Several years ago, I acquired a book entitled Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus. One of its two authors, Dr. David Bivin, resides in Israel and is one of the founders of the Jerusalem School of Synoptic Research, a think tank in which Jewish and Christian scholars strive for a better understanding of the Synoptic Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke.  I had been an avid reader of Dr. Bivin’s teachings online.

In picking up the book, I learned a couple of things about Dr. Bivin I didn’t previously know. For one, he moved to Jerusalem in 1963 and actually served as a reservist in the Israeli military for 17 years. Yet, the most interesting thing I learned about him was his experience as a teenager reading the Bible. “My greatest difficulty,” he said, “was trying to understand the words of Jesus.” He would encounter passages such as these: “For if they do these things in a green tree, what shall be done in the dry?” (Luke 23:31) “From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force.” (Matthew 11:12) As a youth, he would ask his pastor or seminary professors to interpret these passages. Here was their common response: “Just keep reading, son, the Bible will interpret itself.”

Does that answer sound familiar? I’ve encountered it in my own church experience. There are many people with autism in this world who can decipher words on a page, but lack even the remotest sense of what they mean. No matter how much they read, they don’t comprehend. Eventually, they shy away from reading altogether. Though he was not autistic, Bivin’s struggles with the words of Jesus caused him to drift from reading the Gospels: “By the time I went to Israel at the age of 24 to study at Hebrew University, I had almost stopped reading the Gospels. It wasn’t that I wasn’t reading the Bible. I was reading the Bible more than ever before, but I was unconsciously neglecting the Gospels; yet, here were the real words and teachings of Jesus.” Though he would one day take his place among the most respected of Bible scholars, the young Bivin did not find the answer, “just keep reading,” to be satisfying. No matter how much of the Scripture he read—and he read it all repeatedly—the meaning of Jesus’ words was often still unclear. He wrote: “The truth is that one can keep reading the Bible forever, and the Bible will not tell him the meaning of these difficult passages.” Despite that outlook, he kept striving to understand—for the words of God are too precious and important to simply disregard or to push away in the hope of some future understanding. If we want to be intimate with Jesus, we need to understand his words.

In 1969, Bivin joined the Narkis Street Congregation in Jerusalem whose pastor was another American scholar, Dr. Robert Lindsey. Dr. Lindsey had his own brush with the difficult words of Jesus. He was at one time attempting to translate the Greek text of Mark to Hebrew. As he did this, he noticed that the order or sentence construction (syntax) of the words in Greek—often sounding very odd in Greek itself—made perfect sense when translated in the same word sequence into Hebrew. It was almost as if someone in antiquity had placed the Greek words together from a Hebrew source. He recalled that in his own training, he had a similar experience trying to translate the classical Greek books of Homer and Plato into English. “What difficulty I had in making those ancient Greeks speak English!” he said.

One day, Lindsey was teaching a class on the Gospels when he encountered the Greek word ochloi, which when translated into English often is expressed as “crowds” or “multitudes.” This word appears in the New Testament 28 times, 25 of which are found in the Synoptic Gospels: Matthew, Mark and Luke. For instance, in Matthew 9:8, having seen Jesus heal a paralytic, the Greek text reads hoi ochloi ephobethesan—which when brought over literally into English would read—“the multitudes marveled.” The English of this verse is awkward, even tortured—you can have a multitude of people in one place, but not multitudes. In fact, multitudes renders to the word multitude in most English dictionaries. The use of ochloi—a plural in Greek—puzzled Lindsey. He mentioned this in a lecture. A young, Israeli woman in his classroom piped up that ochloi sounded to her very much like the Hebrew word, ochlosim, itself a plural, but also a Hebrew idiom used by the ancient rabbis of Jesus’ day to depict “the people of a locality.” Could it be that the Greek of Matthew borrowed an idiomatic Hebrew term? Lindsey thought yes.

Both Lindsey and his disciple, Bivin, were students of the Hebrew language, and as they read the Greek words of the Gospels, they began to detect a Hebrew “voice”—a Hebrew “undertext”—speaking to them. To these scholars, translating the Greek Gospels into Hebrew clarified many of the “difficult words” of Jesus that had at one time bewildered them.

The existence of a Hebrew undertext in the Gospels presupposes that Hebrew was widely spoken, or even the dominant language of 1st Century Judea. That presupposition collides with a strongly-held hypothesis in Christian scholarship that Aramaic, not Hebrew, was the language of the common man in that period. Aramaic, like Hebrew, was a Semitic language, commonly understood to have been introduced in various dialects to the people of Israel and Judea by the Assyrians and Babylonians who conquered them. By the 1st century, Judea was home to a mix of several tongues: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek and to a lesser extent, Latin. Based on what we discern from the Gospels, it’s likely that Jesus was familiar with all of them. There is no serious scholarship that contends that either Greek or Latin was the primary language of Judea. Of the remaining tongues: which language was dominant—Hebrew or Aramaic?

Bivin and his co-author, Dr. Roy Blizzard, provide abundant evidence. There are 12 different Aramaic words/phrases in the New Testament compared to at least 17 Hebrew words/phrases, one of which, amen, appears over 100 times. In 1947, the year of Israel’s rebirth as a country, the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered in twelve caves near the site of Wadi Qumran in what is known as the West Bank today. Included among the findings were 179 manuscripts, some very fragmentary, of every Old Testament book except Esther. The vast majority were written in Hebrew. Also found were 10 non-Biblical texts specific to Qumran itself—a community that was wiped out by the Romans in 68 A.D. One was in Aramaic whereas the other nine were in Hebrew. 30% of the findings were commentaries on the Bible known as pesharim—all of these were in Hebrew. The importance of the pesharim is that they were the texts used to educate the Israeli population—ancient schools in Israel did not have the Greek structure of language, mathematics and the sciences—they were instead primarily focused on the Scriptures as the subject of learning. Therefore, the common man would need to be able to read the pesharim in order to gain an education.

Archeologically speaking, coins and inscriptions point to the prevalent use of Hebrew in 1st-Century Israel. Of the 215 types of coins minted in and around the time of Jesus, 99 are inscribed in Hebrew compared to just one in Aramaic. The rest were largely in Greek, owing to rule of the Roman puppet, Herod. During periods of Jewish independence—the Great Revolt of 66-70 A.D., and the Bar-Kochba Revolt of 132-135 A.D., a total of 68 different coins were minted, all inscribed in Hebrew. In terms of inscriptions, excavations beginning in 1968 at the Temple Mount in Jerusalem have yielded numerous inscriptions in Hebrew, Greek and Latin, but not a single one in Aramaic. Excavations conducted at Masada between 1963 and 1965 unearthed over 700 pottery fragments with inscriptions in Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek and Latin. The ratio of Hebrew to Aramaic exceeds nine to one.

We could go on and on supporting the preponderance of Hebrew over Aramaic in the remarks of Josephus, the Jewish historian, as well as rabbinic literature, rabbinic parables and Jewish prayer, all of which have a time reference that crosses over the 1st Century A.D. and all of which is amply documented by Bivin and Blizzard in their book. Importantly, they cite the testimony of the early Church fathers to the use of Hebrew in the time of Jesus, specifically with respect to the composition of the Gospel of Matthew.

“Matthew put down the words of the Lord in the Hebrew language, and others have translated them, each as best he could.”—Papias, mid-2nd Century A.D.

“Matthew, indeed, produced his gospel written among the Hebrews in their own dialect.”—Irenaeus, (120-202 A.D.)

“The first [gospel], composed in the Hebrew language, was written by Matthew. . .for those who came to faith from Judaism”—Origen, (first quarter of the third century)

These quotes were recorded by Eusebius, a Roman historian, in his book Ecclesiastical History. who would later become the Bishop of Caesarea in Palestine in 314 A.D. He made his own comment below:

“Matthew had first preached to the Hebrews, and when he was about to go to others also, he transmitted his gospel in writing in his native language.”

Among the later Church fathers (post-Nicean from 325 A.D.), we have the following:

“They have the entire Gospel of Matthew in Hebrew. It is carefully preserved by them as it was originally written, in Hebrew script.”—Epiphanius, Refutation of All Heresies.

“Matthew was the first in Judea to compose the gospel of Christ in Hebrew letters and words. . .Who it was that later translated it into Greek is no longer known with certainty. Furthermore, the Hebrew text itself is still preserved in the library at Caesarea which the martyr Pamphilus assembled with great care.”—Jerome, De Viris Inlustribus 3

Let’s now quickly identify a couple of “Hebraisms” in the Gospels as covered in Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus. Bivin and Blizzard look at the Parable of the Prodigal Son—particularly honing in on the statements of the father character—detecting the repetitive use of the word “and” (Greek: kai):

“And the father saw him, and had compassion, and ran, and fell on his neck, and kissed him. . .And the father said to his servants ‘bring quickly the best robe, and put it on him, and put a ring on his hand and sandals on his feet, and bring the fattened calf, and kill it, and let us eat and make merry.” (Luke 15:20, 22, 23)

According to the authors, joining clauses together with the conjunction “and” is very strange Greek, but very good Hebrew. We see this pattern in Genesis 1:2-5:

“And the earth was without form and empty. And darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved on the face of the waters. And God said, ‘Let there be light.’ And there was light. And God saw the light that it was good. And God divided between the light and the darkness. And God called the light Day. And He called the darkness Night. And there was evening, and there was morning—first day.”

It’s important that we learn as readers of the New Testament to identify the underlying Hebrew in the text. But, you ask, does it really matter insofar as our understanding of the text is concerned? The answer is a resounding yes! There are many examples in which discerning the Hebrew “undertext” has a bearing on the meaning we derive from the verse. One quick example cited by Bivin and Blizzard is found in Luke 10:9: “Heal the sick who are there and tell them ‘The Kingdom of God has come near you.’” (King James version) The phrase “has come near” is the Greek word enkigen. In English, as well as in Greek, “coming near” means that something is not yet here. Is that what we’re to understand about the Kingdom of God?

What, however, does “coming near” mean in Hebrew? The word for “come near” in Hebrew is karav. Bivin and Blizzard reference the Book of 2nd Kings which recounts an incident in which King Ahaz of Judah instructed the priest Uriah to construct an altar according to a design the king had seen in Damascus. Uriah complied and in Chapter 16, Verse 12 we read: “And when the king came from Damascus the king viewed the altar. Then the king drew near (karav) to the altar, and went up on it.” The king wasn’t merely “near” the altar, he was on it! That’s as near as it gets! The authors also reference Deuteronomy 22:13-14 which provides instructions for testing a wife’s virginity: “If any man takes a wife, and goes in to her, and then despises her, and brings false charges against her and maligns her, saying ‘I have taken this woman, and when I came near (karav) her, I did not find her a virgin, then. . .” In this case, “coming near”, that is, karav, is a Hebrew idiom for sexual relations. So, too, is it in Isaiah 8:3 in which we are told the prophet “came near (karav) the prophetess [who was his wife] and she conceived and bore a son.” When Jesus said that the Kingdom of God had “come near”, he was talking about something that had already arrived and that we were in intimate contact with. When we wish to be intimate with God, it first helps to know that He is telling us that He is already intimate with us.

