store for them if they overcome the trials ofthis life (so, e.g., Rev. 4–5; 7; 21–22; cf. 1Cor.2:9; Heb. 12:2).
Themeans of biblical morality.Not surprisingly, the Bible also shows us how to glorify God—howto reflect his majesty in our daily lives, how to praise him, and howto value what he values. Within the whole of this teaching, severalmajor themes can be discerned, five leading examples of which appearbelow, allowing some overlap between them.
Trustingin God’s promises.Biblical faith is the confidence that God will do for us what he haspromised. We believe that he can and will meet our needs and notallow us to endure pointless suffering. When we trust him, weproclaim his greatness and acknowledge our own dependence upon him.Both Rom. 4 and Heb. 11 make this point in ways that reflect upon OThistory with an application to the present Christian life. The gospelis a promise concerning the death, burial, and resurrection ofChrist; and faith assures us that God will reckon these events to ouraccount. Conversely, we often violate God’s commandmentsbecause we doubt that he will give us what we need when we need it(so, e.g., Abraham’s capitulation to Sarah in Gen. 16, with itscorresponding negative results).
Keepingholiness and impurity separated.God is the all-powerful, all-knowing, morally perfect Creator of theuniverse. All things depend on him for their existence, and he isextreme both in his commitment to justice and his desire to love.Consequently, God’s creatures encounter him as “holy,”as the ominously transcendent or dangerously perfect deity. He standsalone, apart from everything else, and life in his presence cannotentail business as usual. The shorthand way of expressing this dutyis to say that we ourselves must be holy, as he is holy, by shunningall forms of impurity. In this way, for example, the ancientIsraelites prepared themselves to enter Yahweh’s presence andgave him public honor (Lev. 11:44; 19:2; Ps. 24:3–4; Isa.6:1–5; cf. 1Pet. 1:15–16).
InScripture, the distinction between the pure and the impure, or theholy and the unholy, is sometimes intrinsic and sometimespedagogical. Breaking any of the Ten Commandments makes oneintrinsically impure. It is always evil, everywhere, for anyone tohave other gods, make idols, and disrespect parents. It is evil tolie, steal, and murder. Even breaking the Sabbath is wrong if itexpresses unbelief in God’s ability and willingness to provide.But some lines between purity and impurity—or, in other cases,just between the sacred and the common—seem to be drawn by Godfor instructional purposes only. They do not separate good from evilas such, but they compel the Israelites to “practice Yahweh’spresence” by honoring boundaries imposed on domestic life. Itis not evil to eat pork, but doing that is forbidden in the OT andpermitted in the NT (Lev. 11:7; Mark 7:19). It is not evil to wearblended cloth, but doing that is forbidden in the OT and passed overin the NT (Lev. 19:19). Therefore, as suggested, Levitical rules ofthis kind must have had some instrumental purpose, serving anobjective beyond themselves. They impose the holiness of Yahweh oneveryday choices, as the Holy Spirit now presses the claims of Godupon his church. This separation of impurity and holiness is, in anycase, a constant theme in the OT, and it carries over into the NT aswell, where it informs the question “What must I do to besaved?” (cf. Acts 16:30).
ImitatingGod/Christ.The biblical writers also construe the moral life as an imitation ofGod and/or Christ, especially when the virtues of mercy, humility,and endurance are at stake. In the OT, Yahweh’s behavior towardpeople becomes the standard for Israel’s own conduct. So, forexample, he says, “But let the one who boasts boast about this:that they have the understanding to know me, that I am the Lord, whoexercises kindness, justice and righteousness on earth, for in theseI delight” (Jer. 9:24). In the NT, similar inferences appear,as when Jesus says, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they willbe called children of God” (Matt. 5:9), the son being one whofollows in his father’s footsteps. We must love our enemies, sothat we may be “children of (our) Father in heaven”(Matt. 5:44–45). We must “be perfect,” as he isperfect (Matt. 5:48). Jesus commands his disciples to wash oneanother’s feet, after his own example (John 13:14–15).They must love each other as he has loved them (John 15:12). The newcommandment to love one another, following the Lord’s example,puts on display his character and their own relationship to him(13:34–35). Jesus prays that his disciples will be “one,”just as the Father and the Son are one (17:22). Paul’s hymn inPhil. 2:5–11 serves this purpose: we must imitate the humilitythat surrendered all, even to the point of crucifixion. Hebrews12:1–2 holds up Christ as one who “for the joy set beforehim endured the cross, scorning its shame,” resulting in hisglory.
Livingout our unique identity.Scripture defines the moral ideal for all persons, whoever they are,because its perspective is not relativistic. Murder, idolatry, andlying are not wrong for some and right for others. Nevertheless, mostof the Bible’s moral teaching has a target audience, so that itoften contains inferences to this effect: “You shall do X (ordoing X is urgent for you), either (a)because you belong to Godin a special way or (b)because he has done this special thingfor you.” In the OT, the target audience is Israel; in the NT,the corresponding group is the church. In both Testaments, however,the same ethical particularism operates, thereby giving the moralexhortations of Paul and Peter, to cite two clear examples, arecognizably “Jewish” structure or theme.
Thelinkage between gift and task, or supernatural identity and behavior,is the basic structure of the Sinai covenant itself. The text movesfrom prologue, “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out ofEgypt,” to moral exhortation, beginning with, “You shallhave no other gods before me” (Exod. 20:1–3; Deut.5:6–7). Echoes of this prologue also occur frequently in the OTas motive clauses. God will say, in effect, “You shall do X,for I am the Lord your God,” or “You shall not do Y, forI am the Lord your God who brought you out of Egypt.” In somecases, the motive clause identifies the people themselves, as in,“For you are a people holy to the Lord your God. The Lord yourGod has chosen you out of all the peoples on the face of the earth tobe his people, his treasured possession” (Deut. 7:6). Or again,“You are the children of the Lord your God. Do not cutyourselves or shave the front of your heads for the dead, for you area people holy to the Lord your God. Out of all the peoples on theface of the earth, the Lord has chosen you to be his treasuredpossession” (Deut. 14:1–2). In some cases, God refers tothe people’s unique condition to shame them, as in, “WhenIsrael was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.But the more they were called, the more they went away from me”(Hos. 11:1–2). Loyalty was especially urgent, given Israel’sexperience of God’s particular love.
Inthe NT, the mandate to live out one’s special identity appearsoften, especially (though not exclusively) in the writings of Pauland Peter. In Rom. 6 those who have been emancipated from sin mustresist its waning influence. In Rom. 8 those who are under the HolySpirit’s new management must walk in accordance with him andshun the mind-set of the flesh. The Corinthians have become anunleavened batch of dough; therefore, they must “Get rid of theold yeast,” which tolerates extraordinary sin (1Cor. 5).The members of Christ’s one body are to function as one newhumanity (1Cor. 12:12–31). If the Galatians live by theSpirit, they must also walk by the Spirit (Gal. 5:25). Peter tellshis readers to love one another because they have been “bornagain” of “imperishable seed” (1Pet.1:22–23). They are a “chosen race,” a “royalpriesthood,” and a “holy nation”; therefore, theymust proclaim his excellence and abstain from carnal passions (1Pet.2:9–11). Jesus himself says that because he is the vine and weare the branches, we must abide in him (John 15:1–11). In allthese cases, the target audience has a special relationship to Godthat imposes on them corresponding duties or priorities, so that theyreflect his holiness, value what he values, and attain the goals thathe has set before them.
Livingin unity with one another.The first sin separated God from humankind and damaged all otherrelationships (Gen. 3). From that point onward, Adam and Eve wouldlive in tension (Gen. 3:16), and their son Cain kills his brotherAbel (Gen. 4:8). Disunity results from sin; and in some cases, Godscatters sinners as judgment on their wickedness (e.g., Gen. 11:1–9;1Kings 11). It is “good and pleasant” when “God’speople live together in unity” (Ps. 133:1), and obedience to OTteaching would make them do so. Nevertheless, sin stands betweenYahweh and his people, and it stands between one Israelite andanother. Disunity, in all these dimensions, is the unfinishedbusiness of the OT story.
TheNT presents unity as both an effect and a duty (or a gift and a task)of the new life in Christ. We are one in Christ, and we must live inunity of fellowship with one another. Jews and Gentiles—indeed,people from all walks of life—become one body, a new kind ofpeople, defined by relationships that are “thicker than blood,”so to speak, as blood is thicker than water. Paul, as the apostle tothe Gentiles, enforces this theme throughout his letters, so that hisexhortations concentrate on the church, in the first instance, ratherthan the individual. Christians must display the social virtues oflove and humility, resisting selfish ambition and pride, both ofwhich separate believer from believer and each from the head of thechurch, who is Christ. Romans and Ephesians make a positive case forChristian unity among Jews and Gentiles, while Philippians (perhaps,in a broader sense, also Galatians and Colossians) confronts adivisive tendency. The essential vice denounced in 1–2Corinthiansis arrogant grandstanding, which rejects Paul’s “messageof the cross” (1Cor. 1:18) and subdivides the church intocults of personality. Worldly forces are centrifugal, leading us awayfrom one another and into competition for influence, wealth, andpublic honor. In contrast, the Holy Spirit’s force iscentripetal, creating unity where no one would expect it and leadingeach person to self-sacrifice so that others in the body of Christmight be built up in him.
The human foot is referred to in the Bible both literally(e.g., Exod. 21:24; Lev. 14:14; Luke 8:29) and figuratively (e.g.,Prov. 4:27; Matt. 18:8; 1Cor. 12:15), and the word “foot”is also used to represent the base of a mountain or a hill (e.g.,Exod. 19:12; Josh. 18:16).
Thecommon footwear was the sandal, which covered only the soles. Becauseroads were generally very dusty and dirty, feet needed to be washedfrequently. Figuratively, a conquering king placed his foot on theneck of the conquered leader, symbolizing dominance (Josh. 10:24).Thus, placing someone under one’s foot represented totaldominance (Ps. 110:1; 1Cor. 15:25). To “sit at the feet”of a person indicated a willingness to learn from or serve a master(Luke 10:39; James 2:3). To “fall at the feet” showed aposture of humility (1Sam. 25:24). The washing of feet was anact of hospitality (Luke 7:44) and a show of humility (John 13:4–15)demonstrated to an honored guest. To set foot in a place sometimessuggested that the person or people would take possession of it(Deut. 1:36; 11:24). The “feet of God” represent thesalvation of God’s people (Zech. 14:4).
A common form of hospitality offered to travelers in biblical times. A host offered a basin full of water so that a guest’s feet could be cleaned upon entrance into the home. The dusty and dry climate of Palestine made footwashing important, as people often walked along dirt roads with nothing more than sandals on their feet. Footwashing was so common that hosts who failed to offer this basic expression of hospitality and comfort were severely criticized (Luke 7:44).
Although a staple of hospitality, footwashing was considered the lowliest of activities performed by a servant. It was so demeaning that Jews did not wash the feet of other Jews but rather left the task to Gentile slaves. More often, travelers simply washed their own feet rather than having the chore performed for them (Gen. 18:4; 19:2; 43:24; Judg. 19:21; Luke 7:44).
Because footwashing was performed by a person of inferior social status for a superior (1Sam. 25:41), it would be unthinkable to reverse this socially accepted norm in a culture saturated with relative social status. So for Jesus, a superior, to perform this demeaning chore for his disciples, his inferiors, makes his object lesson all the more dramatic (John 13:5–17). Jesus washed his disciples’ feet to show them that no role is too lowly for him to show the extent of his love (13:1). Peter learned the necessity of spiritual cleansing when Jesus washed his feet (13:8). Jesus also taught his disciples the importance of following his example in their own lives by washing one another’s feet (13:14). No act of service is too lowly for Christ’s followers, and no one is too great to perform such a humble act.
Some early churches may have taken Jesus’ example literally (1Tim. 5:10). Widows seem to have expressed their devotion by washing the feet of other Christians. Such good deeds need not be taken literally today and can be expressed figuratively in other culturally accepted acts of service. Nonetheless, some churches do perform ritual footwashings today.
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 Cushite 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.
Sometimes called “Passion Week,” Holy Week is theweek preceding Easter Sunday and commemorates events of Jesus’last week of ministry. It begins with Palm Sunday, remembering Jesus’entry to Jerusalem (John 12:13).
MaundyThursday (from Lat. mandatum [“commandment”]) is so namedbecause Jesus gave his disciples “a new commandment”(John 13:34): to love one another. Maundy Thursday services ofteninclude footwashing ceremonies (cf. John 13:4) and the Eucharist (cf.Matt. 26:26–29).
GoodFriday is a remembrance of the day Jesus was crucified (John 19:18).Services on this day are somber. Often the music is voices only,without accompaniment. Crosses may be covered in black cloth, and theproceedings are characterized by a funereal tone.
HolySaturday marks Jesus’ time in the tomb. The mourning lastsuntil dusk, at which time the Vigil, the first service of Easter, maybe celebrated.
EasterSunday is the day of the resurrection (John 20:1–9), the mostjoyous service of the Christian church. Bells are rung, and“Alleluia!” is shouted. In the early church, EasterSunday was the day when baptisms were performed.
To appropriate the thought or behavior of others. God warnsIsrael not to imitate “the detestable ways of the nations”(Deut. 18:9; cf. Exod. 23:24; Lev. 18:3). Israel’s desire forcultural assimilation, leading to idolatry, incurs divine judgment(2Kings 17:15; Ezek. 20:32; 25:8). The NT carries forward thiswarning to Christians, who must embrace their citizenship in heaven(Phil. 3:20; cf. Rom. 12:1–2; James 4:4; 1John 2:15; 5:5,19).
Inversely,to imitate the humility of Christ, complete submission to the will ofGod, regardless of the cost, is a core virtue (Phil. 2:1–11;Titus 3:2; cf. Matt. 11:28–30). Paul invites others to imitatehim as he imitates Christ (1Cor. 11:1; 2Thess. 3:7–9;2Tim. 3:10–12). By obeying Christ, a disciple imitatesGod (Eph. 5:1–2).
Imitationincarnates faith. To this end, Jesus spends time with his disciples,allowing them to observe his way for approximately three years beforesubmitting to the painful conclusion of God’s will for hisearthly ministry (Mark 3:14; 14:36). Jesus commands his disciples toimitate his washing of their feet, a task normally reserved for thelowest household slave (John 13:12–20), and to pick up theirown crosses (Mark 8:34 pars.). “A student,” he remindsthem, “is not above his teacher, but everyone who is fullytrained will be like his teacher” (Luke 6:40).
