Sermon and Worship Resources (2024)

The OT employs thirty-five different words for birds (both wild and domestic), but the identification of these words with known species has proved to be very difficult. Like other words for animals, terminology for birds often is employed in personal names (e.g., Jonah, Oreb, Zippor, Zipporah). There is significant evidence for fowling practices in ancient Israel, usually by means of nets and snares (Pss. 124:7; 140:5; Prov. 6:5; 7:23; Lam. 3:52; Hos. 7:12; Amos 3:5). Small birds and chickens are occasionally even depicted on Iron AgeII (1000586 BC) seals and vessels from sites such as el-Jib (Gibeon) and Tell en-Nasbeh (Mizpah).

Like other animals in the Bible, birds are depicted as agents of God. Divine agency is especially evident in instances such as the ravens feeding Elijah (1Kings 17:4–6) and the dove bringing an olive leaf to Noah (Gen. 8:11). The Bible also employs bird-related imagery such as in descriptions of divine judgment (Prov. 30:17; Jer. 12:9). Birds may also serve as ominous signs of impending judgment (Hos. 8:1). God’s “wings” can offer both healing (Mal. 4:2 KJV, RSV) and protection (Ruth 2:12; Pss. 17:8; 36:7; 57:1; 61:4; 63:7; 91:4). The metaphor of the soul or spirit as a bird is referenced in the description of the Holy Spirit descending like a dove (Matt. 3:16; Mark 1:10; Luke 3:22; John 1:32). The observation that birds “do not sow or reap” is employed as an image of worry-free living (Luke 12:24; cf. Job 38:41; Ps. 147:9). Jesus’ reference to “when the rooster crows” (Mark 13:35) is not strictly literal but rather refers to a watch of the night: the quarter of the night after midnight.

The prominence of sacrificial birds (especially doves and pigeons) in ritual literature indicates that they were likely raised for such purposes in ancient Israel. All birds could be eaten except those listed as unclean in Lev. 11:13–19 (twenty species) and Deut. 14:12–18 (twenty-one species). Generally speaking, birds of prey and those that feed on carrion or fish were considered unclean. Birds often served as food for the poor (Matt. 10:29–31; Luke 12:6–7). Poor people could offer birds as a substitute for expensive livestock (Lev. 5:7; 12:8; 14:21–22; cf. Luke 2:24), while the poorest of the poor were permitted to bring grain (Lev. 5:11). Finally, in one purgation ritual a live bird is used to carry away impurities (Lev. 14:52–53; cf. 16:22).

In the OT, the Hebrew words ruakh (“breath, spirit”) and neshamah (“blast, spirit”) are the standard terms, even collectively translated “wind.” Constructively, these terms reflect the vibrant relationship between God and humankind. However, God’s “breath” can also be an agent of judgment. So “breath/wind” is the invasive power of God—proof of his supremacy—capable of disruption or transformation of human life.

It is in human creation that God’s breath is given one of its most dynamic illustrations. Formed of “dust,” the human being must be enlivened by the Creator’s breath. In the OT, human flesh remains dormant and helplessly passive until God breathes; then a living human being is animated (Gen. 2:7; 6:17; cf. Pss. 33:6; 104:29).

“Breath/wind” is also a powerful force in God’s anger, when a “blast of breath from his nostrils” can undo and destroy (2Sam. 22:16). Similarly, a “strong east wind” rolls back the Red Sea for the Israelites’ crossing (Exod. 14:21), but the very same force is the undoing of Pharaoh’s army, which was destroyed as God, Israel’s warrior, “blew” with his “breath” (Exod. 15:10).

Not surprisingly, themes combining breath, wind, and spirit are also used to describe new creation (Ezek. 37:9). The life-generating force of the ruakh/spirit emerges in the NT as the Holy Spirit, manifested in wind, a breath, or Spirit (Gk. pneuma). At Pentecost “a violent wind came from heaven,” enacting another creation (Acts 2:2). John clearly symbolizes Jesus’ “breathing” on the disciples (John 20:22). Not only does this illustrate John’s theology of being born “from above” (3:3 NRSV), but also “he breathed” reenacts the enlivening of Gen. 2:7. The two creations are connected: God’s enlivening in Gen. 2:7 and Jesus’ creation of eternal life following his own resurrection.

Whether animal or human, “creature” assumes creator. God’s unique creative activity is showcased in his majestic work: “creatures.” While the infinite God is not confined in the lives of his creatures, both are linked in a relationship of fidelity (Ps. 104).

A creature is a gift and has an obligation of service (Ps. 150). Scripture celebrates divine rule and creaturely dependence (Ps. 96). Creatures have roles, and the liturgy of doxology revels in a cosmic and eschatological drama (Ps. 148; Isa. 40:1231; 65:17–25). Humans are caretaking creatures (Ps. 8).

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

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

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

Literally, fruit is the seed-bearing part of a plant. It constitutes an important part of the diet in the ancient Near East. Common fruits are olives, grapes, and figs, though many other varieties of fruit are also available, including apples, apricots, peaches, pomegranates, dates, and melons. Fruit trees play a prominent role as a food source in God’s creation and preparation of the garden of Eden (Gen. 13). The law prohibits the Israelites from cutting down their enemy’s fruit trees (Deut. 20:19). The abundance of fruit trees characterizes the land that God has prepared for Israel (Deut. 8:8; Neh. 9:25) as well as the final restoration (Ezek. 47:12; Joel 2:22; Rev. 22:2).

One aspect of fruit is that it grows from a plant. This use of the term is often extended to represent what emerges from something else. Thus, fruit may represent offspring, whether human or animal (Deut. 7:13; 28:4), one’s actions (Matt. 7:16–20), the result of one’s actions or choices (Prov. 1:31; 10:16; Jer. 17:10), or words coming from one’s mouth (Prov. 12:14; Heb. 13:15). In the NT especially, producing much fruit symbolizes performing deeds that are pleasing to God (Matt. 3:8; 13:23; Mark 4:20; John 15:16; Rom. 7:4; Col. 1:10). Those who live by the Spirit produce the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22–23). The apostle Paul speaks of the first converts in a particular region as being firstfruits, probably referring to their conversion as the result of the gospel being preached in the area (Rom. 16:5; 2Thess. 2:13).

The major body of water dividing Europe and Africa, extending eastward from the Atlantic Ocean well over two thousand miles to the western shore of Israel. The Mediterranean is almost completely surrounded by land. Though in some places this sea has a width of six or seven hundred miles, it is only nine miles wide at the Strait of Gibraltar, which gives access from the Mediterranean to the Atlantic Ocean. Situated between the Middle East, Europe, and Africa, the Mediterranean Sea made possible a quicker means of trade between these three great landmasses.

The Mediterranean Sea (known as the Great Sea, the Western Sea, and the Sea of the Philistines) plays a major role for Israel in both Testaments. It is noted as the Western boundary for the inheritance of Israel (Deut. 11:24; Josh. 1:4) and thus forms the border of Judah (Josh. 15:12, 47). In the NT, the Mediterranean Sea is mentioned in Acts, where Luke relates the story of Simon Peter staying with Simon the tanner in Joppa, which is “by the sea” (10:6, 32). And later in Acts, Luke chronicles the path of the ship taking Paul to Rome, a trip on the Mediterranean starting from Caesarea and passing through Myra, Cnidus, Crete, Malta (after shipwreck in a storm), Syracuse, Rhegium, Puteoli, and Three Taverns (the latter two are in Italy) before concluding in Rome (27:128:14).

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

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

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

Holiness is an attribute of God and of all that is fit for association with him. God alone is intrinsically holy (Rev. 15:4). God the Father is holy (John 17:11), as is the Son (Acts 3:14), while “Holy” is the characteristic designation of God’s Spirit (Ps. 51:11; Matt. 1:18). God’s name is holy (Luke 1:49), as are his arm (Ps. 98:1), ways (Ps. 77:13), and words (Ps. 105:42).

With reference to God himself, holiness may indicate something like his uniqueness, and it is associated with attributes such as his glory (Isa. 6:3), righteousness (Isa. 5:16), and jealousy—that is, his proper concern for his reputation (Josh. 24:19).

God’s dwelling place is in heaven (Ps. 20:6), and “holy” functions in some contexts as a virtual equivalent for heavenly (11:4). God’s throne is holy (47:8), and the angels who surround it are “holy ones” (89:5; cf. Mark 8:38).

A corollary of God’s holiness is that he must be treated as holy (Lev. 22:32)—that is, honored (Lev. 10:3), worshiped (Ps. 96:9), and feared (Isa. 8:13).

While “holy” is sometimes said to mean “set apart,” this does not appear to be its core meaning, though it is an associated notion (Lev. 20:26; Heb. 7:26). Holiness, as applied to people and things, is a relational concept. They are (explicitly or implicitly) holy “to the Lord” (Exod. 28:36), never “from” something.

The symbolic representation of God’s heavenly palace, the tabernacle (Exod. 40:9), and later the temple (1Chron. 29:3), and everything associated with them, are holy and the means whereby God’s people in the OT may symbolically be brought near to God. For God to share his presence with anything or anyone else, these too must be holy (Lev. 11:4445; Heb. 12:14).

The OT system of worship involved the distinction between unclean and clean, and between common and holy, and the means of effecting a transition to a state of cleanness or holiness (Lev. 10:10). People, places, and items may be made holy by a process of consecration or sanctification, whether simply by God’s purifying presence (Exod. 3:5) or by ritual acts (Exod. 19:10; 29:36).

God’s faithful people are described as holy (Exod. 19:6; 1Pet. 2:9). In the OT, this is true of the whole people of God at one level, and of particular individuals at another. Thus, kings (Ps. 16:10), prophets (2Kings 4:9), and in particular priests (Lev. 21:7) are declared to be holy. While the OT witnesses to some tension between the collective holiness of Israel and the particular holiness of its designated leaders (Num. 16:3), the latter were intended to act as models and facilitators of Israel’s holiness.

That humankind has been created in the image of God indicates its unique status above the animals because of a special similarity with God. This status authorizes humankind to rule the earth and requires respect toward people. The particulars of what the phrase “image of God” means have been understood in many ways.

The phrase is rather rare. It first appears in Gen. 1:2627, and the same or similar phrases occur in five more verses (Gen. 5:1, 3; 9:6; 1Cor. 11:7; James 3:9) that refer back to it. The NT also refers to Christ as the image of God and to believers becoming like the image of Christ.

The passages that refer back to Gen. 1:26–27 emphasize honor and respect for human individuals. Humans are to dominate the earth, not one another. They should not kill one another; otherwise they become subject to the death penalty (Gen. 9:6), and they should not curse others but instead treat them with honor (James 3:9). But the motif has no real prominence other than being in the beginning of the Bible. After Gen. 9:6, the OT does not use the phrase “image of God.” The concept of human rule appears (e.g., Ps. 8), but the expression “image of God” is more a subpoint under a larger topic than it is a heading for biblical teaching.

In the NT, Jesus is twice identified by the Greek equivalent to the Hebrew phrase “image of God” (2Cor. 4:4; Col. 1:15). Especially in the context of Col. 1:15, the emphasis is on Christ’s deity and so part of a different topic, despite the similar wording. The two verses about believers that refer to the likeness of God and the image of the Creator (Col. 3:10; Eph. 4:24) deal with moral behavior and the sanctification of the believer (cf. Rom. 8:29; 2Cor. 3:18). Although they do not directly refer to Gen. 1, they do address the common metaphor that humankind, by sinning, marred its imaging of God. To be conformed to the image of Christ restores how humanity images God in the world.

God begins his creation with light, which precedes the creation of sun, moon, and stars and throughout Scripture is an unqualified good (Gen. 1:35, 15–18; Exod. 10:23; 13:21). In the ancient world, people rarely traveled at night and usually went to bed soon after sunset. The only light in the home was a small oil lamp set on a stand, which burned expensive olive oil. Light is a biblical synonym for life (Job 3:20; John 8:12). Seeing the light means living (Ps. 49:19; see also Job 33:30). Conversely, darkness is often a symbol of adversity, disaster, and death (Job 30:26; Isa. 8:22; Jer. 23:12; Lam. 3:2).

John, who offers perhaps the most profound meditations on light, claims that God is light (1John 1:5). The predicate appropriates the intrinsic beauty of light, a quality that draws people’s hearts back to the author of beauty. For the apostle, light represents truth and signifies God’s will in opposition to the deception of the world (John 1:9; 12:46). Light stands for purity and signifies God’s holiness as opposed to the unrighteousness of the world (John 3:19–21). Light is where God is, and it radiates from the place of fellowship between God and his creation (John 1:7).

Mark’s Gospel is a fast-paced, action-packed narrative that portrays Jesus as the mighty Messiah and Son of God, who suffers and dies as the servant of the Lord—a ransom price for sins. Mark’s purpose is to provide an authoritative account of the “good news” about Jesus Christ and to encourage believers to follow Jesus’ example by remaining faithful to their calling through persecution and even martyrdom. A theme verse is Mark 10:45: “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

Mark’s narrative may be divided into two main parts. The first half of the story demonstrates that Jesus is the mighty Messiah and Son of God (1:18:26); the second half reveals that the Messiah’s role is to suffer and die as a sacrifice for sins (8:27–16:8).

Unlike Matthew and Luke, Mark does not begin with stories of Jesus’ birth but instead moves directly to his public ministry. As in the other Gospels, John the Baptist is the “messenger” who prepares the way for the Messiah (cf. Isa. 40:3; Mal. 3:1). John preaches a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins and announces the “more powerful” one, the Messiah, who will come after him (1:7). When Jesus is baptized by John, the Spirit descends on him, empowering him for ministry. After his temptation (or testing) by Satan in the desert, Jesus returns to Galilee and launches his ministry, proclaiming the “good news” (gospel) that “the time has come.... The kingdom of God has come near” (1:15).

During his Galilean ministry, Jesus demonstrates extraordinary authority in teaching, healing, and exorcism. He calls fishermen from their occupation, and they drop everything and follow him (1:16–20). He claims authority to forgive sins (2:10) and authority over the Sabbath command (2:28). He reveals power over natural forces, calming the sea (4:35–41), walking on water (6:45–52), and feeding huge crowds with a few loaves and fishes (6:30–44; 8:1–13). The people stand “amazed” and “astonished” (a major theme in Mark) at Jesus’ teaching and miracles, and his popularity soars.

Jesus’ authority and acclaim provoke opposition from the religious leaders of Israel, who are jealous of his influence. The scribes and Pharisees accuse him of claiming the prerogative of God (2:7), associating with undesirable sinners (2:16), breaking the Sabbath (2:24), and casting out demons by Satan’s powers (3:22). They conspire to kill him (3:6).

A sense of mystery and awe surrounds Jesus’ identity. When he calms the sea, the disciples wonder, “Who is this?” (4:41), and King Herod wonders if this might be John the Baptist risen from the dead (6:16). Adding to this sense of mystery is what has come to be called the “messianic secret.” Jesus silences demons who identify him as the Messiah and orders those he heals not to tell anyone what has happened. This secrecy is not, as some have claimed, a literary device invented by Mark to explain Jesus’ unmessianic life; rather, it is Jesus’ attempt to calm inappropriate messianic expectations and to define his messianic mission on his own terms.

The critical turning point in the narrative comes in 8:27–33, when Peter, as representative of the disciples, declares that Jesus is the Messiah. The authority that Jesus has demonstrated up to this point confirms that he is God’s agent of salvation. Yet Jesus startles the disciples by announcing that his messianic task is to go to Jerusalem to suffer and die. Peter rebukes him, but Jesus responds, “Get behind me, Satan! ... You do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns” (8:33). Jesus will accomplish salvation not by crushing the Roman occupiers, but by offering his life as a sacrifice for sins.

In the second half of the Gospel, Jesus journeys to Jerusalem, three times predicting that he will be arrested and killed (8:31–32; 9:31; 10:33–34). The disciples repeatedly demonstrate pride, ignorance, and spiritual dullness (8:33; 9:32–34; 10:35–41), and Jesus teaches them that whoever wants to be first must become last (9:35); that to lead, one must serve (10:45); and that to be Jesus’ disciple requires taking up one’s cross and following him (8:34).

When he comes to Jerusalem, Jesus symbolically judges the nation by clearing the temple of merchants (11:15–17) and by cursing a fig tree (representing Israel), which subsequently withers (11:12–14, 20–21). He engages in controversies with the religious leaders (chaps. 11–12) and teaches the disciples that Jerusalem and the temple will be destroyed (chap. 13). Judas Iscariot, one of Jesus’ own disciples, betrays him. Jesus is arrested and brought to trial before the Jewish Sanhedrin, which finds him guilty of blasphemy. That council turns Jesus over to the Roman governor Pilate, who accedes to his crucifixion (chaps. 14–15).

The crucifixion scene in Mark is a dark and lonely one. Jesus is deserted by his followers, unjustly condemned, beaten by the soldiers, and mocked by all. Apparently deserted even by God, Jesus cries out from the cross, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (15:34). Yet the reader knows by this point in the story that Jesus’ death is not the tragedy that it seems. This is God’s means of accomplishing salvation. Upon Jesus’ death, the curtain of the temple is torn, opening a new way into God’s presence. The Roman centurion at the cross cries out, “Surely this man was the Son of God!” (15:39). The death of the Messiah is not a defeat; it is an atoning sacrifice for sins. Three days later Jesus rises from the dead, just as he has predicted. When Jesus’ women followers come to the tomb, the angel announces, “He has risen! He is not here” (16:6). Jesus the Messiah has turned tragedy into victory and has defeated sin, Satan, and death.

In the world of the Bible, a person was viewed as a unity of being with the pervading breath and thus imprint of the loving and holy God. The divine-human relationship consequently is portrayed in the Bible as predominantly spiritual in nature. God is spirit, and humankind may communicate with him in the spiritual realm. The ancients believed in an invisible world of spirits that held most, if not all, reasons for natural events and human actions in the visible world.

The OT writers used the common Hebrew word ruakh (“wind” or “breath”) to describe force and even life from the God of the universe. In its most revealing first instance, God’s ruakh hovered above the waters of the uncreated world (Gen. 1:2). In the next chapter of Genesis a companion word, neshamah (“breath”), is used as God breathed into Adam’s nostrils “the breath of life” (2:7). God thus breathed his own image into the first human being. Humankind’s moral obligations in the remainder of the Bible rest on this breathing act of God.

The OT authors often employ ruakh simply to denote air in motion or breath from a person’s mouth. However, special instances of the use of ruakh include references to the very life of a person (Gen. 7:22; Ps. 104:29), an attitude or emotion (Gen. 41:8; Num. 14:24; Ps. 77:3), the negative traits of pride or temper (Ps. 76:12), a generally good disposition (Prov. 11:13; 18:14), the seat of conversion (Ezek. 18:31; 36:26), and determination given by God (2Chron. 36:22; Hag. 1:14).

The NT authors used the Greek term pneuma to convey the concept of spirit. In the world of the NT, the human spirit was understood as the divine part of human reality as distinct from the material realm. The spirit appears conscious and capable of rejoicing (Luke 1:47). Jesus was described by Luke as growing and becoming “strong in spirit” (1:80). In “spirit” Jesus “knew” what certain teachers of the law were thinking in their hearts (Mark 2:8). Likewise, Jesus “was deeply moved in spirit and troubled” at the sickness of a loved one (John 11:33). At the end of his life, Jesus gave up his spirit (John 19:30).

According to Jesus, the spirit is the place of God’s new covenant work of conversion and worship (John 3:5; 4:24). He declared the human spirit’s dependence on God and ascribed great virtue to those people who were “poor in spirit” (Matt. 5:3).

Human beings who were possessed by an evil spirit were devalued in Mediterranean society. In various places in the Synoptic Gospels and the book of Acts, either Jesus or the disciples were involved in exorcisms of such spirits (Matt. 8:2833; Mark 1:21–28; 7:24–30; 9:14–29; 5:1–20; 9:17–29; Luke 8:26–33; 9:37–42; Acts 5:16).

The apostle Paul pointed to the spirit as the seat of conversion (Rom. 7:6; 1Cor. 5:5). He described believers as facing a struggle between flesh and spirit in regard to living a sanctified life (Rom. 8:2–17; Gal. 5:16–17). A contradiction seems apparent in Pauline thinking as he appears to embrace Greek dualistic understanding of body (flesh) and spirit while likewise commanding that “spirit, soul and body be kept blameless” (1Thess. 5:23). However, the Christian struggle between flesh and Spirit (the Holy Spirit) centers around the believer’s body being dead because of sin but the spirit being alive because of the crucified and resurrected Christ (Rom. 8:10). Believers therefore are encouraged to lead a holistic life, lived in the Spirit.

The word “star” is used in the Bible to refer to any bright point of light in the night sky; no linguistic distinction is made between stars and planets (cf. 2Pet. 1:19; Rev. 2:28; 22:16).

Stars often are used to illustrate the scope of God’s promises (Gen. 15:5; 22:17; 26:4; Deut. 10:22). They were used throughout the ancient Near East to represent the king, an association also evident in the OT (Num. 24:17; Isa. 14:12). Stars also were named, and some were objects of worship, a practice condemned in Israel (Amos 5:26; cf. Deut. 4:19). Stars were subject to study by foreign sages who sought to predict the future based on their observations, although their efficacy is denied (Isa. 47:13). Nonetheless, the arrival of the Messiah is heralded by a star in the service of its creator (Matt. 2:210). The falling (Rev. 6:13) and the darkening (Joel 2:10; 3:15) of stars are used to depict the coming of the day of the Lord in judgment.

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).

Animals play a significant role in both their literalpresence in the biblical texts and in their figurative uses. From thebeginning of creation, animals were placed under the dominion andcare of humanity. The Bible is careful to highlight that humankind isa creation superior to animals and also has a responsibility to seeto the betterment of the animal kingdom (Gen. 1:28–30; 2:19–20;Deut. 25:4). Furthermore, the biblical record goes to some lengths todescribe the proper means by which humans and animals ought tofunction in this world and what lines ought not to be crossed (Exod.22:19; Lev. 18:23; Deut. 27:21).

Regardingthe consumption of animals, Genesis suggests that such was not thecase before the flood (cf. 1:30 with 9:3). Scripture separatesanimals into those that are unclean, those that are clean, and thosethat are permissible to be used in offerings. Although the rationalefor such distinctions has been the subject of considerable discussionfor some time among scholars, the similarities between theirdivisions and those of humanity (Gentile, Israelite, and priest) maysuggest that God utilized the animal kingdom and Israel’sinteraction with it as an ongoing reminder of Israel’s greaterrole in the world of humanity. Other proposed rationales fordistinguishing between clean and unclean animals include protectionof health, abstinence from pagan practices, the symbolic nature ofthe animal’s activities for desirable or unpleasant qualities,and the regulations being simply a test of Israel’sfaithfulness. Whatever the specific reason, it is clear that Godintended the food laws to function more generally as a means ofseparating Israel from the world (Lev. 11).

Occasionallyin the prophetic literature and more regularly in apocalyptic texts,animals serve a symbolic purpose in terms of either their physicalcharacteristics or the demeanor that they exuded (e.g., Isa. 30:6).The lion early on became a symbol of strength and ferocity and so wasutilized as a picture of the tribe of Judah, Satan, powerful enemies,and even God (Gen. 49:9; Amos 3:8; Nah. 2:11–12; 1 Pet.5:8; Rev. 5:5). The lamb was alternately used as a symbol ofinnocence, sacrifice, and naiveté (Isa. 53:6–7; Jer.11:19; John 1:29; 1 Pet. 1:19; Rev. 5:6). Other animalssymbolically used in Scripture include the serpent (Gen. 49:17), thedog (Isa. 56:10; 2 Pet. 2:22), the deer (Isa. 35:6; Hab. 3:19),the antelope (Isa. 51:20), and the bull or cow (Ps. 22:12; Amos4:1–4). Daniel used grotesque portrayals of animals tosymbolize the corrupted nature of human kingdoms that were inopposition to the cause of God (Dan. 7).

Formany animals listed in Scripture there is some level of disagreementabout their identity. For instance, the second animal listed in Exod.25:5; 26:14 is alternatively identified as a badger, a goat, aporpoise, a manatee, and as a reference not to a specific animal atall but rather to a type of leather. The last of these seems mostlikely because of availability and also because the specific animalsidentified as an option are unclean and seem ill-suited for use inconnection with tabernacle instruments. Behemoth of Job 40:15 hasbeen identified as an elephant, a water buffalo, or a hippopotamus,though the word itself simply means beast or cattle. The animalidentified as a chameleon in Lev. 11:30 is sometimes simply viewed asa large lizard or perhaps even a mole. Finally, the debate continuesconcerning the identity of the beast that swallowed Jonah (1:17),with most translators preferring to go the more reserved route of“huge fish” rather than the more traditional “whale.”The identification of animals in antiquity, and even up to thenineteenth century, seems to have centered as much on appearance asactual anatomy. This may explain why names applied loosely tocreatures that had a similar general appearance in earlier periodsfound misapplication in some earlier translations.

Froman ecological standpoint, God’s care and concern for animals(including but not limited to proper care and humane means ofslaughter), as well as his expectations of humankind as stewards ofthe animal kingdom, leave the clear impression that the biblicalideal for God’s people includes investing energy inpreservation. Perceptions of humankind as having unrestrained freedomto do with animals as they see fit seem at odds with the moreholistic view of human beings as both lords over creation andcaretakers of that which actually belongs to someone else.

Animals play a significant role in both their literalpresence in the biblical texts and in their figurative uses. From thebeginning of creation, animals were placed under the dominion andcare of humanity. The Bible is careful to highlight that humankind isa creation superior to animals and also has a responsibility to seeto the betterment of the animal kingdom (Gen. 1:28–30; 2:19–20;Deut. 25:4). Furthermore, the biblical record goes to some lengths todescribe the proper means by which humans and animals ought tofunction in this world and what lines ought not to be crossed (Exod.22:19; Lev. 18:23; Deut. 27:21).

Regardingthe consumption of animals, Genesis suggests that such was not thecase before the flood (cf. 1:30 with 9:3). Scripture separatesanimals into those that are unclean, those that are clean, and thosethat are permissible to be used in offerings. Although the rationalefor such distinctions has been the subject of considerable discussionfor some time among scholars, the similarities between theirdivisions and those of humanity (Gentile, Israelite, and priest) maysuggest that God utilized the animal kingdom and Israel’sinteraction with it as an ongoing reminder of Israel’s greaterrole in the world of humanity. Other proposed rationales fordistinguishing between clean and unclean animals include protectionof health, abstinence from pagan practices, the symbolic nature ofthe animal’s activities for desirable or unpleasant qualities,and the regulations being simply a test of Israel’sfaithfulness. Whatever the specific reason, it is clear that Godintended the food laws to function more generally as a means ofseparating Israel from the world (Lev. 11).

Occasionallyin the prophetic literature and more regularly in apocalyptic texts,animals serve a symbolic purpose in terms of either their physicalcharacteristics or the demeanor that they exuded (e.g., Isa. 30:6).The lion early on became a symbol of strength and ferocity and so wasutilized as a picture of the tribe of Judah, Satan, powerful enemies,and even God (Gen. 49:9; Amos 3:8; Nah. 2:11–12; 1 Pet.5:8; Rev. 5:5). The lamb was alternately used as a symbol ofinnocence, sacrifice, and naiveté (Isa. 53:6–7; Jer.11:19; John 1:29; 1 Pet. 1:19; Rev. 5:6). Other animalssymbolically used in Scripture include the serpent (Gen. 49:17), thedog (Isa. 56:10; 2 Pet. 2:22), the deer (Isa. 35:6; Hab. 3:19),the antelope (Isa. 51:20), and the bull or cow (Ps. 22:12; Amos4:1–4). Daniel used grotesque portrayals of animals tosymbolize the corrupted nature of human kingdoms that were inopposition to the cause of God (Dan. 7).

Formany animals listed in Scripture there is some level of disagreementabout their identity. For instance, the second animal listed in Exod.25:5; 26:14 is alternatively identified as a badger, a goat, aporpoise, a manatee, and as a reference not to a specific animal atall but rather to a type of leather. The last of these seems mostlikely because of availability and also because the specific animalsidentified as an option are unclean and seem ill-suited for use inconnection with tabernacle instruments. Behemoth of Job 40:15 hasbeen identified as an elephant, a water buffalo, or a hippopotamus,though the word itself simply means beast or cattle. The animalidentified as a chameleon in Lev. 11:30 is sometimes simply viewed asa large lizard or perhaps even a mole. Finally, the debate continuesconcerning the identity of the beast that swallowed Jonah (1:17),with most translators preferring to go the more reserved route of“huge fish” rather than the more traditional “whale.”The identification of animals in antiquity, and even up to thenineteenth century, seems to have centered as much on appearance asactual anatomy. This may explain why names applied loosely tocreatures that had a similar general appearance in earlier periodsfound misapplication in some earlier translations.

Froman ecological standpoint, God’s care and concern for animals(including but not limited to proper care and humane means ofslaughter), as well as his expectations of humankind as stewards ofthe animal kingdom, leave the clear impression that the biblicalideal for God’s people includes investing energy inpreservation. Perceptions of humankind as having unrestrained freedomto do with animals as they see fit seem at odds with the moreholistic view of human beings as both lords over creation andcaretakers of that which actually belongs to someone else.

In the OT, the Hebrew words ruakh (“breath, spirit”)and neshamah (“blast, spirit”) are the standard terms,even collectively translated “wind.” Constructively,these terms reflect the vibrant relationship between God andhumankind. However, God’s “breath” can also be anagent of judgment. So “breath/wind” is the invasive powerof God—proof of his supremacy—capable of disruption ortransformation of human life.

Itis in human creation that God’s breath is given one of its mostdynamic illustrations. Formed of “dust” (’apar),the human being must be enlivened by the Creator’s breath. Inthe OT, human flesh remains dormant and helplessly passive until Godbreathes; then a living human being (nepesh) is animated (Gen. 2:7;6:17; cf. Pss. 33:6; 104:29). “Soul” (nepesh) must bethought of in a holistic way in the OT, not as part of a dualism:“Praise the Lord, my soul; all my inmost being, praise his holyname” (Ps. 103:1). For human existence, “breath” isGod’s gracious gift that mortals cannot “possess.”Reflecting on this, the psalmist writes, “When you take awaytheir breath, they die and return to the dust” (Ps. 104:29; cf.Gen. 7:22). Theologically, Israel understood that life is utterlydependent on God; the “self” has no permanent propertiesof its own.

“Breath/wind”is also a powerful force in God’s anger, when a “blast ofbreath from his nostrils” can undo and destroy (2 Sam.22:16). Similarly, a “strong east wind” rolls back theRed Sea for the Israelites’ crossing (Exod. 14:21), but thevery same force is the undoing of Pharaoh’s army, which wasdestroyed as God, Israel’s warrior, “blew” with his“breath” (Exod. 15:10). Whether in the aimless waters ofcreation (Gen. 1:2; 8:1) or the mighty waters of “un-creation”(Exod. 15:10), the same cosmic might of God’s ruakh is evident.

Notsurprisingly, themes combining breath, wind, and spirit are also usedto describe new creation (Ezek. 37:9). The life-generating force ofthe ruakh/spirit emerges in the NT as the Holy Spirit, manifested inwind, a breath, or Spirit (Gk. pneuma). At Pentecost “a violentwind came from heaven,” enacting another creation (Acts 2:2).John clearly symbolizes Jesus’ “breathing” on thedisciples (John 20:22). Not only does this illustrate John’stheology of being born “from above” (3:3 NRSV), but also“he breathed” reenacts the enlivening of Gen. 2:7. Thetwo creations are connected: God’s enlivening in Gen. 2:7 andJesus’ creation of eternal life following his own resurrection.

A call or calling is God’s summons to live one’s life in accordance with his purposes. At creation God instructed Adam to fill the earth and subdue it, and to have dominion over it. God created Eve to be Adam’s lifelong companion and to help him fulfill this task (Gen. 1:28). Thus, in the broader (universal) sense, the notion of calling includes the ordinances that God established at creation: work (Gen. 2:15), marriage (2:18, 24), building a family (1:28), and Sabbath rest (2:2–3).

When Adam and Eve disobeyed God, they became alienated from God (Gen. 3:6–19). Their fall brought the same plight of alienation from God upon all humanity. However, it did not abolish the human duty to carry out God’s original creation ordinances. Since God showers his blessings on everyone alike (common grace), all human beings possess gifts and are given opportunities to “fill” the earth and “subdue” it. Thus, everyone participates in the universal call (Acts 17:25–26). This has come to be called the “cultural mandate.”

However, God’s original intention was to have communion with human beings. This could not be realized unless he made provision for human beings to be reconciled with him. Against this backdrop, God initiated his plan to redeem people from their plight of spiritual alienation.

The general call. The promise of God to bring deliverance through a future descendant of Eve established the provision for individuals (e.g., Adam, Abel, Seth, Noah) to be “called” back into a relationship of favor with him (Gen. 3:15). The first occasion when this call is made explicit is in God’s call to Abram to leave his country and go to a land that God would show him (11:32–12:1). God promised that Abram would become the father of a nation (12:2–3). In response to God’s call and his promise, Abram believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness (15:6). Abram’s call was implicitly twofold. First, it was a general call to acknowledge this God as the true God and yield to his lordship. Second, it entailed a specific call to leave his country and journey toward a new country.

Several generations later, God appointed Moses to lead these descendants of Abraham out of Egypt, where they had lived for four hundred years. God’s act of delivering them from slavery in Egypt also symbolized redemption from sin’s bondage (Exod. 20:2). God had called the people by means of a covenant to be his own special people, to serve him as a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (19:5–6). This was a call to set their lives apart for God by living according to his commands. This general call was more than a verbal summons; it was also the means God used to bring his people into existence (Hos. 11:1).

The NT indicates there is a general call to all people to believe in Christ (Matt. 11:28; Acts 17:30) that becomes effective in the ones that God has already chosen (Matt. 22:14; Acts 13:48; Eph. 1:4–5). The latter, which theologians identify as the “effectual call,” is what Paul refers to when he says, “Those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son. . . . And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified” (Rom. 8:29–30). Thus, this is also a sovereign call.

Particular callings. God has endowed each individual Christian with a particular gift set and calls each one to use those gifts in a variety of ways in service to him (1 Pet. 4:10). These callings include one’s occupation, place of residence, status as married or single, involvement in public life, and service in the local church. In the OT, God gifted Bezalel and “filled him with the Spirit of God, with wisdom, with understanding, with knowledge and with all kinds of skills” (Exod. 35:31–32) to beautify the tabernacle. In the parable of the talents, Jesus teaches that God has made each of us stewards of whatever he has entrusted to us; we are to become skilled in the use of our gifts and to seek opportunities to use them in service to him (Matt. 25:14–30). Desire is an important factor in discerning one’s particular callings (Ps. 37:4). One’s particular calling is progressive, unfolding through the different seasons of one’s life (Eph. 2:10; 1 Cor. 7:20, 24). No particular calling is more “sacred” than another in God’s eyes.

A call or calling is God’s summons to live one’s life in accordance with his purposes. At creation God instructed Adam to fill the earth and subdue it, and to have dominion over it. God created Eve to be Adam’s lifelong companion and to help him fulfill this task (Gen. 1:28). Thus, in the broader (universal) sense, the notion of calling includes the ordinances that God established at creation: work (Gen. 2:15), marriage (2:18, 24), building a family (1:28), and Sabbath rest (2:2–3).

When Adam and Eve disobeyed God, they became alienated from God (Gen. 3:6–19). Their fall brought the same plight of alienation from God upon all humanity. However, it did not abolish the human duty to carry out God’s original creation ordinances. Since God showers his blessings on everyone alike (common grace), all human beings possess gifts and are given opportunities to “fill” the earth and “subdue” it. Thus, everyone participates in the universal call (Acts 17:25–26). This has come to be called the “cultural mandate.”

However, God’s original intention was to have communion with human beings. This could not be realized unless he made provision for human beings to be reconciled with him. Against this backdrop, God initiated his plan to redeem people from their plight of spiritual alienation.

The general call. The promise of God to bring deliverance through a future descendant of Eve established the provision for individuals (e.g., Adam, Abel, Seth, Noah) to be “called” back into a relationship of favor with him (Gen. 3:15). The first occasion when this call is made explicit is in God’s call to Abram to leave his country and go to a land that God would show him (11:32–12:1). God promised that Abram would become the father of a nation (12:2–3). In response to God’s call and his promise, Abram believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness (15:6). Abram’s call was implicitly twofold. First, it was a general call to acknowledge this God as the true God and yield to his lordship. Second, it entailed a specific call to leave his country and journey toward a new country.

Several generations later, God appointed Moses to lead these descendants of Abraham out of Egypt, where they had lived for four hundred years. God’s act of delivering them from slavery in Egypt also symbolized redemption from sin’s bondage (Exod. 20:2). God had called the people by means of a covenant to be his own special people, to serve him as a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (19:5–6). This was a call to set their lives apart for God by living according to his commands. This general call was more than a verbal summons; it was also the means God used to bring his people into existence (Hos. 11:1).

The NT indicates there is a general call to all people to believe in Christ (Matt. 11:28; Acts 17:30) that becomes effective in the ones that God has already chosen (Matt. 22:14; Acts 13:48; Eph. 1:4–5). The latter, which theologians identify as the “effectual call,” is what Paul refers to when he says, “Those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son. . . . And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified” (Rom. 8:29–30). Thus, this is also a sovereign call.

Particular callings. God has endowed each individual Christian with a particular gift set and calls each one to use those gifts in a variety of ways in service to him (1 Pet. 4:10). These callings include one’s occupation, place of residence, status as married or single, involvement in public life, and service in the local church. In the OT, God gifted Bezalel and “filled him with the Spirit of God, with wisdom, with understanding, with knowledge and with all kinds of skills” (Exod. 35:31–32) to beautify the tabernacle. In the parable of the talents, Jesus teaches that God has made each of us stewards of whatever he has entrusted to us; we are to become skilled in the use of our gifts and to seek opportunities to use them in service to him (Matt. 25:14–30). Desire is an important factor in discerning one’s particular callings (Ps. 37:4). One’s particular calling is progressive, unfolding through the different seasons of one’s life (Eph. 2:10; 1 Cor. 7:20, 24). No particular calling is more “sacred” than another in God’s eyes.

A call or calling is God’s summons to live one’s life in accordance with his purposes. At creation God instructed Adam to fill the earth and subdue it, and to have dominion over it. God created Eve to be Adam’s lifelong companion and to help him fulfill this task (Gen. 1:28). Thus, in the broader (universal) sense, the notion of calling includes the ordinances that God established at creation: work (Gen. 2:15), marriage (2:18, 24), building a family (1:28), and Sabbath rest (2:2–3).

When Adam and Eve disobeyed God, they became alienated from God (Gen. 3:6–19). Their fall brought the same plight of alienation from God upon all humanity. However, it did not abolish the human duty to carry out God’s original creation ordinances. Since God showers his blessings on everyone alike (common grace), all human beings possess gifts and are given opportunities to “fill” the earth and “subdue” it. Thus, everyone participates in the universal call (Acts 17:25–26). This has come to be called the “cultural mandate.”

However, God’s original intention was to have communion with human beings. This could not be realized unless he made provision for human beings to be reconciled with him. Against this backdrop, God initiated his plan to redeem people from their plight of spiritual alienation.

The general call. The promise of God to bring deliverance through a future descendant of Eve established the provision for individuals (e.g., Adam, Abel, Seth, Noah) to be “called” back into a relationship of favor with him (Gen. 3:15). The first occasion when this call is made explicit is in God’s call to Abram to leave his country and go to a land that God would show him (11:32–12:1). God promised that Abram would become the father of a nation (12:2–3). In response to God’s call and his promise, Abram believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness (15:6). Abram’s call was implicitly twofold. First, it was a general call to acknowledge this God as the true God and yield to his lordship. Second, it entailed a specific call to leave his country and journey toward a new country.

Several generations later, God appointed Moses to lead these descendants of Abraham out of Egypt, where they had lived for four hundred years. God’s act of delivering them from slavery in Egypt also symbolized redemption from sin’s bondage (Exod. 20:2). God had called the people by means of a covenant to be his own special people, to serve him as a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (19:5–6). This was a call to set their lives apart for God by living according to his commands. This general call was more than a verbal summons; it was also the means God used to bring his people into existence (Hos. 11:1).

The NT indicates there is a general call to all people to believe in Christ (Matt. 11:28; Acts 17:30) that becomes effective in the ones that God has already chosen (Matt. 22:14; Acts 13:48; Eph. 1:4–5). The latter, which theologians identify as the “effectual call,” is what Paul refers to when he says, “Those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son. . . . And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified” (Rom. 8:29–30). Thus, this is also a sovereign call.

Particular callings. God has endowed each individual Christian with a particular gift set and calls each one to use those gifts in a variety of ways in service to him (1 Pet. 4:10). These callings include one’s occupation, place of residence, status as married or single, involvement in public life, and service in the local church. In the OT, God gifted Bezalel and “filled him with the Spirit of God, with wisdom, with understanding, with knowledge and with all kinds of skills” (Exod. 35:31–32) to beautify the tabernacle. In the parable of the talents, Jesus teaches that God has made each of us stewards of whatever he has entrusted to us; we are to become skilled in the use of our gifts and to seek opportunities to use them in service to him (Matt. 25:14–30). Desire is an important factor in discerning one’s particular callings (Ps. 37:4). One’s particular calling is progressive, unfolding through the different seasons of one’s life (Eph. 2:10; 1 Cor. 7:20, 24). No particular calling is more “sacred” than another in God’s eyes.

The foundational story in all of the OT is the story ofcreation, found in Gen. 1–2. Throughout the history ofinterpretation there have been many approaches to understanding thesechapters. In the modern world, discoveries from both science andarchaeology have challenged some traditional convictions, and debatescontinue to rage. Still, what Gen. 1–2 communicates isgenerally clear: (1) it establishes Yahweh, the God of Israel,as the God by whose word all exists; (2) it presents for ancientreaders a compelling argument for why they should worship Israel’sGod and not other gods of the ancient world. On this second point, itmust be remembered that Israel’s belief in one God flew in theface of contemporary religious notions, where each nation had a highgod along with lesser gods. Hence, when reading Gen. 1–2, wemust keep in mind its ancient polemical dimension rather thanapproaching it with modern expectations.

Thediffering perspectives of Genesis 1 and 2. Evena quick reading of Gen. 1–2 shows that the perspectives oncreation in the two chapters are somewhat different. Genesis 1 isordered famously as a seven-day process, whereby humanity is createdas the pinnacle of God’s work on day six. On the seventh day,as is well known, God rested. Much has been made among someChristians about the need to read this chapter literally, but that nolonger seems to be the dominant view. Much less is a scientificexplanation winning the day (where the details of the text correspondto certain scientific models, which are themselves disputed). Acommonly accepted understanding of these chapters among Christiansgoes by various names, and it attempts to account for the poeticstructure of Gen. 1. In Gen. 1:2 we read that the earth was “formlessand empty.” What follows is a description of God providing“form” in days one through three and then a correspondingfilling of the “emptiness” in days four through six.Hence, in day one God separates light from darkness, and in day fourhe fills the void with the sun, the moon, and the stars. Day twoyields the expanses between the waters and the sky, and day fivefills the voids with water creatures and sky creatures. Day threeyields the land and vegetation, and day six fills the void with landcreatures, the crowning achievement being humanity.

Genesis2 provides a different perspective on the events. It seems thathumanity is created before there were any shrubs or plants. Apartfrom this difference in order, more important is the focus on Adamand Eve and their role in creation, as those called to work the landtogether. These two perspectives are not contradictory, since one caneasily understand Gen. 2 as explicating Gen. 1:26–30. Modernscholarship has largely assigned these two versions to two differentliterary sources (see Documentary Hypothesis), a theory based notonly on the different perspectives of the two stories but also onother differences, such as language and style. Regardless of thealleged origins of these stories, however, they are presented to ustogether in the OT. As a unit, along with what follows in Gen. 3–11,these early chapters in Genesis in some ways stand in stark contrastto creation stories of the ancient Mesopotamian world, while at thesame time adopting many of the concepts and much of the language ofthose stories.

Modernand ancient questions.To enter into this discussion is to ask, “What are theseopening chapters of Genesis trying to say? How did the Israeliteshear the creation story in Genesis?” It sometimes is temptingto read the creation story and ask modern questions. For example,“How does the Genesis creation narrative conform to scientificknowledge?” Modern questions such as these are not, in and ofthemselves, out of bounds. In fact, they may be unavoidable to acertain degree. But we must remember that ancient Israelites did notask such questions. In the ancient Near East described in Genesis,which is thousands of years old, there was no science in any senseclose to the way we think of it today.

Thecreation story was written not to answer modern questions but ratherto address Israel’s questions. Beginning about the middle ofthe nineteenth century and into the early twentieth century,archaeologists discovered a number of creation stories from differentpeoples of the ancient Near East that help put the biblical accountin context. These accounts tell stories of creation in which a numberof gods are responsible. In one prominent example from ancientBabylon, creation was a result of a bloody conflict among the gods.Genesis 1 shares some of the descriptions of one or more of theseother accounts (e.g., light exists before the creation of the sun,the moon, and the stars).

Thetheology of creation.Where Gen. 1 stands out is in its insistence that Israel’s Godalone created the world through his spoken word. The purpose of sucha declaration is not to satisfy contemporary intellectual curiositiesabout the nature of matter or the first moments of the universe’sexistence. Its purpose is to declare to the Israelites that theirGod, not the gods of the ancient world, is responsible for everythingthere is, and that he alone is the one, therefore, who is worthy oftheir worship. The creation story is not an intellectual exercise butrather a deeply religious one. The Israelites lived in a world whereevery surrounding nation had a plurality of gods (pantheon). TheIsraelites were different. They had one God, and this is the messagethat rings loud and clear from Gen. 1.

ThatYahweh, Israel’s God, is alone the creator is not an abstracttheological statement. It is a call to worship. This is why, forexample, numerous passages in the OT burst out in praise of Yahwehthe creator. One example is Ps. 19. God’s glory is so great andso apparent that even creation itself is said to speak of it. Thepsalm uses specific Genesis language: the “heavens” andthe “firmament” proclaim what God has done (these wordsoccur in Gen. 1:1, 6–8, and the Hebrew words in Gen. 1 and Ps.19 are the same). Even though the heavens and the firmament have nopowers of speech, as the psalm tells us (19:3–4), neverthelessthey are “heard” throughout the world because of theawesomeness of the sun’s circuit (19:5–6). The message isthis: if you want to see how great God is, look up.

Butthe psalm does not end there. David is not simply interested in acontemplative posture for his people. Six verses about creation arefollowed, somewhat abruptly, by eight verses about the law. Clearly,a connection between them is being established, and that connectionseems to be fairly straightforward: knowing God as creator shouldhave an effect on how you behave. The God who created the heavens isalso the God who gave you the law, David seems to be saying. And asworthy as God is of praise for the creation (even the heavens and thefirmament join in), so too is the law. It is to be desired more thangold or sweet honey (v. 10). Knowing God as creator has verypractical implications.

Creationand re-creation. Anotherimportant recurrence of creation in the OT, which also has practicalimplications, concerns God’s saving activity. In brief,according to the OT (and the NT as well), when God saves his people,it is an act of “re-creation.” One can see this themedeveloped in numerous places. For example, God is Israel’s“maker” in texts such as Ps. 95:6; Hos. 8:14. These twotexts are found in the context of God having delivered the Israelitesfrom Egypt; their deliverance corresponds to their “creation”as God’s people. Similarly, Isa. 43:14–17 concernsIsrael’s captivity in Babylon and what God will do to deliverhis people. The prophecy describes their deliverance by using“exodus” language and in doing so refers to Yahweh asIsrael’s “Creator” (v. 15).

Thisconnection between creation and redemption (re-creation) is also wellarticulated in the NT. For example, the opening words of John’sGospel echo the very first verses of the Bible: “in thebeginning.” With the coming of Christ, there is a newbeginning. His act of redemption is described as the act of a secondor new Adam (Rom. 5:12–21; 1 Cor. 15:22). When oneconfesses faith in Christ, one is “born again” or “fromabove” (John 3:3, 7; see also John 1:13; 1 Pet. 1:3, 23).To be a Christian is to start over, to begin anew, or as Paul put it,“If anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old hasgone, the new is here!” (2 Cor. 5:17). And in Rev. 22:2paradise is described as containing a “tree of life,” towhich God’s people once again have access. At the end, in otherwords, it will be as it was in the beginning. In the coming of Christwe see a new creation. That new creation is inaugurated in his firstcoming, where the church, his redeemed people, by the power of theSpirit, live as newly created beings in a fallen world. At his secondcoming, this new creation will be complete, and all creation will beredeemed.

Whether animal or human, “creature” assumescreator. God’s unique creative activity is showcased in hismajestic work: “creatures” (Heb. bar’a, “tocreate” [Gen. 1:1, 27]; Heb. nepesh hayah, “livingcreature” [Gen. 1:24; cf. 2:7]). While the infinite God is notconfined in the lives of his creatures, both are linked in arelationship of fidelity (Ps. 104).

Acreature is a gift and has an obligation of service (Ps. 150).Scripture celebrates divine rule and creaturely dependence (Ps. 96).Creatures have roles, and the liturgy of doxology revels in a cosmicand eschatological drama (Ps. 148; Isa. 40:12–31; 65:17–25).Humans are caretaking creatures (Ps. 8).

At the beginning of creation, the darkness “over thesurface of the deep” is not a primordial principle of chaos tobe combated by God (as sometimes suggested), but simply somethingthat prepares for his creation of light in Gen. 1:3. The “thickand dreadful darkness” that came over sleeping Abram (Gen.15:12) was an indicator of the reception of a mysterious divinerevelation involving a manifestation of God in the form of a smokingfire pot and a blazing torch (15:17). Likewise, the thick cloud anddarkness that shrouded Mount Sinai (Deut. 4:11; 5:23; Ps. 18:7–10)was a sign of God’s presence and also hid him from the sight ofthe Israelites.

Aplague of darkness was inflicted on Egypt as a prelude to the exodusdeliverance (Exod. 10) and made darkness a sign and symbol of God’sjudgment. In prophetic teaching, the coming “day of the Lord”in judgment upon Israel and the nations is “a day of darknessand gloom” (Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18–20; Zeph.1:14–15).The wicked will be thrust into darkness (Prov. 4:19; Isa. 8:22).Jesus used such imagery when speaking of punishment in hell (e.g.,Matt. 22:13; 25:30). The moral life of a believer involves turningaway from deeds of darkness (Eph. 5:8–11; 1Thess. 5:4–8).

Darknessis associated with Sheol and death (e.g., Job 10:21; 17:13) and soalso becomes a metaphor of a situation of distress, especiallylife-threatening danger (Ps. 107:10, 14). In contrast, the dispellingof darkness becomes a metaphor of God’s saving help in Isa.9:2: “The people walking in darkness have seen a great light”(cf. Isa. 10:17). That salvation will include the provision of afuture Davidic ruler (Isa. 9:6–7), so that the coming of Jesusis the dawning of light (John 1:5; 12:35).

Thisrich OT background gives a context to the three-hour period ofdarkness as Jesus hung on the cross (Matt. 27:45). This began at thesixth hour (i.e., noon) and signaled that the judgment day was takingplace as Jesus suffered in the place of sinners (cf. Amos 8:9).

The word “dominion” translates several terms thatexpress power, mastery, rulership, and authority. As the cosmic king,God has deputized humankind as his image bearer to “rule over”creation (Gen. 1:26, 28; Ps. 8:5–6). Human rulership isintended to be a stewardship for God, one of development, notdomination.

Dominionis also found in political might (1Kings 4:24), sometimes inthe possession of Israel’s enemies (Neh. 9:28), and in God’schosen king over creation (Ps. 72:8). There is also the messianicrestoration of dominion (Mic. 4:8), dominion among supernaturalbeings (Eph. 1:21), and the ultimate dominion of Christ over all(Col. 1:15–20). The rule of sin and death is contrasted withthe dominion of grace and resurrection (Rom. 5:14–21; 6:9–14).God’s dominion is his “sovereignty,” both increation and redemption (Dan. 4:34; 1Pet. 4:11; Jude 25).

The Hebrew word ’erets occurs 2,505 times in the OT andis most frequently translated “country” or “land.”“Earth” renders the Greek word gē in the NT. Notsurprisingly, ’erets appears 311 times in Genesis alone, thebook that initiates Israel’s landed covenant (Gen. 15:18). Theprimary uses of ’erets are cosmological (e.g., the earth) andgeographical (e.g., the land of Israel). Other uses of ’eretsinclude physical (e.g., the ground on which one stands) and political(e.g., governed countries) designations. Less frequently, “earth”translates the Hebrew word ’adamah (“country, ground,land, soil”).

Heavenand Earth

Israelshared the cosmology of its ancient Near Eastern neighbors. Thisworldview understood the earth as a “disk” upon theprimeval waters (Job 38:13; Isa. 40:22), with the earth having fourrims or “corners” (Ps. 135:7; Isa. 11:12). These rimswere sealed at the horizon to prevent the influx of cosmic waters.God speaks to Job about the dawn grasping the edges of the earth andshaking the evil people out of it (Job 38:12–13). Similarly,the Akkadian text Hymn to the Sun-God states, “You [Shamash]are holding the ends of the earth suspended from the midst of heaven”(I:22). The earth’s boundaries were set against chaos (Ps.104:7–9; Isa. 40:12). In this way, the Creator and the Saviorcannot be separated because, taken together, God works against chaosin the mission of redemption (Ps. 74:12–17; Isa. 51:9–11).The phrase “heavens and earth” is a merism (two extremesrepresenting the whole) for the entire universe (Gen. 1:1; Ps.102:25). Over the earth arched a firm “vault” (Gen. 1:6).Heaven’s vault rested on the earth’s “pillars,”the mountains (Deut. 32:22; 1Sam. 2:8). Below the heavens isthe sea, part of the earth’s flat surface.

Therewas no term for “world” in the OT. The perception ofworld was basically bipartite (heaven and earth), though sometripartite expressions also occur (e.g., heaven, earth, sea [Exod.20:11; Rev. 5:3, 13]). Though rare, some uses of ’erets mayrefer to the “underworld” or Sheol (Exod. 15:12; Jer.17:13; Jon. 2:6). The earth can be regarded as the realm of the dead(Matt. 12:40; Eph. 4:9). However, the OT is less concerned with theorganic structure of the earth than with what fills the earth:inhabitants (Ps. 33:14; Isa. 24:1), people groups (Gen. 18:18; Deut.28:10), and kingdoms (Deut. 28:25; 2Kings 19:15). The term’erets can be used symbolically to indicate its inhabitants(Gen. 6:11). However, unlike its neighbors, Israel acknowledged nodivine “Mother Earth,” given the cultural associationswith female consorts.

TheTheology of Land

Inbiblical faith, the concept of land combines geography with theology.The modern person values land more as a place to build than for itsproductive capacities. But from the outset, human beings and the“earth” (’erets) functioned in a symbioticrelationship with the Creator (Gen. 1:28). God even gave the landagency to “bring forth living creatures” (Gen. 1:24). The“ground” (’adamah) also provided the raw substanceto make the human being (’adam [Gen. 2:7]). In turn, the humanbeing was charged with developing and protecting the land (Gen. 2:5,15). Showing divine care, the Noahic covenant was “between[God] and the earth” (Gen. 9:13). Thus, land was no mereonlooker; human rebellion had cosmic effects (Gen. 6:7, 17). The landcould be cursed and suffer (Gen. 3:17; cf. 4:11).

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

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

Landpossession had serious ethical and religious ramifications (Deut.26:1–11). Israel was not chosen to receive a special land;rather, land was the medium of Israel’s relationship with God.Land functioned as a spiritual barometer (Ps. 78:56–64; Lam.1:3–5). The heavens and earth stood as covenant witnesses(Deut. 4:26). Blood, in particular, could physically pollute the land(Num. 35:30–34). National sin could culminate in expulsion(Lev. 26:32–39), and eventually the land was lost (Jer.25:1–11). For this reason, Israel’s exiles prompted aprofound theological crisis.

Inheritance

Thenotion of inheritance connected Israel’s religious worship withpractical stewardship. Land was not owned; it was passed down throughpatrimonial succession. God entrusted each family with an inheritancethat was to be safeguarded (Lev. 25:23–28; Mic. 2:1–2).This highlights the serious crime when Naboth’s vineyard wasforcibly stolen (1Kings 21). It was Israel’s filialsonship with Yahweh and Israel’s land tenure that formedYahweh’s solidarity with the nation. The law helped limitIsrael’s attachment to mere real estate: Yahweh was to beIsrael’s preoccupation (see Jer. 3:6–25). When the nationwas finally exiled, the message of the new covenant transcendedgeographical boundaries (Jer. 32:36–44; Ezek. 36–37; cf.Lev. 26:40–45; Deut. 30:1–10). In postexilic Israel,sanctuary was prioritized (Hag. 1:9–14).

Itwas Israel’s redefinition of land through the exile thatprepared the way for the incorporation of the Gentiles (Ezek.47:22–23), an integration already anticipated (Isa. 56:3–7).The prophets saw a time when the nations would share in theinheritance of God previously guarded by Israel (Isa. 60; Zech. 2:11;cf. Gen. 12:3). Viewed as a political territory, land receives nosubstantial theological treatment in the NT; rather, inheritancesurpasses covenant metaphor. Using the language of sonship andinheritance, Paul develops this new Gentile mission in Galatians (cf.Col. 1:13–14). The OT land motif fully flowers in the NTteaching of adoption (cf. 1Pet. 1:3–5). Both curse andcovenant are resolved eschatologically (Rom. 8:19–22).Inheritance is now found in Christ (Eph. 2:11–22; 1Pet.1:4). In the economy of the new covenant, land tenure has matured infellowship (koinōnia). Koinōnia recalibrates the ethicalsignificance of OT land themes, reapplying them practically throughinclusion, lifestyle, economic responsibility, and social equity.

Beyondcosmological realms, heaven and earth are also theological horizonsstill under God’s ownership. What began as the creation mandateto fill and subdue the earth (Gen. 1:28) culminates in the newcreation with Christ (Rom. 8:4–25). Under the power of Satan,the earth “lags behind” heaven. Christ’s missionbrings what is qualitatively of heaven onto the earthly stage, oftenusing signs of the budding rule of God (Matt. 6:10; Mark 2:10–11;John 3:31–36; Eph. 4:9–13; Heb. 12:25). As Israel was tostand out in a hostile world (Deut. 4:5–8), now those ofAbrahamic faith stand out through Christian love (John 13:34–35;Rom. 4:9–16). According to Heb. 4:1–11, Israel’sinitial rest in the land (see Exod. 33:14; Deut. 12:9) culminates inthe believers’ rest in Christ (Heb. 4:3, 5). The formerinheritance of space gives way to the inheritance of Christ’spresence. The OT theme of land is ultimately fulfilled in Jesus’exhortation to “abide in me” (John 15).

Earthquake–InPalestine there have been about seventeen recorded major earthquakesin the past two millennia. One of the major sources of theseearthquakes is believed to originate from the Jordan Rift Valley. Inantiquity earthquakes were viewed as fearful events because themountains, which represented everlasting durability, were disturbed.The confession of faith is pronounced in association with suchphenomena (“We will not fear, though the earth give way”[Ps. 46:2]). An earthquake must have made a great impact in Amos’sday (“two years before the earthquake” [Amos 1:1; cf.Zech. 14:5]).

Anearthquake has many symbolic meanings. First, the power of God andhis divine presence are manifested through it (Job 9:6; Ps. 68:8;Hag. 2:6). It accompanied theophanic revelation (Exod. 19:18; Isa.6:4; 1Kings 19:11–12) when the glory of the Lord appeared(Ezek. 3:12). His divine presence was especially felt whenearthquakes occurred during the time of the crucifixion and theresurrection of Jesus Christ (Matt. 27:54; 28:2). It led thecenturion to confess of Christ, “Surely he was the Son of God!”(Matt. 27:54). God’s salvation power is represented when anearthquake comes at the appropriate moment, such as when it freedPaul and Silas from prison (Acts 16:26).

Second,it is used in the context of God’s judgment (Isa. 13:13; Amos9:1; Nah. 1:5). It becomes the symbol of God’s anger and wrath(Ps. 18:7). God brought earthquakes upon the people to destroy evilin the world and to punish those who had sinned against him (Num.16:31–33; Isa. 29:6; Ezek. 38:19). Earthquake activity possiblyexplains the background to the story of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen.19:24).

Third,earthquakes are said to precede the end of time (Matt. 24:7; Mark13:8; Luke 21:11). In the apocalyptic book of Revelation, earthquakesare regular occurrences (Rev. 6:12; 11:13, 19; 16:18).

Biblical references to the face are both literal andmetaphorical. The Hebrew word for “face” (paneh)frequently occurs in the plural in the OT (over 2,100 times), and itcan express the numerous features of the face, that of God, humans,animals, and inanimate objects. It also can describe a surface, suchas “the face of the ground” (Gen. 2:6 KJV) or “theface of the deep” (Gen. 1:2 KJV).

Theconcept of face must be understood in terms of the diverse emotionalexpressions and stratified social relationships of the biblicalsocial world. This was a world of honor and shame, loyalty andbetrayal. Where the modern person speaks of personal empowerment, thebiblical person thought of social restoration. Life was tantamount tosocial acceptance. In the biblical world of strong corporatesolidarity, the face was the most important part of a person’sbody. Persons did not merely “contact” each other;rather, faces engaged each other. Face was synonymous with person(e.g., Lev. 19:32, where “the aged/elderly” is literally“the faces of the aged/elderly”). The face essentiallydescribes interpersonal relationships.

Presenceand nonpresence are noted in the expressions “hiding the facefrom” (Ps. 27:9) and “seeing the face of” (Gen.32:20 KJV). These denote qualities of relationship through acceptanceor rejection, especially to superiors. To “see someone’sface” who is a dignitary is to be granted a royal audience(Gen. 44:23). Yet it was not customary to show a sad face in a king’spresence (Neh. 2:2). A person could also try to hide his or heridentity, since “face” marks a public expression of one’scharacter and social standing.

Toliterally “fall on the face” (Ezek. 1:28; Luke 5:12)shows humility and homage toward a superior. Personal intention ordetermination is shown in the expressions “set the faceagainst/toward” (Ezek. 35:2) and “turn the face”(2Kings 20:2). Dishonor and disrespect are expressed with a“fallen face” (Gen. 4:6; NIV: “downcast”face; cf. Gen. 40:7). Striking the face can be an act that humiliates(John 18:22), as with mutilation or having a soiled face (Lev. 21:18;2Sam. 19:4–5). By contrast, to speak “face to face”(Exod. 33:11) not only shows respect but also treats another as asocial equal. Reflecting rich emotions, a face can be “cheerful”(Prov. 15:13), “aflame” with agony (Isa. 13:8), “redwith weeping” (Job 16:16), and covered with “shame”(Ps. 69:7).

“Face”can be used as a metonym (i.e., substitution) for a person’spresence. Significantly, God’s rejection of a person or groupcan be expressed as them being hidden from his face (Gen. 4:14 KJV)or as God hiding his face from them (Isa. 54:8; Mic. 3:4; cf. Ps.22:24). Those in distraught prayer ask why God has hidden his face(Job 13:24) or for how long (Ps. 13:1). Similarly, God acts againstpersons when he sets his face against them (Lev. 17:10; 26:17).

Believersanticipate the day when they will see God “face to face”(1Cor. 13:12), having received the ultimate gift of God’sacceptance.

Fish comprise a part of God’s created order (Gen.1:26), given for humankind to rule (Gen. 1:28) and to eat, thoughsome were considered unclean (those with no fins or scales [Lev.11:9–12]). Fish comprised a meaningful part of the ancientIsraelites’ diet for much of their history. They ate fishduring their time in Egypt and longed for it in the wilderness (Num.11:5). Once in Canaan, they could obtain fish from the Sea ofGalilee, the Jordan River, and the Mediterranean Sea. Jerusalem evenhad a gate called the “Fish Gate” (Neh. 3:3; Zeph. 1:10),perhaps named for a fish market located near it inside the city.Nehemiah notes that men from the coastal city of Tyre imported fishto sell in Jerusalem (Neh. 13:16). Fish brought from such a distanceprobably had been preserved, perhaps by salting, smoking, or drying.The Gospels contain many references to fishing, since Jesusministered near the Sea of Galilee and had fishermen among hisfollowers.

Giventhe importance of fish and fishing, it is perhaps surprising that theBible nowhere names specific types of fish. One simply reads that a“huge fish” swallowed Jonah (Jon. 1:17), or that Jesusmultiplied “small fish” to feed a multitude (Mark 8:7–9).These small fish likely were sardines, caught in large quantities inthe Sea of Galilee and preserved by salting. Other common native fishincluded a pan fish, the tilapia (today’s “St.Peter’sfish” from the story in Matt. 17:24–27); a type of carp,the barbel; and the largest native fish, the catfish, forbidden toobservant Jews because of its lack of scales.

Bycontrast, in both Testaments one can find clear indications of howfish were caught. Large sea creatures might be speared or harpooned(Job 41:7), but usually fishermen used hook and line or one ofseveral different types of nets (Isa. 19:8; Hab. 1:15). Jesus sentPeter out to fish with hook and line (Matt. 17:27). Peter and hisbrother Andrew also used a casting net (Matt. 4:18–20), acircular net up to twenty-five feet in diameter cast from shore or aboat. The net spread like a parachute and sank rapidly, trapping fishunderneath. A system of cords drew the net together as it was pulledback in. Jesus’ disciples caught 153 fish with such a net (John21:6–11). Professional fishermen also used a dragnet, the mostcommon type of net used in antiquity (see Dragnet). Finally, theyalso used a trammel net, a standing net often spread between twoboats. The trammel net was made of up to five sections, each aboutone hundred feet long. This net had three layers, two finer-meshedlayers on either side of a larger-meshed, central layer. When fishswam into the net, they pushed one of the finer layers into theheavier layer and became entangled when they turned and tried toescape. The fishermen then pulled in the nets, disentangled the fish,and repeated the process, typically ten to fifteen times during anight’s work. The story in Luke 5:1–11 reflects the useof trammel nets, with fishermen in two boats working hard through thenight. Ancient commercial fishermen usually had to work at nightbecause the fish could see the threads of their nets during the day.

Fish comprise a part of God’s created order (Gen.1:26), given for humankind to rule (Gen. 1:28) and to eat, thoughsome were considered unclean (those with no fins or scales [Lev.11:9–12]). Fish comprised a meaningful part of the ancientIsraelites’ diet for much of their history. They ate fishduring their time in Egypt and longed for it in the wilderness (Num.11:5). Once in Canaan, they could obtain fish from the Sea ofGalilee, the Jordan River, and the Mediterranean Sea. Jerusalem evenhad a gate called the “Fish Gate” (Neh. 3:3; Zeph. 1:10),perhaps named for a fish market located near it inside the city.Nehemiah notes that men from the coastal city of Tyre imported fishto sell in Jerusalem (Neh. 13:16). Fish brought from such a distanceprobably had been preserved, perhaps by salting, smoking, or drying.The Gospels contain many references to fishing, since Jesusministered near the Sea of Galilee and had fishermen among hisfollowers.

Giventhe importance of fish and fishing, it is perhaps surprising that theBible nowhere names specific types of fish. One simply reads that a“huge fish” swallowed Jonah (Jon. 1:17), or that Jesusmultiplied “small fish” to feed a multitude (Mark 8:7–9).These small fish likely were sardines, caught in large quantities inthe Sea of Galilee and preserved by salting. Other common native fishincluded a pan fish, the tilapia (today’s “St.Peter’sfish” from the story in Matt. 17:24–27); a type of carp,the barbel; and the largest native fish, the catfish, forbidden toobservant Jews because of its lack of scales.

Bycontrast, in both Testaments one can find clear indications of howfish were caught. Large sea creatures might be speared or harpooned(Job 41:7), but usually fishermen used hook and line or one ofseveral different types of nets (Isa. 19:8; Hab. 1:15). Jesus sentPeter out to fish with hook and line (Matt. 17:27). Peter and hisbrother Andrew also used a casting net (Matt. 4:18–20), acircular net up to twenty-five feet in diameter cast from shore or aboat. The net spread like a parachute and sank rapidly, trapping fishunderneath. A system of cords drew the net together as it was pulledback in. Jesus’ disciples caught 153 fish with such a net (John21:6–11). Professional fishermen also used a dragnet, the mostcommon type of net used in antiquity (see Dragnet). Finally, theyalso used a trammel net, a standing net often spread between twoboats. The trammel net was made of up to five sections, each aboutone hundred feet long. This net had three layers, two finer-meshedlayers on either side of a larger-meshed, central layer. When fishswam into the net, they pushed one of the finer layers into theheavier layer and became entangled when they turned and tried toescape. The fishermen then pulled in the nets, disentangled the fish,and repeated the process, typically ten to fifteen times during anight’s work. The story in Luke 5:1–11 reflects the useof trammel nets, with fishermen in two boats working hard through thenight. Ancient commercial fishermen usually had to work at nightbecause the fish could see the threads of their nets during the day.

Literally, fruit is the seed-bearing part of a plant. Itconstitutes an important part of the diet in the ancient Near East.Common fruits are olives, grapes, and figs, though many othervarieties of fruit are also available, including apples, apricots,peaches, pomegranates, dates, and melons. Fruit trees play aprominent role as a food source in God’s creation andpreparation of the garden of Eden (Gen. 1–3). The law prohibitsthe Israelites from cutting down their enemy’s fruit trees(Deut. 20:19). The abundance of fruit trees characterizes the landthat God has prepared for Israel (Deut. 8:8; Neh. 9:25) as well asthe final restoration (Ezek. 47:12; Joel 2:22; Rev. 22:2).

Oneaspect of fruit is that it grows from a plant. This use of the termis often extended to represent what emerges from something else.Thus, fruit may represent offspring, whether human or animal (Deut.7:13; 28:4), one’s actions (Matt. 7:16–20), the result ofone’s actions or choices (Prov. 1:31; 10:16; Jer. 17:10), orwords coming from one’s mouth (Prov. 12:14; Heb. 13:15). In theNT especially, producing much fruit symbolizes performing deeds thatare pleasing to God (Matt. 3:8; 13:23; Mark 4:20; John 15:16; Rom.7:4; Col. 1:10). Those who live by the Spirit produce the fruit ofthe Spirit (Gal. 5:22–23). The apostle Paul speaks of the firstconverts in a particular region as being firstfruits, probablyreferring to their conversion as the result of the gospel beingpreached in the area (Rom. 16:5; 2Thess. 2:13).

For Christians, God is the creator of the cosmos and theredeemer of humanity. He has revealed himself in historicalacts—namely, in creation, in the history of Israel, andespecially in the person and work of Jesus Christ. There is only oneGod (Deut. 6:4); “there is no other” (Isa. 45:5). Because“God is spirit” (John 4:24), he must reveal himselfthrough various images and metaphors.

Imageryof God

God’scharacter and attributes are revealed primarily through the use ofimagery, the best and most understandable way to describe themysterious nature of God. Scripture employs many images to describeGod’s being and character. Some examples follow here.

Godis compared to the father who shows compassion and love to hischildren (Ps. 103:13; Rom. 8:15). The father image is also used bythe prophets to reveal God’s creatorship (Isa. 64:8). Jesuspredominantly uses the language of “Father” in referenceto God (Mark 8:38; 13:32; 14:36), revealing his close relationshipwith the Father. God is also identified as the king of Israel evenbefore the Israelites have a human king (1Sam. 10:19).

ThePsalter exalts Yahweh as the king, acknowledging God’ssovereignty and preeminence (Pss. 5:2; 44:4; 47:6–7; 68:24;74:12; 84:3; 95:3; 145:1). God is metaphorically identified as theshepherd who takes care of his sheep, his people, to depict hisnature of provision and protection (Ps. 23:1–4). The image ofthe potter is also employed to describe the nature of God, whocreates his creatures according to his will (Jer. 18:6; Rom.9:20–23). In Hos. 2:4–3:5 God is identified as thelong-suffering husband of the adulterous wife Israel. In the settingof war, God is depicted as the divine warrior who fights against hisenemy (Exod. 15:3).

Godis also referred to as advocate (Isa. 1:18), judge (Gen. 18:25), andlawgiver (Deut. 5:1–22). The image of the farmer is alsofrequently adopted to describe God’s nature of compassionatecare, creation, providence, justice, redemption, sanctification, andmore (e.g., Isa. 5:1–7; John 15:1–12). God is oftenreferred to as the teacher (Exod. 4:15) who teaches what to do, asdoes the Holy Spirit in the NT (John 14:26). The Holy Spirit isidentified as the counselor, the helper, the witness, and the guide(John 14:16, 26; 15:26). God is often metaphorically compared tovarious things in nature, such as rock (Ps. 18:2, 31, 46), light (Ps.27:1), fire (Deut. 4:24; 9:3), lion (Hos. 11:10), and eagle (Deut.32:11–12). In particular, the Davidic psalms employ many imagesin nature—rock, fortress, shield, horn, and stronghold (e.g.,Ps. 18:2)—to describe God’s perfect protection.

Last,anthropomorphism often is employed to describe God’sactivities. Numerous parts of the human body are used to speak ofGod: face (Num. 6:25–26), eyes (2Chron. 16:9), mouth(Deut. 8:3), ears (Neh. 1:6), nostrils (Exod. 15:8), hands (Ezra7:9), arms (Deut. 33:27), fingers (Ps. 8:3), voice (Exod. 15:26),shoulders (Deut. 33:12), feet (Ps. 18:9), and back (Exod. 33:21–22).

Namesand Attributes of God

TheOT refers to God by many names. One of the general terms used forGod, ’el (which probably means “ultimate supremacy”),often appears in a compound form with a qualifying word, as in ’el’elyon (“God Most High”), ’el shadday (“GodAlmighty”), and ’el ro’i (“the God who seesme” or “God of my seeing”). These descriptive namesreveal important attributes of God and usually were derived from thepersonal experiences of the people of God in real-life settings;thus, they do not describe an abstract concept of God.

Themost prominent personal name of God is yahweh (YHWH), which istranslated as “the Lord” in most English Bibles. At theburning bush in the wilderness of Horeb, God first revealed to Moseshis personal name in sentence form: “I am who I am”(Exod. 3:13–15). Though debated, the divine name “YHWH”seems to originate from an abbreviated form of this sentence. Yahweh,who was with Moses and his people at the time of exodus, is the Godwho was with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. According to Jesus’testimony, “the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the Godof Jacob” is identified as the God “of the living”(Matt. 22:32). Hence, the name “Yahweh” is closely tiedto God’s self-revelation as the God of presence and life. (Seealso Names of God.)

Manyof God’s attributes are summarized in Exod. 34:6–7: “TheLord, the Lord, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger,abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands,and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leavethe guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their childrenfor the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation.”Below are further explanations of some of the representativeattributes of God.

Holiness.The moral excellence of God is the attribute that underlies all otherattributes. Thus, all God’s attributes can be modified by theadjective holy: holy love, holy justice, holy mercy, holyrighteousness, holy compassion, holy wisdom, and so forth. God is theonly supremely holy one (1Sam. 2:2; Rev. 15:4). God’sname is also holy; those who profane God’s name are condemnedas guilty (Exod. 20:7; Lev. 22:32). God is depicted as the one whohas concern for his holy name, which the Israelites profaned amongthe nations; God actively seeks to restore the holiness of hisdefiled name (Ezek. 36:21–23). God’s holiness is revealedby his righteous action (Isa. 5:16). Not only is God holy, but alsohe expects his people to be holy (Lev. 11:45; 19:2). All thesacrificial codes of Leviticus represent the moral requirements ofholiness for the worshipers. Because of God’s character ofholiness, he cannot tolerate sin in the lives of people, and hebrings judgment to those who do not repent (Hab. 1:13).

Loveand justice.Because “God is love,” no one reaches the true knowledgeof God without having love (1John 4:8). Images of the fatherand the faithful husband are frequently employed to portray God’slove (Deut. 1:31; Jer. 31:32; Hos. 2:14–20; 11:1–4).God’s love was supremely demonstrated by the giving of his onlySon Jesus Christ for his people (John 3:16; Rom. 5:7–8; 1John4:9–10). God expects his people to follow the model of Christ’ssacrificial love (1John 3:16).

God’sjustice is the foundation of his moral law and his ways (Deut. 32:4;Job 34:12; Ps. 9:16; Rev. 15:3). It is also seen in his will (Ps.99:4). God loves justice and acts with justice (Ps. 33:5). God’sjustice is demonstrated in judging people according to theirdeeds—punishing wickedness and rewarding righteousness (Ezek.18:20; Ps. 58:11; Rev. 20:12–13). God establishes justice byupholding the cause of the oppressed (Ps. 103:6) and by vindicatingthose afflicted (1Sam. 25:39). God is completely impartial inimplementing justice (Job 34:18–19). As with holiness, Godrequires his people to reflect his justice (Prov. 21:3).

Godkeeps a perfect balance between the attributes of love and justice.God’s love never infringes upon his justice, and vice versa.The cross of Jesus Christ perfectly shows these two attributes in oneact. Because of his love, God gave his only Son for his people;because of his justice, God punished his Son for the sake of theirsins. The good news is that God’s justice was satisfied by thework of Jesus Christ (Rom. 3:25–26).

Righteousnessand mercy.God’s righteousness shows his unique moral perfection. God’snature, actions, and laws display his character of righteousness(Pss. 19:8–9; 119:137; Dan. 9:14). “Righteousness andjustice” are the foundation of God’s throne (Ps. 89:14).God’s righteousness was especially demonstrated in the work ofJesus Christ (Rom. 3:21–22). God’s righteousness willultimately be revealed in his final judgment (Rev. 19:2; 20–22;cf. Ps. 7:11).

TheEnglish word “mercy” renders various words in theoriginal languages: in Hebrew, khesed, khanan, rakham; in Greek,charis, eleos, oiktirmos, splanchnon. English Bibles translate thesevariously as “mercy,” “compassion,” “grace,”“kindness,” or “love.” The word “mercy”is chosen here as a representative concept (cf. Ps. 86:15). God’smercy is most clearly seen in his act of forgiving sinners. In thePsalter, “Have mercy on me” is the most common form ofexpression when the psalmist entreats God’s forgiveness (Pss.41:4, 10; 51:1). God’s mercy is shown abundantly to his chosenpeople (Eph. 2:4–8). Because of his mercy, their sins areforgiven (Mic. 7:18), their punishments are withheld (Ezra 9:13), andeven sinners’ prayers are heard (Ps. 51:1; Luke 18:13–14).God is “the Father of mercies” (2Cor. 1:3 NRSV).

Godkeeps a perfect balance between righteousness and mercy. Hisrighteousness and mercy never infringe upon each other, nor does oneoperate at the expense of the other. God’s abundant mercy isshown to sinners through Jesus Christ, but if they do not repent oftheir sins, his righteous judgment will be brought upon them.

Faithfulness.God’s faithfulness is revealed in keeping the covenant that hemade with his people. God “is the faithful God, keeping hiscovenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love him andkeep his commandments” (Deut. 7:9). God is faithful to hischaracter, his name, and his word (Neh. 9:8; Ps. 106:8; 2Tim.2:13; Heb. 6:13–18). God’s faithfulness is clearly seenin fulfilling his promise (Josh. 23:14). God showed his faithfulnessby fulfilling all the promises that he made to Abraham (Gen. 12:2–3;Rom. 9:9; Gal. 4:28; Heb. 6:13–15), by having Solomon build thetemple that he promised to David (2Sam. 7:12–13; 1Kings8:17–21), and by sending his people into exile in Babylon andreturning them to their homeland (Jer. 25:8–11; Dan. 9:2–3).God’s faithfulness was ultimately demonstrated by sending JesusChrist, as was promised in the OT (Luke 24:44; Acts 13:32–33;1Cor. 15:3–8).

Goodness.Jesus said, “No one is good—except God alone” (Mark10:18). God demonstrates his goodness in his actions (Ps. 119:68), inhis work of creation (1Tim. 4:4), in his love (Ps. 86:5), andin his promises (Josh. 23:14–15).

Patience.God is “slow to anger” (Exod. 34:6; Num. 14:18), which isa favorite expression for his patience (Neh. 9:17; Pss. 86:15; 103:8;Joel 2:13). God is patient with sinful people for a long time (Acts13:18). Because of his patient character, he delays punishment (Isa.42:14). For instance, God was patient with his disobedient prophetJonah and also with the sinful people of Nineveh (Jon. 3:1–10).The purpose of God’s patience is to lead people towardrepentance (Rom.2:4).

Godof the Trinity

TheChristian God of the Bible is the triune God. God is one but existsin three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Matt.28:19). The Son is one with the Father (John 10:30); the Holy Spiritis one with God (2Sam. 23:2–3). All three share the samedivine nature; they are all-knowing, holy, glorious, and called“Lord” and “God” (Matt. 11:25; John 1:1;20:28; Acts 3:22; 5:3–4; 10:36; 1Cor. 8:6; 2Cor.3:17–18; 2Pet. 1:1). All three share in the same work ofcreation (Gen. 1:1–3), salvation (1Pet. 1:2), indwelling(John 14:23), and directing the church’s mission (Matt.28:18–20; Acts 16:6–10; 14:27; 13:2–4).

Whereas the Greeks identified the good as an abstract idealtoward which people should strive in all their actions, the Bibleidentifies goodness as an attribute of God, who is personal (Ps.25:8–10). Therefore, God is the ultimate standard of goodness.

Creationitself expresses God’s goodness. Human beings are fearfully andwonderfully made (Ps. 139:14). We have been given the capacity toenjoy the many blessings of God’s creation (Ps. 145:9, 16), andto bring the potentialities of creation to their full expression bycultivating and subduing the earth (Gen. 1:28; Ps. 8). We are createdin God’s image to do good by living according to God’spurposes. Evil came into the world when Adam and Eve looked tosomething in creation instead of God as the source of ultimate good(Gen.3).

Inhis goodness, God has chosen goodness. If we were to shine God’sgoodness through a prism, its color spectrum would include love,mercy, grace, kindness, faithfulness, righteousness, beauty, andperfection to redeem his people, who have lost their capacity forgood through sin. Jesus is the good shepherd who lays down his lifefor his sheep (John 10:11). God showers his benevolence upon both theevil and the good (Matt. 5:45). For believers, God uses everything,even their suffering, to bring about their good, namely,Christlikeness (Rom. 8:28–29).

The present abode of God and the final dwelling place of the righteous. The ancient Jews distinguished three different heavens. The first heaven was the atmospheric heavens of the clouds and where the birds fly (Gen. 1:20). The second heaven was the celestial heavens of the sun, the moon, and the stars. The third heaven was the present home of God and the angels. Paul builds on this understanding of a third heaven in 2Cor. 12:2–4, where he describes himself as a man who “was caught up to the third heaven” or “paradise,” where he “heard inexpressible things.” This idea of multiple heavens also shows itself in how the Jews normally spoke of “heavens” in the plural (Gen. 1:1), while most other ancient cultures spoke of “heaven” in the singular.

The Abode of God

One of the challenges in understanding “heaven” as the present dwelling place of God involves God’s omnipresence. In one sense, God is present everywhere. David asks in Ps. 139:7, “Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence?” He answers that regardless of whether he goes as high up as anyone can go (“up to the heavens”), as low down as anyone can go (“in the depths), as far east as anyone can go (“the wings of the dawn”), or as far west as anyone can go (“the far side of the sea”), God is still there (Ps. 139:8–9).

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

At times, “heaven” becomes virtually a synonym for God himself. In the parable of the prodigal son in Luke 15, the son confesses to his father, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you” (v.21). This son’s sin against “heaven” has nothing to do with environmental issues such as air pollution, and everything to do with his relationship with God. Note also Matthew’s expression “the kingdom of heaven” versus “the kingdom of God” used elsewhere.

The Final Dwelling Place for Believers

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

However, this picture of heaven is more complicated. It is true that heaven is sometimes used in Scripture to refer to the present abode of all departed believers who have left this present life and entered the intermediate state between death and the bodily resurrection (2Cor. 5:4). It is this hope in a bodily resurrection that sets Christianity apart from other religions. Ultimately, the Christian hope is not that people will receive new physical bodies and float around some ethereal “heaven” like astronauts in outer space for all eternity. Instead, God has created human beings with physical bodies to inhabit a physical world, and our future hope is one of new resurrection bodies inhabiting new heavens and a new earth (Isa. 65:17; 66:22; 2Pet. 3:13). Just as there will be a certain continuity between the bodies of believers in this present life and their new resurrection bodies (we will know one another), there will also be a certain continuity between this present earth and the new earth to come. Yet, at the same time, everything will also be changed and made new and perfect, as God has designed it to be (Rom. 8:18–21).

The clearest description of this new reality is found in Rev. 21–22, where John describes how he “saw ‘a new heaven and a new earth,’ for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away” (21:1). Here is “the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband” (21:2), when “God himself will be with them and be their God. ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away” (21:3–4). Even better than all the descriptions of such things as streets of “gold, as pure as transparent glass” (21:21) is that God himself will come and dwell in the midst of his people. As Paul has phrased it, “Now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face” (1Cor. 13:12). The day will come when we will see God as he is, in all his glory (1John3:2).

Two other ideas complete our picture of life in these new heavens and new earth. Heaven will be a place of continued activity and service. Notice Jesus’ blessing in Matt. 25:21: “Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things.” The other principle is that there will be different degrees of reward. Although our ultimate reward is simply being with God himself, Paul also reminds us that if what believers do with their lives “survives, the builder will receive a reward,” and if what they do “is burned up, the builder will suffer loss” (1Cor. 3:14–15 NRSV). Our choices make a difference for time and eternity (cf. Rev. 14:13). See also Heavens, New.

The present abode of God and the final dwelling place of the righteous. The ancient Jews distinguished three different heavens. The first heaven was the atmospheric heavens of the clouds and where the birds fly (Gen. 1:20). The second heaven was the celestial heavens of the sun, the moon, and the stars. The third heaven was the present home of God and the angels. Paul builds on this understanding of a third heaven in 2Cor. 12:2–4, where he describes himself as a man who “was caught up to the third heaven” or “paradise,” where he “heard inexpressible things.” This idea of multiple heavens also shows itself in how the Jews normally spoke of “heavens” in the plural (Gen. 1:1), while most other ancient cultures spoke of “heaven” in the singular.

The Abode of God

One of the challenges in understanding “heaven” as the present dwelling place of God involves God’s omnipresence. In one sense, God is present everywhere. David asks in Ps. 139:7, “Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence?” He answers that regardless of whether he goes as high up as anyone can go (“up to the heavens”), as low down as anyone can go (“in the depths), as far east as anyone can go (“the wings of the dawn”), or as far west as anyone can go (“the far side of the sea”), God is still there (Ps. 139:8–9).

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

At times, “heaven” becomes virtually a synonym for God himself. In the parable of the prodigal son in Luke 15, the son confesses to his father, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you” (v.21). This son’s sin against “heaven” has nothing to do with environmental issues such as air pollution, and everything to do with his relationship with God. Note also Matthew’s expression “the kingdom of heaven” versus “the kingdom of God” used elsewhere.

The Final Dwelling Place for Believers

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

However, this picture of heaven is more complicated. It is true that heaven is sometimes used in Scripture to refer to the present abode of all departed believers who have left this present life and entered the intermediate state between death and the bodily resurrection (2Cor. 5:4). It is this hope in a bodily resurrection that sets Christianity apart from other religions. Ultimately, the Christian hope is not that people will receive new physical bodies and float around some ethereal “heaven” like astronauts in outer space for all eternity. Instead, God has created human beings with physical bodies to inhabit a physical world, and our future hope is one of new resurrection bodies inhabiting new heavens and a new earth (Isa. 65:17; 66:22; 2Pet. 3:13). Just as there will be a certain continuity between the bodies of believers in this present life and their new resurrection bodies (we will know one another), there will also be a certain continuity between this present earth and the new earth to come. Yet, at the same time, everything will also be changed and made new and perfect, as God has designed it to be (Rom. 8:18–21).

The clearest description of this new reality is found in Rev. 21–22, where John describes how he “saw ‘a new heaven and a new earth,’ for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away” (21:1). Here is “the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband” (21:2), when “God himself will be with them and be their God. ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away” (21:3–4). Even better than all the descriptions of such things as streets of “gold, as pure as transparent glass” (21:21) is that God himself will come and dwell in the midst of his people. As Paul has phrased it, “Now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face” (1Cor. 13:12). The day will come when we will see God as he is, in all his glory (1John3:2).

Two other ideas complete our picture of life in these new heavens and new earth. Heaven will be a place of continued activity and service. Notice Jesus’ blessing in Matt. 25:21: “Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things.” The other principle is that there will be different degrees of reward. Although our ultimate reward is simply being with God himself, Paul also reminds us that if what believers do with their lives “survives, the builder will receive a reward,” and if what they do “is burned up, the builder will suffer loss” (1Cor. 3:14–15 NRSV). Our choices make a difference for time and eternity (cf. Rev. 14:13). See also Heavens, New.

In Christian theology, the Third Person of the Trinity. Theusage derives from the NT, in which the divine Spirit is treated asan independent person who is instrumental in salvation and is worthyof the praise accorded to both the Father and the Son (John 14:16–23;Rom. 8:26–27; 1Pet. 1:2).

OldTestament

Thescarcity of the phrase “Holy Spirit” in the OT (only inPs. 51:11; Isa. 63:10–11) does not imply lack of interest orimportance. While it should be recognized that in the OT the personof the Holy Spirit receives nothing like the systematic reflectionfound in the NT, when one includes correlative terms, such as “Spiritof God,” “my Spirit,” “wind,” or“breath,” it is apparent that OT writers attributed greatsignificance to God’s Spirit. Thus, the Spirit was at work inthe beginning of creation (Gen. 1:2). Adam and Eve are uniquely givenlife by the breath of God (Gen. 2:7). The Spirit enables the buildingof the tabernacle (Exod. 31:3), gives voice to the message of theprophets (Num. 11:29; cf. 2Pet. 1:21), empowers Israel’sleaders (1Sam. 16:13), and provides access to God’spresence (Ps. 51:11). Yet in all this, the work of the Spirit in theOT is sporadic, occasional, and localized. Thus, the prophets longfor a new age when God’s people will more perfectly enjoy theSpirit’s presence (Isa. 32:15; 44:3; 61:1; Joel 2:28).

NewTestament

TheSpirit in the ministry of Christ.The NT views the OT prophetic hope for the Spirit as fulfilled in andthrough Jesus Christ (Luke 4:18–21). The unique relationshipbetween God’s Holy Spirit and the person and work of Jesusexplains the systemic reflection that the Holy Spirit receives in theNT. This is signaled at the very beginning of Jesus’ life, whenthe Holy Spirit “comes upon” Mary, overshadowing her with“the power of the Most High” (1:35). Similarly, at thestart of Jesus’ public ministry, the Holy Spirit “descendedon him” at baptism (3:22). This anointing by the Spiritinitiates and empowers Jesus’ public ministry, from hispreaching, to his miraculous works, to his perfect obedience (Luke4:14–18; John 3:34; Acts 10:38). Even his sacrificial death isaccomplished by the power of the Holy Spirit (Heb. 9:14).

Significantly,just as the Holy Spirit empowered the life and death of Jesus, so toois the Spirit responsible for his resurrection and characteristic ofhis glorious reign. Death is not a defeat for Jesus: he is“vindicated by the Spirit” (1Tim. 3:16), “appointedthe Son of God in power by his resurrection from the dead”(Rom. 1:4; cf. 1Pet. 3:18). Furthermore, at his resurrection,Jesus comes into a new phase of full and perfect possession of theeternal Spirit as the reward for his obedience. So complete is thisunion that Paul at one point claims that “the Lord is theSpirit” (2Cor. 3:17).

TheSpirit in the church and the believer.The church and its members are the immediate beneficiaries ofChrist’s spiritual fullness. Since Jesus is now a “life-givingspirit” through his resurrection and ascension (1Cor.15:45), he is able to fulfill the promise of Spirit baptism (Luke3:16). This baptism takes place in the outpouring of the Spirit atPentecost, which marks the birth of the NT church. The apostles,illuminated by the Holy Spirit, provide true and powerful testimonyabout Jesus (John 16:4–15), testimony that serves as thechurch’s foundation and principal tradition (Eph. 2:20). Thework of the Spirit continues within the church in the postapostolicage, uniting its members in Christ for God’s holy purpose (Eph.2:22).

Thissame outpouring of the Holy Spirit is the salvation of individualbelievers. Believers receive the Spirit by faith (Gal. 3:14). TheSpirit in turn unites them to Christ and all his benefits (Gal. 3:2;Eph. 1:3), including his life (Heb. 4:15–16), suffering (Phil.1:29; 1Pet. 4:14), death (Rom. 6:3), resurrection (Rom. 6:5),justification (Rom. 4:25), and glorious reign in heaven (Phil. 3:20).These benefits, though undoubtedly perfected and consummated only atChrist’s return (Phil. 1:6), are characteristic of believers’present experience, enjoyed now because the Spirit dwells within themas the “firstfruits” of the harvest to come (Rom. 8:23;cf. Gal. 2:19–20). This indwelling of the Spirit results in newbirth and new creation (2Cor. 5:17), a newness identified withthe life that Christ received in his resurrection (Rom. 8:11).

Forthis reason, believers are urged to further the work of the Spirit intheir lives until the bodily resurrection of all God’s people.They are to cultivate the “fruit of the Spirit” (Gal.5:22), and they are correspondingly warned not to “grieve theHoly Spirit” (Eph. 4:30). Furthermore, since new life isinitiated by the Spirit (John 3:6–8), Christians are to remainin that Spirit, not turning aside in reliance on vain and uselessprinciples (Gal. 3:1–5). Conversely, they are to be “filledwith the Spirit” (Eph. 5:18), putting off the old person andputting on the new (4:22). This filling grounds every aspect of thebeliever’s life, from obedience, to worship, to the hope ofresurrection. The Spirit, in uniting believers to all the riches ofChrist and his resurrection, is therefore central in the work ofsalvation. See also Spirit.

That humankind has been created in the image of God indicatesits unique status above the animals because of a special similaritywith God. This status authorizes humankind to rule the earth andrequires respect toward people. The particulars of what the phrase“image of God” means have been understood in many ways.

Thephrase is rather rare. It first appears in Gen. 1:26–27, andthe same or similar phrases occur in five more verses (Gen. 5:1, 3;9:6; 1Cor. 11:7; James 3:9) that refer back to it. The NT alsorefers to Christ as the image of God and to believers becoming likethe image of Christ.

UnderstandingGenesis 1:26–27

Thismakes Gen. 1:26–27 the starting point for understanding thephrase. Several factors come into play: the contrast with thecreation of animals on the same day; the connection with humankindruling the other creatures; other elements of the broader context;the meaning of the words “image” (tselem) and “likeness”(demut); the meaning of the preposition “in”; and themeaning and use of images in the ancient Near East.

Inthe immediately preceding context, animals are made “accordingto their kinds,” whereas humans are made “in the image ofGod.” The context directly following also makes a distinctionbetween the two, granting humans rule, or dominion, over the animals.Being in the image of God certainly involves what makes humans uniquein contrast to the rest of the animal kingdom.

Thehistory of interpretation of the phrase “image of God” islong and voluminous. Just about anything from the broader contextthat seems important to the interpreter might be selected as the keymeaning; or whatever philosophical system is dominant at the timewhen the interpreter writes might be tapped as the “obvious”explanation of what being in the image of God means; or perhaps theinsights of a particular academic discipline or systematictheological system might be given preference. Thus, the meaning ofbeing created in the image of God has been associated with manythings, such as language, eternal soul, rationality, relationality,being male and female (often compared to the Trinity), physicalappearance, dominion, and personhood. The wide variety is possiblebecause the text of Scripture does not spell it out, and the optionsseem reasonable to their various proponents as explaining theuniqueness of humanity, something that clearly serves the context.

Althoughmany of these insights may be reasonable and relevant, it can beproblematic to select one as the key element. For example, to supportthe suggestion that being in the image of God means walking erect ontwo feet, one could point out that (1)humankind’s“walking” is in the broader context, (2)humanbeings “walking” with God uniquely contrasts to thecirc*mstances of other animals, and (3)standing erect on twofeet is a dominance move in the animal kingdom. But this is unlikelyto be convincing to anyone, for good reason. And the many optionsoffered by interpreters often look equally out of place fromanother’s perspective. For example, the text emphasizes thatGod created them “male and female,” a unity with adifference. God is a trinity, a unity with a difference. Is this,then, the image of God? Someone might point out that the animals arealso male and female, and that the text does not necessarily have theTrinity in view (there are other explanations for the plural “us”in Gen. 1:26, which many consider better explanations).

Studyingthe words “image” and “likeness” does notquickly clarify the issue. “Image” normally refers to astatue, typically of a god. And “likeness” normallyrefers to similar physical appearance. The true God is a spirit,lacking a particular physical form, and he forbids making a statue ofhimself. If the three-dimensional human physique is not the point,what remains of the terms “image” and “likeness”is simply some notion of similarity. It is this vagueness that haspromoted diverse understandings.

Thepreposition “in” is also much discussed, for it mightmean “in” or “as.” Thus humanity is perhapsmade in a like appearance to God, or in an unspecified similarity toGod. Or humanity has been created as God’s image on the earth.The first emphasizes what humanity is (being), the second whathumanity is to do (function). Yet the two, being and function,certainly are related, so the difference between them may beoverstated.

Thesurrounding cultures of the ancient Near East made images of theirgods. They believed not that the statue actually was the god butrather that it invoked the presence of the god and represented thegod to the people as a central location for interaction. TheBabylonian word for “image” is similar to the Hebrew andalso usually refers to a statue or artistic representation. It issometimes used figuratively about a king being the image of a god.And in Egypt we find the idea that humanity is the image of gods.This conceptual backdrop aligns with an understanding that being inthe image of God relates to the function of ruling.

Additionally,the phrase “and let them rule over” occurs in a sequencethat can indicate purpose or result. Thus, the passage may berendered, “Let us make man as our image, as our likeness, sothat they may rule.” That is, God set up human beings with adistinct nature for a distinct task, which he expressly includes whenblessing them (Gen. 1:28). We might still infer from generalrevelation some of the details that are relevant to that uniqueness,but we should avoid elevating them in importance.

OtherBiblical Passages

Thepassages that refer back to Gen. 1:26–27 emphasize honor andrespect for human individuals. Humans are to dominate the earth, notone another. They should not kill one another; otherwise they becomesubject to the death penalty (Gen. 9:6), and they should not curseothers but instead treat them with honor (James 3:9). But the motifhas no real prominence other than being in the beginning of theBible. After Gen. 9:6, the OT does not use the phrase “image ofGod.” The concept of human rule appears (e.g., Ps. 8), but theexpression “image of God” is more a subpoint under alarger topic than it is a heading for biblical teaching.

Inthe NT, Jesus is twice identified by the Greek equivalent to theHebrew phrase “image of God” (2Cor. 4:4; Col.1:15). Especially in the context of Col. 1:15, the emphasis is onChrist’s deity and so part of a different topic, despite thesimilar wording. The two verses about believers that refer to thelikeness of God and the image of the Creator (Col. 3:10; Eph. 4:24)deal with moral behavior and the sanctification of the believer (cf.Rom. 8:29; 2Cor. 3:18). Although they do not directly refer toGen. 1, they do address the common metaphor that humankind, bysinning, marred its imaging of God. To be conformed to the image ofChrist restores how humanity images God in the world.

In the OT, increase at times refers to a harvest’syield (Ps. 67:7) but more commonly to numerical growth. In Gen. 1God’s creation blessing is expressed in the imperative “befruitful and increase in number” (1:22, 28). Even after thefall in Genesis, God reiterated his intention to bless and increaseNoah (9:1, 7), Abraham (17:2), Ishmael (17:20), Isaac (26:24), andJacob (35:11). This blessing was fulfilled initially when Israelincreased greatly in Egypt (47:27).

Mosesstressed God’s intention to further increase his people if theywould obey God (Deut. 6:3; 8:1), and he warned that disobediencewould bring about ruin and destruction (28:63). According to Hosea,when Israel prospered, it increased in sin and idolatry (Hos. 4:7;10:1). Yet God restated his intention to increase the remnant of hispeople following exile (Jer. 23:3; Ezek. 37:26).

TheNT records prayer for increased faith (Luke 17:5) and love (1Thess.3:12) and stresses the increase of God’s grace (Rom. 5:20) andthe advancement of the word of God (Acts 6:7; 12:24).

The Hebrew word ’erets occurs 2,505 times in the OT andis most frequently translated “country” or “land.”“Earth” renders the Greek word gē in the NT. Notsurprisingly, ’erets appears 311 times in Genesis alone, thebook that initiates Israel’s landed covenant (Gen. 15:18). Theprimary uses of ’erets are cosmological (e.g., the earth) andgeographical (e.g., the land of Israel). Other uses of ’eretsinclude physical (e.g., the ground on which one stands) and political(e.g., governed countries) designations. Less frequently, “earth”translates the Hebrew word ’adamah (“country, ground,land, soil”).

Heavenand Earth

Israelshared the cosmology of its ancient Near Eastern neighbors. Thisworldview understood the earth as a “disk” upon theprimeval waters (Job 38:13; Isa. 40:22), with the earth having fourrims or “corners” (Ps. 135:7; Isa. 11:12). These rimswere sealed at the horizon to prevent the influx of cosmic waters.God speaks to Job about the dawn grasping the edges of the earth andshaking the evil people out of it (Job 38:12–13). Similarly,the Akkadian text Hymn to the Sun-God states, “You [Shamash]are holding the ends of the earth suspended from the midst of heaven”(I:22). The earth’s boundaries were set against chaos (Ps.104:7–9; Isa. 40:12). In this way, the Creator and the Saviorcannot be separated because, taken together, God works against chaosin the mission of redemption (Ps. 74:12–17; Isa. 51:9–11).The phrase “heavens and earth” is a merism (two extremesrepresenting the whole) for the entire universe (Gen. 1:1; Ps.102:25). Over the earth arched a firm “vault” (Gen. 1:6).Heaven’s vault rested on the earth’s “pillars,”the mountains (Deut. 32:22; 1Sam. 2:8). Below the heavens isthe sea, part of the earth’s flat surface.

Therewas no term for “world” in the OT. The perception ofworld was basically bipartite (heaven and earth), though sometripartite expressions also occur (e.g., heaven, earth, sea [Exod.20:11; Rev. 5:3, 13]). Though rare, some uses of ’erets mayrefer to the “underworld” or Sheol (Exod. 15:12; Jer.17:13; Jon. 2:6). The earth can be regarded as the realm of the dead(Matt. 12:40; Eph. 4:9). However, the OT is less concerned with theorganic structure of the earth than with what fills the earth:inhabitants (Ps. 33:14; Isa. 24:1), people groups (Gen. 18:18; Deut.28:10), and kingdoms (Deut. 28:25; 2Kings 19:15). The term’erets can be used symbolically to indicate its inhabitants(Gen. 6:11). However, unlike its neighbors, Israel acknowledged nodivine “Mother Earth,” given the cultural associationswith female consorts.

TheTheology of Land

Inbiblical faith, the concept of land combines geography with theology.The modern person values land more as a place to build than for itsproductive capacities. But from the outset, human beings and the“earth” (’erets) functioned in a symbioticrelationship with the Creator (Gen. 1:28). God even gave the landagency to “bring forth living creatures” (Gen. 1:24). The“ground” (’adamah) also provided the raw substanceto make the human being (’adam [Gen. 2:7]). In turn, the humanbeing was charged with developing and protecting the land (Gen. 2:5,15). Showing divine care, the Noahic covenant was “between[God] and the earth” (Gen. 9:13). Thus, land was no mereonlooker; human rebellion had cosmic effects (Gen. 6:7, 17). The landcould be cursed and suffer (Gen. 3:17; cf. 4:11).

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

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

Landpossession had serious ethical and religious ramifications (Deut.26:1–11). Israel was not chosen to receive a special land;rather, land was the medium of Israel’s relationship with God.Land functioned as a spiritual barometer (Ps. 78:56–64; Lam.1:3–5). The heavens and earth stood as covenant witnesses(Deut. 4:26). Blood, in particular, could physically pollute the land(Num. 35:30–34). National sin could culminate in expulsion(Lev. 26:32–39), and eventually the land was lost (Jer.25:1–11). For this reason, Israel’s exiles prompted aprofound theological crisis.

Inheritance

Thenotion of inheritance connected Israel’s religious worship withpractical stewardship. Land was not owned; it was passed down throughpatrimonial succession. God entrusted each family with an inheritancethat was to be safeguarded (Lev. 25:23–28; Mic. 2:1–2).This highlights the serious crime when Naboth’s vineyard wasforcibly stolen (1Kings 21). It was Israel’s filialsonship with Yahweh and Israel’s land tenure that formedYahweh’s solidarity with the nation. The law helped limitIsrael’s attachment to mere real estate: Yahweh was to beIsrael’s preoccupation (see Jer. 3:6–25). When the nationwas finally exiled, the message of the new covenant transcendedgeographical boundaries (Jer. 32:36–44; Ezek. 36–37; cf.Lev. 26:40–45; Deut. 30:1–10). In postexilic Israel,sanctuary was prioritized (Hag. 1:9–14).

Itwas Israel’s redefinition of land through the exile thatprepared the way for the incorporation of the Gentiles (Ezek.47:22–23), an integration already anticipated (Isa. 56:3–7).The prophets saw a time when the nations would share in theinheritance of God previously guarded by Israel (Isa. 60; Zech. 2:11;cf. Gen. 12:3). Viewed as a political territory, land receives nosubstantial theological treatment in the NT; rather, inheritancesurpasses covenant metaphor. Using the language of sonship andinheritance, Paul develops this new Gentile mission in Galatians (cf.Col. 1:13–14). The OT land motif fully flowers in the NTteaching of adoption (cf. 1Pet. 1:3–5). Both curse andcovenant are resolved eschatologically (Rom. 8:19–22).Inheritance is now found in Christ (Eph. 2:11–22; 1Pet.1:4). In the economy of the new covenant, land tenure has matured infellowship (koinōnia). Koinōnia recalibrates the ethicalsignificance of OT land themes, reapplying them practically throughinclusion, lifestyle, economic responsibility, and social equity.

Beyondcosmological realms, heaven and earth are also theological horizonsstill under God’s ownership. What began as the creation mandateto fill and subdue the earth (Gen. 1:28) culminates in the newcreation with Christ (Rom. 8:4–25). Under the power of Satan,the earth “lags behind” heaven. Christ’s missionbrings what is qualitatively of heaven onto the earthly stage, oftenusing signs of the budding rule of God (Matt. 6:10; Mark 2:10–11;John 3:31–36; Eph. 4:9–13; Heb. 12:25). As Israel was tostand out in a hostile world (Deut. 4:5–8), now those ofAbrahamic faith stand out through Christian love (John 13:34–35;Rom. 4:9–16). According to Heb. 4:1–11, Israel’sinitial rest in the land (see Exod. 33:14; Deut. 12:9) culminates inthe believers’ rest in Christ (Heb. 4:3, 5). The formerinheritance of space gives way to the inheritance of Christ’spresence. The OT theme of land is ultimately fulfilled in Jesus’exhortation to “abide in me” (John 15).

Earthquake–InPalestine there have been about seventeen recorded major earthquakesin the past two millennia. One of the major sources of theseearthquakes is believed to originate from the Jordan Rift Valley. Inantiquity earthquakes were viewed as fearful events because themountains, which represented everlasting durability, were disturbed.The confession of faith is pronounced in association with suchphenomena (“We will not fear, though the earth give way”[Ps. 46:2]). An earthquake must have made a great impact in Amos’sday (“two years before the earthquake” [Amos 1:1; cf.Zech. 14:5]).

Anearthquake has many symbolic meanings. First, the power of God andhis divine presence are manifested through it (Job 9:6; Ps. 68:8;Hag. 2:6). It accompanied theophanic revelation (Exod. 19:18; Isa.6:4; 1Kings 19:11–12) when the glory of the Lord appeared(Ezek. 3:12). His divine presence was especially felt whenearthquakes occurred during the time of the crucifixion and theresurrection of Jesus Christ (Matt. 27:54; 28:2). It led thecenturion to confess of Christ, “Surely he was the Son of God!”(Matt. 27:54). God’s salvation power is represented when anearthquake comes at the appropriate moment, such as when it freedPaul and Silas from prison (Acts 16:26).

Second,it is used in the context of God’s judgment (Isa. 13:13; Amos9:1; Nah. 1:5). It becomes the symbol of God’s anger and wrath(Ps. 18:7). God brought earthquakes upon the people to destroy evilin the world and to punish those who had sinned against him (Num.16:31–33; Isa. 29:6; Ezek. 38:19). Earthquake activity possiblyexplains the background to the story of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen.19:24).

Third,earthquakes are said to precede the end of time (Matt. 24:7; Mark13:8; Luke 21:11). In the apocalyptic book of Revelation, earthquakesare regular occurrences (Rev. 6:12; 11:13, 19; 16:18).

Life is a complex, multifaceted concept in the Bible. VariousHebrew and Greek terms convey the idea of life. Life is described inboth a natural and a theological sense.