Before we begin this study, we need to be aware of what the word hope means in both Greek and Hebrew to give us an appreciation what scripture is telling us. I will be using the NKJV unless otherwise noted in this lesson.

In today’s world, hope means something that may or may not happen. We sure hope today would be a good day. Or we hope our spouse washed the dishes before we arrive home. However, the word “hope” in the Bible means something totally different. It calls God “the God of hope”. Certainly, the Lord isn’t an undecided being. Instead, He’s extremely trustworthy and can be relied on. When we place our hope in God, we shouldn’t feel unsure of His actions and intentions. Let’s see exactly what the Bible means when it mentions the word “hope”.

Meaning Of the Word “Hope” In Greek

elpizo– this verb means “to hope”. The verb is accompanied by one of three prepositions:

• eis– “on”. Usually translated “in” and used in John 5:45:

“Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father; there is one who accuses you—Moses, in (eis) whom you trust (elpizo). “

• epi- “on”. We find this in Romans 15:12:

“There shall be a root of Jesse; And He who shall rise to reign over the Gentiles, On (epi) Him the Gentiles shall hope (elpizo).“

• en- “in”. Used in 1 Corinthians 15:19:

“If in this life only we have hope (elpizo) in (en) Christ, we are of all men the most pitiable.”

These prepositions express that Christ is the sphere and element where this ‘hope’ is placed. Since hope is a verb, those who walk in this hope are considered “hopeful” and have a character of hope.

elpis– to anticipate, usually with pleasure. As a noun it means, “favorable and confident expectation, a forward look with assurance.” Elpis refers to the future and the unseen such as in Romans 8:24-25: “For we were saved in this hope, but hope that is seen is not hope; for why does one still hope for what he sees? But if we hope for what we do not see, we eagerly wait for it with perseverance.”

Elpis is found over 50 times in the New Testament. The apostle Paul was constantly talking about anticipating future events with joy, such as in these scriptures:

“And now I stand and am judged for the hope of the promise made by God to our fathers. -Acts 26:6

“For we through the Spirit eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.” -Galatians 5:5

“If indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister.” -Colossians 1:23

“Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God. “-Romans 5:1-2

“That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give to you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Him, the eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that you may know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints, and what is the exceeding greatness of His power toward us who believe, according to the working of His mighty power“ -Ephesians 1:17-19

Hope is a purifying power. It says so in 1 John 3:3: “And everyone who has this hope in Him purifies himself, just as He is pure.”

Conclusion

Since the term hope in Greek means anticipation, we could read all these scriptures with the replacement of those words (to get a deeper talking about expecting or waiting with absolute certainly for the Lord’s promises.

Meaning Of the Word ”Hope” In Hebrew

chacah– to flee for protection; to trust; confide in; to have hope; to make a refuge. This term is used when God is compared to a shield, a rock, or described as one with protective wings.

“He only is my rock and my salvation;
He is my defense; “ -Psalm 62:2

yachal– to be patient, hope, wait, trust, to stay in expectation.

“O Israel, hope in the Lord;
For with the Lord there is mercy,
And with Him is abundant redemption. “ -Psalm 130:7

“Therefore I will look to the Lord;
I will wait for the God of my salvation;
My God will hear me. “ -Micah 7:7

 mibtach– confidence; trust; assurance; hope. This word means “the act of confiding” as found in Proverbs 21:22, “A wise man scaleth the city of the mighty, and casteth down the strength of the confidence thereof.” (KJV) Mibtach is also used in Job 8:14 referring to the “object of confidence”: “Whose confidence shall be cut off, And whose trust is a spider’s web.” There’s another meaning of this term meaning, “the state of confidence or security.” Used in Proverbs 14:26, “In the fear of the Lord there is strong confidence, And His children will have a place of refuge. “

machaceh– a shelter; hope; a place of refuge, trust.

Sabar (shabar)– to scrutinize, to expect with hope and patience, hope.

“The eyes of all look expectantly to You,
And You give them their food in due season.“ -Psalm 145:15

towcheleth– expectation, hope.

“Hope deferred makes the heart sick,
But when the desire comes, it is a tree of life. “ -Proverbs 13:12

tiqvah– expectation; hope.

“The desire of the righteous is only good,
But the expectation of the wicked is wrath.” -Proverbs 11:23

Conclusion

The word ‘hope’ in Hebrew actually means ‘to expect’ or have some sort of ‘expectation’. This means we aren’t merely hoping it to be completely. We’re 100% expecting it to be completed. There should be no doubt anywhere in our mind concerning the Lord’s promises to us.

Now with this brief understanding of what Hope means in both Hebrew and Greek we can begin to understand more fully what we are reading in scripture.

Hebrews 6:17-20: ¹⁷ In the same way, when God desired to show even more clearly to the heirs of the promise the unchangeable character of his purpose, he guaranteed it by an oath, ¹⁸ so that through two unchangeable things, in which it is impossible that God would prove false, we who have taken refuge might be strongly encouraged to seize the hope set before us. ¹⁹ We have this hope, a sure and steadfast anchor of the soul, a hope that enters the inner shrine behind the curtain, ²⁰ where Jesus, a forerunner on our behalf, has entered, having become a high priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.

It was a long time, or what seems like a long time since March 17, 2020, when everything was basically shut down in Nevada due to the Corona Virus (Covid-19). What people thought would be a few days or maybe a few weeks dragged into months: agonizingly long months. For some, it may have seemed that all hope was lost; maybe they lost their faith; when in fact God was choosing to give us this time to ponder how we, as Christians, could be more effective in our daily lives. How we could be more of a witness to others; even while staying at home. How you ask? When we ordered food for pick up or to be delivered; items we purchased online that were delivered to our homes; and while we attended to those things like a doctors’ appointment or grocery shopping?

Voluntarily staying at home during that time caused some of us to go “stir crazy” thinking we need to do something more normal. What we will have to learn and accept that what we used to accept as normal is no longer our normal. Society has dictated that we will have a “new normal” which will become our normal; different than what we knew previously; but nonetheless, just as exciting as God has determined it to be for ourselves. We will learn how to live this new normal life in family, business, church, and in everything we do. Our hope is being restored.

Hope is important because it gives us 3 things, we all need and that is something:

 1) To Talk About it,  

2) To Work Toward it,

3) To Hang Onto it.

Let’s look at each of these 3 things and discover what we really mean. What do we mean when we talk about hope?

People get together and because they love to talk about their plans for tonight, next week, next month or even next year.

Young people talk about their plans for going to college, where they are going to live after graduation, and, most importantly, where they are going to work.

Working people talk about their vacation plans of where they are going; or where they have just come back from, excited to share their experiences.

Older people talk about their retirement plans and what they are going to do with “all that time”; spend it with family, travel to places they always wanted to go to, buy that extravagant item they have always wanted, or just retire, basking in the sun and relaxing. Or, in some cases, doing more than they did when they had a full-time job, like becoming a pastor.

Jesus spoke of plans to his disciples. Jn 14:1-3, “Do not let your hearts be troubled. Believe in God, believe also in me. In my Father’s house there are many dwelling places. If it were not so, would I have told you that I go to prepare a place for you? And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, so that where I am, there you may be also.”

Peter spoke about his hope for the resurrection. 1 Pet 1:3, 21, “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! By his great mercy he has given us a new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead…”

Paul spoke to the church at Thessalonica words of encouragement in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18: ¹³ But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers and sisters, about those who have died, so that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope. ¹⁴ For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have died. ¹⁵ For this we declare to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will by no means precede those who have died. ¹⁶ For the Lord himself, with a cry of command, with the archangel’s call and with the sound of God’s trumpet, will descend from heaven, and the dead in Christ will rise first. ¹⁷ Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up in the clouds together with them to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will be with the Lord forever. ¹⁸ Therefore encourage one another with these words.

What do we mean when we say hope is what we work toward in our lives? Surprisingly it is hope that motivates us to work.

It is the expectant father with a new baby who is trying to ensure that his little one will be better off than he is in life; or the young person seeking to figure out how to pay for school loans or tuition; or the working man looking forward to his vacation and how he can make it the best one ever. Yes, hope motivates us to work.

Hope motivates Christians to work. We may have hopes for our future works here; if we take a mission trip, we elevate our hopes in how we can be effective in helping others; we plan to work for the congregation, we elevate our hopes

Paul spoke of his future work as well in his letter to the Romans when he wrote, “So when I have completed this, and have delivered to them what has been collected, I will set out by way of you to Spain.” (Romans 15:28)

He told Timothy: 1 Tim 3:14, “I hope to come to you soon, but I am writing these instructions to you so that….”

John wrote in, 3 Jn 14, “instead I hope to see you soon, and we will talk together face to face.”

But hope for Eternal Life should motivate us the most.

Paul states in Titus 1:1-2, “… In the hope of eternal life that God, who never lies, promised before the ages began…”

Peter said our hope motivates us to be sober and “…be sober and set your hope perfectly on the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ.” 1 Peter 1:13.

John reminds us that our hope motivates us to live pure and godly lives as he wrote in 1 Jn 3:2-3,” … And every man that has this hope in him will purify Himself, even as he is pure.”

Last, we have our hope to hang onto and God has given us that ability to trust Him in all things. God can and does get us through difficult things; we can see the “light at the end of the tunnel”; we can do the daily chores because of our hope for some future event; we raise our children in the hope that they have a good life; we can work through difficult times in marriage, if we have hope for better days ahead; hope provides a way for Christians to deal with life’s problems.

So, again I ask you why do we need hope? We need it to talk about it, to work toward it and to hang onto it. Our trust, faith and hope in God is our everything we need as Christians. It sustains us like nothing ever before and it keeps us focused on God knowing he answers all prayers all the time. God is good all the time; all the time God is good.

Sarado ang templo, ang Simbahan ay nasa ating tahanan, sapagkat ang Diyos ay nasa lahat ng dako. The temple is closed, church is in our home, because God is everywhere.

I would like to close by with a poem by Emily Dickinson, one that has meant a lot to me for so many years.

Hope

 by Emily Dickinson

“Hope” is the thing with feathers

That perches in the soul

And sings the tune without the words,

And never stops at all,

And sweetest in the gale is heard.

And sore must be the storm

That could abash the little bird

That kept so many warm.

I’ve heard it in the chilliest land

And on the strangest sea,

Yet never, in extremity,

It asked a crumb of me.