In the NT the most common word used for “minister”is diakonos (e.g., 2Cor. 3:6), and for “ministry,”diakonia (e.g., 1Cor. 16:15 [NIV: “service”]).These words function as umbrella terms for NT writers to describe thewhole range of ministries performed by the church. They can describeeither a special ministry performed by an official functionary(1Cor. 3:5) or one performed by any believer (Rev. 2:19). Inthe early church, ministry was based not on institutional hierarchiesbut on services performed (1Tim. 3:1–13).
Theministry of Jesus.The church’s mind-set flows out of the way in which Jesusunderstood his ministry. He described his ministry pattern as that ofserving (Matt. 20:28; Mark 10:45; John 13:4–17). Thus, hecalled his disciples to follow a model of leadership in the newcommunity that did not elevate them above others (Matt. 20:20–28;23:8–12; cf. 1Pet. 5:3).
Jesus’ministry provides the paradigm for the ministry of the church. The NTwriters describe the threefold ministry of Jesus as preaching,teaching, and healing (Matt. 4:23; 9:35; Mark 1:14, 21–22, 39;Acts 10:36–38). The disciples carried on the earthly ministryof Jesus by the power of the Spirit. They too engaged in preaching,teaching, and healing (Matt. 10:7–8; 28:19–20).
Theministry of the church.The church, because it is the body of Christ, continues theseministry responsibilities. In 1Pet. 4:10–11 is a summaryof the overarching ministries of the church, which include speakingthe words of God and serving. As a priesthood of believers (Exod.19:4–6; 1Pet. 2:5, 9; Rev. 1:5–6), individualmembers took responsibility for fulfilling the various tasks ofservice. Thus, all Christians are called to minister (Rom. 15:27;Philem. 13; 1Pet. 2:16). Even when a member strayed, it wasanother believer’s responsibility to confront that waywardperson and, if necessary, involve others in the body to help (Matt.18:15–20).
Althoughministry was the responsibility of all believers, there were thosewith special expertise whom Christ and the church set apart forparticular leadership roles (Eph. 4:11–12). Christ set apartApollos and Paul for special ministries (1Cor. 3:5; Eph. 3:7).The church called on special functionaries to carry out specificministries. For example, the early church appointed seven individualsto serve tables (Acts 6:2). They appointed certain ones to carry therelief fund collected for the Jerusalem Christians (2Cor. 8:19,23). As special functionaries, Paul, Apollos, Timothy, Titus, theelders, as well as others accepted the responsibility of teaching andpreaching and healing for the whole church.
Allthe ministries of the church, whether performed by believers ingeneral or by some specially appointed functionary, were based ongifts received from God (Rom. 12:1–8; 1Cor. 12:4–26).God gave individuals the abilities necessary to perform works ofservice (Acts 20:24; Eph. 4:11; Col. 4:17; 1Tim. 1:12; 1Pet.4:11). The NT, however, makes it clear that when it comes to one’srelationship and spiritual status before God, all Christians areequal. Yet in equality there is diversity of gifts and talents. Paulidentifies some gifts given to individuals for special positions:apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers (Eph. 4:11).The description here is of special ministry roles that Christ callscertain individuals to fulfill based on the gifts given to them. Theones fulfilling these roles did not do all the ministry of the churchbut rather equipped the rest of the body to do ministry (Eph.4:12–13). No one can boast in the gifts given to him or herbecause those gifts were given for ministry to others (1Cor.4:7). Thus, gifts lead to service, and in turn service results inleadership.
Itbecomes the responsibility of those who lead to equip others forministry. When others are equipped for ministry, they in turnminister and edify the whole body (Eph. 4:15–16; 2Tim.2:1–2). The goal of all ministry, according to Paul, is tobuild up a community of believers until all reach maturity in Christ(Rom. 15:15–17; 1Cor. 3:5–4:5; Eph. 4:12–16;1Thess. 2:19–20).
In the NT the most common word used for “minister”is diakonos (e.g., 2Cor. 3:6), and for “ministry,”diakonia (e.g., 1Cor. 16:15 [NIV: “service”]).These words function as umbrella terms for NT writers to describe thewhole range of ministries performed by the church. They can describeeither a special ministry performed by an official functionary(1Cor. 3:5) or one performed by any believer (Rev. 2:19). Inthe early church, ministry was based not on institutional hierarchiesbut on services performed (1Tim. 3:1–13).
Theministry of Jesus.The church’s mind-set flows out of the way in which Jesusunderstood his ministry. He described his ministry pattern as that ofserving (Matt. 20:28; Mark 10:45; John 13:4–17). Thus, hecalled his disciples to follow a model of leadership in the newcommunity that did not elevate them above others (Matt. 20:20–28;23:8–12; cf. 1Pet. 5:3).
Jesus’ministry provides the paradigm for the ministry of the church. The NTwriters describe the threefold ministry of Jesus as preaching,teaching, and healing (Matt. 4:23; 9:35; Mark 1:14, 21–22, 39;Acts 10:36–38). The disciples carried on the earthly ministryof Jesus by the power of the Spirit. They too engaged in preaching,teaching, and healing (Matt. 10:7–8; 28:19–20).
Theministry of the church.The church, because it is the body of Christ, continues theseministry responsibilities. In 1Pet. 4:10–11 is a summaryof the overarching ministries of the church, which include speakingthe words of God and serving. As a priesthood of believers (Exod.19:4–6; 1Pet. 2:5, 9; Rev. 1:5–6), individualmembers took responsibility for fulfilling the various tasks ofservice. Thus, all Christians are called to minister (Rom. 15:27;Philem. 13; 1Pet. 2:16). Even when a member strayed, it wasanother believer’s responsibility to confront that waywardperson and, if necessary, involve others in the body to help (Matt.18:15–20).
Althoughministry was the responsibility of all believers, there were thosewith special expertise whom Christ and the church set apart forparticular leadership roles (Eph. 4:11–12). Christ set apartApollos and Paul for special ministries (1Cor. 3:5; Eph. 3:7).The church called on special functionaries to carry out specificministries. For example, the early church appointed seven individualsto serve tables (Acts 6:2). They appointed certain ones to carry therelief fund collected for the Jerusalem Christians (2Cor. 8:19,23). As special functionaries, Paul, Apollos, Timothy, Titus, theelders, as well as others accepted the responsibility of teaching andpreaching and healing for the whole church.
Allthe ministries of the church, whether performed by believers ingeneral or by some specially appointed functionary, were based ongifts received from God (Rom. 12:1–8; 1Cor. 12:4–26).God gave individuals the abilities necessary to perform works ofservice (Acts 20:24; Eph. 4:11; Col. 4:17; 1Tim. 1:12; 1Pet.4:11). The NT, however, makes it clear that when it comes to one’srelationship and spiritual status before God, all Christians areequal. Yet in equality there is diversity of gifts and talents. Paulidentifies some gifts given to individuals for special positions:apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers (Eph. 4:11).The description here is of special ministry roles that Christ callscertain individuals to fulfill based on the gifts given to them. Theones fulfilling these roles did not do all the ministry of the churchbut rather equipped the rest of the body to do ministry (Eph.4:12–13). No one can boast in the gifts given to him or herbecause those gifts were given for ministry to others (1Cor.4:7). Thus, gifts lead to service, and in turn service results inleadership.
Itbecomes the responsibility of those who lead to equip others forministry. When others are equipped for ministry, they in turnminister and edify the whole body (Eph. 4:15–16; 2Tim.2:1–2). The goal of all ministry, according to Paul, is tobuild up a community of believers until all reach maturity in Christ(Rom. 15:15–17; 1Cor. 3:5–4:5; Eph. 4:12–16;1Thess. 2:19–20).
The word “portion” is used to translate severalHebrew words that denote a given share in a variety of things, suchas sacrificial meat (Exod. 29:26), delicacies (Esther 2:9), food(Prov. 31:15), booty (Gen. 14:24), and land (Josh. 14:4). Also, it isoften used figuratively. God’s chosen people are identified asGod’s portion (Deut. 32:9; Ps. 119:57). For the Levites, whodid not receive an inheritance, God is their portion (Num. 18:20). Tosay that someone has a portion in or with another person is anidio-matic expression for membership in that person’scommunity. Sheba said in rebellion, “We have no portion inDavid” (2Sam. 20:1 NRSV). The Transjordanian tribes builtan altar as a witness to their faith because they worried that theCisjordan tribes might later say, “You have no portion in theLord” (Josh. 22:27 NRSV). When Peter refused to allow Jesus towash his feet, Jesus said to him, “Unless I wash you, you haveno part with me” (John 13:8). Wisdom literature oftendesignates one’s lot in life as one’s portion (Job 20:29;Ps. 17:14; Eccles. 3:22; 5:18; 9:9; Wis. 2:9).
Allfour Gospels refer to Preparation Day (paraskeuē) as the day ofJesus’ crucifixion. According to Mark 15:42, Preparation Daywas “the day before the Sabbath,” meaning Friday (cf.Luke 23:54). By the end of the first century, paraskeuē hadbecome a technical term meaning “Friday” (Did. 8.1; cf.Mart. Pol. 7.1). The precise referent of Preparation Day in John19:14 is disputed, as the Greek phrase paraskeuē tou pascha hasbeen translated as “the day of Preparation of thePassover” (NIV, ESV). John 19:31 states that Preparation Daywas immediately followed by the Sabbath, which would place Jesus’crucifixion on Friday and his final supper (John 13:2) on PassoverThursday (cf. Matt. 26:18). However, John 18:28 states that theJewish leaders “wanted to be able to eat the Passover,”suggesting that Jesus was crucified on Passover. In this verse, “thePassover” (pascha) may refer to the continuing Feast ofUnleavened Bread, or it may be that the Jews had prepared but noteaten the Passover by early the next morning. Regardless, the Gospelsclearly record that Jesus was crucified on Friday, Preparation Day.
In ancient times, footwear generally was sandals, a flat soleconstructed of leather, wood, or matted grass secured to the footwith leather straps. Soldiers and dignitaries had more-substantialfoot coverings than common people had (cf. Eph. 6:15). Sandals werecommon and cheap; their quality and presence or absence wereindicators of social status (Ezek. 16:10; Luke 15:22). Prisoners wereunshod (2Chron. 28:15; Isa. 20:2–4), and those inmourning also went barefoot (2Sam. 15:30; Ezek. 24:17). One puton sandals in preparation for a journey (Exod. 12:11; Mark 6:9; Acts12:8). Moses and Joshua were instructed to take off sandals when theystood on holy ground (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The transfer of asandal from one party to another sealed a property transaction (Ruth4:6–10; cf. Ps. 60:8), while the removal of the sandal of a manwho refused to marry his brother’s widow was a ceremony ofdisgrace (Deut. 25:9–10).
Thelowest servant in a household removed guests’ sandals andwashed their feet, as Jesus demonstrated for his disciples (John13:5; cf. 1Sam. 25:41; Luke 7:38). John the Baptist did notconsider himself worthy of the humble task of untying Jesus’sandal (Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:7; Acts 13:25).
In ancient times, footwear generally was sandals, a flat soleconstructed of leather, wood, or matted grass secured to the footwith leather straps. Soldiers and dignitaries had more-substantialfoot coverings than common people had (cf. Eph. 6:15). Sandals werecommon and cheap; their quality and presence or absence wereindicators of social status (Ezek. 16:10; Luke 15:22). Prisoners wereunshod (2Chron. 28:15; Isa. 20:2–4), and those inmourning also went barefoot (2Sam. 15:30; Ezek. 24:17). One puton sandals in preparation for a journey (Exod. 12:11; Mark 6:9; Acts12:8). Moses and Joshua were instructed to take off sandals when theystood on holy ground (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The transfer of asandal from one party to another sealed a property transaction (Ruth4:6–10; cf. Ps. 60:8), while the removal of the sandal of a manwho refused to marry his brother’s widow was a ceremony ofdisgrace (Deut. 25:9–10).
Thelowest servant in a household removed guests’ sandals andwashed their feet, as Jesus demonstrated for his disciples (John13:5; cf. 1Sam. 25:41; Luke 7:38). John the Baptist did notconsider himself worthy of the humble task of untying Jesus’sandal (Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:7; Acts 13:25).
In ancient times, footwear generally was sandals, a flat soleconstructed of leather, wood, or matted grass secured to the footwith leather straps. Soldiers and dignitaries had more-substantialfoot coverings than common people had (cf. Eph. 6:15). Sandals werecommon and cheap; their quality and presence or absence wereindicators of social status (Ezek. 16:10; Luke 15:22). Prisoners wereunshod (2Chron. 28:15; Isa. 20:2–4), and those inmourning also went barefoot (2Sam. 15:30; Ezek. 24:17). One puton sandals in preparation for a journey (Exod. 12:11; Mark 6:9; Acts12:8). Moses and Joshua were instructed to take off sandals when theystood on holy ground (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The transfer of asandal from one party to another sealed a property transaction (Ruth4:6–10; cf. Ps. 60:8), while the removal of the sandal of a manwho refused to marry his brother’s widow was a ceremony ofdisgrace (Deut. 25:9–10).
Thelowest servant in a household removed guests’ sandals andwashed their feet, as Jesus demonstrated for his disciples (John13:5; cf. 1Sam. 25:41; Luke 7:38). John the Baptist did notconsider himself worthy of the humble task of untying Jesus’sandal (Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:7; Acts 13:25).
Streets facilitated transportation within a community both injoining residential and public buildings for daily tasks and bylinking city fortifications for the timely deployment of troopsduring a siege. In most large cities, a peripheral street ran alongthe inside of the city wall, primarily serving for quick defensiveaccess to the wall ramparts. Additional streets bisected theresidential and public quarters of the city’s interior. Largermain streets, as well as city gates, served as main places ofcommerce in ancient cities. Main streets typically led to the centerof the city or to any important structures, such as palaces ortemples.
TheNT period saw a clear dichotomy between Jewish cities and those ofGreek or Roman influence. Greco-Roman cities typically were wellplanned and rectilinear and included colonnaded streets. Thesetypical “main” streets were lined with continuous rows ofcolumns supporting a roof, originally developed to provide shade formarketplaces. Commerce took place under these colonnades or in publicplazas. Colonnaded streets were paved and contained sidewalks forpedestrians and furnishings, such as statues of deities. Jewishcities, however, had no formal plan. Rather than being laid out instructured quarters divided by grids of neatly arranged streets,buildings in Jewish cities were constructed randomly over time. Roadswere constructed later on and built around existing clumps ofbuildings as needed.