Lifein the Natural Sense

Inits natural sense, “life” may convey the following:(1)the vital principle of animals and humans, (2)thelength of time that one has life, (3)the complete plot and castof characters of an individual’s lifetime, or (4)themeans for maintaining life.

First,life is the vital principle of animals and humans. This use of theterm is its popular sense. It refers to the quality of having ananimate existence or the state of being animate. Therefore, it isexpressed in terms of ability or power; one who has life has thepower to act. On the other hand, “death” is its antonym;one who is dead no longer acts. In the Bible, life in this senseapplies to both animals and humans; however, the quality of lifediffers because humans are made in the image of God (Gen. 1:26; 5:1;9:6). Life is manifested in the breath of life, so that one who nolonger has the breath of life no longer has life (Gen. 2:7; 6:17; Job12:10; 27:3; Rev. 11:11). At the same time, life is seated in theblood. For this reason, blood should not be consumed but shouldinstead be poured out and buried (Gen. 9:3–5; Lev. 17:10–16;Deut. 12:23–25). Although life may cease because of physicalcauses (whether disease, murder, accident, etc.), God is ultimatelythe Lord of life. He gives life through his breath of life (Gen. 2:7;Ezek. 37:4–14); he sustains life through his spirit (Ps.104:29–30; cf. Gen. 6:3; 1Cor. 15:45); he delivers fromdeath (Gen. 5:24; Ps. 30:3; 1Cor. 15); he gives life and putsto death (Deut. 32:39; 1Sam. 2:6). Life, therefore, is firstand foremost a gift from God.

Ina discussion of life as the vital principle, it is important toaddress the question of the afterlife. The Bible affirms thesignificance of both the material and the immaterial components of ahuman being. The body is not merely a shell in which the true personis housed. Death is not the soul’s escape from the body’sprison, as evidenced by the resurrection of the dead (Ezek. 37:1–14;Dan. 12:2; Luke 14:14; 1Cor. 15). Human beings are not createdto live a disembodied existence ultimately. The fate for those whoexperience eternal life is the resurrection of the body made from anincorruptible source (1Cor. 15, esp. vv. 42–50). Forothers, their fate lies in eternal death (Matt. 25:46; Rev. 20:6–15;21:8).

Second,in both Testaments, “life” may also refer to the durationof animate existence—one’s lifetime. The duration ofone’s life in this sense begins at birth and ends at death(Gen. 23:1; 25:7; 47:9, 28; Luke 16:25; Heb. 2:15). This period oftime is brief (Ps. 90:10; James 4:14). The Bible describes two waysthat one’s lifetime may be extended: first, God givesadditional time to a person’s life (2Kings 20:6; Ps.61:6; Isa. 38:5); second, one gains longer life by living wisely andhonoring God (Prov. 3:2; 4:10; 9:11; 10:27).

Third,sometimes “life” refers to the complete plot and cast ofcharacters of an individual’s lifetime. In other words, “life”may refer to all a person’s activities and relationships(1Sam. 18:18 KJV; Job 10:1; Luke 12:15; James 4:14).

Fourth,“life” rarely may refer to the means of livelihood (Deut.24:6; Prov. 27:27; Matt. 6:25; Luke 12:22–23). These passageshighlight two aspects of life in this sense: (1)people areresponsible to guard life; (2)God gives this life because ofhis great concern, which exceeds his care for the birds and flowers.

Lifeas a Theological Concept

Beyondits natural sense, life is developed as a theological conceptthroughout the Bible.

OldTestament.The first chapters of Genesis set the stage for a rich theologicalunderstanding of life. First, God creates all things and preparesthem for his purposes. He is the creator of life, and life is a giftfrom his hand. The pinnacle of his creative activity is the creationof humankind. God blesses the man (Adam) and the woman (Eve) whom hecreates. God prepares a special place, a garden, for them, so thatthey may be able to live in perfect communion with him, under hisblessing. At the center of the garden lies the tree of life. The treeof life demonstrates that the garden is both the sphere of God’sprovision and the symbol of life itself. At the same time, Godcommands the man not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good andevil, “for when you eat from it you will certainly die”(Gen. 2:17).

Atthis point, life and death take center stage. What follows in thenarrative (Gen. 3) is a presentation of the meaning of life and deathas theological concepts. Adam and Eve disobey the divine commandment.As a result, they die. However, their death is not death in thenatural sense. Instead, when they disobey God’s commandment,there are three results: (1)a curse is pronounced, (2)theyare exiled from the garden away from God, and (3)they areprevented from eating from the tree of life (3:14–24). Death inthis case is not ceasing to breathe and move but is curse and exile;in other words, to die is to be removed from the place of God’spresence and blessing and be placed under a curse. Life, then, is theopposite: to live is to be settled in the place of God’spresence and blessing.

Itis also important to recognize in this narrative that obedience toGod’s commandment leads to life, but disobedience to hiscommandment leads to death. This principle is picked up throughoutthe Bible. Its clearest expression is found in Lev. 18:5: “Keepmy decrees and laws, for the person who obeys them will live bythem.”

Thisnarrative also draws an important connection taken up in other partsof the Bible, especially Proverbs: the connection between life andwisdom. In the garden there are two trees at the center: the tree oflife and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Although thereis some question concerning what is precisely meant by the knowledgeof good and evil, it is likely that wisdom is in view. Two pieces ofevidence support this conclusion: (1)knowledge and wisdom aswell as good and evil are central concerns for the book of Proverbs;(2)the narrative associates the tree with wisdom. When Eveconsiders eating from the tree, she notices that it is like the othertrees in that it has a pleasant appearance and is good for food (Gen.2:9), but it is also distinct from the other trees because it isdesirable for making one wise (3:6). By eating the fruit, she andAdam attempt to gain wisdom contrary to God’s command. As aresult, this type of wisdom leads to death. However, true wisdom hasthe opposite effect. It leads to life, being a tree of life itself(esp. Prov. 3:18; also 3:1–2; 4:10–23; 6:23).

Althoughthese themes—life, blessing, obedience, and wisdom—arefound in various places throughout the Bible, they come together mostexplicitly in Deuteronomy. There devotion and obedience to God areviewed as the means of attaining wisdom and understanding (Deut.4:5–9). Following God leads to living in the land that God hadpromised and enjoying his blessings there (28:1–14); however,forsaking God leads to all kinds of curses and ultimately to utterdefeat and exile from the land (28:15–68). The choice to followGod and obey him or to forsake God and disobey him results in eitherlife or death, good or bad, blessing or curse (30:15–20).

Lifeas a theological concept therefore has the following characteristics:being in the presence of God rather than exile, and experiencing hisblessings rather than his curses. Such life may be attained throughdevotion and obedience to God and through the wisdom that comes fromGod.

NewTestament.This concept of life forms the background for that of the NT as well.The NT often speaks of eternal life, especially in the writings ofJohn. Eternal life is being in fellowship with God the Father andJesus Christ (John 17:3). One may experience eternal life beforenatural death and beyond it into the eternal future (John 3:36; 5:24;6:54; 10:28). At the same time, eternal life may refer more narrowlyonly to the time of perfect fellowship with God that lies beyondnatural life (Matt. 25:46; Mark 10:30; Rom. 2:7). Because lifeconsists of being in fellowship with God and living in his blessings,John can state that the one who believes in Jesus “has eternallife and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life”(John 5:24). In other words, the person who believes in Jesus hasbeen transferred from God’s curse to his blessing, from deathto life. Furthermore, Jesus declares that he is life, and that thosewho believe in him will live and not die; that is, they will never beremoved from his presence and blessing (John 11:25–26).

Scientifically, light may be described as electromagneticradiation, exhibiting qualities of both waves and particles,traveling 186,282 miles per second from a light source, such as thesun or a lightbulb. In contrast, ancient Mediterranean thoughtpresupposes that light, a kind of fire and fundamental constituent ofmatter, emanates from the human eye like a beam; and for some, theintensity of its radiance and luminosity depends upon the moralityand direction of the seer’s heart. Even today, many Europeansare fearful of the “evil eye,” when a person is able tocurse other human beings by merely looking at them. Jesus refers tothe evil eye as emanating from an evil heart (Mark 7:22 [NIV:“envy”]; see also Gal. 3:1). Contemporary experiences ofthis seemingly counterintuitive reversal of empirical reality are thecommon perception of being watched from behind (turning and seeingthat, in fact, this was the case), the luminous screen of theimagination, dreams after closing one’s eyes, and expressionssuch as Shakespeare’s “death-darting eye.”

Jesusappropriates this popular assumption for the sake of his point: “Theeye is the lamp of the body. If your eyes are healthy, your wholebody will be full of light” (Matt. 6:22). Another way oftranslating the verse is “If the eye is focused, your wholebody will be enlightened.” In the larger context, Jesus isexhorting disciples to turn their eyes from Mammon (wealth as anidol) to God’s throne, where their real treasure is (Matt.6:19–24). He claims that only those with pure hearts will seeGod (Matt. 5:8). Paul speaks of the “eyes of your heart”(Eph. 1:18), which are opened by the Holy Spirit—a phenomenonthat he experienced on the way to Damascus, which, ironically, led tothe temporary blindness of his eyes to see Christ, who was at theright hand of the Father in heaven (Acts 9:1–19; cf. 2Cor.3:7–18). The Bible does not require that light be limited toeither the scientifically objective or the experientially subjectiveperspective; it appropriates the phenomenon to elucidate a deeperreality to creation and God, the possibility of seeing the lightbeyond light.

Godbegins his creation with light, which precedes the creation of sun,moon, and stars and throughout Scripture is an unqualified good (Gen.1:3–5, 15–18; Exod. 10:23; 13:21). The comfort of lightis more difficult to appreciate in a world that runs on electricity.In the ancient world, people rarely traveled at night and usuallywent to bed soon after sunset. The only light in the home was a smalloil lamp set on a stand, which burned expensive olive oil. Light is abiblical synonym for life (Job 3:20; John 8:12). Seeing the lightmeans living (Ps. 49:19; see also Job 33:30). Conversely, darkness isoften a symbol of adversity, disaster, and death (Job 30:26; Isa.8:22; Jer. 23:12; Lam. 3:2). Death is likened to the extinguishing ofa flame (Prov. 13:9; Sir. 22:11). God initially overcame the chaoticdarkness when he created light, and ultimately God’s own glorywill replace light in the new heavens and earth (Rev. 21:23–25).It is therefore not surprising that God is often associated withlight (James 1:13–18).

John,who offers perhaps the most profound meditations on light, claimsthat God is light (1John 1:5). The predicate appropriates theintrinsic beauty of light, a quality that draws people’s heartsback to the author of beauty. For the apostle, light represents truthand signifies God’s will in opposition to the deception of theworld (John 1:9; 12:46). Light stands for purity and signifies God’sholiness as opposed to the unrighteousness of the world (John3:19–21). Light is where God is, and it radiates from the placeof fellowship between God and his creation (John 1:7). See also Lightof the World.

The word “likeness” is used in various contexts.In 2Kings 16:10, King Ahaz wanted to have the exact likenessand pattern of the altar from Damascus, indicating a physicalreplica. In 2Chron. 4:3, “likeness of oxen” (NKJV;NIV: “figures of bulls”) is a physical reference. InEzekiel’s visions the word “likeness” refers tovisual similarities (Ezek. 1). Isaiah 13:4 speaks of “a noiseon the mountains, like that of a great multitude,” referring toan auditory similarity.

Thefoundational concept, however, is found in Gen. 1:26: “Let usmake mankind in our image, in our likeness.” This announces thehigh status of humans as the pinnacle of God’s creation (alsoGen. 5:1–2). Genesis 5:3 says that Adam fathered Seth “inhis own likeness, in his own image,” employing both words foundin 1:26. The precise meaning of this has been much debated. Threethings are to be noted. First, the expression “let us,”versus “let there be,” implies a personal aspect. Itrefers to the human capacity to relate to God in worship andobedience of his word (2Cor. 4:4; Eph. 4:24). Second, the word“likeness” describes human beings as not simplyrepresentative of God but representational. Humankind is the visible,corporeal representative of the invisible, bodiless God. Third, beingin God’s likeness/image sets human beings apart from everythingelse that God has made. Humankind’s supremacy and uniquenessare emphasized.

Origins,Composition, and Constitution

Origins.The Bible is not unique in offering an account of human origins.Interesting accounts are found in Sumerian (Enki and Ninmah, Hymn toE-engurra), Akkadian (Atrahasis Epic, Enuma Elish), and Egyptiantexts (Pyramid Texts, Instruction of Merikare). These texts provide ahelpful window into the biblical world and show the common concern toexplain the origin and role of humanity in the world.

Onedistinct feature of ancient Near Eastern texts is that they generallyspeak of human origins in a collective sense. Specialists refer tothis phenomenon as polygenesis. Such a collective creation betterserves the purpose of the gods, who have made the human race as alabor force. In the Bible, however, the book of Genesis describes anoriginal human pair who are the progenitors of the human race. Thisphenomenon is referred to as monogenesis. Humanity is not merelycreated to serve and do the work of the gods. Instead, it is aspecial creation of God, intended to bear his image.

Composition.The composition of humanity is described in Gen. 2:7: “The LordGod formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into hisnostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.”Humanity is not distinct from animals in having the breath of life(1:30). Indeed, the description of the composition of humanity isalso quite, well, human. Genesis describes humans as made from thedust. Dust is not fertile, nor is it pliable. It refers to the earthand that which is dead. The wordplay between “man”(’adam) and the “ground” (’adamah) appears tobe a major focus of the text (2:7) and suggests that the majorconnection being established concerns the first humans as archetypes.

Constitution.Certain passages of Scripture have led interpreters to posit atrichotomous nature of humanity (i.e., mind, body, soul; cf. 2Cor.4:16; 5:1–9; 1Thess. 5:23). Likewise, even though theGreek language can bifurcate the soul (psychē) and the body(sōma), a kind of dualism should not be inferred from this (cf.Matt. 6:25; 27:50; Luke 10:27; 2Cor. 4:11). Either approach isforeign to the unified biblical mind-set. The only dualism in theanthropological perspective of the NT is in the nature of humanity inrelation to Christ’s new creative work.

Formand Function

Form:male and female.Just as God created man (’ish), he also created woman (’ishah)(Gen. 1:26–27). Although woman is initially created as a“suitable helper” (2:18), it should be noted that theunderlying Hebrew term (’ezer) is used almost exclusively inreference to God elsewhere. This suggests that “suitablehelper” does not indicate a difference of essence, value, orstatus.

TheBible describes woman as coming from the “side” of man,probably communicating something about their equality (Gen. 2:21–22).Thus, it should be understood that just as all humanity shares aconnection to the ground, so also a man shares an intimate connectionwith a woman. Although the phrase “one flesh” often istaken as a euphemism, it probably is a remarkably descriptivestatement of the archetypal nature of Adam and Eve (cf. 2:24).

Function:image of God.The distinction between humanity and the other animals created by Godis that humans are created in God’s image. The concept of theimage of God, however, is not unique to the biblical text (Gen.1:26–27; cf. Instruction of Merikare). Throughout the ancientNear East, kings were thought to actually be the image of a god. Inthe Christian understanding, only Christ is the image of God (2Cor.4:4), whereas humanity is created in the image of God. Although thismay imply a kingly role with regard to humanity’s function overthe rest of creation, the main parallel should be seen in how imagesare meant to represent a god’s presence.

Humanityin Pauline Thought

Paul’sconception of humanity is thoroughly eschatological insomuch as hisvision of Christ as the image of God is identified with Christ as“risen Lord.” Christ as the image of God is the finaldestiny of the humanity that is “in Christ” (1Cor.15:23–28; 44–49; Eph. 1:9–10). Because of theeffects of sin, creation has been subjected to futility (Rom.8:19–22), and humanity to death (Rom. 5:12–14; 1Cor.15:21–22). Yet Paul’s outburst of “new creation”(Gal. 6:15; cf. 2Cor. 5:17) indicates his understanding of thecosmological, and therefore anthropological, effects of being unitedwith Christ. Indeed, if God is making the “former things”into “new things” (2Cor. 5:17; cf. Isa. 65:17–19),this new creative act certainly impacts humanity. That reality isalready partially realized in the elimination of distinctions in thispresent “evil age” (Gal. 1:4), for in Christ “thereis neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there maleand female, for you are all one” (Gal. 3:28; cf. 1Cor.12:12–13; Gen. 17). Until the end, the Christian lives in thetension of already beginning to experience the act of new creationand not yet completely disinheriting the effects of sin (Rom.8:18–30; 2Cor. 12:5–10).

The earth’s natural satellite. Its diameter is slightlymore than one-quarter that of the earth. As a result of orbiting theearth, its appearance varies from a full moon (totally bright) to anew moon (totally dark) every 29.5 days. This cycle has influencedcalendars throughout human history.

Theancient Jewish calendar was tied to the phases of the moon, with themonths beginning with each new moon. The new moon was celebrated withmultiple offerings (Num. 28:11–15). Festival days werecalculated from the new moon.

Themoon figures prominently in prophecy. At the day of the Lord, the sunand the moon will be darkened (e.g., Joel 2:10). While most ancientNear Eastern cultures worshiped the moon, Israel was forbidden suchworship (Deut. 4:19).

Theaccount of the moon’s creation recorded in Gen. 1:16 does notmention the moon by name. This is in keeping with the general tone ofthe creation story, wherein God, almost incidentally, creates thethings that were worshiped by contemporary cultures.

Leisure time offers a respite from work, those essentialduties of life such as paid employment and maintaining a household,to pursue other activities. Such nonobligatory pursuits range fromentertainment to fine art, from peaceful relaxation to physicalactivity.

Fromthe beginning, humankind was intended to work (Gen. 1:28; 2:15), butGod also set apart one day per week for his creatures to share in hisdivine rest (Gen. 2:2–3; Exod. 20:8–11). This weekly restshould bring to mind God’s creation and the final rest in theage to come (Heb. 4:9–11). Although leisure time and Sabbathobservance are not identical, both are opportunities to give thanks,worship, and put hope in God. They also refresh and enrich earthlylife.

Indeed,every good thing is a gift from the Father (James 1:17), includingtime off from daily duties. How one uses leisure time is thus amatter of stewardship, much like one’s use of money and workingtime (cf. Matt. 25:14–30). Thus, although the Bible does notdiscuss playing sports or writing poetry, it does proclaim Christ asLord over all spheres of life. Therefore “whether you eat ordrink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God”(1Cor. 10:31).

The KJV uses “dragon” twenty-one times in the OTto translate the Hebrew word tannin, tannim. In Deut. 32:33 the termis used in parallel with peten (“adder” or “cobra”),indicating that it probably refers to a snake of some type. The termis rendered inconsistently by the KJV, so that elsewhere thetranslation is “whale” (Gen. 1:21; Job 7:12; Ezek.32:2–3) or “serpent” (Exod. 7:9–10, 12).There is also some confusion in the KJV of tannim with the plural ofthe noun tan, which means “jackal” (Job 30:29; Ps. 44:19;Isa. 13:22; 34:13; 35:7; 43:20; Jer. 9:11; 10:22; 14:6; 49:3; 51:37;Mic. 1:8; see also Lam. 4:3; Mal. 1:3).

Inmany passages the LXX uses the term drakōn, which again refersto a serpent. This term is used in the NT only in Revelation, where,as in the OT, the writer probably envisioned not the fire-breathingwinged monster familiar to most modern readers but rather somethingmore directly resembling a serpent (note Rev. 12:9, where the “greatdragon” is also described as the “ancient serpent”and identified as “the devil, or Satan”). Revelation 12:3elaborates by describing it as possessing “seven heads and tenhorns.” Hence, the dragon of Revelation is linked directly tothe serpent in the garden of Eden (Gen. 3), which is ultimatelysubject to defeat and eternal punishment (Rev. 20:7–10).

The present abode of God and the final dwelling place of the righteous. The ancient Jews distinguished three different heavens. The first heaven was the atmospheric heavens of the clouds and where the birds fly (Gen. 1:20). The second heaven was the celestial heavens of the sun, the moon, and the stars. The third heaven was the present home of God and the angels. Paul builds on this understanding of a third heaven in 2Cor. 12:2–4, where he describes himself as a man who “was caught up to the third heaven” or “paradise,” where he “heard inexpressible things.” This idea of multiple heavens also shows itself in how the Jews normally spoke of “heavens” in the plural (Gen. 1:1), while most other ancient cultures spoke of “heaven” in the singular.

The Abode of God

One of the challenges in understanding “heaven” as the present dwelling place of God involves God’s omnipresence. In one sense, God is present everywhere. David asks in Ps. 139:7, “Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence?” He answers that regardless of whether he goes as high up as anyone can go (“up to the heavens”), as low down as anyone can go (“in the depths), as far east as anyone can go (“the wings of the dawn”), or as far west as anyone can go (“the far side of the sea”), God is still there (Ps. 139:8–9).

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

At times, “heaven” becomes virtually a synonym for God himself. In the parable of the prodigal son in Luke 15, the son confesses to his father, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you” (v.21). This son’s sin against “heaven” has nothing to do with environmental issues such as air pollution, and everything to do with his relationship with God. Note also Matthew’s expression “the kingdom of heaven” versus “the kingdom of God” used elsewhere.

The Final Dwelling Place for Believers

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

However, this picture of heaven is more complicated. It is true that heaven is sometimes used in Scripture to refer to the present abode of all departed believers who have left this present life and entered the intermediate state between death and the bodily resurrection (2Cor. 5:4). It is this hope in a bodily resurrection that sets Christianity apart from other religions. Ultimately, the Christian hope is not that people will receive new physical bodies and float around some ethereal “heaven” like astronauts in outer space for all eternity. Instead, God has created human beings with physical bodies to inhabit a physical world, and our future hope is one of new resurrection bodies inhabiting new heavens and a new earth (Isa. 65:17; 66:22; 2Pet. 3:13). Just as there will be a certain continuity between the bodies of believers in this present life and their new resurrection bodies (we will know one another), there will also be a certain continuity between this present earth and the new earth to come. Yet, at the same time, everything will also be changed and made new and perfect, as God has designed it to be (Rom. 8:18–21).

The clearest description of this new reality is found in Rev. 21–22, where John describes how he “saw ‘a new heaven and a new earth,’ for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away” (21:1). Here is “the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband” (21:2), when “God himself will be with them and be their God. ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away” (21:3–4). Even better than all the descriptions of such things as streets of “gold, as pure as transparent glass” (21:21) is that God himself will come and dwell in the midst of his people. As Paul has phrased it, “Now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face” (1Cor. 13:12). The day will come when we will see God as he is, in all his glory (1John3:2).

Two other ideas complete our picture of life in these new heavens and new earth. Heaven will be a place of continued activity and service. Notice Jesus’ blessing in Matt. 25:21: “Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things.” The other principle is that there will be different degrees of reward. Although our ultimate reward is simply being with God himself, Paul also reminds us that if what believers do with their lives “survives, the builder will receive a reward,” and if what they do “is burned up, the builder will suffer loss” (1Cor. 3:14–15 NRSV). Our choices make a difference for time and eternity (cf. Rev. 14:13). See also Heavens, New.

OldTestament and Jewish Literature

Inthe OT, the phrase “son of man” usually refers tohumanity in general or to a specific individual. The general use of“son of man” occurs in poetic texts in which the phrasefunctions as a synonym for “man” or “human being”(Num. 23:19; Isa. 51:12; Pss. 144:3; 146:3). In Ps. 8:4 (ESV) thepsalmist asks, “What is man that you are mindful of him, andthe son of man that you care for him?” Echoing the creation ofman in Gen. 1, “man” and “son of man” in thispsalm have a royal status: being “crowned with glory and honor”and receiving dominion over all of God’s creation (Ps. 8:5–6).Later, in Ps. 80:17, “son of man” refers to the nation ofIsrael. The psalmist supplicates that God would make strong forhimself the “son of man” over Israel’s enemies(80:12–16). In Ezekiel, God addresses the prophet himself as“son of man,” possibly indicating his human statuscompared with God or, alternatively, highlighting his unique statusas God’s prophet in contrast with the rest of humanity.

Oneof the most crucial OT “son of man” texts is Dan. 7because of its influence on the “Son of Man” in theGospel tradition. Scholars debate the date of the composition of thischapter. While some argue for the sixth century BC, others prefer asecond-century BC date during the oppressive reign of AntiochusIVEpiphanes. The first half of the chapter records Daniel’svision (7:1–14), while the second half contains itsinterpretation (7:15–27). In the vision Daniel sees “onelike a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven” (7:13).This exalted figure contrasts with the first three beasts, which are“like a lion” (7:4), “like a bear” (7:5), and“like a leopard” (7:6). The fourth beast is so gruesomethat it defies comparison with any species of the animal kingdom(7:7). Many agree that the beasts likely refer to ancient worldempires; however, the referent of “one like a son of man”has given rise to much debate. The figure may refer to earthlyIsrael, since at this figure’s vindication he is endowed withauthority and glory. This is precisely what “the holy people ofthe Most High” receive in v.27. In this way, the “onelike a son of man” is a symbol for the persecuted, earthlysaints. Alternatively, the exalted figure could be a heavenly beingsuch as the archangel Gabriel (Dan. 9:21) or Michael (Dan. 10:13;12:1). Here “one like a son of man” is the heavenlycounterpart and leader of suffering Israel and fights a cosmic battleon its behalf.

Insubsequent Jewish literature, the “one like a son of man”from Dan. 7 becomes quite active, appearing to be a development ofthe static image who is “given authority, glory and sovereignpower” (Dan. 7:14). In 1En. 37–71, a text thatdates from the last half of the first century BC to the first half ofthe first century AD, the “Son of Man” is seated upon histhrone and will judge “the kings and the mighty” who havepersecuted faithful Israel (46:4–8; 62:5). At that point, thefaithful ones (i.e., the holy, righteous, and chosen) will be formedinto a new congregation. In another Jewish text that dates from theend of the first century AD, there is a strong echo of the Danielicson of man. In 4Ezra 13, “something like the figure of aman came up out of the heart of the sea” (v.3a). Unlikein 1Enoch, this figure is a warrior who destroys with firethose who attempt to wage war on him. These texts indicate that atleast two traditions developed and reinterpreted the “one likea son of man” from Dan. 7. He becomes an individual whoexecutes judgment in one tradition, and one who executes destructionin another.

NewTestament

Inthe NT the term “Son of Man” occurs mostly in the Gospelsand, with the exception of John 12:34 (where the crowd quotes Jesus),is uttered exclusively by Jesus himself. The phrase, or a variationof it, also occurs in Acts 7:56; Heb. 2:6; Rev. 1:13; 14:14. Unlikein Daniel or 1Enoch, the epithet occurs in the Gospels with thedefinite article, likely indicating that the Son of Man was a knownfigure. Because of this and because the Son of Man in 1Enochand 4Ezra have similar functions, many scholars in themid-twentieth century speculated that in first-century Judaism manyJews believed that the Son of Man would return at the end as saviorand judge. Others suggested that the significance of the phrase isfound in its Aramaic background, bar ’enash’a, which inother texts means “I,” “man,” “a man,”or “someone.” Despite these alternatives, the OT providesthe most helpful background for understanding the Son of Man in theGospels.

TheSon of Man sayings in the Gospels fall within three categories:earthly, suffering-resurrection, and future-vindication sayings.Starting with the earthly sayings, in Mark 2:10, for example, the Sonof Man has “authority on earth to forgive sins,” and in2:28 he exercises dominion over the Sabbath. Although in Daniel theSon of Man does not receive such authority until his appearance inYahweh’s presence at his vindication, the Son of Man in theGospels exercises such authority during his earthly ministry. Jesusalso predicts that the Son of Man will suffer, die, and be raisedagain. In Mark, these suffering-resurrection predictions occur threetimes (8:31; 9:31; 10:33–34). Echoing Dan. 7, this plight ofJesus recalls the suffering of the holy ones caused by the littlehorn (v.21). If the “one like a son of man”represents the holy ones in their vindication, then it is reasonablethat he does so in their suffering as well; however, the text ofDaniel is silent on this point. Finally, the clearest reference toDan. 7 occurs in the future-vindication sayings. In Mark 13:26; 14:62the Son of Man comes with/on the clouds, which points to hisvindication over the Sanhedrin, the dominant adversaries of Jesus inMark. Matthew appears to develop even more than Mark the judicialresponsibilities of the Son of Man (Matt. 13:41–43; 25:31–33).Meanwhile, in Luke the church must stay alert and be prepared for thereturn of the Son of Man (Luke 12:39–40; 17:22–37;21:34–36).

InActs, the vision that Stephen witnesses confirms that the Son of Manhas indeed been exalted to the right hand of God (Acts 7:56). In theGospel of John, the epithet is used as the object of the verbs “tolift up” and “to glorify,” so that the death ofJesus is a form of exaltation (John 8:28; 12:23; 13:31), whichreflects his current exalted status in early Christian thinking.Finally, the Son of Man in Revelation is in the heavenly templefunctioning as both judge and caretaker of the seven churches (Rev.1:12–20) and reaps the saints while “seated on the cloud”(14:14–16).

The Hebrew expression “sons of God” (often translated as “children of God” in contemporary usage) is an important biblical concept and is used to describe a range of referents.

In the OT, the term is used to refer to angels (e.g., Job 1:6). They are subordinate divine beings, carrying out God’s mission on earth (Job 2:1). Compared to them, Yahweh’s incomparability is asserted in divine council (Ps. 89:6; cf. Deut. 32:8 NIV mg.). They are called upon to praise Yahweh for his creation (Ps. 29:1). They shout for joy at God’s creation (Job 38:7). In Gen. 6:2 the term refers to beings that are apparently of divine origin and to be contrasted with the “daughters of men” in that same passage. The sin mentioned in this passage refers to the cohabitation of divine beings and humans. This union is one of the impetuses for the flood, an indication of how bad things had gotten. The “order” of creation (Gen. 1), where humans are meant to be fruitful with their own kind, is here transgressed. Hence, God introduces further disorder by bringing back the waters of chaos to flood the earth.

Israel as a covenant nation is called “my son, my firstborn” by Yahweh (Exod. 4:22; Jer. 31:9; Hos. 11:1). As son, Israel is expected to give proper reverence and honor for his father (Mal. 1:6). Although only one of many metaphors for Israel in the OT, Israel’s status as son is important for understanding the movement of the book of Exodus. Israel is to be delivered from Egyptian rule because Israel is God’s son. If Pharaoh continues to mistreat Israel, God will call judgment upon Egypt’s firstborn, as he did in the plague of death and the Red Sea incident.

Sonship is not exclusive to Israel. The Gentiles are also included in the future of God’s program (Isa. 19:25; Zech. 14:16). Likewise, in the NT all humans are God’s children (Eph. 4:6). More often, though, the term refers to those who are in Christ. The bond is spiritual, and often the concept of adoption is used (John 1:12; Rom. 9:6; Gal. 3:26; 4:5–7; 1 John 5:1). See also Sons of God

In the world of the Bible, a person was viewed as a unity ofbeing with the pervading breath and thus imprint of the loving andholy God. The divine-human relationship consequently is portrayed inthe Bible as predominantly spiritual in nature. God is spirit, andhumankind may communicate with him in the spiritual realm. Theancients believed in an invisible world of spirits that held most, ifnot all, reasons for natural events and human actions in the visibleworld.

OldTestament

TheOT writers used the common Hebrew word ruakh(“wind” or “breath”) to describe force andeven life from the God of the universe. In its most revealing firstinstance, God’s ruakh hovered above the waters of the uncreatedworld (Gen. 1:2). In the next chapter of Genesis a companion word,neshamah (“breath”) is used as God breathed into Adam’snostrils “the breath of life” (2:7). God thus breathedhis own image into the first human being. Humankind’s moralobligations in the remainder of the Bible rest on this breathing actof God.

TheOT authors often employ ruakh simply to denote air in motion orbreath from a person’s mouth. However, special instances of theuse of ruakh include references to the very life of a person (Gen.7:22; Ps. 104:29), an attitude or emotion (Gen. 41:8; Num. 14:24; Ps.77:3), the negative traits of pride or temper (Ps. 76:12), agenerally good disposition (Prov. 11:13; 18:14), the seat ofconversion (Ezek. 18:31; 36:26), and determination given by God(2Chron. 36:22; Hag. 1:14).

Onoccasion in the OT, spirits are labeled “evil” (Judg.9:23 ESV, NRSV, NASB). In the case of an evil spirit tormenting KingSaul, the spirit was identified as “from the Lord”(1Sam. 16:14–15, 23). According to the perspective of theancients, once a person was possessed by a divine spirit, departureof such a spirit meant possession by a different spirit (1Sam.16:14). Such a perspective was common in the ancient Near Eastern andMediterranean worlds and stemmed from the religious fervor of Semiticnomads.

NewTestament

TheNT authors used the Greek term pneumato convey the concept of spirit. In the world of the NT, the humanspirit was understood as the divine part of human reality as distinctfrom the material realm. The spirit appears conscious and capable ofrejoicing (Luke 1:47). Jesus was described by Luke as growing andbecoming “strong in spirit” (1:80). In “spirit”Jesus “knew” what certain teachers of the law werethinking in their hearts (Mark 2:8). Likewise, Jesus “wasdeeply moved in spirit and troubled” at the sickness of a lovedone (John 11:33). At the end of his life, Jesus gave up his spirit(John 19:30).

Accordingto Jesus, the spirit is the place of God’s new covenant work ofconversion and worship (John 3:5; 4:24). He declared the humanspirit’s dependence on God and ascribed great virtue to thosepeople who were “poor in spirit” (Matt. 5:3).

Humanbeings who were possessed by an evil spirit were devalued inMediterranean society. In various places in the Synoptic Gospels andthe book of Acts, either Jesus or the disciples were involved inexorcisms of such spirits (Matt. 8:28–33; Mark 1:21–28;7:24–30; 9:14–29; 5:1–20; 9:17–29; Luke8:26–33; 9:37–42; Acts 5:16).

Theapostle Paul pointed to the spirit as the seat of conversion (Rom.7:6; 1Cor. 5:5). He described believers as facing a strugglebetween flesh and spirit in regard to living a sanctified life (Rom.8:2–17; Gal. 5:16–17). A contradiction seems apparent inPauline thinking as he appears to embrace Greek dualisticunderstanding of body (flesh) and spirit while likewise commandingthat “spirit, soul and body be kept blameless” (1Thess.5:23). However, the Christian struggle between flesh and Spirit (theHoly Spirit) centers around the believer’s body being deadbecause of sin but the spirit being alive because of the crucifiedand resurrected Christ (Rom. 8:10). Believers therefore areencouraged to lead a holistic life, lived in the Spirit.

HolySpirit

God’sSpirit is described in the opening chapters of Genesis as partakingin creation. His Spirit likewise is seen throughout the OT as anagent in establishing God’s people as a nation and a people ofhis own. Leaders of Israel were chosen and possessed by the Spirit toassist in leading the people into God’s will (Deut. 34:9; Judg.6:34; 15:14; 1Sam. 11:6; 16:23). Typically, the moment theSpirit of God descended on a leader, miraculous fortitude, wisdom,and power resulted. The Spirit also provided whatever was needed forGod’s prophets—courage, inspiration, and miracles (Num.11:25; 1Sam. 10:10; Isa. 11:2; Ezek. 2:2; Dan. 4:8; Joel 2:28).The office of prophet included prophesying both in the king’scourt and among the people of the land. As the Spirit came on aprophet of God, the prophet would correct the king’s andothers’ behavior and at times foretell the future or theoutcome of possible decisions.

Inthe Synoptic Gospels, the Holy Spirit functions in much the same wayas in the OT. One such function appears in Luke’s birthnarrative when the angel answers Mary’s question as to how shemight conceive while a virgin (Luke 1:34): “The Holy Spiritwill come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you”(1:35). The Greek verb translated “will overshadow you”is used in the LXX to describe God’s protective nature (Pss.91:4; 140:7). Likewise, the coming of God’s Spirit presentedempowerment (Acts 1:8). Thus, Mary received both divine empowermentand protection. As the birth narrative continues, Luke records howother characters in the story, Elizabeth and Zechariah, were filledwith the Spirit when Mary came to visit while pregnant with Jesus andwhen John the Baptist, the forerunner of the Messiah, was born (1:41,67). The evangelists record the Spirit descending on Jesus at thetime of his baptism (Matt. 3:16; Mark 1:10; Luke 3:22; John 1:32–34)and describe him as full ofthe Spirit when he was led by theSpirit into the desert (Luke 4:1). Finally, in John’s Gospelthe Spirit is the promised comforter whom Jesus will give to hisfollowers. He will testify about Christ (John 15:26).

Inthe new covenant the Spirit-possession of the OT gave way tobelievers’ reception of the Spirit at conversion. In Acts theHoly Spirit is presented as instrumental in carrying out the missionof the church, providing power and signs as well as moving andmotivating missionaries. The apostle Paul attributes to the HolySpirit the function of imbuing believers and the church with anassortment of virtues (Gal. 5:22), gifts (Rom. 12:7–8; 1Cor.12:1–11), and ministers (Eph. 4:7–13). He uses the ideaof life in the Spirit as a point of contrast with life in the flesh.In John’s letters the Spirit is described as providingdiscernment of truth (1John 4:6). See also Holy Spirit.

The sun was worshiped as a god or goddess in all the nationsaround Israel in OT times, and the polemic against sun worship inDeut. 4:19; 17:3; Jer. 8:2; Job 31:26–28 suggests that sunworship also made inroads into Israel. By way of contrast, the OTattests to the sun’s created status (Gen. 1:16) and counts itas subject to God’s control (e.g., Josh. 10:12–13).

Inthe OT, the sun often is associated with and symbolic of life (e.g.,Eccles. 7:11; cf. Ps. 58:8) or justice (Ps. 19:6; Job 38:13; Mal.4:2; cf. 2Sam. 23:3–4). The darkening of the sun ispresented as a sign of judgment heralding the day of the Lord (Isa.13:10; Ezek. 32:7; Joel 2:10, 31; 3:15; Amos 8:9; Matt. 24:29; Mark13:24; Rev. 6:12; 9:2), which many associate with the darkness thatfell during the crucifixion (Matt. 27:45; Mark 15:33; Luke 23:44).

“The deep” (Heb. tehom; Gk. abyssos) refers tothe deep sea or the depths of the sea, in particular to the primevalsea that was understood to exist prior to God’s creative work,which brought order to the chaotic initial state of the world (Gen.1:2), and that re-covered the earth as creation was reversed in theflood (Gen. 7:11; 8:2). The Hebrew term is etymologically related tothe primeval Babylonian goddess who, according to the creation mythin the Mesopotamian text known as the Enuma Elish, was slain by thegod Marduk and from whose carcass the universe was formed. In spiteof this, there is no indication that the term as used in the Biblewas in any way associated with the Babylonian deity, particularlygiven that the root itself was also used at Ugarit and Ebla to mean“the deep.”

Althoughthe OT does not import the mythological and religious ideasassociated with the deep from Mesopotamia, the deep neverthelessoften represents a somewhat ominous place, a fearful place of chaos(e.g., Ps. 148:7; Jon. 2:5), sometimes symbolically representing thedepths of despair (Ps. 71:20). Yet the OT affirms God’scomplete control and sovereignty over the deep (Pss. 33:7; 77:16;135:6; Isa. 51:10). Elsewhere, however, the term can simply refer tothe source of springs and appears to reflect an abundant supply ofwater (Deut. 8:7; Ps. 78:15).

Inthe NT, the deep (or the abyss) is presented as a place of the dead(Rom. 10:7) or a prison for demons (Luke 8:31; Rev. 9:1–11)from which opposition to God arises. Revelation also continues theview that the deep sea is a place of darkness and opposition to Godwith the pronouncement that in the new heaven and new earth there isno longer any sea (Rev. 21:1).

Water is mentioned extensively in the Bible due to itsprevalence in creation and its association with life and purity. Thecosmic waters of Gen. 1 are held back by the sky (Gen. 1:6–7;cf. Pss. 104:6, 13; 148:4). God is enthroned on these waters in hiscosmic 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).

Wateris also an agent of life and fertility and is therefore associatedwith the presence of God. Both God himself and his temple aredescribed as the source of life-giving water (Jer. 2:13; 17:13; Joel3:18; cf. Isa. 12:2–3). Ezekiel envisions this water flowingfrom beneath the temple and streaming down into the Dead Sea, whereit brings life and fecundity (Ezek. 47:1–12; cf. Zech. 14:8).The book of Revelation, employing the same image, describes “theriver of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from thethrone of God and of the Lamb” (22:1). This imagery is alsoillustrated in archaeological remains associated with temples.Cisterns are attested beneath the Dome of the Rock (presumably thelocation of the Jerusalem temple) and beneath the Judahite temple atArad. Other temples, such as the Israelite high place at Tel Dan, arelocated close to freshwater springs. The Gihon Spring in the City ofDavid may also be associated with the Jerusalem temple (Ps. 46:4; cf.Gen. 2:13).

ThisOT imagery forms the background for Jesus’ teaching regardingeternal life in the writings of the apostle John. Jesus claims to bethe source of living water, and he offers it freely to everyone whothirsts (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 toeternal life” (John 4:14), is the work of the Holy Spirit inthe believer (John 7:38–39).

Wateris also described in the Bible as an agent of cleansing. It isextensively employed in purification rituals in the OT. In the NT,the ritual of water baptism signifies the purity and new life of thebeliever (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). Mostimportant, Jesus commands “the winds and the water, and theyobey him” (Luke 8:25; cf. Ps. 29:3).

Scripture describes wind as a powerful force that is underGod’s command. The Hebrew word ruakhsometimes is translated as “wind” but other times canmean “breath,” as well as “spirit” (Gen.1:2). The Greek word for “spirit,” pneuma,hints of a similar range of meaning, although another word is mostoften used in the NT to denote wind.

OldTestament. Throughoutthe OT wind is used by God to fulfill his purposes. Psalm 148:8declares that winds do God’s bidding. Yahweh keeps the wind instorehouses until they are needed (Ps. 135:7; Jer. 10:13). God useswind to protect and provide for his people. For instance, God sends awind over the earth to cause the floodwaters surrounding the ark torecede (Gen. 8:1), a strong east wind to drive back the sea duringthe exodus from Egypt (Exod. 14:21), and a wind that drives quail infrom the sea to serve as food for the Israelites in the wilderness(Num. 11:31).

Windcan also be an agent of God’s destruction. God sends a plagueupon Egypt by making an east wind blow locusts all across the land;afterward, God uses a west wind to blow the locusts into the sea(Exod. 10:13–19). In the book of Job a mighty wind from thedesert causes the house of Job’s eldest son to collapse,killing Job’s seven sons and three daughters (Job 1:19). In thebook of Jonah a great wind sent by God threatens to destroy Jonah’sship, and a scorching east wind later causes Jonah to grow faint anddesire death (Jon. 1:4; 4:8). The prophetic books use the subject ofwind in communicating God’s judgment (e.g., Isa. 28:2; 64:6;Ezek. 5:2; 13:11).

Whilea single wind is able to blow in several directions (Eccles. 1:6),many passages specify four winds from the four quarters of theheavens. The north wind brings rain (Prov. 25:23), while the southwind brings heat (Job 37:17), both of which are useful for growing agarden (Song 4:16). Only one verse refers to the west windspecifically (Exod. 10:19), but numerous verses refer to the eastwind as an agent of destruction, often appearing along with militaryterms. When let loose by God (Ps. 78:26), the east wind may shatterships (Ps. 48:7), and those in its path will scatter (Jer. 18:17) orshrivel (Ezek. 19:12). In Hos. 12:1 God accuses Israel of pursuingthe east wind along with multiplying lies and violence. Together, thefour winds can be sent to bring destruction (Jer. 49:36) or to bringlife (Ezek. 37:9). They also appear in the visions of Daniel (Dan.7:2; 8:8; 11:4; cf. Rev. 7:1).

Godrides on the wings of the wind on cherubim (Ps. 18:10; 2Sam.22:11), with the clouds as his chariot (Ps. 104:3). In Ps. 104:4 thewinds are called God’s “messengers.” This imageryis strikingly similar to ancient descriptions of the Canaanite godBaal, although Scripture adds that it is Yahweh who created the wind(Job 28:25; Amos 4:13). Yahweh’s power is not contingent uponwind, as Elijah learns when he experiences the presence of Yahweh inthe whisper and not the wind (or the earthquake) after his successfulcontest against the prophets of Baal (1Kings 19:11–12).

Thewisdom literature focuses upon other characteristics of wind besidesits power. The transient nature of wind is significant, as wind isthe inheritance of those who bring trouble upon their family (Prov.11:29). Ecclesiastes continually refers to all things done under thesun as “a chasing after the wind” (e.g., 1:14, 17). Emptytalk is spoken of as wind (Job 8:2). The function of wind to blowaway chaff is also used to declare the fate of the wicked (e.g., Ps.1:4; cf. Job 21:18). The unpredictability of wind serves as ametaphor for the mystery of God’s actions (Eccles. 11:5).

NewTestament.In the NT, the Gospels reveal the divine nature of Jesus byemphasizing his ability to command the wind (Matt. 8:26–27).Jesus declares that the Son of Man will gather his elect from thefour winds (Matt. 24:31; Mark 13:27). Wind is a metaphor in John 3:8for the mystery and unpredictability of those born of the Spirit.Jesus uses the image of empty talk as wind when he refers to John theBaptist as a prophet rather than a reed swayed by the wind (Matt.11:7; Luke 7:24). In Eph. 4:14 false teaching is referred to as wind.It is wind that easily sways the one who doubts (James 1:6). Finally,a correlation between wind and the Holy Spirit occurs when a soundlike a violent wind occurs at the time when the Holy Spirit fills allthose in the house at Pentecost (Acts 2:2).

The Bible has much to say about works, and an understandingof the topic is important because works play a role in mostreligions. In the most generic sense, “works” refers tothe products or activities of human moral agents in the context ofreligious discussion. God’s works are frequently mentioned inScripture, and they are always good. His works include creation (Gen.2:2–3; Isa. 40:28; 42:5), sustenance of the earth (Ps. 104;Heb. 1:3), and redemption (Exod. 6:6; Ps. 111:9; Rom. 8:23). Humanworks, therefore, should be in alignment with God’s works,though obviously of a different sort. Works in the Bible usuallyreflect a moral polarity: good or evil, righteous or unrighteous,just or unjust. The context of the passage often determines the moralcharacter of the works (e.g., Isa. 3:10–11; 2Cor. 11:15).

Importantquestions follow from the existence of works and their moral quality.Do good works merit God’s favor or please him? Can good workssave at the time of God’s judgment? When people asked Jesus,“What must we do to do the works God requires?” heanswered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one hehas sent” (John 6:28–29). Without faith it is impossibleto please God (Heb. 11:6). The people from the OT commended in Heb.11 did their works in the precondition of faith. Explicitly in the NTand often implicitly in the OT, faith is the condition for truly goodworks. God elects out of his mercy, not out of human works (Rom.9:12, 16; Titus 3:5; cf. Rom. 11:2). Works not done in faith, even ifconsidered “good” by human standards, are not commendableto God, since all humankind is under sin (Rom. 3:9) and no person isrighteous or does good (Rom. 3:10–18; cf. Isa. 64:6). Workscannot save; salvation is a gift to be received by faith (Eph. 2:8–9;2Tim. 1:9; cf. Rom. 4:2–6). Even works of the Mosaic laware not salvific (Rom. 3:20, 27–28; Gal. 2:16; 3:2; 5:4). Goodworks follow from faith (2Cor. 9:8; Eph. 2:10; 1Thess.1:3; James 2:18, 22; cf. Acts 26:20). The works of those who havefaith will be judged, but this judgment appears to be related torewards, not salvation (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6; 2Cor. 5:10; cf.Rom. 14:10; 1Cor. 3:13–15).

Because calendars are culturally constructed systems, thereare several important differences between the modern calendar and thecalendars used in biblical times. When dealing with ancient Jewishand early Christian sources, we can reconstruct complete calendarsystems. However, the Bible itself, written over many centuries,employs several calendar systems and systems of dating. No singlenormative calendar system emerges from biblical materials.Nevertheless, many aspects of life in biblical Israel depended on theuse of calendars, which regulated religious festivals, agriculturalactivity, various aspects of the legal system, and the recording ofhistorical events.

Measurementof Time in Antiquity

Therewere several methods of reckoning time in antiquity. Some units oftime corresponded to the observation of celestial phenomena (see Gen.1:14), such as the rising and setting of the sun (defining the day),the waxing and waning of the moon (the lunar month), the ascension ofthe sun in the sky at noon (the solar year). Other measurements oftime were defined by the agricultural cycle, including planting andthe beginning and end of the harvest (see Exod. 23:16; Ruth 1:22). Anagricultural scheme serves as the basis of the Gezer Calendar, animportant archaeological object of the tenth century BC unearthedabout thirty miles northwest of Jerusalem. The Gezer Calendar dividesthe year into eight periods of one or two months, each of whichcorresponds to the planting, tending, and harvest of various crops.Still other units of time, such as the seven-day week and thelunisolar year (see below), were derived by counting or calculationand did not correspond to any observable celestial or terrestrialphenomena.

Thedivision of days into hours and minutes is possible in modern timesbecause of mechanical and electronic timepieces. Without thesedevices, divisions of time shorter than the day would have beenapproximations at best. Biblical texts refer to dawn, morning, noon,evening, night, and midnight. In NT times, the twelve daylight hourswere numbered (Matt. 27:45; John 11:9). There was also a system ofdividing the night into “watches,” attested in both theNT and the OT.

TheMonth and the Year in the Bible

TheHebrew words for “month” are related to the words for“moon” and “new” (i.e., the “newmoon”), which suggests that the ancient Israelite month was alunar month corresponding to the waxing and waning of the moon over aperiod of twenty-nine or thirty days. The Bible refers to numbereddays in each month, as high as the twenty-seventh day.

Thereare several systems of naming the months in the Bible. Four“Canaanite” month names appear in the OT: Aviv (the firstmonth), Ziv (the second), Ethanim (the seventh), and Bul (theeighth). Because of the infrequent use of these names, some scholarshave questioned whether this system was in widespread use in ancientIsrael. The names probably are derived from agricultural terms.

Inmany cases the months are simply numbered. In this system, the firstmonth began in the spring season. According to biblical narrative,this way of reckoning the beginning of the year was commanded toMoses at the time of the exodus (Exod. 12:1). However, the Bibleapplies this scheme to events much earlier, as in the story of theflood of Noah, which began in the second month (Gen. 7:11), andscholars have associated the numerical system of months with latebiblical sources, around the time of the exile. The system may havecome into use around that time and replaced an older system.

Insome late biblical texts Babylonian month names are adopted,including Nisan (the first month), Sivan (the third), Elul (thesixth), Chislev (the ninth), Tebet (the tenth), Shebat (theeleventh), and Adar (the twelfth). Following biblical usage, theBabylonian month names were adopted in the ancient Jewish calendar,which is still in use today.

Basedon references to the “twelfth month,” the Israelite yearapparently consisted of twelve lunar months. Accordingly, the lunaryear consisted of approximately 354 days, which means that it wouldnot have corresponded to the solar year of approximately 365¼days. The beginning of the year would have drifted between eleven andtwelve days each year. Presumably, this would have been anunacceptable situation, given the fact that many of the biblicalfestivals were both assigned to lunar dates and were correlated toagricultural events. The problem probably was solved through theintercalation of “leap months,” as was the practice inmaintaining the later Jewish calendar. The result is a lunisolarcalendar, in which the year is composed of twelve lunar months and iscorrected relative to the solar year by the periodic addition of asecond Adar (Adar II) seven times in every nineteen-year period.The Bible does not mention this procedure or identify who wasresponsible for maintaining the calendar in ancient Israel.

BiblicalDates

Modernsystems of absolute dating, in which all years are numbered relativeto a single historical reference point—for example, the birthof Jesus (Anno Domini), the journey of Muhammad in AD 622 (AnnoHegira 1) from Mecca to Medina in Islamic culture, and thecreation of the world (Anno Mundi) in Jewish tradition—wereunparalleled in biblical times. Instead, events were usually datedrelative to the reigns of kings, Israelite or otherwise. For example,the accession of Abijah is dated to the eighteenth year of Jeroboam’sreign (1 Kings 15:1), and the proclamation of Cyrus is dated tohis first regnal year (Ezra 1:1). In other cases, events were datedrelative to important historical events. The beginning of Amos’scareer as prophet is dated to “two years before the earthquake”(Amos 1:1), and Exod. 12:41 dates the departure from Egypt to the430th year of the captivity. In other instances, the fixed points onwhich relative dates are based cannot be determined. The beginning ofEzekiel’s career as a prophet is dated to the otherwiseunspecified “thirtieth year” (Ezek. 1:1). The verse maysimply refer to Ezekiel’s age.

Thesame practices of dating events are followed in the NT. The birth ofJohn the Baptist is dated to “the time of Herod king of Judea”(Luke 1:5). The census of Caesar Augustus is identified as “thefirst census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria”(Luke 2:2). As in the OT, such formulas presuppose that the readerhas a basic awareness of the succession and reigns of kings andemperors—an advantage lost to modern interpreters, who continueto debate the absolute dating of these events. Perhaps analogously toEzek. 1:1, the beginning of Jesus’ ministry is dated to histhirtieth year of age (Luke 3:23). Other events and persons reportedin the NT can be correlated to extrabiblical historical records toestablish absolute dates for biblical events (e.g., the death ofHerod Agrippa I in AD 44 [Acts 12:23]). These are distinct frominstances in which biblical authors are making a conscious effort toprovide dates intelligible to their readers. In contrast to OThistorical narrative, for the most part, the NT shows little interestin dating events in its narrative, even according to ancientconventions of relative dating.

Death is commonly defined as the end of physical life,wherein the normal biological processes associated with life (such asrespiration) cease. This definition, however, does not adequatelyencompass the varied nuances associated with death in the Bible.

TheBeginning of Death

Deathis introduced in the Bible as the penalty for transgressing theprohibition against eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of goodand evil—a contrast to Mesopotamia, where death was part of thedivine design of human beings. In Gen. 2:16–17 God tells thefirst man, “When you eat from [the fruit of the tree] you willcertainly die.” The consequences of eating provide a usefulbasis for discussing the nature of death from a biblical perspective.

First,as is apparent from the subsequent narrative, neither the man nor thewoman experiences physical, biological death immediately after eatingthe fruit. In this way, Gen. 2–3 reflects the common biblicalnotion that death refers to more than just biological death, pointingto the more significant aspect of death that embodies alienation andseparation from the source of life, God. The point is presupposed byJesus when he offers life to those who are dead (John 5:24), and byPaul when he proclaims that before Christ all were dead in their sinsand transgressions (Eph. 2:1, 5). It is also reflected in the commonpunishment prescribed in the Pentateuch whereby offenders were cutoff from the people (Gen. 17:14; Exod. 12:15, 19; 30:38; cf. Gen.9:11; Exod. 9:15). Within Gen. 2–3, death arrives with loss ofaccess to the tree of life in the garden. Biologically, the first manand woman may continue to live for a while outside the garden, buttheir fate is sealed when they are cut off from the garden and theintimate fellowship with the Creator that had been enjoyed therein.

Second,the strong implication of Gen. 2:16–17 is that human beings, asoriginally created, were not subject to death (see also Rom. 5:12;6:23; 1Cor. 15:21). This does not mean that they were immortalin the same manner as God (cf. 1Tim. 6:16), but rather thatthey were contingently immortal: they were not subject to death butsustained by their relationship to the life-giving God through theprovision of the tree of life (cf. Rev. 2:7; 22:2, 14). Once theywere cut off from the source of life, death ensued.

Theaccount of the arrival of death in Gen. 3, however, tells us littleabout how death affected animals, since the Bible consistentlypresents a predominantly human focus. While Eccles. 3:21 affirmshuman ignorance over the relative postmortem fate of humans andanimals, little else is said on the matter. Similarly, it is notentirely clear whether death is introduced as a punishment for sinfor humans only (and so whether animals could have died prior to thefall) or whether animals were perceived as sharing in immortalityprior to the fall.

Deathin the Old Testament

Deathis frequently depicted negatively throughout the OT. Aside from itsinitial presentation as a divine punishment for sin, it is presentedas that which seeks out and devours life and is terrifying (Pss.18:4–5; 55:4; Prov. 30:15–16; Hab. 2:5). For the authorof Ecclesiastes, death is that which ultimately undermines anypossible value that life may otherwise have (e.g., Eccles. 9:3). Thetragedy of death, in the OT, is that it results in separation, fromGod (as noted above in the context of Gen. 2–3) and frompeople. The psalms, for example, frequently cite the finality andprofundity of death’s effects (e.g., Pss. 6:5; 88:5; 115:17;cf. Isa. 38:18). Even those few passages that appear to present deathmore positively (e.g., Job 3:13, 17) ultimately serve to highlightthe appalling circ*mstances of the speaker’s life rather thanany blessed state of the dead (for a similar idea in the NT, seeRev.9:6).

TheOT does, however, depict death as the natural end of life, and a gooddeath as one that arrives only after a long and prosperous life. SoAbraham (Gen. 25:8), Isaac (Gen. 35:29), and Job (Job 42:16–17)are said to live long lives before they die. Furthermore, somepassages refer to the person being “gathered to his people,”suggesting some form of reunion with previous generations in death,presumably in Sheol, although the location and state of the dead arenever explicated. Isaiah can even include the idea of death withinlanguage used to describe the ideal future world (Isa. 65:20).

Althoughthere are no laws relating to the manner in which the bodies of thedead were to be handled, all the descriptive indicators show thatburial was normative, often in a family tomb or plot (e.g., Gen. 23;cf. 1Kings 13:22). Indeed, the importance of an appropriateburial is apparent in Ecclesiastes’ comment that a stillbornchild is better off than someone who lives a long life but receivesno burial (Eccles. 6:3) and in the prophets’ presentation ofthose not buried as being accursed (Jer. 8:2; 14:16;16:4).

Lifeafter Death in the Old Testament

Beliefin some form of postmortem existence was common in many parts of theancient world. In Egypt, an elaborate set of beliefs relating to thestate of those who had died included the possibility of an ongoingexistence that could even surpass what one may have experiencedbefore death (although such an opportunity was a reasonableexpectation only for the upper classes, while the general populationprobably had more modest expectations of the nature of theirexistence in the afterlife). By way of contrast, Mesopotamian beliefsdepicted a far darker and more troubling afterlife for all but thevery few whose lives and deaths were sufficiently blessed to ensurethem some degree of postmortem comfort. For the remainder, there waslittle hope for any positive experience following death.

TheOT, however, has little to say about the state of those who havedied. The widespread belief in some form of continued existencebeyond biological death in the ancient world suggests that, in theabsence of contrary data in the Bible, the people of Israel probablyassumed that some aspect of a person persisted beyond death.Furthermore, there are hints that this may have been the case, suchas the raising of Samuel’s shade by the medium at Endor (1Sam.28), the escape from death of Enoch (Gen. 5:24) and Elijah (2Kings2:11), the revivification of the body dropped on Elisha’s bones(2Kings 13:21), and expressions used to refer to death such as“gathered to his people” (Gen. 25:8, 17; 35:29; 49:29;Num. 27:13; Deut. 32:50; cf. Gen. 47:30; Deut. 31:16). The dead(sometimes referred to by the term repa’im, “shades/spiritsof the dead”) were thought to dwell in Sheol, generallydescribed as under the earth (e.g., Ezek. 31:14). Beyond this, thereare prophetic expectations that God will ultimately destroy death(e.g., Isa. 25:8), and that God does not take pleasure in anyone’sdeath (Ezek. 18:23, 32).

Deathin the New Testament

TheNT continues, and in some places expands upon, the negative view ofdeath presented in the OT. The notion that death is a consequence ofand punishment for the sinful state that imprisons all humanity isstated emphatically (e.g., Rom. 3:23; 6:23) and reinforced by thenotion that, although biologically alive, sinful humans are dead intheir sin and so incapable of reviving themselves (Eph. 2:1). Death,according to Paul, is the last enemy (1Cor. 15:26), and yet todie is gain (Phil. 1:21–24) because it heralds being withChrist, which, explains Paul, “is better by far” thanbeing alive in this body in this world.

Centralto both the message of the Bible and to the significance of death inthe Bible is the death of the Messiah, God’s Son. Jesus’death provides the basis for countering the consequences of theoriginal rebellion against God by the first couple (2Cor.5:21). Consequently, Paul could write that Jesus’ death itselfdestroyed death (2Tim. 1:10). Furthermore, the life that Jesusoffers—eternal life—is available to the believer in thepresent (John 3:36; 5:24), prior to the time when death is ultimatelyabolished, such that Jesus could assert that all those who believe inhim will live even though they die (John 11:25–26).

TheNT expands somewhat on the details relating to the state of the deadfrom the OT. For one thing, the existence of an afterlife is clearlypresented. Furthermore, the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke16:19–31) reflects a more comprehensive understanding of theexistence of distinctions among those who have died, such that therich man is said to be suffering in Hades (Gk. hadēs, used inthe LXX to translate Heb. she’ol in the OT), while Lazarus isfar off with Abraham and being comforted. Although there is a dangerin reading too much into a parable, the detail appears to reflectsomething of the expanded understanding of the afterlife among somein Jesus’ day.

TheNT makes several references to a “second death” (Rev.2:11; 20:6, 14; 21:8; cf. Jude 12). The expression refers to thestate of eternal judgment under God’s wrath, a death from whichthere will be no escape. But those who remain faithful to Christ willnot experience this second death (Rev. 20:6), and in their dwellingplace with God, the new Jerusalem, death will be no more (21:4).

The name of a person and a word for “humankind.”That the Hebrew word ’adam can be both a personal name and areference to humankind provides the biblical writers with a valuablemeans of drawing theological conclusions important to the nature ofhumankind’s status before God. Unfortunately, in various placesit is unclear whether it is a proper name or a more general noun. Theorigin of the word is usually understood to be related to “red”or “red soil,” and the writer of Genesis makes the linkbetween “the man” and “the soil” moreapparent in Gen. 2:7, where man is said to have been created from’adamah (ground, earth).

Thefirst man was named “Adam.” Because of the difficultiesof the word ’adam serving as both a proper name and meaningsimply “human,” there is disagreement concerning when thetext of Gen. 1–3 is referring to humankind and when it isutilizing “Adam” as a reference to the first man’sname. This discussion often is driven by one’s explanation oforigins; however, the general rule applied by many Bible translationsis that the presence of the definite article (“the”)indicates that the author has humankind in mind, whereas its absenceindicates the use of the proper name.

Humankindwas created in the image of God (Gen. 1:27), who also uniquelybreathed into human beings his own breath (2:7), indicating adistinct capacity for relationship between them and God. Thisemphasis is furthered in the text by God’s granting tohumankind stewardship of the rest of his creation (1:28–30).The fall (Gen. 3) apparently arose out of the desire of human beingsto usurp God’s position and determine for themselves what isbeneficial and what is harmful (knowledge of good and evil). The stepof disobedience taken in consuming fruit from the forbidden tree haddire consequences for the relationships between men and women,humankind and creation, and humankind and God. The fall, however, didnot eliminate the reality that humankind is still in the image of Godand capable of continued relationship with him (5:1–3).

OtherOT passages rely on Adam for purposes of genealogy (Gen. 5:4;1 Chron. 1:1) but also begin to highlight some theologicalconceptions of him that would become significant in his descriptionelsewhere in Scripture. Job 31:33 may suggest a link between Adam’sattempt to cover his sin (Gen. 3:7, 10) and the propensity that humanbeings have to do the same (cf. Isa. 43:27). Psalm 8 expressesreflections concerning the creation of humankind, and the wonder ofGod’s interest and investment of himself in it. The writer ofEcclesiastes seemingly toils over the status of human beings inrelation to the earth, since the former die but the latter continues(Eccles. 1:3–4). Such passages demonstrate the corporateresponsibility that humankind bears for sin following Adam’sfirst sin and establish a framework through which the NT writers maybe able to address the most significant human problems.

Adamis the center of several significant references in the NT. Inparticular, passages such as Rom. 5:12–21 and 1 Cor.15:21–49 establish an Adam/Christ, or First Adam/Second Adamtypology. In the Romans passage, Paul draws on the Jewish concept ofcorporate identity in order to identify the status of death as commonthroughout all humanity because of the first Adam, and the hope ofsalvation and grace as available to all humanity because of thesecond Adam. The 1 Corinthians passage makes its argument alongsimilar lines; however, its interest is in the granting of thepossibility of resurrection to humanity in the second Adam, whoprovides a permanent body, while the first Adam only granted alimited body of dust.

Inother places in the NT the priority of Adam and his impact onhumanity are the source of theological reflection as well. Luke seemsto argue for the solidarity of Jesus with all of humanity by takinghis genealogy back to Adam (Luke 3). Paul draws on the priority ofAdam being created before Eve, as well as her deception by theserpent, as a rationale for not permitting women certain roles in thechurch (1 Tim. 2:13–14). The writer of Hebrews draws theconnection between humankind and Christ in order to highlight Jesus’unique capacity for dealing with the sinful human condition (Heb. 2).See also Adam, Town of; Adam and Eve.

The first human beings. According to Gen. 2, God created Adam(whose name means “humanity” and is related to the wordfor “ground”) from the dust of the ground and his ownbreath, showing that humankind is a part of creation but has aspecial relationship with God. This description contrasts with theBabylonian account of the creation of the first humans from the clayof the ground and the blood of a demon god (Qingu in the EnumaElish). The Bible thus presents a more dignified understanding of theplace of humankind in the world. God placed Adam in a garden in Eden(a name that means “delight” or “abundance”).Even so, God, noting that it was not good for Adam to be alone,created Eve (whose name means “living”), his femalecounterpart. She was created from Adam’s side (or rib),signifying their equality. She was to be his “helper,” aword that does not denote subordination, since elsewhere in the BibleGod is said to be the psalmist’s helper (Pss. 30:10; 54:4). Evewas Adam’s wife, and God pronounced that future marriage willbe characterized by leaving one’s parents, being joined as acouple, and consummating the relationship with sexual intercourse(Gen. 2:24).

Adamand Eve were to tend the garden of Eden. They were permitted to eatthe fruit of all the trees of the garden except for the tree ofthe knowledge of good and evil. Eating the fruit of this tree,against God’s express prohibition, would be an assertion ofmoral independence that would meet with God’s punishment.

InGen. 3 the serpent convinced Eve that it would be good to eat thefruit of the forbidden tree. Adam was present with her as the serpentspoke, but he remained silent. After eating the fruit, Eve gave someto Adam, and he ate without protest. Both Adam and Eve were thereforeguilty of the first sin. The results were immediate, including thealienation of Adam and Eve, signaled by the fact that they could nolonger stand naked before each other without shame.

Adamand Eve were punished for their rebellion. Eve was punished in hermost intimate relationships. She would now experience increased painwhen giving birth, and her relationship with her husband would becomea power struggle as her desire to control him would be met with hisattempt to dominate her (Gen. 3:16). Adam felt the consequences ofhis action in his work, which now would be tinged with frustration(3:17–19). In addition, although they did not die immediately,they were removed from the garden and access to the tree of life, sodeath would be their ultimate end.

AfterAdam and Eve departed from the garden, they had children. We know ofCain and Abel, whose conflict is well known from Gen. 4. After thedeath of Abel, Eve gave birth to Seth. The genealogies of Cain (Gen.4:17–24) and Seth suggest that humanity is divided into thosewho resist and those who follow God (5:1–32). Surprisingly, inthe rest of the OT Adam is mentioned only in the first verse of thegenealogy in 1 Chron. 1, and Eve not at all (cf. Hos. 6:7).

Inthe NT, Adam is mentioned in the Lukan genealogy of Jesus (Luke 3:38)and in Rom. 5:12–21; 1 Cor. 15; 1 Tim. 2:13–14;Jude 14. In Romans, Paul associates Adam with the entry of sin anddeath into the world. Paul contrasts Adam with Christ. Whereas Adam’sact introduced sin and death, Christ’s act broughtreconciliation with God and life. Paul makes essentially the samepoint in 1 Cor. 15 (see esp. vv. 22, 45). Christians thus readGen. 3 through the commentary supplied by Paul and believe that itsupports the notion of original sin, that all humans are sinners frombirth.

Eveis mentioned twice in the NT. In 1 Tim. 2:11–15 Paulargues that women should learn quietly and not teach or haveauthority over men because Eve was created after Adam and was the onedeceived by the serpent. Debate surrounds the issue whether Paul hereaddresses a local situation or is citing a universal principle. Paulagain mentions the deception of Eve in 2 Cor. 11:3, but here heapplies it to men and women who are in danger of being deceived byfalse teachers.

Agriculture is the practice of producing food throughcultivation and harvesting. For the biblical Israelites and theirancestors, it was one of the primary expressions of subsistence intheir economy and life. The priority of agricultural pursuits forIsrael’s worldview is indicated in the fact that it was amongthe first mandates given by God to man in the garden (Gen. 1:28–29).This primacy of place in agricultural concerns meant that care andstewardship of the land was the prerogative of every member ofsociety. In fact, individuals, the priesthood, and the monarchy couldall possess and care for the land (Num. 27:1–8; 35:1–8;1 Chron. 27:26–28).

Theprimary produce of the biblical farmer included cereals (wheat,barley, millet), legumes (beans, peas), olives, and grapes.Additional, less predominant crops included nuts (almonds, walnuts,pistachios), herbs (cumin, coriander, sesame), and vegetables(cucumbers, onions, greens). The production of the various crops waslargely limited to certain geographic regions of Israel (such as thecoastal plain or the plains of Moab) because much of the land was illsuited for agriculture, being rocky and arid.

Theentire calendar in most ancient Near Eastern societies centered onthe agricultural cycle, and many important biblical feasts includedsome connection with the seasonal calendar. For Israel, some of thefirst festivals were linked to the agricultural seasons (Exod.23:14–16; Lev. 23). Cereals were sown at the Feast ofBooths/Tabernacles (late October) and harvested in middle to latespring at the Feasts of Passover (March) and Weeks/Pentecost (May).Grapes and other fruit were harvested in late summer into the fall.

Theactual craft of agriculture involved the three steps of sowing,reaping, and threshing/production. The fields typically were plowedfollowing the first autumn rains, and sowing lasted about two months.Harvest season lasted seven months in all. Cereal products wentthrough the process of threshing, whereas fruits were immediatelyproduced into wine or dried. The practice of threshing the grainsmostly took place on threshing floors located adjacent to the fields.The threshing floors were designed as a circle, generally 25 to 40feet in diameter. Typically animals such as donkeys or oxen weredriven around the floor as the grains were fed into their paths andsubsequently crushed. The resulting broken husks were then throwninto the air, allowing the wind to carry away the chaff and producinga separated grain that could then be cleaned and processed for homeuse.

Besidesplaying a significant role in the practical matters of life,agricultural practices found numerous applications in the images andideals of the biblical writers (Judg. 8:2; 9:8–15; Ezek.17:6–10). The medium could be used to express both blessingsand curses. Several texts point to the cursing of agriculturalendeavors as a punishment from God. Ceremonial defilement was apossibility if proper methodology in sowing seeds was not followed(Lev. 19:19; Deut. 22:9). Similarly, Yahweh’s assessment ofIsrael’s failure to uphold the covenant commitments could leadto disease, locust attacks, crop failure, and total loss of the land(Deut. 28:40; Joel 1:4; Amos 7:1). Conversely, agricultural bountyand blessings were also a part of covenant stipulations. Indeed, manyof the offerings themselves were centered on agriculture (Lev. 2;Num. 18:8–32). Even the Sabbath rest itself was extended tomatters of agriculture and care for the land (Lev. 25:1–7).Finally, the covenant saw some of the greatest benefits of lifebefore Yahweh as being blessed through agricultural bounty (Deut.28:22; Amos 9:13). In a few cases, agricultural imagery cut bothways. For instance, the vine was an image that could expressjudgment, care, and restoration in both Judaism and Christianity(Isa. 5:1–8; John 15:1–11). Despite the link betweenagricultural realities and the covenant, the Scriptures are verycareful to distinguish Israel from the fertility cults of itsCanaanite neighbors (1 Kings 18:17–40; Hos. 2:8–9).This distinction also seems to have found expression in certain NTtexts (1 Cor. 6:15–20).

The study of human beings, their nature and origins. TheChristian understanding of anthropology stems from a biblical view ofhumankind’s relationship to God.

TheOrigin of Humankind

Accordingto Genesis, the creation of humankind took place on the sixth day ofthe creation week. The amount of narrative space allotted to this day(Gen. 1:24–31) testifies to the special importance of whathappened. Human beings were made on the same day as the animals.Human beings were not given a day of their own, showing that theyhave a certain kinship with the animals, although they are far morethan highly successful and adaptive mammals. This has implicationsfor the care of animals and of the environment generally. The valueof human beings and their special place in the created order is clearin passages such as Pss. 8:5–6; 104:14–15.

Createdin the image of God.Whenit came to the making of human beings, God deliberated over thiscrucial step (Gen. 1:26). The plural of exhortation in “Let usmake man in our image” signals that the decision to makehumankind was the most important one that God had made so far.Genesis 1 says that human beings are like God in some way.

Variousopinions have been canvassed as to what the “image” is.We cannot totally exclude the physical form of humans, given God’shumanoid form in OT appearances (theophanies; e.g., Isa. 6:1; Ezek.1:26; Amos 9:1). The image has sometimes been interpreted as a task,the exercising of dominion (Gen. 1:28), with humanity appointed ascreation’s king, ruling under God. But the image is betterunderstood as the precondition for rule rather than rule itself. Theimage shows human worth (Gen. 9:6) and differentiates humans from allother creatures. It is proper for the Bible to use anthropomorphiclanguage for God, for humans are remarkably like God. Both male andfemale are in the image of God (“in the image of God he createdthem; male and female he created them” [1:27]), so that thedivine image is not maleness, nor is sexual differentiation theimage. Commonly, the image of God is thought to be some peculiarquality of human beings—for example, rationality, speech, moralsense, personality, humans as relational beings.

Everycentury has its own view of what is the essence of humanity. However,nothing in the passage allows a choice among such alternatives. Thepoint of the passage is simply the fact of the likeness, with noexact definition being provided. The fact of the image is the basisof the divine prohibition of murder and of the strict penalty appliedto the transgressor (9:4–6). The fall into sin affected everyaspect of the human constitution, and the Bible does not minimize thefact of human sinfulness (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Rom. 3:10–18);nevertheless, humans are still in the image of God (Gen. 5:1–3;9:6; 1 Cor. 11:7). God’s plan of salvation is aimed atridding creation (and especially humanity) of the baneful effects ofsin, and this will be achieved through the work of Christ, who is theimage of God (2 Cor. 4:4; Col. 1:15–20; Heb. 1:1–3;2:5–18). The outcome will be the conformity of believers inChrist to his glorious image (Rom. 8:29–30; 2 Cor. 3.18).

Placein the created order.God’s purpose in giving human beings the divine image is “sothey may rule” (NET [Gen. 1:26b translated as a purposeclause]). The syntax suggests that the image is a presupposition ofdominion. It is plain that such a delegated authority makes humansstewards. The vegetarian diet of Gen.1:29 (there was no eating ofmeat at first) represents a limitation to the human right ofdominion. Adam’s naming of the animals was (in part) expressiveof his sovereignty over them (2:19). Later, Noah was charged to bringpairs of animals into the ark to preserve them alive (6:19–20),showing care for other creatures. The patriarchs tended flocks(13:2–9; 26:12–14), and Joseph’s relief measuressaved the lives of people and animals (47:15–18). The wantondestruction of the Promised Land was expressly forbidden (Deut.20:19–20). Humanity is accountable to God for the stewardshipof the earth. The divine command “be fruitful and multiply”(Gen. 1:28 NRSV) shows that God’s purpose is that the humanrace populate the whole earth.

AtGen. 2:7 the biblical narrative becomes thoroughly anthropocentric,picturing the little world that God establishes around the first man,so this account is quite different from the cosmic presentation ofGen. 1. In Gen. 1 humankind is the apex of a pyramid, the last andhighest of a series of creatures; in Gen. 2 the man is the center ofa circle, everything else made to fit around him, and his connectionto the physical earth is emphasized. In either view, a very specialplace is given to human beings in the created order. The two picturesare complementary, not contradictory.

The“man” (’adam) is formed from the “ground”(’adamah), with the related Hebrew words making a pun. Man’sname reminds him of his earthy origins. He is made from the “dust,”which hints at his coming death. He will return to the dust (Gen.3:19; cf. Job 10:8–9; Ps. 103:14; Isa. 29:16). The reference to“the breath of life” (Gen. 2:7) is due to the fact thatthis leaves a person at death (Job 34:14–15; Ps. 104:29–30),so man’s (potential) mortality is implied. Ironically, themaking of man is described using the language of death. What isdescribed in Gen. 2 is the making of the first man, from whom therest of the human race has descended, not the making of humankind,though the word ’adam can mean that in other contexts.

TheNature of Humankind

Body,soul, and spirit.Arguments over whether human nature is bipartite (body and soul) ortripartite (body, soul, spirit) are not to be decided by arbitraryappeal to isolated verses. Verses can be found in apparent supportfor both the first view (e.g., Matt. 10:28) and the second (e.g.,1 Thess. 5:23), but certainly the first scheme is much moreprevalent in the Bible. “Soul” and “spirit”can be used interchangeably (Eccles. 3:21; 12:7; Ezek. 18:31). Deathis marked by the parting of soul/spirit and body, but it would be amistake to think that human beings are made up of separate componentparts, or that the physical body is only a dispensable shell and notessential to true humanity. The physicality of human existence in the“body” is owned and celebrated in Scripture, part of thatbeing the positive attitude to sexuality when properly expressed(Song of Songs; 1 Cor. 7) and the nonascetic nature of biblicalethics (1 Cor. 10:31; Col. 2:23). The doctrine of theresurrection of the body is the fullest expression of this (1 Cor.15), in contrast to ancient Greek thought that viewed the body asinherently evil and understood salvation as the immortality of theliberated, disembodied soul.

Thedifferent words used in relation to persons are only intended torefer to and at times focus on different aspects of unified humannature. References to the “soul” may stress individualresponsibility (e.g., Ezek. 18:4 NASB: “The soul who sins willdie”). In Ps. 103:1–2, “O my soul” expressesemphatic self-encouragement to praise God and is in parallel with“all my inmost being”—that is, “my wholebeing” (an example of synecdoche: a part standing for the whole[cf. Ps. 35:10]). These are ways of referring to oneself as a personwho expresses will and intention (cf. Ps. 42:5–6, 11). The“flesh” is used to stress the weakness of mortal humanity(e.g., Isa. 40:6 RSV: “All flesh is grass”). The “heart”is the volitional center of a human being (Prov. 4:23; cf. Mark7:17–23). The emotional and empathetic reactions of humans aredescribed by reference to the organs: “liver,” “kidneys,”“bowels.”

Moralsand responsibility.In Gen. 2 the complexities of the man’s moral relation to Godand his relations with the soil, with the animals, and with the womanare explored. God deposited the man in the garden “to work itand take care of it” (2:15). The words chosen to designate theman’s work prior to the fall have an aura of worship aboutthem, for they are later used in the OT for the cultic actions ofserving and guarding within the sanctuary. The priests served byoffering sacrifices, and the Levites guarded the gates of the sacredprecinct. A theology of work as a religious vocation is presented.The man was a kind of king-priest in the garden of God.

Themoral responsibility of humanity is signaled from the beginning.God’s command gives permission for the man to eat from “anytree” except one (Gen. 2:16–17) and as such indicatesman’s freedom, so that this command is no great restriction.The wording “you are free to eat” reinforces the pointabout God’s generous provision. The prohibition is embedded inthe description of God’s fatherly care for the man and graciousact in placing him in the garden. The divine restriction is slightand not at all overbearing, though the serpent will seek to make itappear mean-spirited (3:1). The command and prohibition are the veryfirst words of God to the man, marking them out as of fundamentalimportance for the relationship between them. The prohibition (“youmust not eat . . .”) is an absolute one in thestyle of the Decalogue (Exod. 20:1–17; Deut. 5:6–21).What is placed before the man is a test that gives him theopportunity to express his loyalty to God. A relationship ofobedience and trust requires the possibility of choice and theopportunity to disobey (if that is what he wants to do). The moralnature and responsibility of individuals is not a late discovery bythe prophet Ezekiel (Ezek. 18); rather, it is the presuppositionbehind the Mosaic law, for the commands of the Decalogue (“youshall not . . .”) are phrased as commands toindividuals (as the Hebrew makes clear). On the other hand, theconcept of corporate responsibility is also present (e.g., Achan’spunishment in Josh. 7).

Relationships.Human beings are relational by nature, as the creation of the womanas a helper and partner for the first man makes plain (Gen. 2:18–25).Later in Scripture this is put in more general terms, so thatfriendship and mutual cooperation are shown to be essential to life(Eccles. 4:7–12). The body life of the church reflects the samefact and need (1 Cor. 12). In Psalms, human needs andvulnerability find their answer and fulfillment in God, with thepsalmist acknowledging his frailty and his creaturely dependence onGod (e.g., Ps. 90). This also shows the folly of sinful human pride,against which the prophets so often inveighed (e.g., Isa. 2:9,11–17, 22).

A special type of figure of speech that is quite common inthe Bible. Most figures of speech (metaphors, similes, etc.) work bybringing two very separate items into a comparative relationship byusing language that is directly appropriate for the one to createcolorful imagery for the other. Thus, figures of speech confront thereader with both points of similarity and points of dissimilarity.

Anthropomorphismis a figure of speech in which God is represented with human featuresor human characteristics. Anthropomorphisms abound in Scripture.Isaiah 59:1, for example, states: “Surely the arm of the Lordis not too short to save, nor his ear too dull to hear.”Likewise, note the colorful anthropomorphic description of God in Ps.104:2–3: “The Lord wraps himself in light as with agarment; he stretches out the heavens like a tent and lays the beamsof his upper chambers on their waters. He makes the clouds hischariot and rides on the wings of the wind.”

Infact, Scripture typically describes God with a wide range ofterminology normally associated with people and not with deity. TheBible refers to God as having hands, arms, feet, a face, a nose,breath, a voice, and ears. He walks, sits, hears, looks down, thinks,talks, remembers, gets angry, shouts, lives in a palace, holds court,prepares tables, anoints heads, builds houses, and pitches tents. Hehas a rod, staff, scepter, banner, garments, cloak, tent, throne,footstool, vineyard, field, chariot, shield, breastplate, helmet, andsword. He is identified as father, husband, king, judge, potter, andshepherd. All these are human actions or human features that are usedfiguratively to describe God and his actions.

Onthe other hand, scholars are divided over whether all of theseanthropomorphisms are really figures of speech. Perhaps some of themactually describe literal aspects of God. Perhaps some of the“anthropomorphic” similarities between human beings andGod are due to the fact that we are created in the image of God (Gen.1:27). Thus, we reflect similarity to him in some aspects anddissimilarity in many others. Since God is spirit, the description ofGod as “looking down” or the mention of his face would beanthropomorphism (i.e., figurative language). On the other hand, manyof God’s actions and emotions such as anger, love, patience,mercy, hurt, and compassion are probably literal realities. Althoughwe as human beings understand these emotions because we experiencethem, this does not necessarily mean that in regard to God they aremerely figurative. Although God does not have ears, he does, forexample, “get angry,” “love,” and “feelsorrow.”

The final book of the Bible is known by its opening line:“The revelation of Jesus Christ” (1:1 ESV, NRSV, KJV).This phrase could indicate a “revelation about Jesus Christ”(the main character), or a “revelation from Jesus Christ”(the primary giver of the message to John; so NIV), or, as manybelieve, some of both.

Inpowerful language and vivid imagery, Revelation presents theconclusion to God’s grand story of salvation, in which hedefeats evil, reverses the curse of sin, restores creation, and livesforever among his people. Although the details are often difficult tounderstand, the main idea of Revelation is clear: God is in controland will successfully accomplish his purposes. In the end, God wins.As a transformative vision, Revelation empowers its readers/listenersto persevere faithfully in a fallen world until their Lord returns.

Genreand Historical Context

Genre.Revelation is best understood in light of its literary genre and itshistorical context. The literary genre of Revelation—letter,prophecy, and apocalyptic literature—explains much of thestrangeness of the book. The entire book is a single letter to sevenchurches in Asia Minor (note the letter greeting in 1:4–5 andthe benediction in 22:21). John is commanded to write what he seesand send it to the seven churches (1:11). A letter to seven churchesis in reality a letter to the whole church, since the number “seven”symbolizes wholeness or completeness in Revelation. NT letters wereintended to be read aloud to the gathering of Christians, and thesame is true of Revelation. The book opens with a blessing on the onewho reads the letter aloud and on those who listen (1:3) and closeswith a stern warning to anyone (reader or listener) who changes thebook (22:18–19). Like other NT letters, Revelation alsoaddresses a specific situation. For this reason, any approach toRevelation that ignores the situation faced by the seven churcheswill fail to grasp its central message. Many say that the message ofRevelation extends beyond the first century, but it certainly doesnot ignore its first audience.

Revelationis also a letter that is prophetic. In both the opening (1:3) and theclosing (22:7, 10, 18–19), the book is described as a“prophecy” (cf. 19:10). In 22:9 the angel identifies Johnas a prophet: “I am a fellow servant with you and with yourfellow prophets.” As a prophetic book in line with OT propheticbooks, Revelation contains both prediction about the future andproclamation about God’s will for the present, with emphasisfalling on the latter.

Finally,Revelation is a prophetic letter that is apocalyptic. In the openingphrase, “the revelation of Jesus Christ,” the term“revelation” is a translation of the Greek termapokalypsis,meaning “to unveil” or “to reveal” what hasbeen hidden. Most believe that apocalyptic literature grew out ofHebrew prophecy. The OT books of Daniel and Zechariah are oftenassociated with apocalyptic literature, and there were many Jewishapocalypses written during the time between the Testaments (e.g.,1–2Enoch, 2–3Baruch, 4Ezra).

Inapocalyptic literature there is a revelation from God to somewell-known human figure through a heavenly intermediary. God promisesto intervene in human history, to defeat evil, and to establish hisrightful rule. Such is the case with Revelation, which assumes asituation where God’s people are threatened by hostile powers.God is portrayed as sovereign, and he promises to intervene soon todestroy evil. Through bizarre visions and imagery common toapocalyptic literature, those who hear Revelation are transported toanother world for much-needed heavenly perspective. As the hearersmove outside their hopeless circ*mstances and see God winning the waragainst evil, their perspective is reshaped, and they are empoweredto persevere faithfully. They are simultaneously called to live holyand blameless lives as they worship the one, true God.

Historicalcontext.Along with understanding the literary genre of Revelation, one mustgrasp its historical context in order to read the book responsibly.Revelation itself describes a historical situation where someChristians are suffering for their faith with the real possibilitythat the suffering could become more intense and widespread. Johnhimself has been exiled to the island of Patmos because of hiswitness for Jesus (1:9). Antipas, a Christian in Pergamum, has beenput to death for his faith (2:13). In his message to the church atSmyrna, Jesus indicates that they should not be surprised by whatthey are about to suffer (2:10). The book also includes severalreferences to pagan powers shedding the blood of God’s people(6:10; 16:6; 17:6; 18:24; 19:2). Revelation addresses a situation inwhich pagan political power has formed a partnership with falsereligion. Those who claim to follow Christ are facing mountingpressure to conform to this ungodly partnership at the expense ofloyalty to Christ.

Thetwo primary possibilities for the date of Revelation are a timeshortly after the death of Nero (AD 68–69) or a date near theendof Domitian’s reign (AD 95). Although there is solidevidence for both dates, the majority opinion at present favors adate during the reign of Domitian, when persecution threatened tospread across the Roman Empire. The imperial cult (i.e., the worshipof the Roman emperor) was a powerful force to be reckoned withprimarily because it united religious, political, social, andeconomic elements into a single force. As chapters 2–3indicate, not every Christian was remaining faithful in thisdifficult environment. Some were compromising in order to avoidreligious or economic persecution. Revelation has a pointed messagefor those who are standing strong as well as for those who arecompromising, and this central message ties into the overall purposeof the book.

Purposeand Interpretation

Theoverall purpose of Revelation is to comfort those who are facingpersecution and to warn those who are compromising with the worldsystem. During times of oppression, the righteous suffer and thewicked seem to prosper. This raises the question “Who is Lord?”Revelation says that Jesus is Lord in spite of how things appear, andhe will return soon to establish his eternal kingdom. Those facingpersecution find hope through a renewed perspective, and those whoare compromising are warned to repent. Revelation’s goal is totransform the audience to follow Jesus faithfully.

Thereare five main theories about how Revelation should be interpreted:preterist, historicist, futurist, idealist, and eclectic. Thepreterist theory views Revelation as relating only to the time inwhich John lived rather than to any future period. John communicatesto first-century readers how God plans to deliver them from thewickedness of the Roman Empire. The historicist theory argues thatRevelation gives an overview of the major movements of church historyfrom the first century until the return of Christ. The futuristtheory claims that most of Revelation (usually chaps. 4–22)deals with a future time just before the end of history. The idealisttheory maintains that Revelation is a symbolic portrayal of theongoing conflict between good and evil. Revelation offers timelessspiritual truths to encourage Christians of all ages. The eclectictheory combines the strengths of several of the other theories (e.g.,a message to the original audience, a timeless spiritual message, andsome future fulfillment), while avoiding their weaknesses.

Outlineand Structure

Therehave been many attempts to understand how Revelation is organized.Some see a threefold structure based on 1:19:

Whatyou have seen (past) (1:1–20)

Whatis now (present) (2:1–3:21)

Whatwill take place later (future) (4:1–22:21)

Otherssee the book organized around seven dramatic scenes with interludesoccurring throughout:

Prologue(1:1–8)

Act1: Seven Oracles (1:9–3:22)

Act2: Seven Seals (6:1–17)

Act3: Seven Trumpets (8:1–9:21)

Act4: Seven Signs (12:1–14:20)

Act5: Seven Bowls (16:1–21)

Act6: Seven Visions (19:1–20:15)

Act7: Seven Prophecies (21:2–22:17)

Epilogue(22:18–21)

Thefollowing outline provides an overview of Revelation in ten stages:

I.Introduction (1:1–20)

II.Messages to the Seven Churches (2:1–3:22)

III.Vision of the Heavenly Throne Room (4:1–5:14)

IV.Opening of the Seven Seals (6:1–8:1)

V.Sounding of the Seven Trumpets (8:2–11:19)

VI.The People of God versus the Powers of Evil (12:1–14:20)

VII.Pouring Out of the Seven Bowls (15:1–16:21)

VIII.Judgment and Fall of Babylon (17:1–19:5)

IX.God’s Ultimate Victory (19:6–22:5)

X.Conclusion (22:6–21)

I.Introduction (1:1–20).Chapter 1 includes both a prologue (1:1–8) and John’scommission to write what he sees (1:9–20). John’s visionfocuses on the risen, glorified Christ and his continued presenceamong the seven churches.

II.Messages to the seven churches (2:1–3:22).Chapters 2–3 contain messages to seven churches of Asia Minor:Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, andLaodicea. The seven messages follow a similar literary pattern: adescription of Jesus, a commendation, an accusation, an exhortationcoupled with either warning or encouragement, an admonition tolisten, and a promise to those who overcome. These messages reflectthe twin dangers faced by the church: persecution and compromise.

III.Vision of the heavenly throne room (4:1–5:14).In chapters 4–5 the scene shifts to the heavenly throne room,where God reigns in majestic power. All of heaven worships theCreator and the Lion-Lamb (Jesus), who alone is qualified to open thescroll because of his sacrificial death.

IV.Opening of the seven seals (6:1–8:1).The unveiling of God’s ultimate victory formally begins here.This section begins the first of a series of three judgment visions(seals, trumpets, and bowls), with seven elements each. When thesixth seal is opened, the question is asked, “Who can withstandit?” Chapter 7 provides the answer with its two visions ofGod’s people; only those belonging to God can withstand theoutpouring of the Lamb’s wrath.

V.Sounding of the seven trumpets (8:2–11:19).The trumpet judgments, patterned after the plagues of Egypt, revealGod’s judgment upon a wicked world. Again, before the seventhelement in the series, there is an interval with two visions(10:1–11; 11:1–14) that instruct and encourage God’speople.

VI.The people of God versus the powers of evil (12:1–14:20).Chapter12 offers the main reason why God’s people face hostility inthis world. They are caught up in the larger conflict between God andSatan (the dragon). Although Satan was defeated by the death andresurrection of Christ, he continues to oppose the people of God.Chapter 13 introduces Satan’s two agents: the beast from thesea and the beast from the earth. The dragon and the two beastsconstitute an unholy trinity bent on seducing and destroying God’speople. As another interval, chapter 14 offers a glimpse of the finalfuture that God has in store for his people. One day the Lamb and hisfollowers will stand on Mount Zion and sing a new song of redemption.

VII.Pouring out of the seven bowls (15:1–16:21).The seven golden bowls follow the trumpets and seals as the finalseries of seven judgments. As the bowls of God’s wrath arepoured out on an unrepentant world, the plagues are devastatingindicators of God’s anger toward sin and evil. The onlyresponse from the “earth dwellers” (MSG; NIV:“inhabitants of the earth” [17:2, 8]; this is a commonterm in Revelation for unbelievers) is to curse God rather thanrepent (16:9, 11, 21).

VIII.Judgment and fall of Babylon (17:1–19:5). Thissection depicts the death of Babylon, a pagan power said to be “drunkwith the blood of God’s holy people, the blood of those whobore testimony to Jesus” (17:6). The funeral laments for thedeceased Babylon of chapter 18 give way to a celebration as God’speople rejoice over Babylon’s downfall (19:1–5).

IX.God’s ultimate victory (19:6–22:5). Thisclimactic section describes God’s ultimate victory over eviland the final reward for the people of God. This scene includes thereturn of Christ for his bride (19:6–16), Christ’s defeatof the two beasts and their allies (19:17–21), the binding ofSatan and the millennial reign (20:1–6), the final defeat ofSatan (20:7–10), and the final judgment and the death of deathitself (20:11–15). Chapter 21 features a description of the newheaven and new earth, where God’s long-standing promise to liveamong his people is fully realized.

X.Conclusion (22:6–21).Revelation closes with final blessings for those who heed the messageof the book and warnings for those who do not. Jesus’ promiseto return soon is met with John’s prayer, “Come, LordJesus” (22:20).

Charactersand Themes

Theforegoing outlines are helpful for understanding Revelation, butperhaps an even better way to grasp the message of the book is tolook closely at its main characters and story line. The followingseven themes capture the overall theological message of this dynamicprophetic-apocalyptic letter.

1.God.Revelation presents God as a central character in the story. He issovereign and firmly in control of history, as his description from1:4–8 suggests: “the Alpha and the Omega” (thebeginning and the end), “the one who is, and who was, and whois to come” (God of the past, the present, and the future), and“the Lord God, ... the Almighty” (ruler overthe universe). The throne room vision of chapters 4–5 alsoclearly asserts God’s sovereign rule. The throne of God itselfstands as a central symbol in the book, representing God’ssovereignty over all things. As a main character, God rightlyreceives worship. He is worshiped because he is the creator (e.g.,4:11; 14:7) and the righteous judge who condemns evil and vindicateshis people (15:3–4; 16:5–7; 19:1–2). Revelationalso describes God as one who desires to be fully and intimatelypresent with his people. God cares for and protects his people (e.g.,7:2–3; 14:1; 21:4). As the book closes, God announces thefulfillment of his long-standing promise to live among his people(21:6–7; cf. Exod. 29:45–46; Lev. 26:11–12). God’schildren have unhindered access to their loving Father as they servehim, see his face, and bear his name—all in his presence(22:1–5).

2.God’s enemies.Although God reigns supreme, he has enemies who oppose him and hispeople. As God’s chief enemy, Satan (also known as the dragon,the devil, the serpent, the accuser) works through worldly systemswith the intent of thwarting God’s plan. Chapter 12 summarizesthis cosmic conflict. In that scene, God defeats the dragon, who thenturns his anger against the woman and the rest of her offspring. Thedragon’s evil partners include the beast fromthe sea(traditionally called the “antichrist”) and the beastfrom the earth (the “false prophet”). The first beastoften has been identified with Rome, the dominant pagan power in thefirst century, although the reference likely extends beyond Rome toany political-economic power that demands absolute allegiance (see13:1–8; 19:19–20; 20:10). The second beast usesmiraculous signs to deceive people into worshiping the first beast.This opponent represents religious power organized in support of thefirst beast (13:11–18; 19:20; 20:10). The dragon, the beastfrom the sea, and the false prophet constitute the unholy trinity.God’s enemies also include people (usually called the“inhabitants of the earth”) who follow the beast (13:8,12), indulge in the ways of this world (17:2), and persecutebelievers (6:10; 11:10).

3.The Lamb of God. Jesus,the Lamb of God, plays a central role in God’s redemptive plan.In Revelation the Lamb is clearly identified as a divine figure whoshares in the authority, glory, and worship reserved for God (5:6,9–14; 7:10, 17; 12:10; 21:22–23; 22:1, 3). Expressionsthat refer to God are also used of Jesus, thereby affirming Jesus’deity (e.g., “Alpha and Omega,” “Lord” [seealso 1:4–5]). Revelation highlights the Lamb’ssacrificial death as the key to his victory over evil, paradoxicalthough it may be (1:5, 18; 5:9). As the slaughtered yet risen Lamb(1:17–18), Jesus is able to identify with his suffering people(1:9; 12:17; 20:4). The Lamb promises to return as the warrior-judgeto defeat God’s enemies and rescue God’s people (1:7;3:11; 16:15; 19:11–21). The famous battle with the forces ofevil is recorded in 19:20: “But the beast was captured, andwith it the false prophet.” The two beasts are then condemnedto the lake of fire, and their followers become the banquet meal forthe birds of prey.

4.God’s people.The people of God figure prominently in the book of Revelation. Johnuses a variety of terms and images to portray God’s people(e.g., church, saints, great multitude, bride of the Lamb, newJerusalem). These people have been redeemed by the Lamb, and theycontinue to rely upon his sacrificial death in spite of opposition(1:5; 5:9; 14:3–4). They are a genuinely multicultural people,as indicated by the seven uses of a fourfold formula: every “tribe,language, people, and nation” (5:9; 7:9; 11:9; 13:7; 14:6; cf.17:15). They are also a persecuted people (1:9; 2:9–10; 7:14;11:9–10; 12:10; 13:16–17) and at times even a martyredpeople (6:9–11; 16:6; 17:6; 18:24; 19:2; 20:4). ThroughoutRevelation, God’s people are characterized as those who obeythe commandments of God (1:2, 9; 6:9; 12:17; 14:12; 20:4; 22:9) andwho hold fast to the testimony of Jesus (1:2, 9; 6:9; 12:17; 19:10;20:4). They are a tempted people who are warned throughout the bookto endure in faith (13:10; 14:12; 18:4). Like their Savior, theyconquer evil by holding fast to their confession even to the point ofdeath (12:11).

5.God’s judgment.God’s judgment of evil plays a crucial role in the book. Thecentral section of Revelation contains three series of sevenjudgments: the seals (6:1–8:1), the trumpets (8:2–11:19),and the bowls (15:1–16:21). God sends these plagues on hisenemies to demonstrate his power and to vindicate his people. Theseimages of judgment also encourage repentance and remind people thatGod will win the battle against evil. Using two images ofjudgment—the grain harvest (14:14–16) and the winepress(14:17–20)—chapter 14 presents a clear choice: fear andglorify God (14:7) or face God’s inescapable and eternaljudgment (14:11, 19). God’s final judgment on “Babylonthe great, the mother of prostitutes” is reported in 17:1–19:6.Babylon represents the worldly system that has blasphemed God andpersecuted his people. God’s final judgment of the satanictrinity, their followers, and death itself is described in 19:11–21;20:7–15. Evil has been destroyed, preparing the way for therestoration of creation.

6.The paradise of God.The story culminates in God’s ultimate restoration of hispeople and his creation—the paradise of God. What God began todo in Gen. 1–2 he now completes in Rev. 21–22. The riverof life replaces the sea. The tree of life supplies food for all.God’s throne as a symbol of God’s sovereign rule over allreality serves as the source of life. God has kept his promise toconquer his enemies, vindicate his people, and restore his creation.The Abrahamic covenant of Gen. 12, that God would bless “allpeoples on earth” (v.3), is fulfilled as the tree of lifeprovides healing for the nations (Rev. 22:2). The new heaven and newearth is identified primarily as the place where God lives among hispeople (22:4). In the paradise of God there will be no more Satan orsin or death or evil of any kind. God’s people will bask in hisglory and respond in worship.

7.The present struggle.A final theme of Revelation is the believer’s struggle to liveout God’s story in the present. The Lamb’s followers relyupon the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus for their victory,but they continue to live in enemy territory. They long for the newheaven and new earth, but they must wage war in the present againstthe forces of evil. Jesus challenges the seven churches to “overcome”or “conquer,” a requirement for inheriting his promisesof eternal life, provision, justice, victory, and the presence of God(21:7). A voice from heaven summarizes what it means to overcome:“They [Christians] triumphed over him [Satan] by the blood ofthe Lamb and by the word of their testimony; they did not love theirlives so much as to shrink from death” (12:11).

Theytriumph in the same way that Jesus triumphed: victory throughfaithfulness, even if it includes suffering. This calls for rejectingfalse teaching, resisting idolatry, living righteously, and refusingto compromise. Triumphing includes authentic faith that results inobedience to Jesus. Above all, to triumph or overcome means to followthe Lamb.

Theseseven themes of Revelation reveal how the book offers hope to thosewho are suffering for the cause of Christ and warning to those whoare compromising with the world. Revelation presents the finalchapter in God’s grand plan to defeat evil, reverse the curseof sin, transform creation, and live forever among his people. Forfirst-century readers or twenty-first-century readers, Revelationoffers a dramatic and empowering vision of what it means to followJesus.

The blessings and curses of Scripture are grounded in aworldview that understands the sovereign God to be the ultimatedispenser of each. Blessings and curses are not the outcomes ofmagicians who attempt to manipulate the gods for personal gain orretribution. Rather, God is the giver of blessing and ultimately thefinal judge who determines withdrawal or ban. He is the source ofevery good gift (James 1:17) and the one who gives power and strengthto prosper (Deut. 8:17).

Someview the nature of blessing and curse as simply a gift from God,while others see it as an act in which one party transmits power forlife to another party. Perhaps the common thread between views is theidea of relationship.

Terminology.In the OT, the key Hebrew terms for blessing are the verb barak andthe noun berakah. When the context of their use identifies a personor a living creature as the object of blessing, the basic idea is toprovide someone with special power that will ultimately enhance hisor her life. The blessing theme is also illuminated by means of wordssuch as “grace,” “favor,” “loyalty,”and “happiness.”

Inthe NT, the Greek term eulogeō and its cognates are bestunderstood in terms of the impartation of favor, power, and benefits.The makarios word group describes a state or status of beingfortunate, happy, or privileged.

TheOT curse vocabulary includes the ideas of disgracing, makingcontemptible, and imprecation. The NT curse terminology comprises theideas of curse, slander, or consecrated to destruction.

OldTestament.Thesovereign God sometimes employs agents of blessing in his creation.The blessing extends to the nations through Abraham (Gen. 12:3), toJacob through Isaac (Gen. 26–27), and to the people through thepriests (Num. 6:24–26).

Thetheme of blessing/curse is used to structure Deut. 27–28 andLev. 26 (cf. Josh. 8:34) in the overall covenant format of thesebooks. Scholars have observed that the object of this format is notsymmetry or logical unity but fullness. From this perspective, theblessing/curse structure functions to enforce obedience for thepurpose of ensuring a relationship. The blessing of Deuteronomy alsoincludes the benefits of prosperity, power, and fertility. The curse,on the other hand, is the lack or withdrawal of benefits associatedwith the relationship.

Thecreation narratives are marked with the theme and terminology ofblessing (Gen. 1:22, 28; 2:3; cf. 5:2; 9:1). The objects of blessingin Gen. 1:22, 28 (cf. 5:2; 9:1) are the living creatures and humanbeings created in the image of God. As the revelation progresses, theblessing of God is particularized in the lives of Noah (Gen. 6–8),Abraham (Gen. 12–25) and his descendants, and the nation ofIsrael and its leadership (Gen. 26–50). In these contexts, theblessing is intended to engender offspring and to prosper recipientsin material and physical ways (compare a similar NT emphasis in Acts17:25; cf. Matt. 5:45; 6:25–33; Acts 14:17).

Theblessing of God is also extended to inanimate objects that enhanceand prosper one’s quality of life. The seventh day of creationis the object of blessing (Gen. 2:7; Exod. 20:11), perhaps giving ita sense of well-being and health. Objects and activities of life suchas baskets and kneading troughs (Deut. 28:5), barns (Deut. 28:8), andwork (Job 1:10; Ps. 90:17) are blessed.

Godpromises to bless those who fear him (Ps. 128:1). Blessing isdesigned for those who, out of a deep sense of awe of God’scharacter, love and trust him. The God-fearer confidently embracesGod’s promises, obediently serves, and takes seriously God’swarnings. The blessings itemized in Ps. 128 are comparable to thosedetailed in Deut. 28 relating to productivity and fruitfulness (cf.Ps. 128:2 with Deut. 28:12; Ps. 128:3 with Deut. 28:4, 11). TheDeuteronomic concept of blessing and curse is questioned whenGod-fearers undergo a period of suffering or experience God’sapparent absence (e.g., Joseph, Job; cf. Jesus).

NewTestament.Inthe NT, blessings are not exclusively spiritual. God gives both foodand joy (Acts 14:17) and provides the necessities of life (Matt.6:25–33). The NT does connect blessing with Christ, and itfocuses attention on the spiritual quality of the gift thatoriginates from Christ himself and its intended benefit for spiritualindividuals.

Regardingcurse, the NT explains that Christ bore the curse of the law to freeus from its deadening effect (Gal. 3:10–13). Revelation 22:3anticipates a time when the curse associated with sin will becompletely removed and the blessing associated with creation willprevail.

Of the 206 bones that comprise the adult skeletal structure,the Bible mentions only a few: rib (Gen. 1:21–22), hip (Gen.32:25), skull (Judg. 9:53), jaw (Isa. 30:28), and legs (John19:31–33). The Hebrew noun ’etsem shows evidence of bothcollective “limbs” (masc. pl.) and an individual sense ofbones (fem. pl.). Nevertheless, while bones could be isolated,anatomical description tended more toward a holistic sense so thatbones could refer to physical and psychological collapse in laments(Jer. 23:9) or to the entire person as a corpse (Gen. 50:25; 1 Sam.31:13).

Overwhelmingly,however, anatomical “units” are used metaphorically forhuman emotions or attitudes: shame becomes “decay in [the]bones” (Prov. 12:4), fear makes “bones shake” (Job4:14), and a sad spirit “dries up the bones” (Prov.17:22). The phrase “bone of my bones” is an idiom, akinship formula used to describe unity and close relatives (Gen.2:23; cf. 2 Sam. 5:1).

The book of Exodus (the second book of the OT and of thePentateuch) continues the story begun in Gen. 12 of the election ofAbraham as God’s choice for the beginning of a new people.Abraham’s great-grandson Joseph was taken to Egypt as a slavebut rose to power there. Eventually, his father, Jacob, along withhis brothers and their families, made the trek to Egypt and settledthere. Both Jacob and Joseph died in Egypt, and it is here that thebook of Exodus picks up. In Egypt the Israelites at first found asafe haven, only to be enslaved later by a “new king”(Exod. 1:8). The book of Exodus tells the story of the Israelites’struggles in Egypt, their deliverance through Moses (perhaps thecentral human figure in the OT), their trek to Mount Sinai, and theircontinued movement to Canaan, the promised land.

Authorship,Date, and Historical Issues

Authorshipand date.The authorship of Exodus must be considered together with the largerissue of the authorship of the Pentateuch (see Pentateuch). This isone of the more central issues in the history of modern OTscholarship. Generally, Moses was considered the sole or essentialauthor throughout much of the history of Jewish and Christianinterpretation. This is not to say that careful readers of thePentateuch did not raise thoughtful questions concerning passagesthat were problematic for Mosaic authorship. For example, thefifth-century translator Jerome raised the question of whether Mosescould have recorded the story of his own death (Deut. 34). Seriousquestions concerning Mosaic authorship, however, did not become thedominant trend among scholars until the seventeenth century. Thepresence of numerous post-Mosaic elements as well as repetition insome key stories (e.g., the two creation stories in Gen. 1–2and the repetition in the flood narrative in Gen. 6–9)suggested that the authorship question might be more complicated thantraditionally understood. Some of these earlier discussions were notnecessarily hostile to divine inspiration or to the notion of “basic”or “essential” Mosaic authorship. Nevertheless, thescholarly debates were synthesized in the latter half of thenineteenth century by Julius Wellhausen and his well-knownDocumentary Hypothesis. His theory presented considerable challengesto traditional views of pentateuchal authorship, and the DocumentaryHypothesis soon became widely accepted throughout the scholarlyworld.

