Sermon and Worship Resources (2024)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Of the 206 bones that compose the adult skeletal structure, the Bible mentions only a few: rib (Gen. 1:2122), hip (Gen. 32:25), skull (Judg. 9:53), jaw (Isa. 30:28), and legs (John 19:31–33). Nevertheless, while bones could be isolated, anatomical description tended more toward a holistic sense so that bones could refer to physical and psychological collapse in laments (Jer. 23:9) or to the entire person as a corpse (Gen. 50:25; 1Sam. 31:13).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(1)An African kingdom located along the Nile River to the south of Egypt, in the region that is now part of the country of Sudan. Since the Greeks used the term “Ethiopia” in a generic sense to refer to everything south of Egypt, including Cush, and some historians occasionally refer to the Cush*te kingdom as Nubia, English Bible versions occasionally translate the Hebrew term “Cush” as “Ethiopia” or “Nubia.” Likewise, the NT character referred to as the “Ethiopian eunuch” (Acts 8:27) was not from modern Ethiopia but rather from this same kingdom on the Nile, south of Egypt, called “Cush” throughout the OT.

The OT prophets pronounce judgment on all the surrounding nations for their complicity in the attack on Israel and Judah by the Assyrians and Babylonians. Cush is included among the nations falling under this judgment. However, when the prophets look beyond the destruction to the time of messianic restoration, they paint a picture of people from all nations joining together to worship the true God. The prophets use the Cush*tes as one of their paradigm groups for this restoration. That is, in the prophetic passages of future restoration, Cush often represents the future Gentile inclusion (Isa. 11:11; 45:14; Zeph. 3:910). In the NT, the Ethiopian eunuch (an official from Cush) is similar in several respects to Ebed-Melek in the book of Jeremiah (Acts 8:26–40). At a time when Jerusalem has rejected the message of God and is actively persecuting God’s messengers (Acts 7:1–8:3), it is an Ethiopian (Cush*te) official who believes. Thus, in a fashion similar to Ebed-Melek, this Ethiopian (Cush*te) probably symbolizes the inclusion of Gentiles into the people of God.

(2)The superscription of Ps. 7 (7:1 MT) states that David sang this psalm to God concerning a Benjamite named “Cush,” apparently one of David’s enemies. It is not known why this individual and the Cushi of Zeph. 1:1, who apparently were Hebrews, were so named. Perhaps they were Cush*tes, or perhaps one of their parents was a Cush*te. On the other hand, perhaps they were given the name in honor of a certain Cush*te.

(3)Another reference to someone named “Cush” is in the puzzling passage Gen. 10:6–8 (restated in 1Chron. 1:8–10). Genesis 10, however, is a notoriously difficult chapter to interpret. It consists largely of a genealogy, but the names used in the genealogy include those of individuals, peoples, countries, tribes, and cities. Some scholars think that the chapter is more about geopolitical alliances and geographical locations than about physical descent of individuals. In Gen. 10:6 Cush is said to be the father of Nimrod. Little is known for certain about Nimrod, but in Gen. 10:10–12 he is closely associated with various cities and kingdoms in Mesopotamia. Thus, some scholars associate this reference to Cush with some entity in Mesopotamia, perhaps a people known as the Cassites.

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

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

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

The region within which was situated the primeval garden, the setting of the story of the creation in Gen. 2 and of the fall in Gen. 3. Although numerous attempts have been made to identify its intended location (Turkey, North Africa, the Persian Gulf), the information we can glean from the references to Eden, the rivers that flow from it, and the regions they encompass is insufficient for locating Eden in relation to known geography. It is simply “in the east” (Gen. 2:8).

Eden is portrayed as a mountainous region (Ezek. 28:1314). Four rivers flow from it: the Pishon and the Gihon, which are unknown, and the Tigris and the Euphrates in Mesopotamia (Gen. 2:10–14). This may be compared with other ancient Near Eastern portrayals of rivers flowing from the mountain dwelling of the gods.

The name “Eden” may be connected with a Hebrew word for “luxury, delight,” though another suggestion is that it derives from a Sumerian word meaning “steppe, plain.” The garden in Eden is also referred to as the “garden of the Lord” (Gen. 13:10; Isa. 51:3) or the “garden of God” (Ezek. 28:13; 31:8–9), or (in a visionary reappearance) as “paradise,” from a Persian word for “garden” (Rev. 2:7).

The garden is depicted as a sanctuary or holy space (Ezek. 28:14) into which humanity is invited on God’s terms to act as God’s agents. It contains the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and the tree of life (Gen. 2:9).

As a picture of fertility, Eden holds out the prospect of a reversal from a desolate state (Isa. 51:3).

People in the Bible were family-centered and staunchly loyal to their kin. Families formed the foundation of society. The extended family was the source of people’s status in the community and provided the primary economic, educational, religious, and social interactions.

Marriage and divorce. Marriage in the ancient Near East was a contractual arrangement between two families, arranged by the bride’s father or a male representative. The bride’s family was paid a dowry, a “bride’s price.” Paying a dowry was not only an economic transaction but also an expression of family honor. Only the rich could afford multiple dowries. Thus, polygamy was minimal. The wedding itself was celebrated with a feast provided by the father of the groom.

The primary purpose for marriage in the ancient Near East was to produce a male heir to ensure care for the couple in their old age. The concept of inheritance was a key part of the marriage customs, especially with regard to passing along possessions and property.

Marriage among Jews in the NT era still tended to be endogamous; that is, Jews sought to marry close kin without committing incest violations (Lev. 18:617). A Jewish male certainly was expected to marry a Jew. Exogamy, marrying outside the remote kinship group, and certainly outside the ethnos, was understood as shaming God’s holiness. Thus, a Jew marrying a Gentile woman was not an option. The Romans did practice exogamy. For them, marrying outside one’s kinship group (not ethnos) was based predominantly on creating strategic alliances between families.

Greek and Roman law allowed both men and women to initiate divorce. In Jewish marriages, only the husband could initiate divorce proceedings. If a husband divorced his wife, he had to release her and repay the dowry. Divorce was common in cases of infertility (in particular if the woman had not provided male offspring). Ben Sira comments that barrenness in a woman is a cause of anxiety to the father (Sir. 42:9–10). Another reason for divorce was adultery (Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18). Jesus, though, taught a more restrictive use of divorce than the OT (Mark 10:1–12).

Children and parenting. Childbearing was considered representative of God’s blessing on a woman and her entire family, in particular her husband. In contrast to this blessing, barrenness brought shame on women, their families, and specifically their husbands.

Children were of low social status in society. Infant mortality was high. An estimated 60percent of the children in the first-century Mediterranean society were dead by the age of sixteen.

Ancient Near Eastern and Mediterranean societies exhibited a parenting style based on their view of human nature as a mixture of good and evil tendencies. Parents relied on physical punishment to prevent evil tendencies from developing into evil deeds (Prov. 29:15). The main concern of parents was to socialize the children into family loyalty. Lack of such loyalty was punished (Lev. 20:9). At a very early stage children were taught to accept the total authority of the father. The rearing of girls was entirely the responsibility of the women. Girls were taught domestic roles and duties as soon as possible so that they could help with household tasks.

Family identity was used as a metaphor in ancient Israel to speak of fidelity, responsibility, judgment, and reconciliation. In the OT, the people of Israel often are described as children of God. In their overall relationship to God, the people of Israel are referred to in familial terms—sons and daughters, spouse, and firstborn (Exod. 4:22). God is addressed as the father of the people (Isa. 63:16; 64:8) and referred to as their mother (Isa. 49:14–17).

The church as the family of God. Throughout his ministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a call to loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26), a call to fictive kinship, the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50; Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock I will build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call to community. Entrance into the community was granted through adopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and the initiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–63; John 1:12; 3:16; 10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9). Jesus’ presence as the head of the community was eventually replaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18). Through the Spirit, Jesus’ ministry continues in the community of his followers, God’s family—the church. See also Adoption.

(1)The second of the four rivers that stemmed from the garden of Eden (Gen. 2:13). The identity of the Gihon River is unknown, though much debated. Scholars taking its reference to be more literal in its geography have argued for locations in Mesopotamia, assuming the ancient river to be long since dried up. Still others, believing this portion of Genesis to be more symbolic in intent, have argued for different locations from Egypt to India and even in Jerusalem itself.

(2)A spring located southeast of Jerusalem’s Old City. It lies on the eastern perimeter of the City of David in the modern village of Silwan. The Gihon spring was the primary source of water for Jerusalem in ancient times. Because of the Gihon’s importance, a series of underground water systems was constructed to make use of its waters. One of these is King Hezekiah’s (727698 BC) tunnel, which brought Gihon’s waters to the Pool of Siloam (2Kings 20:20; 2Chron. 32:30). It was at the Gihon that David had Solomon anointed to be king over Israel (1Kings 1:28–48). The spring is also mentioned in connection to the wall that King Manasseh (698–642 BC) rebuilt (2Chron. 33:14).

The Bible contains many references to minerals and metals. Minerals can encompass a wide array of topics, thus the focus here is on valuable minerals such as ornamental stones as well as precious and useful metals.

Copper. References to copper within the Bible are few. Several passages discuss the basic origins of copper, such as the gathering of ore or the smelting process (Deut. 8:9; Job 28:2; Ezek. 22:18, 20; 24:11). Several NT passages acknowledge the presence of minted copper coins as currency (Matt. 10:9; Mark 12:42; Luke 21:2). Pure copper, however, was hard to use, although it could be combined with tin to make the alloy bronze.

Bronze. The first biblical reference to bronze is found in Gen. 4:22, in which we are told that Tubal-Cain forged tools out of bronze and iron. Next, bronze is mentioned in its use in the tabernacle built in the desert. Among the bronze items included were the many bronze clasps and bases for the tent construction (Exod. 26:11, 37; 27:1011, 17–19). The altar and all its utensils were made of, or overlaid with, bronze (27:1–8). God also instructed Moses to make a bronze basin for washing (30:18). Moses also made a snake out of bronze and placed it on top of his staff when the Israelites were struck with an abundance of venomous snakes (Num. 21:9). Samson was bound with shackles of bronze (Judg. 16:21), and Goliath wore armor and carried weapons of bronze (1Sam. 17:5–6). Solomon used an extensive amount of bronze in his building of the temple (2Kings 25:16), and there was bronze in the statue that Daniel dreamed of (Dan. 2:32, 35). Many of the prophets used bronze as a way to discuss something that was to be strong or strengthened by God (Isa. 45:2; Jer. 1:18; Ezek. 40:3).

Iron and steel. One of the earliest references to iron in Scripture is its use by the Canaanites to make chariots (Josh. 17:16, 18). This would have been an early use of the metal in the Iron AgeI period (1200–1000 BC). Also, Goliath’s spear, which was as big as a weaver’s rod, is said to have had a head made of iron (1Sam. 17:7). Elisha’s miracle of making a borrowed ax head float (2Kings 6:6) shows the continued value of the metal. In his latter days, David amassed iron among the goods to give Solomon to use in building the temple (1Chron. 22:14; 29:2); Solomon later used these materials with the help of Huram-Abi (2Chron. 2:13–14). Ezekiel discusses the economic value of iron in the context of trading (Ezek. 27:12, 19), and Daniel uses it as a metaphor for discussing strength (Dan. 2:40–41). The NT recognizes the strength of iron when discussing Christ’s iron scepter (Rev. 2:27; 19:15).

Tin. Tin was initially used mainly to produce the copper alloy bronze. Tin was not used in its pure form until well into the Roman period, and even then seldom by itself. The sources of tin in the ancient world are currently debated. The tin from large deposits in Tarshish in southern Spain (Ezek. 27:12) was available through Phoenician traders. Tin is also found in large deposits in Anatolia, but it is currently unknown whether these deposits had been discovered and used during biblical times. A third option is modern-day Afghanistan. Archaeologists have discovered in modern Turkey the remains of a wrecked ship, dated to around 1350 BC, that was carrying ten tons of copper ingots and about one ton of tin ingots. These ingots possibly originated in the area of modern-day Afghanistan and were bound for the Mediterranean trade routes. Tin is mentioned only four times in Scripture, always within a list of other metals (Num. 31:22; Ezek. 22:18, 20; 27:12).

Lead. Lead was used early in human history, but its applications were few. It would have been mined with copper and silver ore and then extracted as a by-product. The Romans used it for various implements, most notably wine vessels. It is referenced nine times within Scripture, either in a list or in reference to its weight. The only two times it is referenced as an object is when Job mentions a lead writing implement (Job 19:24), and when Zechariah has the vision of a woman sitting in the basket with a lead cover (Zech. 5:7, 8).

Gold and silver. Sought after for much of human history, gold and silver have been worked by humans for their ornamental value. The practical uses of these metals within the biblical setting were constrained mainly to their economic and ornamental value. Gold and silver jewelry were used as a form of payment and were minted into coins during the Greco-Roman era. Gold objects are relatively scarce in archaeological finds, mainly because most gold items would have been part of a large treasury carried off as tribute or plunder. Silver appears in the archaeological record more frequently; a remarkable hoard of silver in lump form was found at Eshtemoa (see 1Sam. 30:26–28). This silver has been dated to the time of the kingdom of Judah, after the northern kingdom of Israel had fallen. The silver in raw lump form was most likely used as a monetary payment, even though it had not yet been minted into coins.

Gold in the ancient world came largely from Egypt and northern Africa. The Bible mentions Havilah as a land of gold (Gen. 2:11), as well as Ophir (1Kings 9:28), but the exact location of both places is unknown. Silver was mined in southern Spain, along with other metals, and brought to the area through sea trading. The Athenians of the Classical period were also known for their vast silver-mining operations.

Silver and gold are mentioned repeatedly in the OT in reference to their uses in trading and their economic value. Most notably, the Israelites asked their Egyptian neighbors to give them gold and silver items just before they left Egypt (Exod. 3:22). The tabernacle was highly ornamented with these two metals, as was the temple built by Solomon. It is said that Solomon made the nation so wealthy that silver was considered as plentiful as stone (1Kings 10:27). Perhaps the most notorious articles of silver within Scripture are those paid to Judas for his betrayal of Jesus (Matt. 26:15).

Precious stones. Stones of various origins were used in and around Palestine. The Bible makes few references to their use. Like gold and silver, they were used mainly for their ornamental value. Their scarcity made them highly prized. One notable exception is turquoise. The Egyptian pharaohs were fascinated with turquoise, and they mined extensively for it on the Sinai Peninsula. The remains of several turquoise mines have been found with Canaanite markings, indicating the presence of Canaanite slaves working the Egyptian mines. There was also a line of forts along the northern edge of the Egyptian Empire, used presumably to protect the pharaohs’ turquoise interests. Precious stones were also found in Syria, where Phoenician traders would have been able to bring them from other parts of the known world.

Exodus 28:17–21 describes twelve stones set in the breastpiece worn by the Israelite high priest. Twelve stones likewise appear in the foundations of the new Jerusalem (Rev. 21:19–20). Ezekiel uses nine of these same twelve stones to discuss the adornment of the king of Tyre (Ezek. 28:13).

The Bible uses the blanket term “precious stones” to denote a hoard of riches, such as that owned by Solomon (1Kings 10:10).

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

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

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

In an agrarian society with an unpredictable climate, such as Israel, rainfall was of the utmost importance. Two rainy periods could be hoped for each year, in February/March and in October/November, and these seasons were critical in producing a good crop. Regular rainfall thus formed a significant part of God’s promise of a good and fruitful land for his people (Lev. 26:4). Solomon’s prayer acknowledges the conditional nature of this promise: rain would be withheld from a sinful nation but would be given to a forgiven and obedient people (1Kings 8:3536).

Rain could also be sent in judgment, most notably in the flood narratives, where God sent rain in order to destroy all living things on the face of the earth (Gen. 7:4), and in the exodus narrative, where rain accompanied hail and thunder in the seventh plague (Exod. 9:23).

Since rain is completely beyond human control, it naturally became a symbol of God’s sovereignty in both blessing and curse. A striking example of this is in 1Kings 17–18, when for three years the rains were withheld, until finally Elijah’s trust in God was vindicated above the prophets of Baal, and the rain followed. The effectiveness of Elijah’s prayers, first for drought and later for rain, is held up in the NT as an example for all believers (James 5:17–18).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rocks and stones were found naturally on the ground (Job 8:17; Ps. 91:12; Isa. 5:2; Mark 5:5; Luke 3:8). They could be heaped or piled up as a sign of disgrace (Josh. 7:26; 8:29; 2Sam. 18:17), as a marker or memorial (Gen. 31:4650), or as an altar (Exod. 20:25). A single rock or stone could also be used as a place marker (Gen. 28:22; 35:14, 20; 1Sam. 7:12), especially standing stones (Deut. 27:2–8; Josh. 4:3–9). Large stones could also be used to cover a well (Gen. 29:2–3) or to seal a cave or tomb, such as at the tombs of Lazarus (John 11:38–39) and of Jesus (Matt. 27:60; Mark 16:3–4).

Stone was used as a construction material, particularly for the temple (1Kings 5:15–18; 1Chron. 2:22; Ezra 5:8; Hag. 2:15; Mark 13:1–2). Stone was used in a building’s foundation and for the cornerstone or capstone (1Kings 5:17; Jer. 51:26; Isa. 28:16), as well as for the walls (Hab. 2:11). Psalm 118:22 refers metaphorically to the stone rejected by the builders becoming the cornerstone. In the NT, this is interpreted as referring to Jesus (Matt. 21:42; Mark 12:10; Luke 20:17; Acts 4:11; 1Pet. 2:7; cf. Eph. 2:20). Stone could also function as a writing material (Josh. 8:32), such as the tablets on which the Ten Commandments were inscribed (Exod. 24:12; Deut. 9:9–11; 1Kings 8:9; cf. 2Cor. 3:3, 7). Stone was also carved, although at Sinai the Israelites are instructed not to use cut or “dressed” stones when constructing an altar (Exod. 20:25; cf. Josh. 8:31). The phrase “carved stone” refers specifically to idols, since stone was one material used for crafting false gods (Lev. 26:1; cf. Deut. 4:28; 29:17; 2Kings 19:18; Isa. 37:19; Rev. 9:20); the term “stone” itself can therefore be used to refer to an idol, especially in the phrase “wood and stone” (Jer. 3:9; Ezek. 20:32).

Stones were used as a weapon or instrument of destruction, whether thrown by hand (Num. 35:17, 23) or flung with a sling (Judg. 20:16; 1Sam. 17:40, 49–50; Prov. 26:8). The verb “to stone” refers to the throwing of stones at an individual, which typically functioned as an official manner of execution (Exod. 19:13; 21:28–29; Deut. 21:20–21; 1Kings 21:13–15; John 8:5; Acts 7:58–59), although it was at times the action of an angry crowd (Exod. 17:4; 1Kings 12:18; cf. John 8:59).

The phrases “precious stones” and “costly stones” refer to gems (2Sam. 12:30; Esther 1:6; Isa. 54:12; 1Cor. 3:12). Gems were used as a display of wealth or honor (1Kings 10:2, 10–11; 2Chron. 32:27; Ezek. 27:22) and for decoration (1Chron. 3:6; Rev. 17:4; 18:16). The two stones on the high priest’s ephod and the twelve precious stones on his breastpiece represented the twelve tribes (Exod. 25:7; 28:9–12, 17–21), a symbolism echoed in the twelve types of precious stones adorning the foundations of the new Jerusalem (Rev. 21:19–20).

Rocks and stones are used often in metaphors or similes (e.g., hard as a rock, still as a stone). They can represent something that is common (1Kings 10:27; Job 5:23; Matt. 3:9; 4:3), strong (Job 6:12), hard (Job 38:30; 41:24), heavy (Exod. 15:5; Prov. 27:3), motionless (Exod. 15:16), or immovable (Zech. 12:3). A “heart of stone” describes coldheartedness (Ezek. 11:19; 36:26). A “stumbling stone,” which is literally a stone that causes one to stumble (Isa. 8:14), is used in the NT as a metaphor for an obstacle to faith in Jesus (Rom. 9:32–33; 1Pet. 2:8).

In Gen. 2:9 the tree of life is at the very center of the lush landscape of the garden of Eden. In Gen. 3:2224 the man and the woman are exiled from the garden as a consequence of their disobedience, but more specifically they are barred from the immortality granted by eating the fruit of the tree.

In the book of Proverbs the tree of life is a symbol of that which brings joy in life: wisdom (3:18), righteousness (11:30), “a longing fulfilled” (13:12), “a soothing tongue” (15:4). In Revelation the tree represents the reversal of the consequences of humankind’s disobedience in the garden. Eternal life is now again offered to those who persevere in Christ (Rev. 2:7; 22:14). And in Rev. 22:2 the tree of life is part of the scenery of the new Jerusalem. Its branches span over the river of the water of life, and its leaves are imbued with healing for the nations (cf. Ezek. 47:12). See also Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.

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

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

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

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

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

In the Bible, woman is first encountered along with man in Gen. 1:2628. God created “man” in the plural, male and female, and commanded them to reproduce and to fill the earth and subdue it. Being created male and female is set in parallel to being created in the image of God. In the ancient Near East, perhaps the king would be thought of as the image of God. But in Genesis, not only is the first man the image of God, but the first woman participates in the image as well. This is all but unthinkable in the ancient world, and it suggests an unparalleled dignity and worth in womankind.

Genesis records that the human race fell through the instrumentality of a man, a woman, and the serpent. The serpent approached the woman, not the man. The woman was convinced by the serpent and ate the forbidden fruit. She gave some to her husband, who also ate it without saying a word. Thus, the woman can be blamed in part for the fall of the race. Adam was condemned because he “listened to [his] wife” (Gen. 3:17). Her judgment, for heeding the serpent, was pain in childbirth and a desire for her husband, who would rule over her (Gen. 3:16). The exact parameters of this judgment are unclear, but it appears that her desire will be for his position of leadership and will be perpetually frustrated.

Often in the Bible, women are motivated by their desire to have children. Rachel demanded of Jacob, “Give me children, or I’ll die!” (Gen. 30:1). She saw herself in competition with her sister, Leah, in this respect (30:8). The “fruit of the womb” is a reward, and like arrows, the blessed man’s quiver is full of them (Ps. 127:1–5). Note also the beatitude of Ps. 128:3: “Your wife will be like a fruitful vine within your house; your children will be like olive shoots around your table.”

In Genesis, the reproductive capability of slave girls is at the disposal of their owners. Thus, Rachel and Leah’s maidservants became surrogate mothers for a number of their sons (Gen. 30:3–10). Sarah also became frustrated at her inability to conceive, so she gave Hagar to Abraham. The result was great familial turmoil, finally resulting in the banishment of both Hagar and Ishmael, whom she bore to Abraham.

In the beginning, God joined one man and one woman together as husband and wife. But soon this idea was corrupted, and Lamech, a man from Cain’s lineage, is credited with the first polygamous marriage (Gen. 4:19). Although the patriarchs (such as Jacob) did have more than one wife, the household discontent and strife are what is highlighted in those stories, such as with Hagar. In the NT, an elder is to be, literally, a “one-woman man” (1Tim. 3:2; ESV, KJV: “the husband of one wife”), meaning monogamous.

The Torah contains significant legislation regarding women. The daughters of Zelophehad argued that their father died without sons, so in Canaan they were disinherited. God agreed and decreed that in Israel daughters would inherit land in the absence of sons. Only if there were no children at all would the land pass to other kin (Num. 27:1–11).

When a man made a vow, he must fulfill it, but a young woman’s vow was subject to her father. If he remained silent, the vow stood, but if he expressed disapproval, then she was freed from it. If she was married, her husband governed her vows, but if she was divorced, then there was no responsible male over her, and her vow was treated as a man’s (Num. 30:1–16).

Sexual intercourse was also regulated in the law of Moses, insofar as the act rendered both parties ritually impure (Lev. 15:18). Both must bathe and were unclean until evening. A woman’s menstrual discharge also made her unclean for a week. Everything she sat or lay upon was unclean, as was anyone who touched these things. She must wash and offer sacrifice to become clean again (15:18–31).