Inthe Bible, streets—along with squares and alleys—areoften symbolic of public places. In the streets people call out inproclamation (2Sam. 1:20; Esther 6:9) or in search of others(Song 3:2; Jer. 5:1; Matt. 22:9–10; Luke 14:21), or they wailin grief and distress (Ps. 144:14; Amos 5:16). On the street cornersidolaters flaunt worship of false gods (Jer. 44:17; Ezek. 16:25) andhypocrites flaunt their piety (Matt. 6:2, 5). When a city isconquered or punished, the dead and destitute lie in the streets(Isa. 5:25; Lam. 4:5; Ezek. 11:6) or the streets are entirelydeserted (Jer. 33:10; Zeph. 3:6). But when a city prospers, thestreets are rebuilt (Isa. 58:12) and are filled with playing children(Zech. 8:4–5). Streets are also described as dusty and muddy(2Sam. 22:43; Lam. 2:21; Mic. 7:10; Zech. 10:5), requiring thewashing of feet (cf. John 13).
Showing
1
to
50
of162
results
1. Wash One Another's Feet
Illustration
Lee Griess
Sociologist Robert Wuthnow of Princeton University has explored how it is that people make everyday ethical decisions. Many people, he found, perform deeds of compassion, service, and mercy because at some point in their past someone acted with compassion toward them. He wrote, "The caring we receive may touch us so deeply that we feel especially gratified when we are able to pass it on to someone else."
He tells the story of Jack Casey, who was employed as an emergency worker on an ambulance rescue squad. When Jack was a child, he had oral surgery. Five teeth were to be pulled under general anesthetic, and Jack was fearful. What he remembers most, though, was the operating room nurse who, sensing the boy's terror, said, "Don't worry, I'll be right here beside you no matter what happens." When Jack woke up after the surgery, she was true to her word, standing right there with him.
Nearly 20 years later, Jack's ambulance team is called to the scene of a highway accident. A truck has overturned, the driver is pinned in the cab and power tools are necessary to get him out. However, gasoline is dripping onto the driver's clothes, and one spark from the tools could have spelled disaster. The driver is terrified, crying out that he is scared of dying. So, Jack crawls into the cab next to him and says, "Look, don't worry, I'm right here with you; I'm not going anywhere." And Jack was true to his word; he stayed with the man until he was safely removed from the wreckage.
Later the truck driver told Jack, "You were an idiot; you know that the whole thing could have exploded, and we'd have both been burned up!" Jack told him that he felt that he just couldn't leave him.
Many years before, Jack had been treated compassionately by the nurse, and because of that experience, he could now show that same compassion to another. Receiving grace enabled him to give grace. Jesus said, "Now that I, your Lord and Teacher have washed your feet, you should wash one another's feet."
2. Two Small Upper Rooms
Illustration
Lee Griess
In his book Life Looks Up, Charles Templeton remarks how ironic it is that the course of human history has been affected so positively and negatively by events that have occurred in two small upper rooms. One of them is a drab flat in London's Westside, dirty, curtainless, with stacks of articles on the table and worn manuscripts, aborted attempts wadded up in the trash can. Seated at the table a man labors over a writing, a writing that would overthrow governments, enslave millions of people, and negatively affect the course of history for a generation to come. The man: Karl Marx; his writing: Das Kapital, the handbook for the Communist revolution.
But there's another upper room that also figures in the course of human history: this one located in one of the oldest cities of the world, Jerusalem, and here also there was a table. Thirteen gather at this table to share a meal and to hear the words of a man whose love and sacrifice would make a lasting impact on human history. His message -- that faith in God and love for one another would revolutionize governments and change the lives of countless generations of people to come.
How strange it is that some 1800 years later, Karl Marx would proclaim that strife among people, rigid control of possessions, strict limitation of personal freedom and a move toward a godless society would bring about the perfect world that humanity was seeking. Karl Marx could not see that the kind of life that you and I desire had already been given us. Given to us there in the words of Jesus in that upper room.
3. Romanticizing the Cross
Illustration
When we view the cross I think that somehow we must learn to see our complicity in it. We cannot dismiss this as an act by self-righteous Jews and brutal Romans. We must somehow understand the horrible fact that Satan sometimes uses religious people to accomplish his means. We distort things and before long we call evil good and good evil. Every time we allow sin to seduce us with its distortions, we nail Jesus on the cross once again.
There is an old episode of MASH, in which a rather cocky young pilot comes to the MASH unit because his plane has been shot down, but he is not seriously injured. He tells everyone in a rather boasting voice that flying really gives him a high. If I could not fly this war would really be a drag, he says. He brags that every time he flies a couple of missions they send him back to Japan for several weeks of R & R. The war to him was really quite a lark.
Then one day a Korean child is brought to the MASH unit and her arm has been horribly mangled in an air attack. The young pilot is taken back. Even though it was not his plane that did it, for the first time he must face his own complicity in the brutality of war. For the first time he sees things not from the perspective of 10,000 feet, but in the eyes of a child.
There is a danger in romanticizing the cross. I love the old hymns about the cross just as much as anyone. But the cross is not meant to lull us, it is meant to jolt us.
4. The Last Supper - Passover
Illustration
We come together this evening to recall in our hearts and minds the events that occurred on Thursday of what the church calls Holy Week, the last week in the life of our Lord. One-third of all the events that we have about Jesus’ life occurred during this week: Reminding us of the great significance of these last days. The disciples have gathered in a home, whose we are not sure, but we do know that it had a furnished second floor.
As they gather they participate in what is called a Seder meal, one of the highlights of the Passover week. The Passover festival, of course, had been done for centuries before Jesus came on the scene. It commemorated that time when the Jews were in bondage in Egypt. Moses warned Pharaoh to let his people go, but Pharaoh hardened his heart. So God sent a death over the land of Egypt, but miraculously this death passed over the homes of the Jews. Thus, the season of Passover was given birth.
The meal itself was a symbolic one reminding the Jews of the sufferings of their forefathers and the power of God's deliverance. The foods that were eaten were symbols to remind the Jews of their captivity in Egypt. Apple sauce was eaten to remind them of brick mortar and the fact that they were forced to make bricks with no straw. A bitter herb is eaten to remind them of the bitterness of their captivity. It was this symbolic Seder Meal that he disciples were partaking of that night in the upper room.
It was at the conclusion of that meal that Jesus himself added two more symbols. He took a loaf and broke it and gave it to his disciples saying: Take eat, this is my body which is broken for you, do this in remembrance of me. Then he took a cup with wine. He drank from it and gave it to his disciples saying, “Drink ye all of this, for this is my blood which is shed for you and for many for the forgiveness of sin.” Thus was born our sacrament of the Lord's Supper, out of the experience of an ancient Jewish custom.
Leonardo da Vinci by his famous painting has forever impressed upon on our minds the last supper of our Lord. The scene that he depicts is that moment when Jesus announces his impending betrayal. The disciples look at one another with great shock, all, that is, except Judas, who refuses to look Jesus in the face and clutches his money to his breast. I wonder as we look at those disciples around the table if we can see ourselves. For me they represent all that is good and bad about our humanity.
5. Wash Your Hands
Illustration
Boyce Mouton
In 1818 people lived in a worldof dying women, the vast majority of which were completely healthy.The finest hospitals lost one out of six young mothers to the scourge of "childbed fever." That diagnosis was actually bacterial infections of the female reproductive tract following childbirth or miscarriage.A doctor's daily routine in the early 1800s began in the dissecting room where he performed autopsies. From there he made his way to the hospital to examine expectant mothers without ever pausing to wash his hands.
Enter Dr. Ignaz Phillip Semmelweishe began to connect the dots and drew an associate with autopsyexaminations with the resultant infection and death in these mothers. He began washingwith a chlorine solution, and after eleven years and the delivery of 8,537 babies, he lost only 184 mothers about one in fifty.
Succes!Right? No.
For years helecturedand debated with his colleagues. He argued, "Puerperal fever is caused by decomposed material, conveyed to a wound. I have shown how it can be prevented. I have proved all that I have said. But while we talk, talk, talk, gentlemen, women are dying. I am not asking anything world shaking. I am asking you only to wash...For God's sake, wash your hands." But no one believed him. Doctors and midwives had been delivering babies for thousands of years without washing, and no outspoken Hungarian was going to change them now!
in 1865 Semmelweis' health began to deteriorate and he died in an asylum at the age of 47, his wash basins discarded, his colleagues laughing in his face, and the death rattle of a thousand women ringing in his ears.
"Wash me!" was the anguished prayer of King David. "Wash!" was the message of John the Baptist. "Unless I wash you, you have no part with me," said the towel-draped Jesus to Peter. Without our being washed clean, we all die from the contamination of sin. For God's sake, wash.
HERE IS A SHORTER VERSION OF THIS STORY
In 1844 a medical doctor named IgnazPhillipSemmelweis, who was assistant director at the Vienna Maternity Hospital, suggested to the doctors that the high rate of death of patients and new babies was due to the fact that the doctors attending them were carrying infections from the diseased and dead people whom they had previously touched.Semmelweisordered doctors to wash their hands with soap and water and rinse them in a strong chemical before examining their patients. He tried to get doctors to wear clean clothes and he battled for clean wards. However, the majority of doctors disagreed withSemmelweisand they deliberately disobeyed his orders. In the late nineteenth century, on the basis of the work bySemmelweis, Joseph Lister began soaking surgery instruments, the operating table, his hands, and the patients with carbolic acid. The results were astonishing. What was previously risky surgery now became routine. However, the majority of doctors criticized his work also. Today we know that Lister andSemmelweiswere right; the majority of doctors in their day were wrong. Just because the majority believes one thing does not necessarily mean it is true.
6. A Hot Foot Washing
Illustration
Michael P. Green
When you go to another to wash his feet, or when another comes to wash your feet, be concerned as to the temperature of the water!
Some come with boiling hot water. They are so angry, so upset, so distracted by something that has happened in the past—and so mad about it—that they come to the other person and say, “Here, stick your feet in here!” Nobody wants to have his feet washed with boiling water.
Some go to the other extreme and come with ice water. They are so righteous, so holier-than-thou, so above it all. They come with this frigid, freezing water and want to wash your feet. Nobody wants to have his feet washed with ice water.
Some find a third extreme and come without any water! They try to dry-clean your feet with “a piece of their mind,” just scrubbing away harshly. What they say may be true, but there is no water of love, nothing to wash the dirt gently away, but only a rigid insistence on scraping away every imperfection and the skin along with it!
There is another way—that is to come and wash one another’s feet in love, in the spirit of servanthood.
7. A Lifetime to Prepare
Illustration
King Duncan
There is an old legend about a man who had a rather stupid servant. The master often got exasperated with his servant. One day in a fit of frustration he said to the servant, "You've got to be the stupidest man I've ever met. Look, I want you to take this staff and carry it with you. And if you ever meet a man stupider than you are, give him the staff." So the servant carried the staff. Often out in the marketplace he'd meet some pretty stupid people. But he was never sure they were worse off than he. Years passed with the servant carrying his staff. Then one day, he came back to the castle and was ushered into the bedroom of his master. His master was quite sick.
In the course of their conversation, the master said, "I'm going on a long journey." The servant said, "When do you plan to be back?" The master said, "This is a journey from which I'll not return." The servant said, "Sir, have you made all the necessary preparations?" The master said, "No, I have not." The servant said, "Could you have made preparations?" The master said, "Yes, I guess I've had my life to make them, but I've been busy about other things." The servant said "Master, you're going on a journey from which you'll never return, you could've prepared for it, and you just didn't?" The master said, "Yes, I guess that's right." The servant took the staff he'd carried so long and said, "Master take this with you. At last I've met a man more stupid than myself."
Could that be us? Could we be that foolish? I hope not. I surely hope not. Victory belongs to those who are prepared. Preparation is an essential characteristic of character. The most important preparation we can make is for eternity.
8. The Mirror of Judas
Illustration
Larry Powell
So muchhas been written, discussed, and speculated about Judas that we feel we know enough about him already. And really, what more is there to say of him other than he is for all times the supreme symbol of betrayal? Nothing, unless we are willing to admit that there was such about his life which causes us to be introspective about our own.
1. Jesus had confidence in him. To begin with, Jesus observed qualities about Judas which were suitable for discipleship. Had there been no goodness, no promise, no ability, Judas certainly would not have been included among the Twelve. Moreover, he was capable and trustworthy enough to be selected as treasurer for the group. So for whatever reason, future potential or ability already acquired, Jesus had confidence in him.
Has not Christ placed tremendous confidence in us? The care of his church, the propagation of his message, the extension of his ministry, faithfulness to our vows. Shall we too betray his confidence?
2. Judas knew how to be discerning. He was not without practical judgment. The care of the treasury would hardly be entrusted to a reckless, emotion-driven individual. Judas was present in the house of Mary and Martha when Mary anointed the feet of Jesus with an expensive ointment. His protest of the anointing is not without merit, inasmuch as his concern was not for himself, but that the ointment could have been sold and the money given to the poor. From time to time a similar protest is raised today by those who question the wisdom of erecting church facilities costing hundreds of thousands of dollars while so many hungry remain to be fed.
Each of us has been entrusted with the freedom of choice and the ability to discern. Do we betray Christ by our choices?
3. Judas had opportunity. His position among Christ’s chosen naturally enabled him to produce a positive witness. And even near the end, he had the opportunity to abort his scheme, the motive of which is still unclear to us. Jesus announced at the table that the one who would betray him would dip in the same dish as the others. Judas played dumb, but inwardly he knew that Jesus saw through his pretense. Judas had opportunity.
As members of Christ’s family, we have numerous opportunities to make positive witnesses. As a people who have followed our own schemes and well-devised plans, we have the opportunity to repent. Shall we betray Christ by bungling our opportunity?
4. Judas had access to Jesus. The fact that Judas was able to walk up to Christ in the garden and greet him with a kiss, the traditional greeting of a disciple for a teacher, clearly establishes that he had easy access to Jesus.
The Scriptures tell us that Christ serves as our "high priest," interceding on our behalf, having access to God, even as we have access to the Son through prayer. To neglect prayer and the spiritual life is to abuse the access. Shall we betray Christ by abusing our access?
What more is there to say of Judas, unless we are willing to admit that there was such about his life which causes us to be introspective about our own?
9. Pastoral Prayer for First Sunday of Lent
Illustration
Joel D. Kline
Gracious God, how blessed we are to live and serve as a community of Your people. Gifted with the beauty of creation surrounding us, lead us into significant relationships that nurture and challenge us, as we experience the promise of life, and are grateful.