This word study centers on the term, serve, which in Greek, is the word diakoneo (dee-ak-on-eh’-o).  We find this word 37 times in the New Testament text, 4 times in the Book of Mark, including being found in a discourse spanning chapter 10, verses 35-45, and 5 times in the Book of Matthew, including a parallel, albeit slightly truncated, account of the same events in Chapter 20, verses 20-28,  both versions of which conclude with Jesus saying: “the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.” (Matthew 20:28, Mark 10:45)

The word, diakoneo, is the verb form of the noun, diakonos, translated as “servant.” In the Matthew account, we find this word in verse 26: “Whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant (diakonos).” Diakonos is the combination of two words, dia meaning “thoroughly” and konis meaning dust. The imagery provided here is of a person who “thoroughly” raises up dust in the performance of a task, running to do an errand with dust rising from his feet, in short, “kicking up dust.” It is the Greek origin of the English word, deacon, a person who ministers to others. In Matthew 25, Jesus foretells his second coming, at which time people will be “separated” as one separates “sheep” and “goats”. Those referred to as “goats” protest against Jesus’ accusation that they did not “care” for him: “Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?” (Matt. 25:44) The word translated as “help” in the NIV translation is diakoneo, translated as “minister” in the KJV.

The world in which Jesus walked was dominated by the authoritarian presence of Rome. The Roman Empire was a class-based, hierarchical society with a slave-dependent economy. At the upper end of the class structure were two classes, the senatorial (nobles–position based on ancestry) and equestrian (position based on wealth). At the bottom were slaves–persons considered property under Roman Law with no legal standing, and in its purest iteration, no rights, no personhood. They could be abused, forced to work under horrific conditions, or even executed, at will. In between these extremes, though by no means the semblance of a middle class, were “plebs”–freeborn Roman citizens. The Apostle Paul counted himself in this group (Acts 22:25). They often performed the same work as slaves–as craftsmen, artisans, household servants–and though they had rights under Roman Law, they had very limited upward mobility. This entire class structure was upheld by a system of patronage. A patron (patronus) entered into a relationship with a client (cliente) whereby both had mutual obligations to the other. A patron would confer rights and privileges (fides–trust, reliability) to his client, and in return, receive pietas (dutiful devotion). In the final analysis, the favoritism of patronage–the patronus favored his cliente and in turn received favored treatment from the cliente–was all about maintaining the stability of the class structure–those at the top would remain at the top, the “first would remain first,” so to speak. Slaves, of course, were at the bottom of the Roman societal order and Roman Law authorized that, with some exceptions, they would stay there. The bottom would stay at the bottom, the last would remain last. This was, in very broad strokes, the order of things in the Roman Empire.

The Hebrew word for servant is ebed. It derives from the word abad, meaning work or serve. In Hebraic culture, work was both a duty and something to be esteemed and loved–in Rabbinical literature, there is a dictum: “Love work, for Adam did not taste food until he had done work.” Genesis 2:15 states: The LORD God took the man and put him into the Garden of Eden to work (abad) it and keep it” whereupon he immediately instructed him “of every tree of the Garden you may eat”. (v. 16) Work, therefore, was embedded in God’s “order of things” for mankind from the beginning. Whereas work in its various forms was identified in Roman society with pre-existing class divisions, Hebrew culture embraced work as a great equalizer between men, bonding them together for the common good and the worship of God. In Rabbinical literature we find the following statement: “I am a creature of God and my neighbor is also His creature; my work is in the city and his in the field; I rise early to my work and he rises early to his. As he cannot excel in my work, so I cannot excel in his work. But perhaps you say, I do great things and he small things! We have learned that it does not matter whether one does much or little if only he directs his heart to Heaven.” Directing one’s heart to Heaven in conjunction with performing work (abad) reveals much about the “order of things” in Hebraic society. When one submits oneself to the authority of one’s master–in this case, the authority of the LORD God–one takes one’s place in the order of God’s government, regardless of the amount of work performed, the type of work, or one’s civil status. As opposed to the Roman order infested by patronage, God’s governance, His Kingdom, allows for no partiality. The word, ebed, is not only translated as servant, but also as slave, a word that makes no distinction between the two since it was the work done according to the Master’s purpose that counted, not one’s social position. 

Being an ebed simply meant to be under someone else’s authority. As opposed to the cruel hierarchy of Roman rule, an ebed, whether considered servant or slave, had rights accorded to them by the Torah. Whereas the Roman slave was the property of his owner, a Hebrew ebed was temporarily indentured, authorized to be released in the 7th year of his service. (Exodus 21:2, Deut 15:12) They were not to be released “empty handed”–the master was required to supply them with provisions for food and drink (Deut. 15:13). A “slave” had the right to continue his service for life should he so choose. (Deut. 15:16)  A fellow Israelite who became indentured due to poverty was to be treated as a hired worker or a temporary resident and must not be ruled over with severity. (Lev. 25:43) A foreign slave who escaped was not to be returned to his foreign master and was accorded the right to live wherever they chose all the while protected from mistreatment. (Deut. 23:16) Roman slaves, on the other hand, were hunted down and if captured, returned for a reward. 

The relationship between a Hebrew master and his Hebrew slave was established on the basis of shared humanity. “Did I ever brush aside the case of my servants, man or maid,” said Job, “when they made a complaint against me?. . .Did not He who made me in my mother’s belly make him?” (Job 31: 13, 15) God authorized humane treatment of His people with the reminder that they were once redeemed from slavery in Egypt. (Lev. 25:42; Jeremiah 34:13-14) It is not surprising that in Scripture the rules for treating slaves immediately follows the giving of the Ten Commandments, which in turn, was considered by the Jews to have been given 50 days after their release from bondage in Egypt. In Jewish literature, masters were instructed they were not to eat clean bread while serving moldy bread to their servants, that they were not to drink old wine while serving new wine to their servants, they were not to sleep on soft cushions while their servants slept on straw. There was a saying that “whoever acquires a Hebrew slave acquires a master for himself.” (Kid. 20a) Of God, the Highest Master, it was said that even He does whatever He commands Israel to perform.

One last thing before proceeding back to the Matthew text. It was widely understood among the Jews that the injustices and inequalities found in this world, the Olam Hazeh, would be addressed and corrected in the World to Come, the Olam Haba, the Afterlife. An ancient anecdote centered on the person of a rabbi named Joseph who, in the story, fell into a state of coma. After he recovered, he was asked what he saw. He answered: “I beheld a world the reverse of this one; those who are on top here were below there, and vice versa.” 

In Matthew 20:25-28, Jesus called over his disciples to offer instruction. He began by saying “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them.”  The “rulers of the Gentiles” is a generic reference but would certainly include the Roman officials ruling the land of Judah. At first glance, Jesus’ statement appears to describe a civil hierarchy of authority–one set of the officials–“the rulers of the Gentiles” exercise authority over the people on the ground, and in a typical governmental hierarchy, are subject themselves to the authority of “high officials”, who theoretically at least, would be subject to the authority of higher officials, all the way to Caesar himself. The Greek for authority is exousia, something emanating from a source that has the inherent right to issue decisions but which are voluntarily submitted to by the receiving party. When we look carefully at the Greek words of Matthew 20:25, we can find the word exousia embedded there twice, translating the terms “lord over” and “exercise authority,” but in this case, exousia has a prefix, kat, therefore yielding the word katexousia. The prefix kat adds the meaning of a downward force from above to below, a top-down exertion of authority. This would plainly describe the behavior of a Roman master upon his slave–forced, abusive labor under potentially horrific conditions.

Jesus then “reversed” the order of authority (its hierarchy) in verse 26, exhorting his disciples that “whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant.” As we shall see, the first would become last and the last first. The instructions given to the disciples here parallels the story told at the beginning of Chapter 26 in which The Kingdom of Heaven is likened to a landowner who hires workers for his vineyard periodically during the day, and who at the end of the day, pays them in reverse  order to when they arrived at work, the last being paid first, and the first last. It is under the authority of the landowner to determine what is the just and right compensation, and likewise, it is under the authority of God in His Kingdom to determine the just and right relationship between master and servant. The master must act the part of the ebed, the diakonos, the “dust kicker,” the servant, and humbly submit to the authority of the servant. He then repeated the same instruction in verse 27, substituting slave for servant, both of whom are ebedim, there being no distinction between the two in the Hebrew language. An ebed served his master with dignity, and was imbued by the Torah with rights. To the Hebrew mind, being an ebed was a designation of very high regard, work being also something among the Jews that was highly esteemed. So much so that “whoever acquires a Hebrew slave (ebed) acquires a master for himself.” What precipitated this instruction by the Lord Jesus was the request by the mother of two disciples that her sons be seated at the right and left sides of Jesus in his kingdom. This was an apparent reference to the Olam Haba, the afterlife, in that Jesus stated that those places “belong to those for whom they have been prepared by my Father”–the occupancy of which would be a future event. In the Jewish conception, the Kingdom of Heaven–insofar as it might relate to the afterlife–was a world the reverse of this one, those on the bottom here would be on the top there. Bringing that principle into the here and now, Jesus chastened his disciples that those desiring high places in the Kingdom would need to humble themselves–an order of authority that was the exact opposite of the Roman order. Instead of the first remaining first and the last remaining last, those who were last in life–the ebed, the slave–would be first in the Kingdom. And this instruction also applied to the master, Jesus, that is, God, who “did not come to be served, but to serve (diakoneo).” God, in the context of Hebraic understanding, does whatever he commands His people to perform. Jesus would be the servant of mankind itself, giving his life as a “ransom for many.” (Matt. 20:28)

This word study centers on the term, “mind of Christ,” or “mindset of Christ.” Looking at its usage in Philippians 2:5, the King James version reads: “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus.” The same verse in the NIV reads: “In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus.” The Greek word in this verse translated to either “mind” or “mindset” is phroneite, based on the word phren (pronounced “frane”) which literally and anatomically refers to “the midriff, or parts around the heart”–that is, the diaphragm. The diaphragm, physiologically, is a dome-shaped muscle under the rib cage that controls the breathing function from inside us (i.e., inhaling/exhaling) so that what takes place inside regulates what is observed about us externally. We can’t see the diaphragm nor can we even feel it–yet it’s still there performing its internal function. The diaphragm operates, therefore, from the inside out. And so does the meaning of phren–that which is “inside” us–our “mind” or “mindset” regulates our outward behavior. In the Septuagint, the Greek version of the Old Testament, the word phren is used several times to translate the Hebrew word, lev, meaning “heart.” Lev is spelled with two Hebrew letters–a lamed (the Hebrew L) and a bet (the Hebrew B). Pictographically, the ancient form of the lamed resembles a shepherd’s staff. A staff, from an Hebraic perspective, associates with the concept of “control” as in the Hebrew word for image, tselem, the word used in Genesis 1:26 referring to man being made in God’s image. Pictographically, tselem would read “the desire to control chaos,” the letter signifying control being the lamed.[1] This same shepherd’s staff, represented by the lamed, is also part of several Hebrew words translated as God: El, Elo’ah and Elohiym. Therefore, the lamed is also considered to be a symbol signifying “authority”. The bet, the second letter of the word, lev, is also Hebrew for “house”. Pictographically, it is considered to resemble the inside of a house, its “floor plan”. Therefore, the pictographic meaning of “lev” is “authority within”.