If a man discovered on his wedding night that his bride was not a virgin, he could accuse her publicly. If her parents provided evidence that she had in fact been a virgin, then the man was severely punished for lying and not allowed to divorce her (otherwise, it was simply a matter of writing a letter to divorce her [Deut. 24:1]). If her virginity could not be proved, she was to be put to death by stoning (Deut. 22:13–21).

In the case of a rape of a betrothed virgin, if it occurred in the city, both the rapist and the victim were stoned, since apparently she had failed to cry out for help and thus, the law assumed, consented to sexual intercourse. If she was raped in the countryside, only the man was killed. But if he raped a woman who was not spoken for, his punishment was that he must marry her without possibility of divorce (Deut. 22:23–29).

Numbers 5:11–31 treats cases where a husband was suspicious that his wife had been unfaithful—that is, a matter of covenantal jealousy. The unprovable was left to God to punish.

In the Bible, women sometimes are afforded dignity beyond what is expected in an ancient Near Eastern provenance. Hagar is the only woman in all ancient Near Eastern literature who gave a name to a deity (Gen. 16:13). In Judg. 4:4, Deborah “judged” Israel (despite the NIV’s “leading,” the underlying Hebrew verb indicates “judging,” as in the NRSV). Even as judge, however, she did not lead the army against the enemy general Sisera; Barak did so. But Barak was unwilling to undertake this mission unless Deborah went with him (4:8). Thus, God ensured that the prestige of killing Sisera went to a woman, Jael (4:9, 21). Another prominent woman was Huldah, to whom the priests turned for guidance when the law was rediscovered (2Kings 22:14).

Many biblical stories feature heroines. Mighty Pharaoh was undermined by two midwives in his attempt to destroy Israel (Exod. 1:15–21). Ruth the Moabite woman gave her name to the book that recounts her trek from Moab to Israel, including her famous oath of loyalty (Ruth 1:16–17). Esther too was a courageous woman whose book bears her name. Heroines are especially prominent in the Gospels, and the women there have the distinction of being the first to witness the risen Lord. Luke’s birth narrative is largely organized around Mary. Priscilla (with her husband) taught and helped to shape the early church (Acts 18:26). Paul lists many women in Rom. 16, calling them “deaconess,” “fellow worker,” and possibly even “apostle.”

Scripture also at times portrays various women as being temptations to men. Eve handed the fruit to Adam (Gen. 3:6). In the wilderness Israel worshiped Moabite gods in conjunction with sexual activity (Num. 25:1–9). Later, Israelites intermarried with Canaanite women, directly leading to worship of their idols (Judg. 3:6). Bathsheba was a temptation to David, and this began a series of events that marred his career as a man after God’s own heart. Solomon loved many foreign women, who turned him to worship their gods. After the exile, the Israelites were admonished by Nehemiah to put away their foreign wives lest history repeat itself (Neh. 13:26).

Women and marriage are used in the Bible as images for spiritual things. Paul writes that marital love mirrors the church’s relationship with Christ (Eph. 5:32–33). A man should love his wife as Christ loved the church. Revelation portrays the climax to human history in the figure of two women: the bride of Christ, adorned with righteous deeds for her husband (19:7–8), and the whor* Babylon, drunk on the blood of the saints (17:5–6). The consummation of the age is when one is judged and the other enters her eternal marital bliss.

The book of Proverbs also separates humankind into two groups, symbolized by two women. Along the path of life, the youth hears the voices of Woman Folly (9:13–18) and of Woman Wisdom (1:20–33) calling out to him. Folly is incarnated in the flesh-and-blood temptation of the immoral woman (7:6–27), whereas Woman Wisdom has her counterpart at the end of the book in the detailed description of the woman of virtue (31:10–31). There, the woman who fears God is set as a prize far above earthly wealth—the highest blessing of the wise.

Paul uses two women from sacred history to help explain his gospel of law versus grace. Hagar the slave woman represents the Mosaic covenant given at Sinai, and the earthly Jerusalem—that is, a mind-set of slavery that futilely attempts to earn God’s favor by works of the law. Sarah was the free woman, and her son was the promised son, who represents the heavenly Jerusalem, the new covenant, and freedom from the requirements of the law (Gal. 4:21–31). Again, two women symbolize two paths and two peoples—one being slaves, the other being God’s free people.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.

In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).

Articles of Clothing

A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.

In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).

Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).

The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il  ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).

In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).

Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).

Special Functions of Clothing

According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).

Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).

Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).

Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.

Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).

The primary term in Hebrew is ’apar (“looseearth, dust”), which is related to the Hebrew terms forcultivatable “soil” (’adamah [Gen. 3:19]) and“earth” (’erets [Gen. 13:16]). These terms aresemantically close enough to be used interchangeably (cf. 1Sam.4:12; 2Sam. 1:2 with Josh. 7:6; Ezek. 27:30).

Inthe OT, the imagery of dust is used to illustrate notions of quantityand abundance (Num. 23:10; 2Chron. 1:9; Job 27:16; Ps. 78:27;Isa. 40:12; Zech. 9:3). This stock of imagery is applied toannihilation (2Sam. 22:43), worthlessness (Zeph. 1:17),humiliation (Isa. 25:12), and mourning (Isa. 2:10; Rev. 18:19). Inthe OT, ’apar alone is used figuratively over sixty times torefer to judgment. Thus, “to lick the dust” (Ps. 72:9) isa sign of subjugation. The opposite is “to shake off the dust,”a sign of repudiation (Isa. 52:2; Matt. 10:14; Mark 6:11; Luke 9:5;10:11; Acts 13:51). It is this figurative use of “dust”that facilitates the theological use of ’apar. Yahweh acts tohumiliate, debase, destroy, and “cast down” into the dust(Isa. 25:12); and he also restores, “lifting up” toremove the shame (1Kings 16:2; Ps. 113:7).

Thesignificance of ’apar is powerfully portrayed in the creationof humans. Whereas animals are made from the “earth,”humankind emerges from more refined material, the dust (’apar[Gen. 2:7]). In an etymological pun, the “human” (’adam)rises from the “humus” (’adamah; cf. Ps. 103:14;Job 4:19). Death comes when God withdraws the human’s “breathof life” (cf. Gen. 2:7), causing the groundling to collapseback to the ground like “crushed dust” (cf. Pss. 90:3;104:29; 146:4). Human life is fragile, dependent, and transitory.This is the teacher’s argument and also the reason that hestresses death as the inevitable end of both human and animal life(Eccles. 3:18–20). However, Daniel knows that “multitudeswho sleep in the dust of the earth will awake” (Dan. 12:2).

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

Heavenand Earth

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

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

TheTheology of Land

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

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

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

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

Inheritance

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Geography

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

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

Symbolism

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

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

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

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

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

The region within which was situated the primeval garden, the setting of the story of the creation in Gen. 2 and of the fall in Gen. 3. Although numerous attempts have been made to identify its intended location (Turkey, North Africa, the Persian Gulf), the information we can glean from the references to Eden, the rivers that flow from it, and the regions they encompass is insufficient for locating Eden in relation to known geography. It is simply “in the east” (Gen. 2:8).

Eden is portrayed as a mountainous region (Ezek. 28:13–14). Four rivers flow from it: the Pishon and the Gihon, which are unknown, and the Tigris and the Euphrates in Mesopotamia (Gen. 2:10–14). This may be compared with other ancient Near Eastern portrayals of rivers flowing from the mountain dwelling of the gods.

The name “Eden” may be connected with a Hebrew word for “luxury, delight,” though another suggestion is that it derives from a Sumerian word meaning “steppe, plain.” The garden in Eden is also referred to as the “garden of the Lord” (Gen. 13:10; Isa. 51:3) or the “garden of God” (Ezek. 28:13; 31:8–9), or (in a visionary reappearance) as “paradise,” from a Persian word for “garden” (Rev. 2:7).

The garden is depicted as a sanctuary or holy space (Ezek. 28:14) into which humanity is invited on God’s terms to act as God’s agents. It contains the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and the tree of life (Gen. 2:9).

As a picture of fertility, Eden holds out the prospect of a reversal from a desolate state (Isa. 51:3).

The two rivers between which Mesopotamia (“betweenrivers”) is located. The Euphrates and the Tigris originate inthe mountains of modern Turkey and run through Syria and Iraq, eachfor more than a thousand miles, before meeting and emptying into thePersian Gulf. Like today, the two rivers gave life to many people,running through major centers of ancient civilization.

TheEuphrates and the Tigris are mentioned together only once in theBible (Gen. 2:10–14), where they are two of the four riversstemming from the garden of Eden. The Euphrates itself figuresprominently in the biblical narrative. It is also known as “thegreat river” or simply “the river.” Besides itsrole in Gen. 2, it is frequently mentioned as a border of the landthat God promised to Abraham and his offspring (Gen. 15:18; Josh.1:4), a land that Israel acquired during the united monarchy (2Sam.8:3; 1Kings 4:24). King Josiah met his death here at the battleof Carchemish in 605 BC (2Chron. 35:20–27; cf. Jer.46:1–10). The Euphrates also functions as a symbol of Israel’sidolatrous past (Josh. 24:2–3) and as a symbol of freedom fromthe exile (Isa. 11:15; 27:12). In the NT, the Euphrates is the placewhere the four angels are bound (Rev. 9:14) and where the sixth angelpours out his bowl. Moreover, the Tigris appears in only one otherplace in the Bible (Dan. 10:4), where Daniel receives a vision on itsbanks. Some dispute the validity of this occurrence because certainmanuscripts (i.e., the Pesh*tta) here replace “Tigris”with “Euphrates.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

“The fall” refers to the events of the firsthuman couple’s sin in the garden of Eden (Gen. 2–3).Although the word “fall” does not occur in the account,Christians have used the term to describe it, taking their cues fromPaul’s writings (esp. Rom. 5:12–21). The term isimportant because it reflects an interpretation that the events inthe garden are the entrance of human sin and that the sin hasuniversal effects on humankind.

TheGenesis Account

Theframework of the Genesis account runs as follows. The account beginswith God’s creation of a man, Adam. God plants a garden filledwith beautiful trees that bear good food. Among the trees, two inparticular are pointed out: the tree of life and the tree of theknowledge of good and evil. God sets Adam in the garden and commandshim that he can eat from any tree except one: the tree of theknowledge of good and evil. God says that it is not good for Adam tolive alone and so, after other attempts, finally provides a suitablehelper for him, a woman(Eve).

Atthis point, the narrative shifts its focus to the woman and aserpent. The serpent raises doubts about God’s commandment. Thewoman tells the serpent that disobeying God’s commandment leadsto death. The serpent replies that she will not die, because God gavethe commandment only to keep her from attaining what God possesses.The woman examines the tree; it is beautiful, has good fruit, and isable to make a person wise. She takes some fruit, eats it, and givesit to Adam, who is there with her.

AfterAdam and Eve eat the fruit, they realize that they are naked, andthey sew leaves together to cover their nakedness. God confrontsthem; Adam blames Eve; Eve blames the serpent. God pronounces a cursethat affects the serpent, the man, and the woman. God then banishesAdam and Eve from the garden, setting a guard to keep them fromreturning and eating from the tree of life.

TheTruth about the Serpent’s Claims

Thefirst question of the narrative is concerned with the central tensionof the narrative: Is the serpent telling the truth about the tree andGod? When God commands Adam not to eat the fruit of the tree of theknowledge of good and evil, he gives the penalty for disobedience:immediate death (Gen. 2:16–17). However, the serpent tells Evethat she will not die if she disobeys. In fact, what will happen isthat her eyes will be opened so that she will know good and evil andbe like God (3:4–5). At first glance, it appears that theserpent is precisely correct. Eve eats the fruit along with Adam,their eyes are opened, and now they are like God, knowing good andevil (3:6–7, 22). At the same time, there is no mention ofdeath in the narrative.

However,a closer look reveals that, in fact, Adam and Eve do die. At the endof the narrative, three events take place: God pronounces curses, Godbanishes them from the garden that he has prepared for them, and Godstations angelic sentries at the entrance of the garden to preventAdam and Eve from eating from the tree of life. The first obvioussign of their death is that they are prevented from eating from thetree of life. By being denied access to the tree of life, they arecondemned to death. It is often assumed that eating the fruit of thattree provides instant immortality, because of God’s statementin Gen. 3:22: “The man has now become like one of us, knowinggood and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and takealso from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.” However,this interpretation is not necessary. What is more likely in view isthat the fruit of the tree restores the life of the partaker. Onewould, therefore, need to return to it to continue living. Thisinterpretation helps explain why God does not deny Adam and Eveaccess to the tree while they are still in the garden. They are givenlife, though not immortality, while in the garden, so there is noneed to deny them the tree.

Theirdeath is also revealed in God’s cursing and banishment. Towardthe end of the Pentateuch, Moses draws out this connection as herelates it to the nation of Israel and the commandment(s) that Godhas given: “This day I call the heavens and earth as witnessesagainst you that I have set before you life and death, blessings andcurses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live andthat you may love the Lord your God, listen to his voice, and holdfast to him. For the Lord is your life, and he will give you manyyears in the land he swore to give to your fathers, Abraham, Isaacand Jacob” (Deut. 30:19–20). Life equals blessings in theland that God has prepared; death equals curses outside the land thatGod has prepared. Therefore, when Adam and Eve disobey thecommandment of God, they suffer death when God pronounces curses,banishes them from the garden, and prevents them from returning tothe tree of life.

TheSignificance of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil

Thesecond question pertains to the tree of the knowledge of good andevil: What is the significance of the tree of the knowledge of goodand evil? To begin, one must discover what the knowledge of good andevil is. There are primarily three possibilities: moral awareness,exhaustive knowledge, and wisdom. Although each of thesepossibilities has merit, it is likely that wisdom is in view.

Knowledgeand wisdom as well as good and evil are central concerns for the bookof Proverbs, occurring proportionately more frequently in Proverbsthan in any other book. The stated goal of the book of Proverbs is toteach wisdom and understanding to those who will read the book andheed its instruction (1:1–7). By gaining this wisdom, one isable to discern what is good and what is bad(2:9).

Alongsidethis wisdom background is the fact that when Eve considers eatingfrom the tree, she notices that it is distinct from the other treesbecause it is desirable for making one wise (Gen. 3:6). Therefore,the knowledge of good and evil is associated with wisdom; however,when Adam and Eve eat the fruit of the tree, they attempt to gainwisdom outside God’s stated will. This type of wisdom leadsthem to determine what is good and evil for themselves rather thantrusting God for what he has provided as good (notice the number oftimes God declares something to be good in Gen. 1–3).

Thereare two more results of understanding the knowledge of good and evilas wisdom. First, the narrative sets up an important distinction thatis highlighted in other biblical books: the distinction between humanwisdom and divine wisdom. This contrast is an important emphasis forbooks such as Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, 1Corinthians,Colossians, and James. Second, the narrative closely connects keepingthe commandment of God with attaining wisdom. When Adam and Eve eatthe fruit in disobedience, they determine for themselves what is goodand bad. Obedience to the divine commandment requires trusting thatwhat God has called good is good and what God has called bad is bad.Such is wisdom. The end of Ecclesiastes shares the same concern: “Nowall has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God[the beginning of wisdom] and keep his commandments, for this is theduty of all mankind. For God will bring every deed into judgment,including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil”(Eccles. 12:13–14).

TheEffect of the Fall on Human History

Thethird question to ask concerns the effects of the fall: How does thefall affect the rest of human history? First, the account shows thata war has begun. One conflict lies between God and the serpent.Everything that God affirms, the serpent rejects. However, as a signof God’s sure victory, the serpent is cursed so that it must goabout on its belly and eat dust (Gen. 3:14). Another conflict liesbetween the serpent (and its seed) and the woman (and her seed). Godalso declares that the serpent will lose in this conflict when theseed of the woman crushes the head of the serpent. Although theaccount is clear that the serpent is only a wild animal (3:1), it isalso associated with all those who are like it, its seed. It is forthis reason that Satan is called the “ancient serpent”(Rev. 12:9; 20:2).

Second,humanity finds itself relating to God differently. The sin in thegarden is often called the “original sin.” The Bible doesnot specifically explain what effects the original sin has on eachindividual person, but it does show that Adam’s disobedienceaffects the rest of humankind (Rom. 5:12). Because of this originalsin, death (i.e., natural death, curse, and exile) has entered theworld so that everyone who remains in a natural state must experiencedeath. However, Christ, through his life and work, brings life (i.e.,eternal life, blessing, and communion) for those who believe in him.

An enclosed farming area where vegetables and fruit trees arecultivated. Vineyards, orchards, and olive groves belong to a broadercategory of the garden. Gardens in biblical times generally weresurrounded by a wall of mud-bricks or stones, along with a hedge ofthorny bushes (Prov. 24:31; Song 4:12; Isa. 5:5). A booth orwatchtower was set up to guard it from thieves and wild animals (Job27:18; Isa. 1:8; 5:2). For irrigation, water was raised from wells orbrought in through a canal system connected to rivers or springs.

Sincemost of the land of Canaan was a hilly and arid region, awell-watered garden was highly valued. Thus Balaam blesses the tentsof the Israelites to be “like gardens beside a river”(Num. 24:6–7; cf. Ps. 1:3; Jer. 17:8). Notably, in Gen. 13:10the Plain of Jordan, in its fertility from the ample water supply, islikened to two places: “the garden of the Lord” and “theland of Egypt.” The land of Egypt had developed vegetablegardens, with an irrigation system connected to the Nile (Deut.11:10; cf. Num. 11:5). The garden of the Lord, or the garden of Eden,was also such a place of fruitfulness, with rivers and fruit trees,especially the tree of life (Gen. 2:9–10).

Thegarden of Eden also carries various connotations that are developedin the rest of the Bible. It is a place secluded from the world,where nakedness is not shameful (Gen. 2:25). Song of Songs describesthe garden as a place of perfect love. It is also a meeting placebetween God and human beings (Gen. 2:16–17; 3:8–14; cf.idolatrous gardens in Isa. 1:29–31; 65:3; 66:17). Moreimportant, God is the gardener who planted it (Gen. 2:8).

Themetaphorical identification of God as the gardener is frequentlydeveloped in the OT. In Deut. 11:10–12 the land of Canaan isdescribed as a garden that God himself will take care of. Isaiahpresents Zion as the vineyard that God planted and cultivated butdecided to destroy due to its unfruitfulness (Isa. 5:1–7; cf.Jer. 12:10; Ezek. 19:10; Joel 2:3); after the time of its desolation,however, God also promises to restore and care for it (Isa. 27:2–6).Restored Zion is likened to a well-watered garden and even the gardenof Eden (Isa. 51:3; 58:11; 61:11; cf. Jer. 31:12; Ezek. 36:34–35;47:12).

Descriptionsof God as the gardener perhaps convey the conception of kingship.Gardens belonged to socially prestigious people, especially royalty,as indicated by the references to the king’s garden atJerusalem (2Kings 25:4; Jer. 39:4; 52:7; Neh. 3:15) as well asthe Persian palace garden (Esther 1:5; 7:7–8). But a royalgarden was particularly regarded as the main achievement of a king(Eccles. 2:4–6; also note the story of Naboth’s vineyardin 1Kings 21). The allusions to the garden of Eden in the tauntsongs of the kings of Tyre, Assyria, and Pharaoh (Ezek. 28:13;31:8–9, 16, 18) also support this relationship.

Metaphoricaluse of the garden continues in the NT. The people of God aredescribed as the vegetation whose fruits reveal their identities (cf.Matt. 7:16–19). The need to bear fruit is particularlyemphasized in the vineyard imagery of John 15, in which God isintroduced as a farmer, Jesus as the vine, and believers as itsbranches. Paul mentions the bearing of fruit as the goal of Christianlife (Rom. 7:4–5; Phil. 1:11; Col. 1:10), which is possiblethrough the work of the Holy Spirit (Gal. 5:22–25). Revelation21:1–22:5 describes the new Jerusalem as a restored garden ofEden, in the midst of which a river of life, issuing from beneathGod’s throne, provides abundant water for the tree of life onboth sides.

Alsonoteworthy is the reference in the Gospel of John to the two gardens:the garden of Jesus’ arrest (18:1–11) and the garden ofJesus’ burial (19:41). Considering their location in Jerusalemand the usage of royal gardens for burial (cf. 2Kings 21:18),it seems that John mentions the gardens in order to underline Jesus’kingship, which he particularly develops in John 18–19. Mary’sperception of the risen Christ as a gardener possibly supports thisinterpretation (John 20:15).

(1)Thesecond of the four rivers that stemmed from the garden of Eden (Gen.2:13). The identity of the Gihon River is unknown, though muchdebated. Scholars taking its reference to be more literal in itsgeography have argued for locations in Mesopotamia, assuming theancient river to be long since dried up. Still others, believing thisportion of Genesis to be more symbolic in intent, have argued fordifferent locations from Egypt to India and even in Jerusalem itself.

(2)Aspring located southeast of Jerusalem’s Old City. It lies onthe eastern perimeter of the City of David in the modern village ofSilwan. The Gihon spring was the primary source of water forJerusalem in ancient times. Archaeological evidence suggests that thespring has been in use as far back as two thousand years before KingDavid conquered Jerusalem (c. 1000 BC). Naturally connected to anunderground cave, the Gihon siphons water once every few hours as thecave fills. This “gushing forth” (from which the name“Gihon” may have come) can occur as many as five times aday, producing up to three hundred thousand gallons of water in therainy season.

Becauseof the Gihon’s importance, a series of underground watersystems has been constructed to make use of its waters. One of theseis King Hezekiah’s (727–698 BC) tunnel, which broughtGihon’s waters to the Pool of Siloam (2Kings 20:20;2Chron. 32:30). It was at the Gihon that David had Solomonanointed to be king over Israel (1Kings 1:28–48). Thespring is also mentioned in connection to the wall that King Manasseh(698–642 BC) rebuilt (2Chron. 33:14).

God puts Adam in the garden of Eden to literally “guard”it (Heb. shamar, Gen. 2:15; NIV “take care of it”), buton account of sin he must be removed. God places cherubim to guardagainst intruders (cf. 1Sam. 26:15; Song 5:7; Isa. 21:11), toguard the way to the tree of life (Gen. 3:24). God “preserves”the faithful (Ps. 31:23) and “guards” their lives (Prov.24:12) from trouble (Ps. 32:7), from violent people (Ps. 140:1, 4),and from the enemy’s plan (Ps. 64:1). The noun mishmeretderives from shamar and is found in both military (2Sam. 20:3;Neh. 7:3; Isa. 21:8) and cultic (Num. 8:26; 1Chron. 9:27; Ezek.40:46) contexts.

Severalverbs are used in the NT to render the sense “to guard.”Most pertinent is phylassō, which is used of “guarding”prisoners (Luke 8:29; Acts 12:4; 28:16) and personal property (Luke2:8; 11:21; Acts 22:20). Paul exhorts Timothy to guard the deposit offaith entrusted to him (1Tim. 6:20; 2Tim. 1:12), andpeople are encouraged to guard themselves against covetousness (Luke12:15), idols (1John 5:21), and lawlessness (2Pet. 3:17).God also serves as a guard who safely delivers his people (John17:12; 2Pet. 2:5) and promises to protect them from the evilone (2Thess. 3:3).

In Gen. 2:18–25 the lone man is provided with a“helper.” This is not necessarily an unromantic view ofthe marriage relationship (cf. Gen. 1:27–28a), but the mainthought is of companionship and partnership (cf. Eccles. 4:9–11).Also, the word “helper” does not require a subservient ordemeaning function but rather can include active intervention, suchas God himself renders (e.g., Ps. 33:20: “[The Lord] is ourhelp and our shield”). The man needs help to carry out themandate of Gen. 1:28b, so a wide-ranging helping role is in view. Thehelper must be “suitable for him” (Gen. 2:18b), that is,come alongside him, as his opposite and complement, and so no merelowly assistant will be adequate for the task. (See also Help Meet.)