Wellhausen’sviews have undergone continual revision and refinement, as well asessential rejection. In contemporary academic dialogue, it is fair tosay that precisely who wrote the Pentateuch that we have and when itwas finalized remain open questions. A commonly accepted position,also among evangelicals, is that the Pentateuch we have today (i.e.,its final form) is not the work of someone living in the middle ofthe second millennium BC (the traditional date for the life ofMoses). The question is not of Moses’ genius and specialpreparation for the task before him, or of his having received thelaw on Mount Sinai and having recorded certain events; rather, thequestion specifically concerns the historical period in which thePentateuch as we know it came to be. And with respect to thisspecific question, contemporary biblical scholars commonly attributethe final form of the Pentateuch to later scribes (in the exilic andpostexilic eras), using older material, both written and oral, atleast some of it going back to Moses himself. Hence, terms such as“essential Mosaic authorship,” although not preciselydefined, have become common designations. References to thePentateuch as the “Law of Moses” or similar phrases donot function as authorial statements in the modern sense of the word(i.e., refer to the one sitting down and doing the writing), butrather reflect the close association between the text and the eventsthat lie behind it. We are perhaps not unwise to allow the questionof the human authorship of the Pentateuch to remain open while alsoconfessing that God is free to bring his word into existence in anyway he sees fit.

Historicity.One reason why Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch has been such afocal point, however, concerns the question of the historicity ofExodus and of the Pentateuch in general. If Moses is not the authorin the usual sense of the word, and if the Pentateuch as we know itwas written by hands much removed from the events themselves, how canwe be assured of its historical reliability? This is a fair question,although it assumes that eyewitnesses (or near eyewitnesses) wouldbetter guarantee historical accuracy than those more removed from theevents. But one could just as easily argue that having somehistorical distance could make one more perceptive about thesignificance of past events. More important, however, such a viewcould appear to be limiting God’s ability to allow thePentateuch to develop through a historical process over a certainlength of time. Since God is the ultimate author, non-Mosaicauthorship does not imply an inability to produce a historicallyreliable text.

Withrespect to Exodus specifically, more serious questions concerninghistoricity have come from archaeological evidence—or better,lack of evidence. First, there are two reigning possibilities for thedate of the exodus. The traditional date is around 1446/1447 BC andis based essentially on a literal reading of 1Kings 6:1, whichputs the exodus 480 years before the fourth year of Solomon’sreign, around 966/967 BC. The alternate date is around 1270/1260 BCand is based on a symbolic reading of 1Kings 6:1 and indirectarchaeological evidence concerning “Pithom and Rameses”(Exod. 1:11) and some conquest sites. Concerning the latter, there isevidence for the destruction of some Canaanite towns, beginningaround 1230–1220 BC, which, according to the biblical record,were destroyed right after Israel’s entrance into Canaan.Hence, if the evidence for the destruction of these towns points toabout 1230–1220 BC, a rough date of 1270/1260 BC for the exodusaccounts for the intervening forty years of wilderness wandering.

However,biblical archaeologists have persistently maintained that there is nopositive archaeological evidence for the existence of Israeliteslaves in Egypt during the time when the exodus would have takenplace. This absence of evidence has been understood in very differentways by people of different camps. For some, the absence of any sortof Israelite material remains in Egypt, not to mention the lack ofany written Egyptian record of Israelite presence, is a fairly clearindication that such events never took place; modern scholarship isreplete with theories to account for the biblical record, fromcomplete fabrication to later legendizing of sparse, ancient records.Others consider the absence of written evidence to indicate Egyptianembarrassment at having been bested by a group of slaves (why wouldthey want to keep a record of that?). The absence of evidence ofspecifically Israelite material culture in Egypt is attributed eitherto Israelite assimilation into Egyptian culture or to similaritieswith other Semitic peoples in Egypt during the second millenniumBC.

Althoughthe question of the historicity of the exodus is very much an opensubject, recent work, particularly by evangelical scholars, has begunmounting arguments for the presence of Semitic peoples insecond-millennium Egypt and therefore for the historical plausibilityof Israelite presence, enslavement, and release from Egyptiancaptivity. From a scholarly point of view, this issue will not besettled in the near future, and much of the debate includes questionsof a more philosophical nature, such as “What does it mean to‘record’ history?” “What did it mean torecord history in the ancient world as opposed to our modern world?”“What type of historical account should we expect from ancientIsraelites?” These and other similar questions broaden thediscussion considerably and ensure that it will be ongoing.

Outline

Inits simplest outline, Exodus may be roughly divided into two parts,which highlight the Israelites’ departure from Egypt and theirsojourn at the foot of Mount Sinai:

I.Departure from Egypt (1–15)

II.Journey to and Arrival at Mount Sinai (16–40)

Asubdivision of sectionII can easily be justified, since twobasic events at Mount Sinai are recounted in chapters 16–40,the giving of the law and the building of the tabernacle:

I.Departure from Egypt (1–15)

II.Mount Sinai: Law (16–24)

III.Mount Sinai: Tabernacle (25–40)

‘

Thisthree-point outline gives the broad contours of Exodus, but a bitmore detail will perhaps provide a more useful presentation of thebook’s contents:

I.Departure from Egypt (1–15)

A.Prelude and call of Moses (1–6)

B.Plagues (7–12)

C.Departure (13–15)

II.Mount Sinai: Law (16–24)

A.Journey to Sinai (16–18)

B.Ten Commandments (19–20)

C.The Book of the Covenant (21–24)

III.Mount Sinai: Tabernacle (25–40)

A.Instructions for the tabernacle (25–31)

B.Rebellion and forgiveness (32–34)

C.Building the tabernacle (35–40)

Whatis immediately striking, even through such a sparse outline, is howmuch space is devoted to the events on Mount Sinai. Exodus is muchmore than a record of historical events, as one might find in amodern textbook of American history. It is, rather, a profoundtheological statement, both in its own right as well as part of thePentateuch as a whole, whose focus is not simply on the Israelites’release from Egypt but also on their arrival at Mount Sinai. Thestructure of the book, in other words, leads us to understandsomething of the book’s theology.

Theology

Creation.Already in the first chapter we see connections to Genesis, whichtell us that we cannot read Exodus in isolation. For example, Exod.1:1 closely parallels Gen. 46:8. The latter speaks of the Israelitesgoing down into Egypt, and the former picks up on this theme, thusreminding us that Israel’s presence in Egypt was not anaccident and that Exodus is a continuation of the story begun inGenesis. Likewise, the use of creation language in Exod. 1:7 (theIsraelites were fruitful, multiplying, becoming numerous, filling theearth; compare to Gen. 1:21, 28; 8:17; 9:1) signals that Israel’simpending drama is somehow connected to creation. That point is madeclearer in the chapters that follow. Perhaps most central is thecrossing of the Red Sea. As in Gen. 1:9, where the dry land appearswhere once there was water, here the dry land (Exod. 14:21) appearsto make a path through the sea.

Thereis, in fact, a fair amount of Exodus that plays on this theologicaltheme of creation and the reversal of creation. In ancient NearEastern conceptions of creation, water represented chaos. The gods’role was to tame the chaos so that the earth could be inhabited.Separating the land from the primordial sea was an important part ofthat, and this is reflected in the biblical account in Gen. 1. Theflood in Gen. 6–9 is a reversal of that creative act, where Godallows the waters of chaos to come crashing down on his creation,thus making it uninhabitable again. Exodus continues this theme, buthere creation is called upon to aid the Israelites in their escape,whereas it is used against the Egyptians. The ten plagues, forexample, are declarations that Israel’s God controls thecosmos, whereas Egypt’s gods stand by helplessly. The plague ofdarkness in particular is a graphic reversal of what God had done inGenesis, the creation of light and the separation of light fromdarkness. Israel’s deliverance from Egypt is, in other words,another act of creation: the same God who brought order to cosmicchaos in Gen. 1 is now unleashing the forces of creation to save hispeople and punish their enemies. And whereas Pharaoh’sEgyptians are able to reproduce the first sign and the first twoplagues, it is only Israel’s God who can end the plagues andrestore order to chaos.

Israelhas been delivered from Egypt for a purpose, and that purpose beginsto become clear in the chapters that follow their departure. Thenewly created people of Israel are not delivered from Egypt so thatthey can be “free” from bondage. The key struggle in theopening chapters of Exodus, indeed, the whole reason for the tenplagues, is to determine to whom Israel belongs, whether to Pharaohor to Yahweh, Israel’s God. The Hebrew word ’abad canmean both “serve” (in the sense of servitude) and“worship.” In a wonderful play on words, the questionbeing asked in the opening chapters is “Whom will Israel ’abad,Pharaoh or Yahweh?” But Yahweh claims his people, not so thatthey can be liberated to go where they please, but rather so thatthey are free to move from serving/worshiping Pharaoh toserving/worshiping Yahweh on Mount Sinai.

Thisis why so much of Exodus concerns the journey to Mount Sinai and whathappens there. Much of the “action” may end by chapter19, but the reason for the action is to get the Israelites to MountSinai so that they can begin their proper life of service to Yahwehand Yahweh alone. And this service involves two things: properbehavior (law) and proper worship (tabernacle). These are the maintopics of the remainder of the book of Exodus. And the fact that somuch text is dedicated to these two topics, which may be ofrelatively little interest to Christian readers, is an indication oftheir central importance to the theology of theOT.

Law.It is important to understand that the law was given to theIsraelites after they had been redeemed from Egypt, not before. Thelaw is a gift to those who have been saved. It is not something to befollowed in order to become saved. Israel is, as we read in Exod.4:22–23, God’s son. This is why Israel was delivered fromEgypt, and this is why Israel was given the gift of the law.

Thepurpose of the law, therefore, was not to prove to God that hispeople were somehow worthy of his covenant with them. The law wasgiven so that Israel would be molded into a new people, one whosehearts were wholly devoted to God and so could be the instrumentthrough which not only Israel but also the nations themselves wouldbe blessed (see Gen. 12:1–3). As Exod. 19:6 puts it, Israel isto become a “kingdom of priests”—that is, the “holynation” that would perform the mediatorial role of blessing thenations. The law, therefore, was not a burden but a delight, a giftfrom God to a redeemed people.

Also,the laws that God gives in Exodus are not necessarily new, as if noone had ever heard of these sorts of things before. Murder andadultery were considered to be wrong long before the Ten Commandmentswere given. Likewise, the laws of Exod. 21–23 (often referredto as the Book of the Covenant) are not new but rather reflect otherancient law codes much older than Israel’s (regardless of whenone dates the exodus). What makes these laws different, however, isthat these are the laws that Yahweh, the true God, gives to hispeople; these are the laws that reflect his character and, if theIsraelites follow them, will ensure that they reflect God’scharacter to one another and the surrounding nations. In other words,the law performs not so much an exclusionary role as a missionalrole. Or perhaps better, the Israelites are being trained to beseparate, and different, from surrounding peoples in order toproperly fulfill their holy, mediating, priestly function.

Tabernacle.The section on the tabernacle begins in chapter 25 and extends to theend of the book, chapter 40. In between is an important episode, therebellion involving the making of the golden calf. Just as the lawrepresents much more than “rules to live by,” thetabernacle is more than just a building for sacrificing animals. Theimportance of the tabernacle can be seen by focusing on some keyelements.

Chapters25–31 provide the list of instructions for the tabernacle. Forcenturies, rabbis and biblical scholars have noticed a pattern inthese chapters. Seven times the phrase is repeated “The Lordsaid to Moses,” and the seventh time is in 31:12 to introducethe topic of Sabbath observance. Just like the creation of the cosmosin Gen. 1, the tabernacle is a product of a six-stage creative act(“And the Lord said”) followed by rest. Some havesuggested that the tabernacle is a microcosm of creation: forexample, cherubim are worked into the curtains, so to look up is tolook at the heavens; the lampstand is a sort of tree of life, as inthe garden of Eden. To be in the tabernacle is to be in touch withcreation as it was meant to be, in the garden apart from the chaos oflife outside.

Chapters35–40 relay how the instructions are carried out. This sectionbegins with reference to the Sabbath (35:1–3), which is how thefirst section ends. In between, we find the episode of the goldencalf (chaps. 32–34), which is about false worship. TheIsraelites nearly succeed in undoing all that God had planned inbringing his people out of Egypt. Still, through Moses’intervention, God’s plan is not thwarted, and so chapter 35does not miss a beat, picking up where chapter 31 leaves off, withthe Sabbath. Some scholars see here a pattern of creation (chaps.25–31), fall (chaps. 32–34), and redemption (chaps.35–40).

Thetabernacle is an important theological entity in Exodus: it is heavenon earth. It is a truly holy space where God communes with his holy(law-keeping) people. This is the ultimate purpose of the exodus: tocreate a people who embody God’s character and who worship himin purity. Then God would be with his people wherever they go(40:36–38).

The book of Genesis (“Origins”) is well namedbecause it provides the foundation for the rest of the Bible andspeaks of the beginnings of the world, humanity, sin, redemption, thepeople of God, covenant, marriage, Sabbath, work, and much more.Genesis is the first chapter of the Pentateuch, a five-part story ofthe origins of the nation of Israel. Genesis is the preamble to thataccount, leading up to the pivotal moment of the exodus and the movetoward the promised land.

Authorship

Asnoted above, Genesis is the opening to the Pentateuch as a whole, sothe question of the authorship of Genesis is connected to thequestion of the authorship of the Pentateuch as a whole. Genesis (andthe entire Pentateuch) is anonymous, though Moses is said to havewritten down certain traditions that were included in the Pentateuch(Exod. 17:14; 24:4; 34:27; Num. 33:2; Deut. 31:22).

Latertradition speaks of the “law of Moses” (Josh. 1:7–8)or the “Book of Moses” (2Chron. 25:4; Ezra 6:18;Neh. 13:1), though it is not certain whether these refer to theentire Pentateuch or merely to portions of it that were associatedwith Moses. The NT writers, as well as Jesus himself, speak of thePentateuch in connection with Moses (e.g., Matt. 19:7; 22:24; Mark7:10; 12:26; John 1:17; 5:46; 7:23).

Thequestion of Moses’ role in writing the Pentateuch is morecomplicated, however. For instance, there are indications thatGenesis was updated well after the death of Moses. Traditionally,these passages are called “post-Mosaica,” because theycontain information that could be available only after the death ofMoses. For example, Deut. 34 speaks of Moses’ death and burial.Apparently so much time has elapsed since his death that the writercan say, “to this day no one knows where his grave is”(v. 6). The writer then states, “since then, no prophet hasrisen in Israel like Moses” (v. 10), which also presumes aconsiderable length of time has passed. Other examples include Gen.11:31, which refers to Abraham’s hometown as “Ur of theChaldeans.” Although Ur was a very ancient city, the Chaldeanswere an Aramaic-speaking tribe that only occupied Ur long after thetime of Moses. Similarly, in Gen. 14:14 a city by the name of “Dan”is mentioned, but we know from Judg. 18 that this city only receivedthis name during the period of the judges.

Despitethese considerations, some scholars are still comfortable ascribingsome “essential” authorship role to Moses. (For the mainalternative theory for the authorship and date of the writing ofGenesis, see Documentary Hypothesis; Pentateuch.)

Structureand Outline

Genesismay be outlined in more than one way. One method is to follow thetoledot formulas that serve as an organizing structure for the book.The phrase “these are the toledot of X” (where X is thepersonal name of the character whose sons are the subject of thenarrative that follows) is repeated ten times: 2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1;11:10, 27; 25:12, 19; 36:1 (cf. 36:9); 37:2 (see also 10:32; 25:13).For instance, Gen. 11:27 begins, “These are the toledot ofTerah” (NIV: “This is the account of Terah’s familyline”), while the account that follows is the story of Terah’sson Abraham. Toledot is best translated as “family history”or “account.” Hence, one can take Genesis as having aprologue (1:1–2:3) followed by ten episodes.

Interms of content and style, the book falls into three main units asfollows:

I.The Primeval History (Gen. 1:1–11:26)

II.The Patriarchal Narrative (Gen. 11:27–36:43)

III.The Joseph Story (Gen. 37–50)

I.The primeval history (Gen. 1:1–11:26).The book opens with an account of creation given in two parts.Genesis 1:1–2:4a provides a creation account that describes thesix days in which God created the heavens and the earth, followed bya seventh day of rest. Genesis 2:4b–25 then provides a secondaccount of creation, this time with a focus on the creation of Adamand Eve. Genesis 3 then narrates the first sin of humanity, whichintroduces sin and death into the world. Genesis 4–11 providesfour additional stories (the murder of Abel by Cain, theintermarrying of the “sons of God” with the “daughtersof men,” the flood, and the tower of Babel). These stories showa creation gone wrong, God’s move to start over again with Noahand his family, and the persistence of sin thereafter. All of thisleads to the story of the patriarchs, where God’s plan to setthings right takes a decisive turn. These stories are connected bygenealogies that mark the march of time as well as providesignificant theological commentary.

II.The patriarchal narrative (Gen. 11:27–36:43).The middle section of the book of Genesis turns its attention to thepatriarchs, so called because they are the fathers of the nation ofIsrael. The style of the book changes at this point, so that ratherthan following the story of all the world and moving at a fast pace,the narrative slows down and focuses on God creating a people to obeyhim and to bring those blessings to the whole world (12:1–3).God now determines to restore the blessing lost at Eden by reachingthe world through the descendants of one individual, Abraham.

Abraham’sfather, Terah, took Abram (as Abraham was then known), Abram’swife Sarai (Sarah), and Terah’s grandson Lot and left Ur tosettle in Harran in northern Mesopotamia. No explanation is givenwhy. While they are settled in Harran, God commands Abraham to leaveUr in Mesopotamia and travel to Canaan. God promises that he willmake him a great nation (implying land and many descendants), andthat he will be blessed and will be a blessing to the nations (Gen.12:1–3). That blessing requires Abraham and Sarah to havechildren, and this sets up much of the drama of his story. OftenAbraham reacts in fear and not faith, but at the end of his story hehas a solid confidence in God’s ability to take care of him andbring all the promises to fulfillment (Gen. 22).

Isaac,not Ishmael (Abraham’s son through Sarah’s maidservantHagar; see Gen. 16), is the conduit of the promises to futuregenerations. Even so, Isaac is not a highly developed character inthe book of Genesis, although his near sacrifice in Gen. 22 iscertainly a matter of great interest. The episode in his life thatreceives the lengthiest attention is the courtship with Rebekah (Gen.24), and there the focus is primarily on her.

Theaccount of Isaac’s life gives way to an account of his sonJacob. Jacob is a complex character. The first episodes of his storyare about how he, the younger, inherits the blessing and becomes theconduit for the promise rather than his older brother, Esau. Jacobbecomes an example of how God uses the foolish things of the world toaccomplish his purposes. That the story of the patriarchs is apreamble to the story of the founding of Israel becomes obvious whenJacob’s name is changed to “Israel” after he fightswith God (Gen. 32:22–32) and his wives give birth to twelvesons, who give their names to the twelve tribes of Israel.

III.The Joseph story (Gen. 37–50).The third section of Genesis focuses on the twelve sons of Jacob, inparticular Joseph. A main theme seems to be God’s providentialpreservation of the family of the promise, in the context of adevastating famine. Joseph himself expresses the theme of thissection at the end of the narrative, after his father dies and hisbrothers now wonder whether he will seek revenge against them. Hereassures them by his statement that although they had meant theiractions to harm him, he knows that God has used these very actionsfor good, for the salvation of the family of God (Gen. 50:19–20).Yes, they had just wanted to get rid of him, but God has used theirjealousy to bring Joseph to Egypt. The wife of his owner had wantedto frame him for rape, but God has used this false accusation inorder to have him thrown into jail, where he meets two of Pharaoh’schief advisers. He had demonstrated to them his ability to interpretdreams, so when the chief cupbearer is restored to a position ofinfluence, he can advise Pharaoh himself to turn to Joseph tointerpret his disturbing dreams. These dreams have allowed Pharaoh,with Joseph’s help, to prepare for the famine. Joseph has risento great prominence in Egypt, so when the famine comes, he is in aposition to help his family, and the promise can continue to the nextgenerations.

Amongother secondary, yet important, themes of the Joseph narrative arethe rising prominence of Judah and the lessening significance ofReuben. Judah at first is pictured as self-serving (Gen. 38), but bythe end of the story he is willing to sacrifice himself for the goodof his father and family (Gen. 44:18–34). This story thusdemonstrates why the descendants of Judah have dominance over thedescendants of the firstborn, Reuben, in later Israelite history.Also, the Joseph story recounts how Israel came to Egypt. This setsup the events of the book of Exodus.

Styleand Genre

Style.Genesis is written in Hebrew prose of a high literary style. Wordsare carefully chosen not only to communicate the message of the bookbut also to attract the reader’s interest and attention.

Genre.Genesis is an account of the origins of the cosmos, humanity, and thepeople of God. Thus, it is proper to refer to the book as a work ofhistory. Of course, there is more than one type of history. Somehistories focus on wars, others on economics or politics. Moreover,Genesis is not history in the modern sense but follows ancientconventions, which do not call for scrupulous accuracy. The centralconcern of Genesis, as with the majority of biblical histories, isthe relationship between God and his people. So, it is appropriate toidentify Genesis as a theological history.

Somereaders misunderstand the nature of the historical information thatthe book provides. For example, Gen. 1–2 communicates to thereader that it is the true God, not a god such as the BabylonianMarduk or the Canaanite Baal, who created the cosmos. The way some ofthe stories are told provides a challenge to rival stories from otherancient religions. One example is how the Bible describes thecreation of Adam from the dust of the ground and the breath of God.This contrasts with the Mesopotamian creation account Enuma Elish, inwhich the god Marduk creates the first humans from the clay of theearth and the blood of a demon god. The biblical flood story also maybe compared to other ancient flood stories, especially the account ofthe flood found in the Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh. Genesis clearlyinteracts with such mythological stories to communicate importanttruths about the primeval period.

Message

Therich and complex book of Genesis pre-sents a profound messageconcerning God and his relationship with human beings. This shortarticle cannot do justice to the book’s depth and importance,but it can point to what is perhaps its most important theme: God’sblessing.

Genesis1–2 teaches that God created Adam and Eve and blessed them.They had everything they needed in the garden of Eden. They enjoyed aperfectly harmonious relationship with God and with each other. Theywanted for nothing.

Genesis3 explains how this blessed existence was disrupted. By choosing torebel against God, Adam and Eve ruptured their relationship with Godand, in consequence, with each other as well. They were expelled fromthe garden of Eden.

Evenin the midst of his judgment, however, God began the work ofrestoring the blessing to his human creatures (Gen. 3:15). Thusbegins the relentless work of God to bring restoration to his people.

NewTestament Connections

Genesisis the foundation not just of the Pentateuch, and not just of the OT,but of the entire Bible. The story that begins with creation and fallis followed by the history of redemption, which continues into the NTand which understands Jesus Christ as the one whose death andresurrection serve to restore God’s blessing to his people. Thefull restoration of relationship awaits the consummation of historyand the new Jerusalem, which is described in language telling us thatheaven is a restoration (and more) of the conditions enjoyed by Adamand Eve in the garden of Eden (Rev. 21–22, esp. Rev. 22:2).

Ofthe many allusions to and quotations of Genesis found in the NT, onlya few representative examples may be described here.

Paulpoints to the Abrahamic promise of the seed in Gen. 12:1–3 andproclaims that Jesus is that seed (Gal. 3:15–16). This claim issurprising in light of the OT’s clear understanding that it wasthe multiple descendants of Abraham constituting Israel who fulfilledthis promise (Gen. 15:15). Paul would have known this, but herecognizes that Jesus is the ultimate descendant of Abraham, and thatanyone who belongs to Jesus, Jew or Gentile, is also a participant inthe Abrahamic promise (Gal. 3:29).

Asecond example comes from the way in which the author of Hebrewscites the Melchizedek tradition of Gen. 14:17–20. In Genesis,Melchizedek is a mysterious figure who is introduced as thepriest-king of Salem (Jerusalem), whom Abraham acknowledges as afellow worshiper of the true God. In order to make his argument thatJesus is the ultimate priest, the author of Hebrews connects Jesuswith Melchizedek rather than with Aaron and asserts the superiorityof Melchizedek because Abraham (and thus also Levi, Aaron’sancestor) paid respects to this man (Heb. 7:1–10).

Afinal example comes from the Joseph narrative. Earlier, we observedthat the narrative shows how God used the evil actions of people inorder to save many people. In this, the Joseph narrative anticipatesthe death of Christ, who was nailed to the cross by the hands ofwicked people, but God used this very action to accomplish a muchgreater salvation than he did through Joseph (see Acts 2:22–24).

The final book of the Bible is known by its opening line:“The revelation of Jesus Christ” (1:1 ESV, NRSV, KJV).This phrase could indicate a “revelation about Jesus Christ”(the main character), or a “revelation from Jesus Christ”(the primary giver of the message to John; so NIV), or, as manybelieve, some of both.

Inpowerful language and vivid imagery, Revelation presents theconclusion to God’s grand story of salvation, in which hedefeats evil, reverses the curse of sin, restores creation, and livesforever among his people. Although the details are often difficult tounderstand, the main idea of Revelation is clear: God is in controland will successfully accomplish his purposes. In the end, God wins.As a transformative vision, Revelation empowers its readers/listenersto persevere faithfully in a fallen world until their Lord returns.

Genreand Historical Context

Genre.Revelation is best understood in light of its literary genre and itshistorical context. The literary genre of Revelation—letter,prophecy, and apocalyptic literature—explains much of thestrangeness of the book. The entire book is a single letter to sevenchurches in Asia Minor (note the letter greeting in 1:4–5 andthe benediction in 22:21). John is commanded to write what he seesand send it to the seven churches (1:11). A letter to seven churchesis in reality a letter to the whole church, since the number “seven”symbolizes wholeness or completeness in Revelation. NT letters wereintended to be read aloud to the gathering of Christians, and thesame is true of Revelation. The book opens with a blessing on the onewho reads the letter aloud and on those who listen (1:3) and closeswith a stern warning to anyone (reader or listener) who changes thebook (22:18–19). Like other NT letters, Revelation alsoaddresses a specific situation. For this reason, any approach toRevelation that ignores the situation faced by the seven churcheswill fail to grasp its central message. Many say that the message ofRevelation extends beyond the first century, but it certainly doesnot ignore its first audience.

Revelationis also a letter that is prophetic. In both the opening (1:3) and theclosing (22:7, 10, 18–19), the book is described as a“prophecy” (cf. 19:10). In 22:9 the angel identifies Johnas a prophet: “I am a fellow servant with you and with yourfellow prophets.” As a prophetic book in line with OT propheticbooks, Revelation contains both prediction about the future andproclamation about God’s will for the present, with emphasisfalling on the latter.

Finally,Revelation is a prophetic letter that is apocalyptic. In the openingphrase, “the revelation of Jesus Christ,” the term“revelation” is a translation of the Greek termapokalypsis,meaning “to unveil” or “to reveal” what hasbeen hidden. Most believe that apocalyptic literature grew out ofHebrew prophecy. The OT books of Daniel and Zechariah are oftenassociated with apocalyptic literature, and there were many Jewishapocalypses written during the time between the Testaments (e.g.,1–2Enoch, 2–3Baruch, 4Ezra).

Inapocalyptic literature there is a revelation from God to somewell-known human figure through a heavenly intermediary. God promisesto intervene in human history, to defeat evil, and to establish hisrightful rule. Such is the case with Revelation, which assumes asituation where God’s people are threatened by hostile powers.God is portrayed as sovereign, and he promises to intervene soon todestroy evil. Through bizarre visions and imagery common toapocalyptic literature, those who hear Revelation are transported toanother world for much-needed heavenly perspective. As the hearersmove outside their hopeless circ*mstances and see God winning the waragainst evil, their perspective is reshaped, and they are empoweredto persevere faithfully. They are simultaneously called to live holyand blameless lives as they worship the one, true God.

Historicalcontext.Along with understanding the literary genre of Revelation, one mustgrasp its historical context in order to read the book responsibly.Revelation itself describes a historical situation where someChristians are suffering for their faith with the real possibilitythat the suffering could become more intense and widespread. Johnhimself has been exiled to the island of Patmos because of hiswitness for Jesus (1:9). Antipas, a Christian in Pergamum, has beenput to death for his faith (2:13). In his message to the church atSmyrna, Jesus indicates that they should not be surprised by whatthey are about to suffer (2:10). The book also includes severalreferences to pagan powers shedding the blood of God’s people(6:10; 16:6; 17:6; 18:24; 19:2). Revelation addresses a situation inwhich pagan political power has formed a partnership with falsereligion. Those who claim to follow Christ are facing mountingpressure to conform to this ungodly partnership at the expense ofloyalty to Christ.

Thetwo primary possibilities for the date of Revelation are a timeshortly after the death of Nero (AD 68–69) or a date near theendof Domitian’s reign (AD 95). Although there is solidevidence for both dates, the majority opinion at present favors adate during the reign of Domitian, when persecution threatened tospread across the Roman Empire. The imperial cult (i.e., the worshipof the Roman emperor) was a powerful force to be reckoned withprimarily because it united religious, political, social, andeconomic elements into a single force. As chapters 2–3indicate, not every Christian was remaining faithful in thisdifficult environment. Some were compromising in order to avoidreligious or economic persecution. Revelation has a pointed messagefor those who are standing strong as well as for those who arecompromising, and this central message ties into the overall purposeof the book.

Purposeand Interpretation

Theoverall purpose of Revelation is to comfort those who are facingpersecution and to warn those who are compromising with the worldsystem. During times of oppression, the righteous suffer and thewicked seem to prosper. This raises the question “Who is Lord?”Revelation says that Jesus is Lord in spite of how things appear, andhe will return soon to establish his eternal kingdom. Those facingpersecution find hope through a renewed perspective, and those whoare compromising are warned to repent. Revelation’s goal is totransform the audience to follow Jesus faithfully.

Thereare five main theories about how Revelation should be interpreted:preterist, historicist, futurist, idealist, and eclectic. Thepreterist theory views Revelation as relating only to the time inwhich John lived rather than to any future period. John communicatesto first-century readers how God plans to deliver them from thewickedness of the Roman Empire. The historicist theory argues thatRevelation gives an overview of the major movements of church historyfrom the first century until the return of Christ. The futuristtheory claims that most of Revelation (usually chaps. 4–22)deals with a future time just before the end of history. The idealisttheory maintains that Revelation is a symbolic portrayal of theongoing conflict between good and evil. Revelation offers timelessspiritual truths to encourage Christians of all ages. The eclectictheory combines the strengths of several of the other theories (e.g.,a message to the original audience, a timeless spiritual message, andsome future fulfillment), while avoiding their weaknesses.

Outlineand Structure

Therehave been many attempts to understand how Revelation is organized.Some see a threefold structure based on 1:19:

Whatyou have seen (past) (1:1–20)

Whatis now (present) (2:1–3:21)

Whatwill take place later (future) (4:1–22:21)

Otherssee the book organized around seven dramatic scenes with interludesoccurring throughout:

Prologue(1:1–8)

Act1: Seven Oracles (1:9–3:22)

Act2: Seven Seals (6:1–17)

Act3: Seven Trumpets (8:1–9:21)

Act4: Seven Signs (12:1–14:20)

Act5: Seven Bowls (16:1–21)

Act6: Seven Visions (19:1–20:15)

Act7: Seven Prophecies (21:2–22:17)

Epilogue(22:18–21)

Thefollowing outline provides an overview of Revelation in ten stages:

I.Introduction (1:1–20)

II.Messages to the Seven Churches (2:1–3:22)

III.Vision of the Heavenly Throne Room (4:1–5:14)

IV.Opening of the Seven Seals (6:1–8:1)

V.Sounding of the Seven Trumpets (8:2–11:19)

VI.The People of God versus the Powers of Evil (12:1–14:20)

VII.Pouring Out of the Seven Bowls (15:1–16:21)

VIII.Judgment and Fall of Babylon (17:1–19:5)

IX.God’s Ultimate Victory (19:6–22:5)

X.Conclusion (22:6–21)

I.Introduction (1:1–20).Chapter 1 includes both a prologue (1:1–8) and John’scommission to write what he sees (1:9–20). John’s visionfocuses on the risen, glorified Christ and his continued presenceamong the seven churches.

II.Messages to the seven churches (2:1–3:22).Chapters 2–3 contain messages to seven churches of Asia Minor:Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, andLaodicea. The seven messages follow a similar literary pattern: adescription of Jesus, a commendation, an accusation, an exhortationcoupled with either warning or encouragement, an admonition tolisten, and a promise to those who overcome. These messages reflectthe twin dangers faced by the church: persecution and compromise.

III.Vision of the heavenly throne room (4:1–5:14).In chapters 4–5 the scene shifts to the heavenly throne room,where God reigns in majestic power. All of heaven worships theCreator and the Lion-Lamb (Jesus), who alone is qualified to open thescroll because of his sacrificial death.

IV.Opening of the seven seals (6:1–8:1).The unveiling of God’s ultimate victory formally begins here.This section begins the first of a series of three judgment visions(seals, trumpets, and bowls), with seven elements each. When thesixth seal is opened, the question is asked, “Who can withstandit?” Chapter 7 provides the answer with its two visions ofGod’s people; only those belonging to God can withstand theoutpouring of the Lamb’s wrath.

V.Sounding of the seven trumpets (8:2–11:19).The trumpet judgments, patterned after the plagues of Egypt, revealGod’s judgment upon a wicked world. Again, before the seventhelement in the series, there is an interval with two visions(10:1–11; 11:1–14) that instruct and encourage God’speople.

VI.The people of God versus the powers of evil (12:1–14:20).Chapter12 offers the main reason why God’s people face hostility inthis world. They are caught up in the larger conflict between God andSatan (the dragon). Although Satan was defeated by the death andresurrection of Christ, he continues to oppose the people of God.Chapter 13 introduces Satan’s two agents: the beast from thesea and the beast from the earth. The dragon and the two beastsconstitute an unholy trinity bent on seducing and destroying God’speople. As another interval, chapter 14 offers a glimpse of the finalfuture that God has in store for his people. One day the Lamb and hisfollowers will stand on Mount Zion and sing a new song of redemption.

VII.Pouring out of the seven bowls (15:1–16:21).The seven golden bowls follow the trumpets and seals as the finalseries of seven judgments. As the bowls of God’s wrath arepoured out on an unrepentant world, the plagues are devastatingindicators of God’s anger toward sin and evil. The onlyresponse from the “earth dwellers” (MSG; NIV:“inhabitants of the earth” [17:2, 8]; this is a commonterm in Revelation for unbelievers) is to curse God rather thanrepent (16:9, 11, 21).

VIII.Judgment and fall of Babylon (17:1–19:5). Thissection depicts the death of Babylon, a pagan power said to be “drunkwith the blood of God’s holy people, the blood of those whobore testimony to Jesus” (17:6). The funeral laments for thedeceased Babylon of chapter 18 give way to a celebration as God’speople rejoice over Babylon’s downfall (19:1–5).

IX.God’s ultimate victory (19:6–22:5). Thisclimactic section describes God’s ultimate victory over eviland the final reward for the people of God. This scene includes thereturn of Christ for his bride (19:6–16), Christ’s defeatof the two beasts and their allies (19:17–21), the binding ofSatan and the millennial reign (20:1–6), the final defeat ofSatan (20:7–10), and the final judgment and the death of deathitself (20:11–15). Chapter 21 features a description of the newheaven and new earth, where God’s long-standing promise to liveamong his people is fully realized.

X.Conclusion (22:6–21).Revelation closes with final blessings for those who heed the messageof the book and warnings for those who do not. Jesus’ promiseto return soon is met with John’s prayer, “Come, LordJesus” (22:20).

Charactersand Themes

Theforegoing outlines are helpful for understanding Revelation, butperhaps an even better way to grasp the message of the book is tolook closely at its main characters and story line. The followingseven themes capture the overall theological message of this dynamicprophetic-apocalyptic letter.

1.God.Revelation presents God as a central character in the story. He issovereign and firmly in control of history, as his description from1:4–8 suggests: “the Alpha and the Omega” (thebeginning and the end), “the one who is, and who was, and whois to come” (God of the past, the present, and the future), and“the Lord God, ... the Almighty” (ruler overthe universe). The throne room vision of chapters 4–5 alsoclearly asserts God’s sovereign rule. The throne of God itselfstands as a central symbol in the book, representing God’ssovereignty over all things. As a main character, God rightlyreceives worship. He is worshiped because he is the creator (e.g.,4:11; 14:7) and the righteous judge who condemns evil and vindicateshis people (15:3–4; 16:5–7; 19:1–2). Revelationalso describes God as one who desires to be fully and intimatelypresent with his people. God cares for and protects his people (e.g.,7:2–3; 14:1; 21:4). As the book closes, God announces thefulfillment of his long-standing promise to live among his people(21:6–7; cf. Exod. 29:45–46; Lev. 26:11–12). God’schildren have unhindered access to their loving Father as they servehim, see his face, and bear his name—all in his presence(22:1–5).

2.God’s enemies.Although God reigns supreme, he has enemies who oppose him and hispeople. As God’s chief enemy, Satan (also known as the dragon,the devil, the serpent, the accuser) works through worldly systemswith the intent of thwarting God’s plan. Chapter 12 summarizesthis cosmic conflict. In that scene, God defeats the dragon, who thenturns his anger against the woman and the rest of her offspring. Thedragon’s evil partners include the beast fromthe sea(traditionally called the “antichrist”) and the beastfrom the earth (the “false prophet”). The first beastoften has been identified with Rome, the dominant pagan power in thefirst century, although the reference likely extends beyond Rome toany political-economic power that demands absolute allegiance (see13:1–8; 19:19–20; 20:10). The second beast usesmiraculous signs to deceive people into worshiping the first beast.This opponent represents religious power organized in support of thefirst beast (13:11–18; 19:20; 20:10). The dragon, the beastfrom the sea, and the false prophet constitute the unholy trinity.God’s enemies also include people (usually called the“inhabitants of the earth”) who follow the beast (13:8,12), indulge in the ways of this world (17:2), and persecutebelievers (6:10; 11:10).

3.The Lamb of God. Jesus,the Lamb of God, plays a central role in God’s redemptive plan.In Revelation the Lamb is clearly identified as a divine figure whoshares in the authority, glory, and worship reserved for God (5:6,9–14; 7:10, 17; 12:10; 21:22–23; 22:1, 3). Expressionsthat refer to God are also used of Jesus, thereby affirming Jesus’deity (e.g., “Alpha and Omega,” “Lord” [seealso 1:4–5]). Revelation highlights the Lamb’ssacrificial death as the key to his victory over evil, paradoxicalthough it may be (1:5, 18; 5:9). As the slaughtered yet risen Lamb(1:17–18), Jesus is able to identify with his suffering people(1:9; 12:17; 20:4). The Lamb promises to return as the warrior-judgeto defeat God’s enemies and rescue God’s people (1:7;3:11; 16:15; 19:11–21). The famous battle with the forces ofevil is recorded in 19:20: “But the beast was captured, andwith it the false prophet.” The two beasts are then condemnedto the lake of fire, and their followers become the banquet meal forthe birds of prey.

4.God’s people.The people of God figure prominently in the book of Revelation. Johnuses a variety of terms and images to portray God’s people(e.g., church, saints, great multitude, bride of the Lamb, newJerusalem). These people have been redeemed by the Lamb, and theycontinue to rely upon his sacrificial death in spite of opposition(1:5; 5:9; 14:3–4). They are a genuinely multicultural people,as indicated by the seven uses of a fourfold formula: every “tribe,language, people, and nation” (5:9; 7:9; 11:9; 13:7; 14:6; cf.17:15). They are also a persecuted people (1:9; 2:9–10; 7:14;11:9–10; 12:10; 13:16–17) and at times even a martyredpeople (6:9–11; 16:6; 17:6; 18:24; 19:2; 20:4). ThroughoutRevelation, God’s people are characterized as those who obeythe commandments of God (1:2, 9; 6:9; 12:17; 14:12; 20:4; 22:9) andwho hold fast to the testimony of Jesus (1:2, 9; 6:9; 12:17; 19:10;20:4). They are a tempted people who are warned throughout the bookto endure in faith (13:10; 14:12; 18:4). Like their Savior, theyconquer evil by holding fast to their confession even to the point ofdeath (12:11).

5.God’s judgment.God’s judgment of evil plays a crucial role in the book. Thecentral section of Revelation contains three series of sevenjudgments: the seals (6:1–8:1), the trumpets (8:2–11:19),and the bowls (15:1–16:21). God sends these plagues on hisenemies to demonstrate his power and to vindicate his people. Theseimages of judgment also encourage repentance and remind people thatGod will win the battle against evil. Using two images ofjudgment—the grain harvest (14:14–16) and the winepress(14:17–20)—chapter 14 presents a clear choice: fear andglorify God (14:7) or face God’s inescapable and eternaljudgment (14:11, 19). God’s final judgment on “Babylonthe great, the mother of prostitutes” is reported in 17:1–19:6.Babylon represents the worldly system that has blasphemed God andpersecuted his people. God’s final judgment of the satanictrinity, their followers, and death itself is described in 19:11–21;20:7–15. Evil has been destroyed, preparing the way for therestoration of creation.

6.The paradise of God.The story culminates in God’s ultimate restoration of hispeople and his creation—the paradise of God. What God began todo in Gen. 1–2 he now completes in Rev. 21–22. The riverof life replaces the sea. The tree of life supplies food for all.God’s throne as a symbol of God’s sovereign rule over allreality serves as the source of life. God has kept his promise toconquer his enemies, vindicate his people, and restore his creation.The Abrahamic covenant of Gen. 12, that God would bless “allpeoples on earth” (v.3), is fulfilled as the tree of lifeprovides healing for the nations (Rev. 22:2). The new heaven and newearth is identified primarily as the place where God lives among hispeople (22:4). In the paradise of God there will be no more Satan orsin or death or evil of any kind. God’s people will bask in hisglory and respond in worship.

7.The present struggle.A final theme of Revelation is the believer’s struggle to liveout God’s story in the present. The Lamb’s followers relyupon the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus for their victory,but they continue to live in enemy territory. They long for the newheaven and new earth, but they must wage war in the present againstthe forces of evil. Jesus challenges the seven churches to “overcome”or “conquer,” a requirement for inheriting his promisesof eternal life, provision, justice, victory, and the presence of God(21:7). A voice from heaven summarizes what it means to overcome:“They [Christians] triumphed over him [Satan] by the blood ofthe Lamb and by the word of their testimony; they did not love theirlives so much as to shrink from death” (12:11).

Theytriumph in the same way that Jesus triumphed: victory throughfaithfulness, even if it includes suffering. This calls for rejectingfalse teaching, resisting idolatry, living righteously, and refusingto compromise. Triumphing includes authentic faith that results inobedience to Jesus. Above all, to triumph or overcome means to followthe Lamb.

Theseseven themes of Revelation reveal how the book offers hope to thosewho are suffering for the cause of Christ and warning to those whoare compromising with the world. Revelation presents the finalchapter in God’s grand plan to defeat evil, reverse the curseof sin, transform creation, and live forever among his people. Forfirst-century readers or twenty-first-century readers, Revelationoffers a dramatic and empowering vision of what it means to followJesus.

These books originally formed a single book and were firstdivided into two in the Greek translation, the LXX. Chronicles tellsthe history of Israel from the creation of the world to the end ofthe Babylonian exile, focusing at length on the history of David andSolomon. In Jewish tradition, Chronicles is the last book in the OT,which may be due to its late acceptance into the canon or because itforms a fitting conclusion to the Hebrew Bible. Like Genesis, whichopens the canon, Chronicles begins with creation (Gen. 1:1; 1 Chron.1:1) and ends with a prophecy of a return to the land (Gen. 50:24;2 Chron. 23) and the hope of redemption.

Authorship

Chroniclesdoes not name anyone as its author. Some have suggested that Ezra,Haggai, Malachi, or Zechariah may have written Chronicles, but suchsuggestions are pure speculation. It is most common to refer to theauthor simply as the Chronicler (hereafter, Ch). Ch clearly hadscribal training, since he was familiar with the biblical books thatpreceded his work and had access to archival sources. Other thanthese broad generalizations, the identity of the author remainsanonymous, as he intended.

Inthe past many believed that Ch also wrote Ezra-Nehemiah because ofsimilarities in language and how Chronicles ends by quoting theopening of Ezra (which implies that they were once connected). Commonauthorship is unlikely, however, since Ezra-Nehemiah stresses Abram’selection, the exodus, the conquest of the land, and the fall ofnorthern Israel, while Chronicles does not explicitly mention any ofthese events. Also Ch emphasizes “immediate retribution”(obedience/disobedience brings immediate blessing/punishment),whereas Ezra-Nehemiah allows that good behavior can bring problemsrather than blessing (e.g., those building the wall of Jerusalem arepersecuted). Also, some differences in terminology may suggestdifferent authors for these books (e.g., Ezra-Nehemiah calls the highpriest “great priest,” whereas Chronicles uses the term“head priest”).

Chprimarily used previous OT books as sources, drawing on thePentateuch and Joshua (for his genealogies) and on Psalms (cf. Pss.96; 105–106 with 1 Chron. 16:7–36) and Ezra (cf.Ezra 1:1–3 with 2 Chron. 36:22–23). However, Chrelied most heavily on Samuel-Kings, as can be seen by his extensiveverbatim quotation of them throughout his stories. Noncanonicalsources probably also were employed (e.g., the reference toHezekiah’s tunnel in 2 Chron. 32:30, which is unparalleledin Kings but is historically accurate), though they do not survivetoday.

Date

Anexact date of composition is not known. However, the mention in1 Chron. 29:7 of Persian darics (coins), which were not minteduntil 515 BC, makes a date after 500 BC likely (since we must allowtime for the spread of darics throughout the empire). Most telling isJehoiachin’s genealogy in 1 Chron. 3:17–24 (sincethe last names listed must predate or be contemporary with Ch), whichextends at least six generations after Zerubbabel, making a datearound 450 BC (assuming twenty years per generation) the earliestpossible date for the composition of Chronicles. Also, Chronicles islikely to have been written before Alexander the Great’sconquest of Palestine in 333 BC, since there is no perceivable Greekinfluence in Chronicles. Therefore, the date for the composition ofChronicles is most likely between 450 and 333 BC, during the Persianperiod.

Audienceand Historical Background

Somehistorical background is necessary to understand Chronicles’purpose and to identify its original audience. In 586 BC Jerusalemwas destroyed, and the bulk of the population was deported to Babylon(2 Kings 25); however, the Jewish community in Babylon retainedits identity and longed to return home. When Cyrus of Persiaconquered Babylon in 539 BC, he offered to send the exiles back totheir homeland to rebuild Jerusalem and their temple. Those whor*turned faced many challenges and struggled with how to rebuild“Israel” in the land that was given to them by God butnow was ruled by the Persians and settled by a mixed population. Evenwith their temple rebuilt and Jerusalem resettled, this communitystill questioned how their new life would work and what theirrelationship to God would be like. Chronicles was written for thisbeleaguered restoration community.

Genre

Chroniclesis perhaps best known for its long genealogies, which open the book(1 Chron. 1–9). In addition, there are many lists in otherparts of the book that seem to detract from its otherwise interestingnarratives. The genre of Chronicles is “historiography”(history writing) as it presents an account of Israel’s past.The nature of the historiography that Ch wrote has been the subjectof much debate due to the difficulty of explaining the considerablefreedom that Ch exercised in selecting, arranging, and even changinghis source material. All written histories involve creative writing,selectivity, and interpretation of sources. Ch’s selectivitycan be seen in his omissions—for example, stories that dealonly with northern Israel, David’s adultery with Bathsheba andmurder of Uriah, and Solomon’s many wives and idolatry. Ch’sselectivity, however, should not be taken as intentional deception onhis part, since he probably assumed that his audience knew the fullstory of David and Solomon’s sin.

Ch’sinterpretation of his sources can be seen in how he rewrote 2 Sam.24:1. The writer of 2 Samuel describes God inciting David totake a census, but Ch holds Satan responsible for inciting him(1 Chron. 21:1). Writing at a later time when it was understoodthat God worked through divine intermediaries, Ch interpreted hissource in light of this new revelation. Just as NT writers quoted theOT interpretively, Ch felt free to make explicit what he saw asimplied in his sources.

However,it must be admitted that not all the changes that Ch makes to hissources can be easily explained. It must be remembered that, unlikemodern historiography, Chronicles was written with mainly theologicalinterests in mind. If omitting certain stories or writing additionsto his narrative were necessary to drive home the message that Godwanted him to deliver, that is what Ch did. Such practices werestandard procedure in history writing in the ancient world and wereacceptable in his day. Yet Ch was constrained by his sources. Despitehis desire to highlight David’s role in the establishment ofthe temple, he could not present David as temple builder, sincehistory recorded that Solomon built the temple. Historiography is acreative attempt to interpret past events and bring out theirsignificance for the present. In this way, Chronicles is definitelyhistoriography, though not the type of historiography that would bewritten today.

Themes

Davidand the Davidic kings.The main characters in Chronicles are the Davidic kings. Although thenarrative begins with Saul as Israel’s king (1 Chron.10:1–3), he is quickly disposed of (10:4). David’skingship is immediately established (without the long struggle tobecome king as described in 1 Samuel) and is for Israel’sbenefit (1 Chron. 14:2). David is presented as the idealmonarch, who sought God with his whole heart and also institutedproper worship. Although Solomon builds the temple, in ChroniclesDavid prepares for its construction (1 Chron. 22) and itsadministration (1 Chron. 23–25).

PresentingDavid as the founder of proper worship underscores Ch’semphasis on the responsibility of Davidic kings to maintain properworship in Israel. Some kings turned from proper worship (e.g.,Manasseh), while others held true and restored it when it had beenforsaken (e.g., Josiah). The Davidic king sat on God’s throne(1 Chron. 17:14; 28:5; 29:23) and represented the people inprayer to God (2 Chron. 6:18–42). When northern Israelrejected the Davidic king, they rejected God (2 Chron. 13:4–12).This elevation of the importance of the Davidic monarchy held outhope of a coming Davidic king despite the current situation ofPersian rule.

Thetemple and the Levites.Chronicles focuses on Israel’s relationship to God, which isshown in the emphasis on the Davidic king as Israel’srepresentative to God but is best expressed through the focus on thetemple and its institutions. Chronicles shows how Israel’srelationship to God was dependent on maintaining proper templeworship. The Levitical priesthood together with the Davidic kingmaintained the worship of God. The Levites even stepped in topreserve the Davidic line when it was threatened (2 Chron.22:10–23:21), and only they could administer proper worship inthe temple (26:16–18). Interestingly, this emphasis on Davidickings and Levitical priests reflects the conditions of rule underwhich the original audience lived when they returned from exile (cf.Zech. 2:4).

AllIsrael.In Chronicles the term “all Israel” is used for northernIsrael (2 Chron. 13:4), southern Judah (2 Chron. 11:3), orall the Israelites together (1 Chron. 11:1). For Ch, “Israel”indicates a people who are in a special relationship with God andaccountable to him. The Davidic king and the Levitical priests areimportant, but the people themselves are also accountable to God(e.g., 2 Chron. 11:3–4, 16–17; 13:14; 15:9–15).This allows Ch to emphasize the responsibility of each generation tohave a proper relationship with God.

Prophecy

InChronicles there are many prophets known by the traditional titles“prophet” or “seer,” but also others whospeak prophetically but are not designated by such titles. Theseother prophetic speakers mostly address the people rather than kings(like official prophets) and are portrayed as interpreting andapplying earlier prophetic tradition to their current situation.Chronicles represents a transitional stage when the “word ofthe Lord” is beginning to be seen not only as oral prophecy butalso as referring to written prophecies (such as those of Moses) orScripture (e.g., 2 Chron. 34:21 rewrites 2 Kings 22:13,“the words of this book,” as “the word of theLord”). This development to written Scripture creates thefoundation for both Judaism and Christianity as text-based faiths.

TheologicalMessage

Chencouraged his community by retelling the old story in new ways. Theold story (Samuel-Kings) taught its audience why the exile happened(their sin), but Ch’s audience needed to be assured that Godwas still interested in them. Chronicles reminds the restorationcommunity of the continuity between preexilic and postexilic timesand their heritage as God’s people and heirs of the promises toDavid. Whereas Samuel-Kings emphasized idolatry as the reason for theexile (2 Kings 17:7–18), Chronicles looks past thissurface symptom to the root problem of “forsaking the Lord,”characterized by neglecting their relationship with God throughproper worship. “Seeking the Lord” calls for a completeresponse of his people to him.

WhereasSamuel-Kings explains the exile by the cumulative buildup of the sinsof the monarchy (2 Kings 23:26; 24:3), in Chronicles the fate ofIsrael is never sealed. Any generation can seek God wholeheartedlyand thereby receive blessing. The thematic verse for Chronicles isperhaps 2 Chron. 7:14: “If my people, who are called by myname, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn fromtheir wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven, and I will forgivetheir sin and will heal their land.” Ch’s message demandsa response in the present. In retelling the history of his people,his audience could see the cause-and-effect relationship betweenseeking and forsaking God and apply it to their current situation.They themselves were “all Israel” and needed to seek Godwholeheartedly in proper worship. Only through faithfulness to Godwould Israel recapture the glory days of its past. In a message asapplicable now as it was millennia ago, Chronicles calls for itsreaders to have a proper relationship with God and holds outexpectation that blessing will follow.

Outline

I.Genealogical Prologue: Adam to the Present (1 Chron. 1–9)

II.United Monarchy: Saul, David, and Solomon (1 Chron. 10–2 Chron.9)

III.The History of Judah: The Later Davidic Kings (2 Chron.10–36:16)

IV.The Exile and Return (2 Chron. 36:17–23)

The biblical corpus known as the Pentateuch consists of thefirst five books of the OT: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, andDeuteronomy. The word “Pentateuch” comes from two Greekwords (penta [“five”] and teuchos [“scroll case,book”]) and is a designation attested in the early churchfathers. The collection is also commonly known as the “FiveBooks of Moses,” “the Law of Moses,” or simply the“Law,” reflecting the traditional Jewish name “Torah,”meaning “law” or “instruction.” The Torah isthe first of three major sections that comprise the Hebrew Bible(Torah, Nebiim, Ketubim [Law, Prophets, Writings]); thus for bothJewish and Christian traditions it represents the introduction to theBible as a whole as well as its interpretive foundation.

TheEnglish names for the books of the Pentateuch came from the LatinVulgate, based on the Greek Septuagint. These appellations are mainlydescriptive of their content. Genesis derives from “generations”or “origin,” Exodus means “going out,”Leviticus represents priestly (Levitical) service, Numbers refers tothe censuses taken in the book, and Deuteronomy indicates “secondlaw” because of Moses’ rehearsal of God’s commands(see Deut. 17:18). The Hebrew designations derive from opening wordsin each book. Beresh*t (Genesis) means “in the beginning”;Shemot (Exodus), “[these are] the names”; Wayyiqra’(Leviticus), “and he called”; Bemidbar (Numbers), “inthe desert”; and Debarim (Deuteronomy), “[these are] thewords.”

Referringto the Pentateuch as “Torah” or the “Law”reflects the climactic reception of God’s commands at MountSinai, which were to govern Israel’s life and worship in thepromised land, including their journey to get there. However, callingthe Pentateuch the “Law” can be a bit misleading becausethere are relatively few passages that simply list a set of commands,and all law passages are set within a broad narrative. The Pentateuchis a grand story that begins on a universal scale with the creationof the cosmos and ends on the plains of Moab as the readeranticipates the fulfillment of God’s plan to redeem a fallenworld through his chosen people. The books offer distinct qualitiesand content, but they are also inherently dependent upon one another,as the narrative remains unbroken through the five volumes. Genesisends with Jacob’s family in Egypt, and, though many years havepassed, this is where Exodus begins. Leviticus outlines cultic lifeat the tabernacle (constructed at the end of Exodus) and even beginswithout a clear subject (“And he called...”),which requires the reader to supply “the Lord” from thelast verse of Exodus. Numbers begins with an account of Israel’sfighting men as the nation prepares to leave Sinai, and Deuteronomyis Moses’ farewell address to the nation on the cusp of thepromised land.

Authorshipand Composition

Althoughthe Pentateuch is technically an anonymous work, Jewish and Christiantradition attributes its authorship to Moses, the main figure of thestory from Exodus to Deuteronomy. The arguments for attributing theauthorship of the Pentateuch to Moses come from internal evidencewithin both Testaments. That Moses is responsible for at leastportions of the Pentateuch is suggested by references to his explicitliterary activity reflected within the narrative itself (Exod. 17:14;24:4; 34:28; Num. 33:2; Deut. 31:9, 22, 24), if not implied invarious literary formulas such as “the Lord said to Moses”(e.g., Exod. 39:1, 7, 21; Lev. 4:1; 11:1; 13:1; Num. 1:1; 2:1).Mosaic authorship receives support from the historical books, whichuse terms such as “the Book of the Law of Moses” invarious forms and references in the preexilic history (Josh. 8:30–35;23:6; 2Kings 14:6) as well as the postexilic history (e.g.,2Chron. 25:4; Ezra 6:18; Neh. 13:1). The same titles are usedby NT authors (e.g., Mark 12:26; Luke 24:44; John 1:45), evenreferring to the Pentateuch simply by the name “Moses” atvarious points (e.g., Luke 16:29; 24:27; 2Cor. 3:15).

Evenwith these examples, nowhere does the text explicitly state thatMoses is responsible for the entire compilation of the Pentateuch orthat he penned it with his own hand. Rather, a number of factorspoint to a later hand at work: Moses’ death and burial arereferenced (Deut. 34), the conquest of Canaan is referred to as past(Deut. 2:12), and there is evidence that the names of people andplaces were updated and explained for later generations (e.g., “Dan”in Gen. 14:14; cf. Josh. 19:47; Judg. 18:28b–29). Based onthese factors, it is reasonable to believe that the Pentateuchunderwent editorial alteration as it was preserved within Jewish lifeand took its final shape after Moses’ lifetime.

Overthe last century, the Documentary Hypothesis has dominated academicdiscussion of the Pentateuch’s composition. This theory wascrystallized by Julius Wellhausen in his Prolegomena to the Historyof Israel in the late nineteenth century and posits that thePentateuch originated from a variety of ancient sources derived fromdistinct authors and time periods that have been transmitted andjoined through a long and complex process. Traditionally thesedocuments are identified as J, E, D, and P. The J source is adocument authored by the “Yahwist” (German, Jahwist) inJudah around 840 BC and is so called because the name “Yahweh”is used frequently in its text. The E source stands for “Elohist”because of its preference for the divine title “Elohim”and was composed in Israel around 700 BC. The D source stands for“Deuteronomy” because it reflects material found in thatbook; it was composed sometime around Josiah’s reform in 621BC. The P document reflects material that priests would be concernedwith in the postexilic time period, approximately 500 BC. This theoryand its related forms stem from the scholarly concern over variousliterary characteristics such as the use of divine names; doubletsand duplications in the text; observable patterns of style,terminology, and themes; and alleged discrepancies in facts,descriptions, and geographic or historical perspective.

Variousdocumentary theories of composition have flourished over the lastcentury of pentateuchal scholarship and still have many adherents.However, lack of scholarly agreement about the dating and characterof the sources and the rise of other literary approaches to the texthave many conservative and liberal scholars calling into question theaccuracy and even interpretive benefit of the source theories.Moreover, if the literary observations used to create sourcedistinctions can be explained in other ways, then the DocumentaryHypothesis is significantly undermined.

Inits canonical form, the pentateuchal narrative combines artisticprose, poetry, and law to tell a dramatic history spanning thousandsof years. One could divide the story into six major sections:primeval history (Gen. 1–11), the patriarchs (Gen. 12–50),liberation from Egypt (Exod. 1–18), Sinai (Exod. 19:1–Num.10:10), wilderness journey (Num. 10:11–36:13), and Moses’farewell (Deuteronomy).

PrimevalHistory (Gen. 1–11)

Itis possible to divide Genesis into two parts based upon subjectmatter: the origin of creation and humankind’s call, fall, andpunishment (chaps 1–11), and the origin of a family that wouldbecome God’s conduit of salvation and blessing for the world(chaps. 12–50).

Theprimeval history comprises essentially the first eleven chapters ofGenesis, ending with the genealogy of Abraham in 11:26. Strictlyspeaking, 11:27 begins the patriarchal section with the sixthinstance of the toledot formula found in Genesis, referencingAbraham’s father, Terah. The Hebrew phrase ’elleh toledot(“these are the generations of”) occurs in eleven placesin Genesis and reflects a deliberate structural marker that one mayuse to divide the book into distinct episodes (2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1;11:10; 11:27; 25:12; 25:19; 36:1; 36:9; 37:2).

Genesisas we know it exhibits two distinct creation accounts in its firsttwo chapters. Although critical scholars contend that the differingaccounts reflect contradictory stories and different authors, it isjust as convenient to recognize that the two stories vary in styleand some content because they attempt to accomplish different aims.The first account, 1:1–2:3, is an artistic, poetic,symmetrical, and “heavenly” view of creation by atranscendent God, who spoke creation into being. In the secondaccount, 2:4–25, God is immanently involved with creation as heis present in a garden, breathes life into Adam’s nostrils,dialogues and problem-solves, fashions Eve from Adam’s side,and bestows warnings and commands. Both perspectives are foundationalfor providing an accurate view of God’s interaction withcreation in the rest of Scripture.

Asone progresses through chapters 1–11, the story quickly changesfrom what God has established as “very good” to discord,sin, and shame. Chapter 3 reflects the “fall” of humanityas Adam and Eve sin in eating from the forbidden tree in directdisobedience to God. The serpent shrewdly deceives the first couple,and thus all three incur God’s curses, which extend tounlimited generations. Sin that breaks the vertical relationshipbetween God and humanity intrinsically leads to horizontal strifebetween humans. Sin and disunity on the earth only intensify as onemoves from the murder story of Cain and Abel in chapter 4 to theflood in chapters 5–9. Violence, evil, and disorder have sopervaded the earth that God sends a deluge to wipe out all livingthings, save one righteous man and his family, along with an ark fullof animals. God makes the first covenant recorded in the biblicalnarrative with Noah (6:18), promising to save him from the flood ashe commands Noah to build an ark and gather food for survival. Noahfulfills all that God has commanded (6:22; 7:5), and God remembershis promise (8:1). This is the prototypical salvation story for therest of Scripture.

Chapter9 reflects a new start for humanity and all living things as thecreation mandate to “be fruitful and increase in number; fillthe earth and subdue it,” first introduced in 1:28, is restatedalong with the reminder that humankind is made in God’s image(1:27). Bearing the image involves new responsibilities andstipulations in the postdiluvian era (9:2–6). There will beenmity between humans and animals, animals are now appropriate food,and yet lifeblood will be specially revered. God still requiresaccountability for just and discriminate shedding of blood andorderly relationships, as he has proved in the deluge, but now herelinquishes this responsibility to humankind. In return, Godpromises never to destroy all flesh again, and he will set therainbow in the sky as a personal reminder. Like the covenant withNoah in 6:18, the postdiluvian covenant involves humankind fulfillingcommands (9:1–7) and God remembering his covenant (9:8–17),specially termed “everlasting” (9:16).

Theprimeval commentary on humankind’s unabating sinful condition(e.g., 6:5; 8:21) proves true as Noah becomes drunk and naked and hisson Ham (father of Canaan) shames him by failing to conceal hisfather’s negligence. Instead of multiplying, filling, andsubduing the earth as God has intended, humankind collaborates tomake a name for itself by building a sort of stairway to heavenwithin a special city (11:4). God foils such haughty plans byscattering the people across the earth and confusing their language.Expressed in an orderly chiastic structure, the story of the tower ofBabel demonstrates that God condescends (11:5) to set things straightwith humanity.

Patriarchs(Gen. 12–50)

Althoughthe primeval history is foundational for understanding the rest ofthe Bible, more space in Genesis is devoted to the patriarchalfigures Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph. In general, the Abrahamicnarrative spans chapters 12–25, the story of Isaac serves as atransition to the Jacob cycle of chapters 25–37, and the Josephnarrative finishes the book of Genesis in chapters 37–50.

Thetransition from the primeval history to the patriarchs (11:27–32)reveals how Abraham, the father of Israel, moves from the east andsettles in Harran as the family ventures to settle in Canaan. InHarran, Abraham receives the call of God’s redemptive plan,which reverberates through Scripture. God will bless him with land,make him a great nation, grant him special favor, and use him as aconduit of blessings to the world (12:1–3). In 11:30 is theindication that the barrenness of Abraham’s wife (Sarah)relates to the essence of God’s magnificent promises. How onebecomes great in name and number, secures enemy territory, and is tobless all peoples without a descendant becomes the compellingquestion of the Abrahamic narrative. The interchange betweenAbraham’s faith in God and his attempts to contrive covenantfulfillment colors the entire narrative leading up to chapter 22. Itis there that Abraham’s faith is ultimately put to the test asGod asks him to sacrifice the promised son, Isaac. Abraham passesGod’s faith test, and a ram is provided to take Isaac’splace. This everlasting covenant that was previously sealed by thesign of circumcision is climactically procured for future generationsthrough Abraham’s exemplary obedience (22:16–18; cf.15:1–21; 17:1–27).

Thepatriarchal stories that follow show that the Abrahamic promises arerenewed with subsequent generations (see 26:3–4; 28:13–14)and survive various threats to fulfillment. The story of Isaac servesmainly as a bridge to the Jacob cycle, as he exists primarily as apassive character in relation to Abraham and Jacob.

Deception,struggle, rivalry, and favoritism characterize the Jacob narrative,as first exemplified in the jostling of twin boys in Rebekah’swomb (25:22). Jacob supplants his twin brother, Esau, for thefirstborn’s blessing and birthright. He flees to Paddan Aram(northern Mesopotamia), marries two sisters, takes their maidservantsas concubines, and has eleven children, followed by a falling-outwith his father-in-law. Jacob’s struggle for God’sblessing that began with Esau comes to a head in his wrestlingencounter with God at Peniel. Ultimately, Jacob emerges victoriousand receives God’s blessing and a name change, “Israel”(“one who struggles with God”). Throughout the Jacobstory, God demonstrates his faithfulness to the Abrahamic covenantand reiterates the promises to Jacob, most notably at Bethel (chaps.28; 35). The interpersonal strife of Jacob’s life is thusenveloped within a message of reconciliation not just with Esau(chap. 33) but ultimately with God. The reader learns from theepisodes in Jacob’s life that although God works through thelives of weak and failing people, his promises for Israel remainsecure.

AlthoughJacob and his family are already living in Canaan, God intends forthem to move to Egypt and grow into a powerful nation beforefulfilling their conquest of the promised land (see 15:13–16).The story of Joseph explains how the family ends up in Egypt at theclose of Genesis. Joseph is specially loved by his father, whichelicits significant jealousy from his brothers, who sell him off tosome nomads and fabricate the alibi that he has been killed by a wildbeast. Joseph winds up in Pharaoh’s household and eventuallybecomes his top official. When famine strikes Canaan years later,Joseph’s brothers go to Egypt to purchase food from the royalcourt, and Joseph reveals his identity to them in an emotionalreunion. Jacob’s entire family moves to Egypt to live for atime in prosperity under Joseph’s care. The Joseph storyillustrates the mysterious relationship of human decision and divinesovereignty (50:20).

Liberationfrom Egypt (Exod. 1–18)

Genesisshows how Abraham develops into a large family. Exodus shows how thisfamily becomes a nation—enslaved, freed, and then taught theways of God. Although it appears that Exodus continues a rivetingstory of God’s chosen people, it is actually the identity andpower of God that take center stage.

Manyyears have passed since Joseph’s family arrived in Egypt. TheHebrews’ good standing in Egypt has also diminished as theirmultiplication and fruitfulness during the intervening period—justas God had promised Abraham (Gen. 17:4–8)—became anational threat to the Egyptians. Abraham’s family will spendtime in Egyptian slavery before being liberated with many possessionsin hand (cf. Gen. 15:13–14).

Inthe book of Exodus the drama of suffering and salvation serves as thevehicle for God’s self-disclosure to a single man, Moses. Mosesis an Israelite of destiny even from birth, as he providentiallyavoids infant death and rises to power and influence in Pharaoh’shousehold. Moses never loses his passion for his own people, and hekills an Egyptian who was beating a fellow Hebrew. Moses flees toobscurity in the desert, where he meets God and his call to lead hispeople out of Egypt and to the promised land (3:7–8; 6:8). Likethe days of Noah’s salvation, God has remembered his covenantwith the patriarchs and responded to the groans of his people inEgypt (2:24; 6:4–5; cf. Gen. 8:1). God reveals himself, and hispersonal name “Yahweh” (“I am”), to Moses inthe great theophany of the burning bush at Mount Horeb (Sinai), thesame place where later he will receive God’s law. Moses doubtshis own ability to carry out the task of confronting Pharaoh andleading the exodus, but God foretells that many amazing signs andwonders not only will make the escape possible but also willultimately reveal the mighty nature of God to the Hebrews, Egypt, andpresumably the world (6:7; 7:5).

Thispromise of creating a nation of his people through deliverance issuccinctly conveyed in the classic covenant formula that findssignificance in the rest of the OT: “I will take you as my ownpeople, and I will be your God” (6:7). Wielding great powerover nature and at times even human decision, God “hardens”Pharaoh’s heart and sends ten plagues to demonstrate his favorfor his own people and wrath against their enemy nation. The tenthplague on the firstborn of all in Egypt provides the context for thePassover as God spares the firstborn of Israel in response to theplacement of sacrificial blood on the doorposts of their homes.Pharaoh persists in the attempt to overtake the Israelites in thedesert, where the power of God climaxes in parting the Red Sea (orSea of Reeds). The Israelites successfully pass through, buttheEgyptian army drowns in pursuit. This is the great salvationevent of the OT.

Thesong of praise for God’s deliverance (15:1–21) quicklyturns to cries of groaning in the seventy days following the exodusas the people of the nation, grumbling about their circ*mstances inthe desert, quickly demonstrate their fleeting trust in the one whohas saved them (Exod. 15:22–18:27). When a shortage of waterand food confronts the people, their faith in God’s care provesshallow, and they turn on Moses. Even though the special marks ofGod’s protection have been evident in the wilderness throughthe pillars of cloud and fire, the angel of God, the provision ofmanna and quail, water from the rock, and the leadership of Moses,the nation continually fails God’s tests of trust and obedience(16:4; cf. 17:2; 20:20). Yet God continues to endure with his peoplethrough the leadership of Moses.

Sinai(Exod. 19:1–Num. 10:10)

Mostof the pentateuchal narrative takes place at Mount Sinai. It is therethat Israel receives national legislation and prescriptions for thetabernacle, the priesthood, feasts and festivals, and othercovenantal demands for living as God’s chosen people. Theeleven-month stay at Sinai takes the biblical reader through thecenter of the Pentateuch, covering approximately the last half ofExodus, all of Leviticus, and the first third of Numbers, before thenation leaves this sacred site and sojourns in the wilderness.Several key sections of the Pentateuch fall withinthe Sinaistory: the Decalogue (Exod. 20:1–17), the Book of the Covenant(Exod. 20:22–23:33), the tabernacle prescriptions (Exod.25–31), the tabernacle construction (Exod. 35–40), themanual on ritual worship (Lev. 1–7), and the Holiness Code(Lev. 17–27).

Theevents and instruction at Sinai are central to the Israelitereligious experience and reflect the third eternal covenant that Godestablishes in the Pentateuch—this time with Israel, wherebythe Sabbath is the sign (Exod. 31:16; cf. Noahic/rainbow covenant[Gen. 9:16] and the Abrahamic/circumcision covenant [Gen. 17:7, 13,19]). The offices of prophet and priest develop into clear view inthis portion of the Pentateuch. Moses exemplifies the dual propheticfunction of representing the people when speaking with God and, inturn, God when speaking to the people. The priesthood is bestowedupon Aaron and his descendants in Exodus and inaugurated within oneof the few narrative sections of Leviticus (Lev. 8–10). Thegiving of the law, the ark, the tabernacle, the priesthood, and theSabbath are all a part of God’s making himself “known”to Israel and the world, which is a constant theme in Exodus (see,e.g., 25:22; 29:43, 46; 31:13).

TheIsraelites’ stay at Sinai opens with one of the greatesttheophanies of the Bible: God speaks aloud to the people (Exod.19–20) and then is envisioned as a consuming fire (Exod. 24).After communicating the Ten Commandments (“ten words”)directly to the people (Exod. 34:28; Deut. 4:13; 10:4), Mosesmediates the rest of the detailed obligations that will govern thefuture life of the nation. The covenant is ratified in ceremonialfashion (Exod. 24), and the Israelites vow to fulfill all that hasbeen spoken. God expects Israel to be a holy nation (Exod. 19:6) withwhom he may dwell, but Moses descends Sinai only to find that theIsraelites have already violated the essence of the Decalogue byfashioning a golden calf to worship as that which delivered them fromEgypt (Exod. 32). This places Israel’s future and calling injeopardy, but Moses intercedes for his people, and God graciouslypromises to preserve the nation and abide with it in his mercy, evenwhile punishing the guilty. This becomes prototypical of God’srelationship with his people in the future (Exod. 34:6–7).

Exodusends with the consecration of the tabernacle and the descent of God’spresence there. With the tent of worship in order, the priesthood andits rituals can be officially established. Leviticus reflects divineinstructions for how a sinful people may live safely in closeproximity to God. Holy living involves dealing with sin andminimizing the need for atonement, purification, and restitution. Thesacrificial and worship system established in Leviticus is based on aworldview of order, perfection, and purity, which should characterizea people who are commanded, “Be holy because I, the Lord yourGod, am holy’ (Lev. 19:2; cf. 11:44–45; 20:26). Withthese rules in place, the Israelites can make final preparations todepart Sinai and move forward on their journey. Numbers 1–10spans a nineteen-day period of such activities as the Israelitesbegin to focus on dispossessing their enemies. These chapters reflecta census of fighting men, the priority of purity, the dedication ofthe tabernacle, and the observance of the Passover before commencingthe quest to Canaan.

WildernessJourney (Num. 10:11–36:13)

Therest of the book of Numbers covers the remainder of a forty-yearstretch of great peaks and valleys in the faith and future of thenation. Chapters 11–25 recount the various events that show theexodus generation’s lack of trust in God. Chapters 26–36reveal a more positive section whereby a new generation prepares forthe conquest. With the third section of Numbers framed by episodesinvolving the inheritance rights of Zelophehad’s daughters(27:1–11; 36:1–13), it is clear that the story has turnedtothe future possession of the land.

Afterthe departure from Sinai, the narrative consists of a number ofIsraelite complaints in the desert. The Israelites have grown tiredof manna and ironically crave the food of Egypt, which they recall asfree fish, fruits, and vegetables. Having forgotten the hardship oflife in slavery, about which they had cried out to God, now thenation is crying out for a lifestyle of old. Moses becomes sooverwhelmed with the complaints of the people that God providesseventy elders, who, to help shoulder the leadership burden, willreceive the same prophetic spirit given to Moses.

Inchapters 13–14 twelve spies are sent out from Kadesh Barnea toperuse Canaan, but the people’s lack of faith to procure theland from the mighty people there proves costly. This final exampleof distrust moves God to punish and purify the nation. Theunbelieving generation will die in the wilderness during a forty-yearperiod of wandering.

Thediscontent in the desert involves not only food and water but alsoleadership status. Moses’ own brother and sister resent hisspecial relationship with God and challenge his exclusive authority.Later, Aaron’s special high priesthood is threatened as anotherLevitical family (Korah) vies for preeminence. Through a sequence ofsigns and wonders, God makes it clear that Moses and Aaron haveexclusive roles in God’s economy. Due to the deaths related toKorah’s rebellion and the fruitless staffs that represent thetribes of Israel, the nation’s concern about sudden extinctionin the presence of a holy God is appeased through the eternalcovenant of priesthood granted to Aaron’s family (chap. 18). Heand the Levites, at the potential expense of their own lives and aspart of their priestly service, will be held accountable for keepingthe tabernacle pure of encroachers.

Evenafter the people’s significant rebellion and punishment, Godcontinues to prove his faithfulness to his word. Hope is restored forthe nation as the Abrahamic promises of blessing are rehearsed fromthe mouth of Balaam, a Mesopotamian seer. The Israelites will indeedone day be numerous (23:10), enjoy the presence of God (23:21), beblessed and protected (24:9), and have a kingly leader (24:17). Thiswonderful mountaintop experience of hope for the exodus generation istragically countered by an even greater event of apostasy in thesubsequent scene. Reminiscent of the incident of the golden calf,when pagan revelry in the camp had foiled Moses’ interactionwith God on Sinai, apostasy at the tabernacle undermines Balaam’soracles of covenant fulfillment. Fornication with Moabite women notonly joins the nation to a foreign god but also betrays God’sholiness at his place of dwelling. If not for the zeal of Aaron’sgrandson Phinehas, who puts an end to the sin, the ensuing plaguecould have finished the nation. For his righteous action, Phinehas isawarded an eternal priesthood and ensures a future for the nation andAaron’s priestly lineage.

Inchapter 26 a second census of fighting men indicates that the old,unbelieving exodus generation has officially died off (except forJoshua and Caleb), and God is proceeding with a new people. Goddispossesses the enemies of the new generation; reinstates the tribalboundaries of the land; reinstates rules concerning worship, service,and bloodshed; and places Joshua at the helm of leadership. Chapters26–36 mention no deaths or rebellions as the nationoptimistically ends its journey in Moab, just east of the promisedland.

Moses’Farewell (Deuteronomy)

Althoughone could reasonably move into the historical books at the end ofNumbers, much would be lost in overstepping Deuteronomy. Deuteronomypresents Moses’ farewell speeches as his final words to anation on the verge of Caanan. Moses’ speeches are best viewedas sermons motivating his people to embrace the Sinai covenant, lovetheir God, and choose life over death and blessings over cursings(30:19). Moses reviews the desert experience since Mount Horeb/Sinai(chaps. 1–4) and recapitulates God’s expectations forlawful living in the land (chaps. 5–26). The covenant code isrecorded on a scroll, is designated the “Book of the Law”(31:24–26), and is to be read and revered by the future king.Finally, Moses leads the nation in covenant renewal (chaps. 29–32)before the book finishes with an account of his death (chaps. 33–34),including tributes such as “since then, no prophet has risen inIsrael like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face” (34:10).

Deuteronomyreflects that true covenant faithfulness is achieved from a rightheart for God. If there were any previous doubts about the essence ofcovenant keeping, Moses eliminates such in Deuteronomy with thefrequent use of emotive terms. Loving God involves committing to himalone and spurning idols and foreign gods. The Ten Commandments(chap. 5) are not a list of stale requirements; they reflect thegreat Shema with the words “Love the Lord your God with allyour heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. Thesecommandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts”(6:5–6). God desires an unrivaled love from the nation, notcold and superficial religiosity.

Obedienceby the Israelites will incur material and spiritual blessing, whereasdisobedience ends in the loss of both. Although Moses stronglycommends covenant obedience, and the nation participates in acovenant-renewal ceremony (chap. 27), it is clear that in the futurethe Israelites will fail to uphold their covenant obligations andwill suffer the consequences (29:23; 30:1–4; 31:16–17).Yet Moses looks to a day when the command for circumcised hearts(10:16) will be fulfilled by the power of God himself (30:6). In thefuture a new king will arise from the nation (17:14–20) as wellas a prophet like Moses (18:15–22). Deuteronomy thusunderscores the extent of God’s own devotion to his patriarchalpromises despite the sinful nature of his people.

Formuch of the middle and end of the twentieth century, Deuteronomy hasreceived a significant amount of attention for its apparentresemblance in structure and content to ancient Hittite and Assyriantreaties. Scholars debate the extent of similarity, but it ispossible that Deuteronomy reflects a suzerain-vassal treaty formbetween Israel and God much like the common format between nations inthe ancient Near East. Although comparative investigation of thistype can be profitable for interpretation, it is prudent to beconservative when outlining direct parallels, since Deuteronomy isnot a legal document but rather a dramatic narrative of God’sredemptive interaction with the world.

Because calendars are culturally constructed systems, thereare several important differences between the modern calendar and thecalendars used in biblical times. When dealing with ancient Jewishand early Christian sources, we can reconstruct complete calendarsystems. However, the Bible itself, written over many centuries,employs several calendar systems and systems of dating. No singlenormative calendar system emerges from biblical materials.Nevertheless, many aspects of life in biblical Israel depended on theuse of calendars, which regulated religious festivals, agriculturalactivity, various aspects of the legal system, and the recording ofhistorical events.

Measurementof Time in Antiquity

Therewere several methods of reckoning time in antiquity. Some units oftime corresponded to the observation of celestial phenomena (see Gen.1:14), such as the rising and setting of the sun (defining the day),the waxing and waning of the moon (the lunar month), the ascension ofthe sun in the sky at noon (the solar year). Other measurements oftime were defined by the agricultural cycle, including planting andthe beginning and end of the harvest (see Exod. 23:16; Ruth 1:22). Anagricultural scheme serves as the basis of the Gezer Calendar, animportant archaeological object of the tenth century BC unearthedabout thirty miles northwest of Jerusalem. The Gezer Calendar dividesthe year into eight periods of one or two months, each of whichcorresponds to the planting, tending, and harvest of various crops.Still other units of time, such as the seven-day week and thelunisolar year (see below), were derived by counting or calculationand did not correspond to any observable celestial or terrestrialphenomena.

Thedivision of days into hours and minutes is possible in modern timesbecause of mechanical and electronic timepieces. Without thesedevices, divisions of time shorter than the day would have beenapproximations at best. Biblical texts refer to dawn, morning, noon,evening, night, and midnight. In NT times, the twelve daylight hourswere numbered (Matt. 27:45; John 11:9). There was also a system ofdividing the night into “watches,” attested in both theNT and the OT.

TheMonth and the Year in the Bible

TheHebrew words for “month” are related to the words for“moon” and “new” (i.e., the “newmoon”), which suggests that the ancient Israelite month was alunar month corresponding to the waxing and waning of the moon over aperiod of twenty-nine or thirty days. The Bible refers to numbereddays in each month, as high as the twenty-seventh day.

Thereare several systems of naming the months in the Bible. Four“Canaanite” month names appear in the OT: Aviv (the firstmonth), Ziv (the second), Ethanim (the seventh), and Bul (theeighth). Because of the infrequent use of these names, some scholarshave questioned whether this system was in widespread use in ancientIsrael. The names probably are derived from agricultural terms.

Inmany cases the months are simply numbered. In this system, the firstmonth began in the spring season. According to biblical narrative,this way of reckoning the beginning of the year was commanded toMoses at the time of the exodus (Exod. 12:1). However, the Bibleapplies this scheme to events much earlier, as in the story of theflood of Noah, which began in the second month (Gen. 7:11), andscholars have associated the numerical system of months with latebiblical sources, around the time of the exile. The system may havecome into use around that time and replaced an older system.

Insome late biblical texts Babylonian month names are adopted,including Nisan (the first month), Sivan (the third), Elul (thesixth), Chislev (the ninth), Tebet (the tenth), Shebat (theeleventh), and Adar (the twelfth). Following biblical usage, theBabylonian month names were adopted in the ancient Jewish calendar,which is still in use today.

Basedon references to the “twelfth month,” the Israelite yearapparently consisted of twelve lunar months. Accordingly, the lunaryear consisted of approximately 354 days, which means that it wouldnot have corresponded to the solar year of approximately 365¼days. The beginning of the year would have drifted between eleven andtwelve days each year. Presumably, this would have been anunacceptable situation, given the fact that many of the biblicalfestivals were both assigned to lunar dates and were correlated toagricultural events. The problem probably was solved through theintercalation of “leap months,” as was the practice inmaintaining the later Jewish calendar. The result is a lunisolarcalendar, in which the year is composed of twelve lunar months and iscorrected relative to the solar year by the periodic addition of asecond Adar (Adar II) seven times in every nineteen-year period.The Bible does not mention this procedure or identify who wasresponsible for maintaining the calendar in ancient Israel.

BiblicalDates

Modernsystems of absolute dating, in which all years are numbered relativeto a single historical reference point—for example, the birthof Jesus (Anno Domini), the journey of Muhammad in AD 622 (AnnoHegira 1) from Mecca to Medina in Islamic culture, and thecreation of the world (Anno Mundi) in Jewish tradition—wereunparalleled in biblical times. Instead, events were usually datedrelative to the reigns of kings, Israelite or otherwise. For example,the accession of Abijah is dated to the eighteenth year of Jeroboam’sreign (1 Kings 15:1), and the proclamation of Cyrus is dated tohis first regnal year (Ezra 1:1). In other cases, events were datedrelative to important historical events. The beginning of Amos’scareer as prophet is dated to “two years before the earthquake”(Amos 1:1), and Exod. 12:41 dates the departure from Egypt to the430th year of the captivity. In other instances, the fixed points onwhich relative dates are based cannot be determined. The beginning ofEzekiel’s career as a prophet is dated to the otherwiseunspecified “thirtieth year” (Ezek. 1:1). The verse maysimply refer to Ezekiel’s age.

Thesame practices of dating events are followed in the NT. The birth ofJohn the Baptist is dated to “the time of Herod king of Judea”(Luke 1:5). The census of Caesar Augustus is identified as “thefirst census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria”(Luke 2:2). As in the OT, such formulas presuppose that the readerhas a basic awareness of the succession and reigns of kings andemperors—an advantage lost to modern interpreters, who continueto debate the absolute dating of these events. Perhaps analogously toEzek. 1:1, the beginning of Jesus’ ministry is dated to histhirtieth year of age (Luke 3:23). Other events and persons reportedin the NT can be correlated to extrabiblical historical records toestablish absolute dates for biblical events (e.g., the death ofHerod Agrippa I in AD 44 [Acts 12:23]). These are distinct frominstances in which biblical authors are making a conscious effort toprovide dates intelligible to their readers. In contrast to OThistorical narrative, for the most part, the NT shows little interestin dating events in its narrative, even according to ancientconventions of relative dating.

There are several censuses in Scripture, and their concern is not simply to account for the number of people or the number of men available for military service; they also have a literary and theological function.

In the creation narrative in Gen. 1–11 the fulfillment of the creation mandate is accounted for through the genealogy of Adam (Gen. 5) and the genealogy of the sons of Noah (Gen. 9:18–19; 10:1–32), which serve as a type of census. The creation narrative has a universal scope; it attempts to account for the total human population on earth.

Census lists are given for the Abrahamic family (Abraham-Isaac-Jacob line) as it grows to become a nation in accordance with God’s promise to Abraham of a great nation and innumerable offspring (Gen. 12:1–3; 15:5). The total number of Jacob’s descendants who went to Egypt was seventy (Gen. 46:8–27; Exod. 1:1–4). This old generation of Israel passed, and a new generation was born that was fruitful, multiplied, and became exceedingly numerous (Exod. 1:6–7). The total number of men of at least twenty years of age who came out of Egypt was 603,550 (Num. 1:1–46; cf. Exod. 12:37–38), and of the new generation that stood on the verge of entering the Promised Land, 601,730 (Num. 26:1–51).

In the book of Numbers there are two census accounts (actually, military registrations). These are important to the structure and theme of the book. The theme of Numbers has to do with the judgment on the first generation (the object of the census in Num. 1) and the hope for the second generation, which will enter the Promised Land (the object of the second census).

David conducted a census to measure his military power, but this is condemned by God and regarded as satanic (2 Sam. 24:1–17; 1 Chron. 21:1–30). For the Chronicler, any attempt to account for the total number of Israelite men twenty years and older, similar to the census in the book of Numbers, is regarded as challenging God’s promise to make Israel as numerous as the stars (1 Chron. 29:23–26).

Ezra and Nehemiah contain census lists of the returnees from exile: under Zerubbabel, 42,360 men returned (Ezra 2:1–66; Neh. 7:4–73), and under Ezra, 1,496 men (Ezra 8:1–14).

In the NT, Jesus participates in the universal census that encompasses not only Israel but other nations as well—a census of the entire Roman world (Luke 2:1–7). The census motif reaches its fulfillment when a great multitude from every nation, tribe, people, and language will stand before the throne and in front of the Lamb, symbolized by the 144,000 from the twelve tribes of Israel, 12,000 from each tribe (Rev. 7:4–10).

In the Bible chaos primarily refers to an opposite conditionto the orderliness of the creation or a mythical force oftenrepresented by the sea or the sea monster(s) (translated as “dragon,”“Leviathan,” or “Rahab”). The two relatedideas are based on the creation accounts recorded in Gen. 1–2and other places.

OldTestament.In Gen. 1:2 chaos is the state of darkness and desolation (note thephrase “formless and empty” [Heb. tohu wabohu], whichprobably refers to the state of desolation of water with nothing init; cf. Isa. 34:11; 45:18). The rest of the chapter describes how Godin his absolute sovereignty and power—only with hiswords—creates order in place of the chaos. God brings light tothe darkness, separates the land from the sea, and provides the landwith abundance. The portrayal of the garden of Eden (2:4–14)further describes God’s provision of orderliness, fertility,eternal life, and harmony in the original creation.

Althoughthe Genesis account does not directly mention any mythical elements(i.e., the primordial combat between the sea and the prime god),other passages describe creation as the event in which God calmed theraging sea and killed the sea monsters (Pss. 74:12–17; 89:9–12;Job 26:7–14). Still, nowhere are the chaotic forces presentedas an independent power that constantly challenges God’ssovereignty. Rather, God always does whatever he pleases with them,lifting up the waves of the sea (Ps. 107:25; Jer. 31:35; cf. Ps.146:6) and uncovering Death and Destruction (Job 26:6). Isaiahalludes to God’s slaying of the chaotic sea creature not onlyas the past event (51:9), but also as the promise to be realized inthe day of the Lord (27:1).

InGenesis, God’s judgment is frequently described by means of thechaos motif, as a pre­creation condition reversed—forexample, loss of harmony, fruitfulness, and eternal life (Gen.3:15–24), return of the waters over the land (Gen. 7–8),loss of communication (11:7–9), and desolation of the fruitfulland (19:23–28; cf. 13:10).

Thechaos motif also plays an important role in the propheticdescriptions of God’s judgment against his people and againstthe foreign nations. Noteworthy is Jer. 4:23–26, which depictsGod’s judgment upon his people in terms of chaos’sreturn—that is, the condition of “formless and empty,”without light, creatures, or fruitful land (cf. Hos. 4:3). In Isa.34:11 God’s judgment upon Edom is expressed with thecharacteristic phrase in Gen. 1:2: “God will stretch out overEdom the measuring line of chaos [tohu, ‘formless’] andthe plumb line of desolation [bohu, ‘empty’].” Inother places Isaiah frequently employs the imageries of desolation(5:6; 7:23–25; 13:19–22; 24:1–13; 34:8–17),darkness (5:30; 8:22; 13:10), and flood (8:7–8).

NewTestament.The concept of chaos developed in the OT provides an importantbackground for understanding the NT. The Gospel writers use the chaosmotif in describing Jesus’ person and work—for example,as light in the darkness (John 1:4–9; 3:19), as provider ofabundance and eternal life (John 3:16; 4:14; 5:51; 6:1–15), andas the sovereign ruler of the chaotic sea, who walks on the water(Matt. 14:22–36; Mark 6:47–55; John 6:16–21) andcalms the stormy sea with his words (Matt. 8:23–27; Mark4:35–41; Luke 8:22–25). Jesus’ resurrection is hisultimate demonstration of his reign over death (cf. 1 Cor. 15).

Paulfurther uses the chaos motif to describe the life of sinners or thesinful world. The identity of believers is changed from “darkness”to “light” or “children of light,” who nowmust shine the light in the world (Eph. 5:8; cf. Matt. 5:15–16;Phil. 2:15).

Inthe book of Revelation the ultimate restoration of the perfectcreation order is presented, making allusions to the OT mythicaldescriptions of the chaotic forces (e.g., Satan as the dragon[12:15–16], Death and Hades as the underground forces[20:13–14]). Particularly, the new Jerusalem is the place of nosea or darkness or death (21:1, 4, 23–25) but of fruitfulnessand eternal life (22:1–2).

Broadly speaking, child abuse refers to physical maltreatment and/or sexual molestation of a child. Often both occur together. In child abuse, legal, moral, and psychological domains are affected. A natural dependence, trust, and frailty define a child, with adulthood typically starting around age eighteen.

Child abuse brings chaos where the Creator blessed with fruitful life (Gen. 1:28; 9:7). Children signify one of God’s richest blessings (Ps. 127:3–6). Pharaoh’s pogrom against the Hebrew children only served to highlight the midwives who “feared God” and chose to foster rather than harm life (Exod. 1:15–22). Orphans lacked parental protection and uniquely came under God’s care as the “helper of fatherless” (Ps. 10:14, 18; cf. James 1:27).

Sadly, one in three girls and one in five boys are sexually abused, 14 percent under the age of six. Most sexual abuse is incest, perpetrated by known providers, often the father. But fathers are exhorted not to even “exasperate” their children (Eph. 6:4; cf. Col. 3:21). For an abused child, their bridging metaphors for God (e.g., “father” and “mother”) can be permanently crushed.

Fortunately, the abused child can find a “spiritual family” in the church (cf. Mark 10:28–30). But woe to those who cause “one of these little ones—those who believe in me” to stumble (Matt. 18:1–6).

The Hebrew expression “sons of God” (often translated as “children of God” in contemporary usage) is an important biblical concept and is used to describe a range of referents.

In the OT, the term is used to refer to angels (e.g., Job 1:6). They are subordinate divine beings, carrying out God’s mission on earth (Job 2:1). Compared to them, Yahweh’s incomparability is asserted in divine council (Ps. 89:6; cf. Deut. 32:8 NIV mg.). They are called upon to praise Yahweh for his creation (Ps. 29:1). They shout for joy at God’s creation (Job 38:7). In Gen. 6:2 the term refers to beings that are apparently of divine origin and to be contrasted with the “daughters of men” in that same passage. The sin mentioned in this passage refers to the cohabitation of divine beings and humans. This union is one of the impetuses for the flood, an indication of how bad things had gotten. The “order” of creation (Gen. 1), where humans are meant to be fruitful with their own kind, is here transgressed. Hence, God introduces further disorder by bringing back the waters of chaos to flood the earth.

Israel as a covenant nation is called “my son, my firstborn” by Yahweh (Exod. 4:22; Jer. 31:9; Hos. 11:1). As son, Israel is expected to give proper reverence and honor for his father (Mal. 1:6). Although only one of many metaphors for Israel in the OT, Israel’s status as son is important for understanding the movement of the book of Exodus. Israel is to be delivered from Egyptian rule because Israel is God’s son. If Pharaoh continues to mistreat Israel, God will call judgment upon Egypt’s firstborn, as he did in the plague of death and the Red Sea incident.

Sonship is not exclusive to Israel. The Gentiles are also included in the future of God’s program (Isa. 19:25; Zech. 14:16). Likewise, in the NT all humans are God’s children (Eph. 4:6). More often, though, the term refers to those who are in Christ. The bond is spiritual, and often the concept of adoption is used (John 1:12; Rom. 9:6; Gal. 3:26; 4:5–7; 1 John 5:1). See also Sons of God

Those individual entitlements protected by a government, such as due process and equal protection under the law (cf. Amendments 13 and 14 of the U.S. Constitution). God gives secular rulers the authority to legislate, enforce, and interpret civil laws; he has therefore entrusted them with administering justice, which includes protecting civil rights (Rom. 13:1–7; Titus 3:1; 1 Pet. 2:13–14; cf. Matt. 22:21). Until Christ returns to rule his kingdom on earth, the church must defer the protection of civil rights to the state (see John 18:36).

Nonetheless, as Christians preach the gospel, they can embody and promote the principles characteristic of God’s kingdom. Since God created man and woman in his own image and likeness (Gen. 1:26), Christians ought to practice and promote the respect and dignity of all people. All humans bear God’s image regardless of the circ*mstances of their birth, and whether or not they are Christians. Hence, the Bible explicitly grounds the rights to life (Gen. 9:6) and fair treatment (James 3:9) in the principle of the divine image. For these reasons, believing citizens do well to advocate a society that serves justice regardless of an individual or group’s race, ethnicity, religion, sex, or class.

The Bible does not have a generic term for the idea of color,but it does use various colors for descriptive and symbolic purposes,and it also refers to different coloring processes. Items can bedescribed as “dyed” (Exod. 25:5), “multicolored”(Ezek. 27:24), or “speckled” (Gen. 30:32) to indicatechanges or variety of color.

Certaincolors are commonly used in the Bible (listed below), while othersoccur rarely (e.g., brown and yellow) or not at all (e.g., orange),reflecting the range of colors and dyes available in the ancient NearEast. Colors are most often used for two purposes: to describe luxuryitems indicating wealth and power, and to describe the earthly andheavenly dwelling places of God. Ordinary people and places are notusually described in terms of the colors of their appearance.Exceptions to this include Esau (Gen. 25:25), David (1 Sam.17:42), and the male lover in Song of Songs (5:10–11).

Thefollowing colors have particular significance or symbolic meaning inthe Bible:

White.Used to describe the symptoms of leprosy (Lev. 13:3–4), whitemuch more commonly has a positive association, being the color ofpurity (Isa. 1:18; Rev. 3:4) and glory (Dan. 7:9; Matt. 17:2; Rev.1:14). Angels appear white (Matt. 28:3) or are dressed in white (Mark16:2; Acts 1:10). The multitude of worshipers in heaven will wearwhite robes (Rev. 7:9), having been washed in the blood of the Lamb.

Black.The female lover in the Song of Songs admires the raven black hair ofher beloved (Song 5:11). However, black things usually have lesspositive connotations: storm clouds (1 Kings 18:45), diseasedskin (Job 30:30), and the effects of the plague of locusts (Exod.10:15). Blackness can also be a sign of judgment (Rev. 6:5, 12).

Red.Red is the color of the earth, the color of wine, and the color ofblood. Red dyes could be made from crushed insects, plants, andminerals, giving a wide range of different shades (red, scarlet, andcrimson are common in the Bible). Scarlet yarn and red-dyed animalskins were included in the offerings made for the construction of thetabernacle (Exod. 25:3–5). Red was used to symbolize sin (Isa.1:18) and was also associated with warfare (Nah. 2:3; Rev. 6:4).

Blue.Blue tassels adorned every Hebrew garment as a reminder of God’scommandments (Num. 15:38). In the Persian court the royal colors wereblue, white, and purple (Esther 1:6; 8:15), and blue garments wereworn by the young Assyrian governors (Ezek. 23:6).

Purple.Purple dye was very expensive, so purple cloth was used as a sign ofwealth (Prov. 31:22; Acts 16:14) and a sign of authority: the kingsof Midian wore purple garments (Judg. 8:26); the wedding carriage ofKing Solomon was upholstered in purple (Song 3:10); the Babylonianking Belshazzar offered purple robes as a reward for service (Dan.5:7). Purple robes were put on Jesus before his crucifixion in amockery of his kingship (John 19:2–5).

Blue,purple, and scarlet were each separately associated with wealth andpower, but when used together these three colors were the epitome ofopulence and, as such, were associated with the divine presence. Thetabernacle curtains were woven from blue, purple, and scarlet yarn(Exod. 26:1), as were the high-priestly garments (28:4–15, 33).The same colors were later used in the temple curtains (2 Chron.3:14). Blue, purple, and red cloths were used for covering the Ark ofthe Covenant and its furnishings (Num. 4:6–12). Jeremiahdescribes idols adorned in blue and purple, an attempt to concealtheir worthlessness (10:9).

Gray.Gray hair indicated old age and thus wisdom (Ps. 71:18; Prov. 16:31).

Green.Green is the color of plants and thus was associated with life-givingfood and therefore God’s blessing. Green plants were given byGod for food (Gen. 1:30), so their removal or destruction was adevastating judgment (Exod. 10:15; Ezek. 17:24; Rev. 8:7). Peoplecould be symbolized as green plants when they were fruitful andblessed (Ps. 92:14; Jer. 17:8) or when they were easily destroyed(2 Kings 19:26; Ps. 37:2).

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

Termsfor Insects

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Functionsof Insects in Scripture

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ScripturalTruths about Insects

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

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

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

Modern science and the Bible present accounts of the creation of the world that often are claimed to be incompatible. In response, interpreters of the Bible have adopted a range of approaches in order to overcome the apparent tensions. At one end of the spectrum is the position that wholeheartedly adopts modern scientific thinking and restricts the Bible’s authority only to matters of faith—where “faith” must necessarily exclude anything that may touch on scientific matters. The other end of the spectrum lies with those who reject any claims of modern science that stand at odds with a “literal” reading of the Bible, affirming the truth of the Bible in all matters upon which it touches. Among contemporary Christians a number of positions on this spectrum are represented in modern debate; some of the more important of these are outlined in what follows here.

First is the view that a literal reading of the creation account in the Bible is necessitated by the nature of God and his self-revelation as trustworthy and true. Consequently, where conflict with modern science occurs, the literal reading of the Bible is right and modern science is wrong. In spite of this disagreement, the Bible’s revelation can be supported through the application of modern scientific methodologies, and consequently an alternate scientific account of the creation of the world can be produced that reflects rather than contradicts the biblical account. Proponents of this view typically affirm the notion that the earth was created in six days within the last few thousand years. Some variations to this interpretation do exist, such as the view that a vast expanse of time may have passed between Gen. 1:1 and Gen. 1:3.

Second, it is possible to employ modern science to illuminate the meaning of the creation accounts. This approach has been used to suggest, for example, that a scientific model of the ancient earth’s atmosphere may have provided conditions that could allow for the earthbound observer to believe that day and night existed before the appearance of the sun and other heavenly bodies. It has also facilitated the production of elaborate and detailed explanations of precisely how Gen. 1–2 can be interpreted to agree with the current scientific account of origins. One major problem is that it allows science ultimately to dictate the interpretation of the Bible, but other problems are apparent as well, such as the fact that because modern science becomes a prerequisite for a correct understanding of the biblical text, the true meaning of the text was unavailable in the past and, in particular, unavailable to its original audience.

Third, others claim that some aspects of the creation account in the Bible are figurative and should not be understood literally. The application of such an approach varies enormously, with disagreement over precisely which parts of the text are to be read figuratively and which literally. What this approach does allow for, however, is that where there are apparent conflicts between a literal reading of the text and modern science, both science and the text can be correct if the text is understood figuratively. One example of this approach suggests that the days of Gen. 1 are a literary device and, as such, should not be interpreted as literal twenty-four-hour days. This view thus allows its proponents to reconcile the creation account with the scientific view that the earth is billions of years old.

The fourth approach—in many ways a refinement of the third—emphasizes the notion that the Bible represents God’s communication with people who lived in a particular historical and cultural context. As such, God’s message is conveyed in their language, using expressions, idioms, concepts, and ideas with which they were familiar in order to effectively communicate with those people. Thus, some aspects of the text are “reflective” instead of didactic, accommodating to the needs of the people in order to effectively communicate the intended message. So, for example, when the OT refers to the heart as the locus of the human intellect, this reflects not an authoritative decree relating to human physiology but rather an aspect of the Hebrew language and culture employed by God to speak effectively to his people. Aspects of the creation account often cited as incoherent or problematical thus actually reflect accommodation to aspects of the worldview of the audience employed by God to communicate accurately with his people.

In spite of the often heated exchanges between proponents of these various positions, many in each group remain committed to the authority of the Bible. For those Christians who do accept that the prevailing modern scientific account of the origin of the universe is accurate (if not necessarily complete), it nonetheless remains impossible to reasonably claim that the Bible has nothing to say about creation or that it can have no impact on how scientists understand the universe. While God is “other”—that is, not part of creation—he is still intimately associated with it: he upholds it, controls it, and purposes it for his own ends (Isa. 46:9–11; Heb. 1:3).

Regardless of how one resolves the difficulties apparent in reconciling the biblical creation account with modern science, the existence of the problem itself highlights a fundamental aspect of Christianity: God intervenes in human history. If God interacts with his creation, then this invariably impacts how we should understand the universe in which we live. Science often adopts an unnecessarily atheistic set of presuppositions that are not only incompatible with biblical faith but also ultimately unnecessary for the pursuit of scientific understanding.

It is also important to acknowledge that science has long influenced readings of the Bible’s creation account, whether that science was that of Aristotle or that of Einstein. For example, many early scholars felt it necessary to note the figurative nature of the days in Gen. 1, because they held that the creation of the universe was instantaneous. History has shown that for those who seek to reconcile their interpretation of the opening chapters of Genesis with the prevailing scientific paradigm of their day, each major shift in scientific understanding necessitates a revision of their understanding of the text. That this is so ought to serve as a warning that this approach is problematic. Understanding the Bible’s creation account is clearly not contingent upon understanding modern science, or else it would have been useless to the many generations who came before us. Rather, in light of the fact that the account was written in an ancient language to the people of ancient Israel, it is more appropriate to read the text through their understanding of the world in order to derive the meaning that they would have attained as they read. We seek to understand the meaning of the text through a study of its language and culture. Part of this process is necessarily to seek to understand the meaning of the ideas implicit in the text, such as the manner in which it expresses details of the world in which the Israelites lived.

Of all aspects of science that have caused difficulties for readers of the Bible, the theory of evolution has perhaps been most consistently at the forefront of debate. Here again the spectrum of approaches outlined above is evident in Christian responses to the theory, and here again the degree of discord has frequently been overstated. Furthermore, the debate has tended to polarize views, driving the more vocal defenders of evolution to express their position more vehemently and with more certitude than is actually warranted by the evidence, and for some opponents of evolution similarly to overstate their case.

Even for those who hold that modern science is incompatible with biblical revelation on the matter of the origins of the universe and life, there remain substantial areas of science that do not come into conflict with the Bible, so we need to avoid an irrational response to modern science that rejects the whole on the basis of a disagreement over a part. It is also important to retain a degree of humility in our approach to both science and the Bible, for we are infallible interpreters neither of the physical world in which we live nor of the word of God.

Finally, it is important to acknowledge that the Bible makes certain claims that necessarily impact one’s view of science. It is difficult to escape the fact that the Bible clearly depicts God as both responsible for creation and intervening in history. Consequently, a scientific worldview that seeks to comprehensively exclude God from involvement with his creation is clearly neither biblical nor compatible with the Bible except through application of the most elaborate exegetical and hermeneutical gymnastics.

The Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur), on the tenth day of theseventh month, was regarded as the most solemn festival of theIsraelite calendar (Lev. 16; 23:27–28; 25:9). The word“atonement” refers to the averting of the wrath of Godthat, unless dealt with, would fall on a sinful people.

Asa special “sabbath” on which no work was to be done (Lev.16:31; 23:28), the day was a reminder of God’s rest after hiscreative work (Gen. 2:2–3). The Israelites were to denythemselves (presumably by fasting and sexual abstinence) and togather in sacred assembly on this day (Lev. 16:29, 31; 23:27).

Thehigh priest performed certain rituals for the purification ofhimself, the tabernacle or temple (representing a renewed cosmos),and the people. He was to be clothed in linen garments (Lev. 16:4),not the more regal vestments of Exod. 28, perhaps signifying hisadmission to the company of attendants on God’s heavenly throne(cf. Ezek. 9:2–3; Dan. 10:5; Rev. 15:6).

Therituals of the day included the sacrifice of a young bull as a sinoffering and a ram as a burnt offering. A unique feature of theritual was the selection of two goats. One was to be slaughtered as asin offering, while the other was “for Azazel,” anobscure term traditionally rendered “as a scapegoat.” Thesacrifice of the one goat and, after the transferal of guilt throughthe laying on of the priest’s hands, the expulsion of thesecond appear to be a twofold way of speaking of the cleansing of theIsraelite community.

Thecentral element of the Day of Atonement is the entry of the highpriest beyond the curtain into the most holy place of the sanctuary,where rested the ark of the covenant, the symbol of God’spresence. The focus is on the covering of the ark, or “mercyseat” (kapporet, a word related to the word for “atonement”),elsewhere depicted as a footstool for God’s imagined throneabove the cherubim that flanked it (1Chron. 28:2; Ps. 99:1;Heb. 9:5). Screened from view by the smoke of incense, the priestsprinkled the blood of the sacrifice on and in front of the mercyseat. The altar was likewise sprinkled with the sacrificial blood.

Hebrews9:7–14 sees the work of Christ as fulfilling what was typifiedin the ritual of the Day of Atonement, securing for us eternalpurification from sin through his own blood. See also Festivals.

Death is commonly defined as the end of physical life,wherein the normal biological processes associated with life (such asrespiration) cease. This definition, however, does not adequatelyencompass the varied nuances associated with death in the Bible.

TheBeginning of Death

Deathis introduced in the Bible as the penalty for transgressing theprohibition against eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of goodand evil—a contrast to Mesopotamia, where death was part of thedivine design of human beings. In Gen. 2:16–17 God tells thefirst man, “When you eat from [the fruit of the tree] you willcertainly die.” The consequences of eating provide a usefulbasis for discussing the nature of death from a biblical perspective.

First,as is apparent from the subsequent narrative, neither the man nor thewoman experiences physical, biological death immediately after eatingthe fruit. In this way, Gen. 2–3 reflects the common biblicalnotion that death refers to more than just biological death, pointingto the more significant aspect of death that embodies alienation andseparation from the source of life, God. The point is presupposed byJesus when he offers life to those who are dead (John 5:24), and byPaul when he proclaims that before Christ all were dead in their sinsand transgressions (Eph. 2:1, 5). It is also reflected in the commonpunishment prescribed in the Pentateuch whereby offenders were cutoff from the people (Gen. 17:14; Exod. 12:15, 19; 30:38; cf. Gen.9:11; Exod. 9:15). Within Gen. 2–3, death arrives with loss ofaccess to the tree of life in the garden. Biologically, the first manand woman may continue to live for a while outside the garden, buttheir fate is sealed when they are cut off from the garden and theintimate fellowship with the Creator that had been enjoyed therein.