The “mind of Christ” is likened, using the Greek words as a guide, to a phren, a diaphragm inside us regulating our external behavior. When looked at through the filter of 1st Century Hebraic thought, the mind of Christ would be likened to a heart, an authority within us. Though this authority is represented by Christ, it ultimately is the authority of God (1 Corinthians 11:3). This authority (samak/exousia) is not a du jour authority–a set of rules enforced by power, though on occasion, God has resorted to this (i.e., the Flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, Tower of Babel). Primarily, it is a de facto authority–a relationship between God and man based on man’s voluntary submission to God’s rule/authority. As we exercise trusting obedience in God’s instructions, we willingly enter the “sphere” of God’s authority, the Kingdom of God; we’re not compelled at gunpoint to abide by God’s rules nor are we prodded like cattle into the sphere of His authority, His Kingdom.

There is another Hebrew word, translated on occasion as “mind”, that may supply an appropriate imagery of this matter of “voluntary submission.” Isaiah 26:1-18 is considered a “song of praise” that would one day be sung by the Jewish people upon their return to their own land, under the authority and governance of God’s rules and ordinances. Verse 3 reads that God “will keep in perfect peace (shalom shalom) those whose minds are steadfast” because they trust in God. What is it to have a “steadfast mind”? The Hebrew word translated as mind here is yetzer. This word has perhaps less to do with the mind, and much more to do with something formed. We first encounter the word in Genesis 2:7: “And Yehovah our God formed (yetzer) man from the dust of the ground.” The prophet Isaiah uses this word to describe the relationship of clay to its potter:  “Shall what is formed (yetzer) say to the one who formed (yetzer) it, ‘You did not make me?'” (Is. 29:16) The Creator formed (yetzer) man, not vice versa. The potter forms the pottery. Aside from a reference to something formed, the word yetzer also means “intent”, “inclination” or “purpose”. For instance, in Genesis 8:21, God told Noah that the “intent (purpose: yetzer) of man’s heart is evil from his youth.” We also find yetzer as purpose elsewhere in the Scripture including Genesis 6:5, Deuteronomy 31:21, 1 Chronicles 28:9 and 29:18.

Next, what is it to be steadfast? The word here is samak, the same Hebrew word signifying authority, and a word connoting the transfer of authority by the laying on of hands.[2] Moses did this to his successor, Joshua: “So the LORD said to Moses, ‘Take Joshua son of Nun, a man in whom is the spirit, and lay (samak) your hand on him. . .Give him some of your majesty so the whole Israelite community will obey him’. . . Moses did as the LORD commanded him. . .He laid (samak) his hands on him and commissioned him.” (Numbers 27:18-20, 22-23) This illustrates the transfer of authority via laying of hands (samak) from the standpoint of the giver, or in the Isaiah example, from the standpoint of the potter, the one who forms (yetzer) the clay. What is the meaning of samak from the standpoint of that which is formed, the clay, the receiver? First, it is useful to know that samak is also the root of the 15th letter of the Hebrew alphabet, pronounced samech. Pictographically, the samech resembles a staff with a hand resting on it. It means to “support,” “lean on” or “rest in”. The clay, therefore, rests in the hands of its potter, and willingly submits to its formation by the work of those hands.

What is it then for us to have a steadfast mind? Borrowing the prophet Isaiah’s potter/clay example, when we “rest in” (samak) the hands of the Master Potter, when we “lean” on (samak) our Creator, when we cease attempting to control our lives and rely on God as our support (samak), we enter the sphere of His samak/authority, submitting ourselves willingly to the work of His hands so that He will form (yetzer) us according to His purpose (yetzer). Likewise, when we “take on” the mindset of Christ, we enter the sphere of Christ’s authority, submitting ourselves to the authority of Christ, who is in turn under the authority of God, internalizing, leaning on, resting in and being supported by (samak) the instructions of Christ (in trusting obedience such that we allow God to fashion or mold (yetzer) our outward behavior, governing it according to His purpose (yetzer).

When we adopt the “mindset of Christ,” according to the Apostle Paul, we, like Christ, “do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit.” (Phil. 2:3) Rather, we “humble ourselves” (v.8) and in so doing, enable God to fashion us into the “pottery”, that is, the person, he intends/purposes us to be. And when we do this, we achieve, to again borrow the prophet Isaiah’s term, “perfect peace” (shalom shalom).

END NOTES

[1] For a more detailed explanation of tselem, see http://fojlv.org/?p=172.

[2] See https://odmlv.org/?p=231 for a more complete discussion of authority.

 

“The Great Commission” begins with the following words spoken by Jesus to his disciples: “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.” (Mat. 28:18) The word, authority, translates the Greek word exousia (ex-oo-si-a), a combination of two words–ex, meaning “out of” and ousia meaning “being.” Together, it literally means “out of being” in the sense of something being “sent out.” Out of being implies the existence of an “origin” or source that possesses the liberty to act as it sees fit, the inherent right to make decisions, the ability to exercise power or rule over something or someone as it would please itself to do so. Importantly, exousia, that is, authority, can be conferred, transferred or delegated from one person (the origin or source) to another.

There are 102 instances of exousia in its various grammatical forms in the New Testament. Ten of these instances are found in the Book of Matthew, one of which we have already discovered in verse 28:18. A corresponding word in Hebrew that provides an interesting imagery for the use and meaning of exousia in Matthew is the word s’mikah. The root of this word is samak, referring literally to the laying of hands upon a person or an animal. There are numerous instructions involving this word in connection to the giving of a sacrifice. For instance, in Leviticus 1:4 we read, “And he (the person making the offering) shall put his hand (v’samak yadov) on the head of the burnt offering and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him.” This then signified a transfer of ownership of the animal from the person to God, as well as a transfer of the person’s sin from himself to the animal. Another aspect of samak, in the context of authority, referred to one’s ability and permission to discern and carry out the will of God. This measure of authority was considered to have been passed down from generation to generation by the laying of hands (samak), an instance of which was the transfer of authority from Moses to Joshua. In Deuteronomy 34:9, we read: “Now Joshua son of Nun was filled with the spirit of wisdom because Moses had laid his hands (samak yadov) on him. So the Israelites listened to him and did what the LORD had commanded Moses.” The Book of Numbers provides further insight about the “transfer of authority” from Moses to Joshua: “So the LORD said to Moses, ‘Take Joshua son of Nun, a man in whom is the spirit, and lay your hand on him. . .Give him some of your majesty so the whole Israelite community will obey him’. . . Moses did as the LORD commanded him. . .He laid his hands on him and commissioned him.” (Numbers 27:18-20, 22-23)

At or near the days of Jesus upon the Earth, a select group of rabbis were considered to have s’mikah, that is, to have the authority to interpret Scripture, not simply teaching someone else’s understanding of the Torah. One of those in the generation preceding Jesus was Rabbi Hillel who coined the phrase “what is hateful to you, do not do unto others”–the “Golden Rule” of Judaism. He followed that by saying “this is the whole Torah, all else is explanation.” This is reflected in Jesus’ saying “Do unto others what you would have them do unto you for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.” (Matthew 7:12) At the close of the Sermon on the Mount, Matthew states “When Jesus had finished saying these things, the crowds were amazed at his teaching, because he taught as one who had authority (exousia), and not as their teachers of the law.” (Matthew 7:28-29) This is the first instance of the use of exousia in the Book of Matthew.

It would be followed shortly thereafter by another. In Chapter 8, a centurion–a commander in the Roman army–asked Jesus to heal his servant. Jesus offered to pay a visit to the centurion’s residence to which the officer humbly objected, preferring instead that Jesus just say the word which would thereby heal his servant. And then followed a mention by the centurion of exousia: “For I also (kai) am a man under authority (hupo exousian tassomenos), with soldiers under me. I tell this one, ‘Go,’ and he goes; and that one, ‘Come,’ and he comes. I say to my servant, ‘Do this,’ and he does it.” (Matthew 8:9) To this, Jesus “marveled” that he had never met a man in all of Israel with such great faith, for authority sits at the very essence of faith–it is the trusting obedience of one for his superior–in this case, the trust of a soldier for his commander, the trust of a servant for his master, the trust of a disciple for his teacher. The Greek word “tasso” refers to an “ordered arrangement”–the centurion had a place in a chain of authority. He was at once “under the authority of another, and in turn, his soldiers were under his authority. Each knew their “place” and their responsibility, and did what they were told. Moreover, the centurion had been given the authority from his superior to carry out his appointed task, and he in turn, gave authority to his soldiers to carry out their appointed tasks. Permission was “sent out” (exousia) from the highest authority to one “under him” along with the power to carry out an instruction, who in turn, gave permission and power for those under him to carry out the same instruction, and so on all the way down to the lowest foot soldier. When Jesus commended the centurion’s faith, it was not only about the centurion’s faith that Jesus could heal from afar, but it was also, if not primarily, that the centurion knew his “place” in the hierarchy of authority in which he operated as an officer.[1]

When the centurion told Jesus, “for I also (kai) am a man under authority,” he was drawing a parallel between himself and Jesus, the Messiah, who Himself was “sent out” at a time appointed by God (the fullness of time–pleroma o chronos) to redeem the world. The centurion understood something about Jesus–that Jesus was also under authority–the authority of God, His Father. We find this fatherly authority expressed explicitly in the Book of John, in which Jesus states: “I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does.” (John 5:19) “I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me.” (John 8:28) “For I did not speak of my own accord, but the Father who sent me commanded me what to say and how to say it.” (John 12:49) Jesus belongs to a genealogy of authority, beginning with Judah, fourth son of Jacob who said of his son: “The scepter will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet.” (Gen. 49:10) The scepter is the “staff of authority”, and it is in the ancestral line of Judah that the kings of Israel and Judah would be born, starting with King David, in whom the throne became hereditary, and leading ultimately to Jesus the Messiah, the King of Kings. This genealogy of authority begins even before Judah with the “fatherly authority” of Abraham transmitted over the generations leading to the Davidic line of kingly authority, and finally, to the Lord Jesus. We see this entire “lineage of authority” unfold beginning in Matthew Chapter 1.

The topic of authority begins the Book of Matthew and also concludes it. In the final verses of Chapter 28 as found at the beginning of this article, Jesus states that “all authority (exousia) in heaven and on earth has been given to Me.” (28:18) The words “has been given to Me” implies an antecedent source of authority–that is, God. Jesus, in turn, authorizes His disciples to “disciple all nations. . .” (28:19) If the centurion belonged to a hierarchy of authority, we do also as disciples of Jesus–we are permitted and empowered to make even more disciples, each person in the chain understanding their “place” in God’s “government” as it were, His Kingdom. This Kingdom is not so much a place, but a movement of men into the sphere of God’s authority, entering into God’s “order” by submitting to His rules and instructions. Though we have the ability to comply with God’s instructions, whether we do so is not a matter of force, but rather a matter of choice. For authority to take hold, there must be compliance. Authority and compliance are the two key elements of the “relationship” between a master and his servant, a commander and his soldier and in our case, a disciple and his teacher. When Jesus commended the centurion for his faith–“with no one in Israel have I found such faith”–the clear implication is that it is the few, not the many, who precisely grasp their “place” in God’s order of things, thereby entering into a deep relationship with their Creator.