Thepsalms portray God as the helper of his needy people (Pss. 10:14;30:10; 54:4; 70:5; 72:12; 146:5). The exodus deliverance is describedby using the motif of God as “my helper” (Exod. 18:4). Onthe other hand, when God acts to judge wicked nations, no humanhelper (or ally) can provide protection (Isa. 30:5; Jer. 47:4; Ezek.30:8). In the crisis of persecution forecast in Dan. 11:34, the“little help” (=helper) may be Judas Maccabeus,though the main point is that the godly will not be totally bereft ofdivine support. Among the charismatically gifted individuals who areto act for the common good listed by Paul in 1Cor. 12:28 arethose able to help others, though the kind of help in mind(distinguished from healing and administration) is not specified.

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

Heavenand Earth

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

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

TheTheology of Land

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

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

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

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

Inheritance

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Lifein the Natural Sense

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

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

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

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

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

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

Lifeas a Theological Concept

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Origins,Composition, and Constitution

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

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

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

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

Formand Function

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

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

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

Humanityin Pauline Thought

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

Mentioned only in the OT in most Bible versions (MSG uses“nose” in the NT as part of English idioms; e.g., Matt.13:57; 21:32), the nose often is referred to in the context ofjewelry, as nose rings for women were a fine adornment in ancientHebrew culture (Gen. 24:47; Ezek. 16:12), in some cases indicative ofextravagance (Isa. 3:16–24). Other times, a stronger partywould direct a weaker party by means of a hook or a cord in theirnose (2Kings 19:28; 2Chron. 33:11; Job 40:24).

TheHebrew word for nose, ’ap, could be used metaphorically foranger, much as English speakers might say that an angry person “hassteam coming out of his nose.” Thus, the NIV’s “[he]became angry” can translate the Hebrew phrase “[his] noseburned” (Gen. 30:2; Judg. 10:7). The same Hebrew term can alsorefer to nostrils. The NIV uses the translation “nostrils”several times in the OT, often in poetry, usually in connection withbreath (Gen. 2:7; 7:22; 2Sam. 22:16 [cf. Ps. 18:15]; Job 27:3)or as a source of smoke (2Sam. 22:9 [cf. Ps. 18:8]; Job 41:20).

TheHebrews also used ’ap to refer to the entire face, normallywhen a person was bowing facedown. In such instances, “boweddown with his face to the ground” translates the Hebrew phrase“bowed down with nostrils [’appayim] toward the ground”(Gen. 19:1; 1Sam. 25:41).

Riversin Cosmology

Genesis2:10–14 describes the garden in Eden as the source of anunnamed river that subsequently divided into four “headwaters”:the Pishon, the Gihon, the Tigris, and the Euphrates. Thisdescription defies any attempt to locate the purported site of Edenin terms of historical geography. The Tigris and the Euphrates do notdiverge from a common source, but instead converge before emptyinginto the Persian Gulf. Moreover, the Gihon, if it is to be identifiedwith the sacred spring of the same name in Jerusalem (1Kings1:45), is several hundred miles away from the Tigris and theEuphrates. The Pishon is otherwise unknown. If, as variouscommentators since antiquity have suggested, the Gihon and the Pishonare to be identified with other great rivers in the same class ofimportance as the Tigris and the Euphrates (the Nile, the Ganges,etc.), then this would further confound any attempt to understandGen. 2:10–14 in terms of historical geography. The image offour rivers emanating from a primordial garden and dividingunnaturalistically from a common source is attested in ancient NearEastern art, notably in the eighteenth-century BC wall paintingillustrating the investiture of Zimri-Lim. In this image, twogoddesses stand in a paradisiacal garden, guarded by mythical,sphinxlike creatures (cf. the cherubim in Gen. 3:24), holding vesselsfrom which four rivers flow.

Inhis vision of the restored land of Israel, Ezekiel sees a great riveremanating from the temple in Jerusalem, flowing into the Judeandesert, and ultimately turning the Dead Sea into freshwater (Ezek.47:1–12). Along the banks of the river, Ezekiel sees fishermenand perpetually fruitful trees. Similarly, the vision of the newJerusalem in Rev. 22:1–2 describes a river of the “waterof life” flowing through the city and watering trees that bearfruit in every month. In both cases, the visions draw on the notionthat Jerusalem is the cultic and religious center of the world andtherefore endow its spring—geologically speaking, aninsignificant body of water—with a cosmological significance.It was perhaps this same impulse that led the author of Gen. 2:13,probably himself a Jerusalemite, to mention the Gihon in the sameclass as the Tigris and the Euphrates.

InPs. 89:25, in the context of a poem describing the adoption of theDavidic king as a divine son, God is described as promising to “sethis hand over the sea, his right hand over the rivers.” Likethe sea, a symbol of cosmic chaos in ancient Near Eastern mythology,the rivers represent a force that is overcome by the divine warriorand then placed under the subjection of his human representative, thebeloved king. In this connection, it is significant that theexodus—in many ways the preeminent foundational moment of theIsraelite religion—involved the splitting of both a sea (Exod.14:21–22) and a river (Josh. 3:16; Ps. 114:3) and thesubsequent passage of the Israelites on dry ground. Thispeople-creating deliverance, in turn, is comparable to the account ofcreation in Gen. 1, where the Creator God drives back the waters toprepare a dry-ground habitation for humanity (vv. 9–10). InUgaritic mythology, Yamm, the sea god, also bore the epithet “judgeriver,” underscoring the cosmological connection between seaand river. As we will see, prophetic oracles of divine judgment,especially when they are directed against the river-basedcivilization of Egypt, often recapitulate the theme of the God ofIsrael fighting against the river.

TheNile River

TheNile (Heb. ye’or) is fed by two major tributaries: the WhiteNile, which begins at Lake Victoria, and the Blue Nile, which beginsin Ethiopia. At over four thousand miles, the Nile is the longestriver in the world. The ancient civilization of Egypt dependedentirely on the flow of the Nile and upon its annual flood (the “giftof the Nile”) for irrigation of crops. Even today, arable landalong the Nile is confined in some places to an area no more than afew miles from its banks.

Giventhe dependence of Egyptian civilization on the Nile, especially itsannual flood and the accompanying deposit of silt, it is notsurprising that the river figured prominently in Egyptian mythologyand religion. In particular, the story of the dying and rising godOsiris was linked with the annual ebb and flow of the great river.The annual inundation is still impressive today; an ancientimpression may be gleaned from Amos 9:5, where the prophet appeals tothe rising and falling of the Nile as a description of divine,earth-melting judgment.

Twoof the plagues sent by God upon the Egyptians took place at the Nile,an appropriate setting for a confrontation between the God of Israeland the Egyptian pharaoh, himself a living representation of theEgyptian pantheon. In Ezek. 29:3 the God of Israel says to Pharaoh,“I am against you, Pharaoh king of Egypt, you great monsterlying among your streams. You say, ‘The Nile belongs to me; Imade it for myself.’  ” Since the Nile wasperhaps the preeminent natural or environmental symbol of Egyptianculture, the God of Israel’s assertion of control of that riverwould have been understood as an unmistakable claim to sovereignty.At the time of the birth of Moses, the Nile was a place of extinctionfor the Israelites, for Pharaoh had commanded that every boy born tothe Hebrews be thrown into the Nile (Exod. 1:22). Ironically, Moseswas saved when his mother put him in the Nile in a pitch-coatedbasket, where he was found by the royal daughter of Pharaoh, who hadcome to the Nile to bathe (2:3, 5).

Godtold Moses to confront Pharaoh at the Nile (Exod. 7:15), and thefirst plague with which God afflicted the Egyptians consisted ofturning the Nile into blood, causing its fish to die and renderingits water unsuitable for drinking. The Egyptians were forced to digwells along its banks (7:20–21). The second plague involved themultiplication of frogs in the Nile, to the point of greatinconvenience (8:3).

Isaiahcontinues the theme of God punishing the Egyptians by attacking theNile: “The waters of the river will dry up, and the riverbedwill be parched and dry. The canals will stink; the streams of Egyptwill dwindle and dry up. The reeds and rushes will wither, also theplants along the Nile” (Isa. 19:5–7). The passage goes onto underscore the importance of the Nile as a source of irrigationwater and fishing and the devastation that results from the failureof the Nile to flood as expected. In other texts, where the emphasisis on the better fortunes of Egypt, the power of Egypt is symbolizedby the mighty Nile: “Who is this that rises like the Nile, likerivers of surging waters? Egypt rises like the Nile....She says, ‘I will rise and cover the earth; I will destroycities and their people’  ” (Jer. 46:7–8).

TheEuphrates River

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

Inthe Bible, the Euphrates represents the northern boundary of theterritory granted to Abraham (Gen. 15:18; see also Exod. 23:31).David extended his territory as far as the Euphrates when he foughtthe Aramean king Hada-de-zer (2Sam. 8:3), and so the dimensionsof Israel at its apex under Solomon are described as controlling allthe kingdoms “from the Euphrates River to the land of thePhilistines, as far as the border of Egypt [i.e., the southern limitof his realm]” (1Kings 4:21).

Inaddition to its significance as a political boundary, the Euphratesmarked an important cultural boundary in Israelite thought. Abrahamand his family are remembered as having come from “beyond theEuphrates River” (Josh. 24:2). The exile was described as ascattering “beyond the Euphrates River,” an expressionthat underscores complete dispossession from Israel’s own land(1Kings 14:15). Interestingly, the cultures to the east of theEuphrates shared the notion that this river marked a major boundary,as evident from the convention among the Neo-Assyrians and thePersians of referring to western lands by the name “Beyond theRiver” or “Trans-Euphrates” (Akk. eber-nari; Aram.abar nahara). This was the name of the province encompassing the landof Israel in the time of Ezra (see Ezra 4:10).

Isaiahmade use of the association between the Euphrates and theMesopotamian empires when he likened the king of Assyria to themighty waters of the river (Isa. 8:7). The Euphrates figuresprominently in Revelation, where it restrains punishment from thenorth, a punishment that is released when God dries up the river,allowing “kings from the East” to cross over (Rev. 9:14;16:12).

TheTigris River

Alongwith the Euphrates, the Tigris (Heb. khiddeqel ) was one ofthe two rivers of ancient Mesopotamia. The Tigris lies east of theEuphrates and runs over a course of approximately 1,150 miles fromnorthwest to southeast, finally joining with the Euphrates andemptying into the Persian Gulf. In antiquity, the cities of Calah,Nineveh, and Ashur lay along the Tigris. The Tigris is mentionedtwice in the Bible: first, as one of the four headwaters emanatingfrom the garden of Eden (Gen. 2:14) and, second, as the location ofDaniel’s visionary experience (Dan. 10:4).

TheJordan River

TheJordan (Heb. yarden) runs southward from the Hula Valley into the Seaof Galilee (also known as the Sea of Tiberias; modern Lake Kinneret)and from there through a river valley (the “plain of theJordan” [see Gen. 13:10]) to the Dead Sea. Over its course ofapproximately 150 miles, it descends dramatically from an elevationof approximately 200 feet in the Hula Valley to an elevation of 690feet below sea level at the Sea of Galilee, and then farther downwardto an elevation of 1,385 feet below sea level at the Dead Sea.Fittingly, the name “Jordan” is related to the Hebrewword yarad(“to go down”).

Inthe story of the exodus and conquest, the Jordan River marked theboundary of the “promised land,” despite the fact thattwo and a half tribes received inheritances on the eastern side ofthe river (the Transjordan [see Num. 32:32; 34:12, 15]). For thoseliving in the land of Israel, the river marked the boundary betweenthem and what they termed “the other side of the Jordan”(Heb. ’eber hayyarden [Num. 32:19; Deut. 1:5]).

Inthe OT, several memorable stories are set near the Jordan. Inaddition to Joshua’s dramatic crossing of the Jordan (Josh.3:1–17), the “fords of the Jordan” were strategiclocations, and it was there that the Gileadites slaughtered forty-twothousand Ephraimites as they attempted to return to their territoryon the western side of the Jordan (Judg. 12:5). Elisha instructedNaaman, the leprous Aramean general, to bathe seven times in theJordan for the healing of his condition (2Kings 5:10). WhenElisha’s companions wished to build shelters for themselves,they went to the Jordan, where they knew they would find abundantvegetation and poles (2Kings 6:2; cf. Zech. 11:3). When one ofthem dropped an iron ax head into the water, Elisha caused it tofloat to the surface (2Kings 6:6–7).

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

Tributariesof the Jordan

Southof the Sea of Galilee, the Jordan is fed by several tributaries. TheYarmuk River joins the Jordan just south of the lake, draining thebiblical region of Bashan to the east. The Wadi Far’ah joinsthe Jordan from the west, halfway between the Sea of Galilee and theDead Sea, and drains the hill country of Ephraim. Nearly across fromthe Wadi Far’ah, the biblical Jabbok River (Wadi Zerqa) entersthe Jordan from the east. In biblical times, the Jabbok was the limitof Ammonite territory (Num. 21:23–24). The Arnon River (WadiMujib), not a tributary of the Jordan, enters the Dead Sea from theeast, opposite En Gedi. It was the border between the Moabites andthe Amorites (Num. 21:13).

TheWadi of Egypt

Ina number of texts the “wadi of Egypt” (or “brook ofEgypt”) represents the far southern limit of Israeliteterritory. Some ancient interpreters understood this as referring tothe Pelusian branch of the Nile River delta, while most modernscholars favor the Besor River, farther east, in present-day Israel.Besides the Bible, Assyrian texts also refer to the Wadi of Egypt. In733 BC Tiglath-pileserIII set up a victory stela there, perhapsto advertise to the Egyptians the southern extent of the territorythat he claimed for Assyria.

Severalbiblical passages refer to the Shihor River as marking a boundarybetween Egypt and Israelite territory (Josh. 13:3; 19:26; 1Chron.13:5; Isa. 23:3; Jer. 2:18).

TheOrontes River

Althoughit is not mentioned in the Bible, the Orontes marked an importantinternational boundary in the biblical world. The Orontes begins inthe Bekaa Valley in present-day Lebanon, then flows northward betweenthe Lebanon and the Anti-Lebanon mountain ranges before turningsharply westward to empty into the Mediterranean Sea. Along theOrontes lay the kingdom of Hamath (see, e.g., 2Sam. 8:9;2Chron. 8:3; Jer. 39:5). Because it ran through a valley thatwas an artery of travel from north to south, the Orontes was theperennial focus of strategic interest, and several important battleswere fought at or near the Orontes. In 1274 BC the Egyptian pharaohRamessesII fought the Hittite king MuwatallisII at theBattle of Kadesh. In 853 BC the Assyrian king ShalmaneserIIIwas challenged at Qarqar on the Orontes by a coalition led byHadadezer of Damascus and including King Ahab of Israel.

The two rivers between which Mesopotamia (“betweenrivers”) is located. The Euphrates and the Tigris originate inthe mountains of modern Turkey and run through Syria and Iraq, eachfor more than a thousand miles, before meeting and emptying into thePersian Gulf. Like today, the two rivers gave life to many people,running through major centers of ancient civilization.

TheEuphrates and the Tigris are mentioned together only once in theBible (Gen. 2:10–14), where they are two of the four riversstemming from the garden of Eden. The Euphrates itself figuresprominently in the biblical narrative. It is also known as “thegreat river” or simply “the river.” Besides itsrole in Gen. 2, it is frequently mentioned as a border of the landthat God promised to Abraham and his offspring (Gen. 15:18; Josh.1:4), a land that Israel acquired during the united monarchy (2Sam.8:3; 1Kings 4:24). King Josiah met his death here at the battleof Carchemish in 605 BC (2Chron. 35:20–27; cf. Jer.46:1–10). The Euphrates also functions as a symbol of Israel’sidolatrous past (Josh. 24:2–3) and as a symbol of freedom fromthe exile (Isa. 11:15; 27:12). In the NT, the Euphrates is the placewhere the four angels are bound (Rev. 9:14) and where the sixth angelpours out his bowl. Moreover, the Tigris appears in only one otherplace in the Bible (Dan. 10:4), where Daniel receives a vision on itsbanks. Some dispute the validity of this occurrence because certainmanuscripts (i.e., the Pesh*tta) here replace “Tigris”with “Euphrates.”

In Gen. 2:9 the tree of life is at the very center of thelush landscape of the garden of Eden. In Gen. 3:22–24 the manand the woman are exiled from the garden as a consequence of theirdisobedience, but more specifically they are barred from theimmortality granted by eating the fruit of the tree. Humankind “mustnot be allowed to reach out ... and take also from thetree of life and eat, and live forever.” A tree granting youthinto old age is an image found also in other ancient Near Easternliterature (see the Epic of Gilgamesh) and in iconography of theancient Near East, in which humans and animals are depicted reachingout to grasp for the tree or its fruit.

Inthe book of Proverbs the tree of life is a symbol of that whichbrings joy in life: wisdom (3:18), righteousness (11:30), “alonging fulfilled” (13:12), “a soothing tongue”(15:4). In Revelation the tree represents the reversal of theconsequences of humankind’s disobedience in the garden. Eternallife is now again offered to those who persevere in Christ (Rev. 2:7;22:14). And in Rev. 22:2 the tree of life is part of the scenery ofthe new Jerusalem. Its branches span over the river of the water oflife, and its leaves are imbued with healing for the nations (cf.Ezek. 47:12). See also Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.

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

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

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

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

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

An occupation or profession is the usual work or business inwhich a person engages for the sake of earning a living. In biblicaltimes, family or social standing most often determined occupation.This was particularly true for occupations tied to land, such asplanting crops and raising animals, since land in ancient Israel waspassed down within the tribe, normally from fathers to sons (Josh.14:9; Ezek. 46:18). Sometimes daughters also received a share in thefamily inheritance (Josh. 17:6). Most people gained their livelihoodfrom their family’s land, and those who did not have land hiredthemselves out to work for wages (Deut. 24:14). A son normallylearned his trade from his father (Gen. 47:3; 2Kings 4:18;Matt. 4:21) and continued in that occupation unless called into God’sservice (1Kings 19:19–21; Jer. 1:5; Matt. 4:22).

Cicero,writing around the time of the NT, considered occupations such as taxcollector, laborer, and fisherman to be vulgar. Conversely,professions such as teacher, doctor, and wholesale trader were morehonorable, with landowner being the most respectable and profitableprofession (Off. 1.42).

Agricultureand Farming

Farmingis the earliest recorded occupation in the Bible, as the first manwas called to work and keep the garden (Gen. 2:15). Even after theexile from Eden because of sin, Adam worked the ground for food, asdid Cain, his firstborn son (Gen. 3:17–18; 4:2). The openingchapters of the Bible establish a fundamental link between “man”(’adam) and the “ground” (’adamah). After theflood, Noah established himself as a “man of the soil”(’ish ha’adamah) by planting a vineyard (Gen. 9:20). KingUzziah “loved the soil” (’oheb ’adamah) andso employed people to work in his fields and vineyards (2Chron.26:10).

Goddemonstrated his covenant commitment to Isaac by blessing him with anincredible harvest (Gen. 26:12), and he promised to prosper Israel’sfarms if the people obeyed him (Deut. 28:4) and to curse the fruit oftheir ground if they disobeyed (Deut. 28:18). The OT ideal was foreveryone to live “under their own vine and under their own figtree” (1Kings 4:25; Mic. 4:4). According to Prov. 28:19,the diligent farmer would have abundant food.

Jesus’parables frequently employed agricultural imagery that would havebeen readily understandable in first-century Palestine, where manypeople were farmers (cf. Mark 4:1–9; 12:1–11) and someowned land (Acts 4:34). The people living around Jerusalem at thistime engaged in agriculture, soil cultivation, and cattle raising(Let. Aris. 107–112).

Herdingand Hunting

Herdinganimals is the second-oldest occupation recorded in Scripture (afterfarming), and raising flocks and herds continued to be one of themost common and important professions throughout biblical times. Abelis the first “keeper of sheep” in the Bible (Gen. 4:2NRSV). Several generations later, Jabal pioneered the nomadic herdinglifestyle (Gen. 4:20). The patriarchs were shepherds (Gen. 47:3), aswere Moses (Exod. 3:1), David (1Sam. 17:34), and many others inthe OT. Josephus acknowledged that “feeding of sheep was theemployment of our forefathers in the most ancient ages”(Ag.Ap. 1.91). While men typically worked as shepherds andherdsmen, the occupation was also open to women, such as Rachel,whose fathers owned sheep (Gen. 29:9). Shepherds were present atJesus’ birth (Luke 2:8–20), and Jesus’ teachingsuggests that shepherding was a common occupation in Palestine (cf.Matt. 18:12; John 10:1–30).

Manypeople in biblical times hunted, either for food, sport, orprotection. The first recorded hunter is Nimrod, “a mightyhunter before the Lord” (Gen. 10:9). Ishmael was “anexpert with the bow” (Gen. 21:20 NRSV), while Esau was “askillful hunter, a man of the open country” who brought backwild game for food (25:27–28). The name of Pokereth-Hazzebaim,included in the genealogy of Solomon’s servants in Ezra 2:57,reflects his occupation as a “gazelle catcher” (cf.1Kings 4:23).

Buildersand Craftsmen

Cainwas the first person in the Bible to build a city (Gen. 4:17), andhis descendant Tubal-Cain was the first metalworker (4:22). Nimrodbuilt a number of cities (10:11–12), and the beginning ofNimrod’s kingdom was Babel (10:10), where the people gatheredtogether to build a city with brick (11:3). Builders in Mesopotamiaused baked brick and asphalt, while Israelite builders usuallypreferred the more readily available stone and mortar. After Joseph’sdeath, Israel was conscripted into forced labor in Egypt, whichinvolved building cities of brick and mortar (Exod. 1:11).

Therole of craftsmen in the construction of the tabernacle wasparticularly significant. Bezalel and Oholiab were “skilledworkers and designers” empowered by God for work on thetabernacle (Exod. 35:35). They engaged in “all kinds ofcrafts,” including artistic metalworking, masonry, carpentry,and weaving (Exod. 31:4–5; 38:23).

Kingsin Israel often commissioned important building projects (1Kings12:25; 15:22; 16:24; 2Chron. 26:9; Josephus, J.W. 1.401–2).Carpenters and stonemasons worked on David’s palace (2Sam.5:11). Solomon conscripted laborers to build the temple and alsoemployed carriers, stonecutters, craftsmen, and foremen to supervisethe work (1Kings 5:13–18). After the Babylonian exile,many Israelites were involved in rebuilding the temple and the wallof Jerusalem, which had been destroyed (Ezra 3:8; Neh. 4:16–18).These projects, directed by Zerubbabel and Nehemiah, utilized masons,carpenters, and other workers (Ezra 3:7).

Jesusis referred to as a tektōn (Mark 6:3) and as the son of a tektōn(Matt. 13:55), with tektōn usually translated “carpenter”by English versions. However,recent scholarshiphas demonstrated that Jesus was likely a builder, not a carpenter inthe modern sense of the term. In the LXX, the word tektōntypically translates a Hebrew word, kharash, used broadly to refer tocraftsmen working with stone, wood, or metal.

Musicians

Thefirst musician recorded in Scripture is Jubal, “the father ofall who play the stringed instruments and pipes” (Gen. 4:21).Musicians performed a variety of roles in ancient society, as they dotoday. Singers and instrumentalists were employed to celebratefestive occasions, often to provide accompaniment for dancing (Gen.31:27; Luke 15:25), to soothe the sick or distressed (1Sam.16:16), and to express lamentation (Job 30:31).

Musiciansplayed an important role in leading God’s people in worship.The “director of music” is mentioned in the headings offifty-five psalms and Hab. 3:19. The most famous musician inScripture is David, “the singer of Israel’s psalms”(2Sam. 23:1 GW), who played the harp (1Sam. 16:18) andwrote or inspired at least seventy-three canonical psalms. Solomonwas also a notable songwriter and lover of music (1Kings 4:32).David appointed many Levites as singers and musicians to lead Israelin worship (1Chron. 15:16; 23:5). The musicians played lyres,harps, cymbals, and trumpets (2Chron. 5:12).

Government,Politics, and Military

Beforethe monarchy, there were no formal government offices. Under Moses, agroup of seventy elders in Israel served as leaders and officials,and these men were to carry out Moses’ decrees and judge thepeople on most matters (Exod. 18:20–22; Num. 11:16). AfterJoshua’s death, God raised up judges to rescue Israel fromforeign enemies and lead the people (Judg. 2:16) until the time ofSamuel, when Saul was made king (1Sam. 11:15).