Second,the strong implication of Gen. 2:16–17 is that human beings, asoriginally created, were not subject to death (see also Rom. 5:12;6:23; 1Cor. 15:21). This does not mean that they were immortalin the same manner as God (cf. 1Tim. 6:16), but rather thatthey were contingently immortal: they were not subject to death butsustained by their relationship to the life-giving God through theprovision of the tree of life (cf. Rev. 2:7; 22:2, 14). Once theywere cut off from the source of life, death ensued.

Theaccount of the arrival of death in Gen. 3, however, tells us littleabout how death affected animals, since the Bible consistentlypresents a predominantly human focus. While Eccles. 3:21 affirmshuman ignorance over the relative postmortem fate of humans andanimals, little else is said on the matter. Similarly, it is notentirely clear whether death is introduced as a punishment for sinfor humans only (and so whether animals could have died prior to thefall) or whether animals were perceived as sharing in immortalityprior to the fall.

Deathin the Old Testament

Deathis frequently depicted negatively throughout the OT. Aside from itsinitial presentation as a divine punishment for sin, it is presentedas that which seeks out and devours life and is terrifying (Pss.18:4–5; 55:4; Prov. 30:15–16; Hab. 2:5). For the authorof Ecclesiastes, death is that which ultimately undermines anypossible value that life may otherwise have (e.g., Eccles. 9:3). Thetragedy of death, in the OT, is that it results in separation, fromGod (as noted above in the context of Gen. 2–3) and frompeople. The psalms, for example, frequently cite the finality andprofundity of death’s effects (e.g., Pss. 6:5; 88:5; 115:17;cf. Isa. 38:18). Even those few passages that appear to present deathmore positively (e.g., Job 3:13, 17) ultimately serve to highlightthe appalling circ*mstances of the speaker’s life rather thanany blessed state of the dead (for a similar idea in the NT, seeRev.9:6).

TheOT does, however, depict death as the natural end of life, and a gooddeath as one that arrives only after a long and prosperous life. SoAbraham (Gen. 25:8), Isaac (Gen. 35:29), and Job (Job 42:16–17)are said to live long lives before they die. Furthermore, somepassages refer to the person being “gathered to his people,”suggesting some form of reunion with previous generations in death,presumably in Sheol, although the location and state of the dead arenever explicated. Isaiah can even include the idea of death withinlanguage used to describe the ideal future world (Isa. 65:20).

Althoughthere are no laws relating to the manner in which the bodies of thedead were to be handled, all the descriptive indicators show thatburial was normative, often in a family tomb or plot (e.g., Gen. 23;cf. 1Kings 13:22). Indeed, the importance of an appropriateburial is apparent in Ecclesiastes’ comment that a stillbornchild is better off than someone who lives a long life but receivesno burial (Eccles. 6:3) and in the prophets’ presentation ofthose not buried as being accursed (Jer. 8:2; 14:16;16:4).

Lifeafter Death in the Old Testament

Beliefin some form of postmortem existence was common in many parts of theancient world. In Egypt, an elaborate set of beliefs relating to thestate of those who had died included the possibility of an ongoingexistence that could even surpass what one may have experiencedbefore death (although such an opportunity was a reasonableexpectation only for the upper classes, while the general populationprobably had more modest expectations of the nature of theirexistence in the afterlife). By way of contrast, Mesopotamian beliefsdepicted a far darker and more troubling afterlife for all but thevery few whose lives and deaths were sufficiently blessed to ensurethem some degree of postmortem comfort. For the remainder, there waslittle hope for any positive experience following death.

TheOT, however, has little to say about the state of those who havedied. The widespread belief in some form of continued existencebeyond biological death in the ancient world suggests that, in theabsence of contrary data in the Bible, the people of Israel probablyassumed that some aspect of a person persisted beyond death.Furthermore, there are hints that this may have been the case, suchas the raising of Samuel’s shade by the medium at Endor (1Sam.28), the escape from death of Enoch (Gen. 5:24) and Elijah (2Kings2:11), the revivification of the body dropped on Elisha’s bones(2Kings 13:21), and expressions used to refer to death such as“gathered to his people” (Gen. 25:8, 17; 35:29; 49:29;Num. 27:13; Deut. 32:50; cf. Gen. 47:30; Deut. 31:16). The dead(sometimes referred to by the term repa’im, “shades/spiritsof the dead”) were thought to dwell in Sheol, generallydescribed as under the earth (e.g., Ezek. 31:14). Beyond this, thereare prophetic expectations that God will ultimately destroy death(e.g., Isa. 25:8), and that God does not take pleasure in anyone’sdeath (Ezek. 18:23, 32).

Deathin the New Testament

TheNT continues, and in some places expands upon, the negative view ofdeath presented in the OT. The notion that death is a consequence ofand punishment for the sinful state that imprisons all humanity isstated emphatically (e.g., Rom. 3:23; 6:23) and reinforced by thenotion that, although biologically alive, sinful humans are dead intheir sin and so incapable of reviving themselves (Eph. 2:1). Death,according to Paul, is the last enemy (1Cor. 15:26), and yet todie is gain (Phil. 1:21–24) because it heralds being withChrist, which, explains Paul, “is better by far” thanbeing alive in this body in this world.

Centralto both the message of the Bible and to the significance of death inthe Bible is the death of the Messiah, God’s Son. Jesus’death provides the basis for countering the consequences of theoriginal rebellion against God by the first couple (2Cor.5:21). Consequently, Paul could write that Jesus’ death itselfdestroyed death (2Tim. 1:10). Furthermore, the life that Jesusoffers—eternal life—is available to the believer in thepresent (John 3:36; 5:24), prior to the time when death is ultimatelyabolished, such that Jesus could assert that all those who believe inhim will live even though they die (John 11:25–26).

TheNT expands somewhat on the details relating to the state of the deadfrom the OT. For one thing, the existence of an afterlife is clearlypresented. Furthermore, the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke16:19–31) reflects a more comprehensive understanding of theexistence of distinctions among those who have died, such that therich man is said to be suffering in Hades (Gk. hadēs, used inthe LXX to translate Heb. she’ol in the OT), while Lazarus isfar off with Abraham and being comforted. Although there is a dangerin reading too much into a parable, the detail appears to reflectsomething of the expanded understanding of the afterlife among somein Jesus’ day.

TheNT makes several references to a “second death” (Rev.2:11; 20:6, 14; 21:8; cf. Jude 12). The expression refers to thestate of eternal judgment under God’s wrath, a death from whichthere will be no escape. But those who remain faithful to Christ willnot experience this second death (Rev. 20:6), and in their dwellingplace with God, the new Jerusalem, death will be no more (21:4).

Recounted in Gen. 6:5–9:19, the flood is the event whereby God destroys all creatures except for Noah, his family, and a gathering of animals. The account is highly literary and God-centered. It opens and closes with Noah’s three sons (6:10; 9:18–19). Noah’s obedience is highlighted (7:5, 9, 16). God is the protagonist, and Noah remains silent.

Terminology. The Hebrew word for “flood” is mabbul, and the Greek word is kataklysmos. Outside of the Gen. 6–9 narrative and references to the flood in Gen. 10:1, 32; 11:10, mabbul occurs only in Ps. 29:10, probably a reference to the primordial water stored above the firmament in jars (cf. Gen. 1:7; 7:11). The LXX translates mabbul with kataklysmos in Sir. 40:10; 44:17–18; 4 Macc. 15:31. Hebrew Sirach and the Aramaic Genesis Apocryphon also use mabbul for the flood (Sir. 44:17; 1QapGenar 12:9–10). All four uses of kataklysmos in the NT refer to the flood (Matt. 24:38–39; Luke 17:27; 2Pet. 2:5).

The flood narrative. In Gen. 6:5–22, God observes the grand scale of human wickedness, determines to destroy all life, and selects righteous Noah to build an ark. God’s “seeing” is judicial investigation (6:5, 13) that counters the sons of God who “saw” (6:2), just as his pained heart counters humankind’s wicked heart (6:5–6). God’s second statement, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race” (6:7), is his judicial sentence (cf. 3:15–19), affecting all life in the domain of human care (1:28; cf. Job 38:41; Ps. 36:6; Hos. 4:3; Joel 1:20).

The earth’s corruption and violence (Gen. 6:12–13) reflect a spectrum of evil that has despoiled a creation that was once “very good” (1:31; cf. 6:17; 7:21; 8:17; 9:11). God’s destruction responds to the moral corruption of the earth. The ark is a rectangular vessel designed for floating rather than sailing (6:14–15). Noah builds a microcosm of the earth to save its life. The boat’s windowlike openings and three decks reflect the cosmology of Gen. 1 (heavens, water, earth [cf. 6:16]). God makes a promise that Noah will survive and receive a covenant from God (6:18), fulfilled in the Noahic covenant following the flood (9:9, 11, 14–17).

Genesis 7:1–24 recounts the boarding of the ark and then the rising waters. Two numbering systems are used by the narrator in the flood narrative: one for dates of Noah’s age (day, month, year) and one for periods between flood stages. Both systems number between 365 and 370 days. The flood is portrayed as a reversal of the second and third days of creation. Watery boundaries that God once separated collapse (cf. 1:6–10). The rising flood is described in three phases: rising and lifting the ark (7:17), increasing greatly and floating the ark on the surface (7:18), and covering all the high mountains (7:19). Total destruction is amplified by reversing the order of creation—people, animals, birds (7:23)—with “all/every” occurring repeatedly in 7:21–23.

Genesis 8:1–22 recounts the disembarking and Noah’s sacrifice. Genesis 8:1 is the structural and theological center, with God fulfilling (=“remember”) his covenant promise for Noah’s safety. The ark rests on one mountain within the range in eastern Turkey (Kurdistan). The earth’s drying occurs as a process (8:3, 5, 9, 11, 13, 14), and echoes of creation reappear (e.g., “wind” [8:1; cf. 1:2]). Although the old curse is not lifted (cf. 5:29), God promises not to add to it (8:21). The flood has not reformed the human heart; it has only stopped the violence. God’s oath of restoration reaffirms the seamless rhythm of seasons that comprise a full year (8:22).

Genesis 9:1–19 recounts the restoration of world order. Since murder was part of the antediluvian violence (6:11, 13), God’s law recalibrates earthly morality (9:5). God’s second postdiluvian speech encodes his plan for the broader preservation of creation (9:8–17). “My rainbow” is God’s confirming sign (9:13). The meteorological phenomenon of the storm is now harnessed as an image of peace. The cosmic warrior “hangs up” his bow in divine disarmament. Humankind now shares the responsibility of justice with God, illustrated in Noah’s first speech of cursing and blessing (9:20–27).

Ancient Near Eastern parallels. Without literary dependence on the biblical story, parallels to the biblical account exist in the Akkadian Atrahasis Epic, Gilgamesh TabletXI, and the Sumerian King List. The exact relationship between the biblical account and these Near Eastern accounts is a debated subject. Perhaps they are variants of a similar story based on the same historical event.

Geography

Whereasthe principal direction in the modern world is north, in the ancientworld different cultures used a variety of orientations as theysought to describe their relationship to their geographicalenvironment. In Israel the primary direction was determined by thesunrise: east. This is reflected in Hebrew, where the main word usedto refer to east as a direction was qedem, which could also be usedto simply refer to that which was directly ahead or in front of thespeaker (e.g., Ps. 139:5). Elsewhere, east is designated by the termsmizrakh (“rising” [Josh. 11:3]) or mizrakh hashamesh(“rising of the sun” [Num. 21:11]), both of which derivefrom the direction of sunrise. By way of contrast, in Egypt theprimary direction was south, in alignment with the source of the NileRiver.

Theancient world employed the same notion of four cardinal directions,which persists to the present, and the terminology related to thesewas influenced by the choice of primary direction. Thus, in Israelnorth is often designated by “left”; south could bedesignated by “right,” and west by “behind.”In addition, directions could be specified by reference togeographical features found in those directions. North could bespecified by the word tsapon, which was derived from the name of anorthern Syrian mountain (Zaphon); south by negeb, a name for theregion south of Israel (Negev); and west by yam (“sea”),since the Mediterranean Sea lay to the west.

Symbolism

Asidefrom their purely geographical significance, the directions also cameto bear figurative significance. Some caution is warranted inassigning symbolic significance to language, for there is danger ofreading invalid meanings into texts. Furthermore, given the ambiguityinherent in the use of terms to refer to directions, which also havealternate significances, there is danger of assigning a symbolicmeaning to the direction that actually resides in the alternate. So,for example, while yam (“sea”) carries significantsymbolic overtones in the Bible, this association does not appear tohave been extended to encompass the term when used to designate awesterly direction.

Eastand west.Nonetheless, there is, for example, probably some significance in theexpulsion from Eden and progressive movement eastward to the tower ofBabel through Gen. 1–11, followed by a return to the promisedland, which was approached by reversing the easterly migration andreturning toward Eden. Eden itself was said to lie “in theeast” (Heb. miqqedem; Gen. 2:8), although the same Hebrewexpression in Pss. 74:12; 77:5, 11; 78:2; 143:5 means “inancient times,” and there is perhaps a deliberate ambiguity inthe use of the expression in Gen. 2:8. In Isa. 2:6 the east is thesource of influences on the people that lead them astray. Followingthe exile, Ezekiel sees the glory of God returning to the temple fromthe east (Ezek. 43:1–2). Thus, when used symbolically, “east”is often viewed negatively or else may be used to mark a connectionwith distant antiquity (Gen. 2:8; Job 1:3). Any symbolic significanceassigned to west appears primarily to be associated with it being theantithesis of east. The distance between east and west was usedpoetically to express vast distance (Ps. 103:12).

Northand south.North is significant for two primary reasons. First, it is thedirection from which invading armies most often descended upon Israel(Jer. 1:13) as well as from which Babylon’s destruction is saidto come (Jer. 50:3). In light of this, Ezekiel’s vision of Godapproaching from the north strikes an ominous tone of impendingjudgment (Ezek. 1:1–4). Second, in Canaanite mythology theabode of the gods, and specifically Baal, lay to the north, on MountZaphon. Thus, the king of Babylon’s plans in Isa. 14:13 amountto a claim to establish himself as one of the gods. In contrast tothis, Ps. 48:2 pre-sents Mount Zion as supplanting Mount Zaphon andthus implicitly presents Israel’s one God as supplanting theCanaanite pantheon.

Aswith west, there is little symbolic significance associated with thedirection south in the Bible, aside from its use in combination withother directions.

Thefour directions.The four directions (or sometimes just pairs of directions) are usedtogether to describe both the scattering of the Israelites as well astheir being gathered by God back to the promised land (Ps. 107:3;Isa. 43:5–6; Luke 13:29). They are also used together toexpress the extent of the promised land (Gen. 13:14) or else todescribe something that is all-encompassing (1Chron. 9:24).

(Disabilities; Disability; Deformity; Deformities; Sickness]The Bible often speaks of health, healing, disease, andillness. Good health was a sign of God’s favor, and healing wasalso the work of God and his divinely empowered agents. These agentsincluded the prophets (1Kings 17:8–23; 2Kings5:1–15), the apostles (Acts 3:1–10), and the messiah(Mal. 4:2). The divine prerogative of Jesus was to heal (Mark 1:32;6:56; Matt. 4:23; 8:16; 15:30; 21:14; Luke 6:10, 17–19), andmiraculous healings were a sign of his messianic office (Luke7:20–23). Disease, on the other hand, was regarded as a sign ofGod’s disfavor. Within a covenantal context, God could senddisease to punish the sinner (Exod. 4:11; 32:35).

TheBible assigns a wide variety of names to various diseases and theirsymptoms. These terms are nontechnical and generally descriptive.Some are uncertain in meaning. In most cases they describe thesymptoms of the disease, not the disease itself. Diagnosis often wasbased on incomplete observation and nonclinical examination. TheBible also presupposes supernatural intervention in the life of aperson. Healing occurred when God’s agents touched individuals,cast out demons, and resurrected the dead.

AncientNear Eastern Influences

Inthe ancient Near East the knowledge of disease and medicine wasprecritical. Bacteria and viruses were virtually unknown.Mesopotamian literature contains many references to medicine,physicians, and medical practice. Minerals, salts, herbs, and otherbotanicals were used to make up treatments. Babylonian physiciansalso administered prescriptions accompanied by incantations. Diseasewas considered to be the result of a violation of a taboo orpossession by a demon. The Code of Hammurabi (1750 BC) includes lawsregulating the practice of medicine and surgery by physicians. InEgypt medicine and healing were connected to the gods. Tomb paintingsand several papyrus documents describe the developing state ofEgyptian medicine, pharmacy, and surgery.

Greekphysicians admired and sought to learn the skills of the Egyptians.However, the early Greek doctor Hippocrates (460–370 BC),called the “Father of Medicine,” is credited with beingthe first physician to reject the belief that supernatural or divineforces cause illness. He argued that disease is the result ofenvironmental factors, diet, and living habits, not a punishmentimposed by the gods.

Itis clear that the biblical world shared with the ancient Near Eastthe same types of maladies common to tropical or subtropicalclimates. These include malaria, tropical fevers, dysentery, andsunstroke. The tendency of the hot climate to produce frequentdroughts and famine certainly contributed to similar types ofdiseases throughout the Fertile Crescent. Additionally, it must beremembered that Palestine was a land bridge between the Mesopotamianand Egyptian worlds. Migrations carry not only goods and products,but also parasites, communicable disease, and epidemics.

BiblicalConcept of Disease

Thereligious tradition of the Hebrews repudiated the magical or demonicorigin of disease. Hence, moral, ethical, and spiritual factorsregulated disease and illness. This was true for the individual aswell as the community. The Hebrews, like the Egyptians, alsorecognized that much sickness arose from the individual’srelationship to the physical environment. Great stress was placed onhygiene and preventive medicine.

Pentateuchallegislation offered seven covenantal principles designed to preventthe possibility of disease and sickness: (1)Sabbath observancefor humans, animals, and the land, which enforced regular periods ofrest (Gen. 2:3); (2)dietary regulations, which divided foodinto efficient categories of clean and unclean (Lev. 11);(3)circumcision, which carried physical benefits as well asreligious and moral implications (Gen. 17:9; circumcision is the onlyexample of Hebrew surgery); (4)laws governing sexualrelationships and health, including a list of forbidden degrees ofmarital relationships (Lev. 18–20); (5)provisions forindividual sexual hygiene (Lev. 15); (6)stipulations forcleanliness and bodily purification (Lev. 14:2; 15:2); (7) sanitaryand hygienic regulations for camp life (Num. 31:19; Deut. 23:12).

InNT times magical charms and incantations were used along with folkremedies in an effort to cure disease. Jesus repudiated these means.He also suggested that sickness and disease were not directpunishments for sin (John 9:2). In the Sermon on the Mount (Matt.5–7), Jesus confirmed that the ethical and religious standardsof the new covenant promoted the total health of the community andthe individual.

CirculatoryDiseases

Nabalmost likely suffered a cerebrovascular accident or stroke (1Sam.25:36–38). After a heavy bout of drinking, his heart “died”(KJV; NIV: “failed”), and he became paralyzed, lapsedinto a coma, and died ten days later. Psalm 137:5–6 may containa clinical example of the symptoms of stroke. The psalmist wrote, “IfI forget you, Jerusalem, may my right hand forget its skill. May mytongue cling to the roof of my mouth if I do not remember you.”This description points to a paralysis of the right side of the body(right hemiplegia) and the loss of speech (motor aphasia) that resultfrom a stroke on the left side of the brain. Basically, the exiledpsalmist is wishing upon himself the effects of a stroke if he heldanything other than Jerusalem as his highest priority. Some haveconsidered the collapse of Uzzah when he reached out to stabilize theark of the covenant (2Sam. 6:6–7) to be the consequenceof an apoplectic seizure. But since no actual paralysis was describedand death occurred immediately, this seems unlikely. It is moreprobable that God struck him down with an aortic aneurism or acoronary thrombosis.

Paralysis

Apossible case of paralysis may be described in the shriveled(atrophic) hand of JeroboamI (1Kings 13:4–6). In anangry outburst Jeroboam ordered the arrest of a prophet who condemnedthe altar at Bethel. When Jeroboam stretched out his hand, it“shriveled up, so that he could not pull it back.”Several complicated diagnoses have been offered to explain the“withered” hand, but it is possibly an example ofcataplexy, a sudden loss of muscle power following a strong emotionalstimulus. After intercession by the man of God, and the subsiding ofthe emotional outburst, the arm was restored.

Thethreat against the faithless shepherd of God’s people (Zech.11:17), which included a withered arm and blindness in the right eye,may refer to a form of paralysis known as tabes dorsalis, orlocomotor ataxia. Knifelike pains in the extremities and blindnesscharacterize this disease.

Paralysisis frequently mentioned in the NT (Matt. 8:6; 9:2, 6; 12:10; Mark2:3–5, 9, 10; 3:1, 3, 5; Luke 5:18, 24; 6:6; John 5:3; Acts9:33; Heb. 12:12). The exact diagnosis for each of these casesremains uncertain.

Thephysician Luke’s use of the Greek medical term paralelymenos(Luke 5:18, 24) suggests that some of these cases were caused bychronic organic disease. Others clearly were congenital (Acts 3:2;cf. 14:8). It is not necessary to rationalize the origin of theseexamples of paralysis as hysteria or pretense. The NT writersregarded the healing of these individuals by Jesus and the apostlesas miraculous.

MentalIllness and Brain Disorders

Casesof mental disease are generally described in the Bible by noting thesymptoms produced by the disorder. The particular cause of a mentalillness in the NT is often blamed on an unknown evil spirit orspirits (Luke 8:2). Such spirits, however, were subject to God’scontrol and operated only within the boundaries allowed by him(1Sam. 16:14–16, 23; 18:10; 19:9). Accordingly, in the OT“madness” and “confusion of mind” wereregarded as consequences of covenantal disobedience (Deut. 28:28,34).

Ithas been argued that King Saul displayed early indications ofpersonality disorder. Symptoms included pride, self-aggrandizement(1Sam. 11:6; 13:12; 15:9, 19), and ecstatic behavior(10:11–12). A rapid deterioration in Saul’s charactertranspired after David was anointed and became more popular (16:14;18:10–11). Since Saul demonstrated fear, jealousy, a sense ofpersecution, and homicidal tendencies, some scholars argue that hesuffered from paranoid schizophrenia.

Nebuchadnezzarsuffered a rare form of monomania in which he lived like a wild beastin the field eating grass (Dan. 4:33). David, in order to save hisown life, feigned insanity or perhaps epilepsy before the Philistineking Achish (1Sam. 21:12–15).

Inthe NT, individuals with mental disorders went about naked, mutilatedthemselves, lived in tombs (Mark 5:2), and exhibited violent behavior(Matt. 8:28). Such mental disorientation was often linked to demonpossession. Examples include the Syrophoenician’s child (Matt.15:22; Mark 7:25), the demoniacs at Gerasa (Matt. 8:28; Mark 5:2;Luke 8:27) and Capernaum (Mark 1:23; Luke 4:33), a blind and mutedemoniac (Matt. 12:22; Luke 11:14), and a fortune-telling slave girl(Acts 16:16). While such behavior is clinically suggestive ofparanoid schizophrenia or other mental disorders, themind-controlling influence of some extraneous negative force cannotbe ruled out.

Epilepsy(grand mal) causes the afflicted person to fall to the ground, foamat the mouth, and clench or grind the teeth (Matt. 17:15; Mark9:17–18; Luke 9:39). The description of Saul falling to theground in an ecstatic state (1Sam. 19:23–24) and Balaamfalling with open eyes may be indicative of an epileptic seizure. Inthe NT, Jesus healed many who suffered from epilepsy (Matt. 4:24;17:14–18; Mark 9:17–18; Luke 9:38–42). Somescholars have linked the light seen by Paul on the road to Damascuswith the aura that some epileptics experience prior to a seizure. Hissubsequent blindness has also been attributed to the epilepticdisturbance of the circulation of the blood in the brain.

ChildhoodDiseases

Thecause of the death of the widow’s son at Zarephath is unknown(1Kings 17:17–22). The death of the Shunammite woman’sson has been attributed to sunstroke (2Kings 4:18–37),although a headache is the only symptom recorded (v.19). Inboth cases there is too little evidence to present an accuratediagnosis.

Inthe first case, the boy at Zarephath stopped breathing (1Kings17:17). This may leave the door open to argue that Elijahresuscitated the child. However, in the second case, the text clearlystates that the Shunammite boy died (2Kings 4:20), implying aresurrection.

Infectiousand Communicable Diseases

Feverand other calamities are listed among the punishments for covenantalinfidelity (Deut. 28:22). Three different types of fever may beintentionally described here: “fever,” “inflammation,”and “scorching heat” (ESV: “fiery heat”).Fever is also mentioned frequently in the NT (Matt. 8:15; Mark1:30–31; Luke 4:38–39; John 4:52; Acts 28:8). Both Jesusand Paul healed individuals who had a fever. A number of these feverswere likely caused by malaria, since the disease was known to beendemic to the Jordan Valley and other marshy areas in Palestine.

Severalepidemics in which numerous people died of pestilence or plague arementioned in the OT (Exod. 11:1; 12:13; Num. 14:37; Zech. 14:12). Thefifth plague of Egypt (Exod. 9:3–6) has been attributed toJordan Rift Valley fever, which is spread by flies. Bubonic plaguehas been blamed for the malady that struck the Philistines (1Sam.5–6). However, it may have been the result of a severe form oftropical dysentery. Acute bacillary dysentery contracted in themilitary camp may also have been responsible for the epidemic thatkilled a large number of the Assyrian army (2Kings 19:35).

ParasiticDiseases

Somescholars have repeatedly argued that the “fiery serpents”(NIV: “venomous snakes”) encountered by Moses and thechildren of Israel (Num. 21:6–9) were in reality an infestationof the parasitic guinea worm (Dracunculus medinensis). Microscopicfleas ingested in drinking water carry the larvae of this slendernematode into the body. The larvae move from the digestive tract tothe skin. The adult worm, which may grow to a length of several feet,discharges its eggs into an ulcer on the skin. Death of the hostoccurs because of the resulting infection of the skin ulcers.

Afterthe conquest of Jericho, Joshua cursed the individual who wouldendeavor to rebuild the city (Josh. 6:26). Later, Hiel of Bethelattempted to rebuild the city and lost two of his sons as a result ofthe curse (1Kings 16:34). Elisha was then asked to purify thebad water at Jericho in order to allow a new settlement (2Kings2:19). Elisha obliged by throwing salt into the spring and therebymaking the water potable (2:20–22). Recent archaeological studyhas discovered the remains of certain snails in the mud-bricks usedto construct Jericho in the Bronze Age. These types of snails are nowknown to serve as intermediate hosts for the flatworm parasite thatcan cause schistosomiasis. The Schistosoma haematobium trematodeinfects the urinary tract and the bladder. It is possible that thistype of parasite was responsible for the death of Hiel’s twosons.

InNT times, Herod Agrippa apparently died of the complications of aparasitic disease, perhaps being infested by the larvae of flies(myiasis) in the bowels. Luke mentions that he was “eaten byworms” (skōlēkobrōtos [Acts 12:23]). The fatherof Publius also suffered from dysentery (Acts 28:8).

PhysicalDeformities and Abnormalities

Individualswith deformities were disqualified from priestly service (Lev.21:18–20). The list included lameness, limb damage, anddwarfism. The deformities mentioned here might have been congenitalor acquired. Mephibosheth was dropped by his nurse (2 Sam. 4:4) andperhaps suffered damage to the spinal cord. Jacob possibly sustainedinjury to an intervertebral disk (Gen. 32:32) causing a deformity anda limp. The woman who was “bent over” (Luke 13:10–17)might have suffered from an abnormality of the spine similar toscoliosis. It is difficult to ascertain the origin of the “shriveledhand” of the unnamed individual healed by Jesus (Matt.12:10–13; Mark 3:1–5; Luke 6:6–10). It could becongenital in character or a paralysis caused by any number offactors.

Diseasesand Disabilities of the Eyes and Ears

Physicalblindness is mentioned several times in the Bible. Blindness excludedone from serving as a priest (Lev. 21:18, 20). Blindness anddeafness, however, were disabilities requiring special care from thecommunity (Lev. 19:14; Deut. 27:18). The “weak eyes” ofLeah may refer to an eye condition (Gen. 29:17).

Blindnessin the biblical world was caused by various factors. Leviticus 26:16speaks of a fever that destroys the eyes. Flies probably wereresponsible for much of the conjunctivitis found in children. John9:1 mentions congenital blindness, which Jesus cured using mud madefrom spittle and dirt (John 9:6). In Mark 8:22–26 Jesus healeda blind man by spitting in his eye and laying hands on him (cf. Matt.20:34 with Mark10:52).

Congenitaldeafness would also be associated with mutism and speech defectsbecause a child learning to speak depends on imitation and mimicry.Jesus healed a man who was deaf and could barely talk (Mark 7:32–37).The man’s inability to say much possibly pointed to a loss ofhearing early in life.

SkinConditions

Variousskin and hair abnormalities are described in the Bible. Some made theindividual unclean (Lev. 13:30; 14:54). The OT speaks of “theboils of Egypt” (Deut. 28:27; cf. Exod. 9:9). Skin ailmentsincluded tumors, festering sores, boils, infections, and the itch(Deut. 28:27, 35; Isa. 3:7). Job complained of a litany of ailments:broken and festering skin (7:5), multiple wounds (9:17), blackpeeling skin and fever (30:30), gnawing bone pain (2:5; 19:20;30:17), insomnia (7:3–4), and wasting away (33:21). Thesesymptoms have been diagnosed as indications of yaws or eczema. Apoultice made of figs cured Hezekiah’s boil (2Kings20:7).

Leprosywas once thought to be a common problem in the biblical world.Leprosy (Hansen’s disease) is a slow, progressive chronicinfectious disease caused by a bacterium. Symptoms include loss ofsensation and loss of parts of the body. Evidence for this type ofdisease in Palestine is rare. Uzziah may have had a true case ofHansen’s disease. He was quarantined until the day he died(2Chron. 26:21).

Scholarsnow suggest that the symptoms of the disease described in the Bibledo not fit this pattern and thus do not signify leprosy (Hansen’sdisease) as it is known today. Instead, the word that Englishversions translate as “leprosy” (Heb. root tsr’)probably refers to different types of infectious skin disease, oftencharacterized by a long-standing, patchy skin condition associatedwith peeling or flakiness and redness of skin. Evidence points moretoward psoriasis, fungal infections, or dermatitis.

Thisdisease could appear in humans (Lev. 14:2), on buildings (14:34), andon clothing (14:55). It was not limited to the extremities but couldoccur on the head (14:42–44). It could run its course quickly(13:5–8). It made the individual ceremonially unclean, but itwas also curable (Lev. 14:3; 2Kings 5:1–27). Individualswith the disease were not necessarily shunned (2Kings 7; Matt.26:6// Mark 14:3). Moses (Exod. 4:6), Miriam (Num. 12:10), andNaaman experienced this type of skin disease (2Kings 5:1–27).Jesus healed many suffering from skin ailments (Matt. 8:2–3;Mark 1:40–42; Luke 5:12–13), including the ten “menwho had leprosy” (Luke 17:12–14).

Ailmentsof an Unknown Nature

Somecases in the Bible present insufficient evidence for scholars torender a clear diagnosis. King Asa suffered a disease in his feet(2Chron. 16:12). However, in the OT the Hebrew expression for“feet” is sometimes used euphemistically for the sexualorgans (Judg. 3:24 KJV). Because of this, the exact nature of thedisease is ambiguous. Jehoram was afflicted with “an incurabledisease of the bowels” (2Chron. 21:18–19). Otherunknown ailments factor in the deaths of the firstborn son of Davidand Bathsheba (2Sam. 12:15), of Jeroboam’s son in infancy(1Kings 14:17), of Elisha (2Kings 13:14), and ofEzekiel’s wife (Ezek. 24:16).

(Disabilities; Disability; Deformity; Deformities; Sickness]The Bible often speaks of health, healing, disease, andillness. Good health was a sign of God’s favor, and healing wasalso the work of God and his divinely empowered agents. These agentsincluded the prophets (1Kings 17:8–23; 2Kings5:1–15), the apostles (Acts 3:1–10), and the messiah(Mal. 4:2). The divine prerogative of Jesus was to heal (Mark 1:32;6:56; Matt. 4:23; 8:16; 15:30; 21:14; Luke 6:10, 17–19), andmiraculous healings were a sign of his messianic office (Luke7:20–23). Disease, on the other hand, was regarded as a sign ofGod’s disfavor. Within a covenantal context, God could senddisease to punish the sinner (Exod. 4:11; 32:35).

TheBible assigns a wide variety of names to various diseases and theirsymptoms. These terms are nontechnical and generally descriptive.Some are uncertain in meaning. In most cases they describe thesymptoms of the disease, not the disease itself. Diagnosis often wasbased on incomplete observation and nonclinical examination. TheBible also presupposes supernatural intervention in the life of aperson. Healing occurred when God’s agents touched individuals,cast out demons, and resurrected the dead.

AncientNear Eastern Influences

Inthe ancient Near East the knowledge of disease and medicine wasprecritical. Bacteria and viruses were virtually unknown.Mesopotamian literature contains many references to medicine,physicians, and medical practice. Minerals, salts, herbs, and otherbotanicals were used to make up treatments. Babylonian physiciansalso administered prescriptions accompanied by incantations. Diseasewas considered to be the result of a violation of a taboo orpossession by a demon. The Code of Hammurabi (1750 BC) includes lawsregulating the practice of medicine and surgery by physicians. InEgypt medicine and healing were connected to the gods. Tomb paintingsand several papyrus documents describe the developing state ofEgyptian medicine, pharmacy, and surgery.

Greekphysicians admired and sought to learn the skills of the Egyptians.However, the early Greek doctor Hippocrates (460–370 BC),called the “Father of Medicine,” is credited with beingthe first physician to reject the belief that supernatural or divineforces cause illness. He argued that disease is the result ofenvironmental factors, diet, and living habits, not a punishmentimposed by the gods.

Itis clear that the biblical world shared with the ancient Near Eastthe same types of maladies common to tropical or subtropicalclimates. These include malaria, tropical fevers, dysentery, andsunstroke. The tendency of the hot climate to produce frequentdroughts and famine certainly contributed to similar types ofdiseases throughout the Fertile Crescent. Additionally, it must beremembered that Palestine was a land bridge between the Mesopotamianand Egyptian worlds. Migrations carry not only goods and products,but also parasites, communicable disease, and epidemics.

BiblicalConcept of Disease

Thereligious tradition of the Hebrews repudiated the magical or demonicorigin of disease. Hence, moral, ethical, and spiritual factorsregulated disease and illness. This was true for the individual aswell as the community. The Hebrews, like the Egyptians, alsorecognized that much sickness arose from the individual’srelationship to the physical environment. Great stress was placed onhygiene and preventive medicine.

Pentateuchallegislation offered seven covenantal principles designed to preventthe possibility of disease and sickness: (1)Sabbath observancefor humans, animals, and the land, which enforced regular periods ofrest (Gen. 2:3); (2)dietary regulations, which divided foodinto efficient categories of clean and unclean (Lev. 11);(3)circumcision, which carried physical benefits as well asreligious and moral implications (Gen. 17:9; circumcision is the onlyexample of Hebrew surgery); (4)laws governing sexualrelationships and health, including a list of forbidden degrees ofmarital relationships (Lev. 18–20); (5)provisions forindividual sexual hygiene (Lev. 15); (6)stipulations forcleanliness and bodily purification (Lev. 14:2; 15:2); (7) sanitaryand hygienic regulations for camp life (Num. 31:19; Deut. 23:12).

InNT times magical charms and incantations were used along with folkremedies in an effort to cure disease. Jesus repudiated these means.He also suggested that sickness and disease were not directpunishments for sin (John 9:2). In the Sermon on the Mount (Matt.5–7), Jesus confirmed that the ethical and religious standardsof the new covenant promoted the total health of the community andthe individual.

CirculatoryDiseases

Nabalmost likely suffered a cerebrovascular accident or stroke (1Sam.25:36–38). After a heavy bout of drinking, his heart “died”(KJV; NIV: “failed”), and he became paralyzed, lapsedinto a coma, and died ten days later. Psalm 137:5–6 may containa clinical example of the symptoms of stroke. The psalmist wrote, “IfI forget you, Jerusalem, may my right hand forget its skill. May mytongue cling to the roof of my mouth if I do not remember you.”This description points to a paralysis of the right side of the body(right hemiplegia) and the loss of speech (motor aphasia) that resultfrom a stroke on the left side of the brain. Basically, the exiledpsalmist is wishing upon himself the effects of a stroke if he heldanything other than Jerusalem as his highest priority. Some haveconsidered the collapse of Uzzah when he reached out to stabilize theark of the covenant (2Sam. 6:6–7) to be the consequenceof an apoplectic seizure. But since no actual paralysis was describedand death occurred immediately, this seems unlikely. It is moreprobable that God struck him down with an aortic aneurism or acoronary thrombosis.

Paralysis

Apossible case of paralysis may be described in the shriveled(atrophic) hand of JeroboamI (1Kings 13:4–6). In anangry outburst Jeroboam ordered the arrest of a prophet who condemnedthe altar at Bethel. When Jeroboam stretched out his hand, it“shriveled up, so that he could not pull it back.”Several complicated diagnoses have been offered to explain the“withered” hand, but it is possibly an example ofcataplexy, a sudden loss of muscle power following a strong emotionalstimulus. After intercession by the man of God, and the subsiding ofthe emotional outburst, the arm was restored.

Thethreat against the faithless shepherd of God’s people (Zech.11:17), which included a withered arm and blindness in the right eye,may refer to a form of paralysis known as tabes dorsalis, orlocomotor ataxia. Knifelike pains in the extremities and blindnesscharacterize this disease.

Paralysisis frequently mentioned in the NT (Matt. 8:6; 9:2, 6; 12:10; Mark2:3–5, 9, 10; 3:1, 3, 5; Luke 5:18, 24; 6:6; John 5:3; Acts9:33; Heb. 12:12). The exact diagnosis for each of these casesremains uncertain.

Thephysician Luke’s use of the Greek medical term paralelymenos(Luke 5:18, 24) suggests that some of these cases were caused bychronic organic disease. Others clearly were congenital (Acts 3:2;cf. 14:8). It is not necessary to rationalize the origin of theseexamples of paralysis as hysteria or pretense. The NT writersregarded the healing of these individuals by Jesus and the apostlesas miraculous.

MentalIllness and Brain Disorders

Casesof mental disease are generally described in the Bible by noting thesymptoms produced by the disorder. The particular cause of a mentalillness in the NT is often blamed on an unknown evil spirit orspirits (Luke 8:2). Such spirits, however, were subject to God’scontrol and operated only within the boundaries allowed by him(1Sam. 16:14–16, 23; 18:10; 19:9). Accordingly, in the OT“madness” and “confusion of mind” wereregarded as consequences of covenantal disobedience (Deut. 28:28,34).

Ithas been argued that King Saul displayed early indications ofpersonality disorder. Symptoms included pride, self-aggrandizement(1Sam. 11:6; 13:12; 15:9, 19), and ecstatic behavior(10:11–12). A rapid deterioration in Saul’s charactertranspired after David was anointed and became more popular (16:14;18:10–11). Since Saul demonstrated fear, jealousy, a sense ofpersecution, and homicidal tendencies, some scholars argue that hesuffered from paranoid schizophrenia.

Nebuchadnezzarsuffered a rare form of monomania in which he lived like a wild beastin the field eating grass (Dan. 4:33). David, in order to save hisown life, feigned insanity or perhaps epilepsy before the Philistineking Achish (1Sam. 21:12–15).

Inthe NT, individuals with mental disorders went about naked, mutilatedthemselves, lived in tombs (Mark 5:2), and exhibited violent behavior(Matt. 8:28). Such mental disorientation was often linked to demonpossession. Examples include the Syrophoenician’s child (Matt.15:22; Mark 7:25), the demoniacs at Gerasa (Matt. 8:28; Mark 5:2;Luke 8:27) and Capernaum (Mark 1:23; Luke 4:33), a blind and mutedemoniac (Matt. 12:22; Luke 11:14), and a fortune-telling slave girl(Acts 16:16). While such behavior is clinically suggestive ofparanoid schizophrenia or other mental disorders, themind-controlling influence of some extraneous negative force cannotbe ruled out.

Epilepsy(grand mal) causes the afflicted person to fall to the ground, foamat the mouth, and clench or grind the teeth (Matt. 17:15; Mark9:17–18; Luke 9:39). The description of Saul falling to theground in an ecstatic state (1Sam. 19:23–24) and Balaamfalling with open eyes may be indicative of an epileptic seizure. Inthe NT, Jesus healed many who suffered from epilepsy (Matt. 4:24;17:14–18; Mark 9:17–18; Luke 9:38–42). Somescholars have linked the light seen by Paul on the road to Damascuswith the aura that some epileptics experience prior to a seizure. Hissubsequent blindness has also been attributed to the epilepticdisturbance of the circulation of the blood in the brain.

ChildhoodDiseases

Thecause of the death of the widow’s son at Zarephath is unknown(1Kings 17:17–22). The death of the Shunammite woman’sson has been attributed to sunstroke (2Kings 4:18–37),although a headache is the only symptom recorded (v.19). Inboth cases there is too little evidence to present an accuratediagnosis.

Inthe first case, the boy at Zarephath stopped breathing (1Kings17:17). This may leave the door open to argue that Elijahresuscitated the child. However, in the second case, the text clearlystates that the Shunammite boy died (2Kings 4:20), implying aresurrection.

Infectiousand Communicable Diseases

Feverand other calamities are listed among the punishments for covenantalinfidelity (Deut. 28:22). Three different types of fever may beintentionally described here: “fever,” “inflammation,”and “scorching heat” (ESV: “fiery heat”).Fever is also mentioned frequently in the NT (Matt. 8:15; Mark1:30–31; Luke 4:38–39; John 4:52; Acts 28:8). Both Jesusand Paul healed individuals who had a fever. A number of these feverswere likely caused by malaria, since the disease was known to beendemic to the Jordan Valley and other marshy areas in Palestine.

Severalepidemics in which numerous people died of pestilence or plague arementioned in the OT (Exod. 11:1; 12:13; Num. 14:37; Zech. 14:12). Thefifth plague of Egypt (Exod. 9:3–6) has been attributed toJordan Rift Valley fever, which is spread by flies. Bubonic plaguehas been blamed for the malady that struck the Philistines (1Sam.5–6). However, it may have been the result of a severe form oftropical dysentery. Acute bacillary dysentery contracted in themilitary camp may also have been responsible for the epidemic thatkilled a large number of the Assyrian army (2Kings 19:35).

ParasiticDiseases

Somescholars have repeatedly argued that the “fiery serpents”(NIV: “venomous snakes”) encountered by Moses and thechildren of Israel (Num. 21:6–9) were in reality an infestationof the parasitic guinea worm (Dracunculus medinensis). Microscopicfleas ingested in drinking water carry the larvae of this slendernematode into the body. The larvae move from the digestive tract tothe skin. The adult worm, which may grow to a length of several feet,discharges its eggs into an ulcer on the skin. Death of the hostoccurs because of the resulting infection of the skin ulcers.

Afterthe conquest of Jericho, Joshua cursed the individual who wouldendeavor to rebuild the city (Josh. 6:26). Later, Hiel of Bethelattempted to rebuild the city and lost two of his sons as a result ofthe curse (1Kings 16:34). Elisha was then asked to purify thebad water at Jericho in order to allow a new settlement (2Kings2:19). Elisha obliged by throwing salt into the spring and therebymaking the water potable (2:20–22). Recent archaeological studyhas discovered the remains of certain snails in the mud-bricks usedto construct Jericho in the Bronze Age. These types of snails are nowknown to serve as intermediate hosts for the flatworm parasite thatcan cause schistosomiasis. The Schistosoma haematobium trematodeinfects the urinary tract and the bladder. It is possible that thistype of parasite was responsible for the death of Hiel’s twosons.

InNT times, Herod Agrippa apparently died of the complications of aparasitic disease, perhaps being infested by the larvae of flies(myiasis) in the bowels. Luke mentions that he was “eaten byworms” (skōlēkobrōtos [Acts 12:23]). The fatherof Publius also suffered from dysentery (Acts 28:8).

PhysicalDeformities and Abnormalities

Individualswith deformities were disqualified from priestly service (Lev.21:18–20). The list included lameness, limb damage, anddwarfism. The deformities mentioned here might have been congenitalor acquired. Mephibosheth was dropped by his nurse (2 Sam. 4:4) andperhaps suffered damage to the spinal cord. Jacob possibly sustainedinjury to an intervertebral disk (Gen. 32:32) causing a deformity anda limp. The woman who was “bent over” (Luke 13:10–17)might have suffered from an abnormality of the spine similar toscoliosis. It is difficult to ascertain the origin of the “shriveledhand” of the unnamed individual healed by Jesus (Matt.12:10–13; Mark 3:1–5; Luke 6:6–10). It could becongenital in character or a paralysis caused by any number offactors.

Diseasesand Disabilities of the Eyes and Ears

Physicalblindness is mentioned several times in the Bible. Blindness excludedone from serving as a priest (Lev. 21:18, 20). Blindness anddeafness, however, were disabilities requiring special care from thecommunity (Lev. 19:14; Deut. 27:18). The “weak eyes” ofLeah may refer to an eye condition (Gen. 29:17).

Blindnessin the biblical world was caused by various factors. Leviticus 26:16speaks of a fever that destroys the eyes. Flies probably wereresponsible for much of the conjunctivitis found in children. John9:1 mentions congenital blindness, which Jesus cured using mud madefrom spittle and dirt (John 9:6). In Mark 8:22–26 Jesus healeda blind man by spitting in his eye and laying hands on him (cf. Matt.20:34 with Mark10:52).

Congenitaldeafness would also be associated with mutism and speech defectsbecause a child learning to speak depends on imitation and mimicry.Jesus healed a man who was deaf and could barely talk (Mark 7:32–37).The man’s inability to say much possibly pointed to a loss ofhearing early in life.

SkinConditions

Variousskin and hair abnormalities are described in the Bible. Some made theindividual unclean (Lev. 13:30; 14:54). The OT speaks of “theboils of Egypt” (Deut. 28:27; cf. Exod. 9:9). Skin ailmentsincluded tumors, festering sores, boils, infections, and the itch(Deut. 28:27, 35; Isa. 3:7). Job complained of a litany of ailments:broken and festering skin (7:5), multiple wounds (9:17), blackpeeling skin and fever (30:30), gnawing bone pain (2:5; 19:20;30:17), insomnia (7:3–4), and wasting away (33:21). Thesesymptoms have been diagnosed as indications of yaws or eczema. Apoultice made of figs cured Hezekiah’s boil (2Kings20:7).

Leprosywas once thought to be a common problem in the biblical world.Leprosy (Hansen’s disease) is a slow, progressive chronicinfectious disease caused by a bacterium. Symptoms include loss ofsensation and loss of parts of the body. Evidence for this type ofdisease in Palestine is rare. Uzziah may have had a true case ofHansen’s disease. He was quarantined until the day he died(2Chron. 26:21).

Scholarsnow suggest that the symptoms of the disease described in the Bibledo not fit this pattern and thus do not signify leprosy (Hansen’sdisease) as it is known today. Instead, the word that Englishversions translate as “leprosy” (Heb. root tsr’)probably refers to different types of infectious skin disease, oftencharacterized by a long-standing, patchy skin condition associatedwith peeling or flakiness and redness of skin. Evidence points moretoward psoriasis, fungal infections, or dermatitis.

Thisdisease could appear in humans (Lev. 14:2), on buildings (14:34), andon clothing (14:55). It was not limited to the extremities but couldoccur on the head (14:42–44). It could run its course quickly(13:5–8). It made the individual ceremonially unclean, but itwas also curable (Lev. 14:3; 2Kings 5:1–27). Individualswith the disease were not necessarily shunned (2Kings 7; Matt.26:6// Mark 14:3). Moses (Exod. 4:6), Miriam (Num. 12:10), andNaaman experienced this type of skin disease (2Kings 5:1–27).Jesus healed many suffering from skin ailments (Matt. 8:2–3;Mark 1:40–42; Luke 5:12–13), including the ten “menwho had leprosy” (Luke 17:12–14).

Ailmentsof an Unknown Nature

Somecases in the Bible present insufficient evidence for scholars torender a clear diagnosis. King Asa suffered a disease in his feet(2Chron. 16:12). However, in the OT the Hebrew expression for“feet” is sometimes used euphemistically for the sexualorgans (Judg. 3:24 KJV). Because of this, the exact nature of thedisease is ambiguous. Jehoram was afflicted with “an incurabledisease of the bowels” (2Chron. 21:18–19). Otherunknown ailments factor in the deaths of the firstborn son of Davidand Bathsheba (2Sam. 12:15), of Jeroboam’s son in infancy(1Kings 14:17), of Elisha (2Kings 13:14), and ofEzekiel’s wife (Ezek. 24:16).

Terminology

The KJV uses “dispensation” to translate some occurrences of the Greek word oikonomia, meaning “stewardship” or “administration of a household.” The Greek noun oikonomos, meaning “steward, manager, trustee, treasurer,” usually refers to an appointed individual responsible for the management of business affairs or an estate, and the related verb oikonomeō refers to acting in such a capacity.

The nuance of oikonomia in four instances (Eph. 1:10; 3:2, 9; Col. 1:25) reflects divine government and the outworking of God’s overarching plan on earth for humankind. God accomplishes this plan by assigning specific responsibilities and duties that people are obligated to fulfill. Covenant infidelity may endanger the viability of the arrangement or alter the terms significantly. Despite disobedience, humankind is responsible for any previous revelation as well as for the new body of truth, underscoring the progressive nature of divine revelation as a series of agreements undergoing the expansion process that culminates in the NT. Each dispensation involves a distinct body of revelation from God that governs his relationship with humankind. Biblical scholars who embrace this hermeneutical model see each dispensation as chronologically successive and, in the case of progressive dispensationalism, as reflecting progressive stages in salvation history. Consequently, each dispensation, although distinguishable from the others in content and character, builds upon the previous revelation to form a unified corpus of truth.

Three Theories on Dispensationalism

Wide disagreement exists among scholars concerning the hermeneutical implications of the term “dispensation” and how to interpret the biblical text based on that framework. The three major divisions of those who hold to some form of dispensations are covenant theologians, classical dispensationalists, and revised or progressive dispensationalists.

Covenant theology. Covenant theology presumes three covenants or dispensations. All Scripture may be categorized under two of those dispensations: a covenant of works and a covenant of grace. Through disobedience, humankind immediately violated the covenant of works, initiated by God in Gen. 2. Consequently, Gen. 3 introduces the covenant of grace, which supersedes the previous covenant and governs the remaining scriptural history. Genesis 12–17 expands the stipulations of the covenant of grace, and all subsequent covenants elaborate or reinforce the covenant of grace. A third covenant, the covenant of redemption, reflects an internal and timeless agreement within the persons of the Godhead concerning the plan and process of unfolding redemption for humankind.

In addition, covenant theology argues that the NT church comprises the new Israel, and that all the promises made to literal Israel in the OT have been transferred and reapplied to the church. This view finds root in the NT citations of OT texts describing historic Israel, which are then understood to represent a spiritual reality in the church.

Classical dispensationalism. According to the classical dispensational model, which originated with J.N. Darby (1880) and became more popularized with the advent of the Scofield Reference Bible (1909), the inauguration of a new dispensation occurs when God gives a further revelation that changes or adds to his governmental relationship with humankind. Each of the seven dispensations covering the extent of scriptural redemptive history represents an agreement between God and humankind characterized by a new divine revelation, followed by a test, disobedience, judgment, and restoration by means of a new revelation. These time periods are distinguished by an alteration of God’s method of dealing with humankind’s sinfulness and culpability. The seven dispensations are innocence, conscience, human government, promise, law, grace, and the millennium.

Classical dispensationalists broadly distinguish two distinctive plans for Israel and the church, recognizing each as a separate entity with promises specific to each group. They affirm clear delineations between the principles of law and grace: law requires humankind’s obedience to God, while grace enables believers to fulfill that righteousness through salvation effected by the sacrifice of Christ.

Relying on a consistently literal interpretation of prophecy, dispensationalists find no mention of the NT church in the OT, affirming Paul’s contention that the church was a “mystery” (Eph. 3:5–6) unforeseen by the earliest biblical writers. These believers understand the church as a parenthesis in the program of God for Israel, since the church is raptured out of the world on the advent of the great tribulation (1Thess. 4:13–17). Promises of Israel’s restoration and return have been temporarily suspended during the dispensation of grace; however, God’s promises to Israel will realize fulfillment during the millennial kingdom.

Revised or progressive dispensationalism. Revised dispensationalism removes the distinction between Israel, as God’s earthly people, and the church, as God’s heavenly people, following the millennial kingdom, since both entities share eternal life through salvation in the new Jerusalem. Jews and Gentiles maintain separate identities under the auspices of redeemed believers.

Those who support this view maintain a threefold concept of the kingdom of God: a universal reign over all things, a spiritual kingdom identical to the present church age, and an eventual political and national Davidic kingdom on earth during the millennium.

Progressive dispensationalism understands the separate dispensations as a unified series of arrangements whereby the manifestation of God’s grace increases with the passing of each dispensation. The dispensations reflect the comprehensive plan through which redemptive history is carried out. Those who support this view of dispensations advocate the partial fulfillment of OT prophecy in the church, with complete fulfillment realized with the culmination of God’s program during the millennial kingdom.

Progressive dispensationalists differ from covenant theologians in their acknowledgment of Israel and the church as distinct entities that coexist as God’s redemptive people. Classical dispensationalists believe that the dispensations reflect differing economies of divine administration aimed at manifesting the glory of God, while progressives argue that redemptive history provides the unifying principle of each dispensation. Both classical and progressive dispensationalists affirm the systematic and progressive unfolding of God’s revelation chronologically through successive dispensations or economies, and each group reinforces separate identities for Israel and the church as two groups subsumed under one people of God. Specific promises made to Israel by God will realize fruition during the millennial reign of Christ.

(Disabilities; Disability; Deformity; Deformities; Sickness]The Bible often speaks of health, healing, disease, andillness. Good health was a sign of God’s favor, and healing wasalso the work of God and his divinely empowered agents. These agentsincluded the prophets (1Kings 17:8–23; 2Kings5:1–15), the apostles (Acts 3:1–10), and the messiah(Mal. 4:2). The divine prerogative of Jesus was to heal (Mark 1:32;6:56; Matt. 4:23; 8:16; 15:30; 21:14; Luke 6:10, 17–19), andmiraculous healings were a sign of his messianic office (Luke7:20–23). Disease, on the other hand, was regarded as a sign ofGod’s disfavor. Within a covenantal context, God could senddisease to punish the sinner (Exod. 4:11; 32:35).

TheBible assigns a wide variety of names to various diseases and theirsymptoms. These terms are nontechnical and generally descriptive.Some are uncertain in meaning. In most cases they describe thesymptoms of the disease, not the disease itself. Diagnosis often wasbased on incomplete observation and nonclinical examination. TheBible also presupposes supernatural intervention in the life of aperson. Healing occurred when God’s agents touched individuals,cast out demons, and resurrected the dead.

AncientNear Eastern Influences

Inthe ancient Near East the knowledge of disease and medicine wasprecritical. Bacteria and viruses were virtually unknown.Mesopotamian literature contains many references to medicine,physicians, and medical practice. Minerals, salts, herbs, and otherbotanicals were used to make up treatments. Babylonian physiciansalso administered prescriptions accompanied by incantations. Diseasewas considered to be the result of a violation of a taboo orpossession by a demon. The Code of Hammurabi (1750 BC) includes lawsregulating the practice of medicine and surgery by physicians. InEgypt medicine and healing were connected to the gods. Tomb paintingsand several papyrus documents describe the developing state ofEgyptian medicine, pharmacy, and surgery.

Greekphysicians admired and sought to learn the skills of the Egyptians.However, the early Greek doctor Hippocrates (460–370 BC),called the “Father of Medicine,” is credited with beingthe first physician to reject the belief that supernatural or divineforces cause illness. He argued that disease is the result ofenvironmental factors, diet, and living habits, not a punishmentimposed by the gods.

Itis clear that the biblical world shared with the ancient Near Eastthe same types of maladies common to tropical or subtropicalclimates. These include malaria, tropical fevers, dysentery, andsunstroke. The tendency of the hot climate to produce frequentdroughts and famine certainly contributed to similar types ofdiseases throughout the Fertile Crescent. Additionally, it must beremembered that Palestine was a land bridge between the Mesopotamianand Egyptian worlds. Migrations carry not only goods and products,but also parasites, communicable disease, and epidemics.

BiblicalConcept of Disease

Thereligious tradition of the Hebrews repudiated the magical or demonicorigin of disease. Hence, moral, ethical, and spiritual factorsregulated disease and illness. This was true for the individual aswell as the community. The Hebrews, like the Egyptians, alsorecognized that much sickness arose from the individual’srelationship to the physical environment. Great stress was placed onhygiene and preventive medicine.

Pentateuchallegislation offered seven covenantal principles designed to preventthe possibility of disease and sickness: (1)Sabbath observancefor humans, animals, and the land, which enforced regular periods ofrest (Gen. 2:3); (2)dietary regulations, which divided foodinto efficient categories of clean and unclean (Lev. 11);(3)circumcision, which carried physical benefits as well asreligious and moral implications (Gen. 17:9; circumcision is the onlyexample of Hebrew surgery); (4)laws governing sexualrelationships and health, including a list of forbidden degrees ofmarital relationships (Lev. 18–20); (5)provisions forindividual sexual hygiene (Lev. 15); (6)stipulations forcleanliness and bodily purification (Lev. 14:2; 15:2); (7) sanitaryand hygienic regulations for camp life (Num. 31:19; Deut. 23:12).

InNT times magical charms and incantations were used along with folkremedies in an effort to cure disease. Jesus repudiated these means.He also suggested that sickness and disease were not directpunishments for sin (John 9:2). In the Sermon on the Mount (Matt.5–7), Jesus confirmed that the ethical and religious standardsof the new covenant promoted the total health of the community andthe individual.

CirculatoryDiseases

Nabalmost likely suffered a cerebrovascular accident or stroke (1Sam.25:36–38). After a heavy bout of drinking, his heart “died”(KJV; NIV: “failed”), and he became paralyzed, lapsedinto a coma, and died ten days later. Psalm 137:5–6 may containa clinical example of the symptoms of stroke. The psalmist wrote, “IfI forget you, Jerusalem, may my right hand forget its skill. May mytongue cling to the roof of my mouth if I do not remember you.”This description points to a paralysis of the right side of the body(right hemiplegia) and the loss of speech (motor aphasia) that resultfrom a stroke on the left side of the brain. Basically, the exiledpsalmist is wishing upon himself the effects of a stroke if he heldanything other than Jerusalem as his highest priority. Some haveconsidered the collapse of Uzzah when he reached out to stabilize theark of the covenant (2Sam. 6:6–7) to be the consequenceof an apoplectic seizure. But since no actual paralysis was describedand death occurred immediately, this seems unlikely. It is moreprobable that God struck him down with an aortic aneurism or acoronary thrombosis.

Paralysis

Apossible case of paralysis may be described in the shriveled(atrophic) hand of JeroboamI (1Kings 13:4–6). In anangry outburst Jeroboam ordered the arrest of a prophet who condemnedthe altar at Bethel. When Jeroboam stretched out his hand, it“shriveled up, so that he could not pull it back.”Several complicated diagnoses have been offered to explain the“withered” hand, but it is possibly an example ofcataplexy, a sudden loss of muscle power following a strong emotionalstimulus. After intercession by the man of God, and the subsiding ofthe emotional outburst, the arm was restored.

Thethreat against the faithless shepherd of God’s people (Zech.11:17), which included a withered arm and blindness in the right eye,may refer to a form of paralysis known as tabes dorsalis, orlocomotor ataxia. Knifelike pains in the extremities and blindnesscharacterize this disease.

Paralysisis frequently mentioned in the NT (Matt. 8:6; 9:2, 6; 12:10; Mark2:3–5, 9, 10; 3:1, 3, 5; Luke 5:18, 24; 6:6; John 5:3; Acts9:33; Heb. 12:12). The exact diagnosis for each of these casesremains uncertain.

Thephysician Luke’s use of the Greek medical term paralelymenos(Luke 5:18, 24) suggests that some of these cases were caused bychronic organic disease. Others clearly were congenital (Acts 3:2;cf. 14:8). It is not necessary to rationalize the origin of theseexamples of paralysis as hysteria or pretense. The NT writersregarded the healing of these individuals by Jesus and the apostlesas miraculous.

MentalIllness and Brain Disorders

Casesof mental disease are generally described in the Bible by noting thesymptoms produced by the disorder. The particular cause of a mentalillness in the NT is often blamed on an unknown evil spirit orspirits (Luke 8:2). Such spirits, however, were subject to God’scontrol and operated only within the boundaries allowed by him(1Sam. 16:14–16, 23; 18:10; 19:9). Accordingly, in the OT“madness” and “confusion of mind” wereregarded as consequences of covenantal disobedience (Deut. 28:28,34).

Ithas been argued that King Saul displayed early indications ofpersonality disorder. Symptoms included pride, self-aggrandizement(1Sam. 11:6; 13:12; 15:9, 19), and ecstatic behavior(10:11–12). A rapid deterioration in Saul’s charactertranspired after David was anointed and became more popular (16:14;18:10–11). Since Saul demonstrated fear, jealousy, a sense ofpersecution, and homicidal tendencies, some scholars argue that hesuffered from paranoid schizophrenia.

Nebuchadnezzarsuffered a rare form of monomania in which he lived like a wild beastin the field eating grass (Dan. 4:33). David, in order to save hisown life, feigned insanity or perhaps epilepsy before the Philistineking Achish (1Sam. 21:12–15).

Inthe NT, individuals with mental disorders went about naked, mutilatedthemselves, lived in tombs (Mark 5:2), and exhibited violent behavior(Matt. 8:28). Such mental disorientation was often linked to demonpossession. Examples include the Syrophoenician’s child (Matt.15:22; Mark 7:25), the demoniacs at Gerasa (Matt. 8:28; Mark 5:2;Luke 8:27) and Capernaum (Mark 1:23; Luke 4:33), a blind and mutedemoniac (Matt. 12:22; Luke 11:14), and a fortune-telling slave girl(Acts 16:16). While such behavior is clinically suggestive ofparanoid schizophrenia or other mental disorders, themind-controlling influence of some extraneous negative force cannotbe ruled out.

Epilepsy(grand mal) causes the afflicted person to fall to the ground, foamat the mouth, and clench or grind the teeth (Matt. 17:15; Mark9:17–18; Luke 9:39). The description of Saul falling to theground in an ecstatic state (1Sam. 19:23–24) and Balaamfalling with open eyes may be indicative of an epileptic seizure. Inthe NT, Jesus healed many who suffered from epilepsy (Matt. 4:24;17:14–18; Mark 9:17–18; Luke 9:38–42). Somescholars have linked the light seen by Paul on the road to Damascuswith the aura that some epileptics experience prior to a seizure. Hissubsequent blindness has also been attributed to the epilepticdisturbance of the circulation of the blood in the brain.

ChildhoodDiseases

Thecause of the death of the widow’s son at Zarephath is unknown(1Kings 17:17–22). The death of the Shunammite woman’sson has been attributed to sunstroke (2Kings 4:18–37),although a headache is the only symptom recorded (v.19). Inboth cases there is too little evidence to present an accuratediagnosis.

Inthe first case, the boy at Zarephath stopped breathing (1Kings17:17). This may leave the door open to argue that Elijahresuscitated the child. However, in the second case, the text clearlystates that the Shunammite boy died (2Kings 4:20), implying aresurrection.

Infectiousand Communicable Diseases

Feverand other calamities are listed among the punishments for covenantalinfidelity (Deut. 28:22). Three different types of fever may beintentionally described here: “fever,” “inflammation,”and “scorching heat” (ESV: “fiery heat”).Fever is also mentioned frequently in the NT (Matt. 8:15; Mark1:30–31; Luke 4:38–39; John 4:52; Acts 28:8). Both Jesusand Paul healed individuals who had a fever. A number of these feverswere likely caused by malaria, since the disease was known to beendemic to the Jordan Valley and other marshy areas in Palestine.

Severalepidemics in which numerous people died of pestilence or plague arementioned in the OT (Exod. 11:1; 12:13; Num. 14:37; Zech. 14:12). Thefifth plague of Egypt (Exod. 9:3–6) has been attributed toJordan Rift Valley fever, which is spread by flies. Bubonic plaguehas been blamed for the malady that struck the Philistines (1Sam.5–6). However, it may have been the result of a severe form oftropical dysentery. Acute bacillary dysentery contracted in themilitary camp may also have been responsible for the epidemic thatkilled a large number of the Assyrian army (2Kings 19:35).

ParasiticDiseases

Somescholars have repeatedly argued that the “fiery serpents”(NIV: “venomous snakes”) encountered by Moses and thechildren of Israel (Num. 21:6–9) were in reality an infestationof the parasitic guinea worm (Dracunculus medinensis). Microscopicfleas ingested in drinking water carry the larvae of this slendernematode into the body. The larvae move from the digestive tract tothe skin. The adult worm, which may grow to a length of several feet,discharges its eggs into an ulcer on the skin. Death of the hostoccurs because of the resulting infection of the skin ulcers.

Afterthe conquest of Jericho, Joshua cursed the individual who wouldendeavor to rebuild the city (Josh. 6:26). Later, Hiel of Bethelattempted to rebuild the city and lost two of his sons as a result ofthe curse (1Kings 16:34). Elisha was then asked to purify thebad water at Jericho in order to allow a new settlement (2Kings2:19). Elisha obliged by throwing salt into the spring and therebymaking the water potable (2:20–22). Recent archaeological studyhas discovered the remains of certain snails in the mud-bricks usedto construct Jericho in the Bronze Age. These types of snails are nowknown to serve as intermediate hosts for the flatworm parasite thatcan cause schistosomiasis. The Schistosoma haematobium trematodeinfects the urinary tract and the bladder. It is possible that thistype of parasite was responsible for the death of Hiel’s twosons.

InNT times, Herod Agrippa apparently died of the complications of aparasitic disease, perhaps being infested by the larvae of flies(myiasis) in the bowels. Luke mentions that he was “eaten byworms” (skōlēkobrōtos [Acts 12:23]). The fatherof Publius also suffered from dysentery (Acts 28:8).

PhysicalDeformities and Abnormalities

Individualswith deformities were disqualified from priestly service (Lev.21:18–20). The list included lameness, limb damage, anddwarfism. The deformities mentioned here might have been congenitalor acquired. Mephibosheth was dropped by his nurse (2 Sam. 4:4) andperhaps suffered damage to the spinal cord. Jacob possibly sustainedinjury to an intervertebral disk (Gen. 32:32) causing a deformity anda limp. The woman who was “bent over” (Luke 13:10–17)might have suffered from an abnormality of the spine similar toscoliosis. It is difficult to ascertain the origin of the “shriveledhand” of the unnamed individual healed by Jesus (Matt.12:10–13; Mark 3:1–5; Luke 6:6–10). It could becongenital in character or a paralysis caused by any number offactors.

Diseasesand Disabilities of the Eyes and Ears

Physicalblindness is mentioned several times in the Bible. Blindness excludedone from serving as a priest (Lev. 21:18, 20). Blindness anddeafness, however, were disabilities requiring special care from thecommunity (Lev. 19:14; Deut. 27:18). The “weak eyes” ofLeah may refer to an eye condition (Gen. 29:17).

Blindnessin the biblical world was caused by various factors. Leviticus 26:16speaks of a fever that destroys the eyes. Flies probably wereresponsible for much of the conjunctivitis found in children. John9:1 mentions congenital blindness, which Jesus cured using mud madefrom spittle and dirt (John 9:6). In Mark 8:22–26 Jesus healeda blind man by spitting in his eye and laying hands on him (cf. Matt.20:34 with Mark10:52).

Congenitaldeafness would also be associated with mutism and speech defectsbecause a child learning to speak depends on imitation and mimicry.Jesus healed a man who was deaf and could barely talk (Mark 7:32–37).The man’s inability to say much possibly pointed to a loss ofhearing early in life.

SkinConditions

Variousskin and hair abnormalities are described in the Bible. Some made theindividual unclean (Lev. 13:30; 14:54). The OT speaks of “theboils of Egypt” (Deut. 28:27; cf. Exod. 9:9). Skin ailmentsincluded tumors, festering sores, boils, infections, and the itch(Deut. 28:27, 35; Isa. 3:7). Job complained of a litany of ailments:broken and festering skin (7:5), multiple wounds (9:17), blackpeeling skin and fever (30:30), gnawing bone pain (2:5; 19:20;30:17), insomnia (7:3–4), and wasting away (33:21). Thesesymptoms have been diagnosed as indications of yaws or eczema. Apoultice made of figs cured Hezekiah’s boil (2Kings20:7).

Leprosywas once thought to be a common problem in the biblical world.Leprosy (Hansen’s disease) is a slow, progressive chronicinfectious disease caused by a bacterium. Symptoms include loss ofsensation and loss of parts of the body. Evidence for this type ofdisease in Palestine is rare. Uzziah may have had a true case ofHansen’s disease. He was quarantined until the day he died(2Chron. 26:21).

Scholarsnow suggest that the symptoms of the disease described in the Bibledo not fit this pattern and thus do not signify leprosy (Hansen’sdisease) as it is known today. Instead, the word that Englishversions translate as “leprosy” (Heb. root tsr’)probably refers to different types of infectious skin disease, oftencharacterized by a long-standing, patchy skin condition associatedwith peeling or flakiness and redness of skin. Evidence points moretoward psoriasis, fungal infections, or dermatitis.

Thisdisease could appear in humans (Lev. 14:2), on buildings (14:34), andon clothing (14:55). It was not limited to the extremities but couldoccur on the head (14:42–44). It could run its course quickly(13:5–8). It made the individual ceremonially unclean, but itwas also curable (Lev. 14:3; 2Kings 5:1–27). Individualswith the disease were not necessarily shunned (2Kings 7; Matt.26:6// Mark 14:3). Moses (Exod. 4:6), Miriam (Num. 12:10), andNaaman experienced this type of skin disease (2Kings 5:1–27).Jesus healed many suffering from skin ailments (Matt. 8:2–3;Mark 1:40–42; Luke 5:12–13), including the ten “menwho had leprosy” (Luke 17:12–14).

Ailmentsof an Unknown Nature

Somecases in the Bible present insufficient evidence for scholars torender a clear diagnosis. King Asa suffered a disease in his feet(2Chron. 16:12). However, in the OT the Hebrew expression for“feet” is sometimes used euphemistically for the sexualorgans (Judg. 3:24 KJV). Because of this, the exact nature of thedisease is ambiguous. Jehoram was afflicted with “an incurabledisease of the bowels” (2Chron. 21:18–19). Otherunknown ailments factor in the deaths of the firstborn son of Davidand Bathsheba (2Sam. 12:15), of Jeroboam’s son in infancy(1Kings 14:17), of Elisha (2Kings 13:14), and ofEzekiel’s wife (Ezek. 24:16).

The KJV uses “dragon” twenty-one times in the OTto translate the Hebrew word tannin, tannim. In Deut. 32:33 the termis used in parallel with peten (“adder” or “cobra”),indicating that it probably refers to a snake of some type. The termis rendered inconsistently by the KJV, so that elsewhere thetranslation is “whale” (Gen. 1:21; Job 7:12; Ezek.32:2–3) or “serpent” (Exod. 7:9–10, 12).There is also some confusion in the KJV of tannim with the plural ofthe noun tan, which means “jackal” (Job 30:29; Ps. 44:19;Isa. 13:22; 34:13; 35:7; 43:20; Jer. 9:11; 10:22; 14:6; 49:3; 51:37;Mic. 1:8; see also Lam. 4:3; Mal. 1:3).

Inmany passages the LXX uses the term drakōn, which again refersto a serpent. This term is used in the NT only in Revelation, where,as in the OT, the writer probably envisioned not the fire-breathingwinged monster familiar to most modern readers but rather somethingmore directly resembling a serpent (note Rev. 12:9, where the “greatdragon” is also described as the “ancient serpent”and identified as “the devil, or Satan”). Revelation 12:3elaborates by describing it as possessing “seven heads and tenhorns.” Hence, the dragon of Revelation is linked directly tothe serpent in the garden of Eden (Gen. 3), which is ultimatelysubject to defeat and eternal punishment (Rev. 20:7–10).

Geography

Whereasthe principal direction in the modern world is north, in the ancientworld different cultures used a variety of orientations as theysought to describe their relationship to their geographicalenvironment. In Israel the primary direction was determined by thesunrise: east. This is reflected in Hebrew, where the main word usedto refer to east as a direction was qedem, which could also be usedto simply refer to that which was directly ahead or in front of thespeaker (e.g., Ps. 139:5). Elsewhere, east is designated by the termsmizrakh (“rising” [Josh. 11:3]) or mizrakh hashamesh(“rising of the sun” [Num. 21:11]), both of which derivefrom the direction of sunrise. By way of contrast, in Egypt theprimary direction was south, in alignment with the source of the NileRiver.

Theancient world employed the same notion of four cardinal directions,which persists to the present, and the terminology related to thesewas influenced by the choice of primary direction. Thus, in Israelnorth is often designated by “left”; south could bedesignated by “right,” and west by “behind.”In addition, directions could be specified by reference togeographical features found in those directions. North could bespecified by the word tsapon, which was derived from the name of anorthern Syrian mountain (Zaphon); south by negeb, a name for theregion south of Israel (Negev); and west by yam (“sea”),since the Mediterranean Sea lay to the west.

Symbolism

Asidefrom their purely geographical significance, the directions also cameto bear figurative significance. Some caution is warranted inassigning symbolic significance to language, for there is danger ofreading invalid meanings into texts. Furthermore, given the ambiguityinherent in the use of terms to refer to directions, which also havealternate significances, there is danger of assigning a symbolicmeaning to the direction that actually resides in the alternate. So,for example, while yam (“sea”) carries significantsymbolic overtones in the Bible, this association does not appear tohave been extended to encompass the term when used to designate awesterly direction.

Eastand west.Nonetheless, there is, for example, probably some significance in theexpulsion from Eden and progressive movement eastward to the tower ofBabel through Gen. 1–11, followed by a return to the promisedland, which was approached by reversing the easterly migration andreturning toward Eden. Eden itself was said to lie “in theeast” (Heb. miqqedem; Gen. 2:8), although the same Hebrewexpression in Pss. 74:12; 77:5, 11; 78:2; 143:5 means “inancient times,” and there is perhaps a deliberate ambiguity inthe use of the expression in Gen. 2:8. In Isa. 2:6 the east is thesource of influences on the people that lead them astray. Followingthe exile, Ezekiel sees the glory of God returning to the temple fromthe east (Ezek. 43:1–2). Thus, when used symbolically, “east”is often viewed negatively or else may be used to mark a connectionwith distant antiquity (Gen. 2:8; Job 1:3). Any symbolic significanceassigned to west appears primarily to be associated with it being theantithesis of east. The distance between east and west was usedpoetically to express vast distance (Ps. 103:12).

Northand south.North is significant for two primary reasons. First, it is thedirection from which invading armies most often descended upon Israel(Jer. 1:13) as well as from which Babylon’s destruction is saidto come (Jer. 50:3). In light of this, Ezekiel’s vision of Godapproaching from the north strikes an ominous tone of impendingjudgment (Ezek. 1:1–4). Second, in Canaanite mythology theabode of the gods, and specifically Baal, lay to the north, on MountZaphon. Thus, the king of Babylon’s plans in Isa. 14:13 amountto a claim to establish himself as one of the gods. In contrast tothis, Ps. 48:2 pre-sents Mount Zion as supplanting Mount Zaphon andthus implicitly presents Israel’s one God as supplanting theCanaanite pantheon.

Aswith west, there is little symbolic significance associated with thedirection south in the Bible, aside from its use in combination withother directions.

Thefour directions.The four directions (or sometimes just pairs of directions) are usedtogether to describe both the scattering of the Israelites as well astheir being gathered by God back to the promised land (Ps. 107:3;Isa. 43:5–6; Luke 13:29). They are also used together toexpress the extent of the promised land (Gen. 13:14) or else todescribe something that is all-encompassing (1Chron. 9:24).

Scripture describes wind as a powerful force that is underGod’s command. The Hebrew word ruakhsometimes is translated as “wind” but other times canmean “breath,” as well as “spirit” (Gen.1:2). The Greek word for “spirit,” pneuma,hints of a similar range of meaning, although another word is mostoften used in the NT to denote wind.

OldTestament. Throughoutthe OT wind is used by God to fulfill his purposes. Psalm 148:8declares that winds do God’s bidding. Yahweh keeps the wind instorehouses until they are needed (Ps. 135:7; Jer. 10:13). God useswind to protect and provide for his people. For instance, God sends awind over the earth to cause the floodwaters surrounding the ark torecede (Gen. 8:1), a strong east wind to drive back the sea duringthe exodus from Egypt (Exod. 14:21), and a wind that drives quail infrom the sea to serve as food for the Israelites in the wilderness(Num. 11:31).

Windcan also be an agent of God’s destruction. God sends a plagueupon Egypt by making an east wind blow locusts all across the land;afterward, God uses a west wind to blow the locusts into the sea(Exod. 10:13–19). In the book of Job a mighty wind from thedesert causes the house of Job’s eldest son to collapse,killing Job’s seven sons and three daughters (Job 1:19). In thebook of Jonah a great wind sent by God threatens to destroy Jonah’sship, and a scorching east wind later causes Jonah to grow faint anddesire death (Jon. 1:4; 4:8). The prophetic books use the subject ofwind in communicating God’s judgment (e.g., Isa. 28:2; 64:6;Ezek. 5:2; 13:11).

Whilea single wind is able to blow in several directions (Eccles. 1:6),many passages specify four winds from the four quarters of theheavens. The north wind brings rain (Prov. 25:23), while the southwind brings heat (Job 37:17), both of which are useful for growing agarden (Song 4:16). Only one verse refers to the west windspecifically (Exod. 10:19), but numerous verses refer to the eastwind as an agent of destruction, often appearing along with militaryterms. When let loose by God (Ps. 78:26), the east wind may shatterships (Ps. 48:7), and those in its path will scatter (Jer. 18:17) orshrivel (Ezek. 19:12). In Hos. 12:1 God accuses Israel of pursuingthe east wind along with multiplying lies and violence. Together, thefour winds can be sent to bring destruction (Jer. 49:36) or to bringlife (Ezek. 37:9). They also appear in the visions of Daniel (Dan.7:2; 8:8; 11:4; cf. Rev. 7:1).

Godrides on the wings of the wind on cherubim (Ps. 18:10; 2Sam.22:11), with the clouds as his chariot (Ps. 104:3). In Ps. 104:4 thewinds are called God’s “messengers.” This imageryis strikingly similar to ancient descriptions of the Canaanite godBaal, although Scripture adds that it is Yahweh who created the wind(Job 28:25; Amos 4:13). Yahweh’s power is not contingent uponwind, as Elijah learns when he experiences the presence of Yahweh inthe whisper and not the wind (or the earthquake) after his successfulcontest against the prophets of Baal (1Kings 19:11–12).

Thewisdom literature focuses upon other characteristics of wind besidesits power. The transient nature of wind is significant, as wind isthe inheritance of those who bring trouble upon their family (Prov.11:29). Ecclesiastes continually refers to all things done under thesun as “a chasing after the wind” (e.g., 1:14, 17). Emptytalk is spoken of as wind (Job 8:2). The function of wind to blowaway chaff is also used to declare the fate of the wicked (e.g., Ps.1:4; cf. Job 21:18). The unpredictability of wind serves as ametaphor for the mystery of God’s actions (Eccles. 11:5).

NewTestament.In the NT, the Gospels reveal the divine nature of Jesus byemphasizing his ability to command the wind (Matt. 8:26–27).Jesus declares that the Son of Man will gather his elect from thefour winds (Matt. 24:31; Mark 13:27). Wind is a metaphor in John 3:8for the mystery and unpredictability of those born of the Spirit.Jesus uses the image of empty talk as wind when he refers to John theBaptist as a prophet rather than a reed swayed by the wind (Matt.11:7; Luke 7:24). In Eph. 4:14 false teaching is referred to as wind.It is wind that easily sways the one who doubts (James 1:6). Finally,a correlation between wind and the Holy Spirit occurs when a soundlike a violent wind occurs at the time when the Holy Spirit fills allthose in the house at Pentecost (Acts 2:2).

The region within which was situated the primeval garden, the setting of the story of the creation in Gen. 2 and of the fall in Gen. 3. Although numerous attempts have been made to identify its intended location (Turkey, North Africa, the Persian Gulf), the information we can glean from the references to Eden, the rivers that flow from it, and the regions they encompass is insufficient for locating Eden in relation to known geography. It is simply “in the east” (Gen. 2:8).

Eden is portrayed as a mountainous region (Ezek. 28:13–14). Four rivers flow from it: the Pishon and the Gihon, which are unknown, and the Tigris and the Euphrates in Mesopotamia (Gen. 2:10–14). This may be compared with other ancient Near Eastern portrayals of rivers flowing from the mountain dwelling of the gods.

The name “Eden” may be connected with a Hebrew word for “luxury, delight,” though another suggestion is that it derives from a Sumerian word meaning “steppe, plain.” The garden in Eden is also referred to as the “garden of the Lord” (Gen. 13:10; Isa. 51:3) or the “garden of God” (Ezek. 28:13; 31:8–9), or (in a visionary reappearance) as “paradise,” from a Persian word for “garden” (Rev. 2:7).

The garden is depicted as a sanctuary or holy space (Ezek. 28:14) into which humanity is invited on God’s terms to act as God’s agents. It contains the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and the tree of life (Gen. 2:9).

As a picture of fertility, Eden holds out the prospect of a reversal from a desolate state (Isa. 51:3).

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

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

Yahweh:The Lord

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

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

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

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

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

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

Elohim

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

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

Adonai

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

The ancient world knew nothing of terms like “global warming” or “going green.” However, the Bible does contain many ideas that can support environmental awareness today. God created a world that is good (Gen. 1:31), and he enlists those whom he made in his image to rule over it (1:27–28).

Although some have understood the words “dominion” and “subdue” in Gen. 1:28 (KJV, ESV, NRSV) to support excessive exploitation of the earth’s resources, the context rules out such a notion. On the contrary, God creates an orderly world from emptiness and disorder (1:2) and intends the bearers of his image to “work and take care of” the garden that he has given them (2:15). It seems necessary, then, that “dominion” and “subdue” endorse not tyranny, but rather a benevolent rule that mimics what the Creator began and continues to do (Gen. 8:21, 22; Ps.65).

Another instructive biblical theme is Israel’s duty to care for the land that God gives them (Deut. 11:11–15). This means that the Israelites are to observe certain limitations regarding the land and its crops (Exod. 23:10; Lev. 19:23–25; 25:1–22). Moreover, there is the theme of neighborly love (Matt. 22:37–39; Phil. 2:3).

Some believe that environmentalism is not supported by Scripture because Scripture does not indicate that an ecological crisis will end the world. Nevertheless, it remains true that present and future generations may suffer greatly due to excesses perpetrated in the present. Creation care is neighborly love.

Eternal life usually is mentioned in reference to human life, where it means unending life in the body, free from death. The expression, though most common in the NT, is drawn from the OT. The book of Daniel says that many who “sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt” (12:2). This yearning for eternal life is also expressed in Genesis, where those who eat of the “tree of life” will “live forever” (3:22). In Deuteronomy, God likewise declares, “I live forever” (32:40). Among the DSS, 4Q418 (frag. 69) and 1QS (4:7), both of which predate the NT, also refer to everlasting life.

The NT expression “eternal life” may seem to have a different meaning than the OT expression “everlasting life.” Any such appearance arises only in translation to English, for the underlying Greek words in the NT have the same meaning as the underlying Hebrew words in the OT. The words are already treated synonymously by the LXX, an ancient translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek (predating the NT).

The English word “eternal” may refer to eternity past and future, but in biblical usage that word does not generally refer to eternity past. This is evident where the NT mentions “eternal fire” (Matt. 18:8) and “eternal punishment” (Matt. 25:46). It is also indicated where eternal life is seen as a future reward for the righteous (Dan. 12:2; Luke 18:30; Rom. 2:7; Gal. 6:8; Titus 1:2; 1John 2:25).

That life in the body is included in the NT concept of eternal life is evident from several considerations. Jesus says of everyone who believes in him, “I will raise them up at the last day” (John 6:40). The bodily nature of everlasting life is indicated by Jesus’ own resurrection, for his tomb was left empty. Jesus says after his own resurrection that a spirit “does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have” (Luke 24:39). The apostle Paul even writes that without the resurrection the Christian faith is invalidated (1Cor. 15:12–19). When Paul says that “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God,” he does not mean that resurrection is of the human spirit, but rather that perishable flesh and blood must first be made immortal (1Cor. 15:50–54; 2Cor. 5:4).

The prospect of eternal life is often contrasted with death and punishment, just as the Bible more generally contrasts the prospect of life with death and lawless behavior. In Gen. 3, the sin of Adam and Eve shows that people turn from God out of self-interest, so everlasting life is not given to them. Much later, the people of Israel are warned that they will suffer death if they break faith with the true God to follow other gods (Lev. 26; Deut. 28; 30:15–20). Later still, the book of Daniel warns plainly that resurrection is to everlasting life or to everlasting contempt (12:1–3). The NT likewise, drawing at times from the Hebrew prophets (e.g., Isa. 66:22–24), contrasts the prospect of eternal life with the prospect of punishment for doing evil (Matt. 25:31–46; John 5:28–29; Rom.6:23; Gal.6:8; Rev.20:10–15; 22:1–6).

Just as eternal life is contrasted with death, eternal life is sometimes referred to more fundamentally and simply as “life” (e.g., Matt. 19:17; Acts 11:18; 1John 3:14). All life comes from God, through his divine word (Gen. 1; Deut. 30:20; John 1:1–4). The NT says that God gave his Son the power to give eternal life, since the Son does only what God the Father commands (John 5:19–30; 6:57–58).

The NT promises eternal life to all who believe (trust) in God’s Son (John 3:16; 3:36; 6:40; 11:25–26; 20:31; 1John 5:13). To believe in God’s Son is to believe that God sent Jesus (John 17:8), to listen to Jesus’ message from God and so believe in God (5:24; 12:44), and to believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Messiah (20:31).

The belief in God and Jesus that secures eternal life is not mere mental assent, but rather is expressed in a life that turns from evil. Those who will receive eternal life are characterized by love rather than by hatred and murder (John 5:29; 1John 3:14–15). Only the righteous will enter into eternal life, and they are marked by their care for Jesus’ brothers and sisters: feeding the hungry and clothing the poor (Matt. 25:31–46). They do not live for themselves, nor do they give free rein to all human desires, but instead they are led by, and walk in accordance with, the Spirit of God (John 12:25; Gal. 5:16–21; 6:8).

The two rivers between which Mesopotamia (“betweenrivers”) is located. The Euphrates and the Tigris originate inthe mountains of modern Turkey and run through Syria and Iraq, eachfor more than a thousand miles, before meeting and emptying into thePersian Gulf. Like today, the two rivers gave life to many people,running through major centers of ancient civilization.

TheEuphrates and the Tigris are mentioned together only once in theBible (Gen. 2:10–14), where they are two of the four riversstemming from the garden of Eden. The Euphrates itself figuresprominently in the biblical narrative. It is also known as “thegreat river” or simply “the river.” Besides itsrole in Gen. 2, it is frequently mentioned as a border of the landthat God promised to Abraham and his offspring (Gen. 15:18; Josh.1:4), a land that Israel acquired during the united monarchy (2Sam.8:3; 1Kings 4:24). King Josiah met his death here at the battleof Carchemish in 605 BC (2Chron. 35:20–27; cf. Jer.46:1–10). The Euphrates also functions as a symbol of Israel’sidolatrous past (Josh. 24:2–3) and as a symbol of freedom fromthe exile (Isa. 11:15; 27:12). In the NT, the Euphrates is the placewhere the four angels are bound (Rev. 9:14) and where the sixth angelpours out his bowl. Moreover, the Tigris appears in only one otherplace in the Bible (Dan. 10:4), where Daniel receives a vision on itsbanks. Some dispute the validity of this occurrence because certainmanuscripts (i.e., the Pesh*tta) here replace “Tigris”with “Euphrates.”

Modern science and the Bible present accounts of the creation of the world that often are claimed to be incompatible. In response, interpreters of the Bible have adopted a range of approaches in order to overcome the apparent tensions. At one end of the spectrum is the position that wholeheartedly adopts modern scientific thinking and restricts the Bible’s authority only to matters of faith—where “faith” must necessarily exclude anything that may touch on scientific matters. The other end of the spectrum lies with those who reject any claims of modern science that stand at odds with a “literal” reading of the Bible, affirming the truth of the Bible in all matters upon which it touches. Among contemporary Christians a number of positions on this spectrum are represented in modern debate; some of the more important of these are outlined in what follows here.

First is the view that a literal reading of the creation account in the Bible is necessitated by the nature of God and his self-revelation as trustworthy and true. Consequently, where conflict with modern science occurs, the literal reading of the Bible is right and modern science is wrong. In spite of this disagreement, the Bible’s revelation can be supported through the application of modern scientific methodologies, and consequently an alternate scientific account of the creation of the world can be produced that reflects rather than contradicts the biblical account. Proponents of this view typically affirm the notion that the earth was created in six days within the last few thousand years. Some variations to this interpretation do exist, such as the view that a vast expanse of time may have passed between Gen. 1:1 and Gen. 1:3.

Second, it is possible to employ modern science to illuminate the meaning of the creation accounts. This approach has been used to suggest, for example, that a scientific model of the ancient earth’s atmosphere may have provided conditions that could allow for the earthbound observer to believe that day and night existed before the appearance of the sun and other heavenly bodies. It has also facilitated the production of elaborate and detailed explanations of precisely how Gen. 1–2 can be interpreted to agree with the current scientific account of origins. One major problem is that it allows science ultimately to dictate the interpretation of the Bible, but other problems are apparent as well, such as the fact that because modern science becomes a prerequisite for a correct understanding of the biblical text, the true meaning of the text was unavailable in the past and, in particular, unavailable to its original audience.

Third, others claim that some aspects of the creation account in the Bible are figurative and should not be understood literally. The application of such an approach varies enormously, with disagreement over precisely which parts of the text are to be read figuratively and which literally. What this approach does allow for, however, is that where there are apparent conflicts between a literal reading of the text and modern science, both science and the text can be correct if the text is understood figuratively. One example of this approach suggests that the days of Gen. 1 are a literary device and, as such, should not be interpreted as literal twenty-four-hour days. This view thus allows its proponents to reconcile the creation account with the scientific view that the earth is billions of years old.

The fourth approach—in many ways a refinement of the third—emphasizes the notion that the Bible represents God’s communication with people who lived in a particular historical and cultural context. As such, God’s message is conveyed in their language, using expressions, idioms, concepts, and ideas with which they were familiar in order to effectively communicate with those people. Thus, some aspects of the text are “reflective” instead of didactic, accommodating to the needs of the people in order to effectively communicate the intended message. So, for example, when the OT refers to the heart as the locus of the human intellect, this reflects not an authoritative decree relating to human physiology but rather an aspect of the Hebrew language and culture employed by God to speak effectively to his people. Aspects of the creation account often cited as incoherent or problematical thus actually reflect accommodation to aspects of the worldview of the audience employed by God to communicate accurately with his people.

In spite of the often heated exchanges between proponents of these various positions, many in each group remain committed to the authority of the Bible. For those Christians who do accept that the prevailing modern scientific account of the origin of the universe is accurate (if not necessarily complete), it nonetheless remains impossible to reasonably claim that the Bible has nothing to say about creation or that it can have no impact on how scientists understand the universe. While God is “other”—that is, not part of creation—he is still intimately associated with it: he upholds it, controls it, and purposes it for his own ends (Isa. 46:9–11; Heb. 1:3).

Regardless of how one resolves the difficulties apparent in reconciling the biblical creation account with modern science, the existence of the problem itself highlights a fundamental aspect of Christianity: God intervenes in human history. If God interacts with his creation, then this invariably impacts how we should understand the universe in which we live. Science often adopts an unnecessarily atheistic set of presuppositions that are not only incompatible with biblical faith but also ultimately unnecessary for the pursuit of scientific understanding.

It is also important to acknowledge that science has long influenced readings of the Bible’s creation account, whether that science was that of Aristotle or that of Einstein. For example, many early scholars felt it necessary to note the figurative nature of the days in Gen. 1, because they held that the creation of the universe was instantaneous. History has shown that for those who seek to reconcile their interpretation of the opening chapters of Genesis with the prevailing scientific paradigm of their day, each major shift in scientific understanding necessitates a revision of their understanding of the text. That this is so ought to serve as a warning that this approach is problematic. Understanding the Bible’s creation account is clearly not contingent upon understanding modern science, or else it would have been useless to the many generations who came before us. Rather, in light of the fact that the account was written in an ancient language to the people of ancient Israel, it is more appropriate to read the text through their understanding of the world in order to derive the meaning that they would have attained as they read. We seek to understand the meaning of the text through a study of its language and culture. Part of this process is necessarily to seek to understand the meaning of the ideas implicit in the text, such as the manner in which it expresses details of the world in which the Israelites lived.

Of all aspects of science that have caused difficulties for readers of the Bible, the theory of evolution has perhaps been most consistently at the forefront of debate. Here again the spectrum of approaches outlined above is evident in Christian responses to the theory, and here again the degree of discord has frequently been overstated. Furthermore, the debate has tended to polarize views, driving the more vocal defenders of evolution to express their position more vehemently and with more certitude than is actually warranted by the evidence, and for some opponents of evolution similarly to overstate their case.

Even for those who hold that modern science is incompatible with biblical revelation on the matter of the origins of the universe and life, there remain substantial areas of science that do not come into conflict with the Bible, so we need to avoid an irrational response to modern science that rejects the whole on the basis of a disagreement over a part. It is also important to retain a degree of humility in our approach to both science and the Bible, for we are infallible interpreters neither of the physical world in which we live nor of the word of God.

Finally, it is important to acknowledge that the Bible makes certain claims that necessarily impact one’s view of science. It is difficult to escape the fact that the Bible clearly depicts God as both responsible for creation and intervening in history. Consequently, a scientific worldview that seeks to comprehensively exclude God from involvement with his creation is clearly neither biblical nor compatible with the Bible except through application of the most elaborate exegetical and hermeneutical gymnastics.

“The fall” refers to the events of the firsthuman couple’s sin in the garden of Eden (Gen. 2–3).Although the word “fall” does not occur in the account,Christians have used the term to describe it, taking their cues fromPaul’s writings (esp. Rom. 5:12–21). The term isimportant because it reflects an interpretation that the events inthe garden are the entrance of human sin and that the sin hasuniversal effects on humankind.

TheGenesis Account

Theframework of the Genesis account runs as follows. The account beginswith God’s creation of a man, Adam. God plants a garden filledwith beautiful trees that bear good food. Among the trees, two inparticular are pointed out: the tree of life and the tree of theknowledge of good and evil. God sets Adam in the garden and commandshim that he can eat from any tree except one: the tree of theknowledge of good and evil. God says that it is not good for Adam tolive alone and so, after other attempts, finally provides a suitablehelper for him, a woman(Eve).

Atthis point, the narrative shifts its focus to the woman and aserpent. The serpent raises doubts about God’s commandment. Thewoman tells the serpent that disobeying God’s commandment leadsto death. The serpent replies that she will not die, because God gavethe commandment only to keep her from attaining what God possesses.The woman examines the tree; it is beautiful, has good fruit, and isable to make a person wise. She takes some fruit, eats it, and givesit to Adam, who is there with her.

AfterAdam and Eve eat the fruit, they realize that they are naked, andthey sew leaves together to cover their nakedness. God confrontsthem; Adam blames Eve; Eve blames the serpent. God pronounces a cursethat affects the serpent, the man, and the woman. God then banishesAdam and Eve from the garden, setting a guard to keep them fromreturning and eating from the tree of life.

TheTruth about the Serpent’s Claims

Thefirst question of the narrative is concerned with the central tensionof the narrative: Is the serpent telling the truth about the tree andGod? When God commands Adam not to eat the fruit of the tree of theknowledge of good and evil, he gives the penalty for disobedience:immediate death (Gen. 2:16–17). However, the serpent tells Evethat she will not die if she disobeys. In fact, what will happen isthat her eyes will be opened so that she will know good and evil andbe like God (3:4–5). At first glance, it appears that theserpent is precisely correct. Eve eats the fruit along with Adam,their eyes are opened, and now they are like God, knowing good andevil (3:6–7, 22). At the same time, there is no mention ofdeath in the narrative.

However,a closer look reveals that, in fact, Adam and Eve do die. At the endof the narrative, three events take place: God pronounces curses, Godbanishes them from the garden that he has prepared for them, and Godstations angelic sentries at the entrance of the garden to preventAdam and Eve from eating from the tree of life. The first obvioussign of their death is that they are prevented from eating from thetree of life. By being denied access to the tree of life, they arecondemned to death. It is often assumed that eating the fruit of thattree provides instant immortality, because of God’s statementin Gen. 3:22: “The man has now become like one of us, knowinggood and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and takealso from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.” However,this interpretation is not necessary. What is more likely in view isthat the fruit of the tree restores the life of the partaker. Onewould, therefore, need to return to it to continue living. Thisinterpretation helps explain why God does not deny Adam and Eveaccess to the tree while they are still in the garden. They are givenlife, though not immortality, while in the garden, so there is noneed to deny them the tree.

Theirdeath is also revealed in God’s cursing and banishment. Towardthe end of the Pentateuch, Moses draws out this connection as herelates it to the nation of Israel and the commandment(s) that Godhas given: “This day I call the heavens and earth as witnessesagainst you that I have set before you life and death, blessings andcurses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live andthat you may love the Lord your God, listen to his voice, and holdfast to him. For the Lord is your life, and he will give you manyyears in the land he swore to give to your fathers, Abraham, Isaacand Jacob” (Deut. 30:19–20). Life equals blessings in theland that God has prepared; death equals curses outside the land thatGod has prepared. Therefore, when Adam and Eve disobey thecommandment of God, they suffer death when God pronounces curses,banishes them from the garden, and prevents them from returning tothe tree of life.

TheSignificance of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil

Thesecond question pertains to the tree of the knowledge of good andevil: What is the significance of the tree of the knowledge of goodand evil? To begin, one must discover what the knowledge of good andevil is. There are primarily three possibilities: moral awareness,exhaustive knowledge, and wisdom. Although each of thesepossibilities has merit, it is likely that wisdom is in view.

Knowledgeand wisdom as well as good and evil are central concerns for the bookof Proverbs, occurring proportionately more frequently in Proverbsthan in any other book. The stated goal of the book of Proverbs is toteach wisdom and understanding to those who will read the book andheed its instruction (1:1–7). By gaining this wisdom, one isable to discern what is good and what is bad(2:9).

Alongsidethis wisdom background is the fact that when Eve considers eatingfrom the tree, she notices that it is distinct from the other treesbecause it is desirable for making one wise (Gen. 3:6). Therefore,the knowledge of good and evil is associated with wisdom; however,when Adam and Eve eat the fruit of the tree, they attempt to gainwisdom outside God’s stated will. This type of wisdom leadsthem to determine what is good and evil for themselves rather thantrusting God for what he has provided as good (notice the number oftimes God declares something to be good in Gen. 1–3).

Thereare two more results of understanding the knowledge of good and evilas wisdom. First, the narrative sets up an important distinction thatis highlighted in other biblical books: the distinction between humanwisdom and divine wisdom. This contrast is an important emphasis forbooks such as Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, 1Corinthians,Colossians, and James. Second, the narrative closely connects keepingthe commandment of God with attaining wisdom. When Adam and Eve eatthe fruit in disobedience, they determine for themselves what is goodand bad. Obedience to the divine commandment requires trusting thatwhat God has called good is good and what God has called bad is bad.Such is wisdom. The end of Ecclesiastes shares the same concern: “Nowall has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God[the beginning of wisdom] and keep his commandments, for this is theduty of all mankind. For God will bring every deed into judgment,including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil”(Eccles. 12:13–14).

TheEffect of the Fall on Human History

Thethird question to ask concerns the effects of the fall: How does thefall affect the rest of human history? First, the account shows thata war has begun. One conflict lies between God and the serpent.Everything that God affirms, the serpent rejects. However, as a signof God’s sure victory, the serpent is cursed so that it must goabout on its belly and eat dust (Gen. 3:14). Another conflict liesbetween the serpent (and its seed) and the woman (and her seed). Godalso declares that the serpent will lose in this conflict when theseed of the woman crushes the head of the serpent. Although theaccount is clear that the serpent is only a wild animal (3:1), it isalso associated with all those who are like it, its seed. It is forthis reason that Satan is called the “ancient serpent”(Rev. 12:9; 20:2).

Second,humanity finds itself relating to God differently. The sin in thegarden is often called the “original sin.” The Bible doesnot specifically explain what effects the original sin has on eachindividual person, but it does show that Adam’s disobedienceaffects the rest of humankind (Rom. 5:12). Because of this originalsin, death (i.e., natural death, curse, and exile) has entered theworld so that everyone who remains in a natural state must experiencedeath. However, Christ, through his life and work, brings life (i.e.,eternal life, blessing, and communion) for those who believe in him.

Agriculture is the practice of producing food throughcultivation and harvesting. For the biblical Israelites and theirancestors, it was one of the primary expressions of subsistence intheir economy and life. The priority of agricultural pursuits forIsrael’s worldview is indicated in the fact that it was amongthe first mandates given by God to man in the garden (Gen. 1:28–29).This primacy of place in agricultural concerns meant that care andstewardship of the land was the prerogative of every member ofsociety. In fact, individuals, the priesthood, and the monarchy couldall possess and care for the land (Num. 27:1–8; 35:1–8;1 Chron. 27:26–28).

Theprimary produce of the biblical farmer included cereals (wheat,barley, millet), legumes (beans, peas), olives, and grapes.Additional, less predominant crops included nuts (almonds, walnuts,pistachios), herbs (cumin, coriander, sesame), and vegetables(cucumbers, onions, greens). The production of the various crops waslargely limited to certain geographic regions of Israel (such as thecoastal plain or the plains of Moab) because much of the land was illsuited for agriculture, being rocky and arid.

Theentire calendar in most ancient Near Eastern societies centered onthe agricultural cycle, and many important biblical feasts includedsome connection with the seasonal calendar. For Israel, some of thefirst festivals were linked to the agricultural seasons (Exod.23:14–16; Lev. 23). Cereals were sown at the Feast ofBooths/Tabernacles (late October) and harvested in middle to latespring at the Feasts of Passover (March) and Weeks/Pentecost (May).Grapes and other fruit were harvested in late summer into the fall.

Theactual craft of agriculture involved the three steps of sowing,reaping, and threshing/production. The fields typically were plowedfollowing the first autumn rains, and sowing lasted about two months.Harvest season lasted seven months in all. Cereal products wentthrough the process of threshing, whereas fruits were immediatelyproduced into wine or dried. The practice of threshing the grainsmostly took place on threshing floors located adjacent to the fields.The threshing floors were designed as a circle, generally 25 to 40feet in diameter. Typically animals such as donkeys or oxen weredriven around the floor as the grains were fed into their paths andsubsequently crushed. The resulting broken husks were then throwninto the air, allowing the wind to carry away the chaff and producinga separated grain that could then be cleaned and processed for homeuse.

Besidesplaying a significant role in the practical matters of life,agricultural practices found numerous applications in the images andideals of the biblical writers (Judg. 8:2; 9:8–15; Ezek.17:6–10). The medium could be used to express both blessingsand curses. Several texts point to the cursing of agriculturalendeavors as a punishment from God. Ceremonial defilement was apossibility if proper methodology in sowing seeds was not followed(Lev. 19:19; Deut. 22:9). Similarly, Yahweh’s assessment ofIsrael’s failure to uphold the covenant commitments could leadto disease, locust attacks, crop failure, and total loss of the land(Deut. 28:40; Joel 1:4; Amos 7:1). Conversely, agricultural bountyand blessings were also a part of covenant stipulations. Indeed, manyof the offerings themselves were centered on agriculture (Lev. 2;Num. 18:8–32). Even the Sabbath rest itself was extended tomatters of agriculture and care for the land (Lev. 25:1–7).Finally, the covenant saw some of the greatest benefits of lifebefore Yahweh as being blessed through agricultural bounty (Deut.28:22; Amos 9:13). In a few cases, agricultural imagery cut bothways. For instance, the vine was an image that could expressjudgment, care, and restoration in both Judaism and Christianity(Isa. 5:1–8; John 15:1–11). Despite the link betweenagricultural realities and the covenant, the Scriptures are verycareful to distinguish Israel from the fertility cults of itsCanaanite neighbors (1 Kings 18:17–40; Hos. 2:8–9).This distinction also seems to have found expression in certain NTtexts (1 Cor. 6:15–20).

Agriculture is the practice of producing food throughcultivation and harvesting. For the biblical Israelites and theirancestors, it was one of the primary expressions of subsistence intheir economy and life. The priority of agricultural pursuits forIsrael’s worldview is indicated in the fact that it was amongthe first mandates given by God to man in the garden (Gen. 1:28–29).This primacy of place in agricultural concerns meant that care andstewardship of the land was the prerogative of every member ofsociety. In fact, individuals, the priesthood, and the monarchy couldall possess and care for the land (Num. 27:1–8; 35:1–8;1 Chron. 27:26–28).

Theprimary produce of the biblical farmer included cereals (wheat,barley, millet), legumes (beans, peas), olives, and grapes.Additional, less predominant crops included nuts (almonds, walnuts,pistachios), herbs (cumin, coriander, sesame), and vegetables(cucumbers, onions, greens). The production of the various crops waslargely limited to certain geographic regions of Israel (such as thecoastal plain or the plains of Moab) because much of the land was illsuited for agriculture, being rocky and arid.

Theentire calendar in most ancient Near Eastern societies centered onthe agricultural cycle, and many important biblical feasts includedsome connection with the seasonal calendar. For Israel, some of thefirst festivals were linked to the agricultural seasons (Exod.23:14–16; Lev. 23). Cereals were sown at the Feast ofBooths/Tabernacles (late October) and harvested in middle to latespring at the Feasts of Passover (March) and Weeks/Pentecost (May).Grapes and other fruit were harvested in late summer into the fall.

Theactual craft of agriculture involved the three steps of sowing,reaping, and threshing/production. The fields typically were plowedfollowing the first autumn rains, and sowing lasted about two months.Harvest season lasted seven months in all. Cereal products wentthrough the process of threshing, whereas fruits were immediatelyproduced into wine or dried. The practice of threshing the grainsmostly took place on threshing floors located adjacent to the fields.The threshing floors were designed as a circle, generally 25 to 40feet in diameter. Typically animals such as donkeys or oxen weredriven around the floor as the grains were fed into their paths andsubsequently crushed. The resulting broken husks were then throwninto the air, allowing the wind to carry away the chaff and producinga separated grain that could then be cleaned and processed for homeuse.

Besidesplaying a significant role in the practical matters of life,agricultural practices found numerous applications in the images andideals of the biblical writers (Judg. 8:2; 9:8–15; Ezek.17:6–10). The medium could be used to express both blessingsand curses. Several texts point to the cursing of agriculturalendeavors as a punishment from God. Ceremonial defilement was apossibility if proper methodology in sowing seeds was not followed(Lev. 19:19; Deut. 22:9). Similarly, Yahweh’s assessment ofIsrael’s failure to uphold the covenant commitments could leadto disease, locust attacks, crop failure, and total loss of the land(Deut. 28:40; Joel 1:4; Amos 7:1). Conversely, agricultural bountyand blessings were also a part of covenant stipulations. Indeed, manyof the offerings themselves were centered on agriculture (Lev. 2;Num. 18:8–32). Even the Sabbath rest itself was extended tomatters of agriculture and care for the land (Lev. 25:1–7).Finally, the covenant saw some of the greatest benefits of lifebefore Yahweh as being blessed through agricultural bounty (Deut.28:22; Amos 9:13). In a few cases, agricultural imagery cut bothways. For instance, the vine was an image that could expressjudgment, care, and restoration in both Judaism and Christianity(Isa. 5:1–8; John 15:1–11). Despite the link betweenagricultural realities and the covenant, the Scriptures are verycareful to distinguish Israel from the fertility cults of itsCanaanite neighbors (1 Kings 18:17–40; Hos. 2:8–9).This distinction also seems to have found expression in certain NTtexts (1 Cor. 6:15–20).

Agriculture is the practice of producing food throughcultivation and harvesting. For the biblical Israelites and theirancestors, it was one of the primary expressions of subsistence intheir economy and life. The priority of agricultural pursuits forIsrael’s worldview is indicated in the fact that it was amongthe first mandates given by God to man in the garden (Gen. 1:28–29).This primacy of place in agricultural concerns meant that care andstewardship of the land was the prerogative of every member ofsociety. In fact, individuals, the priesthood, and the monarchy couldall possess and care for the land (Num. 27:1–8; 35:1–8;1 Chron. 27:26–28).