Lead us now, O God, as we seek, in this season of Lent, to journey with our eyes fixed on Jesus.
Lead us in righteousness, that our journey might be a journey in which we embrace Christ's ways of compassion and justice, grace and mercy, hope and right living.
Lead us, God, in peace, as we seek to keep our eyes fixed on Jesus.
Fill us with a peace that passes all human understanding, a peace the world cannot give to us, neither can it take away.
But, holy God, let us never be satisfied with personal peace alone. Lead us into paths of peacemaking and reconciliation. And God, we pray that You might soften the hearts of those world leaders who are far more inclined to wage war than to seek peace.
God, where there is brokenness, form us into instruments of forgiveness.
Where there is despair, make of us channels of Your hope.
Where there is division, may we be empowered to bring healing and wholeness.
Where darkness abounds, grant us courage to walk in the light, our eyes fixed on Jesus, the light of the world.
God of healing and compassion,
We hold before You now those in special need of Your healing touch …
God, make us mindful of those among us this day who silently hold hurts and brokenness within them. Teach us to look into one another's eyes and hearts.
We pray for those experiencing pain in their significant relationships, those who are yearning for new beginnings in life. We pray, O God, for young people facing untold pressures and challenges, and for older persons seeking to come to terms with limitations and losses. Whatever our life situations, O God, lead us in paths of right living, our eyes fixed on Jesus Christ our Lord, through whom we pray. Amen.
10. A Model of Faith
Illustration
Jerry Goebel
It may come as a shock to most Christians today, but we would do better to use this woman as a model of faith even more than the disciples. After all, we are neither Jewish nor Galilean; we have no familial claim or geographical claim to Jesus.
While the woman learns that the power of faith lies internally, the disciples learn that faith can't be measured by proximity to Jesus. They are right next to the Lord and yet they see the woman as a bother. They don't lead her to Jesus or attempt to heal her daughter, her faith does that. They are too blinded by their social and religious prejudice to offer miracles to anyone.
Jesus words are obviously not meant to cut down the woman (her compassion runs too deep to care if she is insulted). The words of Christ are meant to reprimand the disciples—and us—when our politics and religious agenda blind us to compassion.
Which faith most resembles mine? Am I like the cocksure disciples steeped in religious and cultural prejudice, deeply self-assured of my proximity to Jesus? Or, am I like the outcast woman of Lebanon, indentured by compassion and uncaring of insults if I can just save one soul?
11. The Beauty Of Holiness
Illustration
Clement E. Lewis
The 96th Psalm is closely comparable with 1 Chronicles 16:23-26. Psalm 29:2 also contains the words, "Worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness." The New Revised Standard Version translated Psalm 96:9 to read, "Worship the Lord in holy splendor; tremble before him all the earth." Older people have long been accustomed to using the words from the King James Version.
Worship ought to be made beautiful in sight, sound, and thought. The physical settings of worship experiences serve to enhance and reinforce the yearning for understanding and completeness. This may be illustrated by a question: "Would you rather have a picnic on a graveled area in the heat of the sun, or where there is verdure of grass, and the shade of trees?" Worship is best when the scene is not barren, but blessed with good architecture, beauty of color, protection from the elements, and in the presence of an altar, giving it sacred significance.
We need to remember that truth is not only conveyed by words. It is also shared in feelings, situational inclusion, comfortable meditation and contemplation, which nurtures us. But worship can also take place in foxholes of distress, danger, and despair. God's messages and our responses do not always come in pretty packages with liturgical decorations. Sometimes they come in moments of destitution, hunger, inner distress, pain, and loneliness. What we make of what we learn at such times turns the place of discovery into a temple, and we worship in the beauty of holiness because we have found a relationship that truly enriches life.
Worship may take place in prison, a hospital or a nursing home; in a cemetery, a forest, or in a barren desert. It was in a desert setting that Jesus dealt with his temptations and life determinations, as he recalled Deuteronomy 6:13, and declared, "You shall worship the Lord your God, and him only shall you serve." To the woman at the well in Samaria, Jesus said, "Believe me the hour is coming when on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. ... But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for such the Father seeks to worship him. God is a spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and in truth." (See John 4:19-24)
All of us yearn for the experience of "worship in the beauty of holiness." The psychiatrist, Von Frankl, held that the urge to worship is instinctive in children in much the same way as the urge to nurse. He suggested that the ages of four and five are the times when children are most desirous and accepting for the experiences of worship. Esthetics and quality appreciation are important to the development and life of the child. The elderly demonstrate much of the same needs in their lives.
"The beauty of holiness" is a most suggestive and satisfying phrase. It conveys the idea of "Holy Presence," and of being involved in spiritual goodness. My how human hearts long for that! In the midst of crassness, competitiveness, controversies, hostility, and uncertainty of conditions, we need that respite desperately.
Symbolism, the historic sign of faith, serves to renew our sense of oneness with what has been generative before us, and proclaims that we too can be involved in the experience of personal inclusion.
The building we refer to as the church or the chapel ought to be as adequate, as comfortable, and as attractive as we want our homes to be. Shouldn't God's house be the most attractive and architecturally satisfying of all? Nostalgia is important to many of us, and plays a tremendous role in our religious and personal life. It is the incentive that leads us to memorialize -- to provide new and beautiful things that relate to worship. Yet, we know that nostalgic sentiment can become a barrier to doing what is most important for the future. We can become so attached to what we have, and give our loyalty to what is familiar, that we may neglect to see what we ought to develop.
"The beauty of holiness" should inspire us for the transformation of life. It should also challenge us to greater things, with God's encouragement and guidance. Contemplating "the beauty of holiness" is not enough! We must also ask, "And what else ought we to do, God?" The answer we receive may not be the one we might prefer, but we had better not pray, "Thy will be done," unless we are willing to be a part of that will. God calls us to the faithful application of our Christian belief and commitment to discipleship, in which is included "the beauty of holiness." Therein lies the great truth of the words with which we began this worship time:
"O worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness;
Serve him with gladness all the earth." Amen.
The Benediction: Send us forth, O God, causing us to remember that the beauty of holiness needs to show in our lives, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
12. WASHED ANY FEET LATELY?
Illustration
John H. Krahn
As Jesus and his disciples gathered in the upper room, something seemed to be wrong. Although it is not explicitly stated in the narrative, we can surmise what it might have been. But first let us set the stage. In the Lord’s day when people gathered for a meal, it was the slave’s duty to wash the people’s feet before the meal began. The Lord and his disciples were poor; therefore the disciples probably took turns washing off the dust of the roads from the sandaled feet of the little brotherhood. Normally they did it willingly as a matter of course. But tonight, all of them sat stubbornly in their places and would have none of the menial duty. Perhaps on their journey to the upper room they continued to argue with each other as to whom would have the position of honor when Jesus ushered in the kingdom of God. Perhaps with ruffled tempers and with sore feelings, they trooped into the upper room like a group of sulking schoolboys, not one among them willing to see the pitcher and basin and towel set out for their use. And so, for once, the customary little courtesy was not carried out, and they began their meal with feet still travel-stained. An uncompromising spirit prevailed.
Wanting to clear the air and cleanse this childishness out of their hearts, the Lord took the role of the servant, rose and carried through his dramatic action. The disciples were shocked, as clearly demonstrated by Peter’s challenging the appropriateness of the Lord’s action. In the foot washing, Jesus demonstrated his earlier words spoken just before he entered into Jerusalem, "Whoever would be great among you must be your servant ... even as the Son of man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."
Have you washed any feet lately? I am not referring to your own, although good personal hygiene is laudable. Have you been like the Lord, humbled yourself and done an act of servanthood that was uncalled for, unexpected, yet very Christlike? An act like shoveling the sidewalk of a neighbor who often lets his dog run all over your property. An act like continuing to speak well of someone who constantly knifes you in the back. Continuing to love your kids when they do things that make you dislike them. Coming to the church to help paint twice in one week when you notice that many of your fellow parishioners did not care enough to pitch in once. It means giving the extra needed ... be it forgiveness, monetary offerings, service, or what have you ... because you have been touched by Jesus and have felt his love for you.
The Lord of the universe has knelt at our feet, has been our slave, our brother, our friend, and our salvation. Are any of us better than he? Are we more important than he? Should our knees be deprived of the opportunity of touching the floor in order that we can also be in a position to do a little foot washing?
13. Illustrations for Lent Easter Old Testament Texts
Illustration
Jon L. Joyce
1. God destroys as well as preserves [Isaiah 42:14]
Luther says that God is to be both loved and feared. The same God of compassion who is eager to show love to those who turn to him is equally determined to root out and destroy evil. Isaiah is warning us not to be lulled to sleep by thinking only of the kindness of God. He who shows patience toward our waywardness will eventually cease to overlook unatoned sin and will destroy. He holds all the power of the universe in his hands to work his ends. Our eternal destiny is for him to determine. Are we tempting God by clinging to things he opposes? Remember God has said, "I will destroy." The time to repent and make peace with him is now.
2. Christ will restore sight [Isaiah 42:16]
A blind beggar walking down a street on a day in spring carried a sign saying, "It is April, and I am blind." How pitiful that he was blind at any time. But on a spring day it was even worse; he could not see the newly formed leaves on the trees, or the beautiful flowers blooming on every hand. He could not see the earth bathed in sunshine or the glow of a sunset in the western sky. But another blindness is even worse. It can come to those who have retained their physical sight. There is a saying, "None is so blind as he that will not see." When Isaiah talks of the blind he includes everyone who does not have spiritual insight. Children laugh at the phrase, "I see, said the blind man." Yet it is true that the physically blind can see many things which the person with sight overlooks. So God promises to help us in our spiritual blindness. He will show us the path of righteousness, reveal opportunities to serve our fellow man, to improve ourselves, and to see the Christ who is hidden from those who do not believe in Him.
3. Idolators shall be ashamed [Isaiah 42:17]
Idol worship seems like something out of the long past. It brings to mind visions of ignorant people in an earlier age bowing down before a statue which to them is their god. So this verse does not seem to apply to the one who reads it today. Here is where we deceive ourselves. Idolatry is a very subtle thing. It was said of Sampson that he did not know when the Lord had forsaken him, and thought he could go on in strength as he had before. So idolatry creeps upon anyone who is not alert. It is so easy to cater to oneself; to want fame and fortune so badly that we slowly let these desires come between us and God. Beware lest great shame come upon you because idols of today have subtly replaced God in your objectives and desires.
4. God will be praised for his law (Gospel) [Isaiah 42:21]
Our age is one of much disdain for God’s law. The ten commandments are regarded by many as out of date. They are as foolish in disdaining God’s rules and thinking they have outgrown them as was a certain sailor. The captain had pointed out the north star before turning over the wheel to the young seaman. He told the young man to steer constantly toward that star. The captain then took a nap and upon awakening found that the ship was not on course. When he questioned the young sailor what had gone wrong, he was told, "I have sailed past that star, show me another one." No one can sail past the ten commandments. They remain as up-to-date as the day’s news announcements. God has chosen to give honor to his eternal rules, whether they be revealed in the Ten Commandments or in Jesus Christ. The wise will realize the worth of God’s laws and strive to obey and honor them.
14. Imitate Generosity
Illustration
Douglas R. A. Hare
The climax of the parable occurs in verse 15: "Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you begrudge my generosity?" The vineyard owner claims the right to pay his workers not on the basis of their merits but on the basis of his own compassion. Why should such generosity be condemned as injustice? Underlying the parable is the Old Testament conception of God as the creator who is GOOD, that is, generous to all (see, e.g., Ps.145:9). Jesus reveled in the incredible magnanimity of God (see 5:45). Of course Jesus believed in the God of justice, but in his vision of God the divine compassion greatly outshone the divine justice. Those who worship such a God must imitate his generosity, not begrudge it.
15. SERVANT, SERVITOR
Illustration
Stephen Stewart
Exodus 12:45 - "No sojourner or hired servant may eat of it."
2 Kings 4:43 - "But his servant said, ‘How am I to set this before a hundred men?’ ..."
A servant is a person of either sex who is in the service of another person, and the term does not necessarily mean that this servant is a domestic, in the sense that we use it today. In our usage, a servant is one who works for pay and in so doing attends to the physical needs, in one way or another, of the person who has employed him.
But this was not necessarily the designation in the ancient world. Rather, that concept would be more akin to "slave," which implies a forced labor, but is more in keeping with the type of work done by today’s servants. Rather, the ancient servant means merely someone who was in service to another, and this type of service was often of a high order. In that sense, then, any person under the king was a servant. For example, we have Eliezer, whose position in the household of Abraham compared with that of the prime niinister, hardly a menial position!
However, the servant had certain obligations, whatever his status or rank - he was under obligation to obey and to work for the benefit of his master, which is still not too far away from the idea of the hired workman of today. In return for his obedience and care, he received protection and reciprocal care.
The servitor, on the other hand, may correspond more to our modern concept of servant, since he was the one who served, or ministered to, another. However, again, we must not necessarily equate this with a menial position, although, of course, it could well have been one, and often was. But the point is that it did not have to be so. It may merely mean "one in waiting," or the person who is available to serve in whatever capacity is required. And that, too, is still true today.
16. Taste and See
Illustration
Brett Blair
An elderly woman made her living selling artificial fruit. One day a customer complained the fruit she sold was not realistic enough. She pointed to an apple, saying it was too red, too round and too big to be a real apple. At that point the artificial fruit lady picked up the apple and proceeded to eat it.
The resurrection of Jesus, throughout the years has been critically examined, judged by authorities, and editorialized by writers, and the conclusion of most is that it is simply an event which can not be proven and probably too good to be true. It may look like an apple but in actuality it is artificial fruit, they conclude. But if you will pick it up and take a bite you come to know that he really did rise from the grave. He is alive. He is listening to our prayers. He is ready to serve when that service deals with the human heart in need of a shepherd's guidance and love.
George Bernard Shaw, the famous playwright, was handed a newly written play by a fledgling playwright. Shaw was asked to give the young man a criticism of the work a few days later. "How did you like it?" asked the author. "I fell asleep reading it," said Shaw. "Sleep is my comment on your work."
My friend there is nothing boring about the resurrection. Easter dawns upon a world hidden in darkness. Easter awakens every sleeper with the news that preacher of peace, the Prince of Power and the Lord of Love has appeared. Christianity is real. Christianity is alive. Christianity is anything but boring. Let us all wake up and smell the roses. Let us resolve to live our lives as if Jesus were a guest in our homes, workplaces and businesses. The truth is that the Lord is here, there and everywhere. He is alive. He is our Risen Lord to whom we offer our discipleship with love.