Kingsin Israel employed various officials. In 2Sam. 8:16–18,Joab is listed first among David’s officials, which suggeststhat the military commander was second in authority after the king.Under Solomon, the leader of the army is called “commander inchief” (1Kings 4:4). The royal cabinet included a numberof key advisers, including the recorder, the secretary, and the“confidant” of the king (cf. 2Sam. 16:16). The OTdoes not specify the precise roles of these officials. The recorderwas among the highest governmental positions and served as a royalcounselor. In Hebrew, mazkir (“recorder”) is a cognatenoun to the verb zkr (“to remember”), which suggests thatthis official may have managed and preserved public records (2Kings18:18; Isa. 36:22). The main task of the king’s secretary orscribe (sop̱er)was to write down (sapar) official state documents (2Sam.8:17), and he advised the king and also provided financial oversight(2Kings 12:10). Recorders and secretaries apparently were welleducated and multilingual, as was the palace administrator (2Kings18:18, 26). Solomon’s officials included supervisors of thepalace and the forced labor, as well as governors who suppliedprovisions for the king’s household (1Kings 4:6–7).The OT mentions cupbearers in Israel’s government and in otheradministrations (Gen. 40:1; 1Kings 10:5; Neh. 1:11). Thecupbearer served as the royal wine taster; he protected the king frombeing poisoned and had direct access to the monarch.

Inthe Roman Empire, the emperor was absolute ruler (1Pet. 2:17),with the senate next in authority. Proconsuls held judicial andmilitary authority over larger provinces (Acts 18:12), prefects(governors) administered smaller provinces (Matt. 27:2), withtetrarchs over one-fourth of a province (Luke 3:1).

Christiansin NT times engaged in civil service. Erastus was a financial officerin Corinth (Rom. 16:23), and he may be the same Erastus commemoratedin an inscription from this period who held the office of aedile. Theproconsul Sergius Paulus (Acts 13:7); Manaen, a close friend of HerodAntipas (Acts 13:1); and members of Caesar’s household (Phil.4:22) were also Christian public leaders.

Tradeand Economics

Fromearliest times, people have exchanged goods and property. WhenAbraham purchased Ephron’s field, his silver was measured“according to the weight current among the merchants”(Gen. 23:16), which suggests that a recognized system of publictrading was in place during the time of the patriarchs. Traders ofcommodities such as spices traveled along caravan routes betweensouthern Arabia and Egypt, and these traders often acquired slavesalong the way (Gen. 37:28). Solomon employed royal merchants to buyand sell goods (1Kings 10:28).

Inthe first century, Jews were engaged broadly in economic life aslandowners, artisans, merchants, traders, bankers, and slaves.Several of Jesus’ disciples were fishermen (Matt. 4:18). Lukewas a physician, a well-educated and respectable professional (Col.4:14). Lydia was a dealer in purple cloth (Acts 16:14). Paul, Aquila,and Priscilla worked as tentmakers (Acts 18:3). In the Roman Empire,commerce and pagan religion often intermingled. Merchants oftenformed trade guilds, where membership sometimes required religiousand moral compromise. In Ephesus, silversmiths and craftsmen inrelated trades turned significant profit through their connectionswith the local Artemis cult (Acts 19:24–27).

Jesusfrequently spent time with tax collectors, such as Levi (also called“Matthew”) (Matt. 9:9; Mark 2:14). Tax collectors were adespised group because often they became wealthy by taking advantageof the Roman taxation system, which allowed them to charge commissionon taxes collected (Luke 19:2, 8). Jesus’ parable of thetalents references bankers who offered interest on deposits collected(Matt. 25:27), and Rev. 3:17–18 alludes to the fact thatLaodicea was a financial center with a significant banking system.

Servantsand Slaves

Inthe OT, ’ebed most often designates a slave or servant, whoseoccupation involves work (’abad ) as a subordinate. Someservants held very important positions in their master’shousehold (Gen. 24:2), while many others toiled in hard labor (Job7:2). Israelites were not to enslave their kinfolk, but they couldtake slaves from other nations. Fellow Israelites who became poorcould serve as hired workers, but they were to be released along withtheir children at the Jubilee because God had brought Israel out fromEgyptian slavery and they belonged to God as his servants (Lev.25:39–46).

Slavesin the Roman world were property like goods or cattle, possessed byanother (Dio Chrysostom, 2Serv. lib. 24). Unlike modern slaverypractices, race played no factor in the Roman institution of slavery.Slaves were kidnapped and sold in NT times (1Tim. 1:10; Rev.18:13), but the majority of slaves were so by birth. The mostprominent slave in the NT is Onesimus, for whom Paul intercedes withhis master, Philemon (Philem. 10, 16). Believing slaves were to obeytheir earthly masters “as slaves of Christ” (Eph. 6:5–6),but the NT stressed the equality of slave and free in Christ (Gal.3:28). Paul called himself a “servant [doulos] of Christ Jesus”(Rom. 1:1).

ReligiousService

MostIsraelites engaged in professional religious service were Levites(Num. 3:12), including Moses, Aaron, and the priests in Aaron’sline (Exod. 6:19–20; 35:19). The priests offered sacrifices toGod on behalf of the people (Heb. 5:1). Under the priests’direction, the Levites were charged with caring for the tabernacleand its furnishings (Num. 1:49; 1Chron. 23:32) and carrying theark of the covenant (1Chron. 15:2). They were set apart toserve in God’s presence (Deut. 18:7) and to lead the people inworship (2Chron. 5:12). Further, priests often played animportant advisory role to Israel’s kings (2Sam. 8:17;1Kings 4:5; 2Kings 12:2).

InIsrael, people went to seers and prophets to inquire of God (1Sam.9:9), for they received and communicated God’s word (2Sam.24:11; Jer. 37:6). Sometimes individuals are mentioned as prophets,and other times the prophets are discussed as an organized group(1Sam. 19:20; 1Kings 22:6).

TheNT references a number of ministerial offices (1Cor. 12:28;Eph. 4:11; 1Tim. 3:1–12). Not all ministers were paid,though teachers and preachers had a right to “receive theirliving from the gospel” (1Cor. 9:14–15; cf. 1Tim.5:17). Apostles were those sent out by Jesus as his representatives.The term apostolos refers particularly to the twelve apostles whowere with Jesus during his earthly ministry and who were witnesses ofhis resurrection (Acts 1:21–22). Paul referred to himself as anapostle (Gal. 1:1; 1Cor. 1:1), and he calls Epaph-ro-di-tus andothers “messengers” (apostoloi) in the churches (2Cor.8:23; Phil. 2:25). Prophets have the spiritual gift of prophecy andspeak to strengthen, encourage, and comfort the church (Acts 15:32;1Cor. 14:3). Overseers (also called “elders” or“pastors”) are qualified leaders who teach, shepherd, andexercise authority in the church (1Tim. 3:1; 1Pet. 5:2).Evangelists and missionaries proclaim the gospel and aim to winconverts to Christ (Acts 21:8; 2Tim. 4:5). Those ministers whoare faithful to the gospel deserve support (3John8).

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

TheBeginning of Death

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

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

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

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

Deathin the Old Testament

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

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

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

Lifeafter Death in the Old Testament

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

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

Deathin the New Testament

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

TheOrigin of Humankind

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

TheNature of Humankind

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Genreand Historical Context

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

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

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

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

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

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

Purposeand Interpretation

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

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

Outlineand Structure

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

Whatyou have seen (past) (1:1–20)

Whatis now (present) (2:1–3:21)

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

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

Prologue(1:1–8)

Act1: Seven Oracles (1:9–3:22)

Act2: Seven Seals (6:1–17)

Act3: Seven Trumpets (8:1–9:21)

Act4: Seven Signs (12:1–14:20)

Act5: Seven Bowls (16:1–21)

Act6: Seven Visions (19:1–20:15)

Act7: Seven Prophecies (21:2–22:17)

Epilogue(22:18–21)

Thefollowing outline provides an overview of Revelation in ten stages:

I.Introduction (1:1–20)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

IX.God’s Ultimate Victory (19:6–22:5)

X.Conclusion (22:6–21)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Charactersand Themes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.

In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).

Articles of Clothing

A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.

In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).

Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).

The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il  ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).

In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).

Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).

Special Functions of Clothing

According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).

Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).

Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).

Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.

Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The human body has its origin in the act of creation by Goddepicted in Gen. 2:7, so that it comes under the heading of the “verygood” evaluation at the close of the six days of creation(1:31). In neither the OT nor the NT is the body viewed as evil, incontrast to the ancient Greek view that saw the human body as aprison of the soul and viewed death as a release from this bondage.This contributes to the Bible’s positive view of humansexuality when properly expressed in a committed marriagerelationship, one notable example being the mutual admiration of theman and the woman who are deeply in love in Song of Songs, where wefind a head-to-toe description of the man’s physique (5:10–16)and a corresponding description of the woman’s body (7:1–8).

OldTestament.In the OT, death is regularly described as a returning of the body tothe dust/ground from which it was made (e.g., Gen. 3:19; Ps. 90:3).The dignity of the human body is signaled by the importance of properburial (Deut. 21:22–23), which is a cultic rather than a healthregulation in the OT. The outrage committed by the Philistines on thebodies of Saul and his sons (1 Sam. 31), the deliberatedesecration of tombs (2 Kings 23:16; Amos 2:1), and leaving anenemy unburied are ways of expressing utter contempt. The ensuring ofproper burial (even of strangers) becomes a mark of Jewish piety, asexemplified in Tob. 2:1–10; 12:11–15.

TheHebrew word nepesh (often translated “soul”) can be usedof a dead body (e.g., Lev. 21:11; Num. 6:6; 19:13; Hag. 2:13), thoughthis word has a wide range of meaning (sometimes it means “throat”).This usage is not to be taken as signifying that the soul/bodydistinction is not recognized. On the contrary, in OT teaching “body”(whatever the Hebrew word used) always refers to the physical body,not to the whole human person that is bipartite (body/soul) within anoverall psychophysical unity. The reference in Mic. 6:7 (NIV: “thefruit of my body”) is really to the “womb” (cf.Deut. 28:4), and the Hebrew word in question, beten, can refer to amale body insofar as it is involved in procreation (Ps. 132:11).

NewTestament.Hebrews insists on the real humanity of Jesus (2:14–18), andthe Gospels portray him as having the normal physical requirements ofdrink, food, and sleep (Mark 4:38; John 4:7–8). To deny thatJesus Christ came “in the flesh” strikes at the heart ofthe gospel and is the spirit of the antichrist (1 John 4:2–3).For atonement to take place, it was required that Jesus offer himselfbody and soul to God through death (Heb. 10:5–10, 20). At theLast Supper, when Jesus said, “This is my body” (Matt.26:26), his meaning was that the bread represented his body, whichwould be offered on the cross as the sacrifice that makes possiblethe inauguration of the new covenant (cf. Exod. 24:1–8).

Thebodily resurrection of Jesus is evidenced by the empty tomb (Mark16:4–6) and the appearance of the risen Christ to his followers(e.g., Luke 24:36–43; see the list of witnesses in 1 Cor.15:5–8). This is a fundamental point of Christian doctrine andgospel proclamation, providing assurance to believers that they toowill be physically raised from the dead (1 Cor. 15:42–52),a belief found already in the OT (Dan. 12:2). Salvation in the Bibleembraces the redemption of the body and the renewal of the physicalcreation. At the time of Christ’s return, believers will beraised from their graves and meet their returning Lord (1 Thess.4:13–18).

Inwhat is acknowledged by all to be a difficult passage (2 Cor.5:1–9), Paul appears to envisage that at the point of death hewill not become a disembodied soul but instead will “be clothedwith [his] heavenly dwelling” (5:4). The expression “awayfrom the body” (5:8) is not to be taken as an indication ofbodiless existence, but rather is explained by “at home withthe Lord” and refers to the believer’s state upon leavingthis earthly life. The nature of the “spiritual body” in1 Cor. 15:35–49 is only hinted at by means of analogies(e.g., the seed) or contrasts (between the “perishable”and the “imperishable”), but its physicality (thoughgloriously transformed) is plain. Perhaps our clearest indication isprovided by what we are told of the resurrection body of Jesus, whichcould pass through grave clothes (Luke 24:12; John 20:5–7),appear and disappear in a closed room (Luke 24:31, 36), and ingestfood and be touched (Luke 24:37–43).

Paulmade use the “body” analogy for the character of thechurch as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor. 12:12–26),viewing it as an organism consisting of different, mutually dependentmembers or organs. This teaching was designed to rebuke and correctthe self-glorifying and self-serving use and abuse of spiritual giftsin the Corinthian church. So too, the reality of the Christiancommunity as a “body” (1 Cor. 10:17; 11:29) showedthat their uncaring attitude toward each other manifested at theirsuppers was totally inappropriate. In the same letter Paul says thatthe believer’s “body” is united to Christ, makingsexual immorality a thing to be shunned (6:12–20). Believersare to glorify God in their bodies. The analogy of the body is used alittle differently in Ephesians (1:23; 2:16) and Colossians (1:18,24), where its point is that Christ is the “head” of thebody (the church), which therefore must submit to his direction andrule. Believers are to pre­sent their “bodies” as aliving sacrifice, serving the master who redeemed them (Rom.12:1). The verse that follows gives the other side to theequation: serving God with the mind (12:2). Body and mind togethermake up the complete human being, who is a psychosomatic unity. Seealso Gestures.

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

Authorship,Date, and Historical Issues

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

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

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

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

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

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

Outline

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

I.Departure from Egypt (1–15)

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

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

I.Departure from Egypt (1–15)

II.Mount Sinai: Law (16–24)

III.Mount Sinai: Tabernacle (25–40)

‘

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

I.Departure from Egypt (1–15)

A.Prelude and call of Moses (1–6)

B.Plagues (7–12)

C.Departure (13–15)

II.Mount Sinai: Law (16–24)

A.Journey to Sinai (16–18)

B.Ten Commandments (19–20)

C.The Book of the Covenant (21–24)

III.Mount Sinai: Tabernacle (25–40)

A.Instructions for the tabernacle (25–31)

B.Rebellion and forgiveness (32–34)

C.Building the tabernacle (35–40)

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

Theology

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Authorship

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

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

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

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

Structureand Outline

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

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

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

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

III.The Joseph Story (Gen. 37–50)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Styleand Genre

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

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

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

Message

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

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

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

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

NewTestament Connections

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Genreand Historical Context

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

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

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

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

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

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

Purposeand Interpretation

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

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

Outlineand Structure

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

Whatyou have seen (past) (1:1–20)

Whatis now (present) (2:1–3:21)

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

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

Prologue(1:1–8)

Act1: Seven Oracles (1:9–3:22)

Act2: Seven Seals (6:1–17)

Act3: Seven Trumpets (8:1–9:21)

Act4: Seven Signs (12:1–14:20)

Act5: Seven Bowls (16:1–21)

Act6: Seven Visions (19:1–20:15)

Act7: Seven Prophecies (21:2–22:17)

Epilogue(22:18–21)

Thefollowing outline provides an overview of Revelation in ten stages:

I.Introduction (1:1–20)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

IX.God’s Ultimate Victory (19:6–22:5)

X.Conclusion (22:6–21)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Charactersand Themes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

By its title, Song of Songs claims to be the most sublime song of all. The history of its interpretation also reveals that it may be the most misunderstood song as well. The reader of this book is dazzled by its intensity and honest expression of desire for intimate relationship. No wonder that early theologians who thought that the body was only a temporary casing for the all-important spirit felt that this book could not be talking about what it appeared to be talking about. Thus, for example, when the woman describes the man as a sachet of myrrh lodged between her breasts (1:13), this had to be a reference to Christ spanning the OT and the NT (so Cyril of Alexandria). But over time this book could not be suppressed by such interpretive strategies. Today most readily acknowledge that Song of Songs is love poetry that articulates human desires as well as our joys and worries.

Genre, Structure, and Outline

As implied by the preceding paragraph, Song of Songs is not an allegory. It is love poetry, in which a man and a woman express their deepest longings and desires to each other. They want to be in each other’s passionate embrace. This book celebrates love between a man and a woman.

Some interpreters believe that Song of Songs is a drama or at least tells a story of a particular love relationship. Although there are almost as many different suggestions of a story as there are advocates of the so-called dramatic approach, two main types emerge. One approach believes that there are two characters, a lover and his beloved, and the plot entails their growing relationship, sometimes following the pattern of courtship, engagement, marriage, honeymoon, and so forth. Occasionally this plot is given a historical background, usually with Solomon as the man (thanks to the superscription in 1:1) and a woman who goes by the name of the “Shulammite” (6:13 [curiously, apparently a feminine form of the name “Solomon”]). On the other hand, other interpretations introduce yet a third character, an unnamed shepherd boy, who is the woman’s true love. Thus, the story is that of a love triangle. Solomon is trying or has succeeded in adding the woman to his harem, but she retains her true love toward the shepherd boy. Thus, Song of Songs is the story of true love’s triumph over power and wealth.

Other interpreters point out that if it is difficult to determine how many characters are in this supposed plot or the exact contour of the story, then interpreters must be reading too much into the book to make it work. After all, there is no narrator in the book providing narrative guidelines to the reader. Indeed, there are not even indications of who is speaking when (thus modern translations insert italicized text headings such as “Beloved,” “Lover,” and “Friends” to identify speakers).

Such interpreters argue that Song of Songs does not tell a story but rather is a kind of “love Psalter” containing a number of different love poems. In other words, it is an anthology, a collection, of love poems united by a consistency of character and imagery as well as the occasional recurrent refrain. The book is truly a “Song [composed] of [many] Songs.” The exact number of poems in this anthology can be debated and is unimportant for their interpretation. The important point is that readers do not force connections between poems that are not there. However, the following division, after the superscription (1:1) into twenty-three poems may not be far off the mark.

I. Superscription (1:1)

II. Poem 1 (1:2–4)

III. Poem 2 (1:5–6)

IV. Poem 3 (1:7–8)

V. Poem 4 (1:9–11)

VI. Poem 5 (1:12–14)

VII. Poem 6 (1:15–17)

VIII. Poem 7 (2:1–7)

IX. Poem 8 (2:8–17)

X. Poem 9 (3:1–5)

XI. Poem 10 (3:6–11)

XII. Poem 11 (4:1–7)

XIII. Poem 12 (4:8–9)

XIV. Poem 13 (4:10–5:1)

XV. Poem 14 (5:2–6:3)

XVI. Poem 15 (6:4–10)

XVII. Poem 16 (6:11–12)

XVIII. Poem 17 (6:13–7:10)

XIX. Poem 18 (7:11–13)

XX. Poem 19 (8:1–4)

XXI. Poem 20 (8:5–7)

XXII. Poem 21 (8:8–10)

XXIII. Poem 22 (8:11–12)

XXIV. Poem 23 (8:13–14)

Date and Authorship

The conclusion that Song of Songs is a collection of love poems has implications for the date and authorship of the book. It is true that the superscription (1:1) associates the book with Solomon, and this connection must be taken seriously because there is no indication that the superscription is not a part of the canonical final form of the book. In light of a similar superscription in the book of Proverbs, however, this does not mean that Solomon wrote the entire book or that it is about him. Indeed, Solomon’s track record in love is dubious both in the book (Song 8:11–12) and outside it (1Kings 11:1–13). Perhaps as in Proverbs, he is considered the fountainhead of the composition of the book, and like Psalms and Proverbs, the book came into existence over a lengthy period of time and as a result of several composers. If so, the final form bears the mark of a single editor who brought it all together at an unknown date within the period of the formation of the OT.

Theological Message

Song of Songs celebrates love between a man and a woman. It reminds the people of God that intimate relationship is a divine gift that should be enjoyed. Although joy is indeed the dominant note of the book, the reader is warned that love is a powerful emotion that has its disappointments (so begins the poem in 5:2–6:3). Accordingly, the woman makes sure that the young girls who are watching and looking at her understand that it is important not to hurry love (2:7; 3:5; 8:4).

But we must not read Song of Songs in isolation from the rest of the canon. This book describes the man and the woman in the garden as naked and enjoying each other. How can the reader not think of the garden of Eden? God created a man and a woman and established marriage as a source of mutual joy (Gen. 2:23–25). The next chapter, however, narrates the fall, where the rebellion against God results in alienation not only between God and Adam and Eve, but also between Adam and Eve. Their estrangement results in their efforts to cover themselves from the gaze of the other and their ejection from the garden. The poems of Song of Songs, then, may be seen as the story of the “already but not yet” redemption of sexuality.

Last, the broader canon frequently uses marriage as a metaphor of the relationship between God and his creatures (e.g., Ezek. 16; 23; Hos. 1–3). In other words, the more we learn about intimate marital relationships, the more we learn about our intimate relationship with God. Thus, Song of Songs may be read in a way that deepens our understanding of God and his love toward his people (cf. Eph. 5:21–33).

Continuing Significance

The opening chapters of Genesis describe human beings as creatures who were created for relationship, relationship with God to be sure, but also relationship with other people. Genesis 2:18–25 narrates the origin of the institution that formalizes the most intimate of human relationships, that between a man and a woman in marriage. The story continues in Gen. 3 on a tragic note when, because of sin, a barrier is erected between the man and the woman. Song of Songs poetically celebrates the redemption of the marriage relationship and encourages couples to grow closer to each other. The poems are not a how-to manual for courtship or intimate behavior, but they invite couples to cultivate their own love language and intimacies.

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

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

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

Authorshipand Composition

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

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

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

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

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

PrimevalHistory (Gen. 1–11)

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

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

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

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

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

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

Patriarchs(Gen. 12–50)

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

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

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

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

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

Liberationfrom Egypt (Exod. 1–18)

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

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

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

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

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

Sinai(Exod. 19:1–Num. 10:10)

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

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

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

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

WildernessJourney (Num. 10:11–36:13)

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

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

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

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

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

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

Moses’Farewell (Deuteronomy)

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

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

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

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

By its title, Song of Songs claims to be the most sublime song of all. The history of its interpretation also reveals that it may be the most misunderstood song as well. The reader of this book is dazzled by its intensity and honest expression of desire for intimate relationship. No wonder that early theologians who thought that the body was only a temporary casing for the all-important spirit felt that this book could not be talking about what it appeared to be talking about. Thus, for example, when the woman describes the man as a sachet of myrrh lodged between her breasts (1:13), this had to be a reference to Christ spanning the OT and the NT (so Cyril of Alexandria). But over time this book could not be suppressed by such interpretive strategies. Today most readily acknowledge that Song of Songs is love poetry that articulates human desires as well as our joys and worries.

Genre, Structure, and Outline

As implied by the preceding paragraph, Song of Songs is not an allegory. It is love poetry, in which a man and a woman express their deepest longings and desires to each other. They want to be in each other’s passionate embrace. This book celebrates love between a man and a woman.

Some interpreters believe that Song of Songs is a drama or at least tells a story of a particular love relationship. Although there are almost as many different suggestions of a story as there are advocates of the so-called dramatic approach, two main types emerge. One approach believes that there are two characters, a lover and his beloved, and the plot entails their growing relationship, sometimes following the pattern of courtship, engagement, marriage, honeymoon, and so forth. Occasionally this plot is given a historical background, usually with Solomon as the man (thanks to the superscription in 1:1) and a woman who goes by the name of the “Shulammite” (6:13 [curiously, apparently a feminine form of the name “Solomon”]). On the other hand, other interpretations introduce yet a third character, an unnamed shepherd boy, who is the woman’s true love. Thus, the story is that of a love triangle. Solomon is trying or has succeeded in adding the woman to his harem, but she retains her true love toward the shepherd boy. Thus, Song of Songs is the story of true love’s triumph over power and wealth.

Other interpreters point out that if it is difficult to determine how many characters are in this supposed plot or the exact contour of the story, then interpreters must be reading too much into the book to make it work. After all, there is no narrator in the book providing narrative guidelines to the reader. Indeed, there are not even indications of who is speaking when (thus modern translations insert italicized text headings such as “Beloved,” “Lover,” and “Friends” to identify speakers).