Theprimary produce of the biblical farmer included cereals (wheat,barley, millet), legumes (beans, peas), olives, and grapes.Additional, less predominant crops included nuts (almonds, walnuts,pistachios), herbs (cumin, coriander, sesame), and vegetables(cucumbers, onions, greens). The production of the various crops waslargely limited to certain geographic regions of Israel (such as thecoastal plain or the plains of Moab) because much of the land was illsuited for agriculture, being rocky and arid.

Theentire calendar in most ancient Near Eastern societies centered onthe agricultural cycle, and many important biblical feasts includedsome connection with the seasonal calendar. For Israel, some of thefirst festivals were linked to the agricultural seasons (Exod.23:14–16; Lev. 23). Cereals were sown at the Feast ofBooths/Tabernacles (late October) and harvested in middle to latespring at the Feasts of Passover (March) and Weeks/Pentecost (May).Grapes and other fruit were harvested in late summer into the fall.

Theactual craft of agriculture involved the three steps of sowing,reaping, and threshing/production. The fields typically were plowedfollowing the first autumn rains, and sowing lasted about two months.Harvest season lasted seven months in all. Cereal products wentthrough the process of threshing, whereas fruits were immediatelyproduced into wine or dried. The practice of threshing the grainsmostly took place on threshing floors located adjacent to the fields.The threshing floors were designed as a circle, generally 25 to 40feet in diameter. Typically animals such as donkeys or oxen weredriven around the floor as the grains were fed into their paths andsubsequently crushed. The resulting broken husks were then throwninto the air, allowing the wind to carry away the chaff and producinga separated grain that could then be cleaned and processed for homeuse.

Besidesplaying a significant role in the practical matters of life,agricultural practices found numerous applications in the images andideals of the biblical writers (Judg. 8:2; 9:8–15; Ezek.17:6–10). The medium could be used to express both blessingsand curses. Several texts point to the cursing of agriculturalendeavors as a punishment from God. Ceremonial defilement was apossibility if proper methodology in sowing seeds was not followed(Lev. 19:19; Deut. 22:9). Similarly, Yahweh’s assessment ofIsrael’s failure to uphold the covenant commitments could leadto disease, locust attacks, crop failure, and total loss of the land(Deut. 28:40; Joel 1:4; Amos 7:1). Conversely, agricultural bountyand blessings were also a part of covenant stipulations. Indeed, manyof the offerings themselves were centered on agriculture (Lev. 2;Num. 18:8–32). Even the Sabbath rest itself was extended tomatters of agriculture and care for the land (Lev. 25:1–7).Finally, the covenant saw some of the greatest benefits of lifebefore Yahweh as being blessed through agricultural bounty (Deut.28:22; Amos 9:13). In a few cases, agricultural imagery cut bothways. For instance, the vine was an image that could expressjudgment, care, and restoration in both Judaism and Christianity(Isa. 5:1–8; John 15:1–11). Despite the link betweenagricultural realities and the covenant, the Scriptures are verycareful to distinguish Israel from the fertility cults of itsCanaanite neighbors (1 Kings 18:17–40; Hos. 2:8–9).This distinction also seems to have found expression in certain NTtexts (1 Cor. 6:15–20).

Recounted in Gen. 6:5–9:19, the flood is the event whereby God destroys all creatures except for Noah, his family, and a gathering of animals. The account is highly literary and God-centered. It opens and closes with Noah’s three sons (6:10; 9:18–19). Noah’s obedience is highlighted (7:5, 9, 16). God is the protagonist, and Noah remains silent.

Terminology. The Hebrew word for “flood” is mabbul, and the Greek word is kataklysmos. Outside of the Gen. 6–9 narrative and references to the flood in Gen. 10:1, 32; 11:10, mabbul occurs only in Ps. 29:10, probably a reference to the primordial water stored above the firmament in jars (cf. Gen. 1:7; 7:11). The LXX translates mabbul with kataklysmos in Sir. 40:10; 44:17–18; 4 Macc. 15:31. Hebrew Sirach and the Aramaic Genesis Apocryphon also use mabbul for the flood (Sir. 44:17; 1QapGenar 12:9–10). All four uses of kataklysmos in the NT refer to the flood (Matt. 24:38–39; Luke 17:27; 2Pet. 2:5).

The flood narrative. In Gen. 6:5–22, God observes the grand scale of human wickedness, determines to destroy all life, and selects righteous Noah to build an ark. God’s “seeing” is judicial investigation (6:5, 13) that counters the sons of God who “saw” (6:2), just as his pained heart counters humankind’s wicked heart (6:5–6). God’s second statement, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race” (6:7), is his judicial sentence (cf. 3:15–19), affecting all life in the domain of human care (1:28; cf. Job 38:41; Ps. 36:6; Hos. 4:3; Joel 1:20).

The earth’s corruption and violence (Gen. 6:12–13) reflect a spectrum of evil that has despoiled a creation that was once “very good” (1:31; cf. 6:17; 7:21; 8:17; 9:11). God’s destruction responds to the moral corruption of the earth. The ark is a rectangular vessel designed for floating rather than sailing (6:14–15). Noah builds a microcosm of the earth to save its life. The boat’s windowlike openings and three decks reflect the cosmology of Gen. 1 (heavens, water, earth [cf. 6:16]). God makes a promise that Noah will survive and receive a covenant from God (6:18), fulfilled in the Noahic covenant following the flood (9:9, 11, 14–17).

Genesis 7:1–24 recounts the boarding of the ark and then the rising waters. Two numbering systems are used by the narrator in the flood narrative: one for dates of Noah’s age (day, month, year) and one for periods between flood stages. Both systems number between 365 and 370 days. The flood is portrayed as a reversal of the second and third days of creation. Watery boundaries that God once separated collapse (cf. 1:6–10). The rising flood is described in three phases: rising and lifting the ark (7:17), increasing greatly and floating the ark on the surface (7:18), and covering all the high mountains (7:19). Total destruction is amplified by reversing the order of creation—people, animals, birds (7:23)—with “all/every” occurring repeatedly in 7:21–23.

Genesis 8:1–22 recounts the disembarking and Noah’s sacrifice. Genesis 8:1 is the structural and theological center, with God fulfilling (=“remember”) his covenant promise for Noah’s safety. The ark rests on one mountain within the range in eastern Turkey (Kurdistan). The earth’s drying occurs as a process (8:3, 5, 9, 11, 13, 14), and echoes of creation reappear (e.g., “wind” [8:1; cf. 1:2]). Although the old curse is not lifted (cf. 5:29), God promises not to add to it (8:21). The flood has not reformed the human heart; it has only stopped the violence. God’s oath of restoration reaffirms the seamless rhythm of seasons that comprise a full year (8:22).

Genesis 9:1–19 recounts the restoration of world order. Since murder was part of the antediluvian violence (6:11, 13), God’s law recalibrates earthly morality (9:5). God’s second postdiluvian speech encodes his plan for the broader preservation of creation (9:8–17). “My rainbow” is God’s confirming sign (9:13). The meteorological phenomenon of the storm is now harnessed as an image of peace. The cosmic warrior “hangs up” his bow in divine disarmament. Humankind now shares the responsibility of justice with God, illustrated in Noah’s first speech of cursing and blessing (9:20–27).

Ancient Near Eastern parallels. Without literary dependence on the biblical story, parallels to the biblical account exist in the Akkadian Atrahasis Epic, Gilgamesh TabletXI, and the Sumerian King List. The exact relationship between the biblical account and these Near Eastern accounts is a debated subject. Perhaps they are variants of a similar story based on the same historical event.

The English verb “fornicate” comes from a Latinterm describing the vaulted or arched structure of a ceiling, seenespecially in the basem*nts of buildings. Because prostitutes in theancient world met clients under “fornicated” arches, thesexual usage of the term naturally followed. To fornicate was tovisit a brothel, in the first instance. Later the term acquired themore general sense of illicit sexual activity. Thus, in the KJV,words such as “fornication” and “fornicate”are chosen to translate the NT Greek term p*rneia, which refersgenerically to sexual sin. Adulterers, hom*osexuals, pedophiles, andadults engaged in extramarital affairs were guilty of p*rneia,regardless of more specific labels that may apply.

Genesis1:27 traces human sexuality back to the choice of God himself, whomade male and female human beings. He might have done otherwise, buthe created human beings as men and women, who complement each other’sunique characteristics. The command “Be fruitful and increasein number” (Gen. 1:28) presupposes an attraction between menand women, leading to sexual activity and consequent reproduction.Adam could therefore say of Eve, “This is now bone of my bonesand flesh of my flesh” (Gen. 2:23), given how closely herelates to her and vice versa. The two become “one flesh”through sexual activity, as Paul’s use of Gen. 2:24 makesclear. In 1Cor. 6:16 the apostle argues that men who consortwith prostitutes become one flesh with them, based on what Gen 2:24implies; in this sense, sexual activity unifies. Thus, from abiblical standpoint, there is no such thing as “casual sex.”

InEph. 5:22–33 Paul argues that an analogy exists between theoneness of flesh that husbands and wives experience and the union ofChrist with his bride, the church. Both relationships put servantleadership on display; and as such, a healthy marriage exposesfornication for the fraud that it is. Fornication divorces physicalunity from the multidimensional oneness that husbands and wives areprivileged to share.

Quiteapart from the physical defects of p*rneia—most evident in suchcases as hom*osexuality, bestial*ty, and pedophilia—it is alsodiseased at the social level. For these deviations are, of necessity,exploitative and sterile, and none of them could involve sacrificialleadership tending toward the holiness of husbands and wives. Theyare merely predatory. We therefore are not surprised to find theBible forbidding hom*osexuality (Lev. 18:22; Rom. 1:26–27),bestial*ty (Lev. 18:23), rape (Deut. 22:23–29), adultery (Exod.20:14), and various forms of sexual adventurism (e.g., 1Cor.6:18–20; 1Thess. 4:3–8), including extramaritalintercourse (Deut. 22:13–21).

Although the Bible is dominated by a patriarchal perspective,as one would expect from the ancient Near East, there is also avaluing of women that comes to the surface. Although this falls shortof what we would call “gender equality” today, the Bibledoes make overtures in that direction. Already in the Genesiscreation story, men and women are described as the two halves ofhumanity, who together participate in the mandate to fill and subduethe earth (Gen. 1:26–28). Eve is created from the side of Adam,indicating equality in their very beings (2:21–23).

Inhis own ministry, Jesus includes women in ways that were unusual forhis context. In first-century Palestine, learning from spiritualteachers was a privilege reserved exclusively for men. However, inthe story of Mary and Martha (Luke 10:38–42), Jesus commendsMary for breaking her expected role as a woman in order to follow himand learn at his feet. Martha, however, receives a sharp rebuke forallowing domestic duties to hinder her discipleship. Jesus’first resurrection appearance is to women in all of the Gospels, eventhough the testimony of a woman was generally not considered valid inlegal matters in first-century Palestine (although rabbinicl*terature suggests it was considered valid testimony for a woman toconfirm a man’s death). Jesus takes particular efforts toelevate the position of women, despite a possible tarnishing of hispublic image.

Theconcern for greater gender equality extends into the rest of the NT.Paul says that in Christ all are one regardless of ethnicity, status,or gender (Gal. 3:28). Paul also refers to women as coworkers in thegospel (Rom. 16:3) and as deacons (16:1). Although frequently citedin order to support a hierarchal family structure, the householdcodes (Eph. 5:21–6:9; Col. 3:18–4:1; Titus 2:1–10;1Pet. 2:18–3:7) are a step toward gender equality in theGreco-Roman culture, since secular household codes usually placedresponsibilities on wives, not husbands. That Paul givesresponsibilities to husbands is a significant shift toward amutuality of devotion and obligation.

Grace is the nucleus, the critical core element, of theredemptive and sanctifying work of the triune God detailed throughoutthe entire canon of Scripture. The variegated expressions of graceare rooted in the person and work of God, so that his graciousnessand favor effectively demonstrated in every aspect of the createdrealm glorify him as they are shared and enjoyed with one another.

Thebiblical terminology informing an understanding of grace defines itas a gift or a favorable reaction or disposition toward someone.Grace is generosity, thanks, and goodwill between humans and from Godto humans. Divine expressions of grace are loving, merciful, andeffective. The biblical texts provide a context for a more robustunderstanding of divine gift. The overall redemptive-historicalcontext of grace is the desire of the eternal God to bring glory tohimself through a grace-based relationship with his creation. TheCreator-Redeemer gives grace, and the recipients of grace give himglory.

OldTestament

Genesis.The grace of the creation narratives is summarized with the repeateduse of the term “good” (Gen. 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25,31). God is good, and he made a good creation with abundant gifts forAdam and Eve to enjoy. When Adam and Eve rebelled against God, herighteously judged and graciously provided for an ongoingrelationship. God clothed the naked Adam and Eve (3:21) and announcedthat the seed of the woman would yield a redeemer (3:15).

Gracein the postcreation narratives (Gen. 4–6) is focused onindividuals. God looked with favor on Abel and his offering (4:4),and Noah found grace in God’s eyes (6:8). God looked at and hadregard for the offering of Abel (Gen. 4). Jacob confessed to Esauthat God graced him with descendants and with possessions (33:5).

Graceand graciousness also characterize interaction between individuals.The Jacob and Esau exchange uses grace vocabulary for the gift andthe disposition of grace. Jacob invited Esau to accept his gift if hehad a favorable disposition toward him (Gen. 33:11). The covenant sonJoseph received favorable treatment from the prison warden because ofhis disposition toward him (39:21).

Exodus.The exodus narrative recounts how the seed of Abraham multiplies, isredeemed, and then is given the law, which defines the relationshipof God to Israel. All these events are tied to the gracious promisesthat God made to Abraham and his descendants (Gen. 12; 15; 17; seealso Gen. 21; 27).

Thegrace associated with the redemption of Israel from Egypt iscelebrated in the song of Exod. 15. God’s victory over theEgyptian army and his covenant fidelity to the patriarchs are thesong’s themes. Moses and the Israelites sing because God heardIsrael’s groaning; he remembered his covenant with Abraham andlooked on Israel with concern (2:24). God made Egypt favorablydisposed toward Israel (3:21) and parted the sea for Israel to escape(11:3; 12:36). The confession “He is my God ... myfather’s God” ties together major sections of redemptivehistory and affirms the constancy of God’s grace throughout theperiods (15:2). God’s tenacious covenant loyalty (khesed) tothe nation and his covenant grace (15:13) to Israel cannot bemerited.

Thegiving of the law in Exod. 20 is prefaced by a gracious and powerfulpresentation of God to the nation in Exod. 19. In the organizationand development of Exod. 19–20, grace themes emerge. The graceassociated with redemption and covenant life is marked in Exod. 19.God took Israel from Egyptian bondage, redeemed it, and brought thenation to himself (19:4). Through this action, the nation will becomea special treasure, a holy nation, a kingdom of priests (19:5–6).In sum, Israel exists because God created, loved, and redeemed it.

Second,the Decalogue of Exod. 20 follows upon the redemption effected byGod, defining how Israel will relate to its God. In this sense, lawis viewed as a gift that expresses the divine will. When compared andcontrasted with ancient Near Eastern laws, Torah reflects the graceof God’s character and his genuine concern for the poor,slaves, aliens, and widows. In addition, there is a grace ethic thatmotivates obedience to the law. The motivational statements in theDecalogue in Exod. 20 relate to the grace of redemption (v.2),the righteousness of God (vv. 4–7), the creation work of God(vv. 8–11), and long life (v.12).

Exodus32–34 is a key passage that links the covenant with graceterminology. This section begins with the story of the golden calf(chap. 32) and ends with the account of Moses’ radiant face(34:29–35). The grace terminology is observed in 33:19; 34:6–7.The context of 33:19 involves Moses meeting with God face-to-face.According to 33:12–17, Moses wanted to know who would be leftafter the purge of 33:5. He acknowledged God’s favor in hislife and wondered who else might enjoy it. Moses reminded God thatthe nation was his people (33:13). The grace of this account is God’sassurance of his presence with Israel and the unmerited purposefulexpression of his grace.

Exodus34:6–7 employs a series of adjectives in a grace confessionalstatement. This statement arises out of God’s instructions toMoses to cut two new tablets of stone like the first ones (34:1; seealso 24:12), which were broken after the incident of the golden calf(32:19). God descended in a cloud, stood with Moses, and proclaimedhis name to him (34:5). The rhetoric of the passage emphasizes thespeech of God, who defines himself in connection with covenantmaking. God is merciful and gracious, long-suffering, anddistinguished by steadfast love.

Graceand covenant loyalty.These key passages are foundational for understanding the grace andsteadfast loyalty of God expressed in the subsequent events ofcovenant history. Grace and khesed are expressed in connection withcovenant curse implementation (Num. 14:18; Hos. 4:1; 6:4, 6), in theoverall structure of Deuteronomy (5:10; 7:9, 12), in the Davidiccovenant (2Sam. 7:15; 1Chron. 17:13), in the future hopeof Israel (Isa. 54:8), in restoration (Jer. 32:18), in the newcovenant (Jer. 31:31), and in exile (Dan. 9:4).

Toround out the OT discussion, we may note that covenant siblings wereto be gracious and loyal in their ongoing relationships with oneanother. The book of Ruth illustrates covenant grace in action (2:2,10, 13). In addition, grace is to be expressed toward the poor (Prov.28:8), the young and the old (Deut. 28:50), and those who suffer (Job19:21).

NewTestament

TheNT focus of grace is developed in keeping with the foundation laid inthe OT. The triune God is the center and source of grace: it is thegrace of God (Rom. 1:7), the Spirit of grace (Heb. 10:29), and thegrace of Christ (John 1:17). The grace of God revealed in the OT isunveiled uniquely in the person and work of Christ.

TheGospel of John.The canonical development of the grace theme between the Testamentsis explained in the opening chapter of John’s Gospel. JesusChrist is the Word, who was with God, who is God, and who created theworld (John 1:1–3). Christ then became flesh and dwelled amongus (1:14). In doing so, he made known the glory of God to us. At thispoint in the development of chapter 1, John connects Christ (theWord) with the adjectives describing God in Exod. 34:6 to affirm thatChrist has the very same virtues that God has. The assertion in John1:17 that Jesus is full of grace and truth parallels the statement inExod. 34:6 of God’s steadfast love and faithfulness. In Christwe are able to see the glory that Moses hoped to see in God (John1:18). Christ is both the message and the messenger of grace andtruth.

TheEpistles and Acts.The NT Epistles develop the “full of grace and truth”statement about Christ (John 1:14) in several ways. The grace andtruth found in Christ are given to his servants (1Cor. 1:4) andare a reason for praise (2Cor. 8:9; Gal. 1:6, 15; Eph. 4:7;1Tim. 1:2; 2Tim. 2:1). This grace from Christ iseffective in bringing about redemption and sustaining a life ofgodliness. Ephesians 2:8–9 is the classic statement affirmingthat God’s favor is the source of salvation. Paul makes thispoint by repeating “it is by grace” in 2:5, 8 andclarifying the grace of salvation with the “it is the gift ofGod” statement in 2:8. This design of salvation celebrates theincomparable riches of Christ’s grace and the expression of hiskindness to us (cf. Eph. 1:7). Salvation is devoid of human merit,gifts, or favor (2:8). Keeping the law as a means of entrance into arelationship with God and as a means of gaining favor with God isantithetical to the nature of grace. God’s favor expressed topeople in salvation is an expression of his sovereign will.

Romans5 declares many of the same themes found in Eph. 2. In Rom. 5 Paulcontrasts the action and result of Adam’s transgression withthe obedience of Christ. Salvation is God’s grace and giftbrought by the grace of one man, Jesus Christ (v.15). The giftand grace of Christ brought about justification.

Theeffective operation of God’s grace in salvation is illustratedin the historical narratives of Acts. The men involved in the heateddebate of the Jerusalem council (Acts 15:2) affirmed the salvation ofthe Gentiles by grace after hearing the report of Barnabas and Paul(15:12). Those in Achaia (18:27) are another illustration of aneffective operation of grace.

Thegrace of God that saves is also the grace that sanctifies. Titus 2:11declares that redemptive grace instructs the redeemed to say no to alife of ungodliness. The instructional nature of grace is highlightedin the development of the Titus 2 context. The teacher in 2:1–10,15 is Titus, who is to nurture godly people. There is a change ofinstructors in 2:11, with grace now teaching. Redemptive grace worksin harmony with sanctifying grace to provide for godly living.

Accordingto Titus 3:8, those who trust in the generosity of God’s graceshould devote themselves to doing what is good. By God’s grace,justified sinners will find their delight and satisfaction in thepromises of God for a life of persevering godliness.

Gracealso functions as an enablement for life and ministry. Paul oftenrehearses this feature of grace in his letters. In Rom. 1:5 Paultestifies about the grace associated with a commission to be anapostle. When reflecting on his role in the church, he affirms thatby God’s grace he has been able to lay a foundation (1Cor.3:10). Paul’s testimony in 1Cor. 15:10 demonstrates theessential role of grace in making him who he is and effectivelyenabling what he does. Giving is also viewed as an exercise of grace(2Cor. 8:7) reflecting the grace received by individualbelievers. This gift of grace for life and ministry is somehowrecognizable. Peter, James, and John recognized it in Paul (Gal.2:9). It was upon the apostles (Acts 4:33), and it was seen in thechurch of Antioch (11:23).

Giventhe source and the effective nature of grace, one can understand theappropriateness of appealing to grace in greetings and salutations(Rom. 1:7; 16:20; Gal. 1:3; 6:18).

Commongrace.Finally, grace does operate beyond the context of the elect and thework of salvation and sanctification. Theologians define this as“common grace.” God’s sending rain and givingcreatures intellectual and artistic abilities are expressions ofcommon grace.

The Bible does not have a generic term for the idea of color,but it does use various colors for descriptive and symbolic purposes,and it also refers to different coloring processes. Items can bedescribed as “dyed” (Exod. 25:5), “multicolored”(Ezek. 27:24), or “speckled” (Gen. 30:32) to indicatechanges or variety of color.

Certaincolors are commonly used in the Bible (listed below), while othersoccur rarely (e.g., brown and yellow) or not at all (e.g., orange),reflecting the range of colors and dyes available in the ancient NearEast. Colors are most often used for two purposes: to describe luxuryitems indicating wealth and power, and to describe the earthly andheavenly dwelling places of God. Ordinary people and places are notusually described in terms of the colors of their appearance.Exceptions to this include Esau (Gen. 25:25), David (1 Sam.17:42), and the male lover in Song of Songs (5:10–11).

Thefollowing colors have particular significance or symbolic meaning inthe Bible:

White.Used to describe the symptoms of leprosy (Lev. 13:3–4), whitemuch more commonly has a positive association, being the color ofpurity (Isa. 1:18; Rev. 3:4) and glory (Dan. 7:9; Matt. 17:2; Rev.1:14). Angels appear white (Matt. 28:3) or are dressed in white (Mark16:2; Acts 1:10). The multitude of worshipers in heaven will wearwhite robes (Rev. 7:9), having been washed in the blood of the Lamb.

Black.The female lover in the Song of Songs admires the raven black hair ofher beloved (Song 5:11). However, black things usually have lesspositive connotations: storm clouds (1 Kings 18:45), diseasedskin (Job 30:30), and the effects of the plague of locusts (Exod.10:15). Blackness can also be a sign of judgment (Rev. 6:5, 12).

Red.Red is the color of the earth, the color of wine, and the color ofblood. Red dyes could be made from crushed insects, plants, andminerals, giving a wide range of different shades (red, scarlet, andcrimson are common in the Bible). Scarlet yarn and red-dyed animalskins were included in the offerings made for the construction of thetabernacle (Exod. 25:3–5). Red was used to symbolize sin (Isa.1:18) and was also associated with warfare (Nah. 2:3; Rev. 6:4).

Blue.Blue tassels adorned every Hebrew garment as a reminder of God’scommandments (Num. 15:38). In the Persian court the royal colors wereblue, white, and purple (Esther 1:6; 8:15), and blue garments wereworn by the young Assyrian governors (Ezek. 23:6).

Purple.Purple dye was very expensive, so purple cloth was used as a sign ofwealth (Prov. 31:22; Acts 16:14) and a sign of authority: the kingsof Midian wore purple garments (Judg. 8:26); the wedding carriage ofKing Solomon was upholstered in purple (Song 3:10); the Babylonianking Belshazzar offered purple robes as a reward for service (Dan.5:7). Purple robes were put on Jesus before his crucifixion in amockery of his kingship (John 19:2–5).

Blue,purple, and scarlet were each separately associated with wealth andpower, but when used together these three colors were the epitome ofopulence and, as such, were associated with the divine presence. Thetabernacle curtains were woven from blue, purple, and scarlet yarn(Exod. 26:1), as were the high-priestly garments (28:4–15, 33).The same colors were later used in the temple curtains (2 Chron.3:14). Blue, purple, and red cloths were used for covering the Ark ofthe Covenant and its furnishings (Num. 4:6–12). Jeremiahdescribes idols adorned in blue and purple, an attempt to concealtheir worthlessness (10:9).

Gray.Gray hair indicated old age and thus wisdom (Ps. 71:18; Prov. 16:31).

Green.Green is the color of plants and thus was associated with life-givingfood and therefore God’s blessing. Green plants were given byGod for food (Gen. 1:30), so their removal or destruction was adevastating judgment (Exod. 10:15; Ezek. 17:24; Rev. 8:7). Peoplecould be symbolized as green plants when they were fruitful andblessed (Ps. 92:14; Jer. 17:8) or when they were easily destroyed(2 Kings 19:26; Ps. 37:2).

In Gen. 2:18–25 the lone man is provided with a“helper.” This is not necessarily an unromantic view ofthe marriage relationship (cf. Gen. 1:27–28a), but the mainthought is of companionship and partnership (cf. Eccles. 4:9–11).Also, the word “helper” does not require a subservient ordemeaning function but rather can include active intervention, suchas God himself renders (e.g., Ps. 33:20: “[The Lord] is ourhelp and our shield”). The man needs help to carry out themandate of Gen. 1:28b, so a wide-ranging helping role is in view. Thehelper must be “suitable for him” (Gen. 2:18b), that is,come alongside him, as his opposite and complement, and so no merelowly assistant will be adequate for the task. (See also Help Meet.)

Thepsalms portray God as the helper of his needy people (Pss. 10:14;30:10; 54:4; 70:5; 72:12; 146:5). The exodus deliverance is describedby using the motif of God as “my helper” (Exod. 18:4). Onthe other hand, when God acts to judge wicked nations, no humanhelper (or ally) can provide protection (Isa. 30:5; Jer. 47:4; Ezek.30:8). In the crisis of persecution forecast in Dan. 11:34, the“little help” (=helper) may be Judas Maccabeus,though the main point is that the godly will not be totally bereft ofdivine support. Among the charismatically gifted individuals who areto act for the common good listed by Paul in 1Cor. 12:28 arethose able to help others, though the kind of help in mind(distinguished from healing and administration) is not specified.

hom*osexuality is a sexual relationship between two members ofthe same sex. It is a controversial issue today, especially as itrelates to marriage and to serving in the ministry. Several keybiblical texts stand at the center of interpreting the Bible’sstance and teachings on this subject.

TheBiblical Texts

Genesis19 (with Ezek. 16:49–50; Jude 7).The biblical narrative regarding the degradation and destruction ofSodom and Gomorrah indicates that their sin was grievous (Gen. 18:20;see also Gen. 13:13). When the two angelic visitors arrived, the menof the city, both young and old, asked to “know” (Heb.yada’) them. As an alternative, Lot offered his two virgindaughters, intended as sexual substitutes. While the Hebrew verb usedhere occurs frequently and characteristically simply means “toknow,” ten times in Genesis it has strong overtones of sexualunion. This narrative is sometimes dismissed as a case of gang rape,whereby power over foreigners was demonstrated in sexual terms.Likewise, some suggest that because no father in contemporary Westernculture would ever offer his daughters to maintain the honor ofguests, what this passage says about hom*osexuality also reflectscultural remnants of a bygone age. Thus, the incident would havenothing to do with hom*osexuality as demonstrated in consensual,committed same-sex relationships. In light of these alternativeinterpretations, it is necessary to investigate further theimplications of this event and its subsequent interpretation inScripture.

Thereare two explicit commentaries on the Genesis narrative later in thebiblical canon. The first is provided by Ezekiel, from whom we learnthat Sodom and the surrounding cities were “arrogant, overfedand unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They werehaughty and they did detestable things before [God]” (Ezek.16:49–50). The clause “they did detestable things”must be translated that way. The interpretation “it [i.e., thearrogance] was detestable” is unacceptable because the Hebrewverb is third-person feminine plural (“they did”), andthe subject is Sodom and her sisters (the surrounding towns).Clearly, hom*osexual practice was not one singular sin there. It wasone in the midst of a culture rife with things that were “detestable”in God’s eyes. “Detestable” is used over a hundredtimes in the Hebrew Bible of things that run absolutely counter tothe nature of God. It also appears in Lev. 18; 20, addressed furtherbelow. The second direct response to the incident is Jude’scondemnation of the sexual license in Sodom and Gomorrah: the towns“gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion”(Jude 7).

Insum, Sodom and Gomorrah became the paradigm for comprehensivelydestructive evil (cf. Isa. 1:10; Jer. 23:14; Matt. 10:5–15;11:20–24; Luke 10:1–15), representing societies entirelycorrupt and hardened beyond repentance. This sobering characteristicis particularly evident in Jesus’ references to the cities.Furthermore, what we cannot ignore is that the Genesis narrative ofthat pervasive evil centers on the perversion of sexuality, startingwith men wanting men, followed by Lot’s offering his daughters,and then Lot’s daughters engaging their father in sexualactivity.

Judges19.Tragically, this narrative thread is not isolated in Genesis. Thesame activity appears again in Judg. 19, where some of God’speople had adopted the ways of the debased Canaanite culture aroundthem. In the narrative, a Levite stopped for the night in the town ofGibeah, a city of the tribe of Benjamin. Some men of the citydemanded that his host give them access to him, and again a virgindaughter and the Levite’s concubine were offered in his place.Human sexuality and life itself were being abused in the most heinousways; the narrative is a shocking testimony to the depths to whichhumankind can descend, as the Levite’s concubine was raped todeath over a long night.

Leviticus18:22; 20:13.The first of these passages forbids a man to “have sexualrelations with a man as one does with a woman,” indicating thatit is “detestable,” or an “abomination” (KJV;Heb. to’ebah). It is not limited to the violent hom*osexualactivity that characterized the previous narratives; rather, it is ageneral and blanket prohibition. Leviticus 20:13 pronounces the deathpenalty for that act.

Becausethese are in the so-called Holiness Code (Lev. 17–26),significant parts of which deal with ritual matters, someinterpretations view these statements as merely addressing outdatedpurity issues, not sin. Furthermore, because the death penalty isindicated, they are dismissed as no longer relevant for the church.Nevertheless, the great majority of the other prohibitions andinfractions noted in these chapters address troubling sexualactivities (“uncovering the nakedness [’erwat]of...”), including incest, adultery, andbestial*ty, all of which are still clearly unacceptable. Furthermore,Lev. 19 contains significant ethical instructions, many of whichreiterate the Ten Commandments. Thus, these texts must not bedismissed too hastily. Outside Leviticus, to’ebah is used ofidolatrous worship, sexually immoral acts, and ethical infractions.Activities that are “detestable” cannot be dismissed assimply referring to uncleanness. Finally, the wages of all sin is(not was) death (Rom. 6:23), and that lesson is soberly evident inLev. 20.

Romans1:24–32.Paul commences his comprehensive presentation of the saving work ofChrist and the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit by declaring thathumankind stands utterly condemned (Rom. 1–3). The order thatGod intended for all creation has been disrupted because thecreatures made in his image neither worship nor obey him, exchanging“the truth about God for a lie” (1:25). Thus, God gavethem over to sexual impurity that explicitly includes hom*osexualactivity on the part of both genders (1:26–27). Furthermore,the list that follows condemns every reader in every time and place.In every respect, what is commensurate with the knowledge of God hasbeen intentionally rejected. None of these is in any way restrictedin its meaning by cultural assumptions.

Itis exegetically indefensible to state that Paul here refers only towomen and men who are by nature heterosexual but have chosen toengage in hom*osexual activity. Further, to claim that this has to doonly with certain kinds of sexual offenses (child molestation orritual pagan rites), or that Paul could not have known about loving,committed same-sex relationships, is to underestimate Paul’sgrasp of his own culture. There is a significant body of Hellenisticl*terature that recognizes nurturing hom*osexual relationships andexplores the possible reasons for hom*oerotic impulses; Paul mostlikely knew it well. More significantly, these limitedinterpretations misread the intent of Paul in these chapters andseriously trivialize the matters of sin and grace. The fundamentalmessage toward which Paul moves and that is the source of hope forall humankind is that the terrible price of human sin has been paidin the sacrificial blood of Christ, so that God became both just andthe one who justifies (Rom. 3:26).

FirstCorinthians 6:9–11 (1Tim. 1:10).The 1Corinthians passage states that the wicked will notinherit the kingdom of God and then lists categories of offenders:the sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, “those who aresoft” (malakoi), hom*osexual offenders (arsenokoitai), thieves,the greedy, drunkards, slanderers, swindlers. The word arsenokoitaiis made up of two Greek words that indicate “male” and“to lie with sexually.” Because these two words are usedin the LXX of Lev. 18:22 (and 20:13), it is quite likely that Paulwas specifically interpreting the Leviticus passages for his ownaudience, indicating that he saw them as still applicable. Thisclearly indicates that the behavior is reprehensible. The same termreappears in 1Tim. 1:10 in a list of those who are ungodly andsinful. Again, however, what Paul goes on to say is most important interms of his message of much needed grace: “And that is whatsome of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you werejustified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit ofour God” (1Cor. 6:11).

HermeneuticalConsiderations

Instructionregarding hom*osexual practice transcends specific chronologicalperiods and genres of text. It is not only in the narrative andwarning parts of the Torah; Paul repeatedly addresses the issue,particularly as he describes fallen humankind (Rom. 1; 1Cor. 6;1Tim. 1). He does not qualify his descriptions to include onlycertain kinds of hom*osexual activity; instead, they arecomprehensive. hom*osexual practice is without exception representedin the text as morally offensive in God’s sight.

Itis often claimed that “Jesus never condemned hom*osexuality,”and therefore we should not do so. He also, however, never addressedabortion, incest, or other contemporary ills that are reprehensible.On the other hand, he repeatedly affirmed traditional marriage by hisreferences to Gen. 1:27 (“male and female he created them”)and 2:24 (“a man leaves his father and mother and is united tohis wife”) when asked about issues of marriage and divorce(Matt. 19:1–12).

Itis essential to note the deep ethical foundation that must shape thelives of all believers. God’s people are “to act justlyand to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God” (Mic. 6:8).This injunction refers to the redemptive community that enfoldssinners of all stripes. In fact, the truth of the Gospel is a messageof hope; it has everything to do with transformation and new life.

hom*osexuality is a sexual relationship between two members ofthe same sex. It is a controversial issue today, especially as itrelates to marriage and to serving in the ministry. Several keybiblical texts stand at the center of interpreting the Bible’sstance and teachings on this subject.

TheBiblical Texts

Genesis19 (with Ezek. 16:49–50; Jude 7).The biblical narrative regarding the degradation and destruction ofSodom and Gomorrah indicates that their sin was grievous (Gen. 18:20;see also Gen. 13:13). When the two angelic visitors arrived, the menof the city, both young and old, asked to “know” (Heb.yada’) them. As an alternative, Lot offered his two virgindaughters, intended as sexual substitutes. While the Hebrew verb usedhere occurs frequently and characteristically simply means “toknow,” ten times in Genesis it has strong overtones of sexualunion. This narrative is sometimes dismissed as a case of gang rape,whereby power over foreigners was demonstrated in sexual terms.Likewise, some suggest that because no father in contemporary Westernculture would ever offer his daughters to maintain the honor ofguests, what this passage says about hom*osexuality also reflectscultural remnants of a bygone age. Thus, the incident would havenothing to do with hom*osexuality as demonstrated in consensual,committed same-sex relationships. In light of these alternativeinterpretations, it is necessary to investigate further theimplications of this event and its subsequent interpretation inScripture.

Thereare two explicit commentaries on the Genesis narrative later in thebiblical canon. The first is provided by Ezekiel, from whom we learnthat Sodom and the surrounding cities were “arrogant, overfedand unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They werehaughty and they did detestable things before [God]” (Ezek.16:49–50). The clause “they did detestable things”must be translated that way. The interpretation “it [i.e., thearrogance] was detestable” is unacceptable because the Hebrewverb is third-person feminine plural (“they did”), andthe subject is Sodom and her sisters (the surrounding towns).Clearly, hom*osexual practice was not one singular sin there. It wasone in the midst of a culture rife with things that were “detestable”in God’s eyes. “Detestable” is used over a hundredtimes in the Hebrew Bible of things that run absolutely counter tothe nature of God. It also appears in Lev. 18; 20, addressed furtherbelow. The second direct response to the incident is Jude’scondemnation of the sexual license in Sodom and Gomorrah: the towns“gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion”(Jude 7).

Insum, Sodom and Gomorrah became the paradigm for comprehensivelydestructive evil (cf. Isa. 1:10; Jer. 23:14; Matt. 10:5–15;11:20–24; Luke 10:1–15), representing societies entirelycorrupt and hardened beyond repentance. This sobering characteristicis particularly evident in Jesus’ references to the cities.Furthermore, what we cannot ignore is that the Genesis narrative ofthat pervasive evil centers on the perversion of sexuality, startingwith men wanting men, followed by Lot’s offering his daughters,and then Lot’s daughters engaging their father in sexualactivity.

Judges19.Tragically, this narrative thread is not isolated in Genesis. Thesame activity appears again in Judg. 19, where some of God’speople had adopted the ways of the debased Canaanite culture aroundthem. In the narrative, a Levite stopped for the night in the town ofGibeah, a city of the tribe of Benjamin. Some men of the citydemanded that his host give them access to him, and again a virgindaughter and the Levite’s concubine were offered in his place.Human sexuality and life itself were being abused in the most heinousways; the narrative is a shocking testimony to the depths to whichhumankind can descend, as the Levite’s concubine was raped todeath over a long night.

Leviticus18:22; 20:13.The first of these passages forbids a man to “have sexualrelations with a man as one does with a woman,” indicating thatit is “detestable,” or an “abomination” (KJV;Heb. to’ebah). It is not limited to the violent hom*osexualactivity that characterized the previous narratives; rather, it is ageneral and blanket prohibition. Leviticus 20:13 pronounces the deathpenalty for that act.

Becausethese are in the so-called Holiness Code (Lev. 17–26),significant parts of which deal with ritual matters, someinterpretations view these statements as merely addressing outdatedpurity issues, not sin. Furthermore, because the death penalty isindicated, they are dismissed as no longer relevant for the church.Nevertheless, the great majority of the other prohibitions andinfractions noted in these chapters address troubling sexualactivities (“uncovering the nakedness [’erwat]of...”), including incest, adultery, andbestial*ty, all of which are still clearly unacceptable. Furthermore,Lev. 19 contains significant ethical instructions, many of whichreiterate the Ten Commandments. Thus, these texts must not bedismissed too hastily. Outside Leviticus, to’ebah is used ofidolatrous worship, sexually immoral acts, and ethical infractions.Activities that are “detestable” cannot be dismissed assimply referring to uncleanness. Finally, the wages of all sin is(not was) death (Rom. 6:23), and that lesson is soberly evident inLev. 20.

Romans1:24–32.Paul commences his comprehensive presentation of the saving work ofChrist and the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit by declaring thathumankind stands utterly condemned (Rom. 1–3). The order thatGod intended for all creation has been disrupted because thecreatures made in his image neither worship nor obey him, exchanging“the truth about God for a lie” (1:25). Thus, God gavethem over to sexual impurity that explicitly includes hom*osexualactivity on the part of both genders (1:26–27). Furthermore,the list that follows condemns every reader in every time and place.In every respect, what is commensurate with the knowledge of God hasbeen intentionally rejected. None of these is in any way restrictedin its meaning by cultural assumptions.

Itis exegetically indefensible to state that Paul here refers only towomen and men who are by nature heterosexual but have chosen toengage in hom*osexual activity. Further, to claim that this has to doonly with certain kinds of sexual offenses (child molestation orritual pagan rites), or that Paul could not have known about loving,committed same-sex relationships, is to underestimate Paul’sgrasp of his own culture. There is a significant body of Hellenisticl*terature that recognizes nurturing hom*osexual relationships andexplores the possible reasons for hom*oerotic impulses; Paul mostlikely knew it well. More significantly, these limitedinterpretations misread the intent of Paul in these chapters andseriously trivialize the matters of sin and grace. The fundamentalmessage toward which Paul moves and that is the source of hope forall humankind is that the terrible price of human sin has been paidin the sacrificial blood of Christ, so that God became both just andthe one who justifies (Rom. 3:26).

FirstCorinthians 6:9–11 (1Tim. 1:10).The 1Corinthians passage states that the wicked will notinherit the kingdom of God and then lists categories of offenders:the sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, “those who aresoft” (malakoi), hom*osexual offenders (arsenokoitai), thieves,the greedy, drunkards, slanderers, swindlers. The word arsenokoitaiis made up of two Greek words that indicate “male” and“to lie with sexually.” Because these two words are usedin the LXX of Lev. 18:22 (and 20:13), it is quite likely that Paulwas specifically interpreting the Leviticus passages for his ownaudience, indicating that he saw them as still applicable. Thisclearly indicates that the behavior is reprehensible. The same termreappears in 1Tim. 1:10 in a list of those who are ungodly andsinful. Again, however, what Paul goes on to say is most important interms of his message of much needed grace: “And that is whatsome of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you werejustified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit ofour God” (1Cor. 6:11).

HermeneuticalConsiderations

Instructionregarding hom*osexual practice transcends specific chronologicalperiods and genres of text. It is not only in the narrative andwarning parts of the Torah; Paul repeatedly addresses the issue,particularly as he describes fallen humankind (Rom. 1; 1Cor. 6;1Tim. 1). He does not qualify his descriptions to include onlycertain kinds of hom*osexual activity; instead, they arecomprehensive. hom*osexual practice is without exception representedin the text as morally offensive in God’s sight.

Itis often claimed that “Jesus never condemned hom*osexuality,”and therefore we should not do so. He also, however, never addressedabortion, incest, or other contemporary ills that are reprehensible.On the other hand, he repeatedly affirmed traditional marriage by hisreferences to Gen. 1:27 (“male and female he created them”)and 2:24 (“a man leaves his father and mother and is united tohis wife”) when asked about issues of marriage and divorce(Matt. 19:1–12).

Itis essential to note the deep ethical foundation that must shape thelives of all believers. God’s people are “to act justlyand to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God” (Mic. 6:8).This injunction refers to the redemptive community that enfoldssinners of all stripes. In fact, the truth of the Gospel is a messageof hope; it has everything to do with transformation and new life.

Origins,Composition, and Constitution

Origins.The Bible is not unique in offering an account of human origins.Interesting accounts are found in Sumerian (Enki and Ninmah, Hymn toE-engurra), Akkadian (Atrahasis Epic, Enuma Elish), and Egyptiantexts (Pyramid Texts, Instruction of Merikare). These texts provide ahelpful window into the biblical world and show the common concern toexplain the origin and role of humanity in the world.

Onedistinct feature of ancient Near Eastern texts is that they generallyspeak of human origins in a collective sense. Specialists refer tothis phenomenon as polygenesis. Such a collective creation betterserves the purpose of the gods, who have made the human race as alabor force. In the Bible, however, the book of Genesis describes anoriginal human pair who are the progenitors of the human race. Thisphenomenon is referred to as monogenesis. Humanity is not merelycreated to serve and do the work of the gods. Instead, it is aspecial creation of God, intended to bear his image.

Composition.The composition of humanity is described in Gen. 2:7: “The LordGod formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into hisnostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.”Humanity is not distinct from animals in having the breath of life(1:30). Indeed, the description of the composition of humanity isalso quite, well, human. Genesis describes humans as made from thedust. Dust is not fertile, nor is it pliable. It refers to the earthand that which is dead. The wordplay between “man”(’adam) and the “ground” (’adamah) appears tobe a major focus of the text (2:7) and suggests that the majorconnection being established concerns the first humans as archetypes.

Constitution.Certain passages of Scripture have led interpreters to posit atrichotomous nature of humanity (i.e., mind, body, soul; cf. 2Cor.4:16; 5:1–9; 1Thess. 5:23). Likewise, even though theGreek language can bifurcate the soul (psychē) and the body(sōma), a kind of dualism should not be inferred from this (cf.Matt. 6:25; 27:50; Luke 10:27; 2Cor. 4:11). Either approach isforeign to the unified biblical mind-set. The only dualism in theanthropological perspective of the NT is in the nature of humanity inrelation to Christ’s new creative work.

Formand Function

Form:male and female.Just as God created man (’ish), he also created woman (’ishah)(Gen. 1:26–27). Although woman is initially created as a“suitable helper” (2:18), it should be noted that theunderlying Hebrew term (’ezer) is used almost exclusively inreference to God elsewhere. This suggests that “suitablehelper” does not indicate a difference of essence, value, orstatus.

TheBible describes woman as coming from the “side” of man,probably communicating something about their equality (Gen. 2:21–22).Thus, it should be understood that just as all humanity shares aconnection to the ground, so also a man shares an intimate connectionwith a woman. Although the phrase “one flesh” often istaken as a euphemism, it probably is a remarkably descriptivestatement of the archetypal nature of Adam and Eve (cf. 2:24).

Function:image of God.The distinction between humanity and the other animals created by Godis that humans are created in God’s image. The concept of theimage of God, however, is not unique to the biblical text (Gen.1:26–27; cf. Instruction of Merikare). Throughout the ancientNear East, kings were thought to actually be the image of a god. Inthe Christian understanding, only Christ is the image of God (2Cor.4:4), whereas humanity is created in the image of God. Although thismay imply a kingly role with regard to humanity’s function overthe rest of creation, the main parallel should be seen in how imagesare meant to represent a god’s presence.

Humanityin Pauline Thought

Paul’sconception of humanity is thoroughly eschatological insomuch as hisvision of Christ as the image of God is identified with Christ as“risen Lord.” Christ as the image of God is the finaldestiny of the humanity that is “in Christ” (1Cor.15:23–28; 44–49; Eph. 1:9–10). Because of theeffects of sin, creation has been subjected to futility (Rom.8:19–22), and humanity to death (Rom. 5:12–14; 1Cor.15:21–22). Yet Paul’s outburst of “new creation”(Gal. 6:15; cf. 2Cor. 5:17) indicates his understanding of thecosmological, and therefore anthropological, effects of being unitedwith Christ. Indeed, if God is making the “former things”into “new things” (2Cor. 5:17; cf. Isa. 65:17–19),this new creative act certainly impacts humanity. That reality isalready partially realized in the elimination of distinctions in thispresent “evil age” (Gal. 1:4), for in Christ “thereis neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there maleand female, for you are all one” (Gal. 3:28; cf. 1Cor.12:12–13; Gen. 17). Until the end, the Christian lives in thetension of already beginning to experience the act of new creationand not yet completely disinheriting the effects of sin (Rom.8:18–30; 2Cor. 12:5–10).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Termsfor Insects

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Functionsof Insects in Scripture

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ScripturalTruths about Insects

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

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

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

The act of advocating before the powerful on someone’sbehalf (Gen. 23:8–9), especially turning to God in prayer toseek God’s favor for others in crisis (2Sam. 12:16).While it is a prerogative of prophets (Gen. 20:7; Num. 12; Amos7:1–6), priests (Ezra 6:9–10), and kings (1Chron.21:17; 2Chron. 30:18; Jer. 26:19), intercession is a ministrythat belongs to all the people of God (Acts 12:5; Eph. 6:18; 1Tim.2:1; James 5:16).

OldTestament

ReflectingGod’s own deliberative process (Gen. 1:26–27; 2:18), ourcreation in God’s image implies and makes possible our genuineconversation, participation, and even disputation with God. Abiblical understanding of God’s rule accommodates thisdivine-human dialogue and the intertwined roles of both parties.People request intercession for themselves (1Kings 13:6; Acts8:24), but Scripture highlights God’s initiative.

InGen. 18 God invites (even provokes) Abraham’s intercession byconfiding in Abraham, reviewing the divine promises, and disclosingthe guilt and impending doom of Sodom and Gomorrah. On behalf ofrighteous persons who may live there, Abraham appeals boldly to God’sown “justice” (mishpat) in distinguishing the innocentfrom the guilty, and he successfully negotiates God’s pledge tospare the city if even ten righteous persons can be found there.Without disputing the allegations of wickedness, Abraham puts God’sjust response on the table as well.

Similarly,in Exod. 32 God informs Moses of the Israelites’ sin with thegolden calf and his own intention to destroy them and start over withMoses. In response, Moses intercedes, arguing that God’sdeliverance of Israel, and the likelihood of its being misconstruedby Egypt, should trump divine anger. Moses urges a different courseof action: turn from anger, relent, and do not bring the announceddisaster. The destruction of Israel would be inconsistent with God’sown commitment to multiply the people of Israel and give them theland as their inheritance (cf. Num. 14:13–29). The issue forMoses is not only Israel’s sin but also the rightness of God’sresponse in faithfulness to his purposes.

InJob’s intercession for his friends, God dictates the entireprocess, directing the friends to make offerings and assigning Jobthe task of interceding for them. God makes his own vindication thecentral issue: Eliphaz and friends have not said “the truth”(nekonah) of God, as Job had (Job 42:7–10).

Thesethree narratives highlight God’s initiative and make God’scharacter the grounds for intercession. They also introduce thepotential pain borne by the intercessor. For example, Mosesdramatizes his passionate concern for God’s cause by fallingdown before God and lying prostrate forty days and nights (Deut.9:13–29). He so identifies his own destiny with Israel’sas to offer himself as “atonement,” saying, “Pleaseforgive their sin—but if not, then blot me out of the book youhave written” (Exod. 32:32). This anticipates later prophets’participation in the sorrow of God and the pain of the people’sseparation from God (Jer. 15; cf. Luke 13:34–35; 19:41–44).

NewTestament

Inthe Gospels, Jesus heals by command, without explicit reference tointercession, and in this way remarkably transcends the OT prophets(1Kings 17:19–21). Although he does ask his Father toforgive his crucifiers (Luke 23:34), the Gospels emphasize Jesus’intercession for his disciples, such as for Simon Peter to surviveSatan’s assaults on his faith (22:31–32). John 17comprises an extended intercession of Jesus for hisdisciples—significantly, that the Father will protect them in ahostile world. Moreover, Christ promises to acknowledge faithfuldisciples before the Father (Matt. 10:32), an action formally closeto intercession, and that Christ performs as mediator of the Father’skingdom and salvation.

Paul’sprayer for his fellow Israelites to be saved is fueled by anguishover their unbelief (Rom. 9:1–3; 10:1–4). Mirroring thisis “the pressure of concern” he feels for all thechurches and for the welfare of their members (2Cor. 11:28–29),hence the prominent role of prayer in Paul’s ministry (see thethanksgivings that open his letters [e.g., Phil. 1:3–11]).Intercession perse, as prayer that others be spared ordelivered from crisis, is seen in the churches’ prayers forPaul’s deliverance from prison and death (Phil. 1:19; 2Thess.3:2–3; cf. Rom. 15:31).

TheNT extends the Gospel portrayals to reveal Christ as our heavenlyintercessor, a role made possible by the cross and resurrection. InRom. 8:34–39 Christ’s death, resurrection, and reign “atthe right hand of God” ground Paul’s confidence thatChrist’s intercession assures victory over condemnation and allopposition. The work of Christ our high priest (Heb. 7:25) may besummed up as intercession, echoing Isa. 53:12. Accordingly, “JesusChrist the Righteous One” not only advocates before the Fatherfor the forgiveness of our sins but also is their atoning sacrifice(1John 2:1–2). In these texts, Christ’s heavenlyintercession implements the saving purposes of God made real in thecross. Moreover, the work of Christ as prophet, priest, and kingimplies the central role of intercession, since intercession is afunction of each of these offices.

ThusGod’s initiative in intercession is intensified in the NT:God’s self-giving through Christ is the foundation of anongoing heavenly intercession that in turn gives the church increasedconfidence to intercede boldly. Further, God’s Spirit helps usin our weakness by interceding for us in accord with God’swill, even if we experience that intercession as “wordlessgroans” (Rom. 8:26–28).

The act of advocating before the powerful on someone’sbehalf (Gen. 23:8–9), especially turning to God in prayer toseek God’s favor for others in crisis (2Sam. 12:16).While it is a prerogative of prophets (Gen. 20:7; Num. 12; Amos7:1–6), priests (Ezra 6:9–10), and kings (1Chron.21:17; 2Chron. 30:18; Jer. 26:19), intercession is a ministrythat belongs to all the people of God (Acts 12:5; Eph. 6:18; 1Tim.2:1; James 5:16).

OldTestament

ReflectingGod’s own deliberative process (Gen. 1:26–27; 2:18), ourcreation in God’s image implies and makes possible our genuineconversation, participation, and even disputation with God. Abiblical understanding of God’s rule accommodates thisdivine-human dialogue and the intertwined roles of both parties.People request intercession for themselves (1Kings 13:6; Acts8:24), but Scripture highlights God’s initiative.

InGen. 18 God invites (even provokes) Abraham’s intercession byconfiding in Abraham, reviewing the divine promises, and disclosingthe guilt and impending doom of Sodom and Gomorrah. On behalf ofrighteous persons who may live there, Abraham appeals boldly to God’sown “justice” (mishpat) in distinguishing the innocentfrom the guilty, and he successfully negotiates God’s pledge tospare the city if even ten righteous persons can be found there.Without disputing the allegations of wickedness, Abraham puts God’sjust response on the table as well.

Similarly,in Exod. 32 God informs Moses of the Israelites’ sin with thegolden calf and his own intention to destroy them and start over withMoses. In response, Moses intercedes, arguing that God’sdeliverance of Israel, and the likelihood of its being misconstruedby Egypt, should trump divine anger. Moses urges a different courseof action: turn from anger, relent, and do not bring the announceddisaster. The destruction of Israel would be inconsistent with God’sown commitment to multiply the people of Israel and give them theland as their inheritance (cf. Num. 14:13–29). The issue forMoses is not only Israel’s sin but also the rightness of God’sresponse in faithfulness to his purposes.

InJob’s intercession for his friends, God dictates the entireprocess, directing the friends to make offerings and assigning Jobthe task of interceding for them. God makes his own vindication thecentral issue: Eliphaz and friends have not said “the truth”(nekonah) of God, as Job had (Job 42:7–10).

Thesethree narratives highlight God’s initiative and make God’scharacter the grounds for intercession. They also introduce thepotential pain borne by the intercessor. For example, Mosesdramatizes his passionate concern for God’s cause by fallingdown before God and lying prostrate forty days and nights (Deut.9:13–29). He so identifies his own destiny with Israel’sas to offer himself as “atonement,” saying, “Pleaseforgive their sin—but if not, then blot me out of the book youhave written” (Exod. 32:32). This anticipates later prophets’participation in the sorrow of God and the pain of the people’sseparation from God (Jer. 15; cf. Luke 13:34–35; 19:41–44).

NewTestament

Inthe Gospels, Jesus heals by command, without explicit reference tointercession, and in this way remarkably transcends the OT prophets(1Kings 17:19–21). Although he does ask his Father toforgive his crucifiers (Luke 23:34), the Gospels emphasize Jesus’intercession for his disciples, such as for Simon Peter to surviveSatan’s assaults on his faith (22:31–32). John 17comprises an extended intercession of Jesus for hisdisciples—significantly, that the Father will protect them in ahostile world. Moreover, Christ promises to acknowledge faithfuldisciples before the Father (Matt. 10:32), an action formally closeto intercession, and that Christ performs as mediator of the Father’skingdom and salvation.

Paul’sprayer for his fellow Israelites to be saved is fueled by anguishover their unbelief (Rom. 9:1–3; 10:1–4). Mirroring thisis “the pressure of concern” he feels for all thechurches and for the welfare of their members (2Cor. 11:28–29),hence the prominent role of prayer in Paul’s ministry (see thethanksgivings that open his letters [e.g., Phil. 1:3–11]).Intercession perse, as prayer that others be spared ordelivered from crisis, is seen in the churches’ prayers forPaul’s deliverance from prison and death (Phil. 1:19; 2Thess.3:2–3; cf. Rom. 15:31).

TheNT extends the Gospel portrayals to reveal Christ as our heavenlyintercessor, a role made possible by the cross and resurrection. InRom. 8:34–39 Christ’s death, resurrection, and reign “atthe right hand of God” ground Paul’s confidence thatChrist’s intercession assures victory over condemnation and allopposition. The work of Christ our high priest (Heb. 7:25) may besummed up as intercession, echoing Isa. 53:12. Accordingly, “JesusChrist the Righteous One” not only advocates before the Fatherfor the forgiveness of our sins but also is their atoning sacrifice(1John 2:1–2). In these texts, Christ’s heavenlyintercession implements the saving purposes of God made real in thecross. Moreover, the work of Christ as prophet, priest, and kingimplies the central role of intercession, since intercession is afunction of each of these offices.

ThusGod’s initiative in intercession is intensified in the NT:God’s self-giving through Christ is the foundation of anongoing heavenly intercession that in turn gives the church increasedconfidence to intercede boldly. Further, God’s Spirit helps usin our weakness by interceding for us in accord with God’swill, even if we experience that intercession as “wordlessgroans” (Rom. 8:26–28).

The Bible regularly states that people know some things butnot others. In English versions of the Bible, “knowledge”is usually a translationof the Hebrew noun da’at or the Greek noun gnōsis.Similarly, “know” is usually a translation of the Hebrewverb yada’ or the Greek verb ginōskō. Within eachlanguage, the noun and the verb share related forms.

Godoffers everyone knowledge to guide how one should live, but ifspurned, the offer may be withdrawn (Prov. 1:28; Matt. 7:7–8;John 7:17; Phil. 3:15). Some people love simplistic thinking morethan knowledge (Prov. 1:22), but fools who spurn knowledge in orderto follow their own ways are warned that their complacency “willdestroy them” (1:29–32). People are similarly warned notto value their own wisdom too highly (Prov. 3:7).

TheBible indicates that a basic knowledge of God is possible simply fromobserving the world. Genesis 1 states that God created light, land,stars, plants, animals, and people. The existence of the Creatorprovides an explanation for the existence of each and every thing,and for the world as a whole. Paul accordingly wrote that God’seternal power and divine nature “have been clearly seen, beingunderstood from what has been made” (Rom. 1:19–21).

Beyondthis, a more substantial knowledge of God is possible because God hassometimes spoken or acted in history. God communicates using thelimited forms that people can hear or perceive. The assembled peopleof Israel hear God speak at Mount Sinai from the midst of fire whenhe gives the Ten Commandments (Deut. 5:4–27). God likewisespeaks to Moses from a burning bush (Exod. 3). God speaks in aparticular place and speaks using the words of a language. This doesnot deny God’s transcendence. It instead affirms it by showingthat God is unlike idols made by humans, idols that “cannotspeak” or act (Ps. 115:5).

Inthe Bible, God normally speaks to people indirectly through prophets.Ancient people did not believe every prophet’s testimony, soGod gives Moses miracles to substantiate his claims (Exod.4:1–9,27–31). God likewise comes to Mount Sinai so that the people ofIsrael would trust Moses forever (19:9). Because the nation hears Godspeak, failure to believe Moses is considered unjustifiable.Eventually, the entire law and covenant are known through Moses. Thewritten record of these events and the law, as validated by historiccommunity practice, are considered sufficient basis for each latergeneration to believe Moses’ law. After Moses’ death, Godspeaks through other prophets. There are no grounds to reject theirtestimony, for they do not deny the law and commandments that God hasgiven through Moses, make false predictions (Deut. 13:1–5;18:20–22), or contradict each other.

Inthe NT, Jesus, like Moses, is a prophet (Matt. 21:11; John 7:40;12:40), authenticated by miracles. He observes the law (Matt. 5:17;John 8:46), unlike his opponents (John 5:45–47). In turn, Jesussends out disciples with his message and says, “Whoever rejectsyou rejects me; but whoever rejects me rejects him who sent me”(Luke 10:16). Consequently, the Bible gives knowledge of God largelythrough Moses and the prophets, and in the NT through the prophetJesus, God’s Son, and the disciples whom he sends out with hismessage. Those who receive God’s Spirit will understand themmore deeply (1Cor. 2:9–16).

Godthe Worker

Abiblical theology of work starts with God as the creator of allthings. In the OT, the verb bara’ (“to create”) isused only with God as subject. The first verb in the Bible (Gen.1:1), it occurs also in many other texts that describe Godaccomplishing what only God can do. Other terms such as yatsar (“toform, fashion”) and ’asah (“to make, do”) areused numerous times throughout the OT with either God or humans assubjects.

Thesethree terms reinforce the portrayal of God as worker in Gen. 1–2(cf. Isa. 45:7). God creates light and darkness; sky and earth; sun,moon, and stars; land and sea; plant and animal life; andhumankind—in sum, all that is. He forms the “man”(Heb. ’adam) from the dust of the ground, bringing him to lifeby breathing into him the breath of life.

Elsewherein the OT God is said to build, build up, or rebuild/restore (Heb.banah [e.g., Pss. 102:16; 147:2; Jer. 24:6; Amos 9:11]).Interestingly, God takes a rib from the man, which he then makes(lit., “builds into” [Heb. banah+ le]) a woman(Gen. 2:22). He founds (Heb. kun) the earth (Isa. 45:18) andstretches out (Heb. natah) the heavens (Zech. 12:1). Further, wisdomis God’s “craftsman” (Heb. ’amon), takingpart in the world’s creation (Prov. 8:30). The NT revealsChrist as the one through whom God creates all things (John 1:1–3;Col. 1:16). This brief sketch suggests the range of ways in whichGod’s work is described.

HumanLabor

Ideally,work is performed as service to God (Col. 3:17, 22–24). Work isone way we express the divine image. God’s creation mandate tofill, subdue, and rule the earth implies work (Gen. 1:26–28),and God places the man in the garden “to work it and take careof it” (Gen. 2:15). The importance of work for human dignity aswell as survival undergirds the laws of gleaning that make provisionfor the poor to gather their own food (e.g., Deut. 24:19–22).The expansion of human technologies and occupations (mela’kah[see Exod. 12:16]) reflects that dignity and God’s own diverseworkmanship. Job 28 celebrates human industry and achievement whilesubordinating all to the prevailing value of wisdom, rooted in “thefear of the Lord.” Given the indispensable role of work withinthe limits of human life, diligence is commended (Eccles. 3:9–10),idleness condemned (Prov. 10:4; 12:24; 21:5; 2Thess. 3:6–10).Work is essentially God’s good gift to us in creation.

Butwork now has negative aspects. In response to Adam’s sin, Godcurses the ground, introducing “painful toil” into thework cycle (Gen. 3:17–19; 5:29). We now eke out our living byhardship, finding frustration instead of bounty—a lifelongreminder that we are made of dust and will return to dust. The bookof Ecclesiastes echoes this note of futility and raises sharpquestions about the lasting value of human labor (1:2–3, 14;2:4–11, 17–23; 3:9; 4:4–6; 8:16–17). Sin anddeath haunt the unfolding occupations in Gen. 4, and the episode ofthe tower of Babel in Gen. 11 signals God’s judgment on humanpretension (cf. James 4:13–16). Excessive toil (workaholism) isa pitfall, not a virtue, for it expresses reliance on self ratherthan on God, who builds, protects, and gives rest (Ps. 127:1–2).Oppressive, unjust working conditions are cause for lament, and theyincur God’s judgment (Exod. 5:6–19; Prov. 14:31; James5:4–6).

Thus,Israel’s labor policy is to reflect God’s covenantfaithfulness, generosity, and concern for the vulnerable. Moses’law places limits on employers/masters to protect employees, slaves,and foreign workers from exploitation. The primary limit is God’scommand that Israel keep the Sabbath holy by a complete cessation oflabor (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15). This moveprioritizes God’s covenant above human labor and sets a rhythmof work and rest. Exodus grounds the Sabbath in God’s rest fromhis work of creation on the seventh day. Deuteronomy ties it toIsrael’s history of slavery in Egypt and deliverance by God; bykeeping the Sabbath, Israel shows gratitude to God and guards againstreplicating Egypt’s oppressive policies.

Exodus31–32 portrays work in its best and worst lights. The properinterplay of work and rest is seen in chapter 31, which narrates thedivinely empowered work on the tabernacle, followed by a strongreminder to keep the Sabbath as a “sign” between God andIsrael. In contrast, chapter 32 portrays artisanship put to the worstuse, the making of a golden idol. Aaron fashions gold with a tool andmakes the calf image, but later he tells Moses, “I threw [theirgold jewelry] into the fire, and out came this calf!” (32:24).This remark anticipates the prophets’ later mockery ofidol-makers (e.g., Isa. 44:9–20) and raises the issue ofpersonal responsibility for the outcome of one’s labor: Aaronseeks to avoid being implicated in Israel’s idolatry byconcealing his own role in the project.

Publiclabor issues increase in complexity when Israel adopts human kingshipand engages in international trade (e.g., 1Sam. 8; 1Kings9:15–23). Babylon deals a decisive blow to Judah’sstatehood by deporting leaders and skilled workers. Many of theseestablish such viable, productive new lives in Babylon that whenCyrus later allows the exiled Judeans to return, they choose toremain.

TheNT assumes the legitimacy of work and adopts the OT’s view thatwithin proper limits work is a good gift of God. Jesus, however, hascome to do his Father’s “work” (John 5:16–18),which entails calling some people away from their normal occupationsto follow him, as well as a new approach to Sabbath observance (Mark2:21–27; 3:4). These moves signal the urgency and newness ofthe kingdom of God. Consequently, the apostles are “co-workersin God’s service” (1Cor. 3:9), and Christians are“God’s handiwork” (Eph. 2:10). In light of theresurrection, we offer to God work (Gk. ergon) and labor (Gk. kopos),not in futility but in hope (1Cor. 15:58; cf. Rev. 14:13).

Leisure time offers a respite from work, those essentialduties of life such as paid employment and maintaining a household,to pursue other activities. Such nonobligatory pursuits range fromentertainment to fine art, from peaceful relaxation to physicalactivity.

Fromthe beginning, humankind was intended to work (Gen. 1:28; 2:15), butGod also set apart one day per week for his creatures to share in hisdivine rest (Gen. 2:2–3; Exod. 20:8–11). This weekly restshould bring to mind God’s creation and the final rest in theage to come (Heb. 4:9–11). Although leisure time and Sabbathobservance are not identical, both are opportunities to give thanks,worship, and put hope in God. They also refresh and enrich earthlylife.

Indeed,every good thing is a gift from the Father (James 1:17), includingtime off from daily duties. How one uses leisure time is thus amatter of stewardship, much like one’s use of money and workingtime (cf. Matt. 25:14–30). Thus, although the Bible does notdiscuss playing sports or writing poetry, it does proclaim Christ asLord over all spheres of life. Therefore “whether you eat ordrink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God”(1Cor. 10:31).

When one or more of a person’s vital bodily systemsfails to function without the aid of medical technology, physiciansand family members must sometimes make the painful decision to eithercontinue or end life support. Some people decide for themselves inadvance and record their wishes in a living will.

Thisraises important ethical questions. When is a person dead? To whatextent and with what measures should life be preserved? Does qualityof life matter? More specifically, should “life” or“personhood” be defined by the ability to choose? Byconsciousness? By neocortical function?

Inlight of these dilemmas, the mind-body relationship deservesparticular Christian reflection. Somehow, mind and body form anorganic, unified creature made in God’s image. Human life istherefore of highest value in creation (Gen. 1:26; 9:6). Also worthconsideration is the physical, bodily nature of the resurrection(1Cor. 15). Scripture’s high regard for the body seems tocall into question ethical paradigms that downplay the desirabilityof preserving it. In any case, the beginning and the end point forsomeone faced with difficult medical choices is the apostle’sexhortation to act in faith, hope, and love (1Cor. 13:13).

A Greek term meaning “word,” a title given toJesus Christ that indicates his preexistent divine nature and hisidentity as the climactic revelation of God (John 1:1, 14; 1John1:1; Rev. 19:13).

Philosophicaland Old Testament Backgrounds

Thebackground of the Logos concept is complex. It has roots in bothGreek philosophy (Stoicism) and the OT. Both of these likelyinfluence to some degree the NT use of the term, but neither isdecisive. The NT goes its own way in defining the Logos. The Logos isadapted to fit the unique NT context and redefined in a historicalperson, Jesus of Nazareth.

InStoic thought, Logos was Reason, the impersonal rational principlegoverning the universe. Stoicism understood Logos as the omnipresentforce used by God to create and sustain the world. Logos held theintricate workings of the world together. Philo, a Hellenistic Jewishphilosopher, taught that the Logos was the ideal, primal human beingfrom whom all other human beings derived.

Althoughthe Stoic background of the Logos likely bears at least someinfluence on the NT use, the OT probably has a more direct influence.The Logos in the OT is closely associated with the Wisdom tradition(Prov. 8). Wisdom is personified as the “master worker”at God’s side during creation (8:30 NRSV). Similarly, Wisdomwas “established from everlasting, from the beginning, beforethere was ever an earth” (8:23 NKJV). Wisdom, like the NTLogos, claims preexistence and participation in God’s creativeactivity.

TheOT depiction of God’s Word as the agent of creation is perhapsan even more direct influence (Gen. 1). The phrase “In thebeginning” (John 1:1) clearly echoes the introduction of thecreation account (Gen. 1:1). The repeated phrase “And God said”in Gen. 1 illustrates how God is so powerful that he creates simplyby speaking creation into existence. God’s Word is the powerfulagent of creation (Ps. 33:6). In summary, God’s Wisdom and Wordare both active agents in creation.

God’sWord is largely an impersonal force in Gen. 1, but it develops morepersonal characteristics in Isa. 55:9–11. God’spersonified Word is sent by God in order to accomplish a specificdivine purpose that will not fail (v. 11). It also returns to God,who sent it, after accomplishing its mission (v. 11). God’sWord functions as his personal and effective speech as it revealsGod’s perfect will. Like Wisdom, God’s Word ispersonified and reveals God’s will to humanity, accomplishingits divinely ordained purpose. The Word of God as exemplified in Isa.55 probably has the most direct influence on the NT use of the Logos.

NewTestament Usage

Scholarsdebate which of the aforementioned concepts is the primary influencefor the NT use of the Logos. Perhaps each bears at least some degreeof influence, but more importantly, each is adapted and altered tofit the unique christological context of the NT. The NT goes its ownway in defining the Logos; it is defined in the historicalflesh-and-blood person of Jesus of Nazareth (John 1:14; 1John1:1; Rev. 19:13).

Whatis an impersonal force in Stoicism and the OT becomes profoundlypersonal in the NT. Similar to Stoic Reason, all creation is createdby and through the Logos (John 1:3) and is even held together by him(Col. 1:16–17). But unlike Stoic Reason, the NT Logos is noabstract metaphysical principle but rather the historic person JesusChrist. And unlike personified Wisdom, which was created by God(Prov. 8:22–25), the NT Logos exists eternally as God and was“with” God in the beginning (John 1:1–2). WhereWisdom is present with God and is one of his attributes, the NT Logosis God as the Second Person of the Godhead. Further, the Word of Godin the Genesis creation narrative is largely an impersonal force bywhich God creates the universe, whereas Jesus is the personal agentof creation (John 1:3; Col. 1:16–17).

Finally,although Isaiah’s Word of God is God’s effective speechthat leads to action and accomplishes its purpose, it remainsimpersonal. The NT language is strikingly similar to Isaiah’sWord of God, as Jesus is “sent” by the Father to do hiswill (John 4:34) and completes the work that God has given him to do(John 17:4). But while the Word of God in Isaiah remains apersonification, the NT Logos refers to an actual historical person,the incarnate Lord Jesus Christ. The Word takes on flesh-and-bloodhumanity in Jesus and is the uniquely personal revelatory message ofGod. Jesus preached the Word with his mouth, enacted the Word withhis actions, and embodied the Word in his person. “The Wordbecame flesh and made his dwelling among us” (John 1:14).

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

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

Yahweh:The Lord

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

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

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

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

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

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

Elohim

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

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

Adonai

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

Another name for Sunday, this term reminds us that this daybelongs to the Lord and should be used for his honor and glory. Theterm itself is used only once in Scripture, where John mentions howhe was in the Spirit “on the Lord’s Day” whenChrist commissioned him to write the book of Revelation (Rev. 1:10).There are no other specific details clearly given in Scripture aboutthe identification of this day or how it was observed. Ourunderstanding of this term and how it fits in with other passages ofScripture touches on three separate issues.

Aspecial day.First, should Christians today celebrate any day of the week in aspecial way? At least some believers throughout history have believedthat it is possible to observe every day of the week as equallyspecial in the sense that “this is the day that the Lord hasmade; let us rejoice and be glad in it” (Ps. 118:24 ESV). Paulregards the observance of special days for worship as an area ofChristian freedom: “One person considers one day more sacredthan another; another considers every day alike. Each of them shouldbe fully convinced in their own mind” (Rom. 14:5). The sameprinciple is found in Col. 2:16: “Therefore do not let anyonejudge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religiousfestival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day.”Nevertheless, most Christians have concluded that the expression “theLord’s Day” clearly points to a specific day during theweek when the Lord is to be worshiped in a special way.

Aspecific day.Second, which day of the week should we celebrate in a special way?When is the Lord’s Day? For OT believers, the answer is clear:it is the last, or seventh, day of the week. In the Bible, both theidea of a seven-day week and the setting apart of the seventh day arebased ultimately on the creation account in Gen. 2:1–3. ThisSabbath principle is codified in the Ten Commandments, which indicatethat the Sabbath is to be kept holy by requiring people and theiranimals not to engage in work (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15).Observance of the seventh day, or Sabbath, continues among Jews inthe present. More recently, other groups, such as Seventh-DayAdventists and Seventh-Day Baptists, have felt the weight of this OTevidence and have continued to observe Saturday as the proper day forworship.

Nevertheless,most Christians have been persuaded by the practice of the earlychurch to gather together for worship on the first day of the week.Two key passages of Scripture provide support for this conclusion. InActs 20:7 the church had gathered for the Lord’s Supperspecifically “on the first day of the week,” and in1Cor. 16:2 Paul instructs the church at Corinth to collect anoffering specifically “on the first day of every week”(presumably during its local weekly meetings). Thus, most Christianshave concluded that they are no longer under the OT observance of theSabbath as the seventh day of the week (cf. Rom. 14:5; Col. 2:16),and now they are to worship in honor of Jesus’ resurrection “onthe first day of the week” (Matt. 28:1 pars.).

Asacred day.Third, how should we celebrate this day? The Puritans and othersthroughout church history have considered Sunday as the ChristianSabbath. In other words, they made the shift from the seventh day ofthe week in the OT to the first day of the week in the church age,but they believed that all the OT rules and regulations for theSabbath were still binding on believers today. Nevertheless, mostChristians today accept Sunday as the “Lord’s Day,”when they worship in a NT manner and not under the letter of the OTceremonial law, with its focus primarily on resting or not working.Under the OT system there was no concept of people gathering togetheron a regular weekly basis for corporate worship. OT worship revolvedaround various annual feasts and festivals when people would gathertogether at the central temple in Jerusalem a few times each year.The idea of weekly worship services emerged only later, during theBabylonian captivity, with the development of the Jewish synagogue.Thus, most Christians have concluded that Sunday is no longer atransposed OT Sabbath, but rather the NT Lord’s Day, andconsequently that it should be celebrated accordingly, as when “theydevoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship,to the breaking of bread and to prayer” (Acts 2:42).

An intimate, exclusive, lifelong covenant relationshipbetween a man and a woman wherein a new family is established.

Theologyof Marriage

Thebiblical basis for marriage is recorded in Gen. 2:18–24, whichestablishes a number of important points relating to marriage.

First,in Gen. 2:18 God highlights the first expressed inadequacy withincreation: the man is alone. The solution to the man’s solitudeis found not among the animals (a fact demonstrated by the carefulsearch expressed by having the man name each of them) but in acreature specifically created to address the problem of his solitude:woman. She is created from his “rib” (a bettertranslation is “side”), so that she is more like him thanany of the animals. In spite of this, she is not a clone, but rathera complement to him. She is described as a “helper suitable forhim,” which highlights her fulfillment of the inadequacy Godhad previously identified.

Second,the role of the wife is not restricted to providing a means by whichto fulfill the command to fill the earth (through bearing children),for the problem identified in Gen. 2:18 cannot be reduced to thisalone. The OT establishes that human beings are relational andsocial, and that isolation is not good, quite aside fromconsiderations relating to childbearing. Indeed, when marriage isemployed as a metaphor for the relationship between God and hispeople (see below), it can be conceptualized quite apart from thenotion of procreation, suggesting that the latter should not beconsidered the primary purpose of marriage.

Third,Gen. 2:23 describes the relationship between the man and the woman interms strongly reminiscent of the traditional kinship formula usedwith reference to family members elsewhere in the OT: “bone ofmy bones, and flesh of my flesh” (cf., e.g., Gen. 29:14; Judg.9:2; 2Sam. 5:1; 19:13–14—similar to the modernEnglish expression “my flesh and blood”; see also Matt.19:5; Eph. 5:31). Although “be united” (othertranslations use “cleave”) and “one flesh”are frequently understood to refer to sexual union, this is not theonly, or even the primary, implication of the words. Genesis 2:24expresses the unification of the husband and the wife as theantithesis of the man’s leaving his father and mother. Theseterms (“leave” or “forsake,” “beunited” or “cleave”) are used elsewhere incovenantal contexts. “Cleave” is usually used of peoplein the sense of clinging to another out of affection and loyalty(Gen. 34:3; Ruth 1:14; 2Sam. 20:2; 1Kings 11:2). It isalso frequently used of Israel clinging to God (Deut. 10:20; 11:22;13:5; 30:20; Josh. 22:5; 23:8). “Forsake” is used ofbreaking covenants (Deut. 12:19; 14:27; 29:25; Jer. 1:16; 2:13, 17,19; 5:7; 16:11; 17:13; 19:4; 22:9). The verb also appears in thecontext of marital divorce in Prov. 2:16–17; Isa. 54:6; 62:4.

Theimplication of Gen. 2:24 is that the man was formerly “united”to his parents in a familial relationship, but when he marries, thecovenantal relationship with his parents is superseded by the newrelationship with his wife. Thus, in establishing the covenantalrelationship of marriage, the man and the woman form a new familyunit (they become “one flesh,” which parallels thekinship formula more fully expressed in Gen. 2:23). It is noteworthythat Gen. 2 thus defines a family as husband and wife; a family isformed before any children are born. Furthermore, the emphasis on thepriority of the relationship between husband and wife is particularlystriking, given both the importance of honoring one’s parents(Exod. 20:12; Deut. 5:16) and the distinctly patrilocal nature ofinheritance whereby sons would remain in the parents’ householdafter marriage and ultimately inherit a share of it, but daughterswould leave their parents’ house to be with their husbands.

Fourth,the description of the woman as the man’s “helper”cannot alone be used to demonstrate that the wife’s role waseither subordinate or superior to her husband’s. Although theterm is elsewhere often used as a description of God, it is also usedof subordinate helpers, and other contextual indications determinethe relative status of the helper aside from the use of the termitself.

Marriagein the Old Testament

TheBible presents few formal legal, liturgical, or cultic requirementsfor marriage (whereas there are specific laws dealing with divorce),although it does record some details of specific marriages from whichsome insight into marriage practices can be gleaned. Marriages oftenwere established through an arrangement between the parents of thehusband and those of the wife or between the husband and the parentsof his prospective wife (e.g., Gen. 24; 38:6), but there appears tobe some diversity, with examples of a man choosing his own wife(e.g., Judah in Gen. 38:2) or instances when the consent of the womanis sought (e.g., Gen. 24:8, 58). The requirement of a formalcertificate for divorce (Deut. 24:1, 3), together with examples ofmarriage contracts from the ancient Near East, are possible evidencethat marriage within Israel required certification, although there isno explicit confirmation of this in the OT or in Israel prior to therabbinic period. The marriages recorded in the OT often involvedfeasts of varying duration (Gen. 29:22; Judg. 14:12), the bride beingaccompanied to her home in a festive procession that included musicand singing (Ps. 78:63; Jer. 7:34; 16:9), and a blessing pronouncedover the bride that she might bear many children (Gen. 24:60; Ruth4:11). Deuteronomy 22:15 suggests that evidence of the bride’svirginity was retained by the wife’s family to guard againstfalse accusations by a husband seeking divorce.

Anotheraspect of marriage that appears to have been normative although notlegislated was the payment of a mohar, or “bride-price”(Gen. 34:12; Exod. 22:16; 1Sam. 18:25), as well as theprovision of a dowry (1Kings 9:16). The former was a paymentmade by the groom’s family to the bride’s family, thelatter an amount given by the father to his daughter. Typically, theformer appears to have exceeded the latter in value. The bride-price,at least in later times, functioned as insurance should the wife bedivorced.

TheBible does not issue any specific age constraints upon those beingmarried, indicating that the OT practice probably did not differsignificantly from that of other nations in the ancient Near East,where girls were considered ready for marriage once they had reachedpuberty or the age of twelve, and boys were generally slightly older.Constraints were placed on the eligibility of marriage partners, andgenerally marriages were endogamous: marriage partners were chosenfrom within the clan, tribe, or nation (e.g., Gen. 24:1–9;27:46–28:5; cf. Deut. 7:3, which prohibits marriage with some,but not all, foreigners, and Deut. 21:10–14, which permitsIsraelite warriors to take a wife from among female prisoners ofwar). While there were exceptions to this constraint (e.g., Mosesmarried a Midianite; Bathsheba was married to a Hittite; Boaz marriedRuth, a Moabite), in later times the restriction was given legalsanction under Ezra and Nehemiah (Ezra 9:2, 12; Neh. 13:25; cf. Luke14:26; 18:29).

Inspite of the likelihood that many marriages in the OT and the ancientworld in general were arranged, the notion of romantic love as bothan ideal for marriage and a basis for choosing one’s spouseclearly was known and even regarded as desirable. This is reflectedin the approbation given romantic love in Song of Songs as well as instories such as that of Jacob (Gen. 29:18; see also Judg. 14:1–3;1Sam. 18:20).

Socially,marriage was of particular import for a woman in the ancient world,for her well-being usually depended on her place within the house ofeither her father or her husband. Because inheritance was passed downthe male line, women without connection to the house of a man were ina very tenuous state. Inheritance itself was also an important issuein the ancient world, and so great value was placed not just onmarriage but also on bearing children (particularly male [see alsoFirstborn]). Associated with these social functions of marriage inancient Israel is the fact that the OT permits and records a numberof instances of polygamy (always polygyny, never polyandry). Thisafforded social security to widows (see also Levirate Law, LevirateMarriage) and helped ensure the line of inheritance. It should benoted, however, that neither the welfare aspect of marriage nor therelated acceptance of polygamy is based on the biblical foundationfor marriage in Gen. 2, and consequently, polygamy does not reflectthe biblical ideal for marriage.

Thefundamental importance of the marriage relationship is alsohighlighted by the severity of the penalties for adultery (e.g.,Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18; 22:22–24; see also Adultery).

Marriagein the New Testament

Jesusreinforces the importance of marriage, emphasizing its divine originand lifelong nature (Matt. 19:6; Mark 10:9) as well as itsinviolability (Mark 10:2–12). In light of this, Jesus’assertion that at the resurrection there will be no marriage issurprising (Matt. 22:30). Although Jesus offers no explanation as towhy there will be no marriage following the resurrection, it isperhaps likely that the fundamental need identified by God in Gen.2:18 (the man was alone) will be solved in a different manner in theage to come: the intimate help and companionship ideally found inmarriage will be provided in perfected relationship with God and allothers.

Paulelaborates somewhat on marriage in the Christian community. Christianmarriage ought to be characterized by mutual submission in somerespects (1Cor. 7:4; Eph. 5:21) while reflecting someasymmetrical aspects of the relationship between Christ and thechurch in others (Eph. 5:22–33). Christians ought to marrywithin the church (2Cor. 6:14–18, although this passageis not restricted to marriage); however, those who are married tononbelievers are not to seek divorce, but are to remain faithful totheir spouses for the sake of both the spouse and their children(1Cor. 7:10–16).

TheNT makes reference to some of the marriage customs of the day,including sharing a feast (Matt. 22:2–12; Luke 12:36; John2:1–11), the expectation that guests be suitably attired (Matt.22:11–12), and a procession to the groom’s home (Matt.25:1–13; Luke 12:35–38).

SymbolicUse of Marriage

Marriageis used figuratively in both Testaments. The relationship between Godand his people is described with marriage language (Isa. 62:4–5;Jer. 2:2). By using such language, the prophets emphasize theintimacy and unity inherent in the relationship between God and hischosen people, as well as the devastating betrayal when the covenantis broken. The use of the marriage metaphor is thus extended to theuse of divorce language to describe God’s treatment ofunfaithful Israel (Jer. 3:8), and the notion of adultery andpromiscuity is equated with the worship of foreign gods (Ezek. 16;23). The prophet Hosea’s marriage is itself a graphicrepresentation of God’s relationship with his people and, inparticular, their faithlessness; however, it also holds out theanticipation of a new covenant, one wherein God declares, “Youwill call me ‘my husband’; you will no longer call me ‘mymaster’ ” (Hos. 2:16). The metaphorical use ofmarriage to image the relationship between God and his people alsoreflects the implicit belief in the asymmetrical nature of therelationship between husband and wife in the ancient world.

TheNT primarily identifies the church as the bride and Christ as thehusband when using marriage language figuratively (e.g., Eph.5:22–33). In so doing, the NT affirms Christ’s deity byexplicitly depicting him in the place occupied by God in the OT’suse of marriage symbolism. Jesus uses marriage in his parabolicteaching about the kingdom of God (Matt. 22:2–14; 25:1–12),as well as in reference to himself as bridegroom when explaining thebehavior of his disciples (Mark 2:19–20; Luke 5:34–35).Revelation depicts the return of Christ as the time of the marriagebetween the bride and the bridegroom (Rev. 19:7; 21:9).

Time refers to both the real and the perceived passage ofevents in sequence. It is important to note that “perceived”and “real” need not be the same. For example, Jacobworked for seven years in order to marry Rebekah, “but theyseemed like only a few days to him because of his love for her”(Gen. 29:20 [cf. 2Pet. 3:8]). Jacob’s perception of timeclearly was distinct from the real period of time that passed.

TheBiblical Concept of Time

Time,as the sequential ordering of events that occur in space, pervadesboth human life and the biblical record of God’s dealings withthe universe. The Bible recounts God’s plan for his creation, aplan with a beginning and an end, between which elements of the planunfold in chronological sequence throughout history. The biblicalconcept of time is distinct from the cyclical concept found in someother religions, both in the ancient Near East and elsewhere. Historythus moves toward a divinely predetermined goal through divinelyappointed events that occur in sequence at appointed times accordingto God’s plan. Since God’s purposes for creation areexpressed through time, the major points in his plan are apparent ina broad chronological sweep, beginning with creation, ending withjudgment and the new creation, and centered upon the life, death, andresurrection of Jesus (cf. Mark 1:15).

ThatGod acts within history to bring about his purposes is highlighted bythe use of temporal language to make reference to events that havetaken place in the past (Exod. 12:1–3) and are yet to takeplace (in particular through the use of expressions such as “thelast day[s]” in, e.g., Isa. 2:2; Jer. 23:20; John 6:39–54).The emphasis therefore is not on some spiritual or otherworldlydomain in which specifically religious experiences and events takeplace, a domain distinct from the physical world in which we live.Rather, the emphasis is on the way in which God directs and shapeshistory in order to bring about his purposes.

Furthermore,the Bible acknowledges that all events in history fall within thepurview of God’s sovereignty through the acknowledgment thatthere is an appropriate time appointed for them (Eccles. 3:1–11;Ps. 31:15). God’s sovereignty over time extends to the future,and thus the prophets announce the future actions of God at certaintimes (Isa. 60:22; Ezek. 22:3; 30:3; Dan. 8:17). More specifically,definite times for the end and final judgment are established (Matt.8:29), although the timing of the end is known only to the Father(Matt. 24:36; Mark 13:33).

Modernscience treats time and space as related and essential components ofthe physical universe and thus of God’s creation. Since,therefore, time is created, it is not thereby immediately clearprecisely what God’s relationship to time is, nor is this anissue directly addressed in the Bible. Although it is common toinsist that since time is part of creation, God exists outside oftime, it is not possible to deduce from this observation alone thatGod exists without some analogous notion of time within a divineframe of reference. Nor is the question readily resolved by appeal tobiblical texts, for although a number of passages reflect upon God’sknowledge of the end from the beginning and speak of God predestiningand foreknowing (terms that implicitly have temporal connotations),these can be read as either reflecting God’s interaction withthe temporal aspect of the created universe or as divineaccommodation to human language in order to communicate correctlywith temporal human beings throughout history. Consequently, nodefinitive answer to these philosophical questions is available, andso proposals relating to the issue cannot be judged to providecertainty in these matters. All that can be said with certainty isthat the Bible presents certain propositions that affirm time’ssubservience to God.

MeasuringTime

TheBible makes reference to a variety of different measurements ofperiods of time. These include Jubilees (Lev. 25:10), generations(Deut. 2:14), Sabbath years (Lev. 25:4), years, months, days, andhours. There are no shorter periods of time described by any definedmeasures in the Bible, reflecting a culture in which timekeeping wasnot dominated by devices that afforded such determinations (althoughterms for nonspecific short periods of time do exist, such as rega’,a “moment” [Exod. 33:5; Isa. 26:20]).

Anumber of passages appear to suggest that a day was considered tobegin in the morning and end the following morning (e.g., Deut.28:66–67; 1Sam. 30:12; Isa. 28:19; Jer. 33:20). However,there are also texts that seem to suggest a different division ofdays, specifically the creation account of Gen. 1 (but see also Gen.19:34; Lev. 7:15; Judg. 19:4–9; 1Sam. 19:11). Nehemiah13:19 has the day begin at sunset. By NT times, a full day generallywas reckoned as beginning at sunset.

Dayswere also divided into parts. The Mesopotamian system for dividingthe night into three watches appears paralleled in Exod. 14:24; Judg.7:19; 1Sam. 11:11, although by NT times the night was dividedinto four watches, paralleling the Roman and Egyptian practice (Matt.14:25; Mark 13:35). More precise, shorter divisions of time tended tobe later innovations; for example, the OT does not typically use anhour as a measure of time. Nonetheless, there were in the ancientworld means by which shorter periods could be measured, such assundials and water clocks, examples of which can be found dating tothe second millennium BC in Mesopotamia and Egypt. The only possiblereference to such a device in the Bible appears in Isa. 38:8, wherethe “stairway of Ahaz” is thought by some to have beenused to measure time in some way.

Whenthe LXX uses the Greek word hōra,it refers not to a period of sixty minutes, but usually to a point intime (e.g., Exod. 9:18). In other early Greek literature the term canrefer to a variety of periods of time, including a season and a year.By the NT period, however, the division of the day into twenty-fourhours had become normative (cf. John 11:9), and the NT makes numerousreference to times based on the hour of the day.

Theweek was a well-established measure of time, reflected in thecreation story as well as in the celebration of the Sabbath. Monthswere based on a lunar calendar (the Hebrew words for “month,”yerakhand khodesh,are also used to refer to the moon) (see Calendar). Beyond years, theBible also uses generations as a measure of the passage of time.Finally, other measures less readily associated with specific periodsof time are used in the Bible, in particular in some apocalypticprophetic texts such as Daniel.

Eternity

“Eternity”is another time-related concept that occupies an important place inthe Bible. The modern scientific realization that time is part ofcreation has strengthened the notion, long affirmed by variousphilosophies, that “eternity” represents that which isoutside time and apart from it and so is particularly associated withGod’s existence. In contrast to this, however, when the Biblemakes reference to “eternity,” it invariably has atemporal aspect, referring either to the distant past, the distantfuture, or else the entire expanse of time from distant past todistant future (e.g., Exod. 15:18; Ps. 9:5; Mic. 4:5). What is clear,however, is that God’s relationship to the temporal aspect ofthe universe does reflect that of one who is outside the constraintsof that time (e.g., Ps. 90:2; 2Pet. 3:8).

(Disabilities; Disability; Deformity; Deformities; Sickness]The Bible often speaks of health, healing, disease, andillness. Good health was a sign of God’s favor, and healing wasalso the work of God and his divinely empowered agents. These agentsincluded the prophets (1Kings 17:8–23; 2Kings5:1–15), the apostles (Acts 3:1–10), and the messiah(Mal. 4:2). The divine prerogative of Jesus was to heal (Mark 1:32;6:56; Matt. 4:23; 8:16; 15:30; 21:14; Luke 6:10, 17–19), andmiraculous healings were a sign of his messianic office (Luke7:20–23). Disease, on the other hand, was regarded as a sign ofGod’s disfavor. Within a covenantal context, God could senddisease to punish the sinner (Exod. 4:11; 32:35).

TheBible assigns a wide variety of names to various diseases and theirsymptoms. These terms are nontechnical and generally descriptive.Some are uncertain in meaning. In most cases they describe thesymptoms of the disease, not the disease itself. Diagnosis often wasbased on incomplete observation and nonclinical examination. TheBible also presupposes supernatural intervention in the life of aperson. Healing occurred when God’s agents touched individuals,cast out demons, and resurrected the dead.

AncientNear Eastern Influences

Inthe ancient Near East the knowledge of disease and medicine wasprecritical. Bacteria and viruses were virtually unknown.Mesopotamian literature contains many references to medicine,physicians, and medical practice. Minerals, salts, herbs, and otherbotanicals were used to make up treatments. Babylonian physiciansalso administered prescriptions accompanied by incantations. Diseasewas considered to be the result of a violation of a taboo orpossession by a demon. The Code of Hammurabi (1750 BC) includes lawsregulating the practice of medicine and surgery by physicians. InEgypt medicine and healing were connected to the gods. Tomb paintingsand several papyrus documents describe the developing state ofEgyptian medicine, pharmacy, and surgery.

Greekphysicians admired and sought to learn the skills of the Egyptians.However, the early Greek doctor Hippocrates (460–370 BC),called the “Father of Medicine,” is credited with beingthe first physician to reject the belief that supernatural or divineforces cause illness. He argued that disease is the result ofenvironmental factors, diet, and living habits, not a punishmentimposed by the gods.

Itis clear that the biblical world shared with the ancient Near Eastthe same types of maladies common to tropical or subtropicalclimates. These include malaria, tropical fevers, dysentery, andsunstroke. The tendency of the hot climate to produce frequentdroughts and famine certainly contributed to similar types ofdiseases throughout the Fertile Crescent. Additionally, it must beremembered that Palestine was a land bridge between the Mesopotamianand Egyptian worlds. Migrations carry not only goods and products,but also parasites, communicable disease, and epidemics.

BiblicalConcept of Disease

Thereligious tradition of the Hebrews repudiated the magical or demonicorigin of disease. Hence, moral, ethical, and spiritual factorsregulated disease and illness. This was true for the individual aswell as the community. The Hebrews, like the Egyptians, alsorecognized that much sickness arose from the individual’srelationship to the physical environment. Great stress was placed onhygiene and preventive medicine.

Pentateuchallegislation offered seven covenantal principles designed to preventthe possibility of disease and sickness: (1)Sabbath observancefor humans, animals, and the land, which enforced regular periods ofrest (Gen. 2:3); (2)dietary regulations, which divided foodinto efficient categories of clean and unclean (Lev. 11);(3)circumcision, which carried physical benefits as well asreligious and moral implications (Gen. 17:9; circumcision is the onlyexample of Hebrew surgery); (4)laws governing sexualrelationships and health, including a list of forbidden degrees ofmarital relationships (Lev. 18–20); (5)provisions forindividual sexual hygiene (Lev. 15); (6)stipulations forcleanliness and bodily purification (Lev. 14:2; 15:2); (7) sanitaryand hygienic regulations for camp life (Num. 31:19; Deut. 23:12).

InNT times magical charms and incantations were used along with folkremedies in an effort to cure disease. Jesus repudiated these means.He also suggested that sickness and disease were not directpunishments for sin (John 9:2). In the Sermon on the Mount (Matt.5–7), Jesus confirmed that the ethical and religious standardsof the new covenant promoted the total health of the community andthe individual.

CirculatoryDiseases

Nabalmost likely suffered a cerebrovascular accident or stroke (1Sam.25:36–38). After a heavy bout of drinking, his heart “died”(KJV; NIV: “failed”), and he became paralyzed, lapsedinto a coma, and died ten days later. Psalm 137:5–6 may containa clinical example of the symptoms of stroke. The psalmist wrote, “IfI forget you, Jerusalem, may my right hand forget its skill. May mytongue cling to the roof of my mouth if I do not remember you.”This description points to a paralysis of the right side of the body(right hemiplegia) and the loss of speech (motor aphasia) that resultfrom a stroke on the left side of the brain. Basically, the exiledpsalmist is wishing upon himself the effects of a stroke if he heldanything other than Jerusalem as his highest priority. Some haveconsidered the collapse of Uzzah when he reached out to stabilize theark of the covenant (2Sam. 6:6–7) to be the consequenceof an apoplectic seizure. But since no actual paralysis was describedand death occurred immediately, this seems unlikely. It is moreprobable that God struck him down with an aortic aneurism or acoronary thrombosis.

Paralysis

Apossible case of paralysis may be described in the shriveled(atrophic) hand of JeroboamI (1Kings 13:4–6). In anangry outburst Jeroboam ordered the arrest of a prophet who condemnedthe altar at Bethel. When Jeroboam stretched out his hand, it“shriveled up, so that he could not pull it back.”Several complicated diagnoses have been offered to explain the“withered” hand, but it is possibly an example ofcataplexy, a sudden loss of muscle power following a strong emotionalstimulus. After intercession by the man of God, and the subsiding ofthe emotional outburst, the arm was restored.

Thethreat against the faithless shepherd of God’s people (Zech.11:17), which included a withered arm and blindness in the right eye,may refer to a form of paralysis known as tabes dorsalis, orlocomotor ataxia. Knifelike pains in the extremities and blindnesscharacterize this disease.

Paralysisis frequently mentioned in the NT (Matt. 8:6; 9:2, 6; 12:10; Mark2:3–5, 9, 10; 3:1, 3, 5; Luke 5:18, 24; 6:6; John 5:3; Acts9:33; Heb. 12:12). The exact diagnosis for each of these casesremains uncertain.

Thephysician Luke’s use of the Greek medical term paralelymenos(Luke 5:18, 24) suggests that some of these cases were caused bychronic organic disease. Others clearly were congenital (Acts 3:2;cf. 14:8). It is not necessary to rationalize the origin of theseexamples of paralysis as hysteria or pretense. The NT writersregarded the healing of these individuals by Jesus and the apostlesas miraculous.

MentalIllness and Brain Disorders

Casesof mental disease are generally described in the Bible by noting thesymptoms produced by the disorder. The particular cause of a mentalillness in the NT is often blamed on an unknown evil spirit orspirits (Luke 8:2). Such spirits, however, were subject to God’scontrol and operated only within the boundaries allowed by him(1Sam. 16:14–16, 23; 18:10; 19:9). Accordingly, in the OT“madness” and “confusion of mind” wereregarded as consequences of covenantal disobedience (Deut. 28:28,34).

Ithas been argued that King Saul displayed early indications ofpersonality disorder. Symptoms included pride, self-aggrandizement(1Sam. 11:6; 13:12; 15:9, 19), and ecstatic behavior(10:11–12). A rapid deterioration in Saul’s charactertranspired after David was anointed and became more popular (16:14;18:10–11). Since Saul demonstrated fear, jealousy, a sense ofpersecution, and homicidal tendencies, some scholars argue that hesuffered from paranoid schizophrenia.

Nebuchadnezzarsuffered a rare form of monomania in which he lived like a wild beastin the field eating grass (Dan. 4:33). David, in order to save hisown life, feigned insanity or perhaps epilepsy before the Philistineking Achish (1Sam. 21:12–15).

Inthe NT, individuals with mental disorders went about naked, mutilatedthemselves, lived in tombs (Mark 5:2), and exhibited violent behavior(Matt. 8:28). Such mental disorientation was often linked to demonpossession. Examples include the Syrophoenician’s child (Matt.15:22; Mark 7:25), the demoniacs at Gerasa (Matt. 8:28; Mark 5:2;Luke 8:27) and Capernaum (Mark 1:23; Luke 4:33), a blind and mutedemoniac (Matt. 12:22; Luke 11:14), and a fortune-telling slave girl(Acts 16:16). While such behavior is clinically suggestive ofparanoid schizophrenia or other mental disorders, themind-controlling influence of some extraneous negative force cannotbe ruled out.

Epilepsy(grand mal) causes the afflicted person to fall to the ground, foamat the mouth, and clench or grind the teeth (Matt. 17:15; Mark9:17–18; Luke 9:39). The description of Saul falling to theground in an ecstatic state (1Sam. 19:23–24) and Balaamfalling with open eyes may be indicative of an epileptic seizure. Inthe NT, Jesus healed many who suffered from epilepsy (Matt. 4:24;17:14–18; Mark 9:17–18; Luke 9:38–42). Somescholars have linked the light seen by Paul on the road to Damascuswith the aura that some epileptics experience prior to a seizure. Hissubsequent blindness has also been attributed to the epilepticdisturbance of the circulation of the blood in the brain.

ChildhoodDiseases

Thecause of the death of the widow’s son at Zarephath is unknown(1Kings 17:17–22). The death of the Shunammite woman’sson has been attributed to sunstroke (2Kings 4:18–37),although a headache is the only symptom recorded (v.19). Inboth cases there is too little evidence to present an accuratediagnosis.

Inthe first case, the boy at Zarephath stopped breathing (1Kings17:17). This may leave the door open to argue that Elijahresuscitated the child. However, in the second case, the text clearlystates that the Shunammite boy died (2Kings 4:20), implying aresurrection.

Infectiousand Communicable Diseases

Feverand other calamities are listed among the punishments for covenantalinfidelity (Deut. 28:22). Three different types of fever may beintentionally described here: “fever,” “inflammation,”and “scorching heat” (ESV: “fiery heat”).Fever is also mentioned frequently in the NT (Matt. 8:15; Mark1:30–31; Luke 4:38–39; John 4:52; Acts 28:8). Both Jesusand Paul healed individuals who had a fever. A number of these feverswere likely caused by malaria, since the disease was known to beendemic to the Jordan Valley and other marshy areas in Palestine.

Severalepidemics in which numerous people died of pestilence or plague arementioned in the OT (Exod. 11:1; 12:13; Num. 14:37; Zech. 14:12). Thefifth plague of Egypt (Exod. 9:3–6) has been attributed toJordan Rift Valley fever, which is spread by flies. Bubonic plaguehas been blamed for the malady that struck the Philistines (1Sam.5–6). However, it may have been the result of a severe form oftropical dysentery. Acute bacillary dysentery contracted in themilitary camp may also have been responsible for the epidemic thatkilled a large number of the Assyrian army (2Kings 19:35).

ParasiticDiseases

Somescholars have repeatedly argued that the “fiery serpents”(NIV: “venomous snakes”) encountered by Moses and thechildren of Israel (Num. 21:6–9) were in reality an infestationof the parasitic guinea worm (Dracunculus medinensis). Microscopicfleas ingested in drinking water carry the larvae of this slendernematode into the body. The larvae move from the digestive tract tothe skin. The adult worm, which may grow to a length of several feet,discharges its eggs into an ulcer on the skin. Death of the hostoccurs because of the resulting infection of the skin ulcers.

Afterthe conquest of Jericho, Joshua cursed the individual who wouldendeavor to rebuild the city (Josh. 6:26). Later, Hiel of Bethelattempted to rebuild the city and lost two of his sons as a result ofthe curse (1Kings 16:34). Elisha was then asked to purify thebad water at Jericho in order to allow a new settlement (2Kings2:19). Elisha obliged by throwing salt into the spring and therebymaking the water potable (2:20–22). Recent archaeological studyhas discovered the remains of certain snails in the mud-bricks usedto construct Jericho in the Bronze Age. These types of snails are nowknown to serve as intermediate hosts for the flatworm parasite thatcan cause schistosomiasis. The Schistosoma haematobium trematodeinfects the urinary tract and the bladder. It is possible that thistype of parasite was responsible for the death of Hiel’s twosons.

InNT times, Herod Agrippa apparently died of the complications of aparasitic disease, perhaps being infested by the larvae of flies(myiasis) in the bowels. Luke mentions that he was “eaten byworms” (skōlēkobrōtos [Acts 12:23]). The fatherof Publius also suffered from dysentery (Acts 28:8).

PhysicalDeformities and Abnormalities

Individualswith deformities were disqualified from priestly service (Lev.21:18–20). The list included lameness, limb damage, anddwarfism. The deformities mentioned here might have been congenitalor acquired. Mephibosheth was dropped by his nurse (2 Sam. 4:4) andperhaps suffered damage to the spinal cord. Jacob possibly sustainedinjury to an intervertebral disk (Gen. 32:32) causing a deformity anda limp. The woman who was “bent over” (Luke 13:10–17)might have suffered from an abnormality of the spine similar toscoliosis. It is difficult to ascertain the origin of the “shriveledhand” of the unnamed individual healed by Jesus (Matt.12:10–13; Mark 3:1–5; Luke 6:6–10). It could becongenital in character or a paralysis caused by any number offactors.

Diseasesand Disabilities of the Eyes and Ears

Physicalblindness is mentioned several times in the Bible. Blindness excludedone from serving as a priest (Lev. 21:18, 20). Blindness anddeafness, however, were disabilities requiring special care from thecommunity (Lev. 19:14; Deut. 27:18). The “weak eyes” ofLeah may refer to an eye condition (Gen. 29:17).

Blindnessin the biblical world was caused by various factors. Leviticus 26:16speaks of a fever that destroys the eyes. Flies probably wereresponsible for much of the conjunctivitis found in children. John9:1 mentions congenital blindness, which Jesus cured using mud madefrom spittle and dirt (John 9:6). In Mark 8:22–26 Jesus healeda blind man by spitting in his eye and laying hands on him (cf. Matt.20:34 with Mark10:52).

Congenitaldeafness would also be associated with mutism and speech defectsbecause a child learning to speak depends on imitation and mimicry.Jesus healed a man who was deaf and could barely talk (Mark 7:32–37).The man’s inability to say much possibly pointed to a loss ofhearing early in life.

SkinConditions

Variousskin and hair abnormalities are described in the Bible. Some made theindividual unclean (Lev. 13:30; 14:54). The OT speaks of “theboils of Egypt” (Deut. 28:27; cf. Exod. 9:9). Skin ailmentsincluded tumors, festering sores, boils, infections, and the itch(Deut. 28:27, 35; Isa. 3:7). Job complained of a litany of ailments:broken and festering skin (7:5), multiple wounds (9:17), blackpeeling skin and fever (30:30), gnawing bone pain (2:5; 19:20;30:17), insomnia (7:3–4), and wasting away (33:21). Thesesymptoms have been diagnosed as indications of yaws or eczema. Apoultice made of figs cured Hezekiah’s boil (2Kings20:7).

Leprosywas once thought to be a common problem in the biblical world.Leprosy (Hansen’s disease) is a slow, progressive chronicinfectious disease caused by a bacterium. Symptoms include loss ofsensation and loss of parts of the body. Evidence for this type ofdisease in Palestine is rare. Uzziah may have had a true case ofHansen’s disease. He was quarantined until the day he died(2Chron. 26:21).

Scholarsnow suggest that the symptoms of the disease described in the Bibledo not fit this pattern and thus do not signify leprosy (Hansen’sdisease) as it is known today. Instead, the word that Englishversions translate as “leprosy” (Heb. root tsr’)probably refers to different types of infectious skin disease, oftencharacterized by a long-standing, patchy skin condition associatedwith peeling or flakiness and redness of skin. Evidence points moretoward psoriasis, fungal infections, or dermatitis.

Thisdisease could appear in humans (Lev. 14:2), on buildings (14:34), andon clothing (14:55). It was not limited to the extremities but couldoccur on the head (14:42–44). It could run its course quickly(13:5–8). It made the individual ceremonially unclean, but itwas also curable (Lev. 14:3; 2Kings 5:1–27). Individualswith the disease were not necessarily shunned (2Kings 7; Matt.26:6// Mark 14:3). Moses (Exod. 4:6), Miriam (Num. 12:10), andNaaman experienced this type of skin disease (2Kings 5:1–27).Jesus healed many suffering from skin ailments (Matt. 8:2–3;Mark 1:40–42; Luke 5:12–13), including the ten “menwho had leprosy” (Luke 17:12–14).