The song goes, "They'll know we are Christians by our love." Let us be about our Father's business as we serve him with joy. Let us show and tell others the good news of the gospel.
17. Who Will Wash Your Sins?
Illustration
Alila stood on the beach holding her tiny infant son close to her heart. Tears welled in her eyes as she began slowly walking toward the river's edge. She stepped into the water, silently making her way out until she was waist deep, the water gently lapping at the sleeping baby's feet. She stood there for a long time holding the child tightly as she stared out across the river. Then all of a sudden in one quick movement she threw the six month old baby to his watery death.
Native missionary M.V. Varghese often witnesses among the crowds who gather at the Ganges. It was he who came upon Alila that day kneeling in the sand crying uncontrollably and beating her breast. With compassion he knelt down next to her and asked her what was wrong.
Through her sobs she told him, "The problems in my home are too many and my sins are heavy on my heart, so I offered the best I have to the goddess Ganges, my first born son." Brother Varghese's heart ached for the desperate woman. As she wept he gently began to tell her about the love of Jesus and that through Him her sins could be forgiven. She looked at him strangely. "I have never heard that before," she replied through her tears. "Why couldn't you have come thirty minutes earlier? If you did, my child would not have had to die."
Each year millions of people come to the holy Indian city of Hardwar to bathe in the River Ganges. These multitudes come believing this Hindu ritual will wash their sins away. For many people like Alila, missionaries are arriving too late, simply because there aren't enough of these faithful brothers and sisters on the mission field.
18. The Messianic Age
Illustration
Adrian Dieleman
The Messianic Age. This is what every Jewish child of God was hoping, praying, and waiting for. It is easy to see why when we hear God's Old Testament promises about the Messianic Age:
- (Isa 2:2) In the last days the mountain of the Lord's temple will be established as chief among the mountains; it will be raised above the hills, and all nations will stream to it.
- (Isa 2:4) They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore.
- (Isa 35:5-7) Then will the eyes of the blind be opened and the ears of the deaf unstopped. (6) Then will the lame leap like a deer, and the mute tongue shout for joy. Water will gush forth in the wilderness and streams in the desert. (7) The burning sand will become a pool, the thirsty ground bubbling springs. In the haunts where jackals once lay, grass and reeds and papyrus will grow.
- (Isa 60:3,10-13) Nations will come to your light, and kings to the brightness of your dawn. (13) "Foreigners will rebuild your walls, and their kings will serve you ... (11) Your gates will always stand open, they will never be shut, day or night, so that men may bring you the wealth of the nations their kings led in triumphal procession. (12) For the nation or kingdom that will not serve you will perish; it will be utterly ruined. (13) "The glory of Lebanon will come to you, the pine, the fir and the cypress together, to adorn the place of my sanctuary; and I will glorify the place of my feet.
- (Isa 65:20-21,25) "Never again will there be in it an infant who lives but a few days, or an old man who does not live out his years; he who dies at a hundred will be thought a mere youth; he who fails to reach a hundred will be considered accursed. (21) They will build houses and dwell in them; they will plant vineyards and eat their fruit ... (25) The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox, but dust will be the serpent's food. They will neither harm nor destroy on all my holy mountain," says the LORD.
What wonderful, beautiful promises. No wonder God's Jewish children could hardly wait for the Messianic Age.
The Old Testament Scriptures clearly state that the beauty and wonder of the Messianic Age will become a reality; but this will be so only with the coming of the Messiah. The Messiah. It is He Who brings about the Messianic Age.
Today, in the story of Jesus' baptism, Matthew tells his Jewish audience that the Messiah has come and that the Messianic Age is about to begin. And, in a departure from Jewish expectations about the Messiah, Matthew tells his Jewish audience that Messiah Jesus has come to take the sinner's place.
19. The Spirit Has Landed - Sermon Starter
Illustration
Brett Blair
Back on January 3rd 2010, the Mars rover named "Spirit" began its sixth year of diligent exploration (Spirit landed on January 3, 2004). It hadbeen sending back so many photographs that NASAfigured out a way to teach the little rover how to detect changes in images, so that it sends only images back to Earth with new information. For example, if Rover was taking photographs of dust devils, it now pauses and waits until the image changes before taking the next photo.This meant less work for the scientists sifting through the many, many amazing photographs ‘Spirit' senthome.What a great name for such a small machine. It madegreat discovery. We need that kind of spirit in our world.
I don't know if you sawpictures of the rover back then; it's about the size of a small coffee table. A lot of NASA's hopes wereriding on this little robot. And it delivered, beyond everyone's expectations. There's something to be said about the big influence of small things.
It reminds me of the Scottish minister who told his congregation about dreaming he had died. When he came to the pearly gates, to his dismay, he would be denied entrance until he presented his credentials. Proudly the Pastor articulated the number of sermons preached and the prominent pulpits occupied. But Saint Peter said no one had heard them in heaven. The discouraged servant enumerated his community involvement. He was told they were not recorded. Sorrowfully, the pastor turned to leave, when Peter said, "Stay a moment, and tell me, areyou the man who fed the sparrows?"
"Yes,"the Scotsman replied, "but what does that have to do with it?"
"Come in," said Saint Peter, "the Master of the sparrows wants to thank you."
Here is the pertinent, though often overlooked, point: great and prominent positions indicate skill and capacity, but small services suggest the depth of one's consecration. We overlook the big influence of small things.
And so it is with Jesus' Baptism. It's a small thing for Jesus to do. It was not necessary for him to be baptized since there was no sin in his life for which to repent. But he submits to John's Baptism of Repentance anyway. Why? To identify with our sins. He joined in the popular movement of his day. It was a grass roots movement started by a desert monk named John the Baptist. John was calling for the repentance of Israel. Jesus chooses to be baptized because he wants to participate with the people in their desires to be close to God.
It's a small thing Jesus does but what a big influence. It forever marks baptism as the way we Christians publicly declare our repentance and dependence on God's grace.
So the Spirit descends from the heavens, lands on Jesus and sends the following vivid snapshots:
- In the backdrop all the people are baptized.
- In the forefront Jesus stands out as the focus of God's love.
- Baptism is the framework by which ministry begins.
20. Three Small Steps in Our Faith Journey - Sermon Starter
Illustration
Brett Blair
One day the great Michelangelo attracted a crowd of spectators as he worked. One child in particular was fascinated by the sight of chips flying and the sound of mallet on chisel. The master was shaping a large block of white marble. Unable to contain her curiosity, the little girl inquired, "What are you making?" He replied, "There is an angel in there and I must set it free."
Every Christian at their confirmation or conversion is handed a large cold white marble block called religion. We must then take the mallet in hand and set to work. Religion is not our goal but we must first start there. Now there are many names for religion. At times we do call it religion but we often use other words and images to describe it. Sometimes we call it our faith. Jesus spoke in terms of the Kingdom of God. We say we are the Church, Christians, or Disciples. There are many names with varying nuances of meaning but in the end they all describe the same thing. We are a people of Faith, faith in Christ to be sure, but faith nonetheless.
We are not a business or institution. We do not sell or produce anything. We advocate no earthly cause. We serve no worldly authority. We come to a church building made by men. And to do what? Practice our faith. But we just as well could have met on a hillside or cave.
Our leader is not here, not so that I can show him to you or offer irrefutable evidence of his existence. That means faith is all we have. We are born through faith, live by faith, and die in faith. After my death, then and only then will I know in full, as the Apostle Paul says, when I see Jesus face to face. Until then I had better understand this religion thing. Now that sounds pretty daunting doesn’t it? Here’s the good News. It’s not all that difficult. Religion is a marble slab and we have to find, like Michelangelo, the angel inside.
Chisel with me a few minutes this morning and let the chips fly, and let’s find the faith that lives inside. Faith: it is the angel of our religion. Faith can set us free if we know how to live it. How do you practice your faith and not just religion? Jesus outlined faith in Luke 17. He explained there are three simple ways to exercise faith. Three small steps make up our journey of faith.
1. The First Step Is Learning to Forgive (4).
2. The Second Step Is Learning to Believe (6).
3. The Third Step Is Learning to Serve (10).
21. Kiss the Frog
Illustration
I am sure that each of us has heard the old story of the beautiful princess who kissed the ugly frog. You will remember the frog is really a handsome prince changed into a frog by a wicked witch. It seems to be an irrevocable curse since the only way to break the spell is for someone to kiss the frog. (There’s not usually a long line waiting to kiss frogs). But the princess kisses the frog out of the depth of her compassion and the prince emerges.
What a lesson for us! To free the prince, the princess had to let go of all she’d been taught about ugliness in others. We serve Lord Jesus who was and is in the frog-kissing business. Our faith enables us to abandon all we have been taught about ugliness and unacceptability in others so that we might seek and find the "prince" in each one of them.
22. Breaking the Rules
Illustration
Charles Swindoll
Charles Swindoll, in his book "The Grace Awakening," tells about one of his youth workers many years ago who was a member of an ethnic church. It was Scandinavian. Being a rather forward-looking and creative young man, he decided he would show the youth group a missionary film. We're talking about a simple, safe, black-and-white religious-oriented movie documentary. That film projector hadn't been off an hour before a group of the leaders in the church called him in and asked him about what he had done. They asked, "Did you show the young people a film?" In all honesty he responded, "Well, yeah, I did." "We don't like that," they replied. Without trying to be argumentative, the youth worker reasoned, "Well, I remember that at the last missionary conference, our church showed slides "
One of the church officers put his hand up signaling him to cease talking. Then, in these words, he emphatically explained the conflict: "If it's still, fine. If it moves, sin!" You can show slides, but when they start movin', you're gettin' into sin.
At first glance verse 41 seems cursory, "Jesus reached out his hand and touched the man." Why does mark mention this touch? Does he want to point out that Jesus took the risk of getting Leprosy? Does he want us to understand the depth of Christ's compassion that he would touch a leper? Is he simply trying to describe the moment? Unfortunately these are not the reasons that Mark carefully describes the touch. It is this TOUCH that gets Jesus into trouble with the religious leaders. It is this direct contact with a leper that banishes Jesus from Galilee. Mark's point is that Jesus broke the Mosaic law when he reached out and touched the man. In Leviticus the law states that a person is unclean if he has an infectious disease such as sores on the skin, and anyone who touches him becomes unclean and has sinned.
Doesn't this sound like our legalistic attitude today? If you heal a leper, fine. If you touch him, sin! You can heal all you want, but when you start touching lepers, your breaking the law and gettin' into sin. Because Jesus touched the leper he was regarded as unclean and a sinner.
Not only was the leper banished from the community but Jesus also because he chose compassion over ceremonial law they drove him out of the town because he chose to touch a man who was "unclean." Describe the sick and hurting as ceremonially unclean and you do not have to deal with them.
23. Ain’t Got Time
Illustration
James W. Moore
One of the great celebrative anthems that comes to us out of African-American culture is the powerful spiritual "Ain't Got Time To Die." It was written by Hall Johnson and it has these joyfully dramatic words:
Been so busy praising my Jesus,
Been so busy working for the Kingdom,
Been so busy serving my Master…
Ain't got time to die.
If I don't praise him,
If I don't serve him,
The rocks gonna cry out
Glory and honor, glory and honor…
Ain't got time to die."
In this inspiring and wonderful spiritual, the composer is underscoring and celebrating the joy and excitement of being a Christian, the joy and excitement of serving our Lord in gratitude for what he has done for us. The point that this spiritual is trying to drive home to us with great enthusiasm is… that when we really become Christians, when we really commit our lives to Christ… then, we can't sit still… we become so excited, so thrilled, so grateful for our new life in Christ that we can't help but love Him, praise Him, serve Him, and share Him with others.
This is precisely what happened to Andrew. He found the Messiah, he encountered Jesus – and he was so excited he couldn't sit still.
24. Finding Financial Freedom
Illustration
Brett Blair
Some of you may have read a remarkable short story sometime during your school years by D. H. Lawrence titled, “The Rocking‑Horse Winner." I wonder if you remember how the story begins?
It is a haunting tale about a family living above its means. The mother is considered by friends and neighbors to be the perfect mother, in spite of the fact that deep down she knows she has difficulty loving her three children. It's important to the husband to keep up the pretense of success the large house, staffed with servants but they are living on the edge, just like many families today. Listen as D. H. Lawrence describes this family's life situation:
“And so the house came to be haunted by the unspoken phrase: ‘There must be more money! There must be more money!' The children could hear it all the time though nobody said it aloud. They heard it at Christmas, when the expensive and splendid toys filled the nursery. Behind the shining modern rocking-horse, behind the smart doll's house, a voice would start whispering: ‘There must be more money! There must be more money!' And the children would stop playing, to listen for a moment. They would look into each other's eyes, to see if they had all heard. And each one saw in the eyes of the other two that they too had heard. ‘There must be more money! There must be more money!'
“It came whispering from the springs of the still-swaying rocking-horse, and even the horse, bending his wooden, champing head, heard it. The big doll, sitting so pink and smirking in her new pram, could hear it quite plainly, and seemed to be smirking all the more self-consciously because of it. The foolish puppy, too, that took the place of the teddy-bear, he was looking so extraordinarily foolish for no other reason but that he heard the secret whisper all over the house: ‘There must be more money!'"
That's the family backdrop to the story of “The Rocking‑Horse Winner." Quite an extraordinary picture: “There must be more money! There must be more money!"
I wonder if there are any homes in our community today that are haunted in that same way: “There must be more money!"
Let's talk about financial freedom. Jesus said on one occasion: “No servant can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money."
Here is the challenge for today: We want to break the grip money has on our lives. We want to affirm that Yahweh, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is our god, and our only god. We want to affirm that the God who manifested Himself in Jesus of Nazareth is our god. This is who we are. That is why we are here in this room at this time. “Thou shalt have no other gods before me." We want God to be our god, not material possessions.
25. Servant Morality vs Master Morality
Illustration
W. Robert McClelland
Freidrich Nietzsche drew the distinction between a servant morality and a master morality with disturbing clarity. A servant morality adopts values and follows a morality which is imposed upon us by others. It negates the self. A master morality, on the other hand, sees the self as the creator of both values and morality. It, therefore, affirms the self. Nietzsche saw religion as the great espouser of servant morality because it portrayed values and morals as absolutes given by God. He contended that to be fully human is to realize that morality is something we create. Values are not hung "out there" like stars in the sky. We are the ones who do the valuing. The clues to ethical behavior come from within ourselves and are not prescribed for us by some external authority. Values are neither objective nor carved in stone despite the claims of the church. Instead, they come from an internal gyroscope that guides the course of our lives.