Such interpreters argue that Song of Songs does not tell a story but rather is a kind of “love Psalter” containing a number of different love poems. In other words, it is an anthology, a collection, of love poems united by a consistency of character and imagery as well as the occasional recurrent refrain. The book is truly a “Song [composed] of [many] Songs.” The exact number of poems in this anthology can be debated and is unimportant for their interpretation. The important point is that readers do not force connections between poems that are not there. However, the following division, after the superscription (1:1) into twenty-three poems may not be far off the mark.

I. Superscription (1:1)

II. Poem 1 (1:2–4)

III. Poem 2 (1:5–6)

IV. Poem 3 (1:7–8)

V. Poem 4 (1:9–11)

VI. Poem 5 (1:12–14)

VII. Poem 6 (1:15–17)

VIII. Poem 7 (2:1–7)

IX. Poem 8 (2:8–17)

X. Poem 9 (3:1–5)

XI. Poem 10 (3:6–11)

XII. Poem 11 (4:1–7)

XIII. Poem 12 (4:8–9)

XIV. Poem 13 (4:10–5:1)

XV. Poem 14 (5:2–6:3)

XVI. Poem 15 (6:4–10)

XVII. Poem 16 (6:11–12)

XVIII. Poem 17 (6:13–7:10)

XIX. Poem 18 (7:11–13)

XX. Poem 19 (8:1–4)

XXI. Poem 20 (8:5–7)

XXII. Poem 21 (8:8–10)

XXIII. Poem 22 (8:11–12)

XXIV. Poem 23 (8:13–14)

Date and Authorship

The conclusion that Song of Songs is a collection of love poems has implications for the date and authorship of the book. It is true that the superscription (1:1) associates the book with Solomon, and this connection must be taken seriously because there is no indication that the superscription is not a part of the canonical final form of the book. In light of a similar superscription in the book of Proverbs, however, this does not mean that Solomon wrote the entire book or that it is about him. Indeed, Solomon’s track record in love is dubious both in the book (Song 8:11–12) and outside it (1Kings 11:1–13). Perhaps as in Proverbs, he is considered the fountainhead of the composition of the book, and like Psalms and Proverbs, the book came into existence over a lengthy period of time and as a result of several composers. If so, the final form bears the mark of a single editor who brought it all together at an unknown date within the period of the formation of the OT.

Theological Message

Song of Songs celebrates love between a man and a woman. It reminds the people of God that intimate relationship is a divine gift that should be enjoyed. Although joy is indeed the dominant note of the book, the reader is warned that love is a powerful emotion that has its disappointments (so begins the poem in 5:2–6:3). Accordingly, the woman makes sure that the young girls who are watching and looking at her understand that it is important not to hurry love (2:7; 3:5; 8:4).

But we must not read Song of Songs in isolation from the rest of the canon. This book describes the man and the woman in the garden as naked and enjoying each other. How can the reader not think of the garden of Eden? God created a man and a woman and established marriage as a source of mutual joy (Gen. 2:23–25). The next chapter, however, narrates the fall, where the rebellion against God results in alienation not only between God and Adam and Eve, but also between Adam and Eve. Their estrangement results in their efforts to cover themselves from the gaze of the other and their ejection from the garden. The poems of Song of Songs, then, may be seen as the story of the “already but not yet” redemption of sexuality.

Last, the broader canon frequently uses marriage as a metaphor of the relationship between God and his creatures (e.g., Ezek. 16; 23; Hos. 1–3). In other words, the more we learn about intimate marital relationships, the more we learn about our intimate relationship with God. Thus, Song of Songs may be read in a way that deepens our understanding of God and his love toward his people (cf. Eph. 5:21–33).

Continuing Significance

The opening chapters of Genesis describe human beings as creatures who were created for relationship, relationship with God to be sure, but also relationship with other people. Genesis 2:18–25 narrates the origin of the institution that formalizes the most intimate of human relationships, that between a man and a woman in marriage. The story continues in Gen. 3 on a tragic note when, because of sin, a barrier is erected between the man and the woman. Song of Songs poetically celebrates the redemption of the marriage relationship and encourages couples to grow closer to each other. The poems are not a how-to manual for courtship or intimate behavior, but they invite couples to cultivate their own love language and intimacies.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.

In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).

Articles of Clothing

A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.

In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).

Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).

The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il  ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).

In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).

Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).

Special Functions of Clothing

According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).

Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).

Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).

Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.

Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).

Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.

In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).

Articles of Clothing

A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.

In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).

Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).

The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il  ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).

In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).

Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).

Special Functions of Clothing

According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).

Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).

Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).

Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.

Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).

Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.

In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).

Articles of Clothing

A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.

In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).

Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).

The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il  ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).

In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).

Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).

Special Functions of Clothing

According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).

Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).

Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).

Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.

Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

TheBeginning of Death

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

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

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

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

Deathin the Old Testament

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

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

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

Lifeafter Death in the Old Testament

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

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

Deathin the New Testament

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

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

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

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

Geography

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

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

Symbolism

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

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

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

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

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

Terminology

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

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

Three Theories on Dispensationalism

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In contrast to ascetics who view the physical as inferior tothe “spiritual” and self-serving hedonists who reduce sexto a physical commodity, Scripture has a high view of the sex act.Yet the sex act was created as an act of intimacy between a man and awoman within a marital relationship (Gen. 2:24). Marriage involvesgiving one’s whole person—body, soul, and spirit—toanother person (of the opposite sex) through a formal covenantratified by God. Nakedness symbolizes complete vulnerability andtransparency. Covenant creates the conditions for trust and intimacyto grow. Sex is an act whereby the two celebrate this spiritual unionthrough physical union.

Whilein certain cultural contexts God has at times condescended to allowvariations on monogamy, including polygamy and the taking ofconcubines (secondary wives; e.g., Gen. 30:3–6, 18), these werenever God’s created standard for sexual relations, which is amonogamous heterosexual relationship between one man and one woman(Gen. 2:24).

Paulinforms the unmarried that it is better to marry than to burn withsexual desire (1Cor. 7:8–9). By implication, marriage isthe appropriate context for fulfilling one’s sexual desire. Tohave sex outside the context of marriage is sexual immorality, sinceone has not given total allegiance—emotionally, socially,economically, and personally—to one’s partner. God’swill is that each one honors him by avoiding sexual immorality andexercising self-control over one’s body. Unrepentant sexualimmorality brings divine judgment (1Thess. 4:3–7; Heb.13:4). See also Sex, Sexuality.

The English verb “fornicate” comes from a Latinterm describing the vaulted or arched structure of a ceiling, seenespecially in the basem*nts of buildings. Because prostitutes in theancient world met clients under “fornicated” arches, thesexual usage of the term naturally followed. To fornicate was tovisit a brothel, in the first instance. Later the term acquired themore general sense of illicit sexual activity. Thus, in the KJV,words such as “fornication” and “fornicate”are chosen to translate the NT Greek term p*rneia, which refersgenerically to sexual sin. Adulterers, hom*osexuals, pedophiles, andadults engaged in extramarital affairs were guilty of p*rneia,regardless of more specific labels that may apply.

Genesis1:27 traces human sexuality back to the choice of God himself, whomade male and female human beings. He might have done otherwise, buthe created human beings as men and women, who complement each other’sunique characteristics. The command “Be fruitful and increasein number” (Gen. 1:28) presupposes an attraction between menand women, leading to sexual activity and consequent reproduction.Adam could therefore say of Eve, “This is now bone of my bonesand flesh of my flesh” (Gen. 2:23), given how closely herelates to her and vice versa. The two become “one flesh”through sexual activity, as Paul’s use of Gen. 2:24 makesclear. In 1Cor. 6:16 the apostle argues that men who consortwith prostitutes become one flesh with them, based on what Gen 2:24implies; in this sense, sexual activity unifies. Thus, from abiblical standpoint, there is no such thing as “casual sex.”

InEph. 5:22–33 Paul argues that an analogy exists between theoneness of flesh that husbands and wives experience and the union ofChrist with his bride, the church. Both relationships put servantleadership on display; and as such, a healthy marriage exposesfornication for the fraud that it is. Fornication divorces physicalunity from the multidimensional oneness that husbands and wives areprivileged to share.

Quiteapart from the physical defects of p*rneia—most evident in suchcases as hom*osexuality, bestial*ty, and pedophilia—it is alsodiseased at the social level. For these deviations are, of necessity,exploitative and sterile, and none of them could involve sacrificialleadership tending toward the holiness of husbands and wives. Theyare merely predatory. We therefore are not surprised to find theBible forbidding hom*osexuality (Lev. 18:22; Rom. 1:26–27),bestial*ty (Lev. 18:23), rape (Deut. 22:23–29), adultery (Exod.20:14), and various forms of sexual adventurism (e.g., 1Cor.6:18–20; 1Thess. 4:3–8), including extramaritalintercourse (Deut. 22:13–21).

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

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

Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.

In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).

Articles of Clothing

A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.

In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).

Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).

The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il  ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).

In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).

Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).

Special Functions of Clothing

According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).

Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).

Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).

Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.

Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).

All numbers in the original languages of the Bible arewritten using words, not numerals. Neither the biblical Hebrew northe Koine Greek writing system had distinct written numeral forms torepresent numbers. Preexilic Hebrew inscriptions record numberswritten either with words or in Egyptian hieratic number glyphs.During the exile, exposure to Aramaic resulted in the adoption of theAramaic script to write Hebrew, but there are no clear indicationsthat an Aramaic number system (as reflected in, e.g., the Elephantineinscriptions) was adopted. Hebrew later emulated Greek in assigningto the letters of the alphabet numerical values and so employing themto record numbers, although the practice of assigning numericalvalues to glyphs is also attested in pre-Hellenistic times. InMesopotamia, for example, the practice of assigning numerical valuesto characters from their syllabic writing system seems to haveexisted at least as far back as the eighth century BC. The earliestevidence of this practice in Hebrew dates to no earlier than themiddle of the second century BC, when it was used on Hasmonean coins.

Thevalue and importance of numbers was widely recognized throughout theancient world. Sophisticated mathematical texts are attested in bothMesopotamia and Egypt, although no such texts have been discoveredoriginating in ancient Israel. The use of hieratic numbers inpreexilic Israel suggests that mathematical knowledge may have beenimported, particularly from Egypt. The Akkadian language adapted fromSumerian a hybrid sexagesimal number system, which used cuneiformsymbols to represent numbers. Numbers were written in paired glyphs,one representing the values from 1 to 9, the second representing themultiples of 10 up to 50. For example, 59 was written by combiningthe glyph for 50 with that for 9. Larger numbers were then composedof sets of these paired glyphs. The impact of the sex-a-ges-i-malsystem can still be seen in the division of hours and minutes intosixty parts. Most other Near Eastern cultures, including that ofancient Egypt and Israel, used a decimal system.

Thedecimal system was also used in the Greek-speaking world, and theGreek language, since before the NT era, had employed letters torepresent numbers. The use of archaic letters that had otherwisedisappeared from general usage by NT times gave the Greek alphabettwenty-seven letters, which provided the basis for representingranges 1–9, 10–90, 100–900. Numbers wererepresented by adding letters together, so that the order of letterswas unimportant.

WhenHebrew started using letters to represent numbers, a similar schemewas adopted, although it necessarily stopped at 400 because theHebrew alphabet has only twenty-two letters. For some, this suggeststhat Hebrew may have appropriated the system from Greek, but the samesequence of values in earlier counting indicates that the associationof values 1–9, 10–90, 100–900 with the letters ofthe alphabet was itself not a Greek innovation.

NumberSymbolism

Numbersoften are used with symbolic significance in the Bible. Particularlyprominent are the numbers 7 and 12, together with variations scaledby powers of 10. Other numbers occur frequently and also appear tohave some symbolic significance, including 4, 40, and 1,000. A noteof warning is pertinent, however, because there is a danger both offinding number symbolism where there is none and of overlooking thesymbolic significance of numbers where it is appropriate.

Perhapsthe most prominent symbolic association in the Bible occurs with thenumber seven. Broadly speaking, seven denotes completeness,perfection, or consummation. The number first appears in the creationaccount in association with the first Sabbath, in which it is tied tocompletion and rest. Linked to this are the working week, whichconcluded with a Sabbath, the sabbatical year for the land (Lev.25:2–7), the duration of the major feasts over seven days(e.g., Passover [cf. Lev. 23:6, 34; Ezek. 45:21]), even the number ofyears Jacob worked for Leah and then Rachel (Gen. 29:15–30).God’s promise of comprehensive vengeance upon those who harmCain is reflected in the use of seven (Gen. 4:15; cf. Pss. 12:6;79:12; Prov. 6:31; Isa. 30:26). The idea that seven representscompleteness can be seen in the seventy nations recorded in Gen. 10and in the description of Yahweh as having seven eyes (Zech. 4:10).In the NT, the symbolic use of seven is expanded: it is used by Jesusin explaining unlimited forgiveness (Matt. 18:21–22) and mostextensively by the author of Revelation, where reference is made toseven churches (1:4, 11, 20), spirits (1:4; 3:1; 5:6), goldenlampstands (1:12; 2:1), stars (1:16; 2:1), seals (5:5; 6:1), eyes(5:6), angels (8:2, 6; 15:6, 7, 8; 16:1; 17:1; 21:9), trumpets (8:2,6), thunderclaps (10:3, 4), crowns (12:3), heads (12:3; 13:1; 17:3,7, 9), plagues (15:6, 8; 21:9), golden bowls (15:7; 16:1; 17:1),mountains (17:9), and kings (17:10).

Arisingout of the observations relating to the symbolic use of the numberseven are the manner in which its significance also applied torelated numbers such as 7×7 =49 (cf. Lev.25:8–55) and 7×10 =70 (cf. Exod. 24:1,9; Jer. 25:12; 29:10; Dan. 9:2, 24; Luke 10:1–17).

Thenext most significant number with symbolic associations is twelve. Inthe OT, the primary association is with the tribes of Israel, andthis association later develops to encompass God’s people intheir entirety. It is likely that such an association is deliberatelymade in Jesus’ choice of twelve apostles.

Thenumber ten is also associated with the practice of tithing, which wascommon throughout the ancient Near East. The number ten alone doesnot have a clear symbolic usage, although when a power of ten (e.g.,1,000 or 10,000) is used, these can represent any vast or unnumberedquantity (see “Large Numbers” below). Ten is also used incombination with other symbolic values to express the same symbolicnotion emphatically; for example, 70 (7×10) or 77(7×10 +7) become emphatic affirmations ofcompleteness, perfection, or consummation (e.g., Gen. 4:24; Matt.18:22).

Thenumber four appears to have some symbolic significance, perhaps dueto the typical enumeration of the four cardinal directions,suggesting geographical or cosmological entirety (cf. Isa. 11:12;Jer. 49:36; Zech. 6:5). For example, four rivers leave Eden to waterthe entire land (Gen. 2:10–14).

Thenumber forty appears frequently in association with long periods ofendurance, such as Moses on the mountain (forty days [Exod. 24:18]),the time in the wilderness (forty years [Exod. 16:35]), Elijah’sjourney to Horeb (forty days [1Kings 19:8]), Jesus’ timein the wilderness (forty days/nights [Matt. 4:2; Mark 1:13; Luke4:2]), and his time with his disciples following the resurrection(forty days [Acts 1:3]).

LargeNumbers

Somescholars have argued that the large numbers in the OT present aparticular problem in several places. Based on the figures in Num. 1,for example, there were 603,550 men of fighting age among those inthe exodus, suggesting a total population of between one and threemillion (not counting livestock). Taken at face value, this numberpresents some difficulties: based on estimates of Egyptianpopulation, it represents a very significant proportion of the entirepopulation of that country; taken in conjunction with the number offirstborn recorded in Num. 3:43, it implies a very large averagefamily size; it seems difficult to reconcile with the claim that theseven nations in the land of Canaan were greater than Israel (Deut.4:38; 7:1; 9:1–2); and the logistics of moving that many peoplewould pose significant problems.

However,if the observation made by Pharaoh in Exod. 1:9, that the Hebrewswere more numerous than the Egyptians, was even approximatelyaccurate, then a population of between one and two million would beappropriate. Nonetheless, various attempts have been made to mitigatethe perceived difficulties by suggesting approaches that interpretthe text in ways that result in significantly smaller populationestimates for the Israelites.

Thelargest single-number word used in the OT is rebabah, which is usedto represent large values greater than ten thousand but otherwiseoften lacks precision and is better understood to refer to a vastunnumbered multitude (e.g., Pss. 3:6; 91:7; Song 5:10). Similarly,the number one thousand can be used rhetorically without demandingmathematical precision (e.g., 2Pet. 3:8, which should not beunderstood to provide a mathematical equation). It is this latternumber that appears in the difficult passages in Numbers. The bestsolution to the problems lies in the meaning of the Hebrew term inquestion, ’elep (“thousand”). Several scholars havesuggested that ’elep can also refer to a military unit or someother group (cf. Num. 1:16). Although the precise numbers in questionare debated according to varying understandings of the sizes of thegroups, the best solutions put the total number of Israelites in theexodus at around thirty thousand.

Gematria

Gematriais a system for calculating numerical values for words by assigningspecific values to the letters of an alphabet. As noted above, thepractice was used for legitimate numerical notation in Greek and, insome periods, in Hebrew. Letters were assigned values based on theirorder within the alphabet, the first nine letters assigned values1–9, the next nine assigned values 10–90, and thesubsequent letters assigned multiples of 100.

Althoughnumerology of various forms, and in particular gematria, has formedthe basis of many misguided attempts to discover hidden meaningswithin the biblical text, there appear to be explicit uses ofgematria in Rev. 13:18 and, some suggest, in John 21:11. If thenumber 666 is an actual example of gematria, no consensus has beenreached over the identity of the referent.

Mostof the other supposed examples of gematria within the pages of theBible are unconvincing, largely because the texts wherein suchexamples are found make good sense without resorting to obscure anduncertain interpretations, and partly because it runs counter to thenotion that God speaks to make his will known (e.g., Deut. 29:29).

A biblical genealogy is a listing of names showing theinterrelationships of individuals, clans, or nations. They are foundmainly, though not exclusively, in the Pentateuch, Ezra-Nehemiah, andChronicles. The arrangement of names in such listings is most oftenforward in time, from ancestor to descendant (e.g., Ruth 4:18–22,tracing a family line down to David), and this is the genealogyproper. At other times, names are listed in the opposite direction,backward in time, from the individual to ancestor (e.g., Ezra 7:1–5,where Ezra’s ancestry is traced back to Aaron “the chiefpriest”), and this is, strictly speaking, a pedigree. Theunusually lengthy pedigree (even by biblical standards) of Ezra “thepriest” is an effective way to highlight his temple interestwhen he is first introduced to the reader. The pedigree of 1Chron.6:33–47 shows the impeccable Levitical credentials of Heman,Asaph, and Ethan, who served before the ark of the covenant under theleadership of David. Genealogical information is always supplied fora reason.

Typesof Genealogies

Thetwo main terms used in the OT are toledot (“genealogicalhistory”; e.g., Gen. 2:4; 5:1; 6:9; NIV: “account”)and yakhas (“genealogical record”; only in Neh. 7:5, butthe related verb, “to register by genealogy,” occurs inEzra 2// Neh. 7 and elsewhere). In Ezra-Nehemiah the supplyingof a credible genealogy is necessary for acceptance as an Israelite(Ezra 2:59–60) or for securing priestly privileges (Ezra2:61–63). The concern is not racial purity as such, but ratherIsrael’s theological integrity (Ezra 9:1–2). Thepejorative references to “genealogies” in 1Tim. 1:4and Titus 3:9 do not condemn the OT lists but instead reject theconcocted genealogies in the mythic speculations of Jewishintertestamental books such as Jubilees.

Lineageis almost invariably traced through the male line. Most often inbiblical narrative an individual is supplied only with a patronym(e.g., “Isaiah son of Amoz” [Isa. 1:1]), or sometimesthree generations are specified (e.g., “Bezalel son of Uri, theson of Hur” [Exod. 35:30]). In Exod. 6:16–20 theforeshortened genealogy of Aaron and Moses is not to be understood assaying that there were only four generations between them and Levi.

Somegenealogies involve ethnic and geographical relations—forexample, between the nations of the ancient world in Gen. 11, andbetween Israel and surrounding peoples in Gen. 19:37–38;25:1–4. In lists, the father-son relation can be broader thanimmediate descent and may refer to remote ancestors (grandson,great-grandson, etc.) (e.g., Ezra 5:1; cf. Zech. 1:1).

TheImportance of Genealogies

Genealogiesare an important feature of biblical storytelling. The modern readershould not simply leap over them, and the works of J.R.R.Tolkien show that genealogy is not dead in literary terms. When abiblical genealogy is supplied, it has a narratorial role. Itcontributes something essential to the presentation of the biblicalwriter. For example, 1Chron. 1 is not a bare listing of namesbut rather, beginning with Adam, provides a world context for thehistory of Israel that follows; and 1Chron. 2–9emphasizes the twelve-tribal structure of God’s people, thuspreventing the misapprehension that Chronicles is just a history ofthe southern kingdom of Judah. Also, lists are usually not justnames; they include thematically significant material contributing tothe overall message of the particular book—for example, thetechnological advances of Cain’s descendants told in Gen.4:17–22 and the military exploits recounted in 1Chron.5:18–22.

Theten-generation genealogy of Gen. 5 bridges the antediluvian and thedeluge eras. The repeated refrain “and he died” depictsthe reign of death over the human race. Another ten-generationgenealogy joins the flood generation to Abram (Gen. 11:10–26).In this case, the deleterious effect of sin on humans is shown by thegradual decrease in human life span. There is often an element ofschema in biblical genealogies (e.g., the limitation of generationsto ten). Genesis 5 displays the convention of the seventh generation,which is deemed worthy of special attention (Enoch). There is alsothe Bible’s delight in multiples of seven—for example,the seventy nations in Gen. 10, the 3×14generational schema in Matt. 1, and the seventy members in thepedigree of Christ in Luke 3:23–38. Hence, none of thesegenealogies should be understood as comprehensive in scope; rather,they are highly selective and stylized. Their purpose is to supportand underscore the writer’s theological message.

Becauseit is rare for females to be mentioned in biblical genealogies, whenthey are there is special significance—for example, Sarai inGen. 11:29: though barren, she will become the mother of the line ofpromise; Rebekah in Gen. 22:23: she will become the wife of Isaac;the daughters of Zelophehad in Num. 26:33: their story will beelaborated in Num. 27; 36; the five women in the genealogy of Jesus(Matt. 1): several of them are non-Israelites, suggesting that Jesuscomes as the Savior of the world.

The term “government” may refer to the philosophythat shapes a nation or people’s institutions, customs, andlaws or, more specifically, to actual offices and structures to enactthis philosophy. Generally speaking, government serves to bring orderand direction to a people. This can be accomplished through the ruleof one, or a few, or many. As a constituent portion of bringingorder, some sort of entity for enforcement and protection must becreated. This usually takes the form of a military or police force.

Thebiblical worldview emphasizes the rule of God over everything,inherent in his position as the Creator. Since, however, God didimbue humanity with authority over creation and with the capacity forrelationship, his government can find expression in the actions anddecisions of human beings (1Sam. 8:7–9; Rom. 13:1–4).The successful ruler will be the individual who understands his orher place before God and who desires to lead God’s people withhumility and justice (1Kings 3:7–9).

Beforethe Monarchy

Clan.The earliest forms of governmental relations apparently were in theextended family or clan. The progenitor of the clan normally was thepatriarch, who led several families, all of which were to some degreerelated to him. The patriarch was responsible for land allotments andmaintenance of the family’s spiritual life and well-being (Gen.13:8–9; 31:22–35; Job 1:4–5). He was responsiblefor forming contractual agreements under which the family functioned,in relation both to land acquisitions and to marriages (Gen.21:22–34; 24:1–11; 26:26–33). He alone decided towhom the patriarchy passed when he died, and his power was almostabsolute (Gen. 27), though there is some indication that God desireda husband’s first responsibility to be to his spouse ratherthan to his father (Gen. 2:24).