END NOTES

[1] Pastor Fernando Basilio provides an even deeper treatment of the meeting between Jesus and the centurion. He aptly describes it as an encounter between two authority figures. However, the centurion correctly surmised that Jesus was the higher authority. When he protested that Jesus should come under his roof (Matthew 8:8), Pastor Basilio states: “it would mean that Jesus will come ‘under’ the centurion’s authority. And the centurion would have none of that.” For a more detailed analysis, please navigate to www.fojlv.org/?p=466

A FEW THOUGHTS ON THE SABBATH

After an absence from Bible Fellowship of two weeks, I was very pleased upon my return to see the group engage the subject of Shabbat. The practice of 7^th-day observance of the Sabbath is virtually non-existent today among the vast majority of Christians. These same Christians concurrently claim the Hebrew Scriptures as their canon, and in those Scriptures, the oracles of God specifically command its observance:

 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. ⁹ For six days you shall labor (abad) and do all your work (melachah), ¹⁰ but the seventh day is a Sabbath of the Lord your God; on it you shall not do any work (melachah), you, or your son, or your daughter, your male slave or your female slave, or your cattle, or your ⁽resident who stays with you. ¹¹ For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and everything that is in them, and He rested (nuach) on the seventh day; for that reason the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.” (Exodus 20:8-11)

 “For six days you are to do your work (ma’aseh), but on the seventh day you shall cease (shabbat) from labor so that your ox and your donkey may rest (nuach),  and the son of your female slave, as well as the stranger residing with you, may refresh themselves.” (Exodus 23:12)

² Now the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, ¹³ “Now as for you, speak to the sons of Israel, saying, ‘You must keep My Sabbaths; for this is a sign between Me and you throughout your generations, so that you may know that I am the Lord who sanctifies you. ¹⁴ Therefore you are to keep the Sabbath, for it is holy to you. Everyone who profanes it must be put to death; for whoever does any work (melachah) on it, that person shall be cut off from among his people. ¹⁵ For six days work (melachah) may be done, but on the seventh day there is a Sabbath (shabbat) of complete rest (shabbaton) holy to the Lord; whoever does any work (melachah) on the Sabbath day must be put to death. ¹⁶ So the sons of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, to celebrate the Sabbath throughout their generations as a permanent covenant.’ ¹⁷ It is a sign between Me and the sons of Israel forever; for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, but on the seventh day He ceased (shabbat) from labor, and was refreshed.” (Exodus 31:12-17)

 “You shall work (abad) six days, but on the seventh day you shall rest (shabbat); even during plowing time and harvest you shall rest (shabbat).” (Exodus 34:21)

“For six days (melachah) work may be done, but on the seventh day you shall have a holy day, a Sabbath of complete rest (shabbaton) to the Lord; whoever does any work (melachah) on it shall be put to death. ³ You shall not kindle a fire in any of your dwellings on the Sabbath day.”” (Exodus 35:2-3)

“For six days work (melachah) may be done, but on the seventh day there is a Sabbath of complete rest (shabbaton) a holy convocation. You shall not do any work (melachah); it is a Sabbath to the Lord in all your dwellings.” (Leviticus 23:3)

 “Keep the Sabbath day to treat it as holy, as the Lord your God commanded you. ¹³ For six days you shall labor (abad) and do all your work (melachah), ¹⁴ but the seventh day is a Sabbath of the Lord your God; you shall not do any work (melachah) that day, you or your son or your daughter, or your male slave or your female slave, or your ox, your donkey, or any of your cattle, or your resident who stays with you, so that your male slave and your female slave may rest (nuach) as well as you. ¹⁵ And you shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the Lord your God brought you out of there by a mighty hand and an outstretched arm; therefore the Lord your God commanded you to celebrate the Sabbath day.” (Deuteronomy 5:12-15)

The purpose of bringing forth the above Scriptures is to remind us of the emphasis with which the LORD advanced the observance of the 7^th-day Sabbath. More often than not, the 7^th -day Sabbath is dismissed by Christians as something satisfied by Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross, or something that is practiced on Sundays, or something that can be practiced on any day one chooses to practice it, or something meant for Jews only. Far be it from this teaching to lurch into the “rabbit hole” of Sabbath controversies dating back to the 2^nd Century.

The centuries-old debate over the 7^th-day Sabbath, and the prevailing view that the Sabbath is either not to be observed on the 7^th day or not at all, has made it irrelevant to modern Christians. It is regarded as an outdated religious obligation, a stricture upon the Christian’s relationship with his Maker. In each of the Synoptic Gospels, a controversy arises between Jesus and a group of Pharisees over the disciples plucking heads of grain on the Sabbath. In the Mark version of this encounter, Jesus remarked that “the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.” (Mark 2:27) This strongly implies that the Sabbath has a value for mankind.

Years ago, I read a treatise by Pastor Ray Stedman who made the observation that in the Genesis 1 creation narrative, the account of each of the first six days is concluded with the words “And there was evening and there was morning.” (Genesis 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31) There is no such attribution to the 7^th day. That “day” takes on the character of timelessness.

Inasmuch as we understand the LORD to be the creator of all things, He also is the creator of time itself. Therefore, the eternal LORD of creation exists outside of time.  When we observe the Sabbath, we, in effect, enter a timeless sphere in which, however briefly, we seek contact with the eternal, timeless God of all creation.

Of all the days, only the seventh day is sanctified¸ that is, made holy by the LORD. When looked upon as a “day”, it is “sanctified time”. It is set apart by the LORD for a special purpose, something no other day in Scripture can claim.

A 20^th-century rabbi, Abraham Joshua Heschel, said of the Sabbath: “Unless one learns how to relish the taste of Sabbath. . .one will be unable to enjoy the taste of eternity in the world to come.” According to Heschel, it is through observance of Sabbath that we get a small “taste” of eternity. Is experiencing the eternal something desired by every Christian? I think it is. Therefore, for the believer, the Sabbath—an entry into the sphere of the eternal—may have an unexpected relevancy for today’s Christian.

In the lessons I missed at ODMLV, the meaning of the word Shabbat was studied. Though it is more likely than not to be translated as “rest”, the meaning in Hebrew is “to cease”. Cease what? An explanation was offered that one is instructed “to cease whatever one is doing”. This is imprecise. The first use of the word, shabbat, in Scripture is found in Genesis 2:2:

 ^“By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested (shabbat) on the seventh day from all His work (melachah) which He had done.” (Genesis 2:2)

Specifically, God rested, or rather, ceased, His work on the 7^th day. In English, we have one word, work, spanning many sub-categories of the same. Mowing a lawn is work. Constructing a building is work. Teaching a class is work. And so on and so forth. Hebrew, unlike English, has three words for work, each with a different meaning.

Ma’aseh, the root of which is asah, means to do or make. This can pertain to the production or making of something. We find asah seven times in the creation narrative (Genesis 1:7, 11, 12, 16, 25, 26, 31). In Exodus 23:12, this type of work is mentioned as something to be done for six days, then ceased from on the seventh. In none of the Sabbath instructions is ma’aseh mentioned explicitly as prohibited work with punishment for those doing it on the 7^th day.

Avodah, from the root abad, means to labor or to serve. The labor or service here is “ordinary” in the sense of “lift that barge, tote that bail” or simply work absent any nuance of creativity. The noun related to this word is ebed, meaning servant. Eliezer, for instance, was the ebed of Abraham, his master (adon). The first use of abad is found in Genesis 2:5 in which the text states that “there was no man to work (abad) the ground.” Shortly thereafter in the same narrative, we read “The LORD God took the man and put him in the garden to tend and keep it.” (Genesis 2:15) The word translated as “tend” comes from the Hebrew root word, abad. Adam was placed in the garden to service it, not to create it. This type of work is mentioned as permitted for six days in Exodus 20:8 and Deuteronomy 5:12 but is not explicitly mentioned as the type of work prohibited on the 7^th day.

Melachah refers to “creative” work. What is meant by creative? A way to conceptualize it would be to consider a chair. Moving a chair around a table would be abodah; assembling pieces of wood or metal together to create a chair would be melachah.

At the conclusion of the Genesis creation narrative in verses 2:2,3, the text states twice that “God rested from all His work.” The word translated as work in these two verses is melachah, a specific reference to God’s creative work in bringing the heavens and earth into existence.

Melachah is derived from the same root word as malak, the Hebrew for angel or messenger. Since melachah first appears at the end of the creation narrative, and because from its common root is derived a word referencing a form of divine being, it is immediately associated with divine craftsmanship. However, man, created in the image of God to carry out God’s mission on Earth, also has the God-given capacity to do creative work, that is, melachah, though obviously not on the scale of creating the heavens and the earth. The Genesis creation narrative explains that God made man to rule over other living, created things. (Genesis 1:26,28) As God is the “master of the universe”, melachah are the ways in which man exercises mastery over both living and non-living things in nature, if not nature itself.

In the Book of Exodus, Moses received instructions for the construction of the Tabernacle, God’s intended residence among His people. This is documented beginning in Chapter 25 and ending in Chapter 31:11. In verse 31:2, we read that the person of Bezalel has been “filled with the Spirit of God in wisdom, in understanding, in knowledge, and in craftsmanship.” The word translated as craftsmanship is melachah. God told Moses that Bezalel, along with a person named Oholiab, plus others, in whose “hearts of all who are skillful I have put skill that they may make all that I have commanded you.” (Exodus 31:11)

It is immediately after these six-plus chapters of Tabernacle instructions that God reiterated, if not expanded upon, the commandment to observe the Sabbath in verses 12-17. This matter of the Sabbath had not been mentioned in the text since its mention in Exodus 23:12. Why here?

There is a pattern in the text connecting Genesis 1:1 through 2:3 with Exodus 25:1 through 31:17. It looks like this:

A—Melachah of the creation of heaven and earth (Genesis 1:1-2:1)

B—God rested (Genesis 2:2-3)

A—Melachah of the construction of the Tabernacle (Exodus 25:1-31:11)

B—Man must rest (Exodus 31:12-17)

In both cases, divine or divinely-inspired creative acts, melachah, are followed by divinely-required rest, without melachah.

How then do we know what is melachah and what is not? The rabbis of antiquity, seizing upon the proximity of the Sabbath requirements to the instructions for building the Tabernacle, deduced that there were various types of created materials used to construct the Tabernacle, which in turn, corresponded to specific categories of creative work on those materials, that is, melachah. From this, they came up with 39 categories of melachah that were prohibited to be done during the Sabbath.