Ailmentsof an Unknown Nature

Somecases in the Bible present insufficient evidence for scholars torender a clear diagnosis. King Asa suffered a disease in his feet(2Chron. 16:12). However, in the OT the Hebrew expression for“feet” is sometimes used euphemistically for the sexualorgans (Judg. 3:24 KJV). Because of this, the exact nature of thedisease is ambiguous. Jehoram was afflicted with “an incurabledisease of the bowels” (2Chron. 21:18–19). Otherunknown ailments factor in the deaths of the firstborn son of Davidand Bathsheba (2Sam. 12:15), of Jeroboam’s son in infancy(1Kings 14:17), of Elisha (2Kings 13:14), and ofEzekiel’s wife (Ezek. 24:16).

Rabbinic commentary on the Hebrew Bible, either the text or abiblical event. “Midrash” (pl. “midrashim”)is a noun derived from the verb darash, meaning “to seek”or “to inquire.” “Midrash” can refer to thecommentary on a single passage, such as a midrash on Gen. 1, or to awhole collection of midrashim, such as Genesis Rabbah. It may alsorefer to the process by which ancient rabbis interpreted Scripture.Rabbinic midrash seeks theological and halakic answers tocontemporary concerns; thus, it is concerned with the application ofScripture to various aspects of life.

RabbinicMidrash

Midrashuses Scripture to interpret Scripture and uses the Bible as a whole,unified book. Although context is not ignored altogether, mid-rashjuxtaposes verses from throughout the Hebrew Bible in order toilluminate a given text or illustrate a point. Verses are strungtogether to elucidate a theme that the text suggests eitherimplicitly or explicitly. Within this system of Scriptureinterpreting Scripture, the Pentateuch holds pride of place as thecenter of the biblical witness. In rabbinic midrash, often theProphets and the Writings do not have independent voices separatefrom the Pentateuch but serve a supporting role.

Attimes, the juxtaposition of verses that occur in midrash seemsarbitrary, but this is not the case. A set of midrashic rules,middot, governs how the verses of Scripture are to be used and howargumentation is to be formed. Over time, the rules became moreelaborate, but their earliest statement is attributed to the pre–AD70 rabbi Hillel in the Babylonian Talmud. He lists seven rules:

1.Argument from the less significant to more significant, and viceversa.

2.Argument by analogy when Scripture uses identical expressions.

3.A statement in one verse applies to all topically related verses.

4.Same as the principle in three, but derived from two verses, not justone.

5.Argument from general to particular, and vice versa.

6.Argument from a similar expression found in another passage.

7.Argument from context.

Therabbinic rules of scriptural interpretation are similar to rules forHellenistic rhetoric and Roman legal argument and thus reflectHellenistic and Roman influence.

Rabbinicmidrash can be characterized broadly as halakic (developing rules forSabbath observance, ritual purity, sacrifice, etc.) and haggadic(theological, ethical, and whatever does not fall under halakic).Some bodies of rabbinic midrash explore a book of the Bible more orless verse by verse, and others are topical. Some midrashic works arehomiletical in nature; they preserve sermon material from synagogueservices.

Midrashin the Bible

Althoughthe large compilations of mid-rash are rabbinic and are later thanthe Bible, midrashic material is also found much earlier. Midrash hasits origins in the Bible. The clearest example is Chronicles, whichin many respects is a midrash on Samuel and Kings. At Qumran, we findliterature that can be classified as rewritten Scripture, such as theTemple Scroll, the book of Jubilees, and the Genesis Apocryphon,which have midrashic features. The Qumran Pesharim are alsomidrashic, although of a less sophisticated nature than the laterrabbinic midrash, and seem to employ the middot.

TheNT contains examples of midrashic material. Jesus’ teaching inthe Gospels includes some midrashic material. In Luke 4:16–21,Jesus reads from the scroll of Isaiah and interprets the passage asapplying to himself. Jesus is delivering a petikhah, a shortexposition on a biblical text outside the main synagogue sermon. Whendebating with the Sadducees over the resurrection, Jesus givesmidrashic comment to Exod. 3:6 (Luke 20:27–40). The apostlePaul engages in midrash even more explicitly: for example, he appliesDeut. 25:4, concerning not muzzling an ox while it is threshinggrain, to the idea that a minister is worthy of being paid for work(1Cor. 9:9; 1Tim. 5:18). Paul is arguing from the lesserto the greater in his application of Torah to his contemporarysituation.

Themost extended midrash in the NT isthe book of Hebrews. Forexample, in Heb. 1–2 the writer applies numerous quotationsfrom the Psalter to Jesus in order to show how he is greater than theangels. In Heb. 4 the writer, through an interpretation of Ps. 95:11,does a midrash on entering into God’s rest, by which he appliesGod’s resting from his work (Gen. 2:2) to Christians’entering that rest because of the unbelief of Israel in thewilderness. It appears that the author is forming an argument byanalogy in relating Gen. 2:2 and Ps. 95:11.

Itcan be demonstrated that Jews employed midrashic techniques in theirinterpretation of Scriptures centuries before the earliest rabbinicmidrash compilations were created. We see these techniques in QumranPesharim, Philo’s writings, and in the NT. The rabbis made useof long-established interpretive techniques and made them moresophisticated. The difference between Qumranite, ancient Christian,and rabbinic interpretation of Scripture was one of emphasis. For theQumranites, all Scripture had to speak of their community, which wasthe true, believing community in the end of days. For the Christians,all Scripture had to speak of Jesus and the salvation that hebrought. For the rabbis, all Scripture upheld Torah and obedience tothat Torah as the center of Jewish life.

Because Scripture sees all things as providentially arrangedand sustained by God’s sovereign power at all times (Heb. 1:3),miracles are not aberrations in an otherwise closed and mechanicaluniverse. Nor are miracles raw demonstrations of divinity designed toovercome prejudice or unbelief and to convince people of theexistence of God (Mark 8:11–12). Still less are they cleverconjuring tricks involving some kind of deception that can beotherwise explained on a purely scientific basis. Rather, God in hisinfinite wisdom sometimes does unusual and extraordinary things tocall attention to himself and his activity. Miracles are divinelyordained acts of God that dramatically alert us to the presence ofhis glory and power and advance his saving purposes in redemptivehistory.

Terminology

Thebiblical writers describe miracles with various terms, such as“signs,” “wonders,” and “miracles”(or “powers”), which can carry various connotations. Asthe word “sign” suggests, divine miracles are significantand should cause us to think more deeply about God in a way that goesbeyond mere amazement or curiosity (Exod. 4:30–31; John 2:11).Not all of God’s signs are miraculous. Some are given as partof his ordering of the natural world (Gen. 1:14) or as anencouragement to faith that God will do as he has said (e.g., therainbow in Gen. 9:8–17; the blood of the Passover lamb in Exod.12:13). (See also Sign.)

Oftencoupled with signs are “wonders” (Jer. 32:21; John 4:48;2Cor. 12:12). If the depiction of miracles as “signs”indicates an appeal to the intellect, that of “wonders”points to the emotions. Miracles evoke astonishment and awe at theone who did them.

TheNT word “miracle” carries the meaning of power andtherefore points to the supernatural source of these events (Luke10:13; Acts 8:13).

Miraclesin the Bible

OldTestament.In the OT, miracles are not evenly distributed but rather are foundin greater number during times of great redemptive significance, suchas the exodus and the conquest of Canaan. Miracles were performedalso during periods of apostasy, such as in the days of theninth-century prophets Elijah and Elisha. Common to both of theseeras is the powerful demonstration of the superiority of God overpagan deities (Exod. 7–12; 1Kings 18:20–40).

NewTestament. Inthe NT, miracles often are acts of compassion, but more significantlythey attest the exalted status of Jesus of Nazareth (Acts 2:22) andthe saving power of his word (Heb. 2:3–4). In the SynopticGospels, they reveal the coming of God’s kingdom and theconquest of Satan’s dominion (Matt. 8:16–17; 12:22–30;Mark 3:27). They point to the person of Jesus as the promised Messiahof OT Scripture (Matt. 4:23; 11:4–6). John shows a preferencefor the word “signs,” and his Gospel is structured aroundthem (John 20:30–31). According to John, the signs that Jesusperformed were such that only the one who stood in a uniquerelationship to the Father as the Son of God could do them.

Miraclesand faith.Just as entrenched skepticism is injurious to faith, so too is naivecredulity, for although signs and wonders witness to God, falseprophets also perform them “to deceive, if possible, even theelect” (Matt. 24:24). Christians are to exercise discernmentand not be led astray by such impostors (Matt. 7:15–20).

Therelationship between miracles and faith is not as straightforward assometimes supposed. Miracles do not necessarily produce faith, nordoes faith necessarily produce miracles. Miracles were intended tobring about the faith that leads to eternal life (John 20:31), butnot all who witnessed them believed (John 10:32). Additionally, Jesusregarded a faith that rested only on the miracle itself as precarious(Mark 8:11–13; John 2:23–25; 4:48), though better than nofaith at all (John 10:38). Faith that saves must ultimately find itsgrounding in the person of Jesus as the Son of God.

Itis also clear that although Jesus always encouraged faith in thosewho came to him for help (Mark 9:23), and that he deliberatelylimited his miraculous powers in the presence of unbelief (Mark 6:5),many of his miracles were performed on those who did not or could notexercise faith (Matt. 12:22; Mark 1:23–28; 5:1–20; Luke14:1–4).

Thefact that Jesus performed miracles was never an issue; rather, hisopponents disputed the source of his power (Mark 3:22). Argumentsabout his identity were to be settled by appeal not to miracles butto the word of God (Matt. 22:41–46).

Thefunction of miracles.Miracle accounts function in a symbolic and prophetic manner. Hence,the cursing of the fig tree was prophetic of the coming judgment(Mark 11:12–21). The unusual two-stage healing of the blind manof Bethsaida symbolized Peter’s incomplete understanding ofJesus’ messiahship (Mark 8:22–33).

Themiraculous element of Jesus’ ministry carries an eschatologicalsignificance, pointing to the order of things in the age to come. Forexample, the nature miracles (Mark 4:35–41) look forward to theredemption of creation itself, which is presently subject tofrustration and decay (Rom. 8:20–21); the healing miraclespoint to a day when disease and deformity will be abolished (Rev.21:4); and miracles in which the dead are raised to life anticipate atime when death itself will be no more (Rev. 20:14; 21:4). From thisperspective, the miracles are a gracious foretaste of a far moreglorious future.

The act of giving a specific term of identification tosomeone or something. Naming is a notable feature of biblicalnarrative. From the beginning, God orders and structures creation bynaming the things that he makes, from the elements of nature tohumankind (Gen. 1:5, 10; 5:2). As his ruling representative, Adam isgranted the privilege of naming the animals (1:27–28; 2:19–20).He later names his wife, both as a being and as a person (2:23;3:20). Eve, in turn, names Seth after losing Abel to the murderousrage of his brother Cain (4:25). With the naming of people, what isnotable is that in each case the name clearly is chosen for a reason:the name has significance for the person, revealing somethingsignificant about character, role, or destiny.

Thepatriarchal narratives of Genesis are notable in this regard. In Gen.17 both Abram and Sarai receive name changes, to the more familiar“Abraham” and “Sarah.” No particularexplanation is given in her case, but “Abraham” isexplained in terms of God’s promise of numerous descendants,“father of many” (17:5). Later in the conversation, Goddecrees that the name of the promised son will be “Isaac.”The name means “he laughs,” and it is chosen initially inresponse to Abraham’s laughter at the idea of having a son inhis old age (17:17, 19). When Isaac is born, Sarah describes it asthe laughter of joyful surprise (21:6–7). But when Ishmaelengages in some less innocent “laughing” about Isaac, itbecomes the occasion of Ishmael’s expulsion along with hismother (21:8–14). In the next generation, Esau is named for hisred, hairy appearance—something that will be important on alater occasion (25:25; 27:5–23). His twin brother’s nameis both more symbolic and more suggestive of character, as Esauhimself acknowledges (25:26; 27:34–36).

TheNT also has its cases of notable naming. The apostles expressappreciation for the edifying spirit of a believer named “Joseph”by calling him “Barnabas,” which means “son ofencouragement” (Acts 4:36). Likewise, Jesus marks Simon’srecognition of his identity by naming him “Peter” (Aram.Cepha; Gk. Petros—both mean “rock”). Jesus himselfis the supreme example of having been given a meaningful name (Matt.1:20–21), though it should be noted that his Hebrew name,“Joshua” (yehoshua’, “Yahweh saves/issalvation”), was common in Jewish culture. This is why othersusually referred to him by some descriptive phrase, such as “Jesusof Nazareth”or “Jesus, who is called Messiah.”

Placesalso receive names, often as a result of some encounter with God.Jacob gives the name “Bethel” to the spot where God firstspoke with him (Gen. 28:16–19). The names that Moses gives tosome locations of the wilderness journey are tragically indicative ofIsrael’s frequent disobedience during that time (Exod. 17:1–17;Num. 11:3–5, 18–20, 31–34).

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

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

Yahweh:The Lord

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

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

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

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

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

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

Elohim

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

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

Adonai

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

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

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

Yahweh:The Lord

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

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

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

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

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

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

Elohim

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

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

Adonai

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

The act of giving a specific term of identification tosomeone or something. Naming is a notable feature of biblicalnarrative. From the beginning, God orders and structures creation bynaming the things that he makes, from the elements of nature tohumankind (Gen. 1:5, 10; 5:2). As his ruling representative, Adam isgranted the privilege of naming the animals (1:27–28; 2:19–20).He later names his wife, both as a being and as a person (2:23;3:20). Eve, in turn, names Seth after losing Abel to the murderousrage of his brother Cain (4:25). With the naming of people, what isnotable is that in each case the name clearly is chosen for a reason:the name has significance for the person, revealing somethingsignificant about character, role, or destiny.

Thepatriarchal narratives of Genesis are notable in this regard. In Gen.17 both Abram and Sarai receive name changes, to the more familiar“Abraham” and “Sarah.” No particularexplanation is given in her case, but “Abraham” isexplained in terms of God’s promise of numerous descendants,“father of many” (17:5). Later in the conversation, Goddecrees that the name of the promised son will be “Isaac.”The name means “he laughs,” and it is chosen initially inresponse to Abraham’s laughter at the idea of having a son inhis old age (17:17, 19). When Isaac is born, Sarah describes it asthe laughter of joyful surprise (21:6–7). But when Ishmaelengages in some less innocent “laughing” about Isaac, itbecomes the occasion of Ishmael’s expulsion along with hismother (21:8–14). In the next generation, Esau is named for hisred, hairy appearance—something that will be important on alater occasion (25:25; 27:5–23). His twin brother’s nameis both more symbolic and more suggestive of character, as Esauhimself acknowledges (25:26; 27:34–36).

TheNT also has its cases of notable naming. The apostles expressappreciation for the edifying spirit of a believer named “Joseph”by calling him “Barnabas,” which means “son ofencouragement” (Acts 4:36). Likewise, Jesus marks Simon’srecognition of his identity by naming him “Peter” (Aram.Cepha; Gk. Petros—both mean “rock”). Jesus himselfis the supreme example of having been given a meaningful name (Matt.1:20–21), though it should be noted that his Hebrew name,“Joshua” (yehoshua’, “Yahweh saves/issalvation”), was common in Jewish culture. This is why othersusually referred to him by some descriptive phrase, such as “Jesusof Nazareth”or “Jesus, who is called Messiah.”

Placesalso receive names, often as a result of some encounter with God.Jacob gives the name “Bethel” to the spot where God firstspoke with him (Gen. 28:16–19). The names that Moses gives tosome locations of the wilderness journey are tragically indicative ofIsrael’s frequent disobedience during that time (Exod. 17:1–17;Num. 11:3–5, 18–20, 31–34).

Geography

Whereasthe principal direction in the modern world is north, in the ancientworld different cultures used a variety of orientations as theysought to describe their relationship to their geographicalenvironment. In Israel the primary direction was determined by thesunrise: east. This is reflected in Hebrew, where the main word usedto refer to east as a direction was qedem, which could also be usedto simply refer to that which was directly ahead or in front of thespeaker (e.g., Ps. 139:5). Elsewhere, east is designated by the termsmizrakh (“rising” [Josh. 11:3]) or mizrakh hashamesh(“rising of the sun” [Num. 21:11]), both of which derivefrom the direction of sunrise. By way of contrast, in Egypt theprimary direction was south, in alignment with the source of the NileRiver.

Theancient world employed the same notion of four cardinal directions,which persists to the present, and the terminology related to thesewas influenced by the choice of primary direction. Thus, in Israelnorth is often designated by “left”; south could bedesignated by “right,” and west by “behind.”In addition, directions could be specified by reference togeographical features found in those directions. North could bespecified by the word tsapon, which was derived from the name of anorthern Syrian mountain (Zaphon); south by negeb, a name for theregion south of Israel (Negev); and west by yam (“sea”),since the Mediterranean Sea lay to the west.

Symbolism

Asidefrom their purely geographical significance, the directions also cameto bear figurative significance. Some caution is warranted inassigning symbolic significance to language, for there is danger ofreading invalid meanings into texts. Furthermore, given the ambiguityinherent in the use of terms to refer to directions, which also havealternate significances, there is danger of assigning a symbolicmeaning to the direction that actually resides in the alternate. So,for example, while yam (“sea”) carries significantsymbolic overtones in the Bible, this association does not appear tohave been extended to encompass the term when used to designate awesterly direction.

Eastand west.Nonetheless, there is, for example, probably some significance in theexpulsion from Eden and progressive movement eastward to the tower ofBabel through Gen. 1–11, followed by a return to the promisedland, which was approached by reversing the easterly migration andreturning toward Eden. Eden itself was said to lie “in theeast” (Heb. miqqedem; Gen. 2:8), although the same Hebrewexpression in Pss. 74:12; 77:5, 11; 78:2; 143:5 means “inancient times,” and there is perhaps a deliberate ambiguity inthe use of the expression in Gen. 2:8. In Isa. 2:6 the east is thesource of influences on the people that lead them astray. Followingthe exile, Ezekiel sees the glory of God returning to the temple fromthe east (Ezek. 43:1–2). Thus, when used symbolically, “east”is often viewed negatively or else may be used to mark a connectionwith distant antiquity (Gen. 2:8; Job 1:3). Any symbolic significanceassigned to west appears primarily to be associated with it being theantithesis of east. The distance between east and west was usedpoetically to express vast distance (Ps. 103:12).

Northand south.North is significant for two primary reasons. First, it is thedirection from which invading armies most often descended upon Israel(Jer. 1:13) as well as from which Babylon’s destruction is saidto come (Jer. 50:3). In light of this, Ezekiel’s vision of Godapproaching from the north strikes an ominous tone of impendingjudgment (Ezek. 1:1–4). Second, in Canaanite mythology theabode of the gods, and specifically Baal, lay to the north, on MountZaphon. Thus, the king of Babylon’s plans in Isa. 14:13 amountto a claim to establish himself as one of the gods. In contrast tothis, Ps. 48:2 pre-sents Mount Zion as supplanting Mount Zaphon andthus implicitly presents Israel’s one God as supplanting theCanaanite pantheon.

Aswith west, there is little symbolic significance associated with thedirection south in the Bible, aside from its use in combination withother directions.

Thefour directions.The four directions (or sometimes just pairs of directions) are usedtogether to describe both the scattering of the Israelites as well astheir being gathered by God back to the promised land (Ps. 107:3;Isa. 43:5–6; Luke 13:29). They are also used together toexpress the extent of the promised land (Gen. 13:14) or else todescribe something that is all-encompassing (1Chron. 9:24).

(Disabilities; Disability; Deformity; Deformities; Sickness]The Bible often speaks of health, healing, disease, andillness. Good health was a sign of God’s favor, and healing wasalso the work of God and his divinely empowered agents. These agentsincluded the prophets (1Kings 17:8–23; 2Kings5:1–15), the apostles (Acts 3:1–10), and the messiah(Mal. 4:2). The divine prerogative of Jesus was to heal (Mark 1:32;6:56; Matt. 4:23; 8:16; 15:30; 21:14; Luke 6:10, 17–19), andmiraculous healings were a sign of his messianic office (Luke7:20–23). Disease, on the other hand, was regarded as a sign ofGod’s disfavor. Within a covenantal context, God could senddisease to punish the sinner (Exod. 4:11; 32:35).

TheBible assigns a wide variety of names to various diseases and theirsymptoms. These terms are nontechnical and generally descriptive.Some are uncertain in meaning. In most cases they describe thesymptoms of the disease, not the disease itself. Diagnosis often wasbased on incomplete observation and nonclinical examination. TheBible also presupposes supernatural intervention in the life of aperson. Healing occurred when God’s agents touched individuals,cast out demons, and resurrected the dead.

AncientNear Eastern Influences

Inthe ancient Near East the knowledge of disease and medicine wasprecritical. Bacteria and viruses were virtually unknown.Mesopotamian literature contains many references to medicine,physicians, and medical practice. Minerals, salts, herbs, and otherbotanicals were used to make up treatments. Babylonian physiciansalso administered prescriptions accompanied by incantations. Diseasewas considered to be the result of a violation of a taboo orpossession by a demon. The Code of Hammurabi (1750 BC) includes lawsregulating the practice of medicine and surgery by physicians. InEgypt medicine and healing were connected to the gods. Tomb paintingsand several papyrus documents describe the developing state ofEgyptian medicine, pharmacy, and surgery.

Greekphysicians admired and sought to learn the skills of the Egyptians.However, the early Greek doctor Hippocrates (460–370 BC),called the “Father of Medicine,” is credited with beingthe first physician to reject the belief that supernatural or divineforces cause illness. He argued that disease is the result ofenvironmental factors, diet, and living habits, not a punishmentimposed by the gods.

Itis clear that the biblical world shared with the ancient Near Eastthe same types of maladies common to tropical or subtropicalclimates. These include malaria, tropical fevers, dysentery, andsunstroke. The tendency of the hot climate to produce frequentdroughts and famine certainly contributed to similar types ofdiseases throughout the Fertile Crescent. Additionally, it must beremembered that Palestine was a land bridge between the Mesopotamianand Egyptian worlds. Migrations carry not only goods and products,but also parasites, communicable disease, and epidemics.

BiblicalConcept of Disease

Thereligious tradition of the Hebrews repudiated the magical or demonicorigin of disease. Hence, moral, ethical, and spiritual factorsregulated disease and illness. This was true for the individual aswell as the community. The Hebrews, like the Egyptians, alsorecognized that much sickness arose from the individual’srelationship to the physical environment. Great stress was placed onhygiene and preventive medicine.

Pentateuchallegislation offered seven covenantal principles designed to preventthe possibility of disease and sickness: (1)Sabbath observancefor humans, animals, and the land, which enforced regular periods ofrest (Gen. 2:3); (2)dietary regulations, which divided foodinto efficient categories of clean and unclean (Lev. 11);(3)circumcision, which carried physical benefits as well asreligious and moral implications (Gen. 17:9; circumcision is the onlyexample of Hebrew surgery); (4)laws governing sexualrelationships and health, including a list of forbidden degrees ofmarital relationships (Lev. 18–20); (5)provisions forindividual sexual hygiene (Lev. 15); (6)stipulations forcleanliness and bodily purification (Lev. 14:2; 15:2); (7) sanitaryand hygienic regulations for camp life (Num. 31:19; Deut. 23:12).

InNT times magical charms and incantations were used along with folkremedies in an effort to cure disease. Jesus repudiated these means.He also suggested that sickness and disease were not directpunishments for sin (John 9:2). In the Sermon on the Mount (Matt.5–7), Jesus confirmed that the ethical and religious standardsof the new covenant promoted the total health of the community andthe individual.

CirculatoryDiseases

Nabalmost likely suffered a cerebrovascular accident or stroke (1Sam.25:36–38). After a heavy bout of drinking, his heart “died”(KJV; NIV: “failed”), and he became paralyzed, lapsedinto a coma, and died ten days later. Psalm 137:5–6 may containa clinical example of the symptoms of stroke. The psalmist wrote, “IfI forget you, Jerusalem, may my right hand forget its skill. May mytongue cling to the roof of my mouth if I do not remember you.”This description points to a paralysis of the right side of the body(right hemiplegia) and the loss of speech (motor aphasia) that resultfrom a stroke on the left side of the brain. Basically, the exiledpsalmist is wishing upon himself the effects of a stroke if he heldanything other than Jerusalem as his highest priority. Some haveconsidered the collapse of Uzzah when he reached out to stabilize theark of the covenant (2Sam. 6:6–7) to be the consequenceof an apoplectic seizure. But since no actual paralysis was describedand death occurred immediately, this seems unlikely. It is moreprobable that God struck him down with an aortic aneurism or acoronary thrombosis.

Paralysis

Apossible case of paralysis may be described in the shriveled(atrophic) hand of JeroboamI (1Kings 13:4–6). In anangry outburst Jeroboam ordered the arrest of a prophet who condemnedthe altar at Bethel. When Jeroboam stretched out his hand, it“shriveled up, so that he could not pull it back.”Several complicated diagnoses have been offered to explain the“withered” hand, but it is possibly an example ofcataplexy, a sudden loss of muscle power following a strong emotionalstimulus. After intercession by the man of God, and the subsiding ofthe emotional outburst, the arm was restored.

Thethreat against the faithless shepherd of God’s people (Zech.11:17), which included a withered arm and blindness in the right eye,may refer to a form of paralysis known as tabes dorsalis, orlocomotor ataxia. Knifelike pains in the extremities and blindnesscharacterize this disease.

Paralysisis frequently mentioned in the NT (Matt. 8:6; 9:2, 6; 12:10; Mark2:3–5, 9, 10; 3:1, 3, 5; Luke 5:18, 24; 6:6; John 5:3; Acts9:33; Heb. 12:12). The exact diagnosis for each of these casesremains uncertain.

Thephysician Luke’s use of the Greek medical term paralelymenos(Luke 5:18, 24) suggests that some of these cases were caused bychronic organic disease. Others clearly were congenital (Acts 3:2;cf. 14:8). It is not necessary to rationalize the origin of theseexamples of paralysis as hysteria or pretense. The NT writersregarded the healing of these individuals by Jesus and the apostlesas miraculous.

MentalIllness and Brain Disorders

Casesof mental disease are generally described in the Bible by noting thesymptoms produced by the disorder. The particular cause of a mentalillness in the NT is often blamed on an unknown evil spirit orspirits (Luke 8:2). Such spirits, however, were subject to God’scontrol and operated only within the boundaries allowed by him(1Sam. 16:14–16, 23; 18:10; 19:9). Accordingly, in the OT“madness” and “confusion of mind” wereregarded as consequences of covenantal disobedience (Deut. 28:28,34).

Ithas been argued that King Saul displayed early indications ofpersonality disorder. Symptoms included pride, self-aggrandizement(1Sam. 11:6; 13:12; 15:9, 19), and ecstatic behavior(10:11–12). A rapid deterioration in Saul’s charactertranspired after David was anointed and became more popular (16:14;18:10–11). Since Saul demonstrated fear, jealousy, a sense ofpersecution, and homicidal tendencies, some scholars argue that hesuffered from paranoid schizophrenia.

Nebuchadnezzarsuffered a rare form of monomania in which he lived like a wild beastin the field eating grass (Dan. 4:33). David, in order to save hisown life, feigned insanity or perhaps epilepsy before the Philistineking Achish (1Sam. 21:12–15).

Inthe NT, individuals with mental disorders went about naked, mutilatedthemselves, lived in tombs (Mark 5:2), and exhibited violent behavior(Matt. 8:28). Such mental disorientation was often linked to demonpossession. Examples include the Syrophoenician’s child (Matt.15:22; Mark 7:25), the demoniacs at Gerasa (Matt. 8:28; Mark 5:2;Luke 8:27) and Capernaum (Mark 1:23; Luke 4:33), a blind and mutedemoniac (Matt. 12:22; Luke 11:14), and a fortune-telling slave girl(Acts 16:16). While such behavior is clinically suggestive ofparanoid schizophrenia or other mental disorders, themind-controlling influence of some extraneous negative force cannotbe ruled out.

Epilepsy(grand mal) causes the afflicted person to fall to the ground, foamat the mouth, and clench or grind the teeth (Matt. 17:15; Mark9:17–18; Luke 9:39). The description of Saul falling to theground in an ecstatic state (1Sam. 19:23–24) and Balaamfalling with open eyes may be indicative of an epileptic seizure. Inthe NT, Jesus healed many who suffered from epilepsy (Matt. 4:24;17:14–18; Mark 9:17–18; Luke 9:38–42). Somescholars have linked the light seen by Paul on the road to Damascuswith the aura that some epileptics experience prior to a seizure. Hissubsequent blindness has also been attributed to the epilepticdisturbance of the circulation of the blood in the brain.

ChildhoodDiseases

Thecause of the death of the widow’s son at Zarephath is unknown(1Kings 17:17–22). The death of the Shunammite woman’sson has been attributed to sunstroke (2Kings 4:18–37),although a headache is the only symptom recorded (v.19). Inboth cases there is too little evidence to present an accuratediagnosis.

Inthe first case, the boy at Zarephath stopped breathing (1Kings17:17). This may leave the door open to argue that Elijahresuscitated the child. However, in the second case, the text clearlystates that the Shunammite boy died (2Kings 4:20), implying aresurrection.

Infectiousand Communicable Diseases

Feverand other calamities are listed among the punishments for covenantalinfidelity (Deut. 28:22). Three different types of fever may beintentionally described here: “fever,” “inflammation,”and “scorching heat” (ESV: “fiery heat”).Fever is also mentioned frequently in the NT (Matt. 8:15; Mark1:30–31; Luke 4:38–39; John 4:52; Acts 28:8). Both Jesusand Paul healed individuals who had a fever. A number of these feverswere likely caused by malaria, since the disease was known to beendemic to the Jordan Valley and other marshy areas in Palestine.

Severalepidemics in which numerous people died of pestilence or plague arementioned in the OT (Exod. 11:1; 12:13; Num. 14:37; Zech. 14:12). Thefifth plague of Egypt (Exod. 9:3–6) has been attributed toJordan Rift Valley fever, which is spread by flies. Bubonic plaguehas been blamed for the malady that struck the Philistines (1Sam.5–6). However, it may have been the result of a severe form oftropical dysentery. Acute bacillary dysentery contracted in themilitary camp may also have been responsible for the epidemic thatkilled a large number of the Assyrian army (2Kings 19:35).

ParasiticDiseases

Somescholars have repeatedly argued that the “fiery serpents”(NIV: “venomous snakes”) encountered by Moses and thechildren of Israel (Num. 21:6–9) were in reality an infestationof the parasitic guinea worm (Dracunculus medinensis). Microscopicfleas ingested in drinking water carry the larvae of this slendernematode into the body. The larvae move from the digestive tract tothe skin. The adult worm, which may grow to a length of several feet,discharges its eggs into an ulcer on the skin. Death of the hostoccurs because of the resulting infection of the skin ulcers.

Afterthe conquest of Jericho, Joshua cursed the individual who wouldendeavor to rebuild the city (Josh. 6:26). Later, Hiel of Bethelattempted to rebuild the city and lost two of his sons as a result ofthe curse (1Kings 16:34). Elisha was then asked to purify thebad water at Jericho in order to allow a new settlement (2Kings2:19). Elisha obliged by throwing salt into the spring and therebymaking the water potable (2:20–22). Recent archaeological studyhas discovered the remains of certain snails in the mud-bricks usedto construct Jericho in the Bronze Age. These types of snails are nowknown to serve as intermediate hosts for the flatworm parasite thatcan cause schistosomiasis. The Schistosoma haematobium trematodeinfects the urinary tract and the bladder. It is possible that thistype of parasite was responsible for the death of Hiel’s twosons.

InNT times, Herod Agrippa apparently died of the complications of aparasitic disease, perhaps being infested by the larvae of flies(myiasis) in the bowels. Luke mentions that he was “eaten byworms” (skōlēkobrōtos [Acts 12:23]). The fatherof Publius also suffered from dysentery (Acts 28:8).

PhysicalDeformities and Abnormalities

Individualswith deformities were disqualified from priestly service (Lev.21:18–20). The list included lameness, limb damage, anddwarfism. The deformities mentioned here might have been congenitalor acquired. Mephibosheth was dropped by his nurse (2 Sam. 4:4) andperhaps suffered damage to the spinal cord. Jacob possibly sustainedinjury to an intervertebral disk (Gen. 32:32) causing a deformity anda limp. The woman who was “bent over” (Luke 13:10–17)might have suffered from an abnormality of the spine similar toscoliosis. It is difficult to ascertain the origin of the “shriveledhand” of the unnamed individual healed by Jesus (Matt.12:10–13; Mark 3:1–5; Luke 6:6–10). It could becongenital in character or a paralysis caused by any number offactors.

Diseasesand Disabilities of the Eyes and Ears

Physicalblindness is mentioned several times in the Bible. Blindness excludedone from serving as a priest (Lev. 21:18, 20). Blindness anddeafness, however, were disabilities requiring special care from thecommunity (Lev. 19:14; Deut. 27:18). The “weak eyes” ofLeah may refer to an eye condition (Gen. 29:17).

Blindnessin the biblical world was caused by various factors. Leviticus 26:16speaks of a fever that destroys the eyes. Flies probably wereresponsible for much of the conjunctivitis found in children. John9:1 mentions congenital blindness, which Jesus cured using mud madefrom spittle and dirt (John 9:6). In Mark 8:22–26 Jesus healeda blind man by spitting in his eye and laying hands on him (cf. Matt.20:34 with Mark10:52).

Congenitaldeafness would also be associated with mutism and speech defectsbecause a child learning to speak depends on imitation and mimicry.Jesus healed a man who was deaf and could barely talk (Mark 7:32–37).The man’s inability to say much possibly pointed to a loss ofhearing early in life.

SkinConditions

Variousskin and hair abnormalities are described in the Bible. Some made theindividual unclean (Lev. 13:30; 14:54). The OT speaks of “theboils of Egypt” (Deut. 28:27; cf. Exod. 9:9). Skin ailmentsincluded tumors, festering sores, boils, infections, and the itch(Deut. 28:27, 35; Isa. 3:7). Job complained of a litany of ailments:broken and festering skin (7:5), multiple wounds (9:17), blackpeeling skin and fever (30:30), gnawing bone pain (2:5; 19:20;30:17), insomnia (7:3–4), and wasting away (33:21). Thesesymptoms have been diagnosed as indications of yaws or eczema. Apoultice made of figs cured Hezekiah’s boil (2Kings20:7).

Leprosywas once thought to be a common problem in the biblical world.Leprosy (Hansen’s disease) is a slow, progressive chronicinfectious disease caused by a bacterium. Symptoms include loss ofsensation and loss of parts of the body. Evidence for this type ofdisease in Palestine is rare. Uzziah may have had a true case ofHansen’s disease. He was quarantined until the day he died(2Chron. 26:21).

Scholarsnow suggest that the symptoms of the disease described in the Bibledo not fit this pattern and thus do not signify leprosy (Hansen’sdisease) as it is known today. Instead, the word that Englishversions translate as “leprosy” (Heb. root tsr’)probably refers to different types of infectious skin disease, oftencharacterized by a long-standing, patchy skin condition associatedwith peeling or flakiness and redness of skin. Evidence points moretoward psoriasis, fungal infections, or dermatitis.

Thisdisease could appear in humans (Lev. 14:2), on buildings (14:34), andon clothing (14:55). It was not limited to the extremities but couldoccur on the head (14:42–44). It could run its course quickly(13:5–8). It made the individual ceremonially unclean, but itwas also curable (Lev. 14:3; 2Kings 5:1–27). Individualswith the disease were not necessarily shunned (2Kings 7; Matt.26:6// Mark 14:3). Moses (Exod. 4:6), Miriam (Num. 12:10), andNaaman experienced this type of skin disease (2Kings 5:1–27).Jesus healed many suffering from skin ailments (Matt. 8:2–3;Mark 1:40–42; Luke 5:12–13), including the ten “menwho had leprosy” (Luke 17:12–14).

Ailmentsof an Unknown Nature

Somecases in the Bible present insufficient evidence for scholars torender a clear diagnosis. King Asa suffered a disease in his feet(2Chron. 16:12). However, in the OT the Hebrew expression for“feet” is sometimes used euphemistically for the sexualorgans (Judg. 3:24 KJV). Because of this, the exact nature of thedisease is ambiguous. Jehoram was afflicted with “an incurabledisease of the bowels” (2Chron. 21:18–19). Otherunknown ailments factor in the deaths of the firstborn son of Davidand Bathsheba (2Sam. 12:15), of Jeroboam’s son in infancy(1Kings 14:17), of Elisha (2Kings 13:14), and ofEzekiel’s wife (Ezek. 24:16).

The biblical corpus known as the Pentateuch consists of thefirst five books of the OT: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, andDeuteronomy. The word “Pentateuch” comes from two Greekwords (penta [“five”] and teuchos [“scroll case,book”]) and is a designation attested in the early churchfathers. The collection is also commonly known as the “FiveBooks of Moses,” “the Law of Moses,” or simply the“Law,” reflecting the traditional Jewish name “Torah,”meaning “law” or “instruction.” The Torah isthe first of three major sections that comprise the Hebrew Bible(Torah, Nebiim, Ketubim [Law, Prophets, Writings]); thus for bothJewish and Christian traditions it represents the introduction to theBible as a whole as well as its interpretive foundation.

TheEnglish names for the books of the Pentateuch came from the LatinVulgate, based on the Greek Septuagint. These appellations are mainlydescriptive of their content. Genesis derives from “generations”or “origin,” Exodus means “going out,”Leviticus represents priestly (Levitical) service, Numbers refers tothe censuses taken in the book, and Deuteronomy indicates “secondlaw” because of Moses’ rehearsal of God’s commands(see Deut. 17:18). The Hebrew designations derive from opening wordsin each book. Beresh*t (Genesis) means “in the beginning”;Shemot (Exodus), “[these are] the names”; Wayyiqra’(Leviticus), “and he called”; Bemidbar (Numbers), “inthe desert”; and Debarim (Deuteronomy), “[these are] thewords.”

Referringto the Pentateuch as “Torah” or the “Law”reflects the climactic reception of God’s commands at MountSinai, which were to govern Israel’s life and worship in thepromised land, including their journey to get there. However, callingthe Pentateuch the “Law” can be a bit misleading becausethere are relatively few passages that simply list a set of commands,and all law passages are set within a broad narrative. The Pentateuchis a grand story that begins on a universal scale with the creationof the cosmos and ends on the plains of Moab as the readeranticipates the fulfillment of God’s plan to redeem a fallenworld through his chosen people. The books offer distinct qualitiesand content, but they are also inherently dependent upon one another,as the narrative remains unbroken through the five volumes. Genesisends with Jacob’s family in Egypt, and, though many years havepassed, this is where Exodus begins. Leviticus outlines cultic lifeat the tabernacle (constructed at the end of Exodus) and even beginswithout a clear subject (“And he called...”),which requires the reader to supply “the Lord” from thelast verse of Exodus. Numbers begins with an account of Israel’sfighting men as the nation prepares to leave Sinai, and Deuteronomyis Moses’ farewell address to the nation on the cusp of thepromised land.

Authorshipand Composition

Althoughthe Pentateuch is technically an anonymous work, Jewish and Christiantradition attributes its authorship to Moses, the main figure of thestory from Exodus to Deuteronomy. The arguments for attributing theauthorship of the Pentateuch to Moses come from internal evidencewithin both Testaments. That Moses is responsible for at leastportions of the Pentateuch is suggested by references to his explicitliterary activity reflected within the narrative itself (Exod. 17:14;24:4; 34:28; Num. 33:2; Deut. 31:9, 22, 24), if not implied invarious literary formulas such as “the Lord said to Moses”(e.g., Exod. 39:1, 7, 21; Lev. 4:1; 11:1; 13:1; Num. 1:1; 2:1).Mosaic authorship receives support from the historical books, whichuse terms such as “the Book of the Law of Moses” invarious forms and references in the preexilic history (Josh. 8:30–35;23:6; 2Kings 14:6) as well as the postexilic history (e.g.,2Chron. 25:4; Ezra 6:18; Neh. 13:1). The same titles are usedby NT authors (e.g., Mark 12:26; Luke 24:44; John 1:45), evenreferring to the Pentateuch simply by the name “Moses” atvarious points (e.g., Luke 16:29; 24:27; 2Cor. 3:15).

Evenwith these examples, nowhere does the text explicitly state thatMoses is responsible for the entire compilation of the Pentateuch orthat he penned it with his own hand. Rather, a number of factorspoint to a later hand at work: Moses’ death and burial arereferenced (Deut. 34), the conquest of Canaan is referred to as past(Deut. 2:12), and there is evidence that the names of people andplaces were updated and explained for later generations (e.g., “Dan”in Gen. 14:14; cf. Josh. 19:47; Judg. 18:28b–29). Based onthese factors, it is reasonable to believe that the Pentateuchunderwent editorial alteration as it was preserved within Jewish lifeand took its final shape after Moses’ lifetime.

Overthe last century, the Documentary Hypothesis has dominated academicdiscussion of the Pentateuch’s composition. This theory wascrystallized by Julius Wellhausen in his Prolegomena to the Historyof Israel in the late nineteenth century and posits that thePentateuch originated from a variety of ancient sources derived fromdistinct authors and time periods that have been transmitted andjoined through a long and complex process. Traditionally thesedocuments are identified as J, E, D, and P. The J source is adocument authored by the “Yahwist” (German, Jahwist) inJudah around 840 BC and is so called because the name “Yahweh”is used frequently in its text. The E source stands for “Elohist”because of its preference for the divine title “Elohim”and was composed in Israel around 700 BC. The D source stands for“Deuteronomy” because it reflects material found in thatbook; it was composed sometime around Josiah’s reform in 621BC. The P document reflects material that priests would be concernedwith in the postexilic time period, approximately 500 BC. This theoryand its related forms stem from the scholarly concern over variousliterary characteristics such as the use of divine names; doubletsand duplications in the text; observable patterns of style,terminology, and themes; and alleged discrepancies in facts,descriptions, and geographic or historical perspective.

Variousdocumentary theories of composition have flourished over the lastcentury of pentateuchal scholarship and still have many adherents.However, lack of scholarly agreement about the dating and characterof the sources and the rise of other literary approaches to the texthave many conservative and liberal scholars calling into question theaccuracy and even interpretive benefit of the source theories.Moreover, if the literary observations used to create sourcedistinctions can be explained in other ways, then the DocumentaryHypothesis is significantly undermined.

Inits canonical form, the pentateuchal narrative combines artisticprose, poetry, and law to tell a dramatic history spanning thousandsof years. One could divide the story into six major sections:primeval history (Gen. 1–11), the patriarchs (Gen. 12–50),liberation from Egypt (Exod. 1–18), Sinai (Exod. 19:1–Num.10:10), wilderness journey (Num. 10:11–36:13), and Moses’farewell (Deuteronomy).

PrimevalHistory (Gen. 1–11)

Itis possible to divide Genesis into two parts based upon subjectmatter: the origin of creation and humankind’s call, fall, andpunishment (chaps 1–11), and the origin of a family that wouldbecome God’s conduit of salvation and blessing for the world(chaps. 12–50).

Theprimeval history comprises essentially the first eleven chapters ofGenesis, ending with the genealogy of Abraham in 11:26. Strictlyspeaking, 11:27 begins the patriarchal section with the sixthinstance of the toledot formula found in Genesis, referencingAbraham’s father, Terah. The Hebrew phrase ’elleh toledot(“these are the generations of”) occurs in eleven placesin Genesis and reflects a deliberate structural marker that one mayuse to divide the book into distinct episodes (2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1;11:10; 11:27; 25:12; 25:19; 36:1; 36:9; 37:2).

Genesisas we know it exhibits two distinct creation accounts in its firsttwo chapters. Although critical scholars contend that the differingaccounts reflect contradictory stories and different authors, it isjust as convenient to recognize that the two stories vary in styleand some content because they attempt to accomplish different aims.The first account, 1:1–2:3, is an artistic, poetic,symmetrical, and “heavenly” view of creation by atranscendent God, who spoke creation into being. In the secondaccount, 2:4–25, God is immanently involved with creation as heis present in a garden, breathes life into Adam’s nostrils,dialogues and problem-solves, fashions Eve from Adam’s side,and bestows warnings and commands. Both perspectives are foundationalfor providing an accurate view of God’s interaction withcreation in the rest of Scripture.

Asone progresses through chapters 1–11, the story quickly changesfrom what God has established as “very good” to discord,sin, and shame. Chapter 3 reflects the “fall” of humanityas Adam and Eve sin in eating from the forbidden tree in directdisobedience to God. The serpent shrewdly deceives the first couple,and thus all three incur God’s curses, which extend tounlimited generations. Sin that breaks the vertical relationshipbetween God and humanity intrinsically leads to horizontal strifebetween humans. Sin and disunity on the earth only intensify as onemoves from the murder story of Cain and Abel in chapter 4 to theflood in chapters 5–9. Violence, evil, and disorder have sopervaded the earth that God sends a deluge to wipe out all livingthings, save one righteous man and his family, along with an ark fullof animals. God makes the first covenant recorded in the biblicalnarrative with Noah (6:18), promising to save him from the flood ashe commands Noah to build an ark and gather food for survival. Noahfulfills all that God has commanded (6:22; 7:5), and God remembershis promise (8:1). This is the prototypical salvation story for therest of Scripture.

Chapter9 reflects a new start for humanity and all living things as thecreation mandate to “be fruitful and increase in number; fillthe earth and subdue it,” first introduced in 1:28, is restatedalong with the reminder that humankind is made in God’s image(1:27). Bearing the image involves new responsibilities andstipulations in the postdiluvian era (9:2–6). There will beenmity between humans and animals, animals are now appropriate food,and yet lifeblood will be specially revered. God still requiresaccountability for just and discriminate shedding of blood andorderly relationships, as he has proved in the deluge, but now herelinquishes this responsibility to humankind. In return, Godpromises never to destroy all flesh again, and he will set therainbow in the sky as a personal reminder. Like the covenant withNoah in 6:18, the postdiluvian covenant involves humankind fulfillingcommands (9:1–7) and God remembering his covenant (9:8–17),specially termed “everlasting” (9:16).

Theprimeval commentary on humankind’s unabating sinful condition(e.g., 6:5; 8:21) proves true as Noah becomes drunk and naked and hisson Ham (father of Canaan) shames him by failing to conceal hisfather’s negligence. Instead of multiplying, filling, andsubduing the earth as God has intended, humankind collaborates tomake a name for itself by building a sort of stairway to heavenwithin a special city (11:4). God foils such haughty plans byscattering the people across the earth and confusing their language.Expressed in an orderly chiastic structure, the story of the tower ofBabel demonstrates that God condescends (11:5) to set things straightwith humanity.

Patriarchs(Gen. 12–50)

Althoughthe primeval history is foundational for understanding the rest ofthe Bible, more space in Genesis is devoted to the patriarchalfigures Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph. In general, the Abrahamicnarrative spans chapters 12–25, the story of Isaac serves as atransition to the Jacob cycle of chapters 25–37, and the Josephnarrative finishes the book of Genesis in chapters 37–50.

Thetransition from the primeval history to the patriarchs (11:27–32)reveals how Abraham, the father of Israel, moves from the east andsettles in Harran as the family ventures to settle in Canaan. InHarran, Abraham receives the call of God’s redemptive plan,which reverberates through Scripture. God will bless him with land,make him a great nation, grant him special favor, and use him as aconduit of blessings to the world (12:1–3). In 11:30 is theindication that the barrenness of Abraham’s wife (Sarah)relates to the essence of God’s magnificent promises. How onebecomes great in name and number, secures enemy territory, and is tobless all peoples without a descendant becomes the compellingquestion of the Abrahamic narrative. The interchange betweenAbraham’s faith in God and his attempts to contrive covenantfulfillment colors the entire narrative leading up to chapter 22. Itis there that Abraham’s faith is ultimately put to the test asGod asks him to sacrifice the promised son, Isaac. Abraham passesGod’s faith test, and a ram is provided to take Isaac’splace. This everlasting covenant that was previously sealed by thesign of circumcision is climactically procured for future generationsthrough Abraham’s exemplary obedience (22:16–18; cf.15:1–21; 17:1–27).

Thepatriarchal stories that follow show that the Abrahamic promises arerenewed with subsequent generations (see 26:3–4; 28:13–14)and survive various threats to fulfillment. The story of Isaac servesmainly as a bridge to the Jacob cycle, as he exists primarily as apassive character in relation to Abraham and Jacob.

Deception,struggle, rivalry, and favoritism characterize the Jacob narrative,as first exemplified in the jostling of twin boys in Rebekah’swomb (25:22). Jacob supplants his twin brother, Esau, for thefirstborn’s blessing and birthright. He flees to Paddan Aram(northern Mesopotamia), marries two sisters, takes their maidservantsas concubines, and has eleven children, followed by a falling-outwith his father-in-law. Jacob’s struggle for God’sblessing that began with Esau comes to a head in his wrestlingencounter with God at Peniel. Ultimately, Jacob emerges victoriousand receives God’s blessing and a name change, “Israel”(“one who struggles with God”). Throughout the Jacobstory, God demonstrates his faithfulness to the Abrahamic covenantand reiterates the promises to Jacob, most notably at Bethel (chaps.28; 35). The interpersonal strife of Jacob’s life is thusenveloped within a message of reconciliation not just with Esau(chap. 33) but ultimately with God. The reader learns from theepisodes in Jacob’s life that although God works through thelives of weak and failing people, his promises for Israel remainsecure.

AlthoughJacob and his family are already living in Canaan, God intends forthem to move to Egypt and grow into a powerful nation beforefulfilling their conquest of the promised land (see 15:13–16).The story of Joseph explains how the family ends up in Egypt at theclose of Genesis. Joseph is specially loved by his father, whichelicits significant jealousy from his brothers, who sell him off tosome nomads and fabricate the alibi that he has been killed by a wildbeast. Joseph winds up in Pharaoh’s household and eventuallybecomes his top official. When famine strikes Canaan years later,Joseph’s brothers go to Egypt to purchase food from the royalcourt, and Joseph reveals his identity to them in an emotionalreunion. Jacob’s entire family moves to Egypt to live for atime in prosperity under Joseph’s care. The Joseph storyillustrates the mysterious relationship of human decision and divinesovereignty (50:20).

Liberationfrom Egypt (Exod. 1–18)

Genesisshows how Abraham develops into a large family. Exodus shows how thisfamily becomes a nation—enslaved, freed, and then taught theways of God. Although it appears that Exodus continues a rivetingstory of God’s chosen people, it is actually the identity andpower of God that take center stage.

Manyyears have passed since Joseph’s family arrived in Egypt. TheHebrews’ good standing in Egypt has also diminished as theirmultiplication and fruitfulness during the intervening period—justas God had promised Abraham (Gen. 17:4–8)—became anational threat to the Egyptians. Abraham’s family will spendtime in Egyptian slavery before being liberated with many possessionsin hand (cf. Gen. 15:13–14).

Inthe book of Exodus the drama of suffering and salvation serves as thevehicle for God’s self-disclosure to a single man, Moses. Mosesis an Israelite of destiny even from birth, as he providentiallyavoids infant death and rises to power and influence in Pharaoh’shousehold. Moses never loses his passion for his own people, and hekills an Egyptian who was beating a fellow Hebrew. Moses flees toobscurity in the desert, where he meets God and his call to lead hispeople out of Egypt and to the promised land (3:7–8; 6:8). Likethe days of Noah’s salvation, God has remembered his covenantwith the patriarchs and responded to the groans of his people inEgypt (2:24; 6:4–5; cf. Gen. 8:1). God reveals himself, and hispersonal name “Yahweh” (“I am”), to Moses inthe great theophany of the burning bush at Mount Horeb (Sinai), thesame place where later he will receive God’s law. Moses doubtshis own ability to carry out the task of confronting Pharaoh andleading the exodus, but God foretells that many amazing signs andwonders not only will make the escape possible but also willultimately reveal the mighty nature of God to the Hebrews, Egypt, andpresumably the world (6:7; 7:5).

Thispromise of creating a nation of his people through deliverance issuccinctly conveyed in the classic covenant formula that findssignificance in the rest of the OT: “I will take you as my ownpeople, and I will be your God” (6:7). Wielding great powerover nature and at times even human decision, God “hardens”Pharaoh’s heart and sends ten plagues to demonstrate his favorfor his own people and wrath against their enemy nation. The tenthplague on the firstborn of all in Egypt provides the context for thePassover as God spares the firstborn of Israel in response to theplacement of sacrificial blood on the doorposts of their homes.Pharaoh persists in the attempt to overtake the Israelites in thedesert, where the power of God climaxes in parting the Red Sea (orSea of Reeds). The Israelites successfully pass through, buttheEgyptian army drowns in pursuit. This is the great salvationevent of the OT.

Thesong of praise for God’s deliverance (15:1–21) quicklyturns to cries of groaning in the seventy days following the exodusas the people of the nation, grumbling about their circ*mstances inthe desert, quickly demonstrate their fleeting trust in the one whohas saved them (Exod. 15:22–18:27). When a shortage of waterand food confronts the people, their faith in God’s care provesshallow, and they turn on Moses. Even though the special marks ofGod’s protection have been evident in the wilderness throughthe pillars of cloud and fire, the angel of God, the provision ofmanna and quail, water from the rock, and the leadership of Moses,the nation continually fails God’s tests of trust and obedience(16:4; cf. 17:2; 20:20). Yet God continues to endure with his peoplethrough the leadership of Moses.

Sinai(Exod. 19:1–Num. 10:10)

Mostof the pentateuchal narrative takes place at Mount Sinai. It is therethat Israel receives national legislation and prescriptions for thetabernacle, the priesthood, feasts and festivals, and othercovenantal demands for living as God’s chosen people. Theeleven-month stay at Sinai takes the biblical reader through thecenter of the Pentateuch, covering approximately the last half ofExodus, all of Leviticus, and the first third of Numbers, before thenation leaves this sacred site and sojourns in the wilderness.Several key sections of the Pentateuch fall withinthe Sinaistory: the Decalogue (Exod. 20:1–17), the Book of the Covenant(Exod. 20:22–23:33), the tabernacle prescriptions (Exod.25–31), the tabernacle construction (Exod. 35–40), themanual on ritual worship (Lev. 1–7), and the Holiness Code(Lev. 17–27).

Theevents and instruction at Sinai are central to the Israelitereligious experience and reflect the third eternal covenant that Godestablishes in the Pentateuch—this time with Israel, wherebythe Sabbath is the sign (Exod. 31:16; cf. Noahic/rainbow covenant[Gen. 9:16] and the Abrahamic/circumcision covenant [Gen. 17:7, 13,19]). The offices of prophet and priest develop into clear view inthis portion of the Pentateuch. Moses exemplifies the dual propheticfunction of representing the people when speaking with God and, inturn, God when speaking to the people. The priesthood is bestowedupon Aaron and his descendants in Exodus and inaugurated within oneof the few narrative sections of Leviticus (Lev. 8–10). Thegiving of the law, the ark, the tabernacle, the priesthood, and theSabbath are all a part of God’s making himself “known”to Israel and the world, which is a constant theme in Exodus (see,e.g., 25:22; 29:43, 46; 31:13).

TheIsraelites’ stay at Sinai opens with one of the greatesttheophanies of the Bible: God speaks aloud to the people (Exod.19–20) and then is envisioned as a consuming fire (Exod. 24).After communicating the Ten Commandments (“ten words”)directly to the people (Exod. 34:28; Deut. 4:13; 10:4), Mosesmediates the rest of the detailed obligations that will govern thefuture life of the nation. The covenant is ratified in ceremonialfashion (Exod. 24), and the Israelites vow to fulfill all that hasbeen spoken. God expects Israel to be a holy nation (Exod. 19:6) withwhom he may dwell, but Moses descends Sinai only to find that theIsraelites have already violated the essence of the Decalogue byfashioning a golden calf to worship as that which delivered them fromEgypt (Exod. 32). This places Israel’s future and calling injeopardy, but Moses intercedes for his people, and God graciouslypromises to preserve the nation and abide with it in his mercy, evenwhile punishing the guilty. This becomes prototypical of God’srelationship with his people in the future (Exod. 34:6–7).

Exodusends with the consecration of the tabernacle and the descent of God’spresence there. With the tent of worship in order, the priesthood andits rituals can be officially established. Leviticus reflects divineinstructions for how a sinful people may live safely in closeproximity to God. Holy living involves dealing with sin andminimizing the need for atonement, purification, and restitution. Thesacrificial and worship system established in Leviticus is based on aworldview of order, perfection, and purity, which should characterizea people who are commanded, “Be holy because I, the Lord yourGod, am holy’ (Lev. 19:2; cf. 11:44–45; 20:26). Withthese rules in place, the Israelites can make final preparations todepart Sinai and move forward on their journey. Numbers 1–10spans a nineteen-day period of such activities as the Israelitesbegin to focus on dispossessing their enemies. These chapters reflecta census of fighting men, the priority of purity, the dedication ofthe tabernacle, and the observance of the Passover before commencingthe quest to Canaan.

WildernessJourney (Num. 10:11–36:13)

Therest of the book of Numbers covers the remainder of a forty-yearstretch of great peaks and valleys in the faith and future of thenation. Chapters 11–25 recount the various events that show theexodus generation’s lack of trust in God. Chapters 26–36reveal a more positive section whereby a new generation prepares forthe conquest. With the third section of Numbers framed by episodesinvolving the inheritance rights of Zelophehad’s daughters(27:1–11; 36:1–13), it is clear that the story has turnedtothe future possession of the land.

Afterthe departure from Sinai, the narrative consists of a number ofIsraelite complaints in the desert. The Israelites have grown tiredof manna and ironically crave the food of Egypt, which they recall asfree fish, fruits, and vegetables. Having forgotten the hardship oflife in slavery, about which they had cried out to God, now thenation is crying out for a lifestyle of old. Moses becomes sooverwhelmed with the complaints of the people that God providesseventy elders, who, to help shoulder the leadership burden, willreceive the same prophetic spirit given to Moses.

Inchapters 13–14 twelve spies are sent out from Kadesh Barnea toperuse Canaan, but the people’s lack of faith to procure theland from the mighty people there proves costly. This final exampleof distrust moves God to punish and purify the nation. Theunbelieving generation will die in the wilderness during a forty-yearperiod of wandering.

Thediscontent in the desert involves not only food and water but alsoleadership status. Moses’ own brother and sister resent hisspecial relationship with God and challenge his exclusive authority.Later, Aaron’s special high priesthood is threatened as anotherLevitical family (Korah) vies for preeminence. Through a sequence ofsigns and wonders, God makes it clear that Moses and Aaron haveexclusive roles in God’s economy. Due to the deaths related toKorah’s rebellion and the fruitless staffs that represent thetribes of Israel, the nation’s concern about sudden extinctionin the presence of a holy God is appeased through the eternalcovenant of priesthood granted to Aaron’s family (chap. 18). Heand the Levites, at the potential expense of their own lives and aspart of their priestly service, will be held accountable for keepingthe tabernacle pure of encroachers.

Evenafter the people’s significant rebellion and punishment, Godcontinues to prove his faithfulness to his word. Hope is restored forthe nation as the Abrahamic promises of blessing are rehearsed fromthe mouth of Balaam, a Mesopotamian seer. The Israelites will indeedone day be numerous (23:10), enjoy the presence of God (23:21), beblessed and protected (24:9), and have a kingly leader (24:17). Thiswonderful mountaintop experience of hope for the exodus generation istragically countered by an even greater event of apostasy in thesubsequent scene. Reminiscent of the incident of the golden calf,when pagan revelry in the camp had foiled Moses’ interactionwith God on Sinai, apostasy at the tabernacle undermines Balaam’soracles of covenant fulfillment. Fornication with Moabite women notonly joins the nation to a foreign god but also betrays God’sholiness at his place of dwelling. If not for the zeal of Aaron’sgrandson Phinehas, who puts an end to the sin, the ensuing plaguecould have finished the nation. For his righteous action, Phinehas isawarded an eternal priesthood and ensures a future for the nation andAaron’s priestly lineage.

Inchapter 26 a second census of fighting men indicates that the old,unbelieving exodus generation has officially died off (except forJoshua and Caleb), and God is proceeding with a new people. Goddispossesses the enemies of the new generation; reinstates the tribalboundaries of the land; reinstates rules concerning worship, service,and bloodshed; and places Joshua at the helm of leadership. Chapters26–36 mention no deaths or rebellions as the nationoptimistically ends its journey in Moab, just east of the promisedland.

Moses’Farewell (Deuteronomy)

Althoughone could reasonably move into the historical books at the end ofNumbers, much would be lost in overstepping Deuteronomy. Deuteronomypresents Moses’ farewell speeches as his final words to anation on the verge of Caanan. Moses’ speeches are best viewedas sermons motivating his people to embrace the Sinai covenant, lovetheir God, and choose life over death and blessings over cursings(30:19). Moses reviews the desert experience since Mount Horeb/Sinai(chaps. 1–4) and recapitulates God’s expectations forlawful living in the land (chaps. 5–26). The covenant code isrecorded on a scroll, is designated the “Book of the Law”(31:24–26), and is to be read and revered by the future king.Finally, Moses leads the nation in covenant renewal (chaps. 29–32)before the book finishes with an account of his death (chaps. 33–34),including tributes such as “since then, no prophet has risen inIsrael like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face” (34:10).

Deuteronomyreflects that true covenant faithfulness is achieved from a rightheart for God. If there were any previous doubts about the essence ofcovenant keeping, Moses eliminates such in Deuteronomy with thefrequent use of emotive terms. Loving God involves committing to himalone and spurning idols and foreign gods. The Ten Commandments(chap. 5) are not a list of stale requirements; they reflect thegreat Shema with the words “Love the Lord your God with allyour heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. Thesecommandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts”(6:5–6). God desires an unrivaled love from the nation, notcold and superficial religiosity.

Obedienceby the Israelites will incur material and spiritual blessing, whereasdisobedience ends in the loss of both. Although Moses stronglycommends covenant obedience, and the nation participates in acovenant-renewal ceremony (chap. 27), it is clear that in the futurethe Israelites will fail to uphold their covenant obligations andwill suffer the consequences (29:23; 30:1–4; 31:16–17).Yet Moses looks to a day when the command for circumcised hearts(10:16) will be fulfilled by the power of God himself (30:6). In thefuture a new king will arise from the nation (17:14–20) as wellas a prophet like Moses (18:15–22). Deuteronomy thusunderscores the extent of God’s own devotion to his patriarchalpromises despite the sinful nature of his people.

Formuch of the middle and end of the twentieth century, Deuteronomy hasreceived a significant amount of attention for its apparentresemblance in structure and content to ancient Hittite and Assyriantreaties. Scholars debate the extent of similarity, but it ispossible that Deuteronomy reflects a suzerain-vassal treaty formbetween Israel and God much like the common format between nations inthe ancient Near East. Although comparative investigation of thistype can be profitable for interpretation, it is prudent to beconservative when outlining direct parallels, since Deuteronomy isnot a legal document but rather a dramatic narrative of God’sredemptive interaction with the world.

The study of human beings, their nature and origins. TheChristian understanding of anthropology stems from a biblical view ofhumankind’s relationship to God.

TheOrigin of Humankind

Accordingto Genesis, the creation of humankind took place on the sixth day ofthe creation week. The amount of narrative space allotted to this day(Gen. 1:24–31) testifies to the special importance of whathappened. Human beings were made on the same day as the animals.Human beings were not given a day of their own, showing that theyhave a certain kinship with the animals, although they are far morethan highly successful and adaptive mammals. This has implicationsfor the care of animals and of the environment generally. The valueof human beings and their special place in the created order is clearin passages such as Pss. 8:5–6; 104:14–15.

Createdin the image of God.Whenit came to the making of human beings, God deliberated over thiscrucial step (Gen. 1:26). The plural of exhortation in “Let usmake man in our image” signals that the decision to makehumankind was the most important one that God had made so far.Genesis 1 says that human beings are like God in some way.

Variousopinions have been canvassed as to what the “image” is.We cannot totally exclude the physical form of humans, given God’shumanoid form in OT appearances (theophanies; e.g., Isa. 6:1; Ezek.1:26; Amos 9:1). The image has sometimes been interpreted as a task,the exercising of dominion (Gen. 1:28), with humanity appointed ascreation’s king, ruling under God. But the image is betterunderstood as the precondition for rule rather than rule itself. Theimage shows human worth (Gen. 9:6) and differentiates humans from allother creatures. It is proper for the Bible to use anthropomorphiclanguage for God, for humans are remarkably like God. Both male andfemale are in the image of God (“in the image of God he createdthem; male and female he created them” [1:27]), so that thedivine image is not maleness, nor is sexual differentiation theimage. Commonly, the image of God is thought to be some peculiarquality of human beings—for example, rationality, speech, moralsense, personality, humans as relational beings.

Everycentury has its own view of what is the essence of humanity. However,nothing in the passage allows a choice among such alternatives. Thepoint of the passage is simply the fact of the likeness, with noexact definition being provided. The fact of the image is the basisof the divine prohibition of murder and of the strict penalty appliedto the transgressor (9:4–6). The fall into sin affected everyaspect of the human constitution, and the Bible does not minimize thefact of human sinfulness (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Rom. 3:10–18);nevertheless, humans are still in the image of God (Gen. 5:1–3;9:6; 1 Cor. 11:7). God’s plan of salvation is aimed atridding creation (and especially humanity) of the baneful effects ofsin, and this will be achieved through the work of Christ, who is theimage of God (2 Cor. 4:4; Col. 1:15–20; Heb. 1:1–3;2:5–18). The outcome will be the conformity of believers inChrist to his glorious image (Rom. 8:29–30; 2 Cor. 3.18).

Placein the created order.God’s purpose in giving human beings the divine image is “sothey may rule” (NET [Gen. 1:26b translated as a purposeclause]). The syntax suggests that the image is a presupposition ofdominion. It is plain that such a delegated authority makes humansstewards. The vegetarian diet of Gen.1:29 (there was no eating ofmeat at first) represents a limitation to the human right ofdominion. Adam’s naming of the animals was (in part) expressiveof his sovereignty over them (2:19). Later, Noah was charged to bringpairs of animals into the ark to preserve them alive (6:19–20),showing care for other creatures. The patriarchs tended flocks(13:2–9; 26:12–14), and Joseph’s relief measuressaved the lives of people and animals (47:15–18). The wantondestruction of the Promised Land was expressly forbidden (Deut.20:19–20). Humanity is accountable to God for the stewardshipof the earth. The divine command “be fruitful and multiply”(Gen. 1:28 NRSV) shows that God’s purpose is that the humanrace populate the whole earth.

AtGen. 2:7 the biblical narrative becomes thoroughly anthropocentric,picturing the little world that God establishes around the first man,so this account is quite different from the cosmic presentation ofGen. 1. In Gen. 1 humankind is the apex of a pyramid, the last andhighest of a series of creatures; in Gen. 2 the man is the center ofa circle, everything else made to fit around him, and his connectionto the physical earth is emphasized. In either view, a very specialplace is given to human beings in the created order. The two picturesare complementary, not contradictory.

The“man” (’adam) is formed from the “ground”(’adamah), with the related Hebrew words making a pun. Man’sname reminds him of his earthy origins. He is made from the “dust,”which hints at his coming death. He will return to the dust (Gen.3:19; cf. Job 10:8–9; Ps. 103:14; Isa. 29:16). The reference to“the breath of life” (Gen. 2:7) is due to the fact thatthis leaves a person at death (Job 34:14–15; Ps. 104:29–30),so man’s (potential) mortality is implied. Ironically, themaking of man is described using the language of death. What isdescribed in Gen. 2 is the making of the first man, from whom therest of the human race has descended, not the making of humankind,though the word ’adam can mean that in other contexts.

TheNature of Humankind

Body,soul, and spirit.Arguments over whether human nature is bipartite (body and soul) ortripartite (body, soul, spirit) are not to be decided by arbitraryappeal to isolated verses. Verses can be found in apparent supportfor both the first view (e.g., Matt. 10:28) and the second (e.g.,1 Thess. 5:23), but certainly the first scheme is much moreprevalent in the Bible. “Soul” and “spirit”can be used interchangeably (Eccles. 3:21; 12:7; Ezek. 18:31). Deathis marked by the parting of soul/spirit and body, but it would be amistake to think that human beings are made up of separate componentparts, or that the physical body is only a dispensable shell and notessential to true humanity. The physicality of human existence in the“body” is owned and celebrated in Scripture, part of thatbeing the positive attitude to sexuality when properly expressed(Song of Songs; 1 Cor. 7) and the nonascetic nature of biblicalethics (1 Cor. 10:31; Col. 2:23). The doctrine of theresurrection of the body is the fullest expression of this (1 Cor.15), in contrast to ancient Greek thought that viewed the body asinherently evil and understood salvation as the immortality of theliberated, disembodied soul.

Thedifferent words used in relation to persons are only intended torefer to and at times focus on different aspects of unified humannature. References to the “soul” may stress individualresponsibility (e.g., Ezek. 18:4 NASB: “The soul who sins willdie”). In Ps. 103:1–2, “O my soul” expressesemphatic self-encouragement to praise God and is in parallel with“all my inmost being”—that is, “my wholebeing” (an example of synecdoche: a part standing for the whole[cf. Ps. 35:10]). These are ways of referring to oneself as a personwho expresses will and intention (cf. Ps. 42:5–6, 11). The“flesh” is used to stress the weakness of mortal humanity(e.g., Isa. 40:6 RSV: “All flesh is grass”). The “heart”is the volitional center of a human being (Prov. 4:23; cf. Mark7:17–23). The emotional and empathetic reactions of humans aredescribed by reference to the organs: “liver,” “kidneys,”“bowels.”

Moralsand responsibility.In Gen. 2 the complexities of the man’s moral relation to Godand his relations with the soil, with the animals, and with the womanare explored. God deposited the man in the garden “to work itand take care of it” (2:15). The words chosen to designate theman’s work prior to the fall have an aura of worship aboutthem, for they are later used in the OT for the cultic actions ofserving and guarding within the sanctuary. The priests served byoffering sacrifices, and the Levites guarded the gates of the sacredprecinct. A theology of work as a religious vocation is presented.The man was a kind of king-priest in the garden of God.

Themoral responsibility of humanity is signaled from the beginning.God’s command gives permission for the man to eat from “anytree” except one (Gen. 2:16–17) and as such indicatesman’s freedom, so that this command is no great restriction.The wording “you are free to eat” reinforces the pointabout God’s generous provision. The prohibition is embedded inthe description of God’s fatherly care for the man and graciousact in placing him in the garden. The divine restriction is slightand not at all overbearing, though the serpent will seek to make itappear mean-spirited (3:1). The command and prohibition are the veryfirst words of God to the man, marking them out as of fundamentalimportance for the relationship between them. The prohibition (“youmust not eat . . .”) is an absolute one in thestyle of the Decalogue (Exod. 20:1–17; Deut. 5:6–21).What is placed before the man is a test that gives him theopportunity to express his loyalty to God. A relationship ofobedience and trust requires the possibility of choice and theopportunity to disobey (if that is what he wants to do). The moralnature and responsibility of individuals is not a late discovery bythe prophet Ezekiel (Ezek. 18); rather, it is the presuppositionbehind the Mosaic law, for the commands of the Decalogue (“youshall not . . .”) are phrased as commands toindividuals (as the Hebrew makes clear). On the other hand, theconcept of corporate responsibility is also present (e.g., Achan’spunishment in Josh. 7).

Relationships.Human beings are relational by nature, as the creation of the womanas a helper and partner for the first man makes plain (Gen. 2:18–25).Later in Scripture this is put in more general terms, so thatfriendship and mutual cooperation are shown to be essential to life(Eccles. 4:7–12). The body life of the church reflects the samefact and need (1 Cor. 12). In Psalms, human needs andvulnerability find their answer and fulfillment in God, with thepsalmist acknowledging his frailty and his creaturely dependence onGod (e.g., Ps. 90). This also shows the folly of sinful human pride,against which the prophets so often inveighed (e.g., Isa. 2:9,11–17, 22).

(Disabilities; Disability; Deformity; Deformities; Sickness]The Bible often speaks of health, healing, disease, andillness. Good health was a sign of God’s favor, and healing wasalso the work of God and his divinely empowered agents. These agentsincluded the prophets (1Kings 17:8–23; 2Kings5:1–15), the apostles (Acts 3:1–10), and the messiah(Mal. 4:2). The divine prerogative of Jesus was to heal (Mark 1:32;6:56; Matt. 4:23; 8:16; 15:30; 21:14; Luke 6:10, 17–19), andmiraculous healings were a sign of his messianic office (Luke7:20–23). Disease, on the other hand, was regarded as a sign ofGod’s disfavor. Within a covenantal context, God could senddisease to punish the sinner (Exod. 4:11; 32:35).

TheBible assigns a wide variety of names to various diseases and theirsymptoms. These terms are nontechnical and generally descriptive.Some are uncertain in meaning. In most cases they describe thesymptoms of the disease, not the disease itself. Diagnosis often wasbased on incomplete observation and nonclinical examination. TheBible also presupposes supernatural intervention in the life of aperson. Healing occurred when God’s agents touched individuals,cast out demons, and resurrected the dead.

AncientNear Eastern Influences

Inthe ancient Near East the knowledge of disease and medicine wasprecritical. Bacteria and viruses were virtually unknown.Mesopotamian literature contains many references to medicine,physicians, and medical practice. Minerals, salts, herbs, and otherbotanicals were used to make up treatments. Babylonian physiciansalso administered prescriptions accompanied by incantations. Diseasewas considered to be the result of a violation of a taboo orpossession by a demon. The Code of Hammurabi (1750 BC) includes lawsregulating the practice of medicine and surgery by physicians. InEgypt medicine and healing were connected to the gods. Tomb paintingsand several papyrus documents describe the developing state ofEgyptian medicine, pharmacy, and surgery.

Greekphysicians admired and sought to learn the skills of the Egyptians.However, the early Greek doctor Hippocrates (460–370 BC),called the “Father of Medicine,” is credited with beingthe first physician to reject the belief that supernatural or divineforces cause illness. He argued that disease is the result ofenvironmental factors, diet, and living habits, not a punishmentimposed by the gods.

Itis clear that the biblical world shared with the ancient Near Eastthe same types of maladies common to tropical or subtropicalclimates. These include malaria, tropical fevers, dysentery, andsunstroke. The tendency of the hot climate to produce frequentdroughts and famine certainly contributed to similar types ofdiseases throughout the Fertile Crescent. Additionally, it must beremembered that Palestine was a land bridge between the Mesopotamianand Egyptian worlds. Migrations carry not only goods and products,but also parasites, communicable disease, and epidemics.

BiblicalConcept of Disease

Thereligious tradition of the Hebrews repudiated the magical or demonicorigin of disease. Hence, moral, ethical, and spiritual factorsregulated disease and illness. This was true for the individual aswell as the community. The Hebrews, like the Egyptians, alsorecognized that much sickness arose from the individual’srelationship to the physical environment. Great stress was placed onhygiene and preventive medicine.

Pentateuchallegislation offered seven covenantal principles designed to preventthe possibility of disease and sickness: (1)Sabbath observancefor humans, animals, and the land, which enforced regular periods ofrest (Gen. 2:3); (2)dietary regulations, which divided foodinto efficient categories of clean and unclean (Lev. 11);(3)circumcision, which carried physical benefits as well asreligious and moral implications (Gen. 17:9; circumcision is the onlyexample of Hebrew surgery); (4)laws governing sexualrelationships and health, including a list of forbidden degrees ofmarital relationships (Lev. 18–20); (5)provisions forindividual sexual hygiene (Lev. 15); (6)stipulations forcleanliness and bodily purification (Lev. 14:2; 15:2); (7) sanitaryand hygienic regulations for camp life (Num. 31:19; Deut. 23:12).

InNT times magical charms and incantations were used along with folkremedies in an effort to cure disease. Jesus repudiated these means.He also suggested that sickness and disease were not directpunishments for sin (John 9:2). In the Sermon on the Mount (Matt.5–7), Jesus confirmed that the ethical and religious standardsof the new covenant promoted the total health of the community andthe individual.

CirculatoryDiseases

Nabalmost likely suffered a cerebrovascular accident or stroke (1Sam.25:36–38). After a heavy bout of drinking, his heart “died”(KJV; NIV: “failed”), and he became paralyzed, lapsedinto a coma, and died ten days later. Psalm 137:5–6 may containa clinical example of the symptoms of stroke. The psalmist wrote, “IfI forget you, Jerusalem, may my right hand forget its skill. May mytongue cling to the roof of my mouth if I do not remember you.”This description points to a paralysis of the right side of the body(right hemiplegia) and the loss of speech (motor aphasia) that resultfrom a stroke on the left side of the brain. Basically, the exiledpsalmist is wishing upon himself the effects of a stroke if he heldanything other than Jerusalem as his highest priority. Some haveconsidered the collapse of Uzzah when he reached out to stabilize theark of the covenant (2Sam. 6:6–7) to be the consequenceof an apoplectic seizure. But since no actual paralysis was describedand death occurred immediately, this seems unlikely. It is moreprobable that God struck him down with an aortic aneurism or acoronary thrombosis.

Paralysis

Apossible case of paralysis may be described in the shriveled(atrophic) hand of JeroboamI (1Kings 13:4–6). In anangry outburst Jeroboam ordered the arrest of a prophet who condemnedthe altar at Bethel. When Jeroboam stretched out his hand, it“shriveled up, so that he could not pull it back.”Several complicated diagnoses have been offered to explain the“withered” hand, but it is possibly an example ofcataplexy, a sudden loss of muscle power following a strong emotionalstimulus. After intercession by the man of God, and the subsiding ofthe emotional outburst, the arm was restored.

Thethreat against the faithless shepherd of God’s people (Zech.11:17), which included a withered arm and blindness in the right eye,may refer to a form of paralysis known as tabes dorsalis, orlocomotor ataxia. Knifelike pains in the extremities and blindnesscharacterize this disease.

Paralysisis frequently mentioned in the NT (Matt. 8:6; 9:2, 6; 12:10; Mark2:3–5, 9, 10; 3:1, 3, 5; Luke 5:18, 24; 6:6; John 5:3; Acts9:33; Heb. 12:12). The exact diagnosis for each of these casesremains uncertain.

Thephysician Luke’s use of the Greek medical term paralelymenos(Luke 5:18, 24) suggests that some of these cases were caused bychronic organic disease. Others clearly were congenital (Acts 3:2;cf. 14:8). It is not necessary to rationalize the origin of theseexamples of paralysis as hysteria or pretense. The NT writersregarded the healing of these individuals by Jesus and the apostlesas miraculous.

MentalIllness and Brain Disorders

Casesof mental disease are generally described in the Bible by noting thesymptoms produced by the disorder. The particular cause of a mentalillness in the NT is often blamed on an unknown evil spirit orspirits (Luke 8:2). Such spirits, however, were subject to God’scontrol and operated only within the boundaries allowed by him(1Sam. 16:14–16, 23; 18:10; 19:9). Accordingly, in the OT“madness” and “confusion of mind” wereregarded as consequences of covenantal disobedience (Deut. 28:28,34).

Ithas been argued that King Saul displayed early indications ofpersonality disorder. Symptoms included pride, self-aggrandizement(1Sam. 11:6; 13:12; 15:9, 19), and ecstatic behavior(10:11–12). A rapid deterioration in Saul’s charactertranspired after David was anointed and became more popular (16:14;18:10–11). Since Saul demonstrated fear, jealousy, a sense ofpersecution, and homicidal tendencies, some scholars argue that hesuffered from paranoid schizophrenia.

Nebuchadnezzarsuffered a rare form of monomania in which he lived like a wild beastin the field eating grass (Dan. 4:33). David, in order to save hisown life, feigned insanity or perhaps epilepsy before the Philistineking Achish (1Sam. 21:12–15).

Inthe NT, individuals with mental disorders went about naked, mutilatedthemselves, lived in tombs (Mark 5:2), and exhibited violent behavior(Matt. 8:28). Such mental disorientation was often linked to demonpossession. Examples include the Syrophoenician’s child (Matt.15:22; Mark 7:25), the demoniacs at Gerasa (Matt. 8:28; Mark 5:2;Luke 8:27) and Capernaum (Mark 1:23; Luke 4:33), a blind and mutedemoniac (Matt. 12:22; Luke 11:14), and a fortune-telling slave girl(Acts 16:16). While such behavior is clinically suggestive ofparanoid schizophrenia or other mental disorders, themind-controlling influence of some extraneous negative force cannotbe ruled out.

Epilepsy(grand mal) causes the afflicted person to fall to the ground, foamat the mouth, and clench or grind the teeth (Matt. 17:15; Mark9:17–18; Luke 9:39). The description of Saul falling to theground in an ecstatic state (1Sam. 19:23–24) and Balaamfalling with open eyes may be indicative of an epileptic seizure. Inthe NT, Jesus healed many who suffered from epilepsy (Matt. 4:24;17:14–18; Mark 9:17–18; Luke 9:38–42). Somescholars have linked the light seen by Paul on the road to Damascuswith the aura that some epileptics experience prior to a seizure. Hissubsequent blindness has also been attributed to the epilepticdisturbance of the circulation of the blood in the brain.

ChildhoodDiseases

Thecause of the death of the widow’s son at Zarephath is unknown(1Kings 17:17–22). The death of the Shunammite woman’sson has been attributed to sunstroke (2Kings 4:18–37),although a headache is the only symptom recorded (v.19). Inboth cases there is too little evidence to present an accuratediagnosis.

Inthe first case, the boy at Zarephath stopped breathing (1Kings17:17). This may leave the door open to argue that Elijahresuscitated the child. However, in the second case, the text clearlystates that the Shunammite boy died (2Kings 4:20), implying aresurrection.

Infectiousand Communicable Diseases

Feverand other calamities are listed among the punishments for covenantalinfidelity (Deut. 28:22). Three different types of fever may beintentionally described here: “fever,” “inflammation,”and “scorching heat” (ESV: “fiery heat”).Fever is also mentioned frequently in the NT (Matt. 8:15; Mark1:30–31; Luke 4:38–39; John 4:52; Acts 28:8). Both Jesusand Paul healed individuals who had a fever. A number of these feverswere likely caused by malaria, since the disease was known to beendemic to the Jordan Valley and other marshy areas in Palestine.

Severalepidemics in which numerous people died of pestilence or plague arementioned in the OT (Exod. 11:1; 12:13; Num. 14:37; Zech. 14:12). Thefifth plague of Egypt (Exod. 9:3–6) has been attributed toJordan Rift Valley fever, which is spread by flies. Bubonic plaguehas been blamed for the malady that struck the Philistines (1Sam.5–6). However, it may have been the result of a severe form oftropical dysentery. Acute bacillary dysentery contracted in themilitary camp may also have been responsible for the epidemic thatkilled a large number of the Assyrian army (2Kings 19:35).

ParasiticDiseases

Somescholars have repeatedly argued that the “fiery serpents”(NIV: “venomous snakes”) encountered by Moses and thechildren of Israel (Num. 21:6–9) were in reality an infestationof the parasitic guinea worm (Dracunculus medinensis). Microscopicfleas ingested in drinking water carry the larvae of this slendernematode into the body. The larvae move from the digestive tract tothe skin. The adult worm, which may grow to a length of several feet,discharges its eggs into an ulcer on the skin. Death of the hostoccurs because of the resulting infection of the skin ulcers.

Afterthe conquest of Jericho, Joshua cursed the individual who wouldendeavor to rebuild the city (Josh. 6:26). Later, Hiel of Bethelattempted to rebuild the city and lost two of his sons as a result ofthe curse (1Kings 16:34). Elisha was then asked to purify thebad water at Jericho in order to allow a new settlement (2Kings2:19). Elisha obliged by throwing salt into the spring and therebymaking the water potable (2:20–22). Recent archaeological studyhas discovered the remains of certain snails in the mud-bricks usedto construct Jericho in the Bronze Age. These types of snails are nowknown to serve as intermediate hosts for the flatworm parasite thatcan cause schistosomiasis. The Schistosoma haematobium trematodeinfects the urinary tract and the bladder. It is possible that thistype of parasite was responsible for the death of Hiel’s twosons.

InNT times, Herod Agrippa apparently died of the complications of aparasitic disease, perhaps being infested by the larvae of flies(myiasis) in the bowels. Luke mentions that he was “eaten byworms” (skōlēkobrōtos [Acts 12:23]). The fatherof Publius also suffered from dysentery (Acts 28:8).

PhysicalDeformities and Abnormalities

Individualswith deformities were disqualified from priestly service (Lev.21:18–20). The list included lameness, limb damage, anddwarfism. The deformities mentioned here might have been congenitalor acquired. Mephibosheth was dropped by his nurse (2 Sam. 4:4) andperhaps suffered damage to the spinal cord. Jacob possibly sustainedinjury to an intervertebral disk (Gen. 32:32) causing a deformity anda limp. The woman who was “bent over” (Luke 13:10–17)might have suffered from an abnormality of the spine similar toscoliosis. It is difficult to ascertain the origin of the “shriveledhand” of the unnamed individual healed by Jesus (Matt.12:10–13; Mark 3:1–5; Luke 6:6–10). It could becongenital in character or a paralysis caused by any number offactors.

Diseasesand Disabilities of the Eyes and Ears

Physicalblindness is mentioned several times in the Bible. Blindness excludedone from serving as a priest (Lev. 21:18, 20). Blindness anddeafness, however, were disabilities requiring special care from thecommunity (Lev. 19:14; Deut. 27:18). The “weak eyes” ofLeah may refer to an eye condition (Gen. 29:17).

Blindnessin the biblical world was caused by various factors. Leviticus 26:16speaks of a fever that destroys the eyes. Flies probably wereresponsible for much of the conjunctivitis found in children. John9:1 mentions congenital blindness, which Jesus cured using mud madefrom spittle and dirt (John 9:6). In Mark 8:22–26 Jesus healeda blind man by spitting in his eye and laying hands on him (cf. Matt.20:34 with Mark10:52).

Congenitaldeafness would also be associated with mutism and speech defectsbecause a child learning to speak depends on imitation and mimicry.Jesus healed a man who was deaf and could barely talk (Mark 7:32–37).The man’s inability to say much possibly pointed to a loss ofhearing early in life.

SkinConditions

Variousskin and hair abnormalities are described in the Bible. Some made theindividual unclean (Lev. 13:30; 14:54). The OT speaks of “theboils of Egypt” (Deut. 28:27; cf. Exod. 9:9). Skin ailmentsincluded tumors, festering sores, boils, infections, and the itch(Deut. 28:27, 35; Isa. 3:7). Job complained of a litany of ailments:broken and festering skin (7:5), multiple wounds (9:17), blackpeeling skin and fever (30:30), gnawing bone pain (2:5; 19:20;30:17), insomnia (7:3–4), and wasting away (33:21). Thesesymptoms have been diagnosed as indications of yaws or eczema. Apoultice made of figs cured Hezekiah’s boil (2Kings20:7).

Leprosywas once thought to be a common problem in the biblical world.Leprosy (Hansen’s disease) is a slow, progressive chronicinfectious disease caused by a bacterium. Symptoms include loss ofsensation and loss of parts of the body. Evidence for this type ofdisease in Palestine is rare. Uzziah may have had a true case ofHansen’s disease. He was quarantined until the day he died(2Chron. 26:21).

Scholarsnow suggest that the symptoms of the disease described in the Bibledo not fit this pattern and thus do not signify leprosy (Hansen’sdisease) as it is known today. Instead, the word that Englishversions translate as “leprosy” (Heb. root tsr’)probably refers to different types of infectious skin disease, oftencharacterized by a long-standing, patchy skin condition associatedwith peeling or flakiness and redness of skin. Evidence points moretoward psoriasis, fungal infections, or dermatitis.

Thisdisease could appear in humans (Lev. 14:2), on buildings (14:34), andon clothing (14:55). It was not limited to the extremities but couldoccur on the head (14:42–44). It could run its course quickly(13:5–8). It made the individual ceremonially unclean, but itwas also curable (Lev. 14:3; 2Kings 5:1–27). Individualswith the disease were not necessarily shunned (2Kings 7; Matt.26:6// Mark 14:3). Moses (Exod. 4:6), Miriam (Num. 12:10), andNaaman experienced this type of skin disease (2Kings 5:1–27).Jesus healed many suffering from skin ailments (Matt. 8:2–3;Mark 1:40–42; Luke 5:12–13), including the ten “menwho had leprosy” (Luke 17:12–14).

Ailmentsof an Unknown Nature

Somecases in the Bible present insufficient evidence for scholars torender a clear diagnosis. King Asa suffered a disease in his feet(2Chron. 16:12). However, in the OT the Hebrew expression for“feet” is sometimes used euphemistically for the sexualorgans (Judg. 3:24 KJV). Because of this, the exact nature of thedisease is ambiguous. Jehoram was afflicted with “an incurabledisease of the bowels” (2Chron. 21:18–19). Otherunknown ailments factor in the deaths of the firstborn son of Davidand Bathsheba (2Sam. 12:15), of Jeroboam’s son in infancy(1Kings 14:17), of Elisha (2Kings 13:14), and ofEzekiel’s wife (Ezek. 24:16).

An intimate, exclusive, lifelong covenant relationshipbetween a man and a woman wherein a new family is established.

Theologyof Marriage

Thebiblical basis for marriage is recorded in Gen. 2:18–24, whichestablishes a number of important points relating to marriage.

First,in Gen. 2:18 God highlights the first expressed inadequacy withincreation: the man is alone. The solution to the man’s solitudeis found not among the animals (a fact demonstrated by the carefulsearch expressed by having the man name each of them) but in acreature specifically created to address the problem of his solitude:woman. She is created from his “rib” (a bettertranslation is “side”), so that she is more like him thanany of the animals. In spite of this, she is not a clone, but rathera complement to him. She is described as a “helper suitable forhim,” which highlights her fulfillment of the inadequacy Godhad previously identified.

Second,the role of the wife is not restricted to providing a means by whichto fulfill the command to fill the earth (through bearing children),for the problem identified in Gen. 2:18 cannot be reduced to thisalone. The OT establishes that human beings are relational andsocial, and that isolation is not good, quite aside fromconsiderations relating to childbearing. Indeed, when marriage isemployed as a metaphor for the relationship between God and hispeople (see below), it can be conceptualized quite apart from thenotion of procreation, suggesting that the latter should not beconsidered the primary purpose of marriage.

Third,Gen. 2:23 describes the relationship between the man and the woman interms strongly reminiscent of the traditional kinship formula usedwith reference to family members elsewhere in the OT: “bone ofmy bones, and flesh of my flesh” (cf., e.g., Gen. 29:14; Judg.9:2; 2Sam. 5:1; 19:13–14—similar to the modernEnglish expression “my flesh and blood”; see also Matt.19:5; Eph. 5:31). Although “be united” (othertranslations use “cleave”) and “one flesh”are frequently understood to refer to sexual union, this is not theonly, or even the primary, implication of the words. Genesis 2:24expresses the unification of the husband and the wife as theantithesis of the man’s leaving his father and mother. Theseterms (“leave” or “forsake,” “beunited” or “cleave”) are used elsewhere incovenantal contexts. “Cleave” is usually used of peoplein the sense of clinging to another out of affection and loyalty(Gen. 34:3; Ruth 1:14; 2Sam. 20:2; 1Kings 11:2). It isalso frequently used of Israel clinging to God (Deut. 10:20; 11:22;13:5; 30:20; Josh. 22:5; 23:8). “Forsake” is used ofbreaking covenants (Deut. 12:19; 14:27; 29:25; Jer. 1:16; 2:13, 17,19; 5:7; 16:11; 17:13; 19:4; 22:9). The verb also appears in thecontext of marital divorce in Prov. 2:16–17; Isa. 54:6; 62:4.

Theimplication of Gen. 2:24 is that the man was formerly “united”to his parents in a familial relationship, but when he marries, thecovenantal relationship with his parents is superseded by the newrelationship with his wife. Thus, in establishing the covenantalrelationship of marriage, the man and the woman form a new familyunit (they become “one flesh,” which parallels thekinship formula more fully expressed in Gen. 2:23). It is noteworthythat Gen. 2 thus defines a family as husband and wife; a family isformed before any children are born. Furthermore, the emphasis on thepriority of the relationship between husband and wife is particularlystriking, given both the importance of honoring one’s parents(Exod. 20:12; Deut. 5:16) and the distinctly patrilocal nature ofinheritance whereby sons would remain in the parents’ householdafter marriage and ultimately inherit a share of it, but daughterswould leave their parents’ house to be with their husbands.

Fourth,the description of the woman as the man’s “helper”cannot alone be used to demonstrate that the wife’s role waseither subordinate or superior to her husband’s. Although theterm is elsewhere often used as a description of God, it is also usedof subordinate helpers, and other contextual indications determinethe relative status of the helper aside from the use of the termitself.

Marriagein the Old Testament

TheBible presents few formal legal, liturgical, or cultic requirementsfor marriage (whereas there are specific laws dealing with divorce),although it does record some details of specific marriages from whichsome insight into marriage practices can be gleaned. Marriages oftenwere established through an arrangement between the parents of thehusband and those of the wife or between the husband and the parentsof his prospective wife (e.g., Gen. 24; 38:6), but there appears tobe some diversity, with examples of a man choosing his own wife(e.g., Judah in Gen. 38:2) or instances when the consent of the womanis sought (e.g., Gen. 24:8, 58). The requirement of a formalcertificate for divorce (Deut. 24:1, 3), together with examples ofmarriage contracts from the ancient Near East, are possible evidencethat marriage within Israel required certification, although there isno explicit confirmation of this in the OT or in Israel prior to therabbinic period. The marriages recorded in the OT often involvedfeasts of varying duration (Gen. 29:22; Judg. 14:12), the bride beingaccompanied to her home in a festive procession that included musicand singing (Ps. 78:63; Jer. 7:34; 16:9), and a blessing pronouncedover the bride that she might bear many children (Gen. 24:60; Ruth4:11). Deuteronomy 22:15 suggests that evidence of the bride’svirginity was retained by the wife’s family to guard againstfalse accusations by a husband seeking divorce.

Anotheraspect of marriage that appears to have been normative although notlegislated was the payment of a mohar, or “bride-price”(Gen. 34:12; Exod. 22:16; 1Sam. 18:25), as well as theprovision of a dowry (1Kings 9:16). The former was a paymentmade by the groom’s family to the bride’s family, thelatter an amount given by the father to his daughter. Typically, theformer appears to have exceeded the latter in value. The bride-price,at least in later times, functioned as insurance should the wife bedivorced.

TheBible does not issue any specific age constraints upon those beingmarried, indicating that the OT practice probably did not differsignificantly from that of other nations in the ancient Near East,where girls were considered ready for marriage once they had reachedpuberty or the age of twelve, and boys were generally slightly older.Constraints were placed on the eligibility of marriage partners, andgenerally marriages were endogamous: marriage partners were chosenfrom within the clan, tribe, or nation (e.g., Gen. 24:1–9;27:46–28:5; cf. Deut. 7:3, which prohibits marriage with some,but not all, foreigners, and Deut. 21:10–14, which permitsIsraelite warriors to take a wife from among female prisoners ofwar). While there were exceptions to this constraint (e.g., Mosesmarried a Midianite; Bathsheba was married to a Hittite; Boaz marriedRuth, a Moabite), in later times the restriction was given legalsanction under Ezra and Nehemiah (Ezra 9:2, 12; Neh. 13:25; cf. Luke14:26; 18:29).

Inspite of the likelihood that many marriages in the OT and the ancientworld in general were arranged, the notion of romantic love as bothan ideal for marriage and a basis for choosing one’s spouseclearly was known and even regarded as desirable. This is reflectedin the approbation given romantic love in Song of Songs as well as instories such as that of Jacob (Gen. 29:18; see also Judg. 14:1–3;1Sam. 18:20).

Socially,marriage was of particular import for a woman in the ancient world,for her well-being usually depended on her place within the house ofeither her father or her husband. Because inheritance was passed downthe male line, women without connection to the house of a man were ina very tenuous state. Inheritance itself was also an important issuein the ancient world, and so great value was placed not just onmarriage but also on bearing children (particularly male [see alsoFirstborn]). Associated with these social functions of marriage inancient Israel is the fact that the OT permits and records a numberof instances of polygamy (always polygyny, never polyandry). Thisafforded social security to widows (see also Levirate Law, LevirateMarriage) and helped ensure the line of inheritance. It should benoted, however, that neither the welfare aspect of marriage nor therelated acceptance of polygamy is based on the biblical foundationfor marriage in Gen. 2, and consequently, polygamy does not reflectthe biblical ideal for marriage.

Thefundamental importance of the marriage relationship is alsohighlighted by the severity of the penalties for adultery (e.g.,Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18; 22:22–24; see also Adultery).

Marriagein the New Testament

Jesusreinforces the importance of marriage, emphasizing its divine originand lifelong nature (Matt. 19:6; Mark 10:9) as well as itsinviolability (Mark 10:2–12). In light of this, Jesus’assertion that at the resurrection there will be no marriage issurprising (Matt. 22:30). Although Jesus offers no explanation as towhy there will be no marriage following the resurrection, it isperhaps likely that the fundamental need identified by God in Gen.2:18 (the man was alone) will be solved in a different manner in theage to come: the intimate help and companionship ideally found inmarriage will be provided in perfected relationship with God and allothers.

Paulelaborates somewhat on marriage in the Christian community. Christianmarriage ought to be characterized by mutual submission in somerespects (1Cor. 7:4; Eph. 5:21) while reflecting someasymmetrical aspects of the relationship between Christ and thechurch in others (Eph. 5:22–33). Christians ought to marrywithin the church (2Cor. 6:14–18, although this passageis not restricted to marriage); however, those who are married tononbelievers are not to seek divorce, but are to remain faithful totheir spouses for the sake of both the spouse and their children(1Cor. 7:10–16).

TheNT makes reference to some of the marriage customs of the day,including sharing a feast (Matt. 22:2–12; Luke 12:36; John2:1–11), the expectation that guests be suitably attired (Matt.22:11–12), and a procession to the groom’s home (Matt.25:1–13; Luke 12:35–38).

SymbolicUse of Marriage

Marriageis used figuratively in both Testaments. The relationship between Godand his people is described with marriage language (Isa. 62:4–5;Jer. 2:2). By using such language, the prophets emphasize theintimacy and unity inherent in the relationship between God and hischosen people, as well as the devastating betrayal when the covenantis broken. The use of the marriage metaphor is thus extended to theuse of divorce language to describe God’s treatment ofunfaithful Israel (Jer. 3:8), and the notion of adultery andpromiscuity is equated with the worship of foreign gods (Ezek. 16;23). The prophet Hosea’s marriage is itself a graphicrepresentation of God’s relationship with his people and, inparticular, their faithlessness; however, it also holds out theanticipation of a new covenant, one wherein God declares, “Youwill call me ‘my husband’; you will no longer call me ‘mymaster’ ” (Hos. 2:16). The metaphorical use ofmarriage to image the relationship between God and his people alsoreflects the implicit belief in the asymmetrical nature of therelationship between husband and wife in the ancient world.

TheNT primarily identifies the church as the bride and Christ as thehusband when using marriage language figuratively (e.g., Eph.5:22–33). In so doing, the NT affirms Christ’s deity byexplicitly depicting him in the place occupied by God in the OT’suse of marriage symbolism. Jesus uses marriage in his parabolicteaching about the kingdom of God (Matt. 22:2–14; 25:1–12),as well as in reference to himself as bridegroom when explaining thebehavior of his disciples (Mark 2:19–20; Luke 5:34–35).Revelation depicts the return of Christ as the time of the marriagebetween the bride and the bridegroom (Rev. 19:7; 21:9).

In the most basic sense, a priest is mediator between God andhumanity. Although there are hints in Gen. 1–2 that Adam andEve performed a priestly role in the garden, when the OT speaks ofthe priesthood, it most frequently refers to those involved in theservice of the tabernacle or temple under the Mosaic covenant. Butbefore the formal institution of the Mosaic covenant, God commandedMoses to tell the people of Israel, “If you obey me fully andkeep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasuredpossession. Although the whole earth is mine, you will be for me akingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exod. 19:5–6). Godintends all Israel to be a conduit of his presence to a lost andrebellious world. The rest of the Pentateuch indicates that Israelwas to do this in three ways: (1)practice the law of God as anexample of his holiness; (2)proclaim the mighty deeds of God asa testimony to his power; (3)preserve the word of God as ademonstration of his faithfulness. This, then, was the responsibilityof each Israelite individually and corporately as a people.

Asthe OT unfolds, Israel clearly fails to live up to this loftycalling. But the prophet Isaiah looks forward to a day when God’sredeemed people “will be called priests of the Lord, you willbe named ministers of our God” (Isa. 61:6). This will happen asa result of the Spirit-anointed figure who brings good news to thepoor and the year of God’s favor (Isa. 61:1–4). Jesusclaims that his life, ministry, and death are the fulfillment of thispromise (Luke 4:16–21), which suggests that now is the timethat God’s people can rightly be said to be “priests ofthe Lord.”

Thisconclusion is confirmed in 1Pet. 2:4–10. In the midst ofseveral quotations of and allusions to OT passages, Peter takes upthe language of Exod. 19:6 when he says to believers, “You area chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’sspecial possession, that you may declare the praises of him whocalled you out of darkness into his wonderful light” (v.9).What Israel failed to be because of its persistent rebellion againstGod, believers are. But believers are not a royal priesthood becausethey are somehow better than Israel; they are a royal priesthoodbecause they are united to Jesus Christ. Peter emphasizes this whenearlier in the passage he refers to believers as living stones “beingbuilt into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offeringspiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ”(v.5). Because Jesus is the great high priest who offered hisown blood for the sins of his people (Heb. 9:11–14), believersmust “continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise—thefruit of lips that openly profess his name. And do not forget to dogood and to share with others, for with such sacrifices God ispleased” (Heb. 13:15–16).

Thereare at least three practical ramifications of the priesthood ofbelievers. First, each believer is to be a channel through whichGod’s presence and character are made known in this world.Second, everything that the believer does, even down to eating anddrinking, should be done to reflect the character and glory of God(1Cor. 10:31; Col. 3:17). Third, each believer has a role toplay in the advancement of God’s kingdom.

In the most basic sense, a priest is mediator between God andhumanity. Although there are hints in Gen. 1–2 that Adam andEve performed a priestly role in the garden, when the OT speaks ofthe priesthood, it most frequently refers to those involved in theservice of the tabernacle or temple under the Mosaic covenant. Butbefore the formal institution of the Mosaic covenant, God commandedMoses to tell the people of Israel, “If you obey me fully andkeep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasuredpossession. Although the whole earth is mine, you will be for me akingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exod. 19:5–6). Godintends all Israel to be a conduit of his presence to a lost andrebellious world. The rest of the Pentateuch indicates that Israelwas to do this in three ways: (1)practice the law of God as anexample of his holiness; (2)proclaim the mighty deeds of God asa testimony to his power; (3)preserve the word of God as ademonstration of his faithfulness. This, then, was the responsibilityof each Israelite individually and corporately as a people.

Asthe OT unfolds, Israel clearly fails to live up to this loftycalling. But the prophet Isaiah looks forward to a day when God’sredeemed people “will be called priests of the Lord, you willbe named ministers of our God” (Isa. 61:6). This will happen asa result of the Spirit-anointed figure who brings good news to thepoor and the year of God’s favor (Isa. 61:1–4). Jesusclaims that his life, ministry, and death are the fulfillment of thispromise (Luke 4:16–21), which suggests that now is the timethat God’s people can rightly be said to be “priests ofthe Lord.”

Thisconclusion is confirmed in 1Pet. 2:4–10. In the midst ofseveral quotations of and allusions to OT passages, Peter takes upthe language of Exod. 19:6 when he says to believers, “You area chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’sspecial possession, that you may declare the praises of him whocalled you out of darkness into his wonderful light” (v.9).What Israel failed to be because of its persistent rebellion againstGod, believers are. But believers are not a royal priesthood becausethey are somehow better than Israel; they are a royal priesthoodbecause they are united to Jesus Christ. Peter emphasizes this whenearlier in the passage he refers to believers as living stones “beingbuilt into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offeringspiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ”(v.5). Because Jesus is the great high priest who offered hisown blood for the sins of his people (Heb. 9:11–14), believersmust “continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise—thefruit of lips that openly profess his name. And do not forget to dogood and to share with others, for with such sacrifices God ispleased” (Heb. 13:15–16).

Thereare at least three practical ramifications of the priesthood ofbelievers. First, each believer is to be a channel through whichGod’s presence and character are made known in this world.Second, everything that the believer does, even down to eating anddrinking, should be done to reflect the character and glory of God(1Cor. 10:31; Col. 3:17). Third, each believer has a role toplay in the advancement of God’s kingdom.

The concepts of purity and purification are largelyunfamiliar to modern Western readers of the Bible. These terms oftenappear in cultic contexts and are used to refer to physical, ritual,and ethical purity. They are most frequently applied to the processneeded to restore someone to a state of purity so that he or shecould participate in ritual activities once again (Lev. 22:4–7).These terms are cultural and theological, serving to constrainactions and behaviors through definite boundaries; thus, in theirancient use they have little to do with modern notions of hygiene(e.g., diseases that may be caught from a pig [Lev. 13]; the medicaladvantages of washing [Lev. 15]; quarantining a leper [Lev. 13]).Although some have attempted to relate the rules of purity to simplephysical events, such modern medical rationale cannot account for therange of prohibitions or find explicit support in the text.

OldTestament

Thelaw of Moses. Accordingto Lev. 10:10, it was the duty of the priests to “distinguishbetween the holy and the common, between the unclean and the clean”and to teach the nation of Israel the difference between the two. Godrequired that his people observe purification rites when they cameinto his presence for worship. Ritual purity was intended to teachGod’s holiness and moral purity; thus purification ritualsfunctioned to prepare individuals to approach God (Exod. 19:10; Num.8:15). These fundamental regulations and rites are outlined in Mosaiclaw.

Twomajor sections of the Torah describe ritual purity and the laws ofpurification: Lev. 11–15 and Num. 19. Here the need forpurification resulted from direct or indirect contact with any one ofa number of natural processes, including childbirth (Lev. 12:1–8),scale disease (Lev. 13:1–14:32), genital discharges (Lev.15:1–33), the carcasses of certain animals (Lev. 11:1–47),and human corpses (Num. 19:1–22). Although both the duration ofimpurity and the rite of purification for each of these conditionsdiffer, there are three distinct characteristics of ritual impurity:(1)the sources of ritual impurity generally were natural andmore or less unavoidable; (2)it was not necessarily sinful tocontract these impurities; (3)these conditions conveyedtemporary loss of ritual purity.

Althoughsexual discharge, contact with corpses and carcasses, and thecontraction of diseases were sources of impurity, they wereunavoidable in the normal course of life. Israelites were obligatedto reproduce (Gen. 1:28; 9:7), and they, along with their priests,were obligated to bury their dead (Lev. 21:1–4). Therefore,many of these impurities were unavoidable and, though not encouraged,not necessarily sinful. Further, these conditions conveyed atemporary loss of purity. All the impurities described in Lev. 11–15and Num. 19 were not permanent and had specific rites ofpurification. These rites included washings (a man who had adischarge waited seven days and then washed his clothes and bathed inorder to be clean [Lev. 15:13]), offerings (after the birth of achild, a mother had to wait a certain period and then bring certainofferings to be cleansed “from her flow of blood”[12:7–8]), and other procedures (a “leprous” manwho had been healed had to go through an elaborate ceremony to bedeclared clean [14:4–20]; a “leprous” house wentthrough a similar process [14:48–53]). The ultimate instance ofcleansing was the Day of Atonement, which required blood as thepurifying agent: “[The priest] shall sprinkle some of the bloodon [the altar] with his finger seven times to cleanse it and toconsecrate it from the uncleanness of the Israelites” (16:19).

Afinal characteristic of ritual purity is that it was highly graded;that is, there were various degrees of impurities. Corpse impuritywas especially serious and highly contagious. One could contractcorpse impurity through direct contact, proximity (being in the sametent with a corpse [Num. 19:14]), or by merely touching the bone orthe grave of a human (19:16). The individual who contracted corpseimpurity was able to contaminate other objects and individuals. Majorimpurities also demanded greater time for purification (seven daysrather than one). Unlike major impurities, minor impurities lastedonly until sundown and were not contagious. Individuals mightcontract minor impurity from contact with unclean carcasses (whetherby touching [Lev. 11:24, 27] or carrying [Lev. 11:25, 28]), someonedefiled with corpse impurity (Lev. 22:4, 6; Num. 19:22), a diseasedperson or house (Lev. 13:45–46; 14:46–47), or dischargefrom either a man or a woman (Lev. 15:5–11, 19–23,26–27). The duration of minor impurity was only a day (“untilevening” [Lev. 11:24–25, 27–28, 39–40]), andone was purified either by bathing or washing one’s clothing.

TheProphets and the Writings.Outside the Mosaic law, the terms of “purity” and“purification” are much less common; however, at timesthey are taken up figuratively to describe sin. Loss of purity isused figuratively for transgression. For example, the technical termfor “menstrual impurity” is used figuratively toillustrate the sin of Israel: “Zion stretches out her hands,but there is no one to comfort her.... Jerusalemhas become an unclean thing among them” (Lam. 1:17); and inEzek. 36:17, “When the people of Israel were living in theirown land, they defiled it by their conduct and their actions. Theirconduct was like a woman’s monthly uncleanness in my sight.”