But the question always arises: How do we then live with thousands of people creating their own morality?
26. The Last Meal
Illustration
Larry Powell
Perhapsyou have visited the Upper Room Chapel in Nashville, Tennessee, and had the opportunity to meditate before the marvelous wood carving and its appointments which so dramatically depict the Last Supper. One of the mysterious features of this particular carving is that no matter where you kneel before the figure of Christ, his eyes gaze strangely into yours. So it must have seemed to the disciples gathered around the table in Jerusalem on that fateful evening. How much more intense it must have been for Judas, and we can but wonder where his eyes were fixed when Jesus uttered those terrible words. "He who has dipped his hand in the dish with me, will betray me" (Matthew 26:23).
So far as the disciples were concerned, they had gathered, as they had done since childhood, to partake of the traditional Passover meal. The streets of Jerusalem were crowded with pious Jews who had come into the city for this express purpose. The ritual was always the same: while at the table, the story of the escape from Egypt would be recounted ... there would be special foods on the table and unleavened bread would be eaten as a reminder of the haste in which the Exodus people had been forced to flee Egypt ... it was always the same.
To the disciples’ surprise however, Jesus suddenly departed from the familiar references; "And he took bread, and gave thanks, and broke it, and gave unto them saying, ‘This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.’ Likewise also the cup after supper saying, ‘This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.’ " Jesus had dramatically transformed the Passover supper into the Lord’s Supper on the evening of his "last supper" with them (see also Mark 14:22-24 and Matthew 26:26-29).
The Lord’s Supper:
1. Is a sacrament, meaning that it was instituted by Christ and commanded to be continued "till he come." In Paul’s familiar passage, used in the sacrament ritual, he adds, "For as often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye proclaim the Lord’s death till he comes" (1 Corinthians 11:26).
2. Symbolizes the new covenant. The Old Testament covenant of the Law was sealed with the blood of animal sacrifice. However, this covenant had failed. The prophets themselves had said, "Behold, the days will come, saith Jehovah, that I will make a new convenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah." The covenant of Law was being superseded by the new convenant of love, sealed by the blood of Christ.
3. Uses of common elements. In addition to using the traditional elements of the Passover, bread and wine, Jesus realized that each day when his followers partook of their meals, two things were certain to be on the table ... bread and wine. Consequently, even an ordinary meal would include reminders of the new covenant.
4. Was observed anxiously. Devout early Christians met daily to observe the sacrament in the prayerful hope that Jesus would return while they were sharing the sacred meal. In time, the early Church observed the sacrament each Sunday, a practice continued until the Reformation. Oddly enough, in Scotland, during the sixteenth century, it was observed in the country twice and in town four times a year.
5. Is called the eucharist, meaning the "thanksgiving," based on the passage, "He took a cup, and when he had given thanks...."
Perhaps John Calvin spoke for each of us when he admitted that "the matter is too sublime for me to be able to express, or even to comprehend ... I rather experience it, than understand it."
27. An Exalted Christology
Illustration
Will Willimon
John's account of the miraculous feeding is curious, when compared to the synoptic gospels, for a number of reasons. John links the feeding to the story of Jesus' walking on water, and to Peter's confession of faith. Probably, John means thereby to make a strong point regarding the identity of Jesus as the exalted Christ.
Moreover, we should take note that this feeding is set by John in the context of Passover. In John's gospel, Jesus cleanses the temple at Passover and uses the occasion to speak of his impending death (John 2). Later, in John 13, Jesus will speak again of his death in the context of a Passover meal with his disciples.
Unlike Luke's account of the miraculous feeding, as well as Mark's, this meal is not presented by John as a sign of Jesus' compassion for the hungry multitudes. Rather, this feeding is used by Jesus as an opportunity to perform a sign that will be considerably greater than the crowds expected. This is a typical Johnannine moment. In John's gospel, they come to Jesus asking for "water," and he offers "living water." They come hankering for bread, and he gives them "bread from heaven." So again, in today's passage from John, we are alerted that "bread" means considerably more than what we mean when we say, "bread."
We come to Jesus with our bodily, carnal, immediate needs only to be surprised that Jesus seems to be about more than the meeting of our needs. Nothing so satisfies us as a good meal. After their miraculous meal, the crowd immediately thinks of monarchy. Moses earlier gave bread, manna, in the wilderness of the exodus (Deut. 18:18). They hail Jesus as the new king.
John offers us an exalted Christology. Jesus will not be controlled or utilized by the crowd for our purposes. He will not be jerked around in fulfillment of our wants.
28. It’s Ok to Be Extravagant – Sermon Opener
Illustration
James W. Moore
A few years ago there was a true story about a man in New York City who was kidnapped. His kidnappers called his wife and asked for $100,000 ransom. She talked them down to $30,000.
The story had a happy ending: the man returned home unharmed, the money was recovered, and the kidnappers were caught and sent to jail. But, don't you wonder what happened when the man got home and found that his wife got him back for a discount? Calvin Trillin was the writer of this story. He imagined out loud what the negotiations must have been like: "$100,000 for that old guy? You have got to be crazy. Just look at him! Look at that gut! You want $100,000 for that? You've got to be kidding. Give me a break here. $30,000 is my top offer."
Mark Trotter concluded his rendition of the story with this thoughtful comment: "I suppose there are some here this morning who can identify with the wife in that story, but for some reason I find myself identifying with the husband. I'd like to think if I were in a similar situation, there would be people who would spare no expense to get me back. They wouldn't haggle over the price. They wouldn't say, 'Well, let me think about it.' I like to think that they would say, 'We'll do anything for you.'"
The point of that story is this: sometimes it's O.K. to be extravagant! Now, that is precisely what this story in the Gospel of Mark is all about. Remember the story with me. Jesus is on His way to the cross. It is just a few days before Passover. The chief priests and scribes are plotting against Him. Judas is about ready to betray Him. The crucifixion is less than a week away and Jesus knows it. Jesus and His disciples stop at Bethany. just a few days before, Jesus had raised Lazarus from the dead there in Bethany. Now, as they are having dinner, a woman comes to Jesus and does a beautiful but extravagant thing for our Lord. The Gospel of John tells us that the woman was Mary, (the sister of Martha and Lazarus). Mary brings an alabaster jar of very expensive ointment. She breaks open the jar and pours the costly perfumed oil on Jesus' head. She anoints His head with oil.
Why did she do that? Some say it was an act of gratitude in which she was thanking Jesus for raising her brother Lazarus from the dead. Some say it was an act of consecration in which she was baptizing Jesus to encourage Him to go into the HolyCity and do what had to be done. Others say it was a foreshadowing, an act of preparation, in which she was anointing His body for the death which was to come in Jerusalem a few days later. All say it was an act of love and kindness.
But Judas said it was a waste. If you lived strictly by the Judas mind-set, you would have no Spire on the church, no flowers on the altar, no art on the wall, no robes for the choir, no fine organ, no beautiful weddings. Your daughter would come to you and say, "I'm in love and I'm so happy. I want to get married." And you would say, "Well, why don't you just elope? It's much cheaper. It would be wasteful to have a wedding." But the Mary mind-set says, "Sometimes in the name of love and kindness and gratefulness; it's O.K. Indeed, it's beautiful to be extravagant." Let me show you what I mean.
1. First Of All, It's OK To Be Extravagant In Our Generosity.
2. Second, It's OK To Be Extravagant In Our Gratitude.
3. Third And Finally, It's OK To Be Extravagant In Our Graciousness.
29. See the Resemblance
Illustration
Larry Powell
In all prrobablity, you know of some young boy who bears such a striking resemblance to his father that a person would know immediately, even in a crowd, that they were father and son. The father can be seen in the son. The Bible tells us that "God was Christ!" In what ways did the Son resemble the Father?
a. In his life. Jesus affirmed and celebrated life. His was not the attitude that this world and all that is in it are despicably evil ... that the object is to totally reject life with an eye always on "glory" ... that beauty in any form must be repressed as a tool of the devil. No, instead, Christ affirmed and celebrated life. Not a recluse, he enjoyed friendships with Lazarus, Mary, Martha, and others. He observed simple domestic gestures and was so impressed by them that he gave them a prominent place in his teachings (a woman sweeping a house, or drawing water at a well, baking bread, old wineskins bursting with new wine, lamps flickering in the night, patches on old garments). He enjoyed and absorbed the movements in nature and referred to them in order to illustrate his message; birds gathering into trees, foxes going into dens, figs withering, storm clouds boiling. Jesus affirmed life in such a positive manner, experiencing and relating to God’s great intention and design for all he had made, that we may understand life is not to be either seized nor rejected, but "lived" in an attitude of "Praise God!" In the harmony of Christ’s life with creation, we see something of God’s great intention and design for each of us.
b. In his ministry. Jesus’ ministry was characterized by the absolute "giving" of himself. He was, as one theologian puts it, "radically obedient" to God. In the same spirit, he was "radically giving" to others, always reaching, touching, healing, praying, searching, loving. The Bell Telephone Company did not originate the concept of "Reach Out and Touch Someone." The concept was in the mind of God before creation and the practice is as old as Eden. It was perfected in Jesus Christ, proclaimed in the New Testament, and is as relevant today as this morning’s newspaper. The ministry of Christ reveals a God who "spends" himself for creation.
c. In his teaching. Jesus was able to recognize and relate to God in the common life through his teachings. His life, ministry, and teachings combined to reveal a God of boundless love, caring, concern, and sensitive compassion. What he taught, he practiced. Even in death he was consistent with the witness of his life. Having spoken of "forgiving one’s enemies" and those who "despitefully use you," he gathered his words into action on Calvary. "Father, forgive them," he prayed. He taught so very much more, all of which was personified in his life. He showed that if the "good teacher" is flawlessly consistent, how much more consistent and loving must be our heavenly Father?
d. In his resurrection. Here, God unmistakably reveals himself. His power is beyond imagination. His promises are made good. His intentions and purposes will not be overthrown. His actual involvement in the world is confirmed. In the resurrected Christ, God is clearly revealed. God was, in all ways, in Christ!
30. A People of Compassion
Illustration
H. Stephen Shoemaker
Here's a story from the desert tradition: A brother had committed a fault and was called before the council. The council invited the revered Abba Moses to join, but Abba Moses refused. They sent someone to get him, and he agreed to come. He took a leaking jug, filled it with water and carried it with him to the council. They saw him coming with the jug leaving a trail of water, and asked, "What's this?" Abba Moses said, "My sins run out behind me and I do not see them, and today I am coming to judge the error of another?" When the council heard these words they forgave the brother.
In solitude before God, faced only with ourselves, we learn the compassion of God. Perhaps it is not incidental that in the midst of ministry and the unrelenting needs of the crowd, Jesus, the good shepherd, called his disciples to join him in the desert: "Come away to a deserted place all by yourselves and rest awhile."
It is not all rest, all shabbat in the wilderness. There, wrestling with our own hearts in the darkness before God, we learn mercy the shepherd's prerequisite and become a people of compassion.
31. Tell Me About the Spitfires!
Illustration
John G. Lynch
During World War II the Royal Air Force flew Danny's favorite plane of all time: the Spitfire. Watching those things fly all over the RKO newsreels the young boy came to believe they were dauntless. If a pilot flew a Spitfire, Danny thought, he would always hit his target, and he would always return home.
One day the British Consul from Minneapolis came to Danny's town to visit. Danny's dad was chairman of the County War Bond drive so that gave him the honor of entertaining the British Consul in his home. His mother, Suzanne, went crazy with preparations. She brought in all her friends; she hired a German woman to clean the house; she went downtown to buy a new dress.
The day the Consul arrived 40 people crammed into three rooms to welcome this man. Each one of those people couldn't wait to tell this tall, thin diplomat from England about the town, about how patriotic it was, about how he or she had a great-aunt in London, about how well the war was going. They all had plenty to say.
Suzanne was running around fractiously trying to serve everybody and greet everybody, and make sure everybody had a place to sit, and did they want more of this -- in general, were they having a good time.
Finally the British Consul sat down. For a split second he was actually by himself. The hostess had left to get him a drink; all the other guests momentarily turned away. Danny saw his chance. He ran to him. Even though the Consul was sitting, the boy still had to stand to whisper into his ear: "Tell me about Spitfires!"
The tall man looked at the eight-year-old. He smiled, he relaxed, and he said, "Spitfires? I'll tell you a story about Spitfires. I flew one early in the war. It was splendid. I shot down a Messerschmidt and I came home alive. The next time I wasn't so lucky. That's why I'm not flying anymore. What is your name? I'll send you some pictures of Spitfires."
About a month later a letter came from Minneapolis. Inside was a folder about Spitfires and a note from the Consul: "Dear Danny. I enjoyed talking with you. Good luck." He signed his name.
Danny was the only person who didn't barrage the Consul's ears with information about the town and American patriotism. This small boy was the only one who said, "Tell me about Spitfires." He was the only one who actually listened to him -- even if it was just for a few minutes!
In today's gospel lesson Jesus needs somebody to listen. He has just begun his journey to Jerusalem where he knows he will travel the bitter road of the cross and he will experience the loneliness of being denied, abandoned, and betrayed by his disciples. Martha may think her tasks have a high level of importance and at another time she would be right but not now. Now, it is time to sit and listen.
32. Jesus at the Center of the Storm
Illustration
Will Willimon
The disciples' question is ours: Do you not care that we perish?
Jesus doesn't care about the storm. But does he care about us who care about the storm?
About this time of the year, I invariably think of a divinity student whom I taught. He felt called by God to serve as pastor to rural churches. Amazingly, he found a woman who felt called by God to marry him and go with him into a lifetime of service in out-of-the-way places. They went, in June, on a honeymoon, traveling by bicycle in the mountains and camping, the only honeymoon they could afford. First day out, on the road, there was an accident. She was hit by a car, crushed, and died a painful, terrible death.
I could imagine that young man crying out, "You called me into the ministry. You put me in this boat, placed her here with me. Do you not care that we perish?"
On this beautiful June day, it is easy to sit here in this air-conditioned chapel and think good thoughts about the world. But you know life. There can be darker, more difficult days than this. In June, walking around a placid lake, hiking in the park, nature, the world seems benevolent and benign. We moderns, because we have devised so many means of protecting ourselves from nature, tend to be nature romantics.