1. Carrying
   Burning
   3. Extinguishing
   4. Finishing
   5. Writing
   6. Erasing
   7. Cooking
   8. Washing
   9. Sewing
   10. Tearing
   11. Knotting
   12. Untying
   13. Shaping
   14. Plowing
   15. Planting
   16. Reaping
   17. Harvesting
   18. Threshing
   19. Winnowing
   20. Selecting
   21. Sifting
   22. Grinding
   23. Kneading
   24. Combing
   25. Spinning
   26. Dyeing
   27. Chain-stitching
   28. Warping
   29. Weaving
   30. Unraveling
   31. Building
   32. Demolishing
   33. Trapping
   34. Shearing
   35. Slaughtering
   36. Skinning
   37. Tanning
   38. Smoothing
   39. Marking

This matter of how to observe the Sabbath, or rather, how to abstain from doing melachah, is, in the hands of the rabbis, already presenting as a burdensome task. But, on top of the 39 categories, the ancient rabbis, intellectual descendants of the Pharisees, piled on an almost endless set of instructions in the effort to fine tune Sabbath obedience to the minutest detail.

Alfred Edersheim was a 19^th century Biblical scholar and a Jew who converted to the Christian faith. In his most quoted work, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, he states:

“Let us see how Rabbinism taught Israel to observe its Sabbath. In not less than 24 chapters [In the Jerusalem Talmud[1] a Gemara[2] is attached to the first 20 of the Mishnaic tractate Shabbat; in the Babylon Talmud to all 24 chapters.] matters are seriously discussed as of vital religious importance which one would scarcely imagine a sane intellect would seriously entertain. Through 64.5 folio columns in the Jerusalem, and 156 double pages of folio in the Babylon Talmud does the enumeration and discussion of possible cases, drag on. . .The Talmud itself bears witness to this, when it speaks of a certain Rabbi who had spent no less that 2 ½ years in the study of only one of these 24 chapters!”

Edersheim then launched into a study of Pharisaic minutiae regarding Sabbath regulations. There are far too many stipulations to cover in this article; it would likely require weeks or even months of study. To give a small inkling of the overwhelming detail involved, I will provide several examples of one category of melachah: carrying.

• Carrying the weight of anything heavier than a fig was considered a “burden” and was labeled melachah.
• If carrying an object in front which then slipped to the back, one was guilty of labor considered melachah.
• If an object were thrown into the air by the left hand and caught by the right, this was considered sinful. However, if caught by the mouth and eaten, then there was no sin.
• Any object, regardless of size, was not permitted to be transported from a public to a private place, or vice versa. Public places were considered to be “open” whereas private places were “enclosed”. A person was not allowed to carry an object as tiny as a key from their homes into a public space. Rabbis resorted to wearing keys on chains around their necks so that it would be akin to an article of clothing and hence not be considered sinful melachah. On the other hand, lifting heavy items such as furniture inside within one’s house was not considered melachah.

This is a mere smattering of regulations imposed by the rabbis, and it’s a fraction of just one of 39 categories of melachah. Imagine studying all of it!

Edersheim went on to say this: “Rabbinism enlarged the simple Sabbath law as expressed in the Bible, [Ex. 20:8-11; 23:12-17; 34:1-3; Deut. 5:12-15] and, in its anxiety to ensure its most exact observance, changed the spiritual import of its rest into a complicated code of external and burdensome circumstances.”

Is it any wonder that Jesus opposed the Pharisees insofar as Sabbath regulations were concerned?

Another word intimately associated with the Sabbath is rest. Whereas in English we use the one word, rest, the key Scriptures regarding the Sabbath actually have two different Hebrew words for rest. The first word, shabbat, meaning “to cease”, already been touched upon. One ceases one’s work, melachah, on the 7^th day. God ceased (shabbat) His creative work (melachah) in Genesis 2:2. Israel was commanded to rest in the form of ceasing melachah on the 7^th day in Exodus 31:14, 34:21, 35:2; and Leviticus 23:2.

The other word translated “rest” is nuach. We find this word used as “rest” in Exodus 20:11 and Deuteronomy 5:14. This word is little mentioned in churches. I have neither seen nor heard it mentioned in any Bible Studies. So, what exactly does it mean?

Nuach is the root word for two other words that appear in Genesis 5:29. One is the Hebrew name of the patriarch Noah, pronounced in Hebrew as Noach. The second is nacham. The verse itself, announcing the birth of Noah, reads:

“Now he called his name Noah (Noach), saying ‘This one will give us rest (nacham) from our work (ma’aseh) and from the toil of our hands from the ground that the LORD has cursed.’”

In Hebrew, names mean things and can reveal the God-given purpose of a human being. Noah’s purpose, embedded in his name, was to give nacham to his people. Nacham, based on its root, nuach, has the physical appearance of strong breathing, but in a more abstract sense, the strong breathing, depending on context, is an outward expression of comforting or consoling oneself. We find this word in Psalm 23:4: “Your rod and your staff, they comfort (nacham) me.”

When we rest in the sense of nuach we “take comfort” from our labor. How then would this apply to God, of Whom it was written in Exodus 20:11 that He took nuach on the 7^th day? Did God need comfort? Consolation? Or perhaps an alternative meaning of nuach such as regret or repentance?

Any of the above might apply to a human being, but none of the above seem suitable insofar as God is concerned. There remains another possible meaning of nuach, having to do with placing or “putting aside” something. The first use of nuach in Scripture is found in a verse we previously looked at for a different reason, Genesis 2:15.

“Then the LORD God took the man and put (nuach) him into the garden of Eden to work it and keep it.”

On the occasion of gathering and keeping the manna on the 6^th day, Moses told the leaders of the people:

“Tomorrow is a sabbath observance, a holy sabbath to the LORD. Bake what you will bake and boil what you will boil, and all that is left over put aside (nuach) to be kept until morning.” (Exodus 16:23)

There is a parallelism in the above verse. The sabbath is holy, that is, something to be set apart. This corresponds to the unused manna which is to be set aside.

In Exodus 20:11, the text states: “For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested (nuach) on the seventh day; therefore, the LORD blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.

Here, again, there is an apparent parallelism. In reverse, God set apart the Sabbath day which corresponds to His nuach, the setting aside of the melachah that established His creation. Thereby, through the act of setting aside (nuach), He rested.

Israel was commanded to do the same, setting aside their work (melachah) for one day, in order that they might remember and reflect on the mighty works of God, His act of creation (Exodus 20:11) and the release of Israel from bondage in Egypt. (Deuteronomy 5:15).

Christians share the creation narrative with their Jewish brothers. On behalf of this, there is cause for both groups to set aside their work and to set apart a space in time to reflect upon the glory of the One who created the heavens and the earth. The Christian has the additional opportunity to set aside his work and sanctify the time to remember Jesus, who on the day before the Sabbath went to the cross and on the day after the Sabbath rose from the dead.

END NOTES

[1] The Talmud derives from the word, lamad, meaning instruction. It is the main corpus of the Oral Torah, considered by the Pharisees, and later the rabbis, to have been communicated to Moses by God, concurrently with the written Torah. It is then postulated that it was handed down orally throughout the generations until the 2^nd century C.E. when it began to be codified into writing. There are two versions of Talmud, the Jerusalem and the Babylonian.

[2] A rabbinical commentary.

I copied the list of 39 categories from the website, ou.org.

Many thanks are due to Pastor Terry Austin who set a beautiful foundation in place for the continuing study of the Sabbath.

A–“This is My commandment, that you love one another (Gr. agapate allelous), just as I have loved you.” (John 15:12)

B–“Greater love (Gr. agapen) has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends (Gr. philon).” (John 15:13)

B–” You are My friends (Gr. philoi) if you do what I command you.” (John 15:14)

A–“This I command you, that you love one another (Gr. agapate allelous).”  (John 15:17)

During the week beginning April 16, 2017, I had the opportunity to travel through the beautiful country of Romania. There were two notable deaths that occurred in that week roughly ten years apart–one on April 16, 2007, and the other on April 19, 2017. I’d like to reflect on those incidents with you.

Let’s start with the more recent one. On April 19, 2017, during our stay in the city of Timisoara, I read a report on the internet that ex-NFL player, Aaron Hernandez, had committed suicide. In 2013, he was convicted of 1st-degree murder in the killing of Odin Lloyd, a man who was dating the sister of Mr. Hernandez’ fiancée. Before taking his own life, Mr. Hernandez reportedly wrote the words “John 3:16” in ink across his forehead and in blood on the wall of his prison cell. Under this was a Bible open to John 3:16 with the verse marked in blood.

On April 16, 2007, student Seung-Hui Cho went on a shooting rampage at Virginia Tech University, murdering teachers and students, 33 persons in all. There were many heroic persons who lost their lives trying to resist the shooter. Among those was one, Liviu Librescu, a Romanian, who served as Professor of Engineering Science and Mechanics at Virginia Tech since 1985. Before that, Dr. Librescu was a Holocaust survivor; he refused to pledge allegiance to the Romanian Communist Party; he lost his position as an academic due to his sympathies toward Israel and ultimately he emigrated to the Promised Land after Prime Minister Menachem Begin intervened on his behalf. He was a Jew. Upon hearing gunfire from other classrooms, Librescu held the door of his classroom shut while most of his students escaped through the windows. Cho, the shooter, fired bullets through the door, five of which hit Librescu, one fatally to the head.

There are some Christians, by no means all, who look at Aaron Hernandez and, in spite of his murderous way, see a “saved” man, a man who made a “decision for Christ,” albeit toward the latter stages of his life, perhaps even at the very end. On the other hand, in Liviu Librescu, they see an eternally condemned man, despite the righteous walk he walked, culminating in an heroic act that led to his death, all because he never, to anyone’s knowledge, made a “decision for Christ.” Personally, I do not presume to know the will of God in matters of one’s eternal destination. God’s grace is, after all, His.

There is an important instruction of Jesus found in John 15. It repeats in verses 12 and 17 forming a synonymous parallelism. What Jesus said to his disciples is this: “This is my commandment, that you love one another, just as I have loved you. (v. 12) “This I command you, that you love one another.” (v. 17) The words love one another are in Greek, agapate allelous, and they precisely repeat in those two verses. Jesus put these words forth, not as a suggestion, but as a command (Gr. entolay). We also find this same command in an earlier part of the same discussion between Jesus and His disciples in which our present literary structure is located. Verse 13:34 reads: “A new commandment I give to you, that you should love one another. As I have loved you, so you also should love one another.” The phrase “love one another” (agapate allelous) repeats in each line of this verse, forming yet another synonymous parallelism. The weight of repetition of the phrase “love one another” in repeating literary structures authored by John shows just how important this particular command was to Jesus.