Itwas not the ritual purification that ultimately mattered for theprophets, but rather the forgiveness from God that rendered peoplepure from sin. Thus, purification is a figure of God’sforgiveness; God says, “Your hands are full of blood! Wash andmake yourselves clean. Take your evil deeds out of my sight; stopdoing wrong” (Isa. 1:15–16). God promises cleansing inkey passages in Ezekiel: “I will sprinkle clean water on you,and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your impuritiesand from all your idols” (Ezek. 36:25; cf. 36:33); “theywill no longer defile themselves with their idols and vile images orwith any of their offenses, for I will save them from all theirsinful backsliding, and I will cleanse them” (37:23).

Althoughthere are “those who are pure in their own eyes and yet are notcleansed of their filth” (Prov. 30:12), it is only God who canpromise, “I will cleanse them from all the sin they havecommitted against me and will forgive all their sins of rebellionagainst me” (Jer. 33:8). Painfully aware of his sin withBathsheba, David cries out, “Wash away all my iniquity andcleanse me from my sin.... Cleanse me with hyssop,and I will be clean.... Create in me a pure heart,O God” (Ps. 51:2, 7, 10).

NewTestament

Inthe NT, the idea of ceremonial purity as an important element inJewish life appears in John 11:55; Acts 21:23; 24:18. But just as inthe prophets, the notion of purity is applied to a life lived inwholehearted devotion to God. An individual is purified when obeyingthe truth (1Pet. 1:22). James describes repentance in terms ofpurity: “Wash your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts,you double-minded” (James 4:8); and he describes helping thosein distress as the kind of genuine piety that “God our Fatheraccepts as pure and faultless” (James 1:27).

The concepts of purity and purification are largelyunfamiliar to modern Western readers of the Bible. These terms oftenappear in cultic contexts and are used to refer to physical, ritual,and ethical purity. They are most frequently applied to the processneeded to restore someone to a state of purity so that he or shecould participate in ritual activities once again (Lev. 22:4–7).These terms are cultural and theological, serving to constrainactions and behaviors through definite boundaries; thus, in theirancient use they have little to do with modern notions of hygiene(e.g., diseases that may be caught from a pig [Lev. 13]; the medicaladvantages of washing [Lev. 15]; quarantining a leper [Lev. 13]).Although some have attempted to relate the rules of purity to simplephysical events, such modern medical rationale cannot account for therange of prohibitions or find explicit support in the text.

OldTestament

Thelaw of Moses. Accordingto Lev. 10:10, it was the duty of the priests to “distinguishbetween the holy and the common, between the unclean and the clean”and to teach the nation of Israel the difference between the two. Godrequired that his people observe purification rites when they cameinto his presence for worship. Ritual purity was intended to teachGod’s holiness and moral purity; thus purification ritualsfunctioned to prepare individuals to approach God (Exod. 19:10; Num.8:15). These fundamental regulations and rites are outlined in Mosaiclaw.

Twomajor sections of the Torah describe ritual purity and the laws ofpurification: Lev. 11–15 and Num. 19. Here the need forpurification resulted from direct or indirect contact with any one ofa number of natural processes, including childbirth (Lev. 12:1–8),scale disease (Lev. 13:1–14:32), genital discharges (Lev.15:1–33), the carcasses of certain animals (Lev. 11:1–47),and human corpses (Num. 19:1–22). Although both the duration ofimpurity and the rite of purification for each of these conditionsdiffer, there are three distinct characteristics of ritual impurity:(1)the sources of ritual impurity generally were natural andmore or less unavoidable; (2)it was not necessarily sinful tocontract these impurities; (3)these conditions conveyedtemporary loss of ritual purity.

Althoughsexual discharge, contact with corpses and carcasses, and thecontraction of diseases were sources of impurity, they wereunavoidable in the normal course of life. Israelites were obligatedto reproduce (Gen. 1:28; 9:7), and they, along with their priests,were obligated to bury their dead (Lev. 21:1–4). Therefore,many of these impurities were unavoidable and, though not encouraged,not necessarily sinful. Further, these conditions conveyed atemporary loss of purity. All the impurities described in Lev. 11–15and Num. 19 were not permanent and had specific rites ofpurification. These rites included washings (a man who had adischarge waited seven days and then washed his clothes and bathed inorder to be clean [Lev. 15:13]), offerings (after the birth of achild, a mother had to wait a certain period and then bring certainofferings to be cleansed “from her flow of blood”[12:7–8]), and other procedures (a “leprous” manwho had been healed had to go through an elaborate ceremony to bedeclared clean [14:4–20]; a “leprous” house wentthrough a similar process [14:48–53]). The ultimate instance ofcleansing was the Day of Atonement, which required blood as thepurifying agent: “[The priest] shall sprinkle some of the bloodon [the altar] with his finger seven times to cleanse it and toconsecrate it from the uncleanness of the Israelites” (16:19).

Afinal characteristic of ritual purity is that it was highly graded;that is, there were various degrees of impurities. Corpse impuritywas especially serious and highly contagious. One could contractcorpse impurity through direct contact, proximity (being in the sametent with a corpse [Num. 19:14]), or by merely touching the bone orthe grave of a human (19:16). The individual who contracted corpseimpurity was able to contaminate other objects and individuals. Majorimpurities also demanded greater time for purification (seven daysrather than one). Unlike major impurities, minor impurities lastedonly until sundown and were not contagious. Individuals mightcontract minor impurity from contact with unclean carcasses (whetherby touching [Lev. 11:24, 27] or carrying [Lev. 11:25, 28]), someonedefiled with corpse impurity (Lev. 22:4, 6; Num. 19:22), a diseasedperson or house (Lev. 13:45–46; 14:46–47), or dischargefrom either a man or a woman (Lev. 15:5–11, 19–23,26–27). The duration of minor impurity was only a day (“untilevening” [Lev. 11:24–25, 27–28, 39–40]), andone was purified either by bathing or washing one’s clothing.

TheProphets and the Writings.Outside the Mosaic law, the terms of “purity” and“purification” are much less common; however, at timesthey are taken up figuratively to describe sin. Loss of purity isused figuratively for transgression. For example, the technical termfor “menstrual impurity” is used figuratively toillustrate the sin of Israel: “Zion stretches out her hands,but there is no one to comfort her.... Jerusalemhas become an unclean thing among them” (Lam. 1:17); and inEzek. 36:17, “When the people of Israel were living in theirown land, they defiled it by their conduct and their actions. Theirconduct was like a woman’s monthly uncleanness in my sight.”

Itwas not the ritual purification that ultimately mattered for theprophets, but rather the forgiveness from God that rendered peoplepure from sin. Thus, purification is a figure of God’sforgiveness; God says, “Your hands are full of blood! Wash andmake yourselves clean. Take your evil deeds out of my sight; stopdoing wrong” (Isa. 1:15–16). God promises cleansing inkey passages in Ezekiel: “I will sprinkle clean water on you,and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your impuritiesand from all your idols” (Ezek. 36:25; cf. 36:33); “theywill no longer defile themselves with their idols and vile images orwith any of their offenses, for I will save them from all theirsinful backsliding, and I will cleanse them” (37:23).

Althoughthere are “those who are pure in their own eyes and yet are notcleansed of their filth” (Prov. 30:12), it is only God who canpromise, “I will cleanse them from all the sin they havecommitted against me and will forgive all their sins of rebellionagainst me” (Jer. 33:8). Painfully aware of his sin withBathsheba, David cries out, “Wash away all my iniquity andcleanse me from my sin.... Cleanse me with hyssop,and I will be clean.... Create in me a pure heart,O God” (Ps. 51:2, 7, 10).

NewTestament

Inthe NT, the idea of ceremonial purity as an important element inJewish life appears in John 11:55; Acts 21:23; 24:18. But just as inthe prophets, the notion of purity is applied to a life lived inwholehearted devotion to God. An individual is purified when obeyingthe truth (1Pet. 1:22). James describes repentance in terms ofpurity: “Wash your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts,you double-minded” (James 4:8); and he describes helping thosein distress as the kind of genuine piety that “God our Fatheraccepts as pure and faultless” (James 1:27).

The concepts of purity and purification are largelyunfamiliar to modern Western readers of the Bible. These terms oftenappear in cultic contexts and are used to refer to physical, ritual,and ethical purity. They are most frequently applied to the processneeded to restore someone to a state of purity so that he or shecould participate in ritual activities once again (Lev. 22:4–7).These terms are cultural and theological, serving to constrainactions and behaviors through definite boundaries; thus, in theirancient use they have little to do with modern notions of hygiene(e.g., diseases that may be caught from a pig [Lev. 13]; the medicaladvantages of washing [Lev. 15]; quarantining a leper [Lev. 13]).Although some have attempted to relate the rules of purity to simplephysical events, such modern medical rationale cannot account for therange of prohibitions or find explicit support in the text.

OldTestament

Thelaw of Moses. Accordingto Lev. 10:10, it was the duty of the priests to “distinguishbetween the holy and the common, between the unclean and the clean”and to teach the nation of Israel the difference between the two. Godrequired that his people observe purification rites when they cameinto his presence for worship. Ritual purity was intended to teachGod’s holiness and moral purity; thus purification ritualsfunctioned to prepare individuals to approach God (Exod. 19:10; Num.8:15). These fundamental regulations and rites are outlined in Mosaiclaw.

Twomajor sections of the Torah describe ritual purity and the laws ofpurification: Lev. 11–15 and Num. 19. Here the need forpurification resulted from direct or indirect contact with any one ofa number of natural processes, including childbirth (Lev. 12:1–8),scale disease (Lev. 13:1–14:32), genital discharges (Lev.15:1–33), the carcasses of certain animals (Lev. 11:1–47),and human corpses (Num. 19:1–22). Although both the duration ofimpurity and the rite of purification for each of these conditionsdiffer, there are three distinct characteristics of ritual impurity:(1)the sources of ritual impurity generally were natural andmore or less unavoidable; (2)it was not necessarily sinful tocontract these impurities; (3)these conditions conveyedtemporary loss of ritual purity.

Althoughsexual discharge, contact with corpses and carcasses, and thecontraction of diseases were sources of impurity, they wereunavoidable in the normal course of life. Israelites were obligatedto reproduce (Gen. 1:28; 9:7), and they, along with their priests,were obligated to bury their dead (Lev. 21:1–4). Therefore,many of these impurities were unavoidable and, though not encouraged,not necessarily sinful. Further, these conditions conveyed atemporary loss of purity. All the impurities described in Lev. 11–15and Num. 19 were not permanent and had specific rites ofpurification. These rites included washings (a man who had adischarge waited seven days and then washed his clothes and bathed inorder to be clean [Lev. 15:13]), offerings (after the birth of achild, a mother had to wait a certain period and then bring certainofferings to be cleansed “from her flow of blood”[12:7–8]), and other procedures (a “leprous” manwho had been healed had to go through an elaborate ceremony to bedeclared clean [14:4–20]; a “leprous” house wentthrough a similar process [14:48–53]). The ultimate instance ofcleansing was the Day of Atonement, which required blood as thepurifying agent: “[The priest] shall sprinkle some of the bloodon [the altar] with his finger seven times to cleanse it and toconsecrate it from the uncleanness of the Israelites” (16:19).

Afinal characteristic of ritual purity is that it was highly graded;that is, there were various degrees of impurities. Corpse impuritywas especially serious and highly contagious. One could contractcorpse impurity through direct contact, proximity (being in the sametent with a corpse [Num. 19:14]), or by merely touching the bone orthe grave of a human (19:16). The individual who contracted corpseimpurity was able to contaminate other objects and individuals. Majorimpurities also demanded greater time for purification (seven daysrather than one). Unlike major impurities, minor impurities lastedonly until sundown and were not contagious. Individuals mightcontract minor impurity from contact with unclean carcasses (whetherby touching [Lev. 11:24, 27] or carrying [Lev. 11:25, 28]), someonedefiled with corpse impurity (Lev. 22:4, 6; Num. 19:22), a diseasedperson or house (Lev. 13:45–46; 14:46–47), or dischargefrom either a man or a woman (Lev. 15:5–11, 19–23,26–27). The duration of minor impurity was only a day (“untilevening” [Lev. 11:24–25, 27–28, 39–40]), andone was purified either by bathing or washing one’s clothing.

TheProphets and the Writings.Outside the Mosaic law, the terms of “purity” and“purification” are much less common; however, at timesthey are taken up figuratively to describe sin. Loss of purity isused figuratively for transgression. For example, the technical termfor “menstrual impurity” is used figuratively toillustrate the sin of Israel: “Zion stretches out her hands,but there is no one to comfort her.... Jerusalemhas become an unclean thing among them” (Lam. 1:17); and inEzek. 36:17, “When the people of Israel were living in theirown land, they defiled it by their conduct and their actions. Theirconduct was like a woman’s monthly uncleanness in my sight.”

Itwas not the ritual purification that ultimately mattered for theprophets, but rather the forgiveness from God that rendered peoplepure from sin. Thus, purification is a figure of God’sforgiveness; God says, “Your hands are full of blood! Wash andmake yourselves clean. Take your evil deeds out of my sight; stopdoing wrong” (Isa. 1:15–16). God promises cleansing inkey passages in Ezekiel: “I will sprinkle clean water on you,and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your impuritiesand from all your idols” (Ezek. 36:25; cf. 36:33); “theywill no longer defile themselves with their idols and vile images orwith any of their offenses, for I will save them from all theirsinful backsliding, and I will cleanse them” (37:23).

Althoughthere are “those who are pure in their own eyes and yet are notcleansed of their filth” (Prov. 30:12), it is only God who canpromise, “I will cleanse them from all the sin they havecommitted against me and will forgive all their sins of rebellionagainst me” (Jer. 33:8). Painfully aware of his sin withBathsheba, David cries out, “Wash away all my iniquity andcleanse me from my sin.... Cleanse me with hyssop,and I will be clean.... Create in me a pure heart,O God” (Ps. 51:2, 7, 10).

NewTestament

Inthe NT, the idea of ceremonial purity as an important element inJewish life appears in John 11:55; Acts 21:23; 24:18. But just as inthe prophets, the notion of purity is applied to a life lived inwholehearted devotion to God. An individual is purified when obeyingthe truth (1Pet. 1:22). James describes repentance in terms ofpurity: “Wash your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts,you double-minded” (James 4:8); and he describes helping thosein distress as the kind of genuine piety that “God our Fatheraccepts as pure and faultless” (James 1:27).

In 1928 a Syrian peasant farmer stumbled by chance onto afunerary vault of ancient provenance about half a mile from theMediterranean coastline of Syria and about six miles north of themodern-day city of Latakia. This unforeseen discovery led to anarchaeological excavation of Tell Ras Shamra (Cape Fennel) by theeminent French excavator Claude Schaeffer. What Schaeffer’steam unearthed was not merely an ancient tomb, but a city completewith palaces, private homes, temples, and streets paved with stone.

Withinthe first year of excavation, the ruins of Ugarit yielded a cache ofclay tablets bearing a cuneiform script in a language hithertounknown. From these mysterious texts scholars deciphered analphabetic script written in a West Semitic language related toCanaanite, Arabic, and biblical Hebrew.

TheKingdom of Ugarit

Thesite of the ancient city of Ugarit, Tell Ras Shamra, is enclosed bytwo small rivers that flow westward into the Mediterranean Sea. Thepresence of water ensured the fertility of the surrounding plain;thus a good crop of cereals, grapes, and olives was available tosupplement the fishing industry as a local supply of food. Thekingdom encompassed about twelve hundred square miles, bounded by thenatural geography of the region. To the west of the site lies theMediterranean, with a port that supplied an important route forinternational trade. To the south, the east, and the north aremountain ranges, including Mount Zaphon, whose majesty is recorded inIsa. 14:13. Indeed, the name “Zaphon” becomes simply ageneral word for “north” in biblical Hebrew.

Thesite of Tell Ras Shamra was occupied as far back as Neolithic times(seventh millennium BC), yet the kingdom of Ugarit properly dates tothe second millennium BC. The time of Ugarit’s greatestflourishing was the period just prior to its destruction: from thefourteenth to the twelfth centuries BC, during the Late Bronze Age.The prosperity of the kingdom reached its height during this period.Ugarit’s coastal access and strategic location as a central hubwithin the matrix of Late Bronze Age superpowers made Ugarit animportant focal point for international trade routes, both maritimeand overland. Late Bronze Age Ugaritic society was diverse andcosmopolitan, a feature perhaps best epitomized by its scribaltraining center, in which tablets bearing inscriptions in severaldifferent languages have been discovered.

Around1200 BC, in approximately the same time frame as the exodus of theHebrews from Egypt, Ugarit met an untimely demise. (Note that somebiblical scholars date the exodus from Egypt during the fifteenthcentury BC rather than the thirteenth.) Royal documents from theEgyptian and Hittite kingdoms, as well as one from Ugarit, record aconcern over a group of invaders known as the Sea Peoples. The SeaPeoples likely originated in the northwest, leaving their mark on thecoasts of Turkey, Cyprus, and the Levant. The descendants of theinvading Sea Peoples remained on the coast of Palestine, and thebiblical text refers to them as the Philistines. The destruction ofUgarit is attributed to these invaders from the sea. Thearchaeological remains of Tell Ras Shamra show that many homes wereabandoned as invaders set the city on fire. Ugarit burned to theground sometime between 1190 and 1185 BC.

TheTexts of Ugarit

Morethan fifteen hundred Ugaritic texts have been discovered sinceexcavations began at Tell Ras Shamra. The texts are written ontablets with wedgelike markings impressed into the clay by scribesusing a triangular-shaped reed stylus. The majority of the texts ofUgarit were found in and around the remains of the royal palacegrounds and temples, but some were found in the homes of high-rankingpalace administrators and businessmen. The subject matter of thesetexts is diverse, and the various genres of written material fromUgarit include official letters, administrative and economic texts,scribal training texts, and religious and literary texts. Thecosmopolitan character of Ugarit is also reflected in its texts.Among the various tablets discovered, many were written in Akkadian,which was the lingua franca of the Late Bronze Age in this region.Still other texts were written in various ancient Near Easternlanguages; Hurrian, Hittite, and Cypro-Minoan, and Egyptianhieroglyphs were found inscribed into some artifacts, as well as uponcylinder seals.

Letters.Theletter documents of Ugarit are formal in style with scriptedintroductions and closings, like most royal letters from the ancientNear East. Two notable examples may be pointed out. The first is aletter from the king of Tyre in Phoenicia (for Iron Age references tothe city of Tyre, see Josh. 19:29; 2Sam. 5:11; Ezek. 28) to theking of Ugarit. The occasion of the letter is the shipwreck of aUgaritic trade vessel bound for Egypt that crashed on the coastlineof Phoenicia after a violent storm. The king of Tyre writes that noneof the ship’s crew survived, and its cargo was lost at sea. Asecond epistolary example is a letter written by the king ofCarchemish in the Hittite Empire (see Isa. 10:9; Jer. 46:2) to thelast king of Ugarit, Ammurapi. The occasion of this epistle is theHittite king’s perceived mistreatment of his daughter who wasmarried to Ammurapi. The letter suggests an impending divorce betweenthe royal couple, detailing the division of their joint property.

Administrativeand economic texts. Theroyal palace and temples provided the driving engine of Ugarit’seconomy. Many discovered texts shed light upon the kinds of goods andactivities that comprised local and international trade. Examples ofadministrative texts include lists of various towns within thekingdom of Ugarit, tributes that such towns paid to the king in theform of goods or labor service, lists of temple personnel withaccompanying salaries, and details of distributed goods to those inroyal service. Examples of economic texts include purchase receiptsand bills of lading from maritime trade for products such as wool,grains, olives, milk, and metal ore.

Scribaltraining texts. Amongthe rich archives of texts at Ugarit, more than one hundred tabletsbear witness to scribal training activities scattered throughout thecity grounds. Scribes were universally employed by royal empiresduring the Late Bronze Age, but the sheer number of texts (thousands)found at Ugarit is unusual for a relatively small excavation site.Archives of texts were found in groups throughout the city, and inmany of these archives excavators found tablets of special interest,called “abecedaries.” An abecedary is a tablet on whichthe cuneiform alphabet is written. The Ugaritic alphabet containedthirty signs in roughly the same order as the Hebrew alphabet,largely the same in content as the English alphabet. In addition toUgaritic abecedaries, a Ugaritic-Akkadian abecedary was found inwhich equivalent phonetic values are given from the Ugaritic alphabetinto Akkadian signs. Lexicons, or word lists, also were discovered,listing words from various ancient Near Eastern languages. Indeed,some of the tablets found in the archives are clearly practicetablets used to train scribes: these tablets display clear signswritten by a scribal teacher at the top of the tablet, with the lessskilled markings of the apprentice scribe written below. Thus, it islikely that Ugarit served as a training center for scribes from allover the ancient Near East, as well as its own.

Religioustexts. Twolarge temples dominate the northern acropolis region of Ugarit: thetemple of Baal, the god of fertility, and the temple of Dagon, thegod of grain. Mythology was the vehicle of religious expression inthe ancient Near East. Stories about the gods communicated somethingof the gods’ purposes and realms of authority. In themythological literature of Ugarit, the pantheon of gods dwelt onMount Zaphon, and from the dwelling place of El, the high god, riversof life-giving water flowed. The name “El” was sharedamong Semitic languages and religions throughout the ancient NearEast, including the OT. The name “El” in the Bible canrefer either to a foreign god (e.g., Deut. 3:24: “What god[’el] is there in heaven or on earth who can do the deeds andmighty works you do?”) or to the God of Israel (e.g., Gen.49:25; Deut. 7:9; Ps. 68:19–20). In the pantheon of Ugarit,El’s female consort was the goddess Asherah (1Kings18:19; Judg. 3:7).

El,however, was a more distant god in the religion of Ugarit, and thecity’s patron god was Baal, the storm god. Baal was associatedwith fertile fields, abundant crops, and the birth of sons anddaughters. The goddess Anat is sometimes described as Baal’sconsort, and at other times as Baal’s sister. Anat is thegoddess of war, and the epic mythological literature of Ugaritportrays her warfare in rather graphic and gruesome detail. Somescholars claim that Prov. 7:22–23 alludes to Anat’swarfare in the portrayal of the adulterous woman.

Someof the same epithets and accomplishments of Baal found in thereligious texts of Ugarit are also attributed to Yahweh in the OT.For example, Baal is called the “Rider of the Clouds” inUgaritic literature, and a similar description of Yahweh is found inPss. 68:4 (“Extol him who rides on the clouds”) and 104:3(“He makes the clouds his chariot and rides on the wings of thewind”). This likely reflects a common ancient Near Easternconcern over the regularity of rain for producing crops, as well as abiblical assertion that Yahweh is superior to Canaanite deities, suchas Baal, who claim authority over the forces of nature. Indeed, theOT mocks the impotence of the Canaanite deity Baal to wield powerover the forces of nature in narratives such as Elijah versus theprophets of Baal (1Kings 18:16–45).

Baalis also portrayed in the religious literature of Ugarit as the godwho conquered the rival gods Sea (Yam) and Death (Motu). The OT givessimilar portrayals of Israel’s God in texts such as Gen. 1:2;Isa. 25:7–8. In Gen. 1:2 God’s Spirit “was hoveringover the waters,” “the deep,” or the primordialwaters from which God brings to life the created world and all ofnature (cf. Job 38:8–11). In Isa. 25:7–8 Yahweh isportrayed as more powerful than death in a text of praise that extolshis power by saying that “he will swallow up death forever.”Again the biblical texts rely upon a stock set of religious symbols,language, and imagery common to ancient Near Eastern peoples toportray Yahweh, the all-powerful, one God of Israel.

Conclusion

Thediscovery of Ugarit was an earthshaking event for biblical studies.Scholars have only begun to garner the gems of knowledge hiddenwithin the remains of this lost civilization. The study of theUgaritic language is invaluable for better understanding biblicalHebrew. Ugaritic sheds light particularly upon rare words and phrasesused in the biblical text, as well as upon literary devices andpoetic structure, such as parallelism and meter. Furthermore, thestudy of Ugarit’s religion illuminates the backdrop ofCanaanite worship, against which is set the worship of Yahweh in theOT. Ugarit provides for us a snapshot of Late Bronze Age Canaan, thecrucible of ancient Near Eastern culture from which the Hebrew Biblewas birthed.

Terminology.Themodern scientific category of reptiles (air-breathing, cold-bloodedvertebrates) has no precise equivalent in the biblical vocabulary.The Hebrews described creatures by the way they moved, as “crawlingthings” (zakhal[Deut.32:24; Mic. 7:17]), “creeping things” (remes[Gen. 1:25–26]), and “swarming things” (sherets[Gen. 7:21]). All these terms, which probably overlapped, includedboth reptiles and small mammals.

Nakhash(e.g., Gen. 3) is the commonest general term for snakes and otherreptiles. Rarer terms are tannin(translated “snake” in Exod. 7:9, but more usuallymeaning a mythical “dragon”) and sarap(used, on its own or qualifying nakhash, of the fiery serpents inNum. 21:6, 8; Isa. 14:29; 30:6). In Greek, herpeton(Acts 10:12; 11:6; Rom. 1:23; James 3:7) includes snakes and lizards,while the generic word for snake is ophis(e.g., Matt. 7:10).

Besidesthese general terms, Scripture mentions the following: (1)thecrocodile (liwyatan)found in Egypt and Israel and sometimes portrayed in poetry as amythical monster (Job 3:8; 41:1; Pss. 74:14; 104:26; Isa. 27:1);(2)a variety of lizards, probably including geckos, skinks, andchameleons (Lev. 11:29, 30; Prov. 30:28); (3)a variety ofpoisonous snakes, including the cobra, or asp (Deut. 32:33; Rom.3:13), and the viper, or adder (Isa. 59:5; Acts 28:3).

Althoughtortoises are common in the Middle East, the KJV translation of theHebrew word tsabas “tortoise” in Lev. 11:29 almost certainly is wrong.However, since at least eighty kinds of reptile are found in Israel,precise identifications beyond this are difficult.

Reptilesin the Bible. Thesnake is an important image in Scripture. It is a snake that temptsAdam and Eve (Gen. 3:1; 2Cor. 11:3), and in the first promiseof salvation God says that the seed of woman will crush the snake’shead (Gen. 3:15). From that moment, the snake is condemned to crawlon its belly and eat dust (Gen. 3:14; Isa. 65:25).

Allsuch crawling creatures were unclean in OT law (Lev. 11:29–31).Although some Middle Eastern snakes are nonpoisonous, the OT alwaysportrays snakes as harmful as well as unclean (Deut. 8:15; 32:24, 33;Job 20:14, 16; Eccles. 10:8, 11; Isa. 30:6; Amos 5:19; Matt. 7:10;Luke 11:11). Because the venom was associated with the snake’stongue, the snake was a symbol of treacherous, lying speech as wellas of physical danger (Gen. 49:17; Pss. 58:4; 140:3; Prov. 23:32;Isa. 14:29; Jer. 8:17; 51:34; Matt. 23:33; Rev. 9:19), shrewdness(Matt. 10:16), and degradation (Mic. 7:17). For snakes to be renderedharmless was a sign of divine intervention (Ps. 91:13) and of themessianic age (Isa. 11:8; Luke 10:19; Mark 16:18). Paul and Johnidentify the snake in Eden with Satan and look forward to his totaldestruction in the last days (Rom. 16:20; Rev. 12:9–17;20:2–3).

Snakesfeature three times in biblical miracles. First, Aaron’s rodwas transformed into a serpent that, when Pharaoh’s magiciansreplicated the feat, devoured the magicians’ serpents (Exod.7:10–15; cf. 4:3–4). This would have impressed Pharaohall the more because the snake was a symbol of the pharaoh’spower. Second, when God sent poisonous snakes to punish theIsraelites, who repented, God told Moses to set up a bronze snake ona pole; anyone who looked at the bronze snake (which only much laterbecame an object of idolatry) was saved (Num. 21:6–9; 2Kings18:4). This prefigured the cross, on which Christ became a curse forus (John 3:14; 1Cor. 10:9; Gal. 3:10). Third, Paul was bittenby a snake and suffered no harm (Acts 28:3–6).

God is the all-powerful, all-knowing, morally perfect creatorof the universe; and we are his creatures—no less, but also nomore. Thus, an unimaginable distance must exist between God and us;and this fact has led some theologians to despair of knowing anythingabout him for sure, not even that he actually has these attributes ofdeity. It might seem, furthermore, that some biblical texts encouragesuch a view. Psalm 92:5 recognizes the distance: “How great areyour works, O Lord, how profound your thoughts!” Psalm 145:3says that “no one can fathom” God’s greatness.According to Ps. 147:5, “Great is our Lord and mighty in power;his understanding has no limit.” In Ps. 139:6, David tries tocomprehend God’s perfect insight and concludes, “Suchknowledge is too wonderful for me, too lofty for me to attain.”The doxology of Rom. 11:33–36 exults in the uniqueness of God:“Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge ofGod! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracingout!” In Isa. 55:9, God says, “As the heavens are higherthan the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughtshigher than your thoughts.” Based on these passages and others,and knowing what the difference between creator and creature mustgenerally imply, one might suspect that we can know nothing ofsubstance about God.

Infact, however, the biblical writers tell a different story, beingcautiously optimistic about theology’s prospects. On the onehand, they note our creaturely limitations and God’stranscendence, as seen above. We cannot fully comprehend our Creator.We never will, not even through the eons of eternity. God will alwayshave something more to show us about himself, more that we can learnand adore. In that sense, the biblical writers are cautious aboutwhat theology can grasp. On the other hand, we must be able to learnsome things about God; otherwise, the Scriptures themselves would notexist, since they tell us about God and much else besides. Divineomnipotence, therefore, includes the ability to produce in usadequate theological understanding. We always lean on God, and no oneunderstands him at all apart from his initiative. He remainssovereign over this event, as with any other. But God has madehimself known in two general ways, according to Scripture.

Generaland Special Revelation

First,the biblical writers expect each of us to grasp something of God’snature, based on what is called “general revelation.”General revelation operates in a broadcasted way, so to speak,relying upon commonplace experience and the latter’s God-givenability to make us aware of his existence and nature. We all see theheavens that “declare the glory of God” (Ps. 19:1). Paulargues that every person can detect the “invisible qualities”of God, his “eternal power and divine nature,” in what hehas created, so that we have no excuse for decadent theology andbehavior (Rom. 1:20). The law of God is “written on [our]hearts” (Rom. 2:15), so that we grasp what we owe to him andeach other. Even though God has not spoken directly to every nation,“he has not left himself without testimony”; he has shownall people “kindness by giving [them] rain from heaven andcrops in their seasons” (Acts 14:17). We can learn some thingsabout God from these sources given to us, and thus we are accountablefor right conduct in relationship to them. However, generalrevelation lacks the detail and assurance of what is called “specialrevelation.”

Specialrevelation differs from general revelation in having a targetaudience. It conveys information about God, human beings, and ourworld that cannot be deduced from everyday, highly accessibleexperience. Jesus suffered for our sins. Our trust in his death onthe cross will save us. God is a Trinity of Father, Son, and HolySpirit, though there is one God. Christ will return in power andglory to judge all nations. We can think of God as our heavenlyFather, a morally perfect deity who cares about the individualperson. The Holy Spirit helps us in our weakness as we wonder how topray. God is always sovereign, even over the wicked deeds of humanbeings and the suffering that they cause. These are essential pointsof Christian doctrine. Yet we cannot substantiate any of them bycarefully observing ourselves, our world, or the facts of history.Indeed, sometimes our own thoughts lead us to resist these claimsbecause they entail great mysteries. One can easily (but wrongly)equate “I do not understand this” with “This isfalse.” Thus, our knowledge of these doctrines rests upon God’swillingness to speak and our readiness to hear what he says withhumility and trust, without having all our questions answered. Thevehicle for this latter kind of knowledge is called “specialrevelation.”

Allrevelation is “special,” simply because we can learnnothing about God apart from his self-disclosure. However,theologians use the technical term “special revelation”to capture the idea that God has revealed some matters of doctrineonly to specific people, with the expectation that they will preachthese truths to others as he requires them to do. These doctrinalmatters include the claims given above concerning some aspects ofGod’s nature, his attitude toward human beings, the plan ofsalvation, and so forth. Thus, the Bible is special revelation parexcellence; likewise, the preaching of prophets, Jesus, and then hischosen apostles (to list them in chronological order) is specialrevelation. Of course, since we do not have access to propheticteaching and the life and words of Christ apart from Scripture, thelatter is our sole source of special revelation. We cannot now seeand hear Jesus as his first-century observers did, but we encounterhim as the incarnate Word through the inerrant written word ofScripture. Theology, therefore, concerns what the Bible says aboutGod, humanity, Christ, and so forth, and it looks to generalrevelation, if at all, merely to corroborate or illustrate whatScripture substantiates. Likewise, the promises of God to bless thepreaching of his truth attach to special revelation rather than towhat one might glean from other sources (Isa. 55:11).

TheBible as Special Revelation

TheBible stands alone in revealing who God is and showing what pleaseshim. Its exact contents were ordained by God through inspiration.Scripture is “God-breathed” (2Tim. 3:16), havingbeen produced when people “spoke from God as they were carriedalong by the Holy Spirit” (2Pet. 1:21). Consequently,even though prophecy occurs in NT churches (1Cor. 14), it isnot received there as the unchallengeable teaching of OT prophets,Jesus, or his apostles. Rather, observers are to weigh carefully whatprophets say (1Cor. 14:29). John expressly warns of falseprophecy in the churches: “Dear friends, do not believe everyspirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God,because many false prophets have gone out into the world”(1John 4:1). These facts should lead one to be cautious inusing such phrases as “God told me that...”and in urging other Christians to act upon anyone’s privatesensations of being led by the Spirit, absent any objective reasonsfor doing so. Prophecy given by the Holy Spirit today should involvethe application of biblical truth to present challenges andopportunities. The same principle applies to subjective promptingsfrom the Holy Spirit. They should apply received doctrine withoutrevising it and must always be tested by the church.

Thesixty-six books of the Bible were written by real people, living inconcrete historical settings, and using ordinary language. Yet theyintend to speak of heavenly things and of a holy God. Consequently,theologians face the challenge of “seeing through” theBible’s figurative statements and artistic forms to the truthsthey convey, but without landing in unhelpful abstractions. Mostpeople who read the book of Exodus assume that God does not have anactual “arm” to outstretch (6:6) or a “face”that one may not see and live (33:23). But Moses chose these words toreveal something about God, and thus we have to ask how far theanalogy goes and to what degree it reaches down to our human level ofunderstanding. We know that God must somehow “talk down”to us, using our own language, even as he gives us historical andtheological claims having real content. Balancing these tworealities—the “otherness” of God and the earthinessof the written, human word that reveals him—is the delicatetask of exegesis.

Theinterpreter must also negotiate the various kinds or genres ofliterature found in the Bible, especially the ones that seem mostalien to our own ways of communicating. Our own documents do not(usually) feature the elaborate images of the book of Revelation orthe structures of Hebrew poetry found in the Psalter, and we do notlive in the first-century world. Therefore, to read the Scripturescorrectly, we must become culturally literate, so that we see ourtexts through ancient Near Eastern and Greco-Roman eyes. These fieldsare studied with care, based on the assumption that the Bible’sforms of literature were customary for their own time. They were notentirely strange to their original audiences. Thus, they can becomeless strange to us; and since the Bible is fully human as well asfully divine, reading its pages through the appropriate culturallenses will give us access to what the Spirit says to the churches.

HumanLimitations

Ananalysis of general and special revelation should consider theso-called noetic effects of sin—that is, the effects that sinhas upon our ability to reason and to learn. Human beings werecreated in the image of God (Gen. 1:26–27), having the capacityto interact with their Creator. They bear some “familyresemblance” to God, notwithstanding their materiality andfinitude. But when Adam and Eve sinned, they corrupted themselves andtheir descendants, so much so that Paul can describe them as beingenslaved to sin and death (Rom. 5–6). Since the fall, thebiblical writers have proclaimed the blindness of human beings to thethings of God. All people are “under the power of sin,”and “there is no one who understands” (Rom. 3:9–11).In Eph. 2:1–3 Paul describes unrepentant sinners as being “deadin [their] transgressions and sins,” so that they follow carnal“desires and thoughts.” Even someone as naturallyqualified as Nicodemus fails to see who Jesus is apart from thesovereign power of the Holy Spirit (John 3:1–15). Fallen humanbeings do not see what they ought to see and grasp what they ought tograsp. They can even say in their hearts, “There is no God”(Ps. 14:1).

Humanbeings do not have 20/20 intellectual vision, and our desires arecorrupted. Consequently, we do not benefit from God’sself-revelation as Adam did, not to mention the glorified Christianwho knows fully (1Cor. 13:12). In some cases, the sinner doesnot want to acknowledge the disclosures of God and thus does notperceive them. Habitual sin and doc-trin-al innovation can “sear”the conscience as with an iron, making “hypocritical liars”impervious to sound teaching (1Tim. 4:2). Although the heavensdeclare the glory of God, and although “in these last days hehas spoken to us by his Son” (Heb. 1:2), fallen human beingswill not grasp these truths. Yet they remain accountable to Godbecause the disabling wounds of sin are self-inflicted. Even thedemons of Scripture, who identify Jesus accurately, recoil from whatthey clearly perceive (Matt. 8:29; Mark 3:11; 5:7), as do thePharisees who attribute the Spirit’s work to Beelzebul (Matt.12:22–32). In these cases, the difficulty is not cognitive butaffective. Character becomes intellectual destiny.

Theworld abounds with religious viewpoints, each one claiming to revealhow it works and what constitutes the good life. It is also unlikelythat each of them contains only false statements and no true ones. Onthe contrary, the major rivals to Christianity gain some converts, wemay assume, by including fractions of truth and addressing someperceived human needs. Islam is not wrong in its rejection ofpolytheism and idolatry. Buddhism is right in its belief thatsuffering raises key philosophical questions. However, we shouldavoid saying that God has actually revealed something of his naturethrough these sources, as if their existence were a subset of generalrevelation. Paul may note the Athenians’ religiosity andillustrate a point by quoting one of their poets (Acts 17:22, 28),but his overall polemic makes it clear that he views their ideas asmistaken responses to general revelation. Similar remarks would applyto cults that mix some orthodoxy, based on Scripture, with enougherror to pervert the whole. God is not speaking indistinctly throughthem; rather, they are mishandling what he has said through thebiblical writers. In this sense, therefore, the Bible stands alone asthe unique word of God.

The final book of the Bible is known by its opening line:“The revelation of Jesus Christ” (1:1 ESV, NRSV, KJV).This phrase could indicate a “revelation about Jesus Christ”(the main character), or a “revelation from Jesus Christ”(the primary giver of the message to John; so NIV), or, as manybelieve, some of both.

Inpowerful language and vivid imagery, Revelation presents theconclusion to God’s grand story of salvation, in which hedefeats evil, reverses the curse of sin, restores creation, and livesforever among his people. Although the details are often difficult tounderstand, the main idea of Revelation is clear: God is in controland will successfully accomplish his purposes. In the end, God wins.As a transformative vision, Revelation empowers its readers/listenersto persevere faithfully in a fallen world until their Lord returns.

Genreand Historical Context

Genre.Revelation is best understood in light of its literary genre and itshistorical context. The literary genre of Revelation—letter,prophecy, and apocalyptic literature—explains much of thestrangeness of the book. The entire book is a single letter to sevenchurches in Asia Minor (note the letter greeting in 1:4–5 andthe benediction in 22:21). John is commanded to write what he seesand send it to the seven churches (1:11). A letter to seven churchesis in reality a letter to the whole church, since the number “seven”symbolizes wholeness or completeness in Revelation. NT letters wereintended to be read aloud to the gathering of Christians, and thesame is true of Revelation. The book opens with a blessing on the onewho reads the letter aloud and on those who listen (1:3) and closeswith a stern warning to anyone (reader or listener) who changes thebook (22:18–19). Like other NT letters, Revelation alsoaddresses a specific situation. For this reason, any approach toRevelation that ignores the situation faced by the seven churcheswill fail to grasp its central message. Many say that the message ofRevelation extends beyond the first century, but it certainly doesnot ignore its first audience.

Revelationis also a letter that is prophetic. In both the opening (1:3) and theclosing (22:7, 10, 18–19), the book is described as a“prophecy” (cf. 19:10). In 22:9 the angel identifies Johnas a prophet: “I am a fellow servant with you and with yourfellow prophets.” As a prophetic book in line with OT propheticbooks, Revelation contains both prediction about the future andproclamation about God’s will for the present, with emphasisfalling on the latter.

Finally,Revelation is a prophetic letter that is apocalyptic. In the openingphrase, “the revelation of Jesus Christ,” the term“revelation” is a translation of the Greek termapokalypsis,meaning “to unveil” or “to reveal” what hasbeen hidden. Most believe that apocalyptic literature grew out ofHebrew prophecy. The OT books of Daniel and Zechariah are oftenassociated with apocalyptic literature, and there were many Jewishapocalypses written during the time between the Testaments (e.g.,1–2Enoch, 2–3Baruch, 4Ezra).

Inapocalyptic literature there is a revelation from God to somewell-known human figure through a heavenly intermediary. God promisesto intervene in human history, to defeat evil, and to establish hisrightful rule. Such is the case with Revelation, which assumes asituation where God’s people are threatened by hostile powers.God is portrayed as sovereign, and he promises to intervene soon todestroy evil. Through bizarre visions and imagery common toapocalyptic literature, those who hear Revelation are transported toanother world for much-needed heavenly perspective. As the hearersmove outside their hopeless circ*mstances and see God winning the waragainst evil, their perspective is reshaped, and they are empoweredto persevere faithfully. They are simultaneously called to live holyand blameless lives as they worship the one, true God.

Historicalcontext.Along with understanding the literary genre of Revelation, one mustgrasp its historical context in order to read the book responsibly.Revelation itself describes a historical situation where someChristians are suffering for their faith with the real possibilitythat the suffering could become more intense and widespread. Johnhimself has been exiled to the island of Patmos because of hiswitness for Jesus (1:9). Antipas, a Christian in Pergamum, has beenput to death for his faith (2:13). In his message to the church atSmyrna, Jesus indicates that they should not be surprised by whatthey are about to suffer (2:10). The book also includes severalreferences to pagan powers shedding the blood of God’s people(6:10; 16:6; 17:6; 18:24; 19:2). Revelation addresses a situation inwhich pagan political power has formed a partnership with falsereligion. Those who claim to follow Christ are facing mountingpressure to conform to this ungodly partnership at the expense ofloyalty to Christ.

Thetwo primary possibilities for the date of Revelation are a timeshortly after the death of Nero (AD 68–69) or a date near theendof Domitian’s reign (AD 95). Although there is solidevidence for both dates, the majority opinion at present favors adate during the reign of Domitian, when persecution threatened tospread across the Roman Empire. The imperial cult (i.e., the worshipof the Roman emperor) was a powerful force to be reckoned withprimarily because it united religious, political, social, andeconomic elements into a single force. As chapters 2–3indicate, not every Christian was remaining faithful in thisdifficult environment. Some were compromising in order to avoidreligious or economic persecution. Revelation has a pointed messagefor those who are standing strong as well as for those who arecompromising, and this central message ties into the overall purposeof the book.

Purposeand Interpretation

Theoverall purpose of Revelation is to comfort those who are facingpersecution and to warn those who are compromising with the worldsystem. During times of oppression, the righteous suffer and thewicked seem to prosper. This raises the question “Who is Lord?”Revelation says that Jesus is Lord in spite of how things appear, andhe will return soon to establish his eternal kingdom. Those facingpersecution find hope through a renewed perspective, and those whoare compromising are warned to repent. Revelation’s goal is totransform the audience to follow Jesus faithfully.

Thereare five main theories about how Revelation should be interpreted:preterist, historicist, futurist, idealist, and eclectic. Thepreterist theory views Revelation as relating only to the time inwhich John lived rather than to any future period. John communicatesto first-century readers how God plans to deliver them from thewickedness of the Roman Empire. The historicist theory argues thatRevelation gives an overview of the major movements of church historyfrom the first century until the return of Christ. The futuristtheory claims that most of Revelation (usually chaps. 4–22)deals with a future time just before the end of history. The idealisttheory maintains that Revelation is a symbolic portrayal of theongoing conflict between good and evil. Revelation offers timelessspiritual truths to encourage Christians of all ages. The eclectictheory combines the strengths of several of the other theories (e.g.,a message to the original audience, a timeless spiritual message, andsome future fulfillment), while avoiding their weaknesses.

Outlineand Structure

Therehave been many attempts to understand how Revelation is organized.Some see a threefold structure based on 1:19:

Whatyou have seen (past) (1:1–20)

Whatis now (present) (2:1–3:21)

Whatwill take place later (future) (4:1–22:21)

Otherssee the book organized around seven dramatic scenes with interludesoccurring throughout:

Prologue(1:1–8)

Act1: Seven Oracles (1:9–3:22)

Act2: Seven Seals (6:1–17)

Act3: Seven Trumpets (8:1–9:21)

Act4: Seven Signs (12:1–14:20)

Act5: Seven Bowls (16:1–21)

Act6: Seven Visions (19:1–20:15)

Act7: Seven Prophecies (21:2–22:17)

Epilogue(22:18–21)

Thefollowing outline provides an overview of Revelation in ten stages:

I.Introduction (1:1–20)

II.Messages to the Seven Churches (2:1–3:22)

III.Vision of the Heavenly Throne Room (4:1–5:14)

IV.Opening of the Seven Seals (6:1–8:1)

V.Sounding of the Seven Trumpets (8:2–11:19)

VI.The People of God versus the Powers of Evil (12:1–14:20)

VII.Pouring Out of the Seven Bowls (15:1–16:21)

VIII.Judgment and Fall of Babylon (17:1–19:5)

IX.God’s Ultimate Victory (19:6–22:5)

X.Conclusion (22:6–21)

I.Introduction (1:1–20).Chapter 1 includes both a prologue (1:1–8) and John’scommission to write what he sees (1:9–20). John’s visionfocuses on the risen, glorified Christ and his continued presenceamong the seven churches.

II.Messages to the seven churches (2:1–3:22).Chapters 2–3 contain messages to seven churches of Asia Minor:Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, andLaodicea. The seven messages follow a similar literary pattern: adescription of Jesus, a commendation, an accusation, an exhortationcoupled with either warning or encouragement, an admonition tolisten, and a promise to those who overcome. These messages reflectthe twin dangers faced by the church: persecution and compromise.

III.Vision of the heavenly throne room (4:1–5:14).In chapters 4–5 the scene shifts to the heavenly throne room,where God reigns in majestic power. All of heaven worships theCreator and the Lion-Lamb (Jesus), who alone is qualified to open thescroll because of his sacrificial death.

IV.Opening of the seven seals (6:1–8:1).The unveiling of God’s ultimate victory formally begins here.This section begins the first of a series of three judgment visions(seals, trumpets, and bowls), with seven elements each. When thesixth seal is opened, the question is asked, “Who can withstandit?” Chapter 7 provides the answer with its two visions ofGod’s people; only those belonging to God can withstand theoutpouring of the Lamb’s wrath.

V.Sounding of the seven trumpets (8:2–11:19).The trumpet judgments, patterned after the plagues of Egypt, revealGod’s judgment upon a wicked world. Again, before the seventhelement in the series, there is an interval with two visions(10:1–11; 11:1–14) that instruct and encourage God’speople.

VI.The people of God versus the powers of evil (12:1–14:20).Chapter12 offers the main reason why God’s people face hostility inthis world. They are caught up in the larger conflict between God andSatan (the dragon). Although Satan was defeated by the death andresurrection of Christ, he continues to oppose the people of God.Chapter 13 introduces Satan’s two agents: the beast from thesea and the beast from the earth. The dragon and the two beastsconstitute an unholy trinity bent on seducing and destroying God’speople. As another interval, chapter 14 offers a glimpse of the finalfuture that God has in store for his people. One day the Lamb and hisfollowers will stand on Mount Zion and sing a new song of redemption.

VII.Pouring out of the seven bowls (15:1–16:21).The seven golden bowls follow the trumpets and seals as the finalseries of seven judgments. As the bowls of God’s wrath arepoured out on an unrepentant world, the plagues are devastatingindicators of God’s anger toward sin and evil. The onlyresponse from the “earth dwellers” (MSG; NIV:“inhabitants of the earth” [17:2, 8]; this is a commonterm in Revelation for unbelievers) is to curse God rather thanrepent (16:9, 11, 21).

VIII.Judgment and fall of Babylon (17:1–19:5). Thissection depicts the death of Babylon, a pagan power said to be “drunkwith the blood of God’s holy people, the blood of those whobore testimony to Jesus” (17:6). The funeral laments for thedeceased Babylon of chapter 18 give way to a celebration as God’speople rejoice over Babylon’s downfall (19:1–5).

IX.God’s ultimate victory (19:6–22:5). Thisclimactic section describes God’s ultimate victory over eviland the final reward for the people of God. This scene includes thereturn of Christ for his bride (19:6–16), Christ’s defeatof the two beasts and their allies (19:17–21), the binding ofSatan and the millennial reign (20:1–6), the final defeat ofSatan (20:7–10), and the final judgment and the death of deathitself (20:11–15). Chapter 21 features a description of the newheaven and new earth, where God’s long-standing promise to liveamong his people is fully realized.

X.Conclusion (22:6–21).Revelation closes with final blessings for those who heed the messageof the book and warnings for those who do not. Jesus’ promiseto return soon is met with John’s prayer, “Come, LordJesus” (22:20).

Charactersand Themes

Theforegoing outlines are helpful for understanding Revelation, butperhaps an even better way to grasp the message of the book is tolook closely at its main characters and story line. The followingseven themes capture the overall theological message of this dynamicprophetic-apocalyptic letter.

1.God.Revelation presents God as a central character in the story. He issovereign and firmly in control of history, as his description from1:4–8 suggests: “the Alpha and the Omega” (thebeginning and the end), “the one who is, and who was, and whois to come” (God of the past, the present, and the future), and“the Lord God, ... the Almighty” (ruler overthe universe). The throne room vision of chapters 4–5 alsoclearly asserts God’s sovereign rule. The throne of God itselfstands as a central symbol in the book, representing God’ssovereignty over all things. As a main character, God rightlyreceives worship. He is worshiped because he is the creator (e.g.,4:11; 14:7) and the righteous judge who condemns evil and vindicateshis people (15:3–4; 16:5–7; 19:1–2). Revelationalso describes God as one who desires to be fully and intimatelypresent with his people. God cares for and protects his people (e.g.,7:2–3; 14:1; 21:4). As the book closes, God announces thefulfillment of his long-standing promise to live among his people(21:6–7; cf. Exod. 29:45–46; Lev. 26:11–12). God’schildren have unhindered access to their loving Father as they servehim, see his face, and bear his name—all in his presence(22:1–5).

2.God’s enemies.Although God reigns supreme, he has enemies who oppose him and hispeople. As God’s chief enemy, Satan (also known as the dragon,the devil, the serpent, the accuser) works through worldly systemswith the intent of thwarting God’s plan. Chapter 12 summarizesthis cosmic conflict. In that scene, God defeats the dragon, who thenturns his anger against the woman and the rest of her offspring. Thedragon’s evil partners include the beast fromthe sea(traditionally called the “antichrist”) and the beastfrom the earth (the “false prophet”). The first beastoften has been identified with Rome, the dominant pagan power in thefirst century, although the reference likely extends beyond Rome toany political-economic power that demands absolute allegiance (see13:1–8; 19:19–20; 20:10). The second beast usesmiraculous signs to deceive people into worshiping the first beast.This opponent represents religious power organized in support of thefirst beast (13:11–18; 19:20; 20:10). The dragon, the beastfrom the sea, and the false prophet constitute the unholy trinity.God’s enemies also include people (usually called the“inhabitants of the earth”) who follow the beast (13:8,12), indulge in the ways of this world (17:2), and persecutebelievers (6:10; 11:10).

3.The Lamb of God. Jesus,the Lamb of God, plays a central role in God’s redemptive plan.In Revelation the Lamb is clearly identified as a divine figure whoshares in the authority, glory, and worship reserved for God (5:6,9–14; 7:10, 17; 12:10; 21:22–23; 22:1, 3). Expressionsthat refer to God are also used of Jesus, thereby affirming Jesus’deity (e.g., “Alpha and Omega,” “Lord” [seealso 1:4–5]). Revelation highlights the Lamb’ssacrificial death as the key to his victory over evil, paradoxicalthough it may be (1:5, 18; 5:9). As the slaughtered yet risen Lamb(1:17–18), Jesus is able to identify with his suffering people(1:9; 12:17; 20:4). The Lamb promises to return as the warrior-judgeto defeat God’s enemies and rescue God’s people (1:7;3:11; 16:15; 19:11–21). The famous battle with the forces ofevil is recorded in 19:20: “But the beast was captured, andwith it the false prophet.” The two beasts are then condemnedto the lake of fire, and their followers become the banquet meal forthe birds of prey.

4.God’s people.The people of God figure prominently in the book of Revelation. Johnuses a variety of terms and images to portray God’s people(e.g., church, saints, great multitude, bride of the Lamb, newJerusalem). These people have been redeemed by the Lamb, and theycontinue to rely upon his sacrificial death in spite of opposition(1:5; 5:9; 14:3–4). They are a genuinely multicultural people,as indicated by the seven uses of a fourfold formula: every “tribe,language, people, and nation” (5:9; 7:9; 11:9; 13:7; 14:6; cf.17:15). They are also a persecuted people (1:9; 2:9–10; 7:14;11:9–10; 12:10; 13:16–17) and at times even a martyredpeople (6:9–11; 16:6; 17:6; 18:24; 19:2; 20:4). ThroughoutRevelation, God’s people are characterized as those who obeythe commandments of God (1:2, 9; 6:9; 12:17; 14:12; 20:4; 22:9) andwho hold fast to the testimony of Jesus (1:2, 9; 6:9; 12:17; 19:10;20:4). They are a tempted people who are warned throughout the bookto endure in faith (13:10; 14:12; 18:4). Like their Savior, theyconquer evil by holding fast to their confession even to the point ofdeath (12:11).

5.God’s judgment.God’s judgment of evil plays a crucial role in the book. Thecentral section of Revelation contains three series of sevenjudgments: the seals (6:1–8:1), the trumpets (8:2–11:19),and the bowls (15:1–16:21). God sends these plagues on hisenemies to demonstrate his power and to vindicate his people. Theseimages of judgment also encourage repentance and remind people thatGod will win the battle against evil. Using two images ofjudgment—the grain harvest (14:14–16) and the winepress(14:17–20)—chapter 14 presents a clear choice: fear andglorify God (14:7) or face God’s inescapable and eternaljudgment (14:11, 19). God’s final judgment on “Babylonthe great, the mother of prostitutes” is reported in 17:1–19:6.Babylon represents the worldly system that has blasphemed God andpersecuted his people. God’s final judgment of the satanictrinity, their followers, and death itself is described in 19:11–21;20:7–15. Evil has been destroyed, preparing the way for therestoration of creation.

6.The paradise of God.The story culminates in God’s ultimate restoration of hispeople and his creation—the paradise of God. What God began todo in Gen. 1–2 he now completes in Rev. 21–22. The riverof life replaces the sea. The tree of life supplies food for all.God’s throne as a symbol of God’s sovereign rule over allreality serves as the source of life. God has kept his promise toconquer his enemies, vindicate his people, and restore his creation.The Abrahamic covenant of Gen. 12, that God would bless “allpeoples on earth” (v.3), is fulfilled as the tree of lifeprovides healing for the nations (Rev. 22:2). The new heaven and newearth is identified primarily as the place where God lives among hispeople (22:4). In the paradise of God there will be no more Satan orsin or death or evil of any kind. God’s people will bask in hisglory and respond in worship.

7.The present struggle.A final theme of Revelation is the believer’s struggle to liveout God’s story in the present. The Lamb’s followers relyupon the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus for their victory,but they continue to live in enemy territory. They long for the newheaven and new earth, but they must wage war in the present againstthe forces of evil. Jesus challenges the seven churches to “overcome”or “conquer,” a requirement for inheriting his promisesof eternal life, provision, justice, victory, and the presence of God(21:7). A voice from heaven summarizes what it means to overcome:“They [Christians] triumphed over him [Satan] by the blood ofthe Lamb and by the word of their testimony; they did not love theirlives so much as to shrink from death” (12:11).

Theytriumph in the same way that Jesus triumphed: victory throughfaithfulness, even if it includes suffering. This calls for rejectingfalse teaching, resisting idolatry, living righteously, and refusingto compromise. Triumphing includes authentic faith that results inobedience to Jesus. Above all, to triumph or overcome means to followthe Lamb.

Theseseven themes of Revelation reveal how the book offers hope to thosewho are suffering for the cause of Christ and warning to those whoare compromising with the world. Revelation presents the finalchapter in God’s grand plan to defeat evil, reverse the curseof sin, transform creation, and live forever among his people. Forfirst-century readers or twenty-first-century readers, Revelationoffers a dramatic and empowering vision of what it means to followJesus.

Riversin Cosmology

Genesis2:10–14 describes the garden in Eden as the source of anunnamed river that subsequently divided into four “headwaters”:the Pishon, the Gihon, the Tigris, and the Euphrates. Thisdescription defies any attempt to locate the purported site of Edenin terms of historical geography. The Tigris and the Euphrates do notdiverge from a common source, but instead converge before emptyinginto the Persian Gulf. Moreover, the Gihon, if it is to be identifiedwith the sacred spring of the same name in Jerusalem (1Kings1:45), is several hundred miles away from the Tigris and theEuphrates. The Pishon is otherwise unknown. If, as variouscommentators since antiquity have suggested, the Gihon and the Pishonare to be identified with other great rivers in the same class ofimportance as the Tigris and the Euphrates (the Nile, the Ganges,etc.), then this would further confound any attempt to understandGen. 2:10–14 in terms of historical geography. The image offour rivers emanating from a primordial garden and dividingunnaturalistically from a common source is attested in ancient NearEastern art, notably in the eighteenth-century BC wall paintingillustrating the investiture of Zimri-Lim. In this image, twogoddesses stand in a paradisiacal garden, guarded by mythical,sphinxlike creatures (cf. the cherubim in Gen. 3:24), holding vesselsfrom which four rivers flow.

Inhis vision of the restored land of Israel, Ezekiel sees a great riveremanating from the temple in Jerusalem, flowing into the Judeandesert, and ultimately turning the Dead Sea into freshwater (Ezek.47:1–12). Along the banks of the river, Ezekiel sees fishermenand perpetually fruitful trees. Similarly, the vision of the newJerusalem in Rev. 22:1–2 describes a river of the “waterof life” flowing through the city and watering trees that bearfruit in every month. In both cases, the visions draw on the notionthat Jerusalem is the cultic and religious center of the world andtherefore endow its spring—geologically speaking, aninsignificant body of water—with a cosmological significance.It was perhaps this same impulse that led the author of Gen. 2:13,probably himself a Jerusalemite, to mention the Gihon in the sameclass as the Tigris and the Euphrates.

InPs. 89:25, in the context of a poem describing the adoption of theDavidic king as a divine son, God is described as promising to “sethis hand over the sea, his right hand over the rivers.” Likethe sea, a symbol of cosmic chaos in ancient Near Eastern mythology,the rivers represent a force that is overcome by the divine warriorand then placed under the subjection of his human representative, thebeloved king. In this connection, it is significant that theexodus—in many ways the preeminent foundational moment of theIsraelite religion—involved the splitting of both a sea (Exod.14:21–22) and a river (Josh. 3:16; Ps. 114:3) and thesubsequent passage of the Israelites on dry ground. Thispeople-creating deliverance, in turn, is comparable to the account ofcreation in Gen. 1, where the Creator God drives back the waters toprepare a dry-ground habitation for humanity (vv. 9–10). InUgaritic mythology, Yamm, the sea god, also bore the epithet “judgeriver,” underscoring the cosmological connection between seaand river. As we will see, prophetic oracles of divine judgment,especially when they are directed against the river-basedcivilization of Egypt, often recapitulate the theme of the God ofIsrael fighting against the river.

TheNile River

TheNile (Heb. ye’or) is fed by two major tributaries: the WhiteNile, which begins at Lake Victoria, and the Blue Nile, which beginsin Ethiopia. At over four thousand miles, the Nile is the longestriver in the world. The ancient civilization of Egypt dependedentirely on the flow of the Nile and upon its annual flood (the “giftof the Nile”) for irrigation of crops. Even today, arable landalong the Nile is confined in some places to an area no more than afew miles from its banks.

Giventhe dependence of Egyptian civilization on the Nile, especially itsannual flood and the accompanying deposit of silt, it is notsurprising that the river figured prominently in Egyptian mythologyand religion. In particular, the story of the dying and rising godOsiris was linked with the annual ebb and flow of the great river.The annual inundation is still impressive today; an ancientimpression may be gleaned from Amos 9:5, where the prophet appeals tothe rising and falling of the Nile as a description of divine,earth-melting judgment.

Twoof the plagues sent by God upon the Egyptians took place at the Nile,an appropriate setting for a confrontation between the God of Israeland the Egyptian pharaoh, himself a living representation of theEgyptian pantheon. In Ezek. 29:3 the God of Israel says to Pharaoh,“I am against you, Pharaoh king of Egypt, you great monsterlying among your streams. You say, ‘The Nile belongs to me; Imade it for myself.’  ” Since the Nile wasperhaps the preeminent natural or environmental symbol of Egyptianculture, the God of Israel’s assertion of control of that riverwould have been understood as an unmistakable claim to sovereignty.At the time of the birth of Moses, the Nile was a place of extinctionfor the Israelites, for Pharaoh had commanded that every boy born tothe Hebrews be thrown into the Nile (Exod. 1:22). Ironically, Moseswas saved when his mother put him in the Nile in a pitch-coatedbasket, where he was found by the royal daughter of Pharaoh, who hadcome to the Nile to bathe (2:3, 5).

Godtold Moses to confront Pharaoh at the Nile (Exod. 7:15), and thefirst plague with which God afflicted the Egyptians consisted ofturning the Nile into blood, causing its fish to die and renderingits water unsuitable for drinking. The Egyptians were forced to digwells along its banks (7:20–21). The second plague involved themultiplication of frogs in the Nile, to the point of greatinconvenience (8:3).

Isaiahcontinues the theme of God punishing the Egyptians by attacking theNile: “The waters of the river will dry up, and the riverbedwill be parched and dry. The canals will stink; the streams of Egyptwill dwindle and dry up. The reeds and rushes will wither, also theplants along the Nile” (Isa. 19:5–7). The passage goes onto underscore the importance of the Nile as a source of irrigationwater and fishing and the devastation that results from the failureof the Nile to flood as expected. In other texts, where the emphasisis on the better fortunes of Egypt, the power of Egypt is symbolizedby the mighty Nile: “Who is this that rises like the Nile, likerivers of surging waters? Egypt rises like the Nile....She says, ‘I will rise and cover the earth; I will destroycities and their people’  ” (Jer. 46:7–8).

TheEuphrates River

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

Inthe Bible, the Euphrates represents the northern boundary of theterritory granted to Abraham (Gen. 15:18; see also Exod. 23:31).David extended his territory as far as the Euphrates when he foughtthe Aramean king Hada-de-zer (2Sam. 8:3), and so the dimensionsof Israel at its apex under Solomon are described as controlling allthe kingdoms “from the Euphrates River to the land of thePhilistines, as far as the border of Egypt [i.e., the southern limitof his realm]” (1Kings 4:21).

Inaddition to its significance as a political boundary, the Euphratesmarked an important cultural boundary in Israelite thought. Abrahamand his family are remembered as having come from “beyond theEuphrates River” (Josh. 24:2). The exile was described as ascattering “beyond the Euphrates River,” an expressionthat underscores complete dispossession from Israel’s own land(1Kings 14:15). Interestingly, the cultures to the east of theEuphrates shared the notion that this river marked a major boundary,as evident from the convention among the Neo-Assyrians and thePersians of referring to western lands by the name “Beyond theRiver” or “Trans-Euphrates” (Akk. eber-nari; Aram.abar nahara). This was the name of the province encompassing the landof Israel in the time of Ezra (see Ezra 4:10).

Isaiahmade use of the association between the Euphrates and theMesopotamian empires when he likened the king of Assyria to themighty waters of the river (Isa. 8:7). The Euphrates figuresprominently in Revelation, where it restrains punishment from thenorth, a punishment that is released when God dries up the river,allowing “kings from the East” to cross over (Rev. 9:14;16:12).

TheTigris River

Alongwith the Euphrates, the Tigris (Heb. khiddeqel ) was one ofthe two rivers of ancient Mesopotamia. The Tigris lies east of theEuphrates and runs over a course of approximately 1,150 miles fromnorthwest to southeast, finally joining with the Euphrates andemptying into the Persian Gulf. In antiquity, the cities of Calah,Nineveh, and Ashur lay along the Tigris. The Tigris is mentionedtwice in the Bible: first, as one of the four headwaters emanatingfrom the garden of Eden (Gen. 2:14) and, second, as the location ofDaniel’s visionary experience (Dan. 10:4).

TheJordan River

TheJordan (Heb. yarden) runs southward from the Hula Valley into the Seaof Galilee (also known as the Sea of Tiberias; modern Lake Kinneret)and from there through a river valley (the “plain of theJordan” [see Gen. 13:10]) to the Dead Sea. Over its course ofapproximately 150 miles, it descends dramatically from an elevationof approximately 200 feet in the Hula Valley to an elevation of 690feet below sea level at the Sea of Galilee, and then farther downwardto an elevation of 1,385 feet below sea level at the Dead Sea.Fittingly, the name “Jordan” is related to the Hebrewword yarad(“to go down”).

Inthe story of the exodus and conquest, the Jordan River marked theboundary of the “promised land,” despite the fact thattwo and a half tribes received inheritances on the eastern side ofthe river (the Transjordan [see Num. 32:32; 34:12, 15]). For thoseliving in the land of Israel, the river marked the boundary betweenthem and what they termed “the other side of the Jordan”(Heb. ’eber hayyarden [Num. 32:19; Deut. 1:5]).

Inthe OT, several memorable stories are set near the Jordan. Inaddition to Joshua’s dramatic crossing of the Jordan (Josh.3:1–17), the “fords of the Jordan” were strategiclocations, and it was there that the Gileadites slaughtered forty-twothousand Ephraimites as they attempted to return to their territoryon the western side of the Jordan (Judg. 12:5). Elisha instructedNaaman, the leprous Aramean general, to bathe seven times in theJordan for the healing of his condition (2Kings 5:10). WhenElisha’s companions wished to build shelters for themselves,they went to the Jordan, where they knew they would find abundantvegetation and poles (2Kings 6:2; cf. Zech. 11:3). When one ofthem dropped an iron ax head into the water, Elisha caused it tofloat to the surface (2Kings 6:6–7).

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

Tributariesof the Jordan

Southof the Sea of Galilee, the Jordan is fed by several tributaries. TheYarmuk River joins the Jordan just south of the lake, draining thebiblical region of Bashan to the east. The Wadi Far’ah joinsthe Jordan from the west, halfway between the Sea of Galilee and theDead Sea, and drains the hill country of Ephraim. Nearly across fromthe Wadi Far’ah, the biblical Jabbok River (Wadi Zerqa) entersthe Jordan from the east. In biblical times, the Jabbok was the limitof Ammonite territory (Num. 21:23–24). The Arnon River (WadiMujib), not a tributary of the Jordan, enters the Dead Sea from theeast, opposite En Gedi. It was the border between the Moabites andthe Amorites (Num. 21:13).

TheWadi of Egypt

Ina number of texts the “wadi of Egypt” (or “brook ofEgypt”) represents the far southern limit of Israeliteterritory. Some ancient interpreters understood this as referring tothe Pelusian branch of the Nile River delta, while most modernscholars favor the Besor River, farther east, in present-day Israel.Besides the Bible, Assyrian texts also refer to the Wadi of Egypt. In733 BC Tiglath-pileserIII set up a victory stela there, perhapsto advertise to the Egyptians the southern extent of the territorythat he claimed for Assyria.

Severalbiblical passages refer to the Shihor River as marking a boundarybetween Egypt and Israelite territory (Josh. 13:3; 19:26; 1Chron.13:5; Isa. 23:3; Jer. 2:18).

TheOrontes River

Althoughit is not mentioned in the Bible, the Orontes marked an importantinternational boundary in the biblical world. The Orontes begins inthe Bekaa Valley in present-day Lebanon, then flows northward betweenthe Lebanon and the Anti-Lebanon mountain ranges before turningsharply westward to empty into the Mediterranean Sea. Along theOrontes lay the kingdom of Hamath (see, e.g., 2Sam. 8:9;2Chron. 8:3; Jer. 39:5). Because it ran through a valley thatwas an artery of travel from north to south, the Orontes was theperennial focus of strategic interest, and several important battleswere fought at or near the Orontes. In 1274 BC the Egyptian pharaohRamessesII fought the Hittite king MuwatallisII at theBattle of Kadesh. In 853 BC the Assyrian king ShalmaneserIIIwas challenged at Qarqar on the Orontes by a coalition led byHadadezer of Damascus and including King Ahab of Israel.

Riversin Cosmology

Genesis2:10–14 describes the garden in Eden as the source of anunnamed river that subsequently divided into four “headwaters”:the Pishon, the Gihon, the Tigris, and the Euphrates. Thisdescription defies any attempt to locate the purported site of Edenin terms of historical geography. The Tigris and the Euphrates do notdiverge from a common source, but instead converge before emptyinginto the Persian Gulf. Moreover, the Gihon, if it is to be identifiedwith the sacred spring of the same name in Jerusalem (1Kings1:45), is several hundred miles away from the Tigris and theEuphrates. The Pishon is otherwise unknown. If, as variouscommentators since antiquity have suggested, the Gihon and the Pishonare to be identified with other great rivers in the same class ofimportance as the Tigris and the Euphrates (the Nile, the Ganges,etc.), then this would further confound any attempt to understandGen. 2:10–14 in terms of historical geography. The image offour rivers emanating from a primordial garden and dividingunnaturalistically from a common source is attested in ancient NearEastern art, notably in the eighteenth-century BC wall paintingillustrating the investiture of Zimri-Lim. In this image, twogoddesses stand in a paradisiacal garden, guarded by mythical,sphinxlike creatures (cf. the cherubim in Gen. 3:24), holding vesselsfrom which four rivers flow.

Inhis vision of the restored land of Israel, Ezekiel sees a great riveremanating from the temple in Jerusalem, flowing into the Judeandesert, and ultimately turning the Dead Sea into freshwater (Ezek.47:1–12). Along the banks of the river, Ezekiel sees fishermenand perpetually fruitful trees. Similarly, the vision of the newJerusalem in Rev. 22:1–2 describes a river of the “waterof life” flowing through the city and watering trees that bearfruit in every month. In both cases, the visions draw on the notionthat Jerusalem is the cultic and religious center of the world andtherefore endow its spring—geologically speaking, aninsignificant body of water—with a cosmological significance.It was perhaps this same impulse that led the author of Gen. 2:13,probably himself a Jerusalemite, to mention the Gihon in the sameclass as the Tigris and the Euphrates.

InPs. 89:25, in the context of a poem describing the adoption of theDavidic king as a divine son, God is described as promising to “sethis hand over the sea, his right hand over the rivers.” Likethe sea, a symbol of cosmic chaos in ancient Near Eastern mythology,the rivers represent a force that is overcome by the divine warriorand then placed under the subjection of his human representative, thebeloved king. In this connection, it is significant that theexodus—in many ways the preeminent foundational moment of theIsraelite religion—involved the splitting of both a sea (Exod.14:21–22) and a river (Josh. 3:16; Ps. 114:3) and thesubsequent passage of the Israelites on dry ground. Thispeople-creating deliverance, in turn, is comparable to the account ofcreation in Gen. 1, where the Creator God drives back the waters toprepare a dry-ground habitation for humanity (vv. 9–10). InUgaritic mythology, Yamm, the sea god, also bore the epithet “judgeriver,” underscoring the cosmological connection between seaand river. As we will see, prophetic oracles of divine judgment,especially when they are directed against the river-basedcivilization of Egypt, often recapitulate the theme of the God ofIsrael fighting against the river.

TheNile River

TheNile (Heb. ye’or) is fed by two major tributaries: the WhiteNile, which begins at Lake Victoria, and the Blue Nile, which beginsin Ethiopia. At over four thousand miles, the Nile is the longestriver in the world. The ancient civilization of Egypt dependedentirely on the flow of the Nile and upon its annual flood (the “giftof the Nile”) for irrigation of crops. Even today, arable landalong the Nile is confined in some places to an area no more than afew miles from its banks.

Giventhe dependence of Egyptian civilization on the Nile, especially itsannual flood and the accompanying deposit of silt, it is notsurprising that the river figured prominently in Egyptian mythologyand religion. In particular, the story of the dying and rising godOsiris was linked with the annual ebb and flow of the great river.The annual inundation is still impressive today; an ancientimpression may be gleaned from Amos 9:5, where the prophet appeals tothe rising and falling of the Nile as a description of divine,earth-melting judgment.

Twoof the plagues sent by God upon the Egyptians took place at the Nile,an appropriate setting for a confrontation between the God of Israeland the Egyptian pharaoh, himself a living representation of theEgyptian pantheon. In Ezek. 29:3 the God of Israel says to Pharaoh,“I am against you, Pharaoh king of Egypt, you great monsterlying among your streams. You say, ‘The Nile belongs to me; Imade it for myself.’  ” Since the Nile wasperhaps the preeminent natural or environmental symbol of Egyptianculture, the God of Israel’s assertion of control of that riverwould have been understood as an unmistakable claim to sovereignty.At the time of the birth of Moses, the Nile was a place of extinctionfor the Israelites, for Pharaoh had commanded that every boy born tothe Hebrews be thrown into the Nile (Exod. 1:22). Ironically, Moseswas saved when his mother put him in the Nile in a pitch-coatedbasket, where he was found by the royal daughter of Pharaoh, who hadcome to the Nile to bathe (2:3, 5).

Godtold Moses to confront Pharaoh at the Nile (Exod. 7:15), and thefirst plague with which God afflicted the Egyptians consisted ofturning the Nile into blood, causing its fish to die and renderingits water unsuitable for drinking. The Egyptians were forced to digwells along its banks (7:20–21). The second plague involved themultiplication of frogs in the Nile, to the point of greatinconvenience (8:3).

Isaiahcontinues the theme of God punishing the Egyptians by attacking theNile: “The waters of the river will dry up, and the riverbedwill be parched and dry. The canals will stink; the streams of Egyptwill dwindle and dry up. The reeds and rushes will wither, also theplants along the Nile” (Isa. 19:5–7). The passage goes onto underscore the importance of the Nile as a source of irrigationwater and fishing and the devastation that results from the failureof the Nile to flood as expected. In other texts, where the emphasisis on the better fortunes of Egypt, the power of Egypt is symbolizedby the mighty Nile: “Who is this that rises like the Nile, likerivers of surging waters? Egypt rises like the Nile....She says, ‘I will rise and cover the earth; I will destroycities and their people’  ” (Jer. 46:7–8).

TheEuphrates River

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

Inthe Bible, the Euphrates represents the northern boundary of theterritory granted to Abraham (Gen. 15:18; see also Exod. 23:31).David extended his territory as far as the Euphrates when he foughtthe Aramean king Hada-de-zer (2Sam. 8:3), and so the dimensionsof Israel at its apex under Solomon are described as controlling allthe kingdoms “from the Euphrates River to the land of thePhilistines, as far as the border of Egypt [i.e., the southern limitof his realm]” (1Kings 4:21).

Inaddition to its significance as a political boundary, the Euphratesmarked an important cultural boundary in Israelite thought. Abrahamand his family are remembered as having come from “beyond theEuphrates River” (Josh. 24:2). The exile was described as ascattering “beyond the Euphrates River,” an expressionthat underscores complete dispossession from Israel’s own land(1Kings 14:15). Interestingly, the cultures to the east of theEuphrates shared the notion that this river marked a major boundary,as evident from the convention among the Neo-Assyrians and thePersians of referring to western lands by the name “Beyond theRiver” or “Trans-Euphrates” (Akk. eber-nari; Aram.abar nahara). This was the name of the province encompassing the landof Israel in the time of Ezra (see Ezra 4:10).

Isaiahmade use of the association between the Euphrates and theMesopotamian empires when he likened the king of Assyria to themighty waters of the river (Isa. 8:7). The Euphrates figuresprominently in Revelation, where it restrains punishment from thenorth, a punishment that is released when God dries up the river,allowing “kings from the East” to cross over (Rev. 9:14;16:12).

TheTigris River

Alongwith the Euphrates, the Tigris (Heb. khiddeqel ) was one ofthe two rivers of ancient Mesopotamia. The Tigris lies east of theEuphrates and runs over a course of approximately 1,150 miles fromnorthwest to southeast, finally joining with the Euphrates andemptying into the Persian Gulf. In antiquity, the cities of Calah,Nineveh, and Ashur lay along the Tigris. The Tigris is mentionedtwice in the Bible: first, as one of the four headwaters emanatingfrom the garden of Eden (Gen. 2:14) and, second, as the location ofDaniel’s visionary experience (Dan. 10:4).

TheJordan River

TheJordan (Heb. yarden) runs southward from the Hula Valley into the Seaof Galilee (also known as the Sea of Tiberias; modern Lake Kinneret)and from there through a river valley (the “plain of theJordan” [see Gen. 13:10]) to the Dead Sea. Over its course ofapproximately 150 miles, it descends dramatically from an elevationof approximately 200 feet in the Hula Valley to an elevation of 690feet below sea level at the Sea of Galilee, and then farther downwardto an elevation of 1,385 feet below sea level at the Dead Sea.Fittingly, the name “Jordan” is related to the Hebrewword yarad(“to go down”).

Inthe story of the exodus and conquest, the Jordan River marked theboundary of the “promised land,” despite the fact thattwo and a half tribes received inheritances on the eastern side ofthe river (the Transjordan [see Num. 32:32; 34:12, 15]). For thoseliving in the land of Israel, the river marked the boundary betweenthem and what they termed “the other side of the Jordan”(Heb. ’eber hayyarden [Num. 32:19; Deut. 1:5]).

Inthe OT, several memorable stories are set near the Jordan. Inaddition to Joshua’s dramatic crossing of the Jordan (Josh.3:1–17), the “fords of the Jordan” were strategiclocations, and it was there that the Gileadites slaughtered forty-twothousand Ephraimites as they attempted to return to their territoryon the western side of the Jordan (Judg. 12:5). Elisha instructedNaaman, the leprous Aramean general, to bathe seven times in theJordan for the healing of his condition (2Kings 5:10). WhenElisha’s companions wished to build shelters for themselves,they went to the Jordan, where they knew they would find abundantvegetation and poles (2Kings 6:2; cf. Zech. 11:3). When one ofthem dropped an iron ax head into the water, Elisha caused it tofloat to the surface (2Kings 6:6–7).

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

Tributariesof the Jordan

Southof the Sea of Galilee, the Jordan is fed by several tributaries. TheYarmuk River joins the Jordan just south of the lake, draining thebiblical region of Bashan to the east. The Wadi Far’ah joinsthe Jordan from the west, halfway between the Sea of Galilee and theDead Sea, and drains the hill country of Ephraim. Nearly across fromthe Wadi Far’ah, the biblical Jabbok River (Wadi Zerqa) entersthe Jordan from the east. In biblical times, the Jabbok was the limitof Ammonite territory (Num. 21:23–24). The Arnon River (WadiMujib), not a tributary of the Jordan, enters the Dead Sea from theeast, opposite En Gedi. It was the border between the Moabites andthe Amorites (Num. 21:13).

TheWadi of Egypt

Ina number of texts the “wadi of Egypt” (or “brook ofEgypt”) represents the far southern limit of Israeliteterritory. Some ancient interpreters understood this as referring tothe Pelusian branch of the Nile River delta, while most modernscholars favor the Besor River, farther east, in present-day Israel.Besides the Bible, Assyrian texts also refer to the Wadi of Egypt. In733 BC Tiglath-pileserIII set up a victory stela there, perhapsto advertise to the Egyptians the southern extent of the territorythat he claimed for Assyria.

Severalbiblical passages refer to the Shihor River as marking a boundarybetween Egypt and Israelite territory (Josh. 13:3; 19:26; 1Chron.13:5; Isa. 23:3; Jer. 2:18).

TheOrontes River

Althoughit is not mentioned in the Bible, the Orontes marked an importantinternational boundary in the biblical world. The Orontes begins inthe Bekaa Valley in present-day Lebanon, then flows northward betweenthe Lebanon and the Anti-Lebanon mountain ranges before turningsharply westward to empty into the Mediterranean Sea. Along theOrontes lay the kingdom of Hamath (see, e.g., 2Sam. 8:9;2Chron. 8:3; Jer. 39:5). Because it ran through a valley thatwas an artery of travel from north to south, the Orontes was theperennial focus of strategic interest, and several important battleswere fought at or near the Orontes. In 1274 BC the Egyptian pharaohRamessesII fought the Hittite king MuwatallisII at theBattle of Kadesh. In 853 BC the Assyrian king ShalmaneserIIIwas challenged at Qarqar on the Orontes by a coalition led byHadadezer of Damascus and including King Ahab of Israel.

God’s people were to observe the Sabbath on the seventhday of each week by resting from normal daily work. It is firstexplicitly introduced in Exod. 16:23–30, where God providestwice as much manna for the Israelites in the desert on the sixth dayso that they might enjoy his provision for them on the seventh daywithout having to gather it on that day.

TheSabbath command is incorporated into the Ten Commandments (Exod.20:8–11). The motivation given in Exodus for keeping theSabbath is the fact that God made the world in six days and rested onthe seventh (cf. Gen. 2:2–3)—hence sometimes it isconsidered a “creation ordinance.” God’s rest washis enjoyment of a world that met his expectations, and thus theweekly celebration might look to a time when the world would onceagain truly enjoy such “rest.” In Deut. 5:12–15 themotivation is given as the new creation event, the redemption ofIsrael from slavery in Egypt.

Theweek, marked off by its Sabbath, is closely associated with the newmoon as a quarter of that natural cycle (1Chron. 23:31; Isa.1:13). The people of Mesopotamia observed a lunar festival shabbatu,but we do not know of any people independently of Israel observing aweekly Sabbath. The Sabbath is a communal rather than an individualobservance, including even “any foreigner residing in yourtowns” (Exod. 20:10; Neh. 13:15–22), a sign of Israel’scovenant relationship with God (Exod. 31:13–17; Isa. 56:6).

Althoughreligious worship is not prominent in the Sabbath injunctions in theOT, there was to be a gathering of God’s people on that daywith special offerings (Lev. 23:3; Ezek. 46:3–5), and it was aday when a visit to a prophet might be more likely (2Kings4:23). Psalm 92 is identified as a psalm for the Sabbath.

Theterms “Sabbath” or “sabbath rest” could alsobe applied to special days, such as the Day of Atonement, which didnot fall on the seventh day (Lev. 16:31). In an extension of thesabbatical system, the land was to enjoy a Sabbath of rest everyseven years (Lev. 25:4–7).

ByNT times, regular gatherings were held at local synagogues on theSabbath wherever a sufficient number of observant Jews resided. Jesusoffended Pharisaic sensitivities with regard to Sabbath observance,using it to alleviate human suffering and presenting himself as thetrue representative of humanity, for whom the Sabbath was designed(Matt. 12:1–13; John 5:9–10). The healings on the Sabbathday draw attention to the realization of God’s creative andredemptive purposes for the world.

Thewriter to the Hebrews treats the Sabbath as a foretaste of theultimate rest God provides for those who persevere in faith andobedience (Heb. 4:1–11).

Paulregards the victory of Christ as bringing a freedom “withregard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbathday” (Col. 2:16 [cf. Gal. 4:10]). Some Christians understandthis as denying continuity of the Sabbath principle of a weekly dayof rest. Others understand it in a way similar to Jesus’remarks on Pharisaic restrictions imposed on the day and see acontinuity of Sabbath observance, perhaps with a change of day, tomake it a celebration of the Lord’s resurrection on the firstday of the week.

The Bible does not have a generic term for the idea of color,but it does use various colors for descriptive and symbolic purposes,and it also refers to different coloring processes. Items can bedescribed as “dyed” (Exod. 25:5), “multicolored”(Ezek. 27:24), or “speckled” (Gen. 30:32) to indicatechanges or variety of color.

Certaincolors are commonly used in the Bible (listed below), while othersoccur rarely (e.g., brown and yellow) or not at all (e.g., orange),reflecting the range of colors and dyes available in the ancient NearEast. Colors are most often used for two purposes: to describe luxuryitems indicating wealth and power, and to describe the earthly andheavenly dwelling places of God. Ordinary people and places are notusually described in terms of the colors of their appearance.Exceptions to this include Esau (Gen. 25:25), David (1 Sam.17:42), and the male lover in Song of Songs (5:10–11).

Thefollowing colors have particular significance or symbolic meaning inthe Bible:

White.Used to describe the symptoms of leprosy (Lev. 13:3–4), whitemuch more commonly has a positive association, being the color ofpurity (Isa. 1:18; Rev. 3:4) and glory (Dan. 7:9; Matt. 17:2; Rev.1:14). Angels appear white (Matt. 28:3) or are dressed in white (Mark16:2; Acts 1:10). The multitude of worshipers in heaven will wearwhite robes (Rev. 7:9), having been washed in the blood of the Lamb.

Black.The female lover in the Song of Songs admires the raven black hair ofher beloved (Song 5:11). However, black things usually have lesspositive connotations: storm clouds (1 Kings 18:45), diseasedskin (Job 30:30), and the effects of the plague of locusts (Exod.10:15). Blackness can also be a sign of judgment (Rev. 6:5, 12).

Red.Red is the color of the earth, the color of wine, and the color ofblood. Red dyes could be made from crushed insects, plants, andminerals, giving a wide range of different shades (red, scarlet, andcrimson are common in the Bible). Scarlet yarn and red-dyed animalskins were included in the offerings made for the construction of thetabernacle (Exod. 25:3–5). Red was used to symbolize sin (Isa.1:18) and was also associated with warfare (Nah. 2:3; Rev. 6:4).

Blue.Blue tassels adorned every Hebrew garment as a reminder of God’scommandments (Num. 15:38). In the Persian court the royal colors wereblue, white, and purple (Esther 1:6; 8:15), and blue garments wereworn by the young Assyrian governors (Ezek. 23:6).

Purple.Purple dye was very expensive, so purple cloth was used as a sign ofwealth (Prov. 31:22; Acts 16:14) and a sign of authority: the kingsof Midian wore purple garments (Judg. 8:26); the wedding carriage ofKing Solomon was upholstered in purple (Song 3:10); the Babylonianking Belshazzar offered purple robes as a reward for service (Dan.5:7). Purple robes were put on Jesus before his crucifixion in amockery of his kingship (John 19:2–5).

Blue,purple, and scarlet were each separately associated with wealth andpower, but when used together these three colors were the epitome ofopulence and, as such, were associated with the divine presence. Thetabernacle curtains were woven from blue, purple, and scarlet yarn(Exod. 26:1), as were the high-priestly garments (28:4–15, 33).The same colors were later used in the temple curtains (2 Chron.3:14). Blue, purple, and red cloths were used for covering the Ark ofthe Covenant and its furnishings (Num. 4:6–12). Jeremiahdescribes idols adorned in blue and purple, an attempt to concealtheir worthlessness (10:9).

Gray.Gray hair indicated old age and thus wisdom (Ps. 71:18; Prov. 16:31).

Green.Green is the color of plants and thus was associated with life-givingfood and therefore God’s blessing. Green plants were given byGod for food (Gen. 1:30), so their removal or destruction was adevastating judgment (Exod. 10:15; Ezek. 17:24; Rev. 8:7). Peoplecould be symbolized as green plants when they were fruitful andblessed (Ps. 92:14; Jer. 17:8) or when they were easily destroyed(2 Kings 19:26; Ps. 37:2).

Self-control involves the willingness to submit to theboundaries of nature, society, and family that God places in theworld to bring about order and harmony in relationships. Theself-restraint of an individual’s thoughts, words, and actionsreflects the ordered discipline of God’s creation (Gen. 1–3;8:22; Prov. 6:6–8). Discipline of the self is essential to livea productive life in community (Prov. 25:28).

“Self-control”is one of the terms that Luke uses to summarize Paul’s messageto Felix (Acts 24:25). God’s people must exercise self-control(1Thess. 5:6; 2Tim. 1:7; 2Pet. 1:6). Ultimately,self-control is a gift, a fruit that comes from being in submissionto God’s Spirit (Gal. 5:22–23).

The modern concept of “self-esteem” may haveroots in individualism, but Scripture conceives of it in relation toGod and community. Creation grounds positive self-regard in dignity,blessing, and authority bestowed by God (Gen. 1:26–28; Pss. 8;139:13–16), hence the concern that God preserve one fromoppression, illness, and shame (Ps. 71). Self-esteem is not absolute,unlimited self-regard, but rather a healthy valuing of oneself andothers as beloved, gifted by, and responsible to God (Rom. 12:3–8;contrast Ps. 14).

Self-esteemdraws strength from the community’s defining story. The peopleof Israel are commanded to teach their children their narrative ofpromise, oppression, and deliverance (Deut. 6), and prophetic wordsof divine assurance help restore the exiles’ corporateidentity, preparing them for return to the land (e.g., Isa. 54).Similarly, Jesus pledges the Father’s care for the disciples aspersons, forming them as a community and freeing them for lives oftrust and contentment as God’s beloved children (Luke 12:32–34;Phil. 4:10–20).

When God creates humans, he pronounces them “verygood/beautiful” (Gen. 1:31). They are designed to bemagnificent visual displays of God’s character (1:26–27).Human sexuality originally is set in a context of overwhelmingbeauty. God’s first command is to reproduce and extend thisparadise throughout the earth (1:28). Human sexuality is not simply amechanism for reproduction. From the outset it has been aboutcompletion, without which there is loneliness (2:18).

Althoughthe Bible does not define the distinctives of masculinity andfemininity in any detail, it does defend that there are distinctionsbetween the genders. Behaviors that confuse the genders areexplicitly condemned (Deut. 22:5; 1Cor. 6:9; 11:4–16).

hom*osexualintercourse (Lev. 18:22; 20:13; Rom. 1:24–27; 1Cor. 6:9;1Tim. 1:10) and intercourse with an animal (Exod. 22:19; Lev.18:23; 20:15–16; Deut. 27:21) are violations of God’screated order.

Nakedness

“Nakedness”is confined to the genitals and buttocks (Exod. 20:26; Isa. 20:2–4;Ezek. 23:18, 29; Nah. 3:5) and, after the fall, is synonymous withshame (Gen. 3:7–10; 1Sam. 20:30; Isa. 47:3; Jer. 13:26;Mic. 1:11; Nah. 3:5; Rev. 3:18; cf. Rom. 1:23–24; 1Cor.12:23–24). A woman’s breasts are recognized as erotic(Prov. 5:19; Ezek. 23:3, 21) but not shameful. God slaughters ananimal in order to cover nakedness (Gen. 3:21). Ultimately, when sinand death are removed and the body raised, the redeemed will have noshame and will be clothed only in their righteousness (Rev. 19:5–9).

Exposingnakedness is an action used to humiliate enemies (2Sam. 10:4–5;1Chron. 10:9; Isa. 47:3). Jesus is stripped naked (Matt. 27:28,35–36). Violating another’s nakedness includes touchingor seeing (Deut. 25:11) and produces extreme personal disgrace (Lev.18:6–19 NASB; Hab. 2:15–16). It is an act of grace tocover another’s nakedness (Isa. 58:7; Ezek. 18:7, 16). To eventalk or laugh about inappropriate exposure brings dishonor (Gen.9:21–23). The overarching principle is purity (Lev. 18:24).

Marriageand Adultery

Althoughdamaged by sin, marriage continues to be the ultimate humanrelationship involving intimacy, privacy, and liberty. Marriage isdefined by a covenant—a contract witnessed and enforceable, notjust a promise made in private. The couple separate from theirparents to become “one flesh” (Gen. 2:24).

Oncethe marriage contract is agreed upon, the couple are married. Theycannot consummate the marriage until the economic commitments of thecontract have been delivered (Matt. 1:18; 25:1–13). This iscelebrated with a feast. Jesus uses this custom as an analogy for hisdeparture and return (John 14:1–3).

Paulcommands husbands to love their wives (Eph. 5:25–33; cf. Gen.24:67; 29:20; 1Sam. 1:5; Eccles. 9:9; Song 8:6–7).Nowhere in the Bible is a wife commanded to love her husband, thougholder women should teach younger women to do so (Titus 2:3–4).Love is the husband’s responsibility. Love is a command thatcan be obeyed, not just a pleasurable feeling over which one has nocontrol. The model of husbandly love is Jesus laying down his lifefor his people.

Theecstasy of making love is celebrated in the erotic Song of Songs,which holds out the hope of such marital delight even now. The axiomof marriage is a righteous jealousy (cf. Exod. 20:5; 34:14; Num.5:14, 30; Prov. 6:34).

Thefirst year of marriage is especially important and is protected byexemption from military service (Deut. 20:7; 24:5).

Whena man dies without a male heir, his widow’s possession of thatpart of the family estate can result in her marrying a man fromanother family and so alienating that land. This can be resolvedeither by the injustice of eviction or by the device of leviratemarriage. The nearest male relative of the deceased husband marriesthe widow, and their son then inherits the deceased husband’sname and title to the land (Deut. 25:5–10; cf. Gen. 38; Ruth).

Concubinesare wives from poor families, slaves, or captives, and theirmarriages are protected (Exod. 21:7–9; Deut. 21:11–14).

Rapeof a married woman constitutes adultery by the rapist, not thevictim. Consensual sex with a married woman is adultery by bothparties. Rape of a single woman is treated as fornication, with noblame attached to the woman. Her father has the option of letting hermarry the man or receiving significant financial compensation (Exod.22:16–17; Deut. 22:23–27). Her father has the right totake the money and refuse the marriage. To falsely accuse a woman ofadultery is a crime (Deut. 22:13–21).

Prostitutionis an extreme form of adultery or fornication and totally forbidden(Lev. 19:29; Deut. 23:17). Under the new covenant, this warning isheightened by the reality of the gift of the Holy Spirit transformingeach believer into the temple of the Lord (1Cor. 6:15–20).

Originally,marriage between siblings is implied (Gen. 4:17, 26; 5:4). Abrammarried his half sister, Sarai (Gen. 20:12; cf. Gen. 11:29; Num.26:59). The Mosaic covenant at Sinai bans marriage to bloodrelationships closer than first cousins and to in-laws (Lev. 18:6–30;cf. 2Sam. 13; 1Cor. 5:1).

Polygamyoccurs soon after the fall (Gen. 4:19–24). It is neverexplicitly forbidden in the Bible, but it is managed by OT law so asto restrain further injustice and damage. It is always seen as lessthan satisfactory (cf. Gen. 29–30; 1Sam. 1:6; 2Sam.13; 1Kings 1–2; 11). In the NT, monogamy is mandatory forthose who would lead the church (1Tim. 3:2, 12; Titus 1:6).(See also Premarital and Extramarital Sex.)

Self-Controland Purity

Theviolation of sexual purity is a decision of the heart (Ezek. 23:11;Matt. 5:28). The biblical concept of lust entails more than justphysical arousal. It involves a strong desire for/coveting of (cf.James 1:14–15) something that one has no right to acquire. Thisestablishes both the need for self-control (Titus 2:5–6) andthe availability of appropriate options (1Cor. 7:2, 5, 9).Masturbation is nowhere mentioned in the Bible (Gen. 38:9 is aboutfailure to fulfill the levirate). The critical issue is lust.

Sexualmisconduct is never the responsibility of the victim (Deut. 22:25).Nevertheless, for reasons of personal safety as well as out ofconcern for one another, the family of Christ must practice modestyin dress (1Tim. 2:9) and consider how to build one another uprather than put stumbling blocks in each other’s way.

Godalways provides the believer with what is necessary to resisttemptation and make the right choices (1Cor. 10:13).Consequently, a significant aspect of every parent’s role is toteach godly sexual wisdom to children before they face suchchallenges (cf. Prov. 1–9).

Thegospel requires us to view sexuality from a wider perspective.Reproduction also occurs through the preaching of the gospel, callingforth new birth and a new people (Matt. 28:18–20). This gospelcall will divide families (Luke 12:53). Singleness is no barrier toone’s ability to fulfill the command to multiply and fill theearth (Isa. 56:3–8). In times of distress it may be better toremain single (1Cor. 7, esp. v.26). This is also a giftof God (1Cor. 7:7), given to equip one for the fulfillment ofthe gospel commission.

When God creates humans, he pronounces them “verygood/beautiful” (Gen. 1:31). They are designed to bemagnificent visual displays of God’s character (1:26–27).Human sexuality originally is set in a context of overwhelmingbeauty. God’s first command is to reproduce and extend thisparadise throughout the earth (1:28). Human sexuality is not simply amechanism for reproduction. From the outset it has been aboutcompletion, without which there is loneliness (2:18).

Althoughthe Bible does not define the distinctives of masculinity andfemininity in any detail, it does defend that there are distinctionsbetween the genders. Behaviors that confuse the genders areexplicitly condemned (Deut. 22:5; 1Cor. 6:9; 11:4–16).

hom*osexualintercourse (Lev. 18:22; 20:13; Rom. 1:24–27; 1Cor. 6:9;1Tim. 1:10) and intercourse with an animal (Exod. 22:19; Lev.18:23; 20:15–16; Deut. 27:21) are violations of God’screated order.

Nakedness

“Nakedness”is confined to the genitals and buttocks (Exod. 20:26; Isa. 20:2–4;Ezek. 23:18, 29; Nah. 3:5) and, after the fall, is synonymous withshame (Gen. 3:7–10; 1Sam. 20:30; Isa. 47:3; Jer. 13:26;Mic. 1:11; Nah. 3:5; Rev. 3:18; cf. Rom. 1:23–24; 1Cor.12:23–24). A woman’s breasts are recognized as erotic(Prov. 5:19; Ezek. 23:3, 21) but not shameful. God slaughters ananimal in order to cover nakedness (Gen. 3:21). Ultimately, when sinand death are removed and the body raised, the redeemed will have noshame and will be clothed only in their righteousness (Rev. 19:5–9).

Exposingnakedness is an action used to humiliate enemies (2Sam. 10:4–5;1Chron. 10:9; Isa. 47:3). Jesus is stripped naked (Matt. 27:28,35–36). Violating another’s nakedness includes touchingor seeing (Deut. 25:11) and produces extreme personal disgrace (Lev.18:6–19 NASB; Hab. 2:15–16). It is an act of grace tocover another’s nakedness (Isa. 58:7; Ezek. 18:7, 16). To eventalk or laugh about inappropriate exposure brings dishonor (Gen.9:21–23). The overarching principle is purity (Lev. 18:24).

Marriageand Adultery

Althoughdamaged by sin, marriage continues to be the ultimate humanrelationship involving intimacy, privacy, and liberty. Marriage isdefined by a covenant—a contract witnessed and enforceable, notjust a promise made in private. The couple separate from theirparents to become “one flesh” (Gen. 2:24).

Oncethe marriage contract is agreed upon, the couple are married. Theycannot consummate the marriage until the economic commitments of thecontract have been delivered (Matt. 1:18; 25:1–13). This iscelebrated with a feast. Jesus uses this custom as an analogy for hisdeparture and return (John 14:1–3).

Paulcommands husbands to love their wives (Eph. 5:25–33; cf. Gen.24:67; 29:20; 1Sam. 1:5; Eccles. 9:9; Song 8:6–7).Nowhere in the Bible is a wife commanded to love her husband, thougholder women should teach younger women to do so (Titus 2:3–4).Love is the husband’s responsibility. Love is a command thatcan be obeyed, not just a pleasurable feeling over which one has nocontrol. The model of husbandly love is Jesus laying down his lifefor his people.

Theecstasy of making love is celebrated in the erotic Song of Songs,which holds out the hope of such marital delight even now. The axiomof marriage is a righteous jealousy (cf. Exod. 20:5; 34:14; Num.5:14, 30; Prov. 6:34).

Thefirst year of marriage is especially important and is protected byexemption from military service (Deut. 20:7; 24:5).

Whena man dies without a male heir, his widow’s possession of thatpart of the family estate can result in her marrying a man fromanother family and so alienating that land. This can be resolvedeither by the injustice of eviction or by the device of leviratemarriage. The nearest male relative of the deceased husband marriesthe widow, and their son then inherits the deceased husband’sname and title to the land (Deut. 25:5–10; cf. Gen. 38; Ruth).

Concubinesare wives from poor families, slaves, or captives, and theirmarriages are protected (Exod. 21:7–9; Deut. 21:11–14).

Rapeof a married woman constitutes adultery by the rapist, not thevictim. Consensual sex with a married woman is adultery by bothparties. Rape of a single woman is treated as fornication, with noblame attached to the woman. Her father has the option of letting hermarry the man or receiving significant financial compensation (Exod.22:16–17; Deut. 22:23–27). Her father has the right totake the money and refuse the marriage. To falsely accuse a woman ofadultery is a crime (Deut. 22:13–21).

Prostitutionis an extreme form of adultery or fornication and totally forbidden(Lev. 19:29; Deut. 23:17). Under the new covenant, this warning isheightened by the reality of the gift of the Holy Spirit transformingeach believer into the temple of the Lord (1Cor. 6:15–20).

Originally,marriage between siblings is implied (Gen. 4:17, 26; 5:4). Abrammarried his half sister, Sarai (Gen. 20:12; cf. Gen. 11:29; Num.26:59). The Mosaic covenant at Sinai bans marriage to bloodrelationships closer than first cousins and to in-laws (Lev. 18:6–30;cf. 2Sam. 13; 1Cor. 5:1).

Polygamyoccurs soon after the fall (Gen. 4:19–24). It is neverexplicitly forbidden in the Bible, but it is managed by OT law so asto restrain further injustice and damage. It is always seen as lessthan satisfactory (cf. Gen. 29–30; 1Sam. 1:6; 2Sam.13; 1Kings 1–2; 11). In the NT, monogamy is mandatory forthose who would lead the church (1Tim. 3:2, 12; Titus 1:6).(See also Premarital and Extramarital Sex.)

Self-Controland Purity

Theviolation of sexual purity is a decision of the heart (Ezek. 23:11;Matt. 5:28). The biblical concept of lust entails more than justphysical arousal. It involves a strong desire for/coveting of (cf.James 1:14–15) something that one has no right to acquire. Thisestablishes both the need for self-control (Titus 2:5–6) andthe availability of appropriate options (1Cor. 7:2, 5, 9).Masturbation is nowhere mentioned in the Bible (Gen. 38:9 is aboutfailure to fulfill the levirate). The critical issue is lust.

Sexualmisconduct is never the responsibility of the victim (Deut. 22:25).Nevertheless, for reasons of personal safety as well as out ofconcern for one another, the family of Christ must practice modestyin dress (1Tim. 2:9) and consider how to build one another uprather than put stumbling blocks in each other’s way.

Godalways provides the believer with what is necessary to resisttemptation and make the right choices (1Cor. 10:13).Consequently, a significant aspect of every parent’s role is toteach godly sexual wisdom to children before they face suchchallenges (cf. Prov. 1–9).

Thegospel requires us to view sexuality from a wider perspective.Reproduction also occurs through the preaching of the gospel, callingforth new birth and a new people (Matt. 28:18–20). This gospelcall will divide families (Luke 12:53). Singleness is no barrier toone’s ability to fulfill the command to multiply and fill theearth (Isa. 56:3–8). In times of distress it may be better toremain single (1Cor. 7, esp. v.26). This is also a giftof God (1Cor. 7:7), given to equip one for the fulfillment ofthe gospel commission.

The Hebrew word shekinahrefers to a continuing localized presence of God in the world, asthis is portrayed in the Bible. Although the word shekinahdoes not occur in the Bible, it is related to the biblical Hebrewverb shakan,usually translated as “dwell,” and the biblical Hebrewnoun mishkan,usually translated as “tabernacle, dwelling, tent.” Onlythe biblical usage of these Hebrew terms is discussed below.

TheBible presents God as acting in the world that he made. God sometimesspeaks to people, as when he speaks to the prophet Moses from theburning bush (Exod. 3:1–6). God accompanies the nation ofIsrael in its journey out of Egypt, with his presence represented bypillars of cloud and fire (13:21–22; 14:19–24). From acloud covering Mount Sinai, God speaks to the nation of Israel,giving the Ten Commandments (19:9–20:22). The Bible conceivesof such entry into the world not as a denial of God’stranscendence and rule over the world but instead as affirming God’spower (Ps. 115:5–8). Those who deny God’s willingness orpower to act in this way will naturally discredit the possibility ofsuch events. However, that kind of denial is a philosophical andtheological judgment, not a historical judgment. (For additionaldiscussion of God’s action in the world, see Theophany.)

AtMount Sinai, God tells Moses to make a sanctuary, where God willdwell continually among his people, Israel (Exod. 25:8). Thesanctuary is called a “tabernacle,” and it is a tentstructure. The sanctuary or tabernacle is built, the cloud of God’spresence covers it, and God’s glory fills it (40:34–35).The term shekinah refers to God’s presence, as found, forexample, in this tabernacle. The cloud of God’s presence risesup whenever the tabernacle is to be moved for another day’sjourney through the desert and drops back down afterward (Exod.40:36–38; Num. 9:15–23).

Centurieslater, Solomon builds a temple in Jerusalem to replace the portabletabernacle as God’s sanctuary. The cloud of God’s gloryfills the temple (1Kings 8:10–13). Centuries after this,the prophet Ezekiel has a vision in which he sees the cloud of God’sglory leaving the temple because of the sin of the nation of Israeland envisions the impending destruction of the temple (Ezek. 10–11).The temple is destroyed, later rebuilt, and ultimately destroyedagain in AD 70.

Inthe NT, the presence of God in the tabernacle is compared to thepresence of God in Jesus Christ. John’s Gospel begins withliterary references to Gen. 1, where God creates the world by merelyspeaking. John says that God’s Word of creation both was “withGod” and “was God,” since God’s Word isdistinct from God, even while God himself is present in his Word(John 1:1–3). John goes on to say that this divine Word becameflesh and dwelled among us (1:14). The Greek word for “dwell”is skēnoō,which often has the meaning of dwelling in a tent (skēnē).The idea is that just as God had previously come to dwell in thetabernacle, the divine Word has now come to dwell in human flesh.This interpretation is confirmed in the following words, that thedisciples had seen “his glory.” This is an allusion toGod’s glory, which had typically rested on the tabernacle, andwhich John says was revealed in Jesus’ miracles (e.g., 2:11).

(Disabilities; Disability; Deformity; Deformities; Sickness]The Bible often speaks of health, healing, disease, andillness. Good health was a sign of God’s favor, and healing wasalso the work of God and his divinely empowered agents. These agentsincluded the prophets (1Kings 17:8–23; 2Kings5:1–15), the apostles (Acts 3:1–10), and the messiah(Mal. 4:2). The divine prerogative of Jesus was to heal (Mark 1:32;6:56; Matt. 4:23; 8:16; 15:30; 21:14; Luke 6:10, 17–19), andmiraculous healings were a sign of his messianic office (Luke7:20–23). Disease, on the other hand, was regarded as a sign ofGod’s disfavor. Within a covenantal context, God could senddisease to punish the sinner (Exod. 4:11; 32:35).

TheBible assigns a wide variety of names to various diseases and theirsymptoms. These terms are nontechnical and generally descriptive.Some are uncertain in meaning. In most cases they describe thesymptoms of the disease, not the disease itself. Diagnosis often wasbased on incomplete observation and nonclinical examination. TheBible also presupposes supernatural intervention in the life of aperson. Healing occurred when God’s agents touched individuals,cast out demons, and resurrected the dead.

AncientNear Eastern Influences

Inthe ancient Near East the knowledge of disease and medicine wasprecritical. Bacteria and viruses were virtually unknown.Mesopotamian literature contains many references to medicine,physicians, and medical practice. Minerals, salts, herbs, and otherbotanicals were used to make up treatments. Babylonian physiciansalso administered prescriptions accompanied by incantations. Diseasewas considered to be the result of a violation of a taboo orpossession by a demon. The Code of Hammurabi (1750 BC) includes lawsregulating the practice of medicine and surgery by physicians. InEgypt medicine and healing were connected to the gods. Tomb paintingsand several papyrus documents describe the developing state ofEgyptian medicine, pharmacy, and surgery.

Greekphysicians admired and sought to learn the skills of the Egyptians.However, the early Greek doctor Hippocrates (460–370 BC),called the “Father of Medicine,” is credited with beingthe first physician to reject the belief that supernatural or divineforces cause illness. He argued that disease is the result ofenvironmental factors, diet, and living habits, not a punishmentimposed by the gods.

Itis clear that the biblical world shared with the ancient Near Eastthe same types of maladies common to tropical or subtropicalclimates. These include malaria, tropical fevers, dysentery, andsunstroke. The tendency of the hot climate to produce frequentdroughts and famine certainly contributed to similar types ofdiseases throughout the Fertile Crescent. Additionally, it must beremembered that Palestine was a land bridge between the Mesopotamianand Egyptian worlds. Migrations carry not only goods and products,but also parasites, communicable disease, and epidemics.