But this story of Jesus and his disciples in a boat renders another world, a world where storms rise up out of nowhere and nature puts us in peril. If you have ever suffered from say, cancer, you know that world. In cancer, the normal reproductive processes, the "natural" workings of cells, somehow go out of control, reproduce with astonishing speed, oblivious to the checks and balances of the body. The once placid lake which has been our body on most days becomes an angry, raging sea.
And this story is about that.
Perhaps you thought that there would be smooth sailing with Jesus. You thought that, with Jesus in the boat, there would be no storm, no waves, no fear. No. Almost every page of Mark's gospel proclaims that Jesus is the center of a storm. When Jesus is near, the wind picks up, the waves bang against the side of the boat, and there is trouble.
33. Inviting Us Out to Worship
Illustration
Carveth Mitchell
There is a chapel somewhere in Wisconsin that has a stained glass window over the entrance, showing the figure of Jesus with open arms. Some, seeing it for the first time, remarked, "How meaningful! He seems to be inviting us in to worship."
"That's true," the pastor said. "He is indeed inviting us in to worship."
When the service was over and the same person was going out the door, he looked up at the window again. There was the figure of Jesus, with the same invitingly open arms. "Look!" he said. "Now he seems to be inviting us out."
"Right," the pastor replied. "The Jesus who invited you to worship now invites you out into the world to serve other people in his name."
Our Lord is greatly interested not only in what goes on in the church, but in what goes on in the office, the home and the factory. That's where people spend most of their time. That's where the Christian life is to be lived.
34. Thomas - Sermon Starter
Illustration
Brett Blair
If I were to mention the names of certain disciples to you and ask you to write down the first word that comes into your mind, it is unlikely you would come up with the same words. If I were to mention the name of Judas many of you would write down the word "betray" but not all of you. If I were to mention Simon Peter, some of you would write down the word "faith," but not all of you. If I were to mention the names of James and John, some of you would write down the phrase "Sons of Thunder," but not all of you. But when I mention the word Thomas, there is little question about the word most everyone would write down. It would be the word doubt. Indeed, so closely have we associated Thomas with this word, that we have coined a phrase to describe him: "Doubting Thomas."
You may be interested to know that in the first three gospels we are told absolutely nothing at all about Thomas. It is in John's Gospel that he emerges as a distinct personality, but even then there are only 155 words about him. There is not a lot about this disciple in the Bible but there is more than one description.
When Jesus turned his face toward Jerusalem the disciples thought that it would be certain death for all of them. Surprisingly, it was Thomas who said: Then let us go so that we may die with him. It was a courageous statement, yet we don't remember him for that. We also fail to point out that in this story of Thomas' doubt we have the one place in the all the Gospels where the Divinity of Christ is bluntly and unequivocally stated. It is interesting, is it not, that the story that gives Thomas his infamous nickname, is the same story that has Thomas making an earth shattering confession of faith? Look at his confession, "My Lord, and my God." Not teacher. Not Lord. Not Messiah. But God! It is the only place where Jesus is called God without qualification of any kind. It is uttered with conviction as if Thomas was simply recognizing a fact, just as 2 + 2 = 4, and the sun is in the sky. You are my Lord and my God! These are certainly not the words of a doubter.
Unfortunately history has remembered him for this scene where the resurrected Christ made an appearance to the disciples in a home in Jerusalem. Thomas was not present and when he heard about the event he refused to believe it. Maybe he was the forerunner of modern day cynicism. Maybe the news simply sounded too good to be true. Thomas said: Unless I feel the nail prints in his hands I will not believe.
Now I cannot help but notice that Thomas has separated himself from the disciples and therefore, in his solitude, missed the resurrection appearance. I think that john is suggesting to us that Christ appears most often within the community of believers that we call the church, and when we separate ourselves from the church we take a chance on missing his unique presence.
But the story doesn't end here. The second time Jesus made his appearance Thomas was present with the disciples and this time he too witnessed the event. This time he believed. What can we learn from the life of Thomas?
1. Jesus did not blame him.
2. The most endearing things in life can never be proven.
3. We must move beyond doubt to faith.
35. Appointment in Samarra
Illustration
Editor James S. Hewett
Legend says that it happened in the streets of Damascus. A merchant sent his servant to the market. When the servant returned, trembling and agitated, he said, "While I was at the market, I was jostled by someone in the crowd. I turned to look and saw that Death had jostled me. She looked at me and made a threatening gesture. Master, please lend me your horse so I can escape. I want to ride to Samarra. There I will hide so that Death cannot find me."
Later that same day the merchant himself was in the marketplace, and he also saw Death in the crowd. He said to her, "Why did you startle my servant this morning by making a threatening gesture?"
Death replied, "That was no threatening gesture; it was simply a start of surprise. I was startled to see your servant in Damascus, for we have an appointment tonight in Samarra."
36. Jesus and Germs
Illustration
Robert Allen
A little boy, growing up in a community where his father served as a Methodist minister was outside playing. He was doing all of the things that a little boy does. He was climbing trees. He was swinging on the swing set and jumping out. He was rolling and playing with his dog. His mother called him for dinner and all of the family gathered at the table. His mother looked at him and said, "Young man, let me see your hands."
There was some rubbing of his hands on his blue jeans before he held his hands up. His mother looked at them and asked, "How many times do I have to tell you that you must wash your hands before you eat? When your hands are dirty, they have germs all over them and you could get sick. After we say the blessing, I want you to march back to the bathroom and wash your hands."
Everyone at the table bowed their heads and the father said the blessing. Then, the little boy got up and headed out of the kitchen. He stopped, then turned and looked at his mother and said, "Jesus and germs! Jesus and germs! That's all I ever hear around here and I haven't seen either one of them."
That is a humorous little story, but it does point out the fact that our hands can be an identifying characteristic. According to the F.B.I., every one of us has a different set of fingerprints. We are all different, yet we can be identified by our hands. And the same was true for Jesus. On that first Easter, Peter and John gathered with the other disciples in that upper room to talk about the empty tomb and the possibility of the resurrection. As they were talking, Jesus came and stood among them. They were frightened, but Jesus reassured them by showing them his hands and feet. How often had the disciples seen those hands of Jesus touch blind eyes so they could see? How often had they seen his hands bless little children? How often had they seen him reach out hands and lift the cripple up and say, "Walk?" They saw the hands of Jesus and they knew that he was resurrected from the dead.
37. BIG DADDY, J.C., AND THE SPOOK
Illustration
John H. Krahn
Many Christians are hurt by even the slightest criticism of their faith. Yet God often uses attacks and slurs on one’s faith to strengthen it.
Madalyn Murray O’Hair was invited by the Student Christian Association to speak at a certain college in Ohio. Mrs. O’Hair will go down in history as the one who knocked prayer and Bible reading out of the public schools. Over 350 students, faculty, and townspeople gathered to hear Mrs. O’Hair discuss her views in opposition to God and religion.
She lambasted everything sacred. She made fun of pastors, leaders, and church officers. She said the Bible was not infallible, and it did not amount to anything anyway; she harassed the students and professors; she harangued the foolish thinkers who believed what they read. She referred to God as "Big Daddy" and to Jesus Christ as "J.C." and to the Holy Ghost as the "Spook." The audience was stunned by her speech, and as questions were put to Mrs. O’Hair, she further attacked Christianity.
As the meeting was about to break up, a tiny voice of a little college girl came from the back of the auditorium. She spoke quietly and lovingly and her voice was full of compassion. Here is what she said, "Mrs. O’Hair, I am so happy you came to speak to all of us here at our college tonight! We have listened with attention to your tirade on our beliefs. We thank you for showing all of us what an atheist is; we express gratitude on your challenge to our faith; we appreciate your concern for us ... but now we, in turn, must be ever grateful for your visit ... because ... now and forever we have been strengthened in our Christian beliefs. We really feel sorry for you, and we’ll pray each night and day for your conversion to our Christian beliefs, and again we thank you for coming, and I know that you have strengthened my faith in our church, in our religion, and in our Christ! Now I’ll have more faith in ‘Big Daddy,’ in ‘J.C.’, and in the ‘Spook’! Again I say, thank you, and bless your soul!"
The speaker of the evening was flabbergasted. She had no answer. There was a riot of noise. The applause for this response was deafening. The meeting broke up with people experiencing an unbelievable Christian conviction of love for Jesus Christ, the Father, and the Holy Spirit.
The next time someone looks down on your faith, let God use even that person’s negative attitude to draw you closer to him.
38. A Revolution in Seven Verses
Illustration
Mickey Anders
Walter Wink, in his book Engaging the Powers, suggests that Jesus' action represented a revolution happening in seven short verses. In this short story, Jesus tries to wake people up to the kind of life God wants for them. He often talks about the Kingdom of God where people have equal worth and all of life has dignity. But in the latter part of his ministry, he begins to act this out. In the midst of a highly patriarchal culture Jesus breaks at least six strict cultural rules:
1. Jesus speaks to the woman. In civilized society, Jewish men did not speak to women. Remember the story in John 4 where Jesus spoke to the Samaritan woman at the well. She was shocked because a Jew would speak to a Samaritan. But when the disciples returned, the Scripture records, "They were astonished that he was speaking with a woman?" In speaking to her, Jesus jettisons the male restraints on women's freedom.
2. He calls her to the center of the synagogue. By placing her in the geographic middle, he challenges the notion of a male monopoly on access to knowledge and to God.
3. He touches her, which revokes the holiness code. That is the code which protected men from a woman's uncleanness and from her sinful seductiveness.
4. He calls her "daughter of Abraham," a term not found in any of the prior Jewish literature. This is revolutionary because it was believed that women were saved through their men. To call her a daughter of Abraham is to make her a full-fledged member of the nation of Israel with equal standing before God.
5. He heals on the Sabbath, the holy day. In doing this he demonstrates God's compassion for people over ceremony, and reclaims the Sabbath for the celebration of God's liberal goodness.
6. Last, and not least, he challenges the ancient belief that her illness is a direct punishment from God for sin. He asserts that she is ill, not because God willed it, but because there is evil in the world. (In other words, bad things happen to good people.)
And Jesus did all this in a few seconds.
39. What's Your Style of Evangelism?
Illustration
Brett Blair
A true heart of compassion will let people know of God's love and that God has provided a way to experience truelife, an abundant life.But How? Do we all have to share the same way? No, the unbelieving world is made up of a variety of people: young, old, rich, poor, educated, uneducated, urban, rural, with different race, personalities, values, politics, and religious backgrounds. It's going to take more than one style of evangelism to reach such a diverse population!
So what is your style?
Confrontational? Repent and be baptized, save yourselves from this corrupt generation.(Acts 2)
Intellectual? Paul debated with the philosophers on Mars Hill to convince them. (Acts 17)
Testimonial? One thing I do know. I was blind but now I see!(John 9)
Relational? Go home to your family and tell them how much the Lord has done for you. (Mark 5)
Invitational? The Samaritan woman at the well begged the people of the city to come and hear Jesus for themselves. (John 4)
Serving? Dorcas impacted her city by doing deeds of kindness. (Acts 9)
Don't ever think you're a second class Christian because you don't proclaim Christ like Peter or Paul. Discover your own method. Then get out of your chair and use it, for the Glory of God. Live by faith, not fear!!!
40. The Power of Fear
Illustration
John R. Steward
Four centuries ago there was an incident that can serve as an example of the power of fear. It was the occasion of the last Tatar invasion of Russia in the fall of 1462. The two armies faced each other on the banks of the Oka River, which is located about 200 miles east of Moscow. For several days they had been engaged in battle. When the Tatar army would attempt to cross the Oka River, they would be beaten back by the Russians. It was the Oka River that gave the inferior Russian army any chance of surviving. After several days it began to appear that the river would be all the Russians needed to be saved from the onslaught of the Tatars. But then something happened that frightened them greatly. A cold wave developed that blew down the Ural Mountains and caused the Oka River to begin to freeze. If the river were to freeze over completely, it would mean that the Tatars would be able to cross and the Russians would be destroyed.
As the night passed the Russian soldiers were sitting by their fires discussing the problem of the freezing water. They knew full well what would happen if the enemy were able to cross on the hardened ice. With the wind growing stronger their fears evolved as well and by midnight the entire Russian army left their encampment. They did not stop until they had reached Moscow.
In the morning when the Tatars awakened they soon realized that the Russians were no longer on the other side of the river. They couldn't believe what they were seeing. This only caused the soldiers and their officers to speculate as to what might be happening. They concluded that the Russians had probably crossed the river many miles to the east and that they would now attack from the rear. Now it was the Tatars who were in a panic. In less than two hours they left their tents and were in retreat. The Tatars did not stop running until they reached the Volga River.
These two armies allowed fear, which was based in their imaginations, to lead and guide them. Too many times we function in the same way. We were built for faith and not fear. Jesus promises that the Holy Spirit will empower us in all that we do. Jesus promises that he will give us his peace and then we will not need to be afraid.
Adapted by William Stidger, There Are Sermons in Stories (New York City: Abingdon-Cokesbury Press), p. 154. Used by permission.
41. St. Ignatius Prayer
Illustration
St. Ignatius of Loyola
Lord Jesus, teach me to be generous,
teach me to serve you as you deserve,
to give and not to count the cost,
to fight and not heed the wounds,
to toil and not to seek for rest,
to labor and not to seek reward,
except that of knowing that I do your will.
42. I Died on the Battlefield
Illustration
Adrian Dieleman
Dwight L. Moody told of the young man who did not want to serve in Napoleon Bonaparte's army. When he was drafted, a friend volunteered to go in his place. The substitution was made, and some time later the surrogate was killed in battle.
However, the same young man was, through a clerical error, drafted again. "You can't take me" he told the startled officers. "I'm dead. I died on the battlefield."
They argued that they could see him standing right in front of them, but he insisted they look on the roll to find the record of his death. Sure enough, there on the roll was the man's name, with another name written beside it.
The case finally went to the emperor himself. After examining the evidence, Napoleon said, "Through a surrogate, this man has not only fought, but has died in his country's service. No man can die more than once, therefore the law has no claim on him."
Two thousand years ago, Jesus went to the cross to bear the penalty that rightly belongs to us. He died in our place. And through Him, our names are written in the book with His name written beside ours.