Within our literary structure, the chiasm shown at the top of the article, verses 12 and 17 point to what it means to love one another in verse 13: “Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends.” The context here is that verse 13 “amplifies” verse 12 by referencing what is “the greatest love.” Verses 12 and 13, looked at together, form a synthetic parallelism since verse 13 “enlarges” upon verse 12. And what is “the greatest love?” To “lay down one’s life for one’s friends,” even unto death. And who are one’s friends? “You are my friends if you do what I command you.” (v. 14) The word friend (Gr. philoi) repeats in verses 13 and 14, two verses that yet form another synthetic parallelism in which Jesus explains in verse 14 what is meant by “friends” in verse 13.

When we look at the “end of life” experiences of Liviu Librescu and Aaron Hernandez, we can ask: who most closely modeled the behavior commanded by Jesus? Would the phrase, “love one another,” apply to Dr. Librescu? Could we fairly say that he modeled the “greatest love” by giving his life to save his students? If you were situated in his classroom on April 16, 2007, who would you say most closely followed the command of Christ–a Jewish professor who barricaded himself at the door to save his students, or the students who fled out the classroom windows to save themselves?

Let’s now turn our attention to Mr. Hernandez. Was killing himself an example of “loving one another?” Was it akin to laying his life down for his friends? Or was it a self-centered act to escape an existence that was displeasing to him? Mr. Hernandez once played football for the New England Patriots. In terms of football, he was considered a very talented player. The New England Patriots are considered one of the best, if not the best, team in the National Football League, having won more championships than any other franchise. The culture of the Patriots is known as the “Patriot Way.” It embodies dedication, commitment, and hard work toward unity and success on the field of play. Most of all, prioritizing the needs of the team over the needs of the individual player is at the core of the Patriot Way. Players who conduct themselves selfishly or with poor attitudes are quickly sent packing.

When Mr. Hernandez murdered Mr. Lloyd, was that an example of his hard work and dedication to the team’s success? When he was subsequently arrested for murder and, as a consequence, was removed from the field of play, did that prioritize the team over the individual? Were either of  these acts compatible with the Patriot Way? Apparently not, for 90 minutes after his arrest, Mr. Hernandez was cut from the team.

Over the years, there have been many players who have worn the Patriot uniform.  Those uniforms display the insignia of the team, its color scheme, its brand. However, putting on the uniform does not make you a Patriot. Only by following the “Patriot Way” do you become a Patriot, or remain one. Mr. Hernandez wore the uniform, but his behavior was not according to the Patriot Way. He was jettisoned off the team.

There are many Christians who wear the uniform of Christianity. They wear shirts with symbols and signs, tattoos of Bible verses or even the image of Jesus. They may memorize Bible verses and make professions of faith in Jesus. Wearing the uniform of Christianity may make one a Christian in some people’s eyes, but it does not, in and of itself, make one a follower of Jesus.

You see, like the Patriots, Jesus has a way. And to walk in that way is to behave according to the command He repeated over and over in our text from John 15 and 13, love one another. In Hebrew, the word for love is ahav, meaning “I give.” Being a follower of Jesus, in the context of our chiasm, a friend of Jesus, means to follow His commands, beginning again in our context, with “loving one another.” At its most amplified level, this means “to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.” (v. 13) Mr. Librescu gave his life for others, sacrificing his life to save the lives of his students, thereby aligning his behavior to the commands of Jesus. Mr. Hernandez, on the other hand, took his life, along with any possibility that he might be of service to others, to the grave. A person can wear the “uniform of Christianity”–write John 3:16 on his forehead, write it on a wall in blood, open the Bible to that verse with John 3:16 highlighted in blood–but only the person who conducts his life according to the way of Jesus is the follower of Jesus, the friend of Jesus.

CHIASM, 1 SAMUEL 12:19-23

Explaining the Chiasm

Verses 19 and 23 share a phrase: hitpalel baad–“pray for your sake” or when followed by abadeka, “pray for (the sake of) your servants.” The theme here, therefore, is praying for others. Verses 20 and 21 also share a common word, sur, meaning to “turn from” or “depart.” What then does it mean to pray for someone else? Samuel provides an answer to this question, but perhaps not quite what many would have expected.

The conversation captured by this chiasm followed Samuel’s chastisement of the people for desiring a human king, all the while disregarding the rule of their rightful king–YHVH. In verse 12:7, Samuel told the people: “Now therefore stand that I may reason with you before the LORD all the righteous acts of the LORD that He did to you and to your fathers.” The word, reason, is the Hebrew, shaphat, meaning to judge. And the judgment was this: that though the LORD had acted on their behalf to bring them out of Egypt, “they forgot the LORD their God.” (1 Sam. 12:9) So the LORD sent judges (shoftim, meaning judges, the noun associated with shaphat) in the persons of Jerubbaal, Bedan (otherwise known as Balak), Jephthah and Samuel, who “delivered you from the hands of your enemies all around, so that you lived in security.” (1 Sam. 12:11)

The latest offense was Israel’s request for a king. “When you saw that Nahash the king of the sons of Ammon came against you, you said to me, ‘No, but a king shall reign over us, although the Lord your God was your king.” (1 Sam. 12:12) A chiasm just prior to the one we’re looking at demonstrated to the people that what they had done was wrong.

With this as a context, we now arrive at verse 19. The people, having witnessed the sign of the thunder and rain, now know and see that they have “added” (yasaph) to the evil sin they committed in requesting a king. They said to Samuel to pray for them (hitpalel baad) “so that we may not die.” And what prayer did Samuel pray? Did he fall to his knees, or face to the ground, and beg God to forgive Israel? His response started with two words: “Al tirau,” meaning “do not fear.” And he followed that with an instruction: “Do not turn aside (sur meaning depart) from following the LORD, but serve[1] (avod) the LORD with all your heart.” (v. 20)  And in the very next breath, he again stated not to “turn aside, for then you would go after (achar) futile things.” What are futile things? In Hebrew, the word is tohu, the very same word found in Genesis 1:2–“the earth was tohu va bohu“–formless and void. In that same chapter, God made seven utterances–“vayomer Elohim“–and the world was brought into order. Man was then made in “the image of God”–tselem Elohim–with tselem pictographically meaning “the desire to control chaos.” Therefore, following the LORD brings order; departing or turning aside from the LORD brings tohu–chaos.

So, what was Samuel’s prayer? Did he go off somewhere to lift up his fellow Israelites to the LORD? There is nothing in this passage of Scripture bearing witness to anything like that. Rather, it simply states that Samuel resolved to instruct Israel in what was good and upright. And, if we take verses 20 and 21 into account, he told Israel not to “turn aside” from God, to follow the LORD, to serve the LORD with all their heart, to turn themselves toward the way and order of God, since to do otherwise would be “tohu“–chaos. That was Samuel’s palel–his prayer. Palal literally means to judge oneself, directing one’s heart and mouth to God. Samuel looked inside himself, aligned himself with the purpose for which God created man–the desire to control chaos–and issued a “call to action” for his fellow Israelites to do the same.

Is this what it means to pray for others? In the context of this Scriptural passage, yes. If this seems strange to us, it is because we are raised within the paradigm of associating prayer with its Latin root–precari, meaning entreat, ask or the bringing of a petition to God. Although this view of prayer–precari–has its own Biblical basis, to restrict our view of prayer to precari only narrows the means by which we enrich our relationship with God.

END NOTES

[1] This word, avod, meaning to serve or work, is first found in Genesis 2:5, “and there was no man to work the ground.” Man then is brought to life in Genesis 2:7. In Genesis 2:15, God put the man in the garden of Eden to avod (work), and keep (shamar–keep watch over) it.

Luke

It is generally accepted that this book was written by Luke; however, there is no reliable evidence that it is not a composite of several manuscripts by several different authors over time.

Many scholars believe that Luke, mentioned in Acts by Paul, is the author of the book bearing his name. If so, Luke was physician and sometime companion of Paul.

Luke was a Gentile and one of his central themes is that God’s salvation is for Gentiles as well as for Jews.

Luke was led to the faith through his relationship with the Apostle Paul with whom he served. Luke did not have an eyewitness account of Jesus’ work on earth but he is an astute and exacting historian.

He relied upon eyewitness accounts and on written and oral sources as he thoroughly investigated the events he reported.

Luke’s purpose was to write so that “you can be certain of the truth of everything you were taught”.

The book of Luke could have been written as early as AD 59-63 or as late as AD 66-70 depending on if you accept the ending of Acts with Paul alive and in prison in Rome for 2 years.

Some scholars believe it was written during the later date and Luke used some of the book of Mark as a source book for his writings.

Luke addressed his work to a man named Theophilus, most likely a patron, wealthy, and who sponsored the expensive task of writing the book. Theophilus was most likely a Christian and was looking for more detail and knowledge about Jesus and therefore underwrote the research and writing of the book, for his own edification as well as for other Gentile Christians and some Jewish Christians also.

Luke emphasizes that his book is historical and he assures his readers that the gospel message is authentic; he used reliable eyewitness testimony and meticulously dates Jesus’ ministry with reference to the rulers of his day.

Luke reflects Jesus as a theme of promise and fulfillment.

Jesus is introduced as the promised Savior; the Messiah descended from King David; born in Bethlehem the city of David; and will reign forever on David’s throne.

Jesus accomplished salvation, not by military might, but by suffering the fate of the prophets; he died as the servant of the Lord; fulfilling the promises of the OT.

Through his death and resurrection, Jesus became the Savior of the world.

Acts

Luke is considered to be the author of the book of Acts although there is no reference by name to him in the book just as there was no reference by name to him in the book of Luke.

However, Paul referred to a “beloved doctor” in Colossians and it was known that Luke was with Paul at that time and was a co-worker.

As we already know, Luke was a Gentile Christian.

Most scholars believe that Acts was written sometime between AD 70-80 after the death of Paul.

They believe that Luke used the book of Mark in his research.

If this date is correct, it is curious why there is no mention of the outcome of Paul’s trial (AD 62); the death of James, the Lord’s brother (early AD 60’s); the persecution of Christians carried out by Nero following the fire of Rome (AD 64); the deaths of Peter and Paul (about AD 64-65); and Nero (AD 68); the Jewish revolt (AD 66) or the destruction of Jerusalem (AD 70).

Since Acts ends with Paul under house arrest (AD 60-62), it would seem that the book would have been written before AD 64.

However, a case can be made that Luke may have considered these events to not be important and merely omitted them because they were not suited to his purpose in writing Acts and a date after AD 70 is the correct date.

Luke places emphasis in his writing of Acts showing that the Christian faith truly fulfills God’s promises in the Hebrew Scriptures. Christ brought salvation; prayer advances God’s Kingdom; all the while the Holy Spirit energizes and equips God’s people to carry out their mission.

Luke shows the importance of individuals that God has chosen to carry his message and testify about Christ.

Many persons became prominent during this time to include Paul, Stephen, Philip, and Peter. And, it was important enough for the Disciples to choose Matthias to replace Judas in the company of the twelve apostles.

Luke’s message was “believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved”.