BiblicalConcept of Disease

Thereligious tradition of the Hebrews repudiated the magical or demonicorigin of disease. Hence, moral, ethical, and spiritual factorsregulated disease and illness. This was true for the individual aswell as the community. The Hebrews, like the Egyptians, alsorecognized that much sickness arose from the individual’srelationship to the physical environment. Great stress was placed onhygiene and preventive medicine.

Pentateuchallegislation offered seven covenantal principles designed to preventthe possibility of disease and sickness: (1)Sabbath observancefor humans, animals, and the land, which enforced regular periods ofrest (Gen. 2:3); (2)dietary regulations, which divided foodinto efficient categories of clean and unclean (Lev. 11);(3)circumcision, which carried physical benefits as well asreligious and moral implications (Gen. 17:9; circumcision is the onlyexample of Hebrew surgery); (4)laws governing sexualrelationships and health, including a list of forbidden degrees ofmarital relationships (Lev. 18–20); (5)provisions forindividual sexual hygiene (Lev. 15); (6)stipulations forcleanliness and bodily purification (Lev. 14:2; 15:2); (7) sanitaryand hygienic regulations for camp life (Num. 31:19; Deut. 23:12).

InNT times magical charms and incantations were used along with folkremedies in an effort to cure disease. Jesus repudiated these means.He also suggested that sickness and disease were not directpunishments for sin (John 9:2). In the Sermon on the Mount (Matt.5–7), Jesus confirmed that the ethical and religious standardsof the new covenant promoted the total health of the community andthe individual.

CirculatoryDiseases

Nabalmost likely suffered a cerebrovascular accident or stroke (1Sam.25:36–38). After a heavy bout of drinking, his heart “died”(KJV; NIV: “failed”), and he became paralyzed, lapsedinto a coma, and died ten days later. Psalm 137:5–6 may containa clinical example of the symptoms of stroke. The psalmist wrote, “IfI forget you, Jerusalem, may my right hand forget its skill. May mytongue cling to the roof of my mouth if I do not remember you.”This description points to a paralysis of the right side of the body(right hemiplegia) and the loss of speech (motor aphasia) that resultfrom a stroke on the left side of the brain. Basically, the exiledpsalmist is wishing upon himself the effects of a stroke if he heldanything other than Jerusalem as his highest priority. Some haveconsidered the collapse of Uzzah when he reached out to stabilize theark of the covenant (2Sam. 6:6–7) to be the consequenceof an apoplectic seizure. But since no actual paralysis was describedand death occurred immediately, this seems unlikely. It is moreprobable that God struck him down with an aortic aneurism or acoronary thrombosis.

Paralysis

Apossible case of paralysis may be described in the shriveled(atrophic) hand of JeroboamI (1Kings 13:4–6). In anangry outburst Jeroboam ordered the arrest of a prophet who condemnedthe altar at Bethel. When Jeroboam stretched out his hand, it“shriveled up, so that he could not pull it back.”Several complicated diagnoses have been offered to explain the“withered” hand, but it is possibly an example ofcataplexy, a sudden loss of muscle power following a strong emotionalstimulus. After intercession by the man of God, and the subsiding ofthe emotional outburst, the arm was restored.

Thethreat against the faithless shepherd of God’s people (Zech.11:17), which included a withered arm and blindness in the right eye,may refer to a form of paralysis known as tabes dorsalis, orlocomotor ataxia. Knifelike pains in the extremities and blindnesscharacterize this disease.

Paralysisis frequently mentioned in the NT (Matt. 8:6; 9:2, 6; 12:10; Mark2:3–5, 9, 10; 3:1, 3, 5; Luke 5:18, 24; 6:6; John 5:3; Acts9:33; Heb. 12:12). The exact diagnosis for each of these casesremains uncertain.

Thephysician Luke’s use of the Greek medical term paralelymenos(Luke 5:18, 24) suggests that some of these cases were caused bychronic organic disease. Others clearly were congenital (Acts 3:2;cf. 14:8). It is not necessary to rationalize the origin of theseexamples of paralysis as hysteria or pretense. The NT writersregarded the healing of these individuals by Jesus and the apostlesas miraculous.

MentalIllness and Brain Disorders

Casesof mental disease are generally described in the Bible by noting thesymptoms produced by the disorder. The particular cause of a mentalillness in the NT is often blamed on an unknown evil spirit orspirits (Luke 8:2). Such spirits, however, were subject to God’scontrol and operated only within the boundaries allowed by him(1Sam. 16:14–16, 23; 18:10; 19:9). Accordingly, in the OT“madness” and “confusion of mind” wereregarded as consequences of covenantal disobedience (Deut. 28:28,34).

Ithas been argued that King Saul displayed early indications ofpersonality disorder. Symptoms included pride, self-aggrandizement(1Sam. 11:6; 13:12; 15:9, 19), and ecstatic behavior(10:11–12). A rapid deterioration in Saul’s charactertranspired after David was anointed and became more popular (16:14;18:10–11). Since Saul demonstrated fear, jealousy, a sense ofpersecution, and homicidal tendencies, some scholars argue that hesuffered from paranoid schizophrenia.

Nebuchadnezzarsuffered a rare form of monomania in which he lived like a wild beastin the field eating grass (Dan. 4:33). David, in order to save hisown life, feigned insanity or perhaps epilepsy before the Philistineking Achish (1Sam. 21:12–15).

Inthe NT, individuals with mental disorders went about naked, mutilatedthemselves, lived in tombs (Mark 5:2), and exhibited violent behavior(Matt. 8:28). Such mental disorientation was often linked to demonpossession. Examples include the Syrophoenician’s child (Matt.15:22; Mark 7:25), the demoniacs at Gerasa (Matt. 8:28; Mark 5:2;Luke 8:27) and Capernaum (Mark 1:23; Luke 4:33), a blind and mutedemoniac (Matt. 12:22; Luke 11:14), and a fortune-telling slave girl(Acts 16:16). While such behavior is clinically suggestive ofparanoid schizophrenia or other mental disorders, themind-controlling influence of some extraneous negative force cannotbe ruled out.

Epilepsy(grand mal) causes the afflicted person to fall to the ground, foamat the mouth, and clench or grind the teeth (Matt. 17:15; Mark9:17–18; Luke 9:39). The description of Saul falling to theground in an ecstatic state (1Sam. 19:23–24) and Balaamfalling with open eyes may be indicative of an epileptic seizure. Inthe NT, Jesus healed many who suffered from epilepsy (Matt. 4:24;17:14–18; Mark 9:17–18; Luke 9:38–42). Somescholars have linked the light seen by Paul on the road to Damascuswith the aura that some epileptics experience prior to a seizure. Hissubsequent blindness has also been attributed to the epilepticdisturbance of the circulation of the blood in the brain.

ChildhoodDiseases

Thecause of the death of the widow’s son at Zarephath is unknown(1Kings 17:17–22). The death of the Shunammite woman’sson has been attributed to sunstroke (2Kings 4:18–37),although a headache is the only symptom recorded (v.19). Inboth cases there is too little evidence to present an accuratediagnosis.

Inthe first case, the boy at Zarephath stopped breathing (1Kings17:17). This may leave the door open to argue that Elijahresuscitated the child. However, in the second case, the text clearlystates that the Shunammite boy died (2Kings 4:20), implying aresurrection.

Infectiousand Communicable Diseases

Feverand other calamities are listed among the punishments for covenantalinfidelity (Deut. 28:22). Three different types of fever may beintentionally described here: “fever,” “inflammation,”and “scorching heat” (ESV: “fiery heat”).Fever is also mentioned frequently in the NT (Matt. 8:15; Mark1:30–31; Luke 4:38–39; John 4:52; Acts 28:8). Both Jesusand Paul healed individuals who had a fever. A number of these feverswere likely caused by malaria, since the disease was known to beendemic to the Jordan Valley and other marshy areas in Palestine.

Severalepidemics in which numerous people died of pestilence or plague arementioned in the OT (Exod. 11:1; 12:13; Num. 14:37; Zech. 14:12). Thefifth plague of Egypt (Exod. 9:3–6) has been attributed toJordan Rift Valley fever, which is spread by flies. Bubonic plaguehas been blamed for the malady that struck the Philistines (1Sam.5–6). However, it may have been the result of a severe form oftropical dysentery. Acute bacillary dysentery contracted in themilitary camp may also have been responsible for the epidemic thatkilled a large number of the Assyrian army (2Kings 19:35).

ParasiticDiseases

Somescholars have repeatedly argued that the “fiery serpents”(NIV: “venomous snakes”) encountered by Moses and thechildren of Israel (Num. 21:6–9) were in reality an infestationof the parasitic guinea worm (Dracunculus medinensis). Microscopicfleas ingested in drinking water carry the larvae of this slendernematode into the body. The larvae move from the digestive tract tothe skin. The adult worm, which may grow to a length of several feet,discharges its eggs into an ulcer on the skin. Death of the hostoccurs because of the resulting infection of the skin ulcers.

Afterthe conquest of Jericho, Joshua cursed the individual who wouldendeavor to rebuild the city (Josh. 6:26). Later, Hiel of Bethelattempted to rebuild the city and lost two of his sons as a result ofthe curse (1Kings 16:34). Elisha was then asked to purify thebad water at Jericho in order to allow a new settlement (2Kings2:19). Elisha obliged by throwing salt into the spring and therebymaking the water potable (2:20–22). Recent archaeological studyhas discovered the remains of certain snails in the mud-bricks usedto construct Jericho in the Bronze Age. These types of snails are nowknown to serve as intermediate hosts for the flatworm parasite thatcan cause schistosomiasis. The Schistosoma haematobium trematodeinfects the urinary tract and the bladder. It is possible that thistype of parasite was responsible for the death of Hiel’s twosons.

InNT times, Herod Agrippa apparently died of the complications of aparasitic disease, perhaps being infested by the larvae of flies(myiasis) in the bowels. Luke mentions that he was “eaten byworms” (skōlēkobrōtos [Acts 12:23]). The fatherof Publius also suffered from dysentery (Acts 28:8).

PhysicalDeformities and Abnormalities

Individualswith deformities were disqualified from priestly service (Lev.21:18–20). The list included lameness, limb damage, anddwarfism. The deformities mentioned here might have been congenitalor acquired. Mephibosheth was dropped by his nurse (2 Sam. 4:4) andperhaps suffered damage to the spinal cord. Jacob possibly sustainedinjury to an intervertebral disk (Gen. 32:32) causing a deformity anda limp. The woman who was “bent over” (Luke 13:10–17)might have suffered from an abnormality of the spine similar toscoliosis. It is difficult to ascertain the origin of the “shriveledhand” of the unnamed individual healed by Jesus (Matt.12:10–13; Mark 3:1–5; Luke 6:6–10). It could becongenital in character or a paralysis caused by any number offactors.

Diseasesand Disabilities of the Eyes and Ears

Physicalblindness is mentioned several times in the Bible. Blindness excludedone from serving as a priest (Lev. 21:18, 20). Blindness anddeafness, however, were disabilities requiring special care from thecommunity (Lev. 19:14; Deut. 27:18). The “weak eyes” ofLeah may refer to an eye condition (Gen. 29:17).

Blindnessin the biblical world was caused by various factors. Leviticus 26:16speaks of a fever that destroys the eyes. Flies probably wereresponsible for much of the conjunctivitis found in children. John9:1 mentions congenital blindness, which Jesus cured using mud madefrom spittle and dirt (John 9:6). In Mark 8:22–26 Jesus healeda blind man by spitting in his eye and laying hands on him (cf. Matt.20:34 with Mark10:52).

Congenitaldeafness would also be associated with mutism and speech defectsbecause a child learning to speak depends on imitation and mimicry.Jesus healed a man who was deaf and could barely talk (Mark 7:32–37).The man’s inability to say much possibly pointed to a loss ofhearing early in life.

SkinConditions

Variousskin and hair abnormalities are described in the Bible. Some made theindividual unclean (Lev. 13:30; 14:54). The OT speaks of “theboils of Egypt” (Deut. 28:27; cf. Exod. 9:9). Skin ailmentsincluded tumors, festering sores, boils, infections, and the itch(Deut. 28:27, 35; Isa. 3:7). Job complained of a litany of ailments:broken and festering skin (7:5), multiple wounds (9:17), blackpeeling skin and fever (30:30), gnawing bone pain (2:5; 19:20;30:17), insomnia (7:3–4), and wasting away (33:21). Thesesymptoms have been diagnosed as indications of yaws or eczema. Apoultice made of figs cured Hezekiah’s boil (2Kings20:7).

Leprosywas once thought to be a common problem in the biblical world.Leprosy (Hansen’s disease) is a slow, progressive chronicinfectious disease caused by a bacterium. Symptoms include loss ofsensation and loss of parts of the body. Evidence for this type ofdisease in Palestine is rare. Uzziah may have had a true case ofHansen’s disease. He was quarantined until the day he died(2Chron. 26:21).

Scholarsnow suggest that the symptoms of the disease described in the Bibledo not fit this pattern and thus do not signify leprosy (Hansen’sdisease) as it is known today. Instead, the word that Englishversions translate as “leprosy” (Heb. root tsr’)probably refers to different types of infectious skin disease, oftencharacterized by a long-standing, patchy skin condition associatedwith peeling or flakiness and redness of skin. Evidence points moretoward psoriasis, fungal infections, or dermatitis.

Thisdisease could appear in humans (Lev. 14:2), on buildings (14:34), andon clothing (14:55). It was not limited to the extremities but couldoccur on the head (14:42–44). It could run its course quickly(13:5–8). It made the individual ceremonially unclean, but itwas also curable (Lev. 14:3; 2Kings 5:1–27). Individualswith the disease were not necessarily shunned (2Kings 7; Matt.26:6// Mark 14:3). Moses (Exod. 4:6), Miriam (Num. 12:10), andNaaman experienced this type of skin disease (2Kings 5:1–27).Jesus healed many suffering from skin ailments (Matt. 8:2–3;Mark 1:40–42; Luke 5:12–13), including the ten “menwho had leprosy” (Luke 17:12–14).

Ailmentsof an Unknown Nature

Somecases in the Bible present insufficient evidence for scholars torender a clear diagnosis. King Asa suffered a disease in his feet(2Chron. 16:12). However, in the OT the Hebrew expression for“feet” is sometimes used euphemistically for the sexualorgans (Judg. 3:24 KJV). Because of this, the exact nature of thedisease is ambiguous. Jehoram was afflicted with “an incurabledisease of the bowels” (2Chron. 21:18–19). Otherunknown ailments factor in the deaths of the firstborn son of Davidand Bathsheba (2Sam. 12:15), of Jeroboam’s son in infancy(1Kings 14:17), of Elisha (2Kings 13:14), and ofEzekiel’s wife (Ezek. 24:16).

(Disabilities; Disability; Deformity; Deformities; Sickness]The Bible often speaks of health, healing, disease, andillness. Good health was a sign of God’s favor, and healing wasalso the work of God and his divinely empowered agents. These agentsincluded the prophets (1Kings 17:8–23; 2Kings5:1–15), the apostles (Acts 3:1–10), and the messiah(Mal. 4:2). The divine prerogative of Jesus was to heal (Mark 1:32;6:56; Matt. 4:23; 8:16; 15:30; 21:14; Luke 6:10, 17–19), andmiraculous healings were a sign of his messianic office (Luke7:20–23). Disease, on the other hand, was regarded as a sign ofGod’s disfavor. Within a covenantal context, God could senddisease to punish the sinner (Exod. 4:11; 32:35).

TheBible assigns a wide variety of names to various diseases and theirsymptoms. These terms are nontechnical and generally descriptive.Some are uncertain in meaning. In most cases they describe thesymptoms of the disease, not the disease itself. Diagnosis often wasbased on incomplete observation and nonclinical examination. TheBible also presupposes supernatural intervention in the life of aperson. Healing occurred when God’s agents touched individuals,cast out demons, and resurrected the dead.

AncientNear Eastern Influences

Inthe ancient Near East the knowledge of disease and medicine wasprecritical. Bacteria and viruses were virtually unknown.Mesopotamian literature contains many references to medicine,physicians, and medical practice. Minerals, salts, herbs, and otherbotanicals were used to make up treatments. Babylonian physiciansalso administered prescriptions accompanied by incantations. Diseasewas considered to be the result of a violation of a taboo orpossession by a demon. The Code of Hammurabi (1750 BC) includes lawsregulating the practice of medicine and surgery by physicians. InEgypt medicine and healing were connected to the gods. Tomb paintingsand several papyrus documents describe the developing state ofEgyptian medicine, pharmacy, and surgery.

Greekphysicians admired and sought to learn the skills of the Egyptians.However, the early Greek doctor Hippocrates (460–370 BC),called the “Father of Medicine,” is credited with beingthe first physician to reject the belief that supernatural or divineforces cause illness. He argued that disease is the result ofenvironmental factors, diet, and living habits, not a punishmentimposed by the gods.

Itis clear that the biblical world shared with the ancient Near Eastthe same types of maladies common to tropical or subtropicalclimates. These include malaria, tropical fevers, dysentery, andsunstroke. The tendency of the hot climate to produce frequentdroughts and famine certainly contributed to similar types ofdiseases throughout the Fertile Crescent. Additionally, it must beremembered that Palestine was a land bridge between the Mesopotamianand Egyptian worlds. Migrations carry not only goods and products,but also parasites, communicable disease, and epidemics.

BiblicalConcept of Disease

Thereligious tradition of the Hebrews repudiated the magical or demonicorigin of disease. Hence, moral, ethical, and spiritual factorsregulated disease and illness. This was true for the individual aswell as the community. The Hebrews, like the Egyptians, alsorecognized that much sickness arose from the individual’srelationship to the physical environment. Great stress was placed onhygiene and preventive medicine.

Pentateuchallegislation offered seven covenantal principles designed to preventthe possibility of disease and sickness: (1)Sabbath observancefor humans, animals, and the land, which enforced regular periods ofrest (Gen. 2:3); (2)dietary regulations, which divided foodinto efficient categories of clean and unclean (Lev. 11);(3)circumcision, which carried physical benefits as well asreligious and moral implications (Gen. 17:9; circumcision is the onlyexample of Hebrew surgery); (4)laws governing sexualrelationships and health, including a list of forbidden degrees ofmarital relationships (Lev. 18–20); (5)provisions forindividual sexual hygiene (Lev. 15); (6)stipulations forcleanliness and bodily purification (Lev. 14:2; 15:2); (7) sanitaryand hygienic regulations for camp life (Num. 31:19; Deut. 23:12).

InNT times magical charms and incantations were used along with folkremedies in an effort to cure disease. Jesus repudiated these means.He also suggested that sickness and disease were not directpunishments for sin (John 9:2). In the Sermon on the Mount (Matt.5–7), Jesus confirmed that the ethical and religious standardsof the new covenant promoted the total health of the community andthe individual.

CirculatoryDiseases

Nabalmost likely suffered a cerebrovascular accident or stroke (1Sam.25:36–38). After a heavy bout of drinking, his heart “died”(KJV; NIV: “failed”), and he became paralyzed, lapsedinto a coma, and died ten days later. Psalm 137:5–6 may containa clinical example of the symptoms of stroke. The psalmist wrote, “IfI forget you, Jerusalem, may my right hand forget its skill. May mytongue cling to the roof of my mouth if I do not remember you.”This description points to a paralysis of the right side of the body(right hemiplegia) and the loss of speech (motor aphasia) that resultfrom a stroke on the left side of the brain. Basically, the exiledpsalmist is wishing upon himself the effects of a stroke if he heldanything other than Jerusalem as his highest priority. Some haveconsidered the collapse of Uzzah when he reached out to stabilize theark of the covenant (2Sam. 6:6–7) to be the consequenceof an apoplectic seizure. But since no actual paralysis was describedand death occurred immediately, this seems unlikely. It is moreprobable that God struck him down with an aortic aneurism or acoronary thrombosis.

Paralysis

Apossible case of paralysis may be described in the shriveled(atrophic) hand of JeroboamI (1Kings 13:4–6). In anangry outburst Jeroboam ordered the arrest of a prophet who condemnedthe altar at Bethel. When Jeroboam stretched out his hand, it“shriveled up, so that he could not pull it back.”Several complicated diagnoses have been offered to explain the“withered” hand, but it is possibly an example ofcataplexy, a sudden loss of muscle power following a strong emotionalstimulus. After intercession by the man of God, and the subsiding ofthe emotional outburst, the arm was restored.

Thethreat against the faithless shepherd of God’s people (Zech.11:17), which included a withered arm and blindness in the right eye,may refer to a form of paralysis known as tabes dorsalis, orlocomotor ataxia. Knifelike pains in the extremities and blindnesscharacterize this disease.

Paralysisis frequently mentioned in the NT (Matt. 8:6; 9:2, 6; 12:10; Mark2:3–5, 9, 10; 3:1, 3, 5; Luke 5:18, 24; 6:6; John 5:3; Acts9:33; Heb. 12:12). The exact diagnosis for each of these casesremains uncertain.

Thephysician Luke’s use of the Greek medical term paralelymenos(Luke 5:18, 24) suggests that some of these cases were caused bychronic organic disease. Others clearly were congenital (Acts 3:2;cf. 14:8). It is not necessary to rationalize the origin of theseexamples of paralysis as hysteria or pretense. The NT writersregarded the healing of these individuals by Jesus and the apostlesas miraculous.

MentalIllness and Brain Disorders

Casesof mental disease are generally described in the Bible by noting thesymptoms produced by the disorder. The particular cause of a mentalillness in the NT is often blamed on an unknown evil spirit orspirits (Luke 8:2). Such spirits, however, were subject to God’scontrol and operated only within the boundaries allowed by him(1Sam. 16:14–16, 23; 18:10; 19:9). Accordingly, in the OT“madness” and “confusion of mind” wereregarded as consequences of covenantal disobedience (Deut. 28:28,34).

Ithas been argued that King Saul displayed early indications ofpersonality disorder. Symptoms included pride, self-aggrandizement(1Sam. 11:6; 13:12; 15:9, 19), and ecstatic behavior(10:11–12). A rapid deterioration in Saul’s charactertranspired after David was anointed and became more popular (16:14;18:10–11). Since Saul demonstrated fear, jealousy, a sense ofpersecution, and homicidal tendencies, some scholars argue that hesuffered from paranoid schizophrenia.

Nebuchadnezzarsuffered a rare form of monomania in which he lived like a wild beastin the field eating grass (Dan. 4:33). David, in order to save hisown life, feigned insanity or perhaps epilepsy before the Philistineking Achish (1Sam. 21:12–15).

Inthe NT, individuals with mental disorders went about naked, mutilatedthemselves, lived in tombs (Mark 5:2), and exhibited violent behavior(Matt. 8:28). Such mental disorientation was often linked to demonpossession. Examples include the Syrophoenician’s child (Matt.15:22; Mark 7:25), the demoniacs at Gerasa (Matt. 8:28; Mark 5:2;Luke 8:27) and Capernaum (Mark 1:23; Luke 4:33), a blind and mutedemoniac (Matt. 12:22; Luke 11:14), and a fortune-telling slave girl(Acts 16:16). While such behavior is clinically suggestive ofparanoid schizophrenia or other mental disorders, themind-controlling influence of some extraneous negative force cannotbe ruled out.

Epilepsy(grand mal) causes the afflicted person to fall to the ground, foamat the mouth, and clench or grind the teeth (Matt. 17:15; Mark9:17–18; Luke 9:39). The description of Saul falling to theground in an ecstatic state (1Sam. 19:23–24) and Balaamfalling with open eyes may be indicative of an epileptic seizure. Inthe NT, Jesus healed many who suffered from epilepsy (Matt. 4:24;17:14–18; Mark 9:17–18; Luke 9:38–42). Somescholars have linked the light seen by Paul on the road to Damascuswith the aura that some epileptics experience prior to a seizure. Hissubsequent blindness has also been attributed to the epilepticdisturbance of the circulation of the blood in the brain.

ChildhoodDiseases

Thecause of the death of the widow’s son at Zarephath is unknown(1Kings 17:17–22). The death of the Shunammite woman’sson has been attributed to sunstroke (2Kings 4:18–37),although a headache is the only symptom recorded (v.19). Inboth cases there is too little evidence to present an accuratediagnosis.

Inthe first case, the boy at Zarephath stopped breathing (1Kings17:17). This may leave the door open to argue that Elijahresuscitated the child. However, in the second case, the text clearlystates that the Shunammite boy died (2Kings 4:20), implying aresurrection.

Infectiousand Communicable Diseases

Feverand other calamities are listed among the punishments for covenantalinfidelity (Deut. 28:22). Three different types of fever may beintentionally described here: “fever,” “inflammation,”and “scorching heat” (ESV: “fiery heat”).Fever is also mentioned frequently in the NT (Matt. 8:15; Mark1:30–31; Luke 4:38–39; John 4:52; Acts 28:8). Both Jesusand Paul healed individuals who had a fever. A number of these feverswere likely caused by malaria, since the disease was known to beendemic to the Jordan Valley and other marshy areas in Palestine.

Severalepidemics in which numerous people died of pestilence or plague arementioned in the OT (Exod. 11:1; 12:13; Num. 14:37; Zech. 14:12). Thefifth plague of Egypt (Exod. 9:3–6) has been attributed toJordan Rift Valley fever, which is spread by flies. Bubonic plaguehas been blamed for the malady that struck the Philistines (1Sam.5–6). However, it may have been the result of a severe form oftropical dysentery. Acute bacillary dysentery contracted in themilitary camp may also have been responsible for the epidemic thatkilled a large number of the Assyrian army (2Kings 19:35).

ParasiticDiseases

Somescholars have repeatedly argued that the “fiery serpents”(NIV: “venomous snakes”) encountered by Moses and thechildren of Israel (Num. 21:6–9) were in reality an infestationof the parasitic guinea worm (Dracunculus medinensis). Microscopicfleas ingested in drinking water carry the larvae of this slendernematode into the body. The larvae move from the digestive tract tothe skin. The adult worm, which may grow to a length of several feet,discharges its eggs into an ulcer on the skin. Death of the hostoccurs because of the resulting infection of the skin ulcers.

Afterthe conquest of Jericho, Joshua cursed the individual who wouldendeavor to rebuild the city (Josh. 6:26). Later, Hiel of Bethelattempted to rebuild the city and lost two of his sons as a result ofthe curse (1Kings 16:34). Elisha was then asked to purify thebad water at Jericho in order to allow a new settlement (2Kings2:19). Elisha obliged by throwing salt into the spring and therebymaking the water potable (2:20–22). Recent archaeological studyhas discovered the remains of certain snails in the mud-bricks usedto construct Jericho in the Bronze Age. These types of snails are nowknown to serve as intermediate hosts for the flatworm parasite thatcan cause schistosomiasis. The Schistosoma haematobium trematodeinfects the urinary tract and the bladder. It is possible that thistype of parasite was responsible for the death of Hiel’s twosons.

InNT times, Herod Agrippa apparently died of the complications of aparasitic disease, perhaps being infested by the larvae of flies(myiasis) in the bowels. Luke mentions that he was “eaten byworms” (skōlēkobrōtos [Acts 12:23]). The fatherof Publius also suffered from dysentery (Acts 28:8).

PhysicalDeformities and Abnormalities

Individualswith deformities were disqualified from priestly service (Lev.21:18–20). The list included lameness, limb damage, anddwarfism. The deformities mentioned here might have been congenitalor acquired. Mephibosheth was dropped by his nurse (2 Sam. 4:4) andperhaps suffered damage to the spinal cord. Jacob possibly sustainedinjury to an intervertebral disk (Gen. 32:32) causing a deformity anda limp. The woman who was “bent over” (Luke 13:10–17)might have suffered from an abnormality of the spine similar toscoliosis. It is difficult to ascertain the origin of the “shriveledhand” of the unnamed individual healed by Jesus (Matt.12:10–13; Mark 3:1–5; Luke 6:6–10). It could becongenital in character or a paralysis caused by any number offactors.

Diseasesand Disabilities of the Eyes and Ears

Physicalblindness is mentioned several times in the Bible. Blindness excludedone from serving as a priest (Lev. 21:18, 20). Blindness anddeafness, however, were disabilities requiring special care from thecommunity (Lev. 19:14; Deut. 27:18). The “weak eyes” ofLeah may refer to an eye condition (Gen. 29:17).

Blindnessin the biblical world was caused by various factors. Leviticus 26:16speaks of a fever that destroys the eyes. Flies probably wereresponsible for much of the conjunctivitis found in children. John9:1 mentions congenital blindness, which Jesus cured using mud madefrom spittle and dirt (John 9:6). In Mark 8:22–26 Jesus healeda blind man by spitting in his eye and laying hands on him (cf. Matt.20:34 with Mark10:52).

Congenitaldeafness would also be associated with mutism and speech defectsbecause a child learning to speak depends on imitation and mimicry.Jesus healed a man who was deaf and could barely talk (Mark 7:32–37).The man’s inability to say much possibly pointed to a loss ofhearing early in life.

SkinConditions

Variousskin and hair abnormalities are described in the Bible. Some made theindividual unclean (Lev. 13:30; 14:54). The OT speaks of “theboils of Egypt” (Deut. 28:27; cf. Exod. 9:9). Skin ailmentsincluded tumors, festering sores, boils, infections, and the itch(Deut. 28:27, 35; Isa. 3:7). Job complained of a litany of ailments:broken and festering skin (7:5), multiple wounds (9:17), blackpeeling skin and fever (30:30), gnawing bone pain (2:5; 19:20;30:17), insomnia (7:3–4), and wasting away (33:21). Thesesymptoms have been diagnosed as indications of yaws or eczema. Apoultice made of figs cured Hezekiah’s boil (2Kings20:7).

Leprosywas once thought to be a common problem in the biblical world.Leprosy (Hansen’s disease) is a slow, progressive chronicinfectious disease caused by a bacterium. Symptoms include loss ofsensation and loss of parts of the body. Evidence for this type ofdisease in Palestine is rare. Uzziah may have had a true case ofHansen’s disease. He was quarantined until the day he died(2Chron. 26:21).

Scholarsnow suggest that the symptoms of the disease described in the Bibledo not fit this pattern and thus do not signify leprosy (Hansen’sdisease) as it is known today. Instead, the word that Englishversions translate as “leprosy” (Heb. root tsr’)probably refers to different types of infectious skin disease, oftencharacterized by a long-standing, patchy skin condition associatedwith peeling or flakiness and redness of skin. Evidence points moretoward psoriasis, fungal infections, or dermatitis.

Thisdisease could appear in humans (Lev. 14:2), on buildings (14:34), andon clothing (14:55). It was not limited to the extremities but couldoccur on the head (14:42–44). It could run its course quickly(13:5–8). It made the individual ceremonially unclean, but itwas also curable (Lev. 14:3; 2Kings 5:1–27). Individualswith the disease were not necessarily shunned (2Kings 7; Matt.26:6// Mark 14:3). Moses (Exod. 4:6), Miriam (Num. 12:10), andNaaman experienced this type of skin disease (2Kings 5:1–27).Jesus healed many suffering from skin ailments (Matt. 8:2–3;Mark 1:40–42; Luke 5:12–13), including the ten “menwho had leprosy” (Luke 17:12–14).

Ailmentsof an Unknown Nature

Somecases in the Bible present insufficient evidence for scholars torender a clear diagnosis. King Asa suffered a disease in his feet(2Chron. 16:12). However, in the OT the Hebrew expression for“feet” is sometimes used euphemistically for the sexualorgans (Judg. 3:24 KJV). Because of this, the exact nature of thedisease is ambiguous. Jehoram was afflicted with “an incurabledisease of the bowels” (2Chron. 21:18–19). Otherunknown ailments factor in the deaths of the firstborn son of Davidand Bathsheba (2Sam. 12:15), of Jeroboam’s son in infancy(1Kings 14:17), of Elisha (2Kings 13:14), and ofEzekiel’s wife (Ezek. 24:16).

Geography

Whereasthe principal direction in the modern world is north, in the ancientworld different cultures used a variety of orientations as theysought to describe their relationship to their geographicalenvironment. In Israel the primary direction was determined by thesunrise: east. This is reflected in Hebrew, where the main word usedto refer to east as a direction was qedem, which could also be usedto simply refer to that which was directly ahead or in front of thespeaker (e.g., Ps. 139:5). Elsewhere, east is designated by the termsmizrakh (“rising” [Josh. 11:3]) or mizrakh hashamesh(“rising of the sun” [Num. 21:11]), both of which derivefrom the direction of sunrise. By way of contrast, in Egypt theprimary direction was south, in alignment with the source of the NileRiver.

Theancient world employed the same notion of four cardinal directions,which persists to the present, and the terminology related to thesewas influenced by the choice of primary direction. Thus, in Israelnorth is often designated by “left”; south could bedesignated by “right,” and west by “behind.”In addition, directions could be specified by reference togeographical features found in those directions. North could bespecified by the word tsapon, which was derived from the name of anorthern Syrian mountain (Zaphon); south by negeb, a name for theregion south of Israel (Negev); and west by yam (“sea”),since the Mediterranean Sea lay to the west.

Symbolism

Asidefrom their purely geographical significance, the directions also cameto bear figurative significance. Some caution is warranted inassigning symbolic significance to language, for there is danger ofreading invalid meanings into texts. Furthermore, given the ambiguityinherent in the use of terms to refer to directions, which also havealternate significances, there is danger of assigning a symbolicmeaning to the direction that actually resides in the alternate. So,for example, while yam (“sea”) carries significantsymbolic overtones in the Bible, this association does not appear tohave been extended to encompass the term when used to designate awesterly direction.

Eastand west.Nonetheless, there is, for example, probably some significance in theexpulsion from Eden and progressive movement eastward to the tower ofBabel through Gen. 1–11, followed by a return to the promisedland, which was approached by reversing the easterly migration andreturning toward Eden. Eden itself was said to lie “in theeast” (Heb. miqqedem; Gen. 2:8), although the same Hebrewexpression in Pss. 74:12; 77:5, 11; 78:2; 143:5 means “inancient times,” and there is perhaps a deliberate ambiguity inthe use of the expression in Gen. 2:8. In Isa. 2:6 the east is thesource of influences on the people that lead them astray. Followingthe exile, Ezekiel sees the glory of God returning to the temple fromthe east (Ezek. 43:1–2). Thus, when used symbolically, “east”is often viewed negatively or else may be used to mark a connectionwith distant antiquity (Gen. 2:8; Job 1:3). Any symbolic significanceassigned to west appears primarily to be associated with it being theantithesis of east. The distance between east and west was usedpoetically to express vast distance (Ps. 103:12).

Northand south.North is significant for two primary reasons. First, it is thedirection from which invading armies most often descended upon Israel(Jer. 1:13) as well as from which Babylon’s destruction is saidto come (Jer. 50:3). In light of this, Ezekiel’s vision of Godapproaching from the north strikes an ominous tone of impendingjudgment (Ezek. 1:1–4). Second, in Canaanite mythology theabode of the gods, and specifically Baal, lay to the north, on MountZaphon. Thus, the king of Babylon’s plans in Isa. 14:13 amountto a claim to establish himself as one of the gods. In contrast tothis, Ps. 48:2 pre-sents Mount Zion as supplanting Mount Zaphon andthus implicitly presents Israel’s one God as supplanting theCanaanite pantheon.

Aswith west, there is little symbolic significance associated with thedirection south in the Bible, aside from its use in combination withother directions.

Thefour directions.The four directions (or sometimes just pairs of directions) are usedtogether to describe both the scattering of the Israelites as well astheir being gathered by God back to the promised land (Ps. 107:3;Isa. 43:5–6; Luke 13:29). They are also used together toexpress the extent of the promised land (Gen. 13:14) or else todescribe something that is all-encompassing (1Chron. 9:24).

Another name for Sunday, this term reminds us that this daybelongs to the Lord and should be used for his honor and glory. Theterm itself is used only once in Scripture, where John mentions howhe was in the Spirit “on the Lord’s Day” whenChrist commissioned him to write the book of Revelation (Rev. 1:10).There are no other specific details clearly given in Scripture aboutthe identification of this day or how it was observed. Ourunderstanding of this term and how it fits in with other passages ofScripture touches on three separate issues.

Aspecial day.First, should Christians today celebrate any day of the week in aspecial way? At least some believers throughout history have believedthat it is possible to observe every day of the week as equallyspecial in the sense that “this is the day that the Lord hasmade; let us rejoice and be glad in it” (Ps. 118:24 ESV). Paulregards the observance of special days for worship as an area ofChristian freedom: “One person considers one day more sacredthan another; another considers every day alike. Each of them shouldbe fully convinced in their own mind” (Rom. 14:5). The sameprinciple is found in Col. 2:16: “Therefore do not let anyonejudge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religiousfestival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day.”Nevertheless, most Christians have concluded that the expression “theLord’s Day” clearly points to a specific day during theweek when the Lord is to be worshiped in a special way.

Aspecific day.Second, which day of the week should we celebrate in a special way?When is the Lord’s Day? For OT believers, the answer is clear:it is the last, or seventh, day of the week. In the Bible, both theidea of a seven-day week and the setting apart of the seventh day arebased ultimately on the creation account in Gen. 2:1–3. ThisSabbath principle is codified in the Ten Commandments, which indicatethat the Sabbath is to be kept holy by requiring people and theiranimals not to engage in work (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15).Observance of the seventh day, or Sabbath, continues among Jews inthe present. More recently, other groups, such as Seventh-DayAdventists and Seventh-Day Baptists, have felt the weight of this OTevidence and have continued to observe Saturday as the proper day forworship.

Nevertheless,most Christians have been persuaded by the practice of the earlychurch to gather together for worship on the first day of the week.Two key passages of Scripture provide support for this conclusion. InActs 20:7 the church had gathered for the Lord’s Supperspecifically “on the first day of the week,” and in1Cor. 16:2 Paul instructs the church at Corinth to collect anoffering specifically “on the first day of every week”(presumably during its local weekly meetings). Thus, most Christianshave concluded that they are no longer under the OT observance of theSabbath as the seventh day of the week (cf. Rom. 14:5; Col. 2:16),and now they are to worship in honor of Jesus’ resurrection “onthe first day of the week” (Matt. 28:1 pars.).

Asacred day.Third, how should we celebrate this day? The Puritans and othersthroughout church history have considered Sunday as the ChristianSabbath. In other words, they made the shift from the seventh day ofthe week in the OT to the first day of the week in the church age,but they believed that all the OT rules and regulations for theSabbath were still binding on believers today. Nevertheless, mostChristians today accept Sunday as the “Lord’s Day,”when they worship in a NT manner and not under the letter of the OTceremonial law, with its focus primarily on resting or not working.Under the OT system there was no concept of people gathering togetheron a regular weekly basis for corporate worship. OT worship revolvedaround various annual feasts and festivals when people would gathertogether at the central temple in Jerusalem a few times each year.The idea of weekly worship services emerged only later, during theBabylonian captivity, with the development of the Jewish synagogue.Thus, most Christians have concluded that Sunday is no longer atransposed OT Sabbath, but rather the NT Lord’s Day, andconsequently that it should be celebrated accordingly, as when “theydevoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship,to the breaking of bread and to prayer” (Acts 2:42).

Self-control involves the willingness to submit to theboundaries of nature, society, and family that God places in theworld to bring about order and harmony in relationships. Theself-restraint of an individual’s thoughts, words, and actionsreflects the ordered discipline of God’s creation (Gen. 1–3;8:22; Prov. 6:6–8). Discipline of the self is essential to livea productive life in community (Prov. 25:28).

“Self-control”is one of the terms that Luke uses to summarize Paul’s messageto Felix (Acts 24:25). God’s people must exercise self-control(1Thess. 5:6; 2Tim. 1:7; 2Pet. 1:6). Ultimately,self-control is a gift, a fruit that comes from being in submissionto God’s Spirit (Gal. 5:22–23).

Godthe Worker

Abiblical theology of work starts with God as the creator of allthings. In the OT, the verb bara’ (“to create”) isused only with God as subject. The first verb in the Bible (Gen.1:1), it occurs also in many other texts that describe Godaccomplishing what only God can do. Other terms such as yatsar (“toform, fashion”) and ’asah (“to make, do”) areused numerous times throughout the OT with either God or humans assubjects.

Thesethree terms reinforce the portrayal of God as worker in Gen. 1–2(cf. Isa. 45:7). God creates light and darkness; sky and earth; sun,moon, and stars; land and sea; plant and animal life; andhumankind—in sum, all that is. He forms the “man”(Heb. ’adam) from the dust of the ground, bringing him to lifeby breathing into him the breath of life.

Elsewherein the OT God is said to build, build up, or rebuild/restore (Heb.banah [e.g., Pss. 102:16; 147:2; Jer. 24:6; Amos 9:11]).Interestingly, God takes a rib from the man, which he then makes(lit., “builds into” [Heb. banah+ le]) a woman(Gen. 2:22). He founds (Heb. kun) the earth (Isa. 45:18) andstretches out (Heb. natah) the heavens (Zech. 12:1). Further, wisdomis God’s “craftsman” (Heb. ’amon), takingpart in the world’s creation (Prov. 8:30). The NT revealsChrist as the one through whom God creates all things (John 1:1–3;Col. 1:16). This brief sketch suggests the range of ways in whichGod’s work is described.

HumanLabor

Ideally,work is performed as service to God (Col. 3:17, 22–24). Work isone way we express the divine image. God’s creation mandate tofill, subdue, and rule the earth implies work (Gen. 1:26–28),and God places the man in the garden “to work it and take careof it” (Gen. 2:15). The importance of work for human dignity aswell as survival undergirds the laws of gleaning that make provisionfor the poor to gather their own food (e.g., Deut. 24:19–22).The expansion of human technologies and occupations (mela’kah[see Exod. 12:16]) reflects that dignity and God’s own diverseworkmanship. Job 28 celebrates human industry and achievement whilesubordinating all to the prevailing value of wisdom, rooted in “thefear of the Lord.” Given the indispensable role of work withinthe limits of human life, diligence is commended (Eccles. 3:9–10),idleness condemned (Prov. 10:4; 12:24; 21:5; 2Thess. 3:6–10).Work is essentially God’s good gift to us in creation.

Butwork now has negative aspects. In response to Adam’s sin, Godcurses the ground, introducing “painful toil” into thework cycle (Gen. 3:17–19; 5:29). We now eke out our living byhardship, finding frustration instead of bounty—a lifelongreminder that we are made of dust and will return to dust. The bookof Ecclesiastes echoes this note of futility and raises sharpquestions about the lasting value of human labor (1:2–3, 14;2:4–11, 17–23; 3:9; 4:4–6; 8:16–17). Sin anddeath haunt the unfolding occupations in Gen. 4, and the episode ofthe tower of Babel in Gen. 11 signals God’s judgment on humanpretension (cf. James 4:13–16). Excessive toil (workaholism) isa pitfall, not a virtue, for it expresses reliance on self ratherthan on God, who builds, protects, and gives rest (Ps. 127:1–2).Oppressive, unjust working conditions are cause for lament, and theyincur God’s judgment (Exod. 5:6–19; Prov. 14:31; James5:4–6).

Thus,Israel’s labor policy is to reflect God’s covenantfaithfulness, generosity, and concern for the vulnerable. Moses’law places limits on employers/masters to protect employees, slaves,and foreign workers from exploitation. The primary limit is God’scommand that Israel keep the Sabbath holy by a complete cessation oflabor (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15). This moveprioritizes God’s covenant above human labor and sets a rhythmof work and rest. Exodus grounds the Sabbath in God’s rest fromhis work of creation on the seventh day. Deuteronomy ties it toIsrael’s history of slavery in Egypt and deliverance by God; bykeeping the Sabbath, Israel shows gratitude to God and guards againstreplicating Egypt’s oppressive policies.

Exodus31–32 portrays work in its best and worst lights. The properinterplay of work and rest is seen in chapter 31, which narrates thedivinely empowered work on the tabernacle, followed by a strongreminder to keep the Sabbath as a “sign” between God andIsrael. In contrast, chapter 32 portrays artisanship put to the worstuse, the making of a golden idol. Aaron fashions gold with a tool andmakes the calf image, but later he tells Moses, “I threw [theirgold jewelry] into the fire, and out came this calf!” (32:24).This remark anticipates the prophets’ later mockery ofidol-makers (e.g., Isa. 44:9–20) and raises the issue ofpersonal responsibility for the outcome of one’s labor: Aaronseeks to avoid being implicated in Israel’s idolatry byconcealing his own role in the project.

Publiclabor issues increase in complexity when Israel adopts human kingshipand engages in international trade (e.g., 1Sam. 8; 1Kings9:15–23). Babylon deals a decisive blow to Judah’sstatehood by deporting leaders and skilled workers. Many of theseestablish such viable, productive new lives in Babylon that whenCyrus later allows the exiled Judeans to return, they choose toremain.

TheNT assumes the legitimacy of work and adopts the OT’s view thatwithin proper limits work is a good gift of God. Jesus, however, hascome to do his Father’s “work” (John 5:16–18),which entails calling some people away from their normal occupationsto follow him, as well as a new approach to Sabbath observance (Mark2:21–27; 3:4). These moves signal the urgency and newness ofthe kingdom of God. Consequently, the apostles are “co-workersin God’s service” (1Cor. 3:9), and Christians are“God’s handiwork” (Eph. 2:10). In light of theresurrection, we offer to God work (Gk. ergon) and labor (Gk. kopos),not in futility but in hope (1Cor. 15:58; cf. Rev. 14:13).

An appearance by God. The word “theophany” is notfound in the Bible; however, by the early fourth century AD, the termhad come to be used in reference to God. Eusebius, bishop of Caesareaat that time, uses the term (Gk. theophaneia) in reference to God’sappearances to people as these are recounted in Gen. 18:1–5,25; 32:28–30; Exod. 3:4–6; Josh. 5:13–15 (Hist.eccl. 1.2.10). This meaning of “theophany,” referring tothe biblical phenomenon of God’s appearing, is the sense of theword considered here.

“Theophany”is a compound word, related to the Greek words theos(usually translated as “god” or “God”) andphainō (often translatedas “to appear”). The Bible says in many places that God“appeared” (e.g., Gen. 12:7; 17:1; 18:1; 26:2, 24; 35:9;48:3; Exod. 3:16; 4:5; Deut. 31:15). For example, Gen. 18:1 says that“the Lord appeared” to Abraham. Several other passagessay that people saw God (Gen. 32:30; Exod. 24:10; Isa. 6:1). Forexample, Isa. 6:1 says that Isaiah “saw the Lord.”“Appeared” and “see” usually reflectdifferent forms of the same Hebrew verb.

Closelyrelated to these appearances are statements describing God’spresence and glory within a cloud and at God’s tent or temple.During the exodus of Israel from Egypt, “by day the Lord wentahead of them in a pillar of cloud,” leading them (Exod.13:21). When Moses later constructs the tabernacle or tent ofmeeting, a cloud covers it, and the glory of God fills the tabernacle(40:34). God typically speaks to Moses from the tabernacle (Exod.33:7–9; Num. 1:1; 7:89).

Later,when the temple is dedicated, “the cloud filled the temple ofthe Lord” (1Kings 8:10). This cloud is associated withGod’s glory, and where God says he would dwell (8:11–12).In the book of Ezekiel, God forsakes the temple because of the sinsof Israel, so the cloud and God’s glory depart (Ezek. 10:4).Throughout the Bible, the local presence of God is regularlyindicated by the tabernacle and later by the temple, for this is theplace where all offerings are given to God, and where people comebefore God.

Inthe Bible, an appearance by God does not limit God to one place.Solomon says during the dedication of the temple that even heavencannot contain God, much less the temple that Solomon has built(1Kings 8:27). God’s omnipresence is likewise expressedby the psalmist (Ps. 139:7–8).

Goddoes not always appear in the same form in theophanies. The angel ofthe Lord appears in the fire of a burning bush, saying that he is theGod of Abraham (Exod. 3:2–6). Elsewhere, the angel of the Lordis described as a man, but then ascends to heaven in the flame of analtar (Judg. 13:3–13, 20). John describes God sitting on athrone (Rev. 4:2; 5:1). In other passages God is locally present andspeaks, yet without explicitly appearing, which might be classifiedas a theophany (Num. 22:9, 20; 23:16; Mark 1:11; 9:7; John 12:28).

Despitethese examples of theophanies, some biblical passages state thatpeople cannot see God. However, these passages may refer to practicalhuman limitations rather than any inherent characteristic of Godhimself. In Exodus, for example, God tells Moses that no one seeingGod’s face can live (33:20). However, God then says that Moses,without seeing God’s face, “will see my back”(33:23). The entire passage indicates that God can be seen morefully, but only with fatal results. Several NT passages similarlyindicate that God cannot be fully seen (John1:18; 4:24; 1Tim.1:17; 6:15–16; Heb. 11:27).

Justas God dwelled within the tabernacle, at times showing his glory, theNT says that the Word of God was made to dwell in flesh (incarnate)as Jesus Christ and so revealed God’s glory (John1:14).This Word of God is the same word that created all things in Gen. 1and so is genuinely God (John1:1–3).

The two rivers between which Mesopotamia (“betweenrivers”) is located. The Euphrates and the Tigris originate inthe mountains of modern Turkey and run through Syria and Iraq, eachfor more than a thousand miles, before meeting and emptying into thePersian Gulf. Like today, the two rivers gave life to many people,running through major centers of ancient civilization.

TheEuphrates and the Tigris are mentioned together only once in theBible (Gen. 2:10–14), where they are two of the four riversstemming from the garden of Eden. The Euphrates itself figuresprominently in the biblical narrative. It is also known as “thegreat river” or simply “the river.” Besides itsrole in Gen. 2, it is frequently mentioned as a border of the landthat God promised to Abraham and his offspring (Gen. 15:18; Josh.1:4), a land that Israel acquired during the united monarchy (2Sam.8:3; 1Kings 4:24). King Josiah met his death here at the battleof Carchemish in 605 BC (2Chron. 35:20–27; cf. Jer.46:1–10). The Euphrates also functions as a symbol of Israel’sidolatrous past (Josh. 24:2–3) and as a symbol of freedom fromthe exile (Isa. 11:15; 27:12). In the NT, the Euphrates is the placewhere the four angels are bound (Rev. 9:14) and where the sixth angelpours out his bowl. Moreover, the Tigris appears in only one otherplace in the Bible (Dan. 10:4), where Daniel receives a vision on itsbanks. Some dispute the validity of this occurrence because certainmanuscripts (i.e., the Pesh*tta) here replace “Tigris”with “Euphrates.”

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

OldTestament

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

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

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

NewTestament

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

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

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

Relationshipsbetween Father, Son, and Spirit

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

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

TrinitarianHeresies

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

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

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

A “type” (from Gk. typos) can be defined as abiblical event, person, or institution that serves as an example orpattern for events, persons, or institutions in the later OT or inthe NT. Typology is based on the assumption that there is a patternin God’s work in the OT and in the NT that forms apromise-fulfillment relationship. In the OT there are shadows ofthings that will be more fully revealed in the NT. Thus, the OT flowsinto the NT as part of a continuous story of salvation history. Whatis promised in the OT is fulfilled in the NT. This can beaccomplished through prophetic word or through propheticaction/event. The use of prophetic action/event to predict orforeshadow future actions/events involves typology. Typology is partof the promise-fulfillment scheme that connects the two Testaments.

Anumber of biblical interpreters note that three primarycharacteristics of types can be identified. First, there must be somenotable point of resemblance or analogy between the type and itsantitype. Second, there must be evidence that the type was appointedby God to represent the thing typified. Here one must avoid the twoextremes of, on the one hand, saying that a type is a type only whenthe Scripture explicitly calls it such, and, on the other hand, offinding a type “behind every tree.” Third, a type shouldprefigure something in the future. Thus, antitypes in the NT mustpresent truth more fully realized than in the OT.

Typologicalinterpretation of the OT is different from allegorizing a text. Theformer restricts itself to the meaning intended by the originalauthor, whereas the latter reads things into the OT passage (usuallyin connection with messianic prophecy) not initially intended. On theother hand, it should be noted that the OT authors may not alwayshave fully comprehended the long-range fulfillment of theirprophecies. Thus, for example, Ps. 22 reveals King David’strials and tribulations that are later viewed by NT authors asapplicable to the crucifixion of Christ (e.g., the quotation of Ps.22:18 in John 19:24 regarding the soldiers casting lots for Jesus’clothes). David probably did not envision his situation as predictiveof the sufferings of the coming Christ. But the Holy Spirit did, andhe allowed the Gospel authors to make the connection. Thus, typologyis a special form of biblical prophecy, which Jesus seemed to useextensively. Hence, the type is found in the OT, and its antitypeoccurs in the NT.

Moreparticularly, Jesus seemed to perceive himself as the antitype to allthree of the aforementioned possible types. First, Jesus fulfilled inhimself persons in the OT who were types. Thus, Jesus is the ultimateDavid, Solomon, Elijah, Elisha, Jonah, the heavenly Son of Man ofDan. 7, and the Suffering Servant of Isa. 52:13–53:12. Second,with regard to famous OT events, Jesus reenacted the new exodus andpassed the test in the new wilderness wanderings (Matt. 4:1–11pars.), and then he proclaimed a new law from the mountain, as didMoses (Matt. 5–7). Third, Jesus revised or replaced OTinstitutions such as the sacrificial system and the feasts of Yahweh(most notably Passover) at his death, and at his resurrection hebecame the new temple of God.

TheNT continues Jesus’ typological interpretation of the OT,seeing in him the supreme antitype of OT symbolism. Thus, forexample, Paul sees Christ as the second Adam (Rom. 5:12–21),whose church is the new Israel, the eschatological people of God(1Cor. 10:1–13). Matthew perceives Jesus to be the newMoses (Matt. 1–10). Note the following comparisons:

Moses,the Old Testament Type vs. Jesus, Matthew’s Antitype to Moses:

Moseswas born to deliver his people. Jesus was born to save his people.

Pharoahtried to kill the infant Moses. Herod tried to kill the infant Jesus.

Moseswas “baptized” in the exodus. Jesus was baptized in thenew “exodus.”

Moseswas tempted in the wilderness. Jesus was tempted in the wildnerness.

Mosesperformed ten plagues. Jesus performed ten miracles.

Mosesreceived the law on the mount. Jesus gave a new law on the mount.

Lukeunderstands Jesus to be the new David (Luke 1:32). Hebrews assertsthat Jesus has inaugurated the new covenant (chap. 8), the truepriesthood (chaps. 7–8; 10), whose death is the fulfillment andreplacement of the sacrificial system of the OT (chaps. 9–10).But perhaps the most extensive usage of typology in the NT occurs inRev. 21–22 (cf. Rev. 19), where the new creation is theantitype of the old creation of Gen. 1–3 (see table 10).

Table10. New Creation Typology in Revelation 21–22

Sinfulpeople are scattered (Gen. 1-3). God’s people unite to singhis praises (Rev. 21-22; cf. 19:6-7).

The“marriage” of Adam and Eve takes place in the garden(Gen. 1-3). The marriage of the second Adam and his bride, thechurch has come (Rev. 21-22; cf. 19:7, 21:2, 9).

Godis abandoned by sinful people (Gen. 1-3). God’s people (newJerusalem, bride of Christ) are made ready for God; marriage of theLamb. (Rev. 21-22; cf. 19:7-8, 21:2, 9-21).

Exclusionfrom bounty of Eden (Gen. 1-3). Invitation to marriage supper ofLamb (Rev. 21-22; cf. 19:9).

Satanintroduces sin into world (Gen. 1-3). Satan and sin are judged (Rev.21-22; cf. 19:11-21, 20:7-10).

Theserpent deceives humankind (Gen. 1-3). The ancient serpent is bound“to keep him from deceiving the nations (Rev. 21-22; cf.20:2-3).

Godgives humans dominion over the earth (Gen. 1-3). God’s peoplewill reign with him forever (Rev. 21-22; cf. 20:4, 6, 22:5).

Peoplerebel against the true God, resulting in physical and spiritual death(Gen. 1-3). God’s people risk death to worship the true Godand thus experience life (Rev. 21-22; cf. 20:4-6).

Sinfulpeople are sent away from life (Gen. 1-3). God’s people havetheir names written in the book of life (Rev. 20:4-6, 15; 21:6, 27).

Deathenters the world (Gen. 1-3). Death is put to death (Rev. 20:14;21:4).

Godcreates the first heaven and earth, eventually cursed by sin (Gen.1-3). God creates a new heaven and earth, where sin is nowhere to befound (Rev. 21:1)/

Watersymbolizes chaos (Gen. 1-3). There is no longer any sea (Rev. 21:1).

Sinbrings pain and tears (Gen. 1-3). God comforts his people andremoves crying and pain (Rev. 21:4).

Sinfulhumanity is cursed with wandering (exile) (Gen. 1-3). God’speople are given a permanent home (Rev. 21:3).

Communityis forfeited (Gen. 1-3). Genuine community is experienced (Rev.21-22; cf. 21:3, 7).

Sinfulpeople are banished from the presence of God (Gen. 1-3). God livesamong his people (Rev. 21:3, 7, 22; 22:4).

Creationbegins to grow old and die (Gen. 1-3). All things are made new (Rev.21:5).

Wateris used to destroy wicked humanity (Gen. 1-3). God quenches thirstwith water from the spring of life (Rev. 21:6; 22:1).

“Inthe beginning, God…” (Gen. 1-3). “I am the Alphaand the Omega, the beginning and the end.” (Rev. 21:6).

Sinfulhumanity suffers a wandering exile in the land (Gen. 1-3). God giveshis children an inheritance (Rev. 21:7).

Sinenters the world (Gen. 1-3). Sin is banished from God’s city(Rev. 21:8, 27; 22:15).

Sinfulhumanity is separated from the presence of the holy God (Gen. 1-3). God’s people experience God’s holiness (cubed city = holyof holies) (Rev. 21:15-21).

Godcreates light and separates it from darkness (Gen. 1-3). No morenight or natural light; God himself is the source of light (Rev.21:23; 22:5)

Languagesof sinful humanity are confused (Gen. 1-3). God’s people is amulticultural people (Rev. 21:24, 26; 22:2).

Sinfulpeople are sent away from the garden (Gen. 1-3). The newheaven/earth includes a garden (Rev. 22:2).

Sinfulpeople are forbidden to eat from the tree of life (Gen. 1-3). God’speople may eat freely from the tree of life (Rev. 22:2, 14).

Sinresults in spiritual sickness (Gen. 1-3). God heals the nations(Rev. 22:2).

Sinfulpeople are cursed (Gen. 1-3). The curse is removed from redeemedhumanity, and people become a blessing (Rev. 22:3).

Sinfulpeople refuse to serve/obey God (Gen. 1-3). God’s people servehim (Rev. 22:3).

Sinfulpeople are ashamed in God’s presence (Gen. 1-3). God’speople will “see his face” (Rev. 22:4).

In 1928 a Syrian peasant farmer stumbled by chance onto afunerary vault of ancient provenance about half a mile from theMediterranean coastline of Syria and about six miles north of themodern-day city of Latakia. This unforeseen discovery led to anarchaeological excavation of Tell Ras Shamra (Cape Fennel) by theeminent French excavator Claude Schaeffer. What Schaeffer’steam unearthed was not merely an ancient tomb, but a city completewith palaces, private homes, temples, and streets paved with stone.

Withinthe first year of excavation, the ruins of Ugarit yielded a cache ofclay tablets bearing a cuneiform script in a language hithertounknown. From these mysterious texts scholars deciphered analphabetic script written in a West Semitic language related toCanaanite, Arabic, and biblical Hebrew.

TheKingdom of Ugarit

Thesite of the ancient city of Ugarit, Tell Ras Shamra, is enclosed bytwo small rivers that flow westward into the Mediterranean Sea. Thepresence of water ensured the fertility of the surrounding plain;thus a good crop of cereals, grapes, and olives was available tosupplement the fishing industry as a local supply of food. Thekingdom encompassed about twelve hundred square miles, bounded by thenatural geography of the region. To the west of the site lies theMediterranean, with a port that supplied an important route forinternational trade. To the south, the east, and the north aremountain ranges, including Mount Zaphon, whose majesty is recorded inIsa. 14:13. Indeed, the name “Zaphon” becomes simply ageneral word for “north” in biblical Hebrew.

Thesite of Tell Ras Shamra was occupied as far back as Neolithic times(seventh millennium BC), yet the kingdom of Ugarit properly dates tothe second millennium BC. The time of Ugarit’s greatestflourishing was the period just prior to its destruction: from thefourteenth to the twelfth centuries BC, during the Late Bronze Age.The prosperity of the kingdom reached its height during this period.Ugarit’s coastal access and strategic location as a central hubwithin the matrix of Late Bronze Age superpowers made Ugarit animportant focal point for international trade routes, both maritimeand overland. Late Bronze Age Ugaritic society was diverse andcosmopolitan, a feature perhaps best epitomized by its scribaltraining center, in which tablets bearing inscriptions in severaldifferent languages have been discovered.

Around1200 BC, in approximately the same time frame as the exodus of theHebrews from Egypt, Ugarit met an untimely demise. (Note that somebiblical scholars date the exodus from Egypt during the fifteenthcentury BC rather than the thirteenth.) Royal documents from theEgyptian and Hittite kingdoms, as well as one from Ugarit, record aconcern over a group of invaders known as the Sea Peoples. The SeaPeoples likely originated in the northwest, leaving their mark on thecoasts of Turkey, Cyprus, and the Levant. The descendants of theinvading Sea Peoples remained on the coast of Palestine, and thebiblical text refers to them as the Philistines. The destruction ofUgarit is attributed to these invaders from the sea. Thearchaeological remains of Tell Ras Shamra show that many homes wereabandoned as invaders set the city on fire. Ugarit burned to theground sometime between 1190 and 1185 BC.

TheTexts of Ugarit

Morethan fifteen hundred Ugaritic texts have been discovered sinceexcavations began at Tell Ras Shamra. The texts are written ontablets with wedgelike markings impressed into the clay by scribesusing a triangular-shaped reed stylus. The majority of the texts ofUgarit were found in and around the remains of the royal palacegrounds and temples, but some were found in the homes of high-rankingpalace administrators and businessmen. The subject matter of thesetexts is diverse, and the various genres of written material fromUgarit include official letters, administrative and economic texts,scribal training texts, and religious and literary texts. Thecosmopolitan character of Ugarit is also reflected in its texts.Among the various tablets discovered, many were written in Akkadian,which was the lingua franca of the Late Bronze Age in this region.Still other texts were written in various ancient Near Easternlanguages; Hurrian, Hittite, and Cypro-Minoan, and Egyptianhieroglyphs were found inscribed into some artifacts, as well as uponcylinder seals.

Letters.Theletter documents of Ugarit are formal in style with scriptedintroductions and closings, like most royal letters from the ancientNear East. Two notable examples may be pointed out. The first is aletter from the king of Tyre in Phoenicia (for Iron Age references tothe city of Tyre, see Josh. 19:29; 2Sam. 5:11; Ezek. 28) to theking of Ugarit. The occasion of the letter is the shipwreck of aUgaritic trade vessel bound for Egypt that crashed on the coastlineof Phoenicia after a violent storm. The king of Tyre writes that noneof the ship’s crew survived, and its cargo was lost at sea. Asecond epistolary example is a letter written by the king ofCarchemish in the Hittite Empire (see Isa. 10:9; Jer. 46:2) to thelast king of Ugarit, Ammurapi. The occasion of this epistle is theHittite king’s perceived mistreatment of his daughter who wasmarried to Ammurapi. The letter suggests an impending divorce betweenthe royal couple, detailing the division of their joint property.

Administrativeand economic texts. Theroyal palace and temples provided the driving engine of Ugarit’seconomy. Many discovered texts shed light upon the kinds of goods andactivities that comprised local and international trade. Examples ofadministrative texts include lists of various towns within thekingdom of Ugarit, tributes that such towns paid to the king in theform of goods or labor service, lists of temple personnel withaccompanying salaries, and details of distributed goods to those inroyal service. Examples of economic texts include purchase receiptsand bills of lading from maritime trade for products such as wool,grains, olives, milk, and metal ore.

Scribaltraining texts. Amongthe rich archives of texts at Ugarit, more than one hundred tabletsbear witness to scribal training activities scattered throughout thecity grounds. Scribes were universally employed by royal empiresduring the Late Bronze Age, but the sheer number of texts (thousands)found at Ugarit is unusual for a relatively small excavation site.Archives of texts were found in groups throughout the city, and inmany of these archives excavators found tablets of special interest,called “abecedaries.” An abecedary is a tablet on whichthe cuneiform alphabet is written. The Ugaritic alphabet containedthirty signs in roughly the same order as the Hebrew alphabet,largely the same in content as the English alphabet. In addition toUgaritic abecedaries, a Ugaritic-Akkadian abecedary was found inwhich equivalent phonetic values are given from the Ugaritic alphabetinto Akkadian signs. Lexicons, or word lists, also were discovered,listing words from various ancient Near Eastern languages. Indeed,some of the tablets found in the archives are clearly practicetablets used to train scribes: these tablets display clear signswritten by a scribal teacher at the top of the tablet, with the lessskilled markings of the apprentice scribe written below. Thus, it islikely that Ugarit served as a training center for scribes from allover the ancient Near East, as well as its own.

Religioustexts. Twolarge temples dominate the northern acropolis region of Ugarit: thetemple of Baal, the god of fertility, and the temple of Dagon, thegod of grain. Mythology was the vehicle of religious expression inthe ancient Near East. Stories about the gods communicated somethingof the gods’ purposes and realms of authority. In themythological literature of Ugarit, the pantheon of gods dwelt onMount Zaphon, and from the dwelling place of El, the high god, riversof life-giving water flowed. The name “El” was sharedamong Semitic languages and religions throughout the ancient NearEast, including the OT. The name “El” in the Bible canrefer either to a foreign god (e.g., Deut. 3:24: “What god[’el] is there in heaven or on earth who can do the deeds andmighty works you do?”) or to the God of Israel (e.g., Gen.49:25; Deut. 7:9; Ps. 68:19–20). In the pantheon of Ugarit,El’s female consort was the goddess Asherah (1Kings18:19; Judg. 3:7).

El,however, was a more distant god in the religion of Ugarit, and thecity’s patron god was Baal, the storm god. Baal was associatedwith fertile fields, abundant crops, and the birth of sons anddaughters. The goddess Anat is sometimes described as Baal’sconsort, and at other times as Baal’s sister. Anat is thegoddess of war, and the epic mythological literature of Ugaritportrays her warfare in rather graphic and gruesome detail. Somescholars claim that Prov. 7:22–23 alludes to Anat’swarfare in the portrayal of the adulterous woman.

Someof the same epithets and accomplishments of Baal found in thereligious texts of Ugarit are also attributed to Yahweh in the OT.For example, Baal is called the “Rider of the Clouds” inUgaritic literature, and a similar description of Yahweh is found inPss. 68:4 (“Extol him who rides on the clouds”) and 104:3(“He makes the clouds his chariot and rides on the wings of thewind”). This likely reflects a common ancient Near Easternconcern over the regularity of rain for producing crops, as well as abiblical assertion that Yahweh is superior to Canaanite deities, suchas Baal, who claim authority over the forces of nature. Indeed, theOT mocks the impotence of the Canaanite deity Baal to wield powerover the forces of nature in narratives such as Elijah versus theprophets of Baal (1Kings 18:16–45).

Baalis also portrayed in the religious literature of Ugarit as the godwho conquered the rival gods Sea (Yam) and Death (Motu). The OT givessimilar portrayals of Israel’s God in texts such as Gen. 1:2;Isa. 25:7–8. In Gen. 1:2 God’s Spirit “was hoveringover the waters,” “the deep,” or the primordialwaters from which God brings to life the created world and all ofnature (cf. Job 38:8–11). In Isa. 25:7–8 Yahweh isportrayed as more powerful than death in a text of praise that extolshis power by saying that “he will swallow up death forever.”Again the biblical texts rely upon a stock set of religious symbols,language, and imagery common to ancient Near Eastern peoples toportray Yahweh, the all-powerful, one God of Israel.

Conclusion

Thediscovery of Ugarit was an earthshaking event for biblical studies.Scholars have only begun to garner the gems of knowledge hiddenwithin the remains of this lost civilization. The study of theUgaritic language is invaluable for better understanding biblicalHebrew. Ugaritic sheds light particularly upon rare words and phrasesused in the biblical text, as well as upon literary devices andpoetic structure, such as parallelism and meter. Furthermore, thestudy of Ugarit’s religion illuminates the backdrop ofCanaanite worship, against which is set the worship of Yahweh in theOT. Ugarit provides for us a snapshot of Late Bronze Age Canaan, thecrucible of ancient Near Eastern culture from which the Hebrew Biblewas birthed.

A call or calling is God’s summons to live one’s life in accordance with his purposes. At creation God instructed Adam to fill the earth and subdue it, and to have dominion over it. God created Eve to be Adam’s lifelong companion and to help him fulfill this task (Gen. 1:28). Thus, in the broader (universal) sense, the notion of calling includes the ordinances that God established at creation: work (Gen. 2:15), marriage (2:18, 24), building a family (1:28), and Sabbath rest (2:2–3).

When Adam and Eve disobeyed God, they became alienated from God (Gen. 3:6–19). Their fall brought the same plight of alienation from God upon all humanity. However, it did not abolish the human duty to carry out God’s original creation ordinances. Since God showers his blessings on everyone alike (common grace), all human beings possess gifts and are given opportunities to “fill” the earth and “subdue” it. Thus, everyone participates in the universal call (Acts 17:25–26). This has come to be called the “cultural mandate.”

However, God’s original intention was to have communion with human beings. This could not be realized unless he made provision for human beings to be reconciled with him. Against this backdrop, God initiated his plan to redeem people from their plight of spiritual alienation.

The general call. The promise of God to bring deliverance through a future descendant of Eve established the provision for individuals (e.g., Adam, Abel, Seth, Noah) to be “called” back into a relationship of favor with him (Gen. 3:15). The first occasion when this call is made explicit is in God’s call to Abram to leave his country and go to a land that God would show him (11:32–12:1). God promised that Abram would become the father of a nation (12:2–3). In response to God’s call and his promise, Abram believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness (15:6). Abram’s call was implicitly twofold. First, it was a general call to acknowledge this God as the true God and yield to his lordship. Second, it entailed a specific call to leave his country and journey toward a new country.

Several generations later, God appointed Moses to lead these descendants of Abraham out of Egypt, where they had lived for four hundred years. God’s act of delivering them from slavery in Egypt also symbolized redemption from sin’s bondage (Exod. 20:2). God had called the people by means of a covenant to be his own special people, to serve him as a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (19:5–6). This was a call to set their lives apart for God by living according to his commands. This general call was more than a verbal summons; it was also the means God used to bring his people into existence (Hos. 11:1).

The NT indicates there is a general call to all people to believe in Christ (Matt. 11:28; Acts 17:30) that becomes effective in the ones that God has already chosen (Matt. 22:14; Acts 13:48; Eph. 1:4–5). The latter, which theologians identify as the “effectual call,” is what Paul refers to when he says, “Those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son. . . . And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified” (Rom. 8:29–30). Thus, this is also a sovereign call.

Particular callings. God has endowed each individual Christian with a particular gift set and calls each one to use those gifts in a variety of ways in service to him (1 Pet. 4:10). These callings include one’s occupation, place of residence, status as married or single, involvement in public life, and service in the local church. In the OT, God gifted Bezalel and “filled him with the Spirit of God, with wisdom, with understanding, with knowledge and with all kinds of skills” (Exod. 35:31–32) to beautify the tabernacle. In the parable of the talents, Jesus teaches that God has made each of us stewards of whatever he has entrusted to us; we are to become skilled in the use of our gifts and to seek opportunities to use them in service to him (Matt. 25:14–30). Desire is an important factor in discerning one’s particular callings (Ps. 37:4). One’s particular calling is progressive, unfolding through the different seasons of one’s life (Eph. 2:10; 1 Cor. 7:20, 24). No particular calling is more “sacred” than another in God’s eyes.

Geography

Whereasthe principal direction in the modern world is north, in the ancientworld different cultures used a variety of orientations as theysought to describe their relationship to their geographicalenvironment. In Israel the primary direction was determined by thesunrise: east. This is reflected in Hebrew, where the main word usedto refer to east as a direction was qedem, which could also be usedto simply refer to that which was directly ahead or in front of thespeaker (e.g., Ps. 139:5). Elsewhere, east is designated by the termsmizrakh (“rising” [Josh. 11:3]) or mizrakh hashamesh(“rising of the sun” [Num. 21:11]), both of which derivefrom the direction of sunrise. By way of contrast, in Egypt theprimary direction was south, in alignment with the source of the NileRiver.

Theancient world employed the same notion of four cardinal directions,which persists to the present, and the terminology related to thesewas influenced by the choice of primary direction. Thus, in Israelnorth is often designated by “left”; south could bedesignated by “right,” and west by “behind.”In addition, directions could be specified by reference togeographical features found in those directions. North could bespecified by the word tsapon, which was derived from the name of anorthern Syrian mountain (Zaphon); south by negeb, a name for theregion south of Israel (Negev); and west by yam (“sea”),since the Mediterranean Sea lay to the west.

Symbolism

Asidefrom their purely geographical significance, the directions also cameto bear figurative significance. Some caution is warranted inassigning symbolic significance to language, for there is danger ofreading invalid meanings into texts. Furthermore, given the ambiguityinherent in the use of terms to refer to directions, which also havealternate significances, there is danger of assigning a symbolicmeaning to the direction that actually resides in the alternate. So,for example, while yam (“sea”) carries significantsymbolic overtones in the Bible, this association does not appear tohave been extended to encompass the term when used to designate awesterly direction.

Eastand west.Nonetheless, there is, for example, probably some significance in theexpulsion from Eden and progressive movement eastward to the tower ofBabel through Gen. 1–11, followed by a return to the promisedland, which was approached by reversing the easterly migration andreturning toward Eden. Eden itself was said to lie “in theeast” (Heb. miqqedem; Gen. 2:8), although the same Hebrewexpression in Pss. 74:12; 77:5, 11; 78:2; 143:5 means “inancient times,” and there is perhaps a deliberate ambiguity inthe use of the expression in Gen. 2:8. In Isa. 2:6 the east is thesource of influences on the people that lead them astray. Followingthe exile, Ezekiel sees the glory of God returning to the temple fromthe east (Ezek. 43:1–2). Thus, when used symbolically, “east”is often viewed negatively or else may be used to mark a connectionwith distant antiquity (Gen. 2:8; Job 1:3). Any symbolic significanceassigned to west appears primarily to be associated with it being theantithesis of east. The distance between east and west was usedpoetically to express vast distance (Ps. 103:12).

Northand south.North is significant for two primary reasons. First, it is thedirection from which invading armies most often descended upon Israel(Jer. 1:13) as well as from which Babylon’s destruction is saidto come (Jer. 50:3). In light of this, Ezekiel’s vision of Godapproaching from the north strikes an ominous tone of impendingjudgment (Ezek. 1:1–4). Second, in Canaanite mythology theabode of the gods, and specifically Baal, lay to the north, on MountZaphon. Thus, the king of Babylon’s plans in Isa. 14:13 amountto a claim to establish himself as one of the gods. In contrast tothis, Ps. 48:2 pre-sents Mount Zion as supplanting Mount Zaphon andthus implicitly presents Israel’s one God as supplanting theCanaanite pantheon.

Aswith west, there is little symbolic significance associated with thedirection south in the Bible, aside from its use in combination withother directions.

Thefour directions.The four directions (or sometimes just pairs of directions) are usedtogether to describe both the scattering of the Israelites as well astheir being gathered by God back to the promised land (Ps. 107:3;Isa. 43:5–6; Luke 13:29). They are also used together toexpress the extent of the promised land (Gen. 13:14) or else todescribe something that is all-encompassing (1Chron. 9:24).

AncientNear East

Theancient Near East was a male-dominated culture in which, therefore,women were marginalized and treated more or less as property. Note,for example, Boaz’s question “Who does that young womanbelong to?” (Ruth 2:5). Women, of course, produce children, andthis power was prized. Women were also fit to engage in variousmundane tasks, but they were not trained for war or educated forservice in the royal court. Their role in society was subordinate andsecondary.

Inthe Epic of Gilgamesh, the wild and powerful Enkidu met a “wisewoman” who seduced him. Thereafter, Enkidu was tamed andweakened. She made a civilized man of him. In the Ugaritic legend ofDanil, Danil was unhappy because he had no sons. With the blessing ofthe gods, he married Hurriya, and had sons and daughters. Thus, sonsfulfilled Danil as much as they fulfilled the woman.

Butthe power to reproduce, which resides in the woman’s womb, alsowas mysterious and seemed to belong in the same category as otherforces of nature, such as the rebirth of life in the spring followingsterile winter. Thus, the ancient world was filled with goddesses ofgreat power. These goddesses at times also took on masculinecharacteristics, such as displaying great prowess in war; this isespecially true of Anat of Canaanite mythology.

ThroughoutIsrael’s sojourn in the Promised Land, there was anundercurrent of Canaanite-style goddess worship. In the period of thejudges, the Israelites worshiped the goddess Asherah (Judg. 6:25).Led astray by his wives, Solomon also worshiped the goddess (1Kings11:1–8). The “fertility cult” included ritual sexin places of worship. This eventually took place in the temple ofYahweh. Much of this seems to have been hom*osexual sex (2Kings23:7).

Creationof Woman

Inthe Bible, woman is first encountered along with man in Gen. 1:26–28.God created “man” in the plural, male and female, andcommanded them to reproduce and to fill the earth and subdue it.Being created male and female is set in parallel to being created inthe image of God. In the ancient Near East, perhaps the king would bethought of as the image of God. But in Genesis, not only is the firstman the image of God, but the first woman participates in the imageas well. This is all but unthinkable in the ancient world, and itsuggests an unparalleled dignity and worth in womankind.

Genesisrecords that the human race fell through the instrumentality of aman, a woman, and the serpent. The serpent approached the woman, notthe man. The woman was convinced by the serpent and ate the forbiddenfruit. She gave some to her husband, who also ate it without saying aword. Thus, the woman can be blamed in part for the fall of the race.Adam was condemned because he “listened to [his] wife”(Gen. 3:17). Her judgment, for heeding the serpent, was pain inchildbirth and a desire for her husband, who would rule over her(Gen. 3:16). The exact parameters of this judgment are unclear, butit appears that her desire will be for his position of leadership andwill be perpetually frustrated.

Throughoutthe remainder of Genesis, this judgment does not seem to unfold asexpected. Instead, men are shown to desire women. Jacob was willingto work seven years to get the beautiful Rachel as his wife, and whenhe was fooled into marrying her sister, Leah, he was willing to workanother seven years for her (Gen. 29:16–30). And women exploitmen and their desire in order to get what they want, in effectmastering them. Lot’s daughters contrived to get what theywanted from him (19:30–38), and Tamar manipulated Judah’sdesire (38:13–26).

Reproduction

Oftenin the Bible, women are motivated by their desire to have children.Rachel demanded of Jacob, “Give me children, or I’lldie!” (Gen. 30:1). She saw herself in competition with hersister, Leah, in this respect (30:8). The “fruit of the womb”is a reward, and like arrows, the blessed man’s quiver is fullof them (Ps. 127:1–5). Note also the beatitude of Ps. 128:3:“Your wife will be like a fruitful vine within your house; yourchildren will be like olive shoots around your table.”

InGenesis, the reproductive capability of slave girls is at thedisposal of their owners. Thus, Rachel and Leah’s maidservantsbecame surrogate mothers for a number of their sons (Gen. 30:3–10).Sarah also became frustrated at her inability to conceive, so shegave Hagar to Abraham. The result was great familial turmoil, finallyresulting in the banishment of both Hagar and Ishmael, whom she boreto Abraham.

Inthe beginning, God joined one man and one woman together as husbandand wife. But soon this idea was corrupted, and Lamech, a man fromCain’s lineage, is credited with the first polygamous marriage(Gen. 4:19). Although the patriarchs (such as Jacob) did have morethan one wife, the household discontent and strife are what ishighlighted in those stories, such as with Hagar. In the NT, an elderis to be, literally, a “one-woman man” (1Tim. 3:2;ESV, KJV: “the husband of onewife”),meaningmonogamous.

Inthe Bible, women are described as having a number of different sexualrelationships with men. There were wives, who enjoyed the closestrelationship and had the greatest privileges. There were concubines,who were not wives but were bound to a single man. The greatestdeviation from the norm of creation was the institution of the harem,whereby a king took to himself any number of consorts. The law ofMoses restricted this practice (Deut. 17:17).

Legislation

TheTorah contains significant legislation regarding women. The daughtersof Zelophehad argued that their father died without sons, so inCanaan they were disinherited. God agreed and decreed that in Israeldaughters would inherit land in the absence of sons. Only if therewere no children at all would the land pass to other kin (Num.27:1–11).

Whena man made a vow, he must fulfill it, but a young woman’s vowwas subject to her father. If he remained silent, the vow stood, butif he expressed disapproval, then she was freed from it. If she wasmarried, her husband governed her vows, but if she was divorced, thenthere was no responsible male over her, and her vow was treated as aman’s (Num. 30:1–16).

Sexualintercourse was also regulated in the law of Moses, insofar as theact rendered both parties ritually impure (Lev. 15:18). Both mustbathe and were unclean until evening. A woman’s menstrualdischarge also made her unclean for a week. Everything she sat or layupon was unclean, as was anyone who touched these things. She mustwash and offer sacrifice to become clean again (15:18–31).

Ifa man discovered on his wedding night that his bride was not avirgin, he could accuse her publicly. If her parents providedevidence that she had in fact been a virgin, then the man wasseverely punished for lying and not allowed to divorce her(otherwise, it was simply a matter of writing a letter to divorce her[Deut. 24:1]). If her virginity could not be proved, she was to beput to death by stoning (Deut. 22:13–21).

Inthe case of a rape of a betrothed virgin, if it occurred in the city,both the rapist and the victim were stoned, since apparently she hadfailed to cry out for help and thus, the law assumed, consented tosexual intercourse. If she was raped in the countryside, only the manwas killed. But if he raped a woman who was not spoken for, hispunishment was that he must marry her without possibility of divorce(Deut. 22:23–29).

Numbers5:11–31 treats cases where a husband was suspicious that hiswife had been unfaithful—that is, a matter of covenantaljealousy. The unprovable was left to God to punish.

TheStatus of Women

Inthe Bible, women sometimes are afforded dignity beyond what isexpected in an ancient Near Eastern provenance. Hagar is the onlywoman in all ancient Near Eastern literature who gave a name to adeity (Gen. 16:13). In Judg. 4:4, Deborah “judged” Israel(despite the NIV’s “leading,” the underlying Hebrewverb indicates “judging,” as in the NRSV). Even as judge,however, she did not lead the army against the enemy general Sisera;Barak did so. But Barak was unwilling to undertake this missionunless Deborah went with him (4:8). Thus, God ensured that theprestige of killing Sisera went to a woman, Jael (4:9, 21). Anotherprominent woman was Huldah, to whom the priests turned for guidancewhen the law was rediscovered (2Kings 22:14).

Manybiblical stories feature heroines. Mighty Pharaoh was undermined bytwo midwives in his attempt to destroy Israel (Exod. 1:15–21).Ruth the Moabite woman gave her name to the book that recounts hertrek from Moab to Israel, including her famous oath of loyalty (Ruth1:16–17). Esther too was a courageous woman whose book bearsher name. Heroines are especially prominent in the Gospels, and thewomen there have the distinction of being the first to witness therisen Lord. Luke’s birth narrative is largely organized aroundMary. Priscilla (with her husband) taught and helped to shape theearly church (Acts 18:26). Paul lists many women in Rom. 16, callingthem “deaconess,” “fellow worker,” andpossibly even “apostle.”

Scripturealso at times portrays various women as being temptations to men. Evehanded the fruit to Adam (Gen. 3:6). In the wilderness Israelworshiped Moabite gods in conjunction with sexual activity (Num.25:1–9). Later, Israelites intermarried with Canaanite women,directly leading to worship of their idols (Judg. 3:6). Bathsheba wasa temptation to David, and this began a series of events that marredhis career as a man after God’s own heart. Solomon loved manyforeign women, who turned him to worship their gods. After the exile,the Israelites were admonished by Nehemiah to put away their foreignwives lest history repeat itself (Neh. 13:26).

Songof Songs

Songof Songs, while acknowledging the great power of sexuality to movepeople to act against their own best interests, nevertheless portrayslove in a very positive light. The love between a man and a woman isshown in Song of Songs to be not primarily about generating children.Offspring are not at issue in the Bible’s great love song.Rather, relations between man and wife rest on a deeper foundation,that of sexual enjoyment and desire. In the words of Hannah’shusband, Elkanah, “Don’t I mean more to you than tensons?” (1Sam. 1:8).

InGen. 3:16, God pronounces judgment on the woman that her “desire”will be for her husband, but that he will master her. The Hebrew wordfor “desire” occurs only once outside Genesis, in Song7:10, where the woman says that her lover’s “desire”is for her. This seems to be a direct reference to Gen. 3:16. Thus,in Song of Songs the judgment on the woman is rolled back andreversed in love. In Song of Songs it is the king who is enthralledin love and thus subdued (7:5). He would not have it any other way!

Thus,sexuality is celebrated in Song of Songs. What proves to be such agrave temptation to men elsewhere is shown to be an essential part ofGod’s good creation, albeit a potent and dangerous facet oflife. Women do not exist simply to produce children; they partner andrevel with their lovers, together enjoying that particular part ofGod’s creation that requires two sexes to explore.

Imagery

Womenand marriage are used in the Bible as images for spiritual things.Paul writes that marital love mirrors the church’s relationshipwith Christ (Eph. 5:32–33). A man should love his wife asChrist loved the church. Revelation portrays the climax to humanhistory in the figure of two women: the bride of Christ, adorned withrighteous deeds for her husband (19:7–8), and the whor*Babylon, drunk on the blood of the saints (17:5–6). Theconsummation of the age is when one is judged and the other entersher eternal marital bliss.

Thebook of Proverbs also separates humankind into two groups, symbolizedby two women. Along the path of life, the youth hears the voices ofWoman Folly (9:13–18) and of Woman Wisdom (1:20–33)calling out to him. Folly is incarnated in the flesh-and-bloodtemptation of the immoral woman (7:6–27), whereas Woman Wisdomhas her counterpart at the end of the book in the detaileddescription of the woman of virtue (31:10–31). There, the womanwho fears God is set as a prize far above earthly wealth—thehighest blessing of the wise.

Pauluses two women from sacred history to help explain his gospel of lawversus grace. Hagar the slave woman represents the Mosaic covenantgiven at Sinai, and the earthly Jerusalem—that is, a mind-setof slavery that futilely attempts to earn God’s favor by worksof the law. Sarah was the free woman, and her son was the promisedson, who represents the heavenly Jerusalem, the new covenant, andfreedom from the requirements of the law (Gal. 4:21–31). Again,two women symbolize two paths and two peoples—one being slaves,the other being God’s free people.

ChurchGovernment

Throughoutmost of Christian history, women’s roles in the church havebeen comparable to their role in the general culture. Womenparticipated little in the institutional life of society, and thechurch was no different. A number of Bible texts can be used insupport of women’s marginalization as leaders. For example, inthe OT, the cult was managed by the priestly caste, and no woman wasever a priest of Yahweh. In the NT, the local churches were overseenby a company of elders. Elders are described by Paul as men, thehusband of one wife, who were apt to teach and who managed their ownfamilies well (1Tim. 3:1–7). Immediately before thisdescription, Paul notes that women were not to teach or haveauthority over men (1Tim. 2:9–15). Women were the “weakerpartner” (1Pet. 3:7). Thus, women’s subordinaterole throughout most of church history has some biblicaljustification.

However,as women participate more and more in the institutional life ofsociety, the normative value of the aforementioned texts has beenquestioned, and other texts have been put forward to provide analternative biblical conception of women’s roles in the church.Perhaps 1Tim. 2:12 is only against teaching a specific heresy,and the Greek verb translated “to assume authority over”(authenteō)may refer to a specific kind of authoritarian or domineeringbehavior. As noted above, in Rom. 16 Paul considers women to beleaders in the church. Since it is true that in Christ there is nomale or female (Gal. 3:28), how far does this extend? Today’schallenge for churches is to decide these matters in light of thewhole of Scripture rather than a few proof texts.

Because Scripture sees all things as providentially arrangedand sustained by God’s sovereign power at all times (Heb. 1:3),miracles are not aberrations in an otherwise closed and mechanicaluniverse. Nor are miracles raw demonstrations of divinity designed toovercome prejudice or unbelief and to convince people of theexistence of God (Mark 8:11–12). Still less are they cleverconjuring tricks involving some kind of deception that can beotherwise explained on a purely scientific basis. Rather, God in hisinfinite wisdom sometimes does unusual and extraordinary things tocall attention to himself and his activity. Miracles are divinelyordained acts of God that dramatically alert us to the presence ofhis glory and power and advance his saving purposes in redemptivehistory.

Terminology

Thebiblical writers describe miracles with various terms, such as“signs,” “wonders,” and “miracles”(or “powers”), which can carry various connotations. Asthe word “sign” suggests, divine miracles are significantand should cause us to think more deeply about God in a way that goesbeyond mere amazement or curiosity (Exod. 4:30–31; John 2:11).Not all of God’s signs are miraculous. Some are given as partof his ordering of the natural world (Gen. 1:14) or as anencouragement to faith that God will do as he has said (e.g., therainbow in Gen. 9:8–17; the blood of the Passover lamb in Exod.12:13). (See also Sign.)

Oftencoupled with signs are “wonders” (Jer. 32:21; John 4:48;2Cor. 12:12). If the depiction of miracles as “signs”indicates an appeal to the intellect, that of “wonders”points to the emotions. Miracles evoke astonishment and awe at theone who did them.

TheNT word “miracle” carries the meaning of power andtherefore points to the supernatural source of these events (Luke10:13; Acts 8:13).

Miraclesin the Bible

OldTestament.In the OT, miracles are not evenly distributed but rather are foundin greater number during times of great redemptive significance, suchas the exodus and the conquest of Canaan. Miracles were performedalso during periods of apostasy, such as in the days of theninth-century prophets Elijah and Elisha. Common to both of theseeras is the powerful demonstration of the superiority of God overpagan deities (Exod. 7–12; 1Kings 18:20–40).

NewTestament. Inthe NT, miracles often are acts of compassion, but more significantlythey attest the exalted status of Jesus of Nazareth (Acts 2:22) andthe saving power of his word (Heb. 2:3–4). In the SynopticGospels, they reveal the coming of God’s kingdom and theconquest of Satan’s dominion (Matt. 8:16–17; 12:22–30;Mark 3:27). They point to the person of Jesus as the promised Messiahof OT Scripture (Matt. 4:23; 11:4–6). John shows a preferencefor the word “signs,” and his Gospel is structured aroundthem (John 20:30–31). According to John, the signs that Jesusperformed were such that only the one who stood in a uniquerelationship to the Father as the Son of God could do them.

Miraclesand faith.Just as entrenched skepticism is injurious to faith, so too is naivecredulity, for although signs and wonders witness to God, falseprophets also perform them “to deceive, if possible, even theelect” (Matt. 24:24). Christians are to exercise discernmentand not be led astray by such impostors (Matt. 7:15–20).

Therelationship between miracles and faith is not as straightforward assometimes supposed. Miracles do not necessarily produce faith, nordoes faith necessarily produce miracles. Miracles were intended tobring about the faith that leads to eternal life (John 20:31), butnot all who witnessed them believed (John 10:32). Additionally, Jesusregarded a faith that rested only on the miracle itself as precarious(Mark 8:11–13; John 2:23–25; 4:48), though better than nofaith at all (John 10:38). Faith that saves must ultimately find itsgrounding in the person of Jesus as the Son of God.

Itis also clear that although Jesus always encouraged faith in thosewho came to him for help (Mark 9:23), and that he deliberatelylimited his miraculous powers in the presence of unbelief (Mark 6:5),many of his miracles were performed on those who did not or could notexercise faith (Matt. 12:22; Mark 1:23–28; 5:1–20; Luke14:1–4).

Thefact that Jesus performed miracles was never an issue; rather, hisopponents disputed the source of his power (Mark 3:22). Argumentsabout his identity were to be settled by appeal not to miracles butto the word of God (Matt. 22:41–46).

Thefunction of miracles.Miracle accounts function in a symbolic and prophetic manner. Hence,the cursing of the fig tree was prophetic of the coming judgment(Mark 11:12–21). The unusual two-stage healing of the blind manof Bethsaida symbolized Peter’s incomplete understanding ofJesus’ messiahship (Mark 8:22–33).

Themiraculous element of Jesus’ ministry carries an eschatologicalsignificance, pointing to the order of things in the age to come. Forexample, the nature miracles (Mark 4:35–41) look forward to theredemption of creation itself, which is presently subject tofrustration and decay (Rom. 8:20–21); the healing miraclespoint to a day when disease and deformity will be abolished (Rev.21:4); and miracles in which the dead are raised to life anticipate atime when death itself will be no more (Rev. 20:14; 21:4). From thisperspective, the miracles are a gracious foretaste of a far moreglorious future.

“Word” is used in the Bible to refer to thespeech of God in oral, written, or incarnate form. In each of theseuses, God desires to make himself known to his people. Thecommunication of God is always personal and relational, whether hespeaks to call things into existence (Gen. 1) or to address anindividual directly (Gen. 2:16–17; Exod. 3:14). The prophetsand the apostles received the word of God (Deut. 18:14–22; John16:13), some of which was proclaimed but not recorded. The greatestrevelation in this regard is the person of Jesus Christ, who iscalled the “Word” of God (John 1:1, 14).

Theprimary focus of this article is the written form of the word of God,the Bible. The psalmist declared God’s word to be an eternalobject of hope and trust that gives light and direction (Ps. 119),and Jesus declared the word to be truth (John 17:17). The word isparticularized and intimately connected with God himself by means ofthe key phrases “your word,” “the word of God,”“the word of the Lord,” “word about Christ,”and “the word of Christ” (Rom. 10:17; Col. 3:16). Ourunderstanding of the word is informed by a variety of terms andcontexts in the canon of Scripture, a collection of which is found inPsalm 119.

Theologyof the Word

Fromthe perspective of many systematic theologians, the word of God isdefined with several essential labels. The word is the specialrevelation of God to humans—specifically, truth communicatedfrom God to his human creatures by supernatural intervention,including a disclosure of his mind and will, his attributes, and hisredemptive plans. This revealed word is inspired. Inspiration is anact of the Holy Spirit of God whereby he superintended the biblicalauthors so that they composed the canonical books of Scripture.Inspiration is verbal and plenary in that it extends to every part ofthe Bible and includes the choice of words used by the authors.

Theword of God is inerrant, free from error in every matter addressed,and infallible, true in every matter addressed. The locus ofinspiration, inerrancy, and infallibility is the original manuscriptsand not the translations. A translation is reliable when itaccurately reflects the meaning of the inspired originals (Matt.5:18; cf. John 10:35; 17:17; 2Tim. 3:16; 2Pet. 1:21). Andfinally, the word is authoritative. Because the Bible is the divinelyinspired word of God reliably composed in the originals withouterror, it is binding upon people in their relationship with their Godas well as their relationships with their fellow human beings.Biblical authority derives from the eternal character of the divineauthor and the revelatory content of the Scriptures.

Psalm119

Akey OT text extolling the word is Psalm 119 (cf. Pss. 1; 19). Thewriter glorifies God, his word, and his divine directions to peopleby means of an acrostic format that covers the subject of Torahmeditation. Eight synonyms are used for the “word” in thepsalm. The eight are translated in the NIV as “words”(v.57), “promise” (v.58), “statutes”(v.59), “commands” (v.60), “law”(v.61), “laws” (v.62), “precepts”(v.63), and “decrees” (v.64).

ThePs. 119 word vocabulary informs us that God has pierced the darknessof our existence with the light of his word to make himself known tous. The word is his word spoken to us and preserved for us. The psalmalso instructs us that the word is the will of God. When God piercedour darkness, he lit the path of freedom for us with his word. Hedescribed himself, defined righteousness, declared his love,announced his promises, and issued his warnings. Finally, thevocabulary establishes the authority of his word in our lives.Directions, commandments, laws, charges, and divine will ring withthe sound of authority. The word of God is an authoritativeproclamation from God to us that must be obeyed, that must be sought,that cannot be ignored.

Finally,Ps. 119 makes an intimate connection between the content of the word,things spoken, and the author of the things spoken. This connectionbetter enables us to understand the “Word” as the personof Jesus Christ in John 1. The progressive development of verses 1–2of Ps. 119 intimately connects the law of God, his statutes, and him,the one sought with all the heart. Verses 89–96 emphasize thedurability and eternality of the word in keeping with the eternalcharacter of God. In verse 114 the writer parallels God as refugewith putting hope in his word. Here the writer intimately connectsGod as a refuge with his word. In the Hebrew text “you”and “your word” stand side by side. In verses 137–44the writer aligns the righteous God with a righteous word. Accordingto verses 105, 130, 135, God and God’s word give light. Thelife-giving quality of the word and the Lord are proclaimed in verse93. Just as God is to be feared, so is his word (vv. 63, 120).

TheWord of God

Thetheme of the word in Ps. 119 is continued and clarified in the NT,accentuating the intimate connection between the word of God and Godhimself. The “Word” of God is the eternal Lord JesusChrist (John 1:1; 1John 1:1–4), who took on flesh andblood so that we might see the glory of the eternal God. Thesovereign glory of Christ as the Word of God is depicted in thevision of John in Rev. 19:13. As the Word of God, Jesus Christultimately gives us our lives (John 1:4; 6:33; 10:10), sustains ourlives (John 5:24; 6:51, 54; 8:51), and ultimately renders a justjudgment regarding our lives (John 5:30; 8:16, 26; 9:39; cf. Matt.25:31–33; Heb. 4:12).

In classical Greek, “world” (kosmos)communicated the idea that the external universe is a well-orderedsystem. In early Greek usage, the term was used with reference tospecific types of social orderings, such as the seating order ofrowers (Homer, Od. 13.77), the order of soldiers (Homer, Il. 12.225),and well-ordered political states such as Sparta (Herodotus, Hist.1.65).

CreatedWorld

Inthe OT, the notion of the created “world” departed fromthe Greek understanding specifically in that creation is never seenas an independent entity controlled by an impersonal, all-embracingorder. Rather, the universe, usually described with the phrase “theheavens and the earth” (Gen. 1:1; 2:1, 4; Ps. 113:6; Jer.10:11) or at times the “all” or “all things”(Ps. 103:19; Jer. 10:16), is always understood in its relationship toits creator: “He who created the heavens, he is God; he whofashioned and made the earth, he founded it; he did not create it tobe empty, but formed it to be inhabited—he says: ‘I amthe Lord, and there is no other’ ” (Isa. 45:18).Here, the “world” (“earth”) refers to thematerial elements that make up the planet (see also Jer. 32:17; Zech.12:1) and the sum total of the entire universe (cf. Acts 17:24). Evenin the account of creation in Gen. 1:1–2:4, where many of theelements of the physical world are mentioned (waters, firmament,stars, etc.), the primary intent of the account is to convey that Godis Lord over everything because he is the Creator. Often thesecreated elements that make up the world are praised not for their owninherent beauty, but as a testimony to the majesty, supremacy, andomnipotence of the Creator (Pss. 8; 19:1–6; 33:6–9). InPs. 148:3–6 the elements within the natural order (kosmos) areinstructed to praise God: “Praise him, sun and moon; praisehim, all you shining stars. Praise him, you highest heavens and youwaters above the skies. Let them praise the name of the Lord, for athis command they were created, and he established them for ever andever—he issued a decree that will never pass away.”

Thoughnot providing a comprehensive description, the OT does at times referto how the world is constructed as a whole. The “vault”(Gen. 1:6–20 [RSV: “firmament”]) of heavenseparates the waters above from the waters below (which arerestrained by God’s sovereign care [Gen. 1:7; 7:11; 49:25]),and this area or chamber rests on “pillars” (Job 26:11).At times the earth is described as a disc with the sanctuary as itscenter point (Judg. 9:37; Ezek. 38:12), which rests on pillars (Job9:6). There is an underworld, from which there is no return (Job10:21); however, the OT does not engage in the kind of speculationregarding the underworld as is evident in the Greco-Roman tradition.

Earthand Its Inhabitants

Theterm “world” conveys other nuances in the Bible. It oftenrefers to the inhabitants of the earth or the place of human life:“He rules the world in righteousness and judges the peopleswith equity” (Ps. 9:8 [cf. Pss. 96:13; 98:9]); or, “Comenear, you nations, and listen; pay attention, you peoples! Let theearth hear, and all that is in it, the world, and all that comes outof it!” (Isa. 34:1). Also, in the Gospels “world”is used in this way: “What good is it for someone to gain thewhole world, yet forfeit their soul?” (Mark 8:36). Matthew 4:8refers to all the kingdoms of the world. Also the expressions “cominginto the world” (John 1:9; 3:19), “in the world”(John 1:10; 2Cor. 1:12), and “leave this world”(1Cor. 5:10) can be understood as referring to the sphere ofhuman life.

UngodlyCulture and Worldview

“World”can also refer to something more than the material world or humanityin general; it can refer to the entire cultural value system or worldorder that is hostile toward God. The “world” is a commonbiblical way of referring to the ungodly worldview and lifestyle thatcharacterize human life in its rebellion against the Creator. Thecourse of the world is profoundly affected by fallen humans, throughwhom death came into the world and rules over it (Rom. 5:12).Therefore, Paul can claim that “the whole world” hasbecome guilty before God (Rom. 3:19), and even the created world isaffected by such rebellion (8:20–22). Paul especially links“this world” with “this age” (1Cor.3:19; 5:10; Eph. 2:2 NET), which God has judged (Rom. 3:6). Johndeclares that Satan is the “prince of this world” (John12:31; 14:30; 16:11). Paul refers to Satan as the “god of thisworld” (2Cor. 4:4 ESV, NRSV, NASB), who is able to blindindividuals to the truth and who animates human rebellion (Eph. 2:2).In this sense, God and the world are strictly separate: “Don’tyou know that friendship with the world means enmity against God?Therefore, anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes anenemy of God” (James 4:4). Because of this call to an exclusiverelationship with God, believers are mandated to resist and evenconfront the world. Followers of Christ must not be taken captive byphilosophy or the “elemental spiritual forces of this world”(Col. 2:8, 20), since, as Paul says, “the worldhas beencrucified to me, and I to the world” (Gal. 6:14).

Butit is the world that designates the location and object of God’ssaving activity. Indeed, God sent his Son into this world in order toreconcile it to himself (2Cor. 5:19). Jesus, the sacrificialLamb of God, “takes away the sins of the world” (John1:29). Out of love for this world, God sent his Son (John 3:1), notto judge it but to save it: “God did not send his Son into theworld to condemn the world, but to save the world through him”(John 3:17).

Althoughbelievers live in the world (1Cor. 5:10; Phil. 2:15) and musthave dealings with the world, ultimately they are not of the world(John 17:14). Remaining in Christ, believers are able to demonstratein the world the belief and practice of the new commandment to love(John 13:34; 15:9). Therefore, Christians must maintain a criticaldistance from the world’s system: “Do not love the worldor anythingin the world. If anyone loves the world, love forthe Father is not in them. For everything inthe world—thelust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—comesnot from the Father but from the world” (1John 2:15–16[cf. James 1:27; 4:4]). Believers are to avoid the seductive power ofthe world and not abandon themselves to it; they are to follow theirLord in proclaiming God’s project of reconciling the world tohimself through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (2Cor.5:18).

Because calendars are culturally constructed systems, thereare several important differences between the modern calendar and thecalendars used in biblical times. When dealing with ancient Jewishand early Christian sources, we can reconstruct complete calendarsystems. However, the Bible itself, written over many centuries,employs several calendar systems and systems of dating. No singlenormative calendar system emerges from biblical materials.Nevertheless, many aspects of life in biblical Israel depended on theuse of calendars, which regulated religious festivals, agriculturalactivity, various aspects of the legal system, and the recording ofhistorical events.

Measurementof Time in Antiquity

Therewere several methods of reckoning time in antiquity. Some units oftime corresponded to the observation of celestial phenomena (see Gen.1:14), such as the rising and setting of the sun (defining the day),the waxing and waning of the moon (the lunar month), the ascension ofthe sun in the sky at noon (the solar year). Other measurements oftime were defined by the agricultural cycle, including planting andthe beginning and end of the harvest (see Exod. 23:16; Ruth 1:22). Anagricultural scheme serves as the basis of the Gezer Calendar, animportant archaeological object of the tenth century BC unearthedabout thirty miles northwest of Jerusalem. The Gezer Calendar dividesthe year into eight periods of one or two months, each of whichcorresponds to the planting, tending, and harvest of various crops.Still other units of time, such as the seven-day week and thelunisolar year (see below), were derived by counting or calculationand did not correspond to any observable celestial or terrestrialphenomena.

Thedivision of days into hours and minutes is possible in modern timesbecause of mechanical and electronic timepieces. Without thesedevices, divisions of time shorter than the day would have beenapproximations at best. Biblical texts refer to dawn, morning, noon,evening, night, and midnight. In NT times, the twelve daylight hourswere numbered (Matt. 27:45; John 11:9). There was also a system ofdividing the night into “watches,” attested in both theNT and the OT.

TheMonth and the Year in the Bible

TheHebrew words for “month” are related to the words for“moon” and “new” (i.e., the “newmoon”), which suggests that the ancient Israelite month was alunar month corresponding to the waxing and waning of the moon over aperiod of twenty-nine or thirty days. The Bible refers to numbereddays in each month, as high as the twenty-seventh day.

Thereare several systems of naming the months in the Bible. Four“Canaanite” month names appear in the OT: Aviv (the firstmonth), Ziv (the second), Ethanim (the seventh), and Bul (theeighth). Because of the infrequent use of these names, some scholarshave questioned whether this system was in widespread use in ancientIsrael. The names probably are derived from agricultural terms.

Inmany cases the months are simply numbered. In this system, the firstmonth began in the spring season. According to biblical narrative,this way of reckoning the beginning of the year was commanded toMoses at the time of the exodus (Exod. 12:1). However, the Bibleapplies this scheme to events much earlier, as in the story of theflood of Noah, which began in the second month (Gen. 7:11), andscholars have associated the numerical system of months with latebiblical sources, around the time of the exile. The system may havecome into use around that time and replaced an older system.

Insome late biblical texts Babylonian month names are adopted,including Nisan (the first month), Sivan (the third), Elul (thesixth), Chislev (the ninth), Tebet (the tenth), Shebat (theeleventh), and Adar (the twelfth). Following biblical usage, theBabylonian month names were adopted in the ancient Jewish calendar,which is still in use today.

Basedon references to the “twelfth month,” the Israelite yearapparently consisted of twelve lunar months. Accordingly, the lunaryear consisted of approximately 354 days, which means that it wouldnot have corresponded to the solar year of approximately 365¼days. The beginning of the year would have drifted between eleven andtwelve days each year. Presumably, this would have been anunacceptable situation, given the fact that many of the biblicalfestivals were both assigned to lunar dates and were correlated toagricultural events. The problem probably was solved through theintercalation of “leap months,” as was the practice inmaintaining the later Jewish calendar. The result is a lunisolarcalendar, in which the year is composed of twelve lunar months and iscorrected relative to the solar year by the periodic addition of asecond Adar (Adar II) seven times in every nineteen-year period.The Bible does not mention this procedure or identify who wasresponsible for maintaining the calendar in ancient Israel.

BiblicalDates

Modernsystems of absolute dating, in which all years are numbered relativeto a single historical reference point—for example, the birthof Jesus (Anno Domini), the journey of Muhammad in AD 622 (AnnoHegira 1) from Mecca to Medina in Islamic culture, and thecreation of the world (Anno Mundi) in Jewish tradition—wereunparalleled in biblical times. Instead, events were usually datedrelative to the reigns of kings, Israelite or otherwise. For example,the accession of Abijah is dated to the eighteenth year of Jeroboam’sreign (1 Kings 15:1), and the proclamation of Cyrus is dated tohis first regnal year (Ezra 1:1). In other cases, events were datedrelative to important historical events. The beginning of Amos’scareer as prophet is dated to “two years before the earthquake”(Amos 1:1), and Exod. 12:41 dates the departure from Egypt to the430th year of the captivity. In other instances, the fixed points onwhich relative dates are based cannot be determined. The beginning ofEzekiel’s career as a prophet is dated to the otherwiseunspecified “thirtieth year” (Ezek. 1:1). The verse maysimply refer to Ezekiel’s age.

Thesame practices of dating events are followed in the NT. The birth ofJohn the Baptist is dated to “the time of Herod king of Judea”(Luke 1:5). The census of Caesar Augustus is identified as “thefirst census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria”(Luke 2:2). As in the OT, such formulas presuppose that the readerhas a basic awareness of the succession and reigns of kings andemperors—an advantage lost to modern interpreters, who continueto debate the absolute dating of these events. Perhaps analogously toEzek. 1:1, the beginning of Jesus’ ministry is dated to histhirtieth year of age (Luke 3:23). Other events and persons reportedin the NT can be correlated to extrabiblical historical records toestablish absolute dates for biblical events (e.g., the death ofHerod Agrippa I in AD 44 [Acts 12:23]). These are distinct frominstances in which biblical authors are making a conscious effort toprovide dates intelligible to their readers. In contrast to OThistorical narrative, for the most part, the NT shows little interestin dating events in its narrative, even according to ancientconventions of relative dating.