Tribe.Beyond the clan, the next larger societal unit was the tribe.Although tribes were for the most part still related genetically, thedistance of the relationship permitted the inclusion of persons fromoutside the family. This may have been the case with Caleb, who isidentified both as a member of the tribe of Judah (Num. 13:6) and asa descendant of the Kenizzites, who were Edomites (Gen. 36:9–11;Num. 32:12). If modern nomadic tribes are any indication, thegovernmental structure of the related tribes was a type ofconfederation coming together for defensive purposes. The decisionswould have been made by a group of elders from the various clans.Like the clan chief of the smaller structures, the tribal elderscould make covenants and were responsible for keeping order in thetribe (Deut. 21:19; Ruth 4:1–12; 2Sam. 5:3).

Duringthe period following the exodus and before the time of the judges,Israel’s tribal structure was maintained, though with a singleleader. The leadership of Moses and Joshua was in many ways aprecursor to the offices of both judge and king. The men hadconsiderable power, and opposition to their leadership often wasdealt with harshly (Num. 12; 16). Yet, their rule was establishedthrough presence of the Spirit of God rather than physical lineage.The weight of leading such a large body of people had itsdifficulties, and it is related that Moses delegated some of hisauthority to judges who rendered decisions for the people (Exod.18).

Judges.The period of the judges witnessed a devolution of sorts in thegovernmental structures of Israel. The relationship between thevarious tribes was somewhat strained, and it seems clear from thenarrative that no judge ever led more than a handful of tribes.Although these judges were like Moses and Joshua in that they wereimbued with power by the Spirit of God, their focus was almost solelymilitary in nature, and the everyday aspects of governance seem tohave been left to the individual tribes. There was little sense ofordered society, and lawlessness and anarchy seem to have been theorder of the day. In two cases, those of Gideon and Abimelek,attempts were made to found petty kingdoms (Judg. 8:22–23,30–31; 9:1–21). Similarly, Jephthah seems to haveestablished a minor kingdom east of the Jordan, in Gilead (Judg.11:6–11). However, these attempts were transitory in nature andlacked the stability that grows out of a unified identity. Indeed,one of the roles of the judges seems to have been to solidify thepeople’s resolve for permanent leadership in the form of amonarch, which they hoped would raise them to greatness and standingin the world (1Sam. 8:1–6).

TheMonarchy

Theperiod of the monarchy represented a strong centralized governmentinvested in the mind and decisions of a single man. The term “king”was applied symbolically to any great leader, but above all it wasapplied to God, to whom Israel’s throne rightfully belonged(1Chron. 28:5; 29:23; Ps. 2). With the office of the king camea bureaucracy designed to increase efficiency, but which sometimesinvolved corruption.

Establishingthe monarchy.The first ruler called “king” was Saul, son of Kish,though he is often referred to as a prince or a chieftain rather thana king (1Sam. 13:13–14). It is difficult to say whetherthis related specifically to the level of office that he possessed orif it was a sort of disparaging comparison to David, who was viewedby the biblical writer as a true king. As king, David took possessionof the great fortress of Jerusalem. In many ways, he combined theecclesiastical and the military headship of the nation through themovement of the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem and the purchase ofthe threshing floor for the temple. Solomon attempted to furtherbreak down the old tribal divisions by dividing the whole countryinto administrative districts (1Kings 4:7), not according totribal divisions, but instead after the pattern established duringthe Egyptian hegemony of Canaan that had existed several centuriesearlier. The kingdom was divided into two separate kingdoms at thedeath of Solomon, but for the people of God the monarchy had becomethe standard of government through which God ruled. This monarchialexpectation found expression in the messianic hope of Israel(Ezek.47).

Therole of the king.The chief duty of the king was to act as the commander in chief ofthe army. With the establishment of a monarchy, the people gained astanding army that could be kept in the field for protection of thenation (1Sam. 13:2). The king was also intimately connectedwith the religious organization of the people. He was considered acentral component of the cult, so that major moments in his life werecause for worship (Pss. 2; 45; 110). It is certain that the king,especially after David, performed priestly functions. David wore anephod (1Chron. 15:27), and Solomon addressed the people in thetemple (1Kings 8:14). Indeed, the coronation itself identifiedthe king as both priest and king (Ps. 110:4). The fact that Solomonbuilt the temple and played a significant role in its dedicationshows the intimate relation that the king had with the nationalsanctuary, which was attached to his palace. The king also served asjudge (1Kings 3:16–28; 7:7) over his people, and hedetermined the economic structures of the society, including taxes,monetary weights, and covenants with other nations. The king did nothold absolute authority, however, and like the rest of Israel, he wassubject to the law (Deut. 17:14–20).

Successorsand officers.Once the kingship had been established, the hereditary principlearose naturally. Saul’s son Ish-Bosheth maintained a smallkingship of northern tribes for some time after Saul’s death(2Sam. 2:8–10). Still, the king appears to have had theright to select which of his descendants would be his successor(1Kings 1). When the decision was made, the people oftenproclaimed their satisfaction at the result (1Kings 1:25;2Kings 14:21), and a ceremony of anointing took place.Sometimes the anointing was a private affair (2Kings 9:6), butthe presence of certain psalms related to the ceremony itselfsuggests that, generally speaking, it was a national event and timeof worship (Ps. 2:2).

Thebureaucracy that came with the king meant the installation of severalnew offices. The chief officer of the king was the commander of hisarmy (2Sam. 2:8; 8:16). Another high-ranking military officerwas the captain of the bodyguard, who was not placed under the ordersof the commander of the army (2Sam. 8:18; 23:22–23). Theking also had more domestic officers, such as the officer over thehousehold (2Kings 18:18), the court historian, the courtsecretary, various deputies and advisers, and the king’s friend(2Sam. 8:16–18; 1Kings 4:1–6).

Revenue.The means of sustaining the state varied by era and king. While it istrue that the king had his own flocks and land (1Sam. 8:15–17;1Chron. 27:25–28), he could also, depending on how stronghe was, raise revenue through gifts from vassals (1Kings 4:21;10:25) and through the spoils of war (2Chron. 27:5). Startingwith the control and regulation of trade routes during the reign ofSolomon, the king maintained a stream of revenue through taxation ofmerchants moving through the land and trade with other nations.

Afterthe Exile

Theperiod following the exile witnessed a transition in the governmentof Israel. Apart from a very short period from about 160 to 60 BC,Israel was under the control of foreign powers. These various empiresruled with a variety of methods, determined by their own philosophyof government.

Persianrule.The Persians established a rule based largely on a sort of benevolentdictatorship, though there are multiple accounts of vicious responsesto any notion of rebellion from its vassals. In 539 BC Cyruspermitted the Jews to return from their captivity in Babylon toJerusalem and showed them certain favors. One of his successors,Darius I (r. 522–486 BC), continued the liberal policy of Cyrustoward the Jews and played a major role in the rebuilding of thetemple at Jerusalem (Ezra 5:13–17; 6:1–15). He alsoorganized the Persian Empire to facilitate the easy collection oftribute from subject nations. He ultimately divided the kingdom intotwenty provinces ruled by governors, a system maintained through theremainder of his dynastic line. Another important development duringthis period was the increase in power of the Jewish priesthood. Withno Jewish monarchy in place, governmental power in Israel becameconcentrated in the office of the high priest.

Greekand Roman rule.Alexander the Great and his successors brought Hellenism into theJewish experience. His acquisition of power was distinctly differentbecause it was not simply a political one. Its cultural and spiritualinfluence was much more significant. The people were subjected to newlanguage, art, thought, and philosophy. The struggle that ensueddivided the Jewish population into competing groups, one dedicated tothe preservation of the old ways and one more receptive to theHellenistic life.

Thecoming of the Romans brought with it a more complex balance of power,with authority shifting between the high priest, vassal kingsappointed by the Romans, and Roman governors called “prefects”and “procurators.” Among the kings of this period, Herodthe Great was the most successful and important. Herod gained controlof the region with the help of Augustus Caesar and Marc Antony, beinginvested with the office by the Roman senate and then winning animportant military victory over Jerusalem in 37 BC. Herod was hatedby the Jews because of his pagan commitments, his cruelty, and hisdesire to Hellenize Judea. His children did not enjoy his success orhis power, however, and following his death Roman influence andintervention in Judea became more direct and significant.

Thepriestly class also held significant power in the office of the highpriest and in the Jewish high court, the Sanhedrin. The Sanhedrinaddressed issues such as legal procedure, verdicts, and decrees of apolitical nature and also dealt with questions relating to thetemple, priesthood, and sacrifices. The Sanhedrin was in manyrespects the highest political authority (although its control wasalways mitigated by Roman power and presence). It could deal withmost criminal cases, though its authority was limited in capitalcases.

TheRoman presence in the region was represented by the governance ofprefects and procurators. These governors were appointed by Rome overJudea after the removal of Archelaus in AD 6, and over all ofPalestine at the death of Herod Agrippa. Prefects and procuratorswere the highest power in their province, but they answered to thelegate and ultimately to Caesar. They lived primarily in Caesarea,but they traveled to Jerusalem for high festivals or in the case ofcivil unrest. They tended to have as little contact as possible withthe Jews unless their own personal interest demanded it. Decisionsconcerning everyday life were left to the Jewish authorities. WithRoman citizens living in their areas, the procurators had directinfluence; however, such citizens could go over the procurator’shead and appeal to Caesar if they did not receive the sentence thatthey desired.

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

OldTestament

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

NewTestament

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

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

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

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

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

Origins,Composition, and Constitution

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

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

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

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

Formand Function

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

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

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

Humanityin Pauline Thought

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

The quality of being not mortal, living forever. The OTcryptically mentions Enoch (Gen. 5:24) and Elijah (2Kings2:1–12) ascending into heaven without passing through death orSheol. Otherwise, mortality is presented as part of the universalhuman condition, a result of Adam and Eve’s disobedience (Gen.2:17; 5:1–32).

Eventually,two solutions were embraced. Some Jews appropriated the Hellenisticconcept of the immortal soul. But this is not clearly taught in theBible, which furthermore claims that only God has the power to bestowimmortality (e.g., Pss. 49; 73). The modern Western mind often viewsdeath as a sudden happening, the ceasing of brain functions, whereasother cultures regard dying as a process advancing from the moment ofbirth and continuing beyond the grave. In the creation story, Godwarns Adam that if he eats from the tree of the knowledge of good andevil, he will die that very day (Gen. 2:17). But despite eating fromthe tree, Adam lives on physically for almost a millennium (Gen.5:5), and so this sin-begotten death describes separation from God.Jesus will overcome this separation at the cross (Luke 23:43; cf.Matt. 10:28 par.). For those who trust this work—believe in hisname—death is already overcome because they are reconciled withGod. Life is no longer bound, as it were, to brain activity, butrather is unbound in the immortal being of God. By reconciling othersto God, Jesus is able to promise eternal life (John 3:15, 36; 5:24).Indeed, John writes his Gospel to advance this promise (20:31).

ThreeNT assertions need to be taken into account in ascertaining biblicalperspectives on immortality: (1)God is immortal (Rom. 1:23;1Tim. 1:17); (2)God alone is immortal (1Tim. 6:16);(3)God grants immortality to those who seek him (Rom. 2:7;1Cor. 15:53–54; 2Tim. 1:10). These assertions areimportant in distinguishing immortality from the idea of thecontinued existence of some part of the human makeup after the deathof the body. The word “immortality” should be reserved torefer to the existence of body and soul together for eternity. Humanbeings, therefore, do not intrinsically possess immortality; it mustbe granted by God.

Thisdistinction, however, does not in any way negate the abundantbiblical evidence that the human soul or spirit continues in someform after the death of the body. In the OT, that continuation isusually conceived of as a vague, shadowy existence in a place called“Sheol.” In the NT, for the Christian, that continuationis envisioned as being in the presence of Christ (2Cor. 5:8;Phil. 1:23). But immortality is the eternal life of body and soultogether. Whatever view one takes of the eternal state of the wicked,their existence should not be regarded as one of immortality. Rather,it is the “second death” (Rev. 21:8).

The quality of being not mortal, living forever. The OTcryptically mentions Enoch (Gen. 5:24) and Elijah (2Kings2:1–12) ascending into heaven without passing through death orSheol. Otherwise, mortality is presented as part of the universalhuman condition, a result of Adam and Eve’s disobedience (Gen.2:17; 5:1–32).

Eventually,two solutions were embraced. Some Jews appropriated the Hellenisticconcept of the immortal soul. But this is not clearly taught in theBible, which furthermore claims that only God has the power to bestowimmortality (e.g., Pss. 49; 73). The modern Western mind often viewsdeath as a sudden happening, the ceasing of brain functions, whereasother cultures regard dying as a process advancing from the moment ofbirth and continuing beyond the grave. In the creation story, Godwarns Adam that if he eats from the tree of the knowledge of good andevil, he will die that very day (Gen. 2:17). But despite eating fromthe tree, Adam lives on physically for almost a millennium (Gen.5:5), and so this sin-begotten death describes separation from God.Jesus will overcome this separation at the cross (Luke 23:43; cf.Matt. 10:28 par.). For those who trust this work—believe in hisname—death is already overcome because they are reconciled withGod. Life is no longer bound, as it were, to brain activity, butrather is unbound in the immortal being of God. By reconciling othersto God, Jesus is able to promise eternal life (John 3:15, 36; 5:24).Indeed, John writes his Gospel to advance this promise (20:31).

ThreeNT assertions need to be taken into account in ascertaining biblicalperspectives on immortality: (1)God is immortal (Rom. 1:23;1Tim. 1:17); (2)God alone is immortal (1Tim. 6:16);(3)God grants immortality to those who seek him (Rom. 2:7;1Cor. 15:53–54; 2Tim. 1:10). These assertions areimportant in distinguishing immortality from the idea of thecontinued existence of some part of the human makeup after the deathof the body. The word “immortality” should be reserved torefer to the existence of body and soul together for eternity. Humanbeings, therefore, do not intrinsically possess immortality; it mustbe granted by God.

Thisdistinction, however, does not in any way negate the abundantbiblical evidence that the human soul or spirit continues in someform after the death of the body. In the OT, that continuation isusually conceived of as a vague, shadowy existence in a place called“Sheol.” In the NT, for the Christian, that continuationis envisioned as being in the presence of Christ (2Cor. 5:8;Phil. 1:23). But immortality is the eternal life of body and soultogether. Whatever view one takes of the eternal state of the wicked,their existence should not be regarded as one of immortality. Rather,it is the “second death” (Rev. 21:8).

There are few subjects more prominent in the Bible than sin;hardly a page can be found where sin is not mentioned, described, orportrayed. As the survey that follows demonstrates, sin is one of thedriving forces of the entire Bible.

Sinin the Bible

OldTestament.Sin enters the biblical story in Gen. 3. Despite God’scommandment to the contrary (2:16–17), Eve ate from the tree ofthe knowledge of good and evil at the prompting of the serpent. WhenAdam joined Eve in eating the fruit, their rebellion was complete.They attempted to cover their guilt and shame, but the fig leaveswere inadequate. God confronted them and was unimpressed with theirattempts to shift the blame. Judgment fell heavily on the serpent,Eve, and Adam; even creation itself was affected (3:17–18).

Inthe midst of judgment, God made it clear in two specific ways thatsin did not have the last word. First, God cryptically promised toput hostility between the offspring of the serpent and that of thewoman (Gen. 3:15). Although the serpent would inflict a severe blowupon the offspring of the woman, the offspring ofthe womanwould defeat the serpent. Second, God replaced the inadequatecovering of the fig leaves with animal skins (3:21). The implicationis that the death of the animal functioned as a substitute for Adamand Eve, covering their sin.

InGen. 4–11 the disastrous effects of sin and death are on fulldisplay. Not even the cataclysmic judgment of the flood was able toeradicate the wickedness of the human heart (6:5; 8:21). Humansgathered in rebellion at the tower of Babel in an effort to make aname for themselves and thwart God’s intention for them toscatter across the earth (11:1–9).

Inone sense, the rest of the OT hangs on this question: How will a holyGod satisfy his wrath against human sin and restore his relationshipwith human beings without compromising his justice? The short answeris: through Abraham and his offspring (Gen. 12:1–3), whoeventually multiplied into the nation of Israel. After God redeemedthem from their slavery in Egypt (Exod. 1–15), he brought themto Sinai to make a covenant with them that was predicated onobedience (19:5–6). A central component of this covenant wasthe sacrificial system (e.g., Lev. 1–7), which God provided asa means of dealing with sin. In addition to the regular sacrificesmade for sin throughout the year, God set apart one day a year toatone for Israel’s sins (Lev. 16). On this Day of Atonement thehigh priest took the blood of a goat into the holy of holies andsprinkled it on the mercy seat as a sin offering. Afterward he took asecond goat and confessed “all the iniquities of the people ofIsrael, and all their transgressions, all their sins, putting them onthe head of the goat, and sending it away into the wilderness....The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to a barrenregion; and the goat shall be set free in the wilderness” (Lev.16:21–22 NRSV). In order for the holy God to dwell with sinfulpeople, extensive provisions had to be made to enable fellowship.

Despitethese provisions, Israel repeatedly and persistently broke itscovenant with God. Even at the highest points of prosperity under thereign of David and his son Solomon, sin plagued God’s people,including the kings themselves. David committed adultery and murder(2Sam. 11:1–27). Solomon had hundreds of foreign wivesand concubines, who turned his heart away from Yahweh to other gods(1Kings 11:1–8). Once the nation split into two (Israeland Judah), sin and its consequences accelerated. Idolatry becamerampant. The result was exile from the land (Israel in 722 BC, Judahin 586 BC). But God refused to give up on his people. He promised toraise up a servant who would suffer for the sins of his people as aguilt offering (Isa. 52:13–53:12).

AfterGod’s people returned from exile, hopes remained high that thegreat prophetic promises, including the final remission of sins, wereat hand. But disillusionment quickly set in as the returnees remainedunder foreign oppression, the rebuilt temple was but a shell ofSolomon’s, and a Davidic king was nowhere to be found. Beforelong, God’s people were back to their old ways, turning awayfrom him. Even the priests, who were charged with the administrationof the sacrificial system dealing with the sin of the people, failedto properly carry out their duties (Mal. 1:6–2:9).

NewTestament.During the next four hundred years of prophetic silence, the longingfor God to finally put away the sins of his people grew. At last,when the conception and birth of Jesus were announced, it wasrevealed that he would “save his people from their sins”(Matt. 1:21). In the days before the public ministry of Jesus, Johnthe Baptist prepared the way for him by “preaching a baptism ofrepentance for the forgiveness of sins” (Luke 3:3). Whereasboth Adam and Israel were disobedient sons of God, Jesus proved to bethe obedient Son by his faithfulness to God in the face of temptation(Matt. 2:13–15; 4:1–11; 26:36–46; Luke 3:23–4:13;Rom. 5:12–21; Phil. 2:8; Heb. 5:8–10). He was also theSuffering Servant who gave his life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45;cf. Isa. 52:13–53:12). On the cross Jesus experienced the wrathof God that God’s people rightly deserved for their sin. Withhis justice fully satisfied, God was free to forgive and justify allwho are identified with Christ by faith (Rom. 3:21–26). Whatneither the law nor the blood of bulls and goats could do, JesusChrist did with his own blood (Rom. 8:3–4; Heb. 9:1–10:18).

Afterhis resurrection and ascension, Jesus’ followers beganproclaiming the “good news” (gospel) of what Jesus didand calling to people, “Repent and be baptized, every one ofyou, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins”(Acts 2:38). As people began to experience God’s forgiveness,they were so transformed that they forgave those who sinned againstthem (Matt. 6:12; 18:15–20; Col. 3:13). Although believerscontinue to struggle with sin in this life (Rom. 8:12–13; Gal.5:16–25), sin is no longer master over them (Rom. 6:1–23).The Holy Spirit empowers them to fight sin as they long for the newheaven and earth, where there will be no sin, no death, and no curse(Rom. 8:12–30; Rev. 21–22).

Aseven this very brief survey of the biblical story line from Genesisto Revelation shows, sin is a fundamental aspect of the Bible’splot. Sin generates the conflict that drives the biblical narrative;it is the fundamental “problem” that must be solved inorder for God’s purposes in creation to be completed.

Definitionand Terminology

Definitionof sin. Althoughno definition can capture completely the breadth and depth of theconcept of sin, it seems best to regard sin as a failure to conformto God’s law in thought, feeling, attitude, word, action,orientation, or nature. In this definition it must be remembered thatGod’s law is an expression of his perfect and holy character,so sin is not merely the violation of an impersonal law but rather isa personal offense against the Creator. Sin cannot be limited toactions. Desires (Exod. 20:17; Matt. 5:27–30), emotions (Gen.4:6–7; Matt. 5:21–26), and even our fallen nature ashuman beings (Ps. 51:5; Eph. 2:1–3) can be sinful as well.

Terminology.TheBible uses dozens of terms to speak of sin. Neatly classifying themis not easy, as there is significant overlap in the meaning and useof the various terms. Nonetheless, many of the terms fit in one ofthe following four categories.

1.Personal. Sin is an act of rebellion against God as the creator andruler of the universe. Rather than recognizing God’sself-revelation in nature and expressing gratitude, humankindfoolishly worships the creation rather than the Creator (Rom.1:19–23). The abundant love, grace, and mercy that God shows tohumans make their rebellion all the more stunning (Isa. 1:2–31).Another way of expressing the personal nature of sin is ungodlinessor impiety, which refers to lack of devotion to God (Ps. 35:16; Isa.9:17; 1Pet. 4:18).

2.Legal. A variety of words portray sin in terms drawn from thelawcourts. Words such as “transgression” and “trespass”picture sin as the violation of a specific command of God or thecrossing of a boundary that God has established (Num. 14:41–42;Rom. 4:7, 15). When individuals do things that are contrary to God’slaw, they are deemed unrighteous or unjust (Isa. 10:1; Matt. 5:45;Rom. 3:5). Breaking the covenant with God is described as violatinghis statutes and disobeying his laws (Isa. 24:5). The result isguilt, an objective legal status that is present whenever God’slaw is violated regardless of whether the individual subjectivelyfeels guilt.

3.Moral. In the most basic sense, sin is evil, the opposite of what isgood. Therefore, God’s people are to hate evil and love what isgood (Amos 5:14–15; Rom. 12:9). Similarly, Scripture contraststhe upright and the wicked (Prov. 11:11; 12:6; 14:11). One could alsoinclude here the term “iniquity,” which is used to speakof perversity or crookedness (Pss. 51:2; 78:38; Isa. 59:2). Frequentmention is also made of sexual immorality as an especially grievousdeparture from God’s ways (Num. 25:1; Rom. 1:26–27;1Cor. 5:1–11).

4.Cultic. In order for a person to approach a holy God, that individualhad to be in a state of purity before him. While a person couldbecome impure without necessarily sinning (e.g., a menstruating womanwas impure but not sinful), in some cases the term “impurity”clearly refers to a sinful state (Lev. 20:21; Isa. 1:25; Ezek.24:13). The same is true of the term “unclean.” Althoughit is frequently used in Leviticus to speak of ritual purity, inother places it clearly refers to sinful actions or states (Ps. 51:7;Prov. 20:9; Isa. 6:5; 64:6).

Metaphors

Inaddition to specific terms used for “sin,” the Bible usesseveral metaphors or images to describe it. The following four areamong the more prominent.

Missingthe mark.In both Hebrew and Greek, two of the most common words for “sin”have the sense of missing the mark. But this does not mean that sinis reduced to a mistake or an oversight. The point is not that aperson simply misses the mark of what God requires; instead, it isthat he or she is aiming for the wrong target altogether (Exod. 34:9;Deut. 9:18). Regardless of whether missing the mark is intentional ornot, the individual is still responsible (Lev. 4:2–31; Num.15:30).

Departingfrom the way.Sin as departing from God’s way is especially prominent in thewisdom literature. Contrasts are drawn between the way of therighteous and the way of the wicked (Ps. 1:1, 6; Prov. 4:11–19).Wisdom is pictured as a woman who summons people to walk in her ways,but fools ignore her and depart from her ways (Prov. 9:1–18).Those who do not walk in God’s ways are eventually destroyed bytheir own wickedness (Prov. 11:5; 12:26; 13:15).