“There is peace with God through Jesus Christ, who is Lord of all”.

John

This book was written by John, a Disciple of Jesus, and one of the twelve.

John, along with James his brother and Peter, formed an inner circle around Jesus.

This Gospel reflects this close perspective as it highlights Peter and John.

Most scholars believe that the book was written (completed) about AD 90.

John wrote for Jewish Christians. He stresses the divinity of Jesus more than any of the other Gospels, so much so that Jesus is presented as being alien to this world.

John, however, also stresses that the readers are to believe that Jesus is the Messiah and the Son of God.

This was probably intended to inspire the Christian members of the community to maintain their belief during a troubled time rather than to convert outsiders.

Due to the writing style of John, many of the things would have meaning only to Christians who were already believers.

John’s basic principles are as follows –

1. Those who embrace Christ’s revelation and redemption with faith will gain eternal life
2. Worship must take place in spirit and in truth and be energized and formed by the Spirit of God
3. Jesus affirmed his oneness with the Father and their unity of purpose, as well as their personal distinctiveness
4. The Holy Spirit is the central feature of Jesus’ human experience and of our lives.
5. God sent Jesus into the world to proclaim his glory and to testify to the Good News of redemption
6. When Jesus departed he passed this mission on to the Holy Spirit who in turn would fill the church and empower believers to fulfill the mission of Jesus in the world
7. John affirms the anticipated return of Jesus for the early Christians

2 John

The author of this book is held to be the same John as the author of the book of John supported by quotations by Papias, bishop of Hierapolis in Asia Minor (AD 100-130).

It is apparent that Papias personally heard John speak at some time and it is known that John lived to be a very old man.

Therefore, it is reasonable to believe that the Apostle John was the author of the book of John, 1 John, 2 John and 3 John.

It was probably written sometime around AD 90.

John wants Christians to live in the eternal truth and to continue to love one another.

He warns them about false teachers.

He encourages them to hold on to the teaching of the Apostles concerning Jesus Christ so that they will receive their full reward.

He warns them to avoid the false teachers as all costs, for to associate with them would be heresy.

1 John

The author of this book is held to be the same John as the author of the book of John supported by quotations by Papias, bishop of Hierapolis in Asia Minor (AD 100-130).

It is apparent that Papias personally heard John speak at some time and it is known that John lived to be a very old man.

Therefore, it is reasonable to believe that the Apostle John was the author of the book of John, 1 John, 2 John and 3 John.

It was probably written sometime around AD 90.

This book urges Christian readers to stay with that they have heard “from the beginning”.

This means believing in the physical, human Jesus with the divine Son of God and in the saving value of his death.

It also means keeping the commandment to love one another.

This book repeatedly insists that one cannot truly believe in Jesus Christ without truly and selflessly loving other believers.

God is love.

The author stresses that Christians must maintain loyalty to Jesus’ apostles – those who had followed Jesus during his life and had known him personally – in order to safeguard against pseudo-spirituality and heresy.

John urges his Christian reader to:

1. Maintain loyalty in fellowship toward the apostles and thus to have fellowship with God, who is light, by living in the light he gives us;
2. Confess their sins to God and thus know the advocacy of Jesus Christ, the righteous one;
3. Esteem Jesus Christ as the Word of life, the Son of God;
4. Love God, who is love, and love other Christians;
5. Remain in Christ, become like Christ, and purify themselves of worldly lusts;
6. Know and experience God Personally and understand the truth through the Spirit;
7. Discern false teaching by the aid of the Spirit and recognize the spirit of false prophets and of the antichrist;
8. And enjoy eternal life.

Christians at this time were facing immense persecution for their faith and public displays of Christianity were being met with severe consequences, particularly under the Emperor Nero.

Titus

This letter to Titus was written by Paul about AD 63 and Titus was known to be a co-worker of Paul’s.

There is no written record of Paul ever traveling to Crete, so it can only be explained that Paul charged Titus with the responsibility to reach the churches that had been established there and give them focus.

Paul outlines the following –

1. Leadership in Crete
2. Relationships in the Church
3. Relationship with Society

The situation in Crete was far different than in Ephesus. Crete was a new church, with new converts, and therefore Paul’s letter fed them slowly so they could understand.

He identified what leadership was needed, what the relationships in the church should be and what the relationship was with society as it related to the church.

Paul chose to walk slowly and nurture the new church and gave Titus the responsibility of doing so.

Paul still emphasized the saving grace of God which had been shown to the world in the person and work of Jesus Christ.

Paul tries to show the importance of remembering how God has dealt with us, has given us salvation, and has provided for our godliness. The new converts in Crete had difficulty in understanding what this meant

The fact that Paul’s letter to Titus was short demonstrates a virtue by Paul to Titus that did not require many words, but only an explanation of a short remembrance.

2 Timothy

This book was probably written during the time Paul was imprisoned in Rome in AD 64-65 just prior to his death.

Paul’s letter was the final letter he wrote as he anticipated his imminent death, and he was summoning Timothy to Rome to receive his mantle of leadership.

Paul was still proclaiming the Good News of Jesus Christ. His imprisonment is not clearly explained as to why, but it is possible that the heretical false teachers had something to do with it as Paul has disciplined some of them earlier.

The Good News gives rise to a way of life that takes up the cross and follows Jesus in the life-giving power of his resurrection. Paul had modeled his life after Christ’s and now his own death was at hand.

Paul was certain that God’s work would be completed right up to the day of Christ’s return, yet he also knew that the continuing responsibility of God’s servants is great.

Paul passed the torch to Timothy and challenged him to carry Paul’s work forward.

In this letter, all who take up the cross and follow Jesus are charged to complete the ministry that God has given them, through the life giving power of Christ’s resurrection.

1 Peter

The Apostle Peter is the author and the recipients are Christians living in Asia Minor, where Paul had established churches many years earlier.

Peter probably writes this letter while in Rome in AD 60-62.

There is no record that Peter ever traveled to or visited any of the Christians in Asia Minor, now called Turkey.

Peter’s travels remain a mystery to this day except for his initial ministry in Jerusalem and Judea.

He was also in Antioch at one time.

Peter discussed the following in his letter –

1. Salvation and the Call to Holiness
2. Living under Authority
3. Doing Good in the Face of Suffering
4. Concluding Exhortations

Peter challenges his readers to regard their present temporary suffering as strengthening their faith and preparing them to receive salvation.

The gift of salvation should result in a life of holiness that recognizes the cost at which God purchased our salvation.

Finally, we are to love and have patience toward fellow Christians.

Peter calls on Christians to live within recognized authority structures as a witness to a hostile world.

Christians are to accept the authority of government, Christian slaves are to accept the authority of their Masters and Christian wives are to accept the authority of their husbands.

Husbands are to respond by honoring their wives. Behave in a way that God rewards.

Peter issues a challenge to respond to social pressures with honorable and respectful behavior, even when it results in abuse.

Our hope of redemption is secure because of Christ’s life, death, resurrection, and ascension.

Finally, Peter call for standing firm in the midst of suffering. He charges Elders, younger men and the Church at large with specific responsibilities.

Mark

Mark is the author of this Gospel book and it was written in approximately AD 65-70.

Mark could have been a scribe for Peter and merely written the stories of Peter, but more than likely, the writing is of Mark himself due to the fact that the author appears to be bilingual in that he knew intimate details of the Aramaic phrases in the Greek text.

He was also Jewish, in that he was able to explain various Jewish customs to his Gentile readers.

Being a Gospel, this book centered on the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

This Gospel was written for the Christians who were familiar with gospel traditions.

The author does not explain such things as who John the Baptist was, who Isaiah the prophet was, where Capernaum was located, various OT references of who King Herod was, or who the Pharisees and teachers of religious law were.

It is also apparent the readers were Roman because of the “Latinisms” in the book. Examples are his using the Latin word meaning “soldier”, he uses a Roman coin (the quadran) to explain the meaning of “two lepta” (Greek coins), and he uses the Latin word “centurion” rather than the Greek word with the same meaning that other Gospel writers used (Matthew and Luke).

Mark wanted his readers to know that Jesus of Nazareth is “the Messiah, the Son of God”.

Mark uses the title “Son of God” to describe Jesus frequently throughout the book.

Mark’s major theological emphasis is the identity of Jesus of Nazareth. He is above all “the Messiah”, “the Son of Man”, “the Son of God”.

Mark’s book is a passion about Jesus because of Jesus’ passion – his suffering, death, and resurrection. The emphasis was that Jesus’ death was God’s plan for his life with His life being a divine necessity for God had willed it.

Mark also stressed the importance of denying one’s self and taking up one’s cross.

Christians are promised that endurance in faith means salvation and eternal life.

Throughout Mark’s Gospel, Jesus tells others to keep quiet about his true identity, but Mark says that is not possible given the magnitude of Jesus and the wonders he creates and the amazement he shows by His works.

Mark reiterates that the Kingdom of God has come and people need to repent and believe the gospel because it has arrived.

OT promises are fulfilled.

Life in the Kingdom is different from what it was during the time awaiting the Kingdom.

Matthew

The authorship of the book of Matthew is speculation according to some scholars.

Many think it is a book written by a multilingual man, probably an Israelite, with a rather sophisticated command of Israelite traditions and scribal argumentation in the late first century, possibly between AD 65-80.

Other scholars believe that Matthew is in fact the author and used the Gospel of Mark as a source document for his writings, justifying the fact that it would not be a conflict for one apostle (Matthew) to use the account of another apostle (Peter) as a convenient source from which to shape his own report.

Matthew’s Gospel is distinctive in its presentation of Jesus as Messiah and Teacher; its emphasis on the Kingdom of Heaven; its strong call to discipleship; its constant pattern of OT fulfillment; its incisive criticism of the Jewish religious leaders; and its universal outlook that includes Gentiles in the Kingdom.

Matthew focuses on Jesus as Messiah. Jesus fulfills the OT prophesy.

Matthew uses “Kingdom of Heaven” over 30 times; it is a roundabout way for Jews to say “Kingdom of God.”

Matthew does this for the following reasons –

1. The invisible but present rule of God on earth through the saving work of Jesus the Messiah
2. The fulfillment of OT promises
3. The saving activity of God, often through quiet and humble means
4. The power and strength of God’s activity
5. The coming of the Kingdom within a “generation”
6. The final, climactic judgment of God
7. The final, perfect fellowship of all God’s holy people with the Father

Matthew Gospel stresses Jesus’ call for all men and women to be baptized, to follow him as disciples, to obey his teachings and to enjoy fellowship with him.

Jesus summarizes the requirements for discipleship in His Sermon on the Mount.

Matthew focuses on the interrelationship of the OT impact on the NT through the expectations and promises and their fulfillment in Jesus.

Matthew baffles logic by including Gentiles in the book so strongly in spite of the emphasis on Jewish orientation in the writing.

This Gospel emphasizes the Good News is for all people, including Gentiles.