43. Lamplight vs. Starlight
Illustration
Leonard Sweet
In the middle of the New Mexico desert, astronomers fume about the "light pollution" from all the sprawling cities that are gradually snaking out across the land. Even on the darkest moonless nights, the stars that used to gleam and twinkle so brilliantly look faded and dim. We who dwell in the middle of cities and suburbs rarely glance heavenward at night anymore - at least not to see stars. The lights that now illumine our nights as brightly as our days read "McDonald's," "Holiday Inn," "Casino Open," and "Twenty-Four Hour Service."
In the glare of all these high-powered night lights, it is hard to remember just how dark and frightening the hours between sunset and sunrise used to be for our ancestors. Light, whether natural or artificial, was a precious commodity. Perhaps the only place where people still tune the rhythms of their lives to the lights in the sky are those who dwell above the Arctic Circle. Despite the modern convenience of the light switch, there is no ignoring the fact that the daylight hours all but disappear for several months. In Tromso, Norway, this period of darkness is called morketida. From mid-November to mid-January, the sun does not rise above the horizon. In fact, from August until mid-November, residents can count on losing 10 to 15 minutes of light each day until the depths of the winter solstice. At best, those high above the Arctic Circle may look forward to only two or three hours of indirect or half-light around midday for nearly two months.
Yet while the stars that light the sky during this morketida period may shine for long periods, they are not enough to dispel the gloom that pervades the streets and can easily poison the soul. Those of us who curse "light pollution" for dimming our stars are disgusted, not at losing light, but at losing a beautiful, heavenly starscape to ponder. Stars are both too distant and too overwhelming to offer us any real nighttime comfort or vision.
During our own periods of morketida, we don't really need more stars - we need more common lights or lamps to light our everyday paths on this earth. Whether in literature, academe, Hollywood or the firmament, stars inspire us, they dazzle us, they entice us to dream. But a star won't keep you from stubbing your toe on a stone as you wander down a dark and lonely road.
In Matthew's text this week, Jesus urges us to serve as lamps for one another, not stars that only dazzle and inspire. Jesus calls us to be lights for the world, not exploding supernovas. Alas, there seem to be a lot more Christians who want to be stars than are willing to be lamps.
44. A Healthy Church
Illustration
Kevin Harney
Picture a church in which everyone wants to be served. Each person believes the church exists to meet their needs, to make them happy, and to cater to their whims and tastes. Imagine a congregation in which everyone has a “take care of me” attitude and is quick to complain whenever things are not just the way they feel they should be. Sadly, some people don’t have to use their imagination to picture such a church.
This kind of church will never have a positive impact on the world. It will grow small, inward, and unhealthy. This kind of church does not honor Jesus and bring glory to God. This is not a church ruled by a servant spirit.
Now imagine a church in which every single person has a passion to serve others. Think about what God could do through a group of people who are committed to sacrificial ministry to each other. These people know that the Holy Spirit has given each of them unique abilities (spiritual gifts) that are to be used for building up people and bringing glory to God. So they are purposeful about discovering their gifts and developing and using them.
What could God do through such a church?
We are either on the stretcher or helping carry it. There are times we need to be served. But most of the time, we are called to serve others. The bottom line is that God wants each of us to help carry people through their times of need. The church was never meant to be a bunch of people watching as a few exhausted workers strain to carry the burdens of a whole congregation . . . A church filled with people who serve will change the world.”
45. No Scar?
Illustration
Amy Carmichael
Hast thou no scar?
No hidden scar on foot, or side, or hand?
I hear thee sung as mighty in the land,
I hear them hail thy bright ascendant star,
Hast thou no scar?
Hast thou no wound?
Yet I was wounded by the archers, spend,
Leaned Me against a tree to die; and rent
By ravening beasts that compassed Me, I swooned:
Hast thou no wound?
No wound, no scar?
Yet, as the Master shall the servant be,
And, pierced are the feet that follow Me;
But thine are whole: can he have followed far
Who has no wounds nor scar?
46. A Thankless Job
Illustration
King Duncan
Any job where there is not much recognition or you are taken for granted can seem like a thankless job. Author Ruth Harms Calkin stated it well:
You know, Lord, how I serve You
With great emotional fervor
In the limelight.
You know how eagerly I speak for You
At a women's club;
You know how I effervesce when I promote
A fellowship group.
You know my genuine enthusiasm
At a Bible study.
But how would I react, I wonder
If You pointed to a basin of water
And asked me to wash the callused feet
Of a bent and wrinkled old woman
Day after day
Month after month,
In a room where nobody saw
And nobody knew?
We know what she's talking about, don't we? Thankless jobs. Jobs without much of a payoff in money or recognition. Repetitive jobs, boring jobs, repulsive jobs.
Being a shepherd is a thankless job. It really is. Imagine dealing with dumb, smelly sheep all day. In Palestine, flocks of sheep are plentiful. They dot the countryside, clutter up highways, crowd the streets of towns and villages. The shepherd with his long staff walks in front of his flock and his sheep follow him. In fact, they crowd around so closely they hamper the shepherd's movement. Dumb, helpless sheep.
47. Compassion for the Suffering
Illustration
Glenn E. Ludwig
In England in the 1940s a young woman entered Oxford University with little focus. She had no idea what to do with her life. But she soon came under the influence of a colorful professor of English, a writer with a gift, named C.S. Lewis. She became a Christian through much of his influence.
She left Oxford, against the advice of friends and family, and began to study nursing. After five more years of rigorous training, she was certified as a nurse.
But her story doesn't end there, for her questing, Christian spirit would not let her rest with the way things were. You see, she ended up working on a cancer ward in a London hospital. Gradually, she came to realize that most of the doctors ignored the patients who were deemed terminally ill. As a result she watched many of them die virtually alone.
Greatly troubled she felt that Christian compassion needed to be expressed to these patients in a visible way. She approached the hospital administration with an idea she had for surrounding those dying of cancer with friends and loved ones during their last days, rather than isolating them in sterile rooms with strangers. Her radical ideas were quickly rejected.
But undaunted, she decided to enroll in medical school to try to make a difference even though she was already 33 years old and would not graduate until she was 39. This she did and later a movement soon grew around her ideas that made it possible for dying patients to live their days in a setting of love and support.
Cicely Saunders, out of Christian compassion and a sense of calling to help in a specific way, began this movement in England in the 1950s. It later moved to the Americas and is now used everywhere and in every town. It is called the Hospice Movement, and it draws its inspiration from Jesus' own passion and compassion for his children -- "as a hen gathers her brood under her wings."
My prayer is that God will continually come to us in new ways and in fresh images, so that more Cicely Saunderses among us can be moved and inspired to take risks to join in God's compassion for his children. Amen.
48. Stronger after the Struggle
Illustration
Leonard Sweet
British naturalist Alfred Russell Wallace was without peer in the 19th century except for one name: Charles Darwin. One of Wallace's most astute observations about nature has gotten totally forgotten in the whole debate over the "survival of the fittest." Wallace made a surprising discovery about the saving nature of struggle.
One day Wallace was observing moths struggling to hatch out from their cocoons. One of the larger insects seemed to be having a particularly hard time getting out. After hours of watching this moth beat desperately with its yet undeveloped wings to break out of the cocoon, Wallace couldn't take it anymore. Moved by the creature's life-and-death struggle, Wallace decided to lend a helping hand. Gently, being careful not to injure the insect, Wallace used his sharp knife to cut open the remainder of the cocoon and freed the moth from that transformation chamber.
But something was wrong. The moth was not injured. It began beating its wings to pump them up. Its body unfolded and filled out. Yet in the ensuing days, compared to all the other moths that had struggled their way out of their cocoon captivity, Wallace's moth appeared smaller. Its movements were noticeably weaker. Even its wing and body color were less vivid, pale and dull. Over the course of its brief life span the "helped out" moth flew poorly, fed inefficiently, and finally died long before its time.
In this little experiment Wallace discovered that his compassion was actually cruelty. The struggle against the cocoon was nature's way of strengthening and developing the moth's wings so it could fly. The "easy-way-out," the struggle-free hatching, was a recipe for failure, not success. The struggle to break free from a cocoon was a necessary, life-enhancing, life sustaining part of a successful moth's existence. The struggle made the moths stronger, their shades of color more vivid, and increased their vitality.
Parents know this, but how hard is it for us to do this. One of the worst things we can do for our children is give them everything they want. Why? Because there will never be an end to "all we want." Give someone everything they want and they will simply want more.
One of the other worst things we can do for our children is to do everything for them. If you find yourself cutting your teenage son's meat for him, you know somewhere along the way you went too far, "helped out" too much. Doing everything for another, even out of love and compassion, insures the other will have a gray and dreamless life. Like the over-aided moth, they will have no strength, no vibrancy, no soaring spirit in their living.
In today's gospel text Jesus shows his great love for his disciples by sending them off, by themselves, without his help, to struggle alone.
49. The Drum Major Instinct
Illustration
Dr. Martin Luther King
The following words were part of a sermon given by Dr. King at the Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, Georgia, on February 4, 1968.
I know a man—and I just want to talk about him a minute, and maybe you will discover who I'm talking about as I go down the way (Yeah) because he was a great one. And he just went about serving. He was born in an obscure village, (Yes, sir) the child of a poor peasant woman. And then he grew up in still another obscure village, where he worked as a carpenter until he was thirty years old. (Amen) Then for three years, he just got on his feet, and he was an itinerant preacher. And he went about doing some things. He didn't have much. He never wrote a book. He never held an office. He never had a family. (Yes) He never owned a house. He never went to college. He never visited a big city. He never went two hundred miles from where he was born. He did none of the usual things that the world would associate with greatness. He had no credentials but himself.
He was only thirty-three when the tide of public opinion turned against him. They called him a rabble-rouser. They called him a troublemaker. They said he was an agitator. (Glory to God) He practiced civil disobedience; he broke injunctions. And so he was turned over to his enemies and went through the mockery of a trial. And the irony of it all is that his friends turned him over to them. (Amen) One of his closest friends denied him. Another of his friends turned him over to his enemies. And while he was dying, the people who killed him gambled for his clothing, the only possession that he had in the world. (Lord help him) When he was dead he was buried in a borrowed tomb, through the pity of a friend.
Nineteen centuries have come and gone and today he stands as the most influential figure that ever entered human history. All of the armies that ever marched, all the navies that ever sailed, all the parliaments that ever sat, and all the kings that ever reigned put together (Yes) have not affected the life of man on this earth (Amen) as much as that one solitary life. His name may be a familiar one. (Jesus) But today I can hear them talking about him. Every now and then somebody says, "He's King of Kings." (Yes) And again I can hear somebody saying, "He's Lord of Lords." Somewhere else I can hear somebody saying, "In Christ there is no East nor West." (Yes) And then they go on and talk about, "In Him there's no North and South, but one great Fellowship of Love throughout the whole wide world." He didn't have anything. (Amen) He just went around serving and doing good.
This morning, you can be on his right hand and his left hand if you serve. (Amen) It's the only way in.
50. Pithy, Terse, and Succinct
Illustration
Luke Bouman
A high school English teacher would use three words to describe how he wanted his students to write: pithy, terse and succinct. By that the students took it to mean that he didn’t want them to waste words and space on the paper. He wanted them to pack as much meaning into a few words as possible. Of course it made sense to them from a mechanical standpoint: they used typewriters and white-out. The less they had to type, the better. They imagined his motivation was less to read and less time to grade. They didn’t imagine, at age 16, that perhaps it meant that they would be better writers. Today, after the advent of the personal computer and the reality of the endless blog on the internet, word conservation is a lost art.
Mark, on the other hand, does not have a problem with word conservation. The state of his prose was less important than the scarcity of paper. Or perhaps he just doesn’t want to waste time on details that do not serve his proclamation. Whatever the reason, his story of the temptation of Jesus is much shorter than that of Matthew and Luke. Mark does not record the challenges that come in a confrontation with the devil, only that Satan tempted him. Mark has written a lot in a very few words. If we are not careful, we may miss something.
Showing
1
to
50
of
162
results
- 'Tyrannical dictatorship': Pro-life activist warns of escalating hostilities if Kamala Harris is elected
- Franklin Graham says Americans must help each other amid storm devastation, trust in God’s goodness
- Phil Wickham, CeCe Winans and Brandon Lake sweep 2024 GMA Dove Awards
- Homeland Security to distribute $210M to protect faith-based groups, nonprofits
- Fulanis killing more Christians than Boko Haram, ISWAP: report
- More women’s college volleyball teams forfeit match against San Jose State over trans player
- Tullian Tchividjian says his 'favorite cuss word’ is 'actually a prayer'
- SBC leaders urge Biden, Congress not to waver in supporting Israel as Hamas terror attack anniversary nears
- Chris Reed announces plan to launch new ‘Jesus Revolution Church’ after personal failure
- Lausanne, WEA launch Business Bible, announce Global Day of Faith at Work
- Latino Churches’ Vibrant Testimony
- Modern ‘Technoculture’ Makes the World Feel Unnaturally Godless
- The Chinese Christian Who Helped Overcome Illiteracy in Asia
- Evangelicals Struggle to Preach Life in the Top Country for Assisted Death
- No More Sundays on the Couch
- What Would Lecrae Do?
- Safety Shouldn’t Come First
- A Hurricane Doesn’t Tell Us Who to Hate
- Gen Z Protestants Want to Be Famous for Their Hobbies and Talents
- The Gettys’ Modern Hymn Movement Has Theological Pull
- Six Pakistani soldiers killed in clash with Islamist insurgents, military says
- Weekly News RoundUp
- Oklahoma defends Bibles-in-schools proposal after report that only Trump’s might qualify
- Imagine that: A Bible spat in Oklahoma public schools
- ‘Manipulative wife’: Christian activist demands boycott targeting Melania Trump
- Pakistan: 6 soldiers killed in fight with Islamist militants
- Opinion: Helene destroyed my hometown. I don’t want climate change stories of false hope
- Islamic Jihad Not Just Against Israel
- After event at Mansfield high school, questions arise about separation of church & state
- Tragic story of man who tried to contact ‘most dangerous tribe in the world’ on island people are forbidden from visiting
- War Doesn't Thwart a Western Wall Tradition
- In Israel's Hour of Need, How Will Christians Respond?
- To Be An Israeli Jew Means Living With Danger Every Day
- Around Dallas, the Church Scandals Seem to Have No End
- JK Rowling Among Devotees of Scotland's Fastest Growing Religion
- Belgium, Vatican in Diplomatic Row Over Pope's Language on Abortion
- The Transparent Silliness of the Lack of Synodal Transparency
- How Do We Fight Idolatry (Part 2)
- Evangelism Without Justice Ignores the Words of Jesus
- US Govt Commission Flags 'Worsening' Religious Freedom in India