Adultery.Since God’s relationship with his people is described as amarriage (Isa. 62:4–5; Ezek. 16:8–14; Eph. 5:25–32),it is not surprising that the Bible describes their unfaithfulness asadultery. The prophet Hosea’s marriage to an adulterous womanvividly portrays Israel’s unfaithfulness to Yahweh (Hos. 1–3).When the Israelites chase after other gods, Yahweh accuses them ofspiritual adultery in extremely graphic terms (Ezek. 16:15–52).When Christians join themselves to a prostitute or participate inidolatry, they too are engaged in spiritual adultery (1Cor.6:12–20; 10:1–22).

Slavery.Sin is portrayed as a power that enslaves. The prophets make it clearthat Israel’s bondage to foreign powers is in fact a picture ofits far greater enslavement to sin (Isa. 42:8; 43:4–7;49:1–12). Paul makes a similar point when he refers to thosewho do not know Christ as slaves to sin, unable to do anything thatpleases God (Rom. 6:1–23; 8:5–8). Sin is a cosmic powerthat is capable of using even the law to entrap people in its snare(Rom. 7:7–25).

Scopeand Consequences

Sindoes not travel alone; it brings a large collection of baggage alongwith it. Here we briefly examine its scope and consequences.

Scope.The stain of sin extends to every part of the created order. As aresult of Adam’s sin, the ground was cursed to resist humanefforts to cultivate it, producing thorns and thistles (Gen.3:17–18). The promised land is described as groaning under theweight of Israel’s sin and in need of Sabbath rest (2Chron.36:21; Jer. 12:4); Paul applies the same language to all creation aswell (Rom. 8:19–22).

Sinaffects every aspect of the individual: mind, heart, will, emotions,motives, actions, and nature (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Jer. 17:9; Rom.3:9–18). Sometimes this reality is referred to as “totaldepravity.” This phrase means not that people are as sinful asthey could be but rather that every aspect of their lives is taintedby sin. As a descendant of Adam, every person enters the world as asinner who then sins (Rom. 5:12–21). Sin also pollutes societalstructures, corrupting culture, governments, nations, and economicmarkets, to name but a few.

Consequences.Since the two greatest commandments are to love God and to love one’sneighbor as oneself (Matt. 22:34–40), it makes sense that sinhas consequences on both the vertical and the horizontal level.Vertically, sin results in both physical and spiritual death (Gen.2:16–17; Rom. 5:12–14). It renders humanity guilty inGod’s court of law, turns us into God’s enemies, andsubjects us to God’s righteous wrath (Rom. 1:18; 3:19–20;5:6–11). On the horizontal level, sin causes conflict betweenindividuals and harms relationships of every kind. It breedsmistrust, jealousy, and selfishness that infect even the closestrelationships.

Conclusion

Nosubject is more unpleasant than sin. But a proper understanding ofsin is essential for understanding the gospel of Jesus Christ. As thePuritan Thomas Watson put it, “Until sin be bitter, Christ willnot be sweet.”

In biblical and systematic theology, “inspiration”is one of several descriptions of God’s involvement in theproduction of Scripture. It is not an exhaustive description of themany ways in which divine revelation is mediated.

Takenas a description of “all Scripture” (as in 2Tim.3:16), inspiration must necessarily encompass such diverse modes ofrevelation as words audibly spoken or dictated by God and writtendown by humans (i.e., dictation: “the Lord said to Moses,”“thus says the Lord”), words spoken by angels, texts inwhich a divine or angelic voice is entirely obscured by the voice andidentity of the human author (e.g., the letters of Paul), and, in thevast majority of cases, texts that are essentially anonymous,invoking no human author or divine author in particular. Moreover,any catalog of divinely inspired texts must include not only directquotations of God’s speech but also occasional letters (the NTEpistles), prayers directed to God by humans (the Psalter), divineoracles given through prophets, the results of historical research(e.g., Luke 1:1–4; 1Kings 14:19), and anthological textsthat were collected and edited over a long period of time, often byunnamed individuals or groups of individuals.

Thus,the inspiration of Scripture must be regarded as a concept that isapplied in the broadest possible way to the materials of Scripture.While the doctrine of inspiration constitutes a strong statementconcerning the authority and divine authorship of Scripture, it mustremain highly flexible with regard to the particular modes andliterary products of divine revelation in Scripture.

God-Breathed(theopneustos)in 2 Timothy 3:16

Theidea of divine inspiration is stated most clearly in 2Tim.3:16–17: “All Scripture is God-breathed [theopneustos]and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training inrighteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equippedfor every good work.” Here, the fact of divine inspirationserves the apostle’s interest in the authority and relevance ofScripture, especially as Scripture undergirds Timothy’sreligious education (2Tim. 3:14–15). This sole biblicaluse of the term theopneustos says little about how inspiration isaccomplished, and the emphasis is entirely on the consequences of thefact. Because it is inspired, all Scripture is useful andauthoritative for a variety of purposes.

Insome older English translations, the key term, theopneustos, wastranslated as “inspired,” following the ancient traditionof rendering the term in Latin as divinitus inspirata. Strictlyspeaking, “inspiration” is not a biblical term. In oneclassic Protestant evangelical exposition of the text and doctrine,B.B. Warfield noted that the Greek word denotes not so much a“breathing in” as a “breathing out” on God’spart. Scripture is not simply a container into which God has breathedhis word (so that Scripture merely “contains” God’sword), nor is Scripture only “inspiring,” in the sensethat it works an effect on the reader (taking theopneustos in anactive rather than a passive sense: “God-breathing”rather than “God-breathed”). Scripture is not the productof inspiration, as if produced by inspired authors but not itselfinspired. Rather than all these things, it is most correct to saythat Scripture is, in the strictly literal sense of the word,“expired”—breathed out by God himself. This view ofthe matter is reflected in, among other places, the NIV translationof theopneustos as “God-breathed.”

Thetranslation by the NIV—“all Scripture is God-breathed andis useful...”—takes theopneustos as agrammatical predicate. Others have suggested that theopneustos can beunderstood attributively: “all God-breathed Scripture isuseful.” This interpretation remains a minority position,especially among evangelical scholars, both on grammatical groundsand because it implies a distinction between inspired and noninspiredScriptures. There is little other evidence for such a notion in theNT.

Theapplication of the notion of inspiration to the whole of theChristian canon (OT and NT) inevitably involves some extension of theoriginal meaning of 2Tim. 3:16. By no account were the NTwritings either composed or collected prior to the writing of2Timothy, and the final shape of the Christian OT canon mayalso have been undecided at the time 2Tim. 3:16 was written. Inpostbiblical Christian theology, however, what is said of “allScripture” (pāsa graphē) in 2Tim. 3:16 isapplied to all Christian Scripture, regardless of what was directlyin view when the verse was written. It is likely that by “allScripture,” the apostle meant nothing more than the ChristianOT—that is, the books that lay before Timothy as he waseducated in the faith from his infancy (2Tim. 3:14–15).In systematic theology, the application of inspiration and otherdescriptors of “Scripture” to the NT writings owes muchto a comment in 2Pet. 3:16 that places the letters of Paul inthe same class as “the other Scriptures” (tas loipasgraphas).

Why“Inspiration”?

Thesheer diversity of the modes of revelation described in the Bibleraises a question: Why is “inspiration” (or, as Warfieldargued, “expiration” or “breathing out”) aparticularly appropriate description of God’s involvement inthe production of the scriptural text? At the root of theopneustos,Greek pneuma (as well as its Hebrew cognate, ruakh) denotes severalrelated concepts ranging from “wind” or “breath”to “spirit,” as in “the Holy Spirit.” It isfrom this complex of meanings that the relevance of theopneustos isevident.

Physiologically,several of the speech organs are also organs of respiration, so thatthe spoken word can be thought of as a kind of breathing, as in Acts9:1: “Saul was still breathing out [empneuōn] murderousthreats against the Lord’s disciples.” To speak ofScripture as “God-breathed,” then, is simply to identifyit as God’s spoken utterance or word, as in the many biblicaltexts that introduce a scriptural utterance as “the word of theLord” or with the phrase “thus says the Lord.” Tothe extent that 2Tim. 3:16 has in view the physiologicaldimension of “breathing,” it extends these explicitstatements of divine speaking to the whole of Scripture. In onesense, theopneustos is an anthropomorphism: God does not speak as ahuman, with lungs, throat, and mouth. Scripture is not God-breathedas opposed to being written by humans; the figurative breathing orspeaking of God does not circumvent other processes of textualproduction. Again, the idea of inspiration pertains more to theauthority of Scripture as revelation than to the mode of themediation of God’s word.

Aswith the concept of “inspiration” itself, to speak ofScripture as the “word of God” specifies its divineauthority without exhaustively describing how that word is mediatedto the human author who then commits it to writing. To speak ofScripture as the “breathing out” of God is to invoke thebroader concept of God’s (anthropomorphic) breath, and thus toplace scriptural production among the other phenomena that are sodescribed. These include the divine creation of life (Gen. 2:7; Job33:4; Ezek. 37:5) and the cosmos (Ps. 33:6), divine judgment anddestruction (Job 4:9; Isa. 30:33; 2Thess. 2:8), the impartationof divine wisdom (Job 32:8), the impartation of the Holy Spirit (John20:22), and the continuing action of God in creation (Exod. 15:10;Job 37:10; Isa. 40:7). In contrast to the living God of Israel, theidols lack breath (ruakh) and are therefore false gods (Jer. 10:14).

Equallyimportant as the anthropomorphic description of God’s role asexhalation or speaking is the fact that pneuma refers not only tobodily breathing but also to the spirit of God—that is, theHoly Spirit. The inspiration of scriptural revelation is theparticular work of the Holy Spirit, as comes to light particularly in2Pet. 1:20–21: “You must understand that noprophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s owninterpretation of things. For prophecy never had its origin in thehuman will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they werecarried along by the Holy Spirit.” Unlike 2Tim. 3:16,this verse gives a description of the mechanism by which God isinvolved in scriptural production: the Holy Spirit “carriesalong” humans speaking from God. Again, however, if this is tobe taken as a description of the entirety of the Christian Bible, itmust encompass a wide variety of literary phenomena.

Asin 2 Tim. 3:16, the emphasis is on the authority and divine origin ofScripture rather than on the worldly history of the Bible. Like theadjective “God-breathed,” the Holy Spirit’s“carrying along” of the prophets is figurative andanthropomorphic, and the expression leaves many questions unansweredregarding the mode of revelation. Nevertheless, the specific mentionof the role of the Holy Spirit as the divine agent of scripturalproduction sheds light on the term theopneustos in 2Tim. 3:16.This is consistent with the citation formula in Acts 4:25, whichquotes Ps. 2:1–2 by saying, “You [God] spoke by the HolySpirit through the mouth of your servant, our father David.”This verse highlights several facets of the notion of the inspirationof Scripture: its character as divine speech, the agency of the HolySpirit, and the concurrence of divine and human authorship.

The act of advocating before the powerful on someone’sbehalf (Gen. 23:8–9), especially turning to God in prayer toseek God’s favor for others in crisis (2Sam. 12:16).While it is a prerogative of prophets (Gen. 20:7; Num. 12; Amos7:1–6), priests (Ezra 6:9–10), and kings (1Chron.21:17; 2Chron. 30:18; Jer. 26:19), intercession is a ministrythat belongs to all the people of God (Acts 12:5; Eph. 6:18; 1Tim.2:1; James 5:16).

OldTestament

ReflectingGod’s own deliberative process (Gen. 1:26–27; 2:18), ourcreation in God’s image implies and makes possible our genuineconversation, participation, and even disputation with God. Abiblical understanding of God’s rule accommodates thisdivine-human dialogue and the intertwined roles of both parties.People request intercession for themselves (1Kings 13:6; Acts8:24), but Scripture highlights God’s initiative.

InGen. 18 God invites (even provokes) Abraham’s intercession byconfiding in Abraham, reviewing the divine promises, and disclosingthe guilt and impending doom of Sodom and Gomorrah. On behalf ofrighteous persons who may live there, Abraham appeals boldly to God’sown “justice” (mishpat) in distinguishing the innocentfrom the guilty, and he successfully negotiates God’s pledge tospare the city if even ten righteous persons can be found there.Without disputing the allegations of wickedness, Abraham puts God’sjust response on the table as well.

Similarly,in Exod. 32 God informs Moses of the Israelites’ sin with thegolden calf and his own intention to destroy them and start over withMoses. In response, Moses intercedes, arguing that God’sdeliverance of Israel, and the likelihood of its being misconstruedby Egypt, should trump divine anger. Moses urges a different courseof action: turn from anger, relent, and do not bring the announceddisaster. The destruction of Israel would be inconsistent with God’sown commitment to multiply the people of Israel and give them theland as their inheritance (cf. Num. 14:13–29). The issue forMoses is not only Israel’s sin but also the rightness of God’sresponse in faithfulness to his purposes.

InJob’s intercession for his friends, God dictates the entireprocess, directing the friends to make offerings and assigning Jobthe task of interceding for them. God makes his own vindication thecentral issue: Eliphaz and friends have not said “the truth”(nekonah) of God, as Job had (Job 42:7–10).

Thesethree narratives highlight God’s initiative and make God’scharacter the grounds for intercession. They also introduce thepotential pain borne by the intercessor. For example, Mosesdramatizes his passionate concern for God’s cause by fallingdown before God and lying prostrate forty days and nights (Deut.9:13–29). He so identifies his own destiny with Israel’sas to offer himself as “atonement,” saying, “Pleaseforgive their sin—but if not, then blot me out of the book youhave written” (Exod. 32:32). This anticipates later prophets’participation in the sorrow of God and the pain of the people’sseparation from God (Jer. 15; cf. Luke 13:34–35; 19:41–44).

NewTestament

Inthe Gospels, Jesus heals by command, without explicit reference tointercession, and in this way remarkably transcends the OT prophets(1Kings 17:19–21). Although he does ask his Father toforgive his crucifiers (Luke 23:34), the Gospels emphasize Jesus’intercession for his disciples, such as for Simon Peter to surviveSatan’s assaults on his faith (22:31–32). John 17comprises an extended intercession of Jesus for hisdisciples—significantly, that the Father will protect them in ahostile world. Moreover, Christ promises to acknowledge faithfuldisciples before the Father (Matt. 10:32), an action formally closeto intercession, and that Christ performs as mediator of the Father’skingdom and salvation.

Paul’sprayer for his fellow Israelites to be saved is fueled by anguishover their unbelief (Rom. 9:1–3; 10:1–4). Mirroring thisis “the pressure of concern” he feels for all thechurches and for the welfare of their members (2Cor. 11:28–29),hence the prominent role of prayer in Paul’s ministry (see thethanksgivings that open his letters [e.g., Phil. 1:3–11]).Intercession perse, as prayer that others be spared ordelivered from crisis, is seen in the churches’ prayers forPaul’s deliverance from prison and death (Phil. 1:19; 2Thess.3:2–3; cf. Rom. 15:31).

TheNT extends the Gospel portrayals to reveal Christ as our heavenlyintercessor, a role made possible by the cross and resurrection. InRom. 8:34–39 Christ’s death, resurrection, and reign “atthe right hand of God” ground Paul’s confidence thatChrist’s intercession assures victory over condemnation and allopposition. The work of Christ our high priest (Heb. 7:25) may besummed up as intercession, echoing Isa. 53:12. Accordingly, “JesusChrist the Righteous One” not only advocates before the Fatherfor the forgiveness of our sins but also is their atoning sacrifice(1John 2:1–2). In these texts, Christ’s heavenlyintercession implements the saving purposes of God made real in thecross. Moreover, the work of Christ as prophet, priest, and kingimplies the central role of intercession, since intercession is afunction of each of these offices.

ThusGod’s initiative in intercession is intensified in the NT:God’s self-giving through Christ is the foundation of anongoing heavenly intercession that in turn gives the church increasedconfidence to intercede boldly. Further, God’s Spirit helps usin our weakness by interceding for us in accord with God’swill, even if we experience that intercession as “wordlessgroans” (Rom. 8:26–28).

The act of advocating before the powerful on someone’sbehalf (Gen. 23:8–9), especially turning to God in prayer toseek God’s favor for others in crisis (2Sam. 12:16).While it is a prerogative of prophets (Gen. 20:7; Num. 12; Amos7:1–6), priests (Ezra 6:9–10), and kings (1Chron.21:17; 2Chron. 30:18; Jer. 26:19), intercession is a ministrythat belongs to all the people of God (Acts 12:5; Eph. 6:18; 1Tim.2:1; James 5:16).

OldTestament

ReflectingGod’s own deliberative process (Gen. 1:26–27; 2:18), ourcreation in God’s image implies and makes possible our genuineconversation, participation, and even disputation with God. Abiblical understanding of God’s rule accommodates thisdivine-human dialogue and the intertwined roles of both parties.People request intercession for themselves (1Kings 13:6; Acts8:24), but Scripture highlights God’s initiative.

InGen. 18 God invites (even provokes) Abraham’s intercession byconfiding in Abraham, reviewing the divine promises, and disclosingthe guilt and impending doom of Sodom and Gomorrah. On behalf ofrighteous persons who may live there, Abraham appeals boldly to God’sown “justice” (mishpat) in distinguishing the innocentfrom the guilty, and he successfully negotiates God’s pledge tospare the city if even ten righteous persons can be found there.Without disputing the allegations of wickedness, Abraham puts God’sjust response on the table as well.

Similarly,in Exod. 32 God informs Moses of the Israelites’ sin with thegolden calf and his own intention to destroy them and start over withMoses. In response, Moses intercedes, arguing that God’sdeliverance of Israel, and the likelihood of its being misconstruedby Egypt, should trump divine anger. Moses urges a different courseof action: turn from anger, relent, and do not bring the announceddisaster. The destruction of Israel would be inconsistent with God’sown commitment to multiply the people of Israel and give them theland as their inheritance (cf. Num. 14:13–29). The issue forMoses is not only Israel’s sin but also the rightness of God’sresponse in faithfulness to his purposes.

InJob’s intercession for his friends, God dictates the entireprocess, directing the friends to make offerings and assigning Jobthe task of interceding for them. God makes his own vindication thecentral issue: Eliphaz and friends have not said “the truth”(nekonah) of God, as Job had (Job 42:7–10).

Thesethree narratives highlight God’s initiative and make God’scharacter the grounds for intercession. They also introduce thepotential pain borne by the intercessor. For example, Mosesdramatizes his passionate concern for God’s cause by fallingdown before God and lying prostrate forty days and nights (Deut.9:13–29). He so identifies his own destiny with Israel’sas to offer himself as “atonement,” saying, “Pleaseforgive their sin—but if not, then blot me out of the book youhave written” (Exod. 32:32). This anticipates later prophets’participation in the sorrow of God and the pain of the people’sseparation from God (Jer. 15; cf. Luke 13:34–35; 19:41–44).

NewTestament

Inthe Gospels, Jesus heals by command, without explicit reference tointercession, and in this way remarkably transcends the OT prophets(1Kings 17:19–21). Although he does ask his Father toforgive his crucifiers (Luke 23:34), the Gospels emphasize Jesus’intercession for his disciples, such as for Simon Peter to surviveSatan’s assaults on his faith (22:31–32). John 17comprises an extended intercession of Jesus for hisdisciples—significantly, that the Father will protect them in ahostile world. Moreover, Christ promises to acknowledge faithfuldisciples before the Father (Matt. 10:32), an action formally closeto intercession, and that Christ performs as mediator of the Father’skingdom and salvation.

Paul’sprayer for his fellow Israelites to be saved is fueled by anguishover their unbelief (Rom. 9:1–3; 10:1–4). Mirroring thisis “the pressure of concern” he feels for all thechurches and for the welfare of their members (2Cor. 11:28–29),hence the prominent role of prayer in Paul’s ministry (see thethanksgivings that open his letters [e.g., Phil. 1:3–11]).Intercession perse, as prayer that others be spared ordelivered from crisis, is seen in the churches’ prayers forPaul’s deliverance from prison and death (Phil. 1:19; 2Thess.3:2–3; cf. Rom. 15:31).

TheNT extends the Gospel portrayals to reveal Christ as our heavenlyintercessor, a role made possible by the cross and resurrection. InRom. 8:34–39 Christ’s death, resurrection, and reign “atthe right hand of God” ground Paul’s confidence thatChrist’s intercession assures victory over condemnation and allopposition. The work of Christ our high priest (Heb. 7:25) may besummed up as intercession, echoing Isa. 53:12. Accordingly, “JesusChrist the Righteous One” not only advocates before the Fatherfor the forgiveness of our sins but also is their atoning sacrifice(1John 2:1–2). In these texts, Christ’s heavenlyintercession implements the saving purposes of God made real in thecross. Moreover, the work of Christ as prophet, priest, and kingimplies the central role of intercession, since intercession is afunction of each of these offices.

ThusGod’s initiative in intercession is intensified in the NT:God’s self-giving through Christ is the foundation of anongoing heavenly intercession that in turn gives the church increasedconfidence to intercede boldly. Further, God’s Spirit helps usin our weakness by interceding for us in accord with God’swill, even if we experience that intercession as “wordlessgroans” (Rom. 8:26–28).

A set of techniques for artificially watering crops.Irrigation is the key to cultivating land in regions where directrainfall is insufficient. While several of the ancient empires of thebiblical world diverted water from large rivers (Nile, Tigris,Euphrates) to sustain large-scale intensive agriculture, the land ofIsrael was hilly, and thus irrigation was limited. Israeliteagriculture relied on smaller irrigation works or direct rainfall,enhanced by other methods such as the terracing of hillsides.

InCanaanite religion, the dependence of the region on rainfall-basedagriculture was reflected in the prominence of sky gods, such asBaal, who controlled the weather. In contrast, the civilizations ofMesopotamia and Egypt focused such attention on their great rivers(see Isa. 8:7, where the river represents the military power ofAssyria against Judah). In Israelite religion, this power wasattributed to the God of Israel (Deut. 11:11–12), so that hewas a direct rival of Baal. For instance, Jeremiah rebukes the peoplefor their failure to depend on Israel’s God, characterizing theproper attitude of the farmer: “Let us fear the Lord our God,who gives autumn and spring rains in season, who assures us of theregular weeks of harvest” (Jer. 5:24 [see also 1Kings17:1; 18:1; James 5:17–18]). Likewise, the prophet Isaiahpromises, “The Lord will guide you always; he will satisfy yourneeds in a sun-scorched land and will strengthen your frame. You willbe like a well-watered garden, like a spring whose waters never fail”(Isa. 58:11).

Consistentwith this situation, Deuteronomy refers to irrigation as a way ofcontrasting Israelite and Egyptian agriculture: “The land youare entering to take over is not like the land of Egypt, from whichyou have come, where you planted your seed and irrigated it by footas in a vegetable garden” (Deut. 11:10). Modern scholars seehere a reference to a particular practice of irrigation in whichworkers controlled the flow of water through a field by manipulatinga system of earthen channels and dams with their feet.

Inaddition to rainfall-based agriculture, groundwater coming fromsprings supported gardens and horticulture. Ecclesiastes 2:5–6speaks of such royal gardens and waterworks: “I made gardensand parks and planted all kinds of fruit trees in them. I madereservoirs to water groves of flourishing trees” (cf. Isa.58:11; Ezek. 47:12). Excavations in Jerusalem have confirmed thepresence of irrigation works in the City of David, which probablydiverted water into the Kidron Valley from the Gihon Spring.

Tosummarize, crops in biblical Israel were sustained by a combinationof rainfall agriculture with small-scale irrigation sustaininghorticulture (i.e., the production of vegetables in gardens, but notthe intensive cultivation of staples such as grains). Perhaps thisparticular combination is best illustrated in Gen. 2:5–6: “Noshrub had yet appeared on the earth and no plant had yet sprung up,for the Lord God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no oneto work the ground, but streams came up from the earth and wateredthe whole surface of the ground.” See also Cistern.

Godthe Worker

Abiblical theology of work starts with God as the creator of allthings. In the OT, the verb bara’ (“to create”) isused only with God as subject. The first verb in the Bible (Gen.1:1), it occurs also in many other texts that describe Godaccomplishing what only God can do. Other terms such as yatsar (“toform, fashion”) and ’asah (“to make, do”) areused numerous times throughout the OT with either God or humans assubjects.

Thesethree terms reinforce the portrayal of God as worker in Gen. 1–2(cf. Isa. 45:7). God creates light and darkness; sky and earth; sun,moon, and stars; land and sea; plant and animal life; andhumankind—in sum, all that is. He forms the “man”(Heb. ’adam) from the dust of the ground, bringing him to lifeby breathing into him the breath of life.

Elsewherein the OT God is said to build, build up, or rebuild/restore (Heb.banah [e.g., Pss. 102:16; 147:2; Jer. 24:6; Amos 9:11]).Interestingly, God takes a rib from the man, which he then makes(lit., “builds into” [Heb. banah+ le]) a woman(Gen. 2:22). He founds (Heb. kun) the earth (Isa. 45:18) andstretches out (Heb. natah) the heavens (Zech. 12:1). Further, wisdomis God’s “craftsman” (Heb. ’amon), takingpart in the world’s creation (Prov. 8:30). The NT revealsChrist as the one through whom God creates all things (John 1:1–3;Col. 1:16). This brief sketch suggests the range of ways in whichGod’s work is described.

HumanLabor

Ideally,work is performed as service to God (Col. 3:17, 22–24). Work isone way we express the divine image. God’s creation mandate tofill, subdue, and rule the earth implies work (Gen. 1:26–28),and God places the man in the garden “to work it and take careof it” (Gen. 2:15). The importance of work for human dignity aswell as survival undergirds the laws of gleaning that make provisionfor the poor to gather their own food (e.g., Deut. 24:19–22).The expansion of human technologies and occupations (mela’kah[see Exod. 12:16]) reflects that dignity and God’s own diverseworkmanship. Job 28 celebrates human industry and achievement whilesubordinating all to the prevailing value of wisdom, rooted in “thefear of the Lord.” Given the indispensable role of work withinthe limits of human life, diligence is commended (Eccles. 3:9–10),idleness condemned (Prov. 10:4; 12:24; 21:5; 2Thess. 3:6–10).Work is essentially God’s good gift to us in creation.

Butwork now has negative aspects. In response to Adam’s sin, Godcurses the ground, introducing “painful toil” into thework cycle (Gen. 3:17–19; 5:29). We now eke out our living byhardship, finding frustration instead of bounty—a lifelongreminder that we are made of dust and will return to dust. The bookof Ecclesiastes echoes this note of futility and raises sharpquestions about the lasting value of human labor (1:2–3, 14;2:4–11, 17–23; 3:9; 4:4–6; 8:16–17). Sin anddeath haunt the unfolding occupations in Gen. 4, and the episode ofthe tower of Babel in Gen. 11 signals God’s judgment on humanpretension (cf. James 4:13–16). Excessive toil (workaholism) isa pitfall, not a virtue, for it expresses reliance on self ratherthan on God, who builds, protects, and gives rest (Ps. 127:1–2).Oppressive, unjust working conditions are cause for lament, and theyincur God’s judgment (Exod. 5:6–19; Prov. 14:31; James5:4–6).

Thus,Israel’s labor policy is to reflect God’s covenantfaithfulness, generosity, and concern for the vulnerable. Moses’law places limits on employers/masters to protect employees, slaves,and foreign workers from exploitation. The primary limit is God’scommand that Israel keep the Sabbath holy by a complete cessation oflabor (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15). This moveprioritizes God’s covenant above human labor and sets a rhythmof work and rest. Exodus grounds the Sabbath in God’s rest fromhis work of creation on the seventh day. Deuteronomy ties it toIsrael’s history of slavery in Egypt and deliverance by God; bykeeping the Sabbath, Israel shows gratitude to God and guards againstreplicating Egypt’s oppressive policies.

Exodus31–32 portrays work in its best and worst lights. The properinterplay of work and rest is seen in chapter 31, which narrates thedivinely empowered work on the tabernacle, followed by a strongreminder to keep the Sabbath as a “sign” between God andIsrael. In contrast, chapter 32 portrays artisanship put to the worstuse, the making of a golden idol. Aaron fashions gold with a tool andmakes the calf image, but later he tells Moses, “I threw [theirgold jewelry] into the fire, and out came this calf!” (32:24).This remark anticipates the prophets’ later mockery ofidol-makers (e.g., Isa. 44:9–20) and raises the issue ofpersonal responsibility for the outcome of one’s labor: Aaronseeks to avoid being implicated in Israel’s idolatry byconcealing his own role in the project.

Publiclabor issues increase in complexity when Israel adopts human kingshipand engages in international trade (e.g., 1Sam. 8; 1Kings9:15–23). Babylon deals a decisive blow to Judah’sstatehood by deporting leaders and skilled workers. Many of theseestablish such viable, productive new lives in Babylon that whenCyrus later allows the exiled Judeans to return, they choose toremain.

TheNT assumes the legitimacy of work and adopts the OT’s view thatwithin proper limits work is a good gift of God. Jesus, however, hascome to do his Father’s “work” (John 5:16–18),which entails calling some people away from their normal occupationsto follow him, as well as a new approach to Sabbath observance (Mark2:21–27; 3:4). These moves signal the urgency and newness ofthe kingdom of God. Consequently, the apostles are “co-workersin God’s service” (1Cor. 3:9), and Christians are“God’s handiwork” (Eph. 2:10). In light of theresurrection, we offer to God work (Gk. ergon) and labor (Gk. kopos),not in futility but in hope (1Cor. 15:58; cf. Rev. 14:13).

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

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

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

An intimate, exclusive, lifelong covenant relationshipbetween a man and a woman wherein a new family is established.

Theologyof Marriage

Thebiblical basis for marriage is recorded in Gen. 2:18–24, whichestablishes a number of important points relating to marriage.

First,in Gen. 2:18 God highlights the first expressed inadequacy withincreation: the man is alone. The solution to the man’s solitudeis found not among the animals (a fact demonstrated by the carefulsearch expressed by having the man name each of them) but in acreature specifically created to address the problem of his solitude:woman. She is created from his “rib” (a bettertranslation is “side”), so that she is more like him thanany of the animals. In spite of this, she is not a clone, but rathera complement to him. She is described as a “helper suitable forhim,” which highlights her fulfillment of the inadequacy Godhad previously identified.

Second,the role of the wife is not restricted to providing a means by whichto fulfill the command to fill the earth (through bearing children),for the problem identified in Gen. 2:18 cannot be reduced to thisalone. The OT establishes that human beings are relational andsocial, and that isolation is not good, quite aside fromconsiderations relating to childbearing. Indeed, when marriage isemployed as a metaphor for the relationship between God and hispeople (see below), it can be conceptualized quite apart from thenotion of procreation, suggesting that the latter should not beconsidered the primary purpose of marriage.

Third,Gen. 2:23 describes the relationship between the man and the woman interms strongly reminiscent of the traditional kinship formula usedwith reference to family members elsewhere in the OT: “bone ofmy bones, and flesh of my flesh” (cf., e.g., Gen. 29:14; Judg.9:2; 2Sam. 5:1; 19:13–14—similar to the modernEnglish expression “my flesh and blood”; see also Matt.19:5; Eph. 5:31). Although “be united” (othertranslations use “cleave”) and “one flesh”are frequently understood to refer to sexual union, this is not theonly, or even the primary, implication of the words. Genesis 2:24expresses the unification of the husband and the wife as theantithesis of the man’s leaving his father and mother. Theseterms (“leave” or “forsake,” “beunited” or “cleave”) are used elsewhere incovenantal contexts. “Cleave” is usually used of peoplein the sense of clinging to another out of affection and loyalty(Gen. 34:3; Ruth 1:14; 2Sam. 20:2; 1Kings 11:2). It isalso frequently used of Israel clinging to God (Deut. 10:20; 11:22;13:5; 30:20; Josh. 22:5; 23:8). “Forsake” is used ofbreaking covenants (Deut. 12:19; 14:27; 29:25; Jer. 1:16; 2:13, 17,19; 5:7; 16:11; 17:13; 19:4; 22:9). The verb also appears in thecontext of marital divorce in Prov. 2:16–17; Isa. 54:6; 62:4.

Theimplication of Gen. 2:24 is that the man was formerly “united”to his parents in a familial relationship, but when he marries, thecovenantal relationship with his parents is superseded by the newrelationship with his wife. Thus, in establishing the covenantalrelationship of marriage, the man and the woman form a new familyunit (they become “one flesh,” which parallels thekinship formula more fully expressed in Gen. 2:23). It is noteworthythat Gen. 2 thus defines a family as husband and wife; a family isformed before any children are born. Furthermore, the emphasis on thepriority of the relationship between husband and wife is particularlystriking, given both the importance of honoring one’s parents(Exod. 20:12; Deut. 5:16) and the distinctly patrilocal nature ofinheritance whereby sons would remain in the parents’ householdafter marriage and ultimately inherit a share of it, but daughterswould leave their parents’ house to be with their husbands.

Fourth,the description of the woman as the man’s “helper”cannot alone be used to demonstrate that the wife’s role waseither subordinate or superior to her husband’s. Although theterm is elsewhere often used as a description of God, it is also usedof subordinate helpers, and other contextual indications determinethe relative status of the helper aside from the use of the termitself.

Marriagein the Old Testament

TheBible presents few formal legal, liturgical, or cultic requirementsfor marriage (whereas there are specific laws dealing with divorce),although it does record some details of specific marriages from whichsome insight into marriage practices can be gleaned. Marriages oftenwere established through an arrangement between the parents of thehusband and those of the wife or between the husband and the parentsof his prospective wife (e.g., Gen. 24; 38:6), but there appears tobe some diversity, with examples of a man choosing his own wife(e.g., Judah in Gen. 38:2) or instances when the consent of the womanis sought (e.g., Gen. 24:8, 58). The requirement of a formalcertificate for divorce (Deut. 24:1, 3), together with examples ofmarriage contracts from the ancient Near East, are possible evidencethat marriage within Israel required certification, although there isno explicit confirmation of this in the OT or in Israel prior to therabbinic period. The marriages recorded in the OT often involvedfeasts of varying duration (Gen. 29:22; Judg. 14:12), the bride beingaccompanied to her home in a festive procession that included musicand singing (Ps. 78:63; Jer. 7:34; 16:9), and a blessing pronouncedover the bride that she might bear many children (Gen. 24:60; Ruth4:11). Deuteronomy 22:15 suggests that evidence of the bride’svirginity was retained by the wife’s family to guard againstfalse accusations by a husband seeking divorce.

Anotheraspect of marriage that appears to have been normative although notlegislated was the payment of a mohar, or “bride-price”(Gen. 34:12; Exod. 22:16; 1Sam. 18:25), as well as theprovision of a dowry (1Kings 9:16). The former was a paymentmade by the groom’s family to the bride’s family, thelatter an amount given by the father to his daughter. Typically, theformer appears to have exceeded the latter in value. The bride-price,at least in later times, functioned as insurance should the wife bedivorced.

TheBible does not issue any specific age constraints upon those beingmarried, indicating that the OT practice probably did not differsignificantly from that of other nations in the ancient Near East,where girls were considered ready for marriage once they had reachedpuberty or the age of twelve, and boys were generally slightly older.Constraints were placed on the eligibility of marriage partners, andgenerally marriages were endogamous: marriage partners were chosenfrom within the clan, tribe, or nation (e.g., Gen. 24:1–9;27:46–28:5; cf. Deut. 7:3, which prohibits marriage with some,but not all, foreigners, and Deut. 21:10–14, which permitsIsraelite warriors to take a wife from among female prisoners ofwar). While there were exceptions to this constraint (e.g., Mosesmarried a Midianite; Bathsheba was married to a Hittite; Boaz marriedRuth, a Moabite), in later times the restriction was given legalsanction under Ezra and Nehemiah (Ezra 9:2, 12; Neh. 13:25; cf. Luke14:26; 18:29).

Inspite of the likelihood that many marriages in the OT and the ancientworld in general were arranged, the notion of romantic love as bothan ideal for marriage and a basis for choosing one’s spouseclearly was known and even regarded as desirable. This is reflectedin the approbation given romantic love in Song of Songs as well as instories such as that of Jacob (Gen. 29:18; see also Judg. 14:1–3;1Sam. 18:20).

Socially,marriage was of particular import for a woman in the ancient world,for her well-being usually depended on her place within the house ofeither her father or her husband. Because inheritance was passed downthe male line, women without connection to the house of a man were ina very tenuous state. Inheritance itself was also an important issuein the ancient world, and so great value was placed not just onmarriage but also on bearing children (particularly male [see alsoFirstborn]). Associated with these social functions of marriage inancient Israel is the fact that the OT permits and records a numberof instances of polygamy (always polygyny, never polyandry). Thisafforded social security to widows (see also Levirate Law, LevirateMarriage) and helped ensure the line of inheritance. It should benoted, however, that neither the welfare aspect of marriage nor therelated acceptance of polygamy is based on the biblical foundationfor marriage in Gen. 2, and consequently, polygamy does not reflectthe biblical ideal for marriage.

Thefundamental importance of the marriage relationship is alsohighlighted by the severity of the penalties for adultery (e.g.,Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18; 22:22–24; see also Adultery).

Marriagein the New Testament

Jesusreinforces the importance of marriage, emphasizing its divine originand lifelong nature (Matt. 19:6; Mark 10:9) as well as itsinviolability (Mark 10:2–12). In light of this, Jesus’assertion that at the resurrection there will be no marriage issurprising (Matt. 22:30). Although Jesus offers no explanation as towhy there will be no marriage following the resurrection, it isperhaps likely that the fundamental need identified by God in Gen.2:18 (the man was alone) will be solved in a different manner in theage to come: the intimate help and companionship ideally found inmarriage will be provided in perfected relationship with God and allothers.

Paulelaborates somewhat on marriage in the Christian community. Christianmarriage ought to be characterized by mutual submission in somerespects (1Cor. 7:4; Eph. 5:21) while reflecting someasymmetrical aspects of the relationship between Christ and thechurch in others (Eph. 5:22–33). Christians ought to marrywithin the church (2Cor. 6:14–18, although this passageis not restricted to marriage); however, those who are married tononbelievers are not to seek divorce, but are to remain faithful totheir spouses for the sake of both the spouse and their children(1Cor. 7:10–16).

TheNT makes reference to some of the marriage customs of the day,including sharing a feast (Matt. 22:2–12; Luke 12:36; John2:1–11), the expectation that guests be suitably attired (Matt.22:11–12), and a procession to the groom’s home (Matt.25:1–13; Luke 12:35–38).

SymbolicUse of Marriage

Marriageis used figuratively in both Testaments. The relationship between Godand his people is described with marriage language (Isa. 62:4–5;Jer. 2:2). By using such language, the prophets emphasize theintimacy and unity inherent in the relationship between God and hischosen people, as well as the devastating betrayal when the covenantis broken. The use of the marriage metaphor is thus extended to theuse of divorce language to describe God’s treatment ofunfaithful Israel (Jer. 3:8), and the notion of adultery andpromiscuity is equated with the worship of foreign gods (Ezek. 16;23). The prophet Hosea’s marriage is itself a graphicrepresentation of God’s relationship with his people and, inparticular, their faithlessness; however, it also holds out theanticipation of a new covenant, one wherein God declares, “Youwill call me ‘my husband’; you will no longer call me ‘mymaster’ ” (Hos. 2:16). The metaphorical use ofmarriage to image the relationship between God and his people alsoreflects the implicit belief in the asymmetrical nature of therelationship between husband and wife in the ancient world.

TheNT primarily identifies the church as the bride and Christ as thehusband when using marriage language figuratively (e.g., Eph.5:22–33). In so doing, the NT affirms Christ’s deity byexplicitly depicting him in the place occupied by God in the OT’suse of marriage symbolism. Jesus uses marriage in his parabolicteaching about the kingdom of God (Matt. 22:2–14; 25:1–12),as well as in reference to himself as bridegroom when explaining thebehavior of his disciples (Mark 2:19–20; Luke 5:34–35).Revelation depicts the return of Christ as the time of the marriagebetween the bride and the bridegroom (Rev. 19:7; 21:9).

Although for millennia meat has been a major element in manypeople’s diets, the earliest humans did not eat it. In thegarden of Eden, God gave Adam and Eve a diet of plants, particularlyfruit (Gen. 2:15–16). God first sanctioned human consumption ofanimals only after the flood, though with the stipulation that meatnot be eaten with blood remaining in it (Gen. 9:3–4; see alsoLev. 7:26; 19:26).

Inthe Mosaic law the Israelites received further restrictions from Godconcerning the meat they could consume. Among land animals, onlythose that have a split hoof and chew the cud were “clean”for the Israelites to eat (Lev. 11:1–8). When the Israelitestwice complained that they had no meat in the wilderness, Godresponded both times by sending quail. In the second instance, Godbecame angry and sent a plague among those who had eaten the meat(Exod. 16:2–13; Num. 11:1–35).

Inthe NT, Jesus declared all foods clean (Mark 7:19), and God confirmedin a vision to Peter that he had rescinded all dietary restrictions(Acts 10:9–16). However, the Jerusalem council instructedGentile Christians to abstain from certain dietary practices thatwould be offensive to their Jewish brothers and sisters, includingeating blood and eating meat sacrificed to idols (Acts 15:28–29).In 1Corinthians, Paul continued the discussion of eating meatsacrificed to idols (8:4–13; 10:18–33) and therebyprovided guidance on various matters of Christian liberty.

Behind the English translation “mercy” liediverse biblical words in Hebrew (khesed, khanan, rakham) and inGreek (charis, eleos, oiktirmos, splanchnon). These words are alsotranslated as “love,” “compassion,” “grace,”“favor,” “kindness,” “loving-kindness,”and so on, depending on context. Hence, a conceptual approach to themeaning of “mercy” is best.

God’sMercy

Mercyas part of God’s character.Mercy is a distinguishing characteristic of the nature of God. God iscalled “the Father of mercies” (2Cor. 1:3 NRSV[NIV: “Father of compassion”]). God is “rich inmercy” (Eph. 2:4; cf. 2Sam. 24:14; Dan. 9:9). God’smercy was demonstrated in his covenantal faithfulness to his people(1Kings 8:23–24; Mic. 7:18–20). God redeemed theoppressed Israelites from slavery under Pharaoh because of his mercy,which was stirred when he heard their groaning and cry for help.Here, the rekindling of God’s mercy toward the Israelites wasdepicted in terms of remembering his covenant with Abraham, Isaac,and Jacob (Exod. 2:23–25). Mercy is a manifestation of God’sfaithfulness to his covenant. Hence, God’s mercy to hiscovenant people never ceases (Pss. 119:132; 103:17).

Godhas absolute sovereignty in electing the people to whom he wills toshow mercy. A classic expression appears in Exod. 33:19: “Iwill have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassionon whom I will have compassion.” Paul quoted this to explainGod’s sovereignty in electing Jacob as the recipient of God’smercy (Rom. 9:13–15). God’s mercy cannot be acquired byhuman effort or desire (Rom. 9:16). God even ordered the Israelitesto show no mercy to the Canaanites because of their corruption andidolatry (Deut. 7:2).

Diverseimages are used to describe God’s mercy. God is compared to aloving father who has compassion on his children (Jer. 31:20; Mal.3:17). “As a father has compassion on his children, so the Lordhas compassion on those who fear him; for he knows how we are formed,he remembers that we are dust” (Ps. 103:13–14). God’scompassion is also compared to that of a nursing mother who feeds herbaby at her breast (Isa. 49:15). The images of the loving father andthe loving mother reflect closely the heart of God’s mercytoward his chosen people. God is especially merciful to the needy,the weak, the afflicted, and the oppressed (Exod. 2:23–24; Ps.123:2–3; Isa. 49:13; Heb. 4:16). God is called “a fatherto the fatherless” and “a defender of widows” (Ps.68:5). Sinners appeal for God’s mercy when they requestforgiveness (Ps. 51:1). “Have mercy on me” is a commonform of expression when the psalmist entreats God for his forgiveness(Pss. 41:4, 10; 51:1). God’s mercy is also shown in his act ofsalvation and blessing (Exod. 15:13; Deut. 13:17–18; Judg.2:18; Eph. 2:4–5).

God’smercy in redemptive history.Redemptive history is a successive demonstration of God’s mercytoward his chosen people. It was because of God’s mercy that hetook the initiative to save fallen human beings (Gen. 3:15). Deathwas the due penalty for Adam and Eve (Gen. 2:17), but God preachedthe good news of mercy that the descendant of the woman would somedaycrush the head of the serpent. In Rev. 20:2 that ancient serpent inthe garden of Eden is identified as “the devil, or Satan,”whose head was crushed by Jesus Christ on the cross and is bound bythe coming Messiah “for a thousand years” and will be“thrown into the lake of burning sulfur” (Rev. 20:2, 10).In spite of God’s judgment on Cain, the first murderer, Godshowed mercy by putting a mark on him so that no one would kill him(Gen. 4:15). As the psalmist later confesses, God proves himself asthe merciful God who “does not treat us as our sins deserve orrepay us according to our iniquities” (Ps. 103:10).

Noahand his family were saved from the judgment of the flood because ofGod’s special mercy toward them (Gen. 6:8). Immediately afterGod confused the languages of human beings because of their challengeto him (Gen. 11:1–9), God showed mercy on Abram, “awandering Aramean” (Deut. 26:5), and designated him to be thefather of his chosen people (Gen. 12:1–3). Jacob’selection originated solely from God’s mercy, as Paul pointedout by quoting Scripture: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated”(Rom. 9:13). The exodus is also the clearest evidence of God’sdemonstration of mercy toward his chosen people (Exod. 2:23–25).They were saved not by their own righteousness but rather by God’smercy on the covenant people, who suffered under the bondage ofPharaoh’s slavery. God’s mercy reached its climax when hesent his only Son, Jesus Christ, to save sinners (Rom. 5:8). It isbecause of God’s mercy that we are saved, not because of ourrighteousness (Titus 3:5).

Christ’sMercy

JesusChrist lived a life full of mercy. He is, in a sense, the bodilymanifestation of God’s mercy. Jesus expressed deep mercywhenever he saw the sick and the lost. The writers of the Gospelsdescribe Jesus’ demonstrations of mercy when he healed theblind, the lame, the deaf, the leprous, the demon-possessed, and thedead (Matt. 9:36; 14:14; 20:34; Mark 1:41; 5:19; 6:34; 8:2; Luke7:13; John 11:33). Jesus especially had compassion on the crowds, whodid not have a spiritual leader, and he compared them to “sheepwithout a shepherd” (Matt. 9:36).

Jesus’ministry of healing and evangelism was motivated by his deep mercyand compassion toward people in physical and spiritual need (Luke4:16–21; cf. Isa. 61:1–2). Whenever the sick appealed tohis mercy, Jesus never refused to dispense it to them (Matt. 15:22;17:14–18). For example, he healed the two blind men whoentreated his mercy (Matt. 20:30–34). When a leper, kneelingbefore him, entreated his mercy, Jesus touched him (risking his ownuncleanness according to the law) and healed him (Matt. 8:2–3).When a centurion asked for Jesus’ mercy on his sick servant, hewas willing to go and heal the sick man (Matt. 8:5–13). Jesus’mercy was aroused especially when he saw people crying for the dead,and even he shed tears (John 11:33–35). When Jesus saw a widowcrying for her dead son during a funeral procession, he comforted andhad compassion on her and made her son alive (Luke 7:12–15).

Accordingto Heb. 2:17–18, Jesus became “a merciful and faithfulhigh priest” to make atonement for the sins of his people. Heis also compared to the high priest who is able to sympathize withour weaknesses because he “has been tempted in every way, justas we are” (Heb. 4:15). His high priestly work on earth washighlighted in terms of his ministry of mercy toward his people. LikeGod’s mercy, Jesus’ mercy was shown in his actions ofsalvation (Luke 19:10; Eph. 5:2; 1Tim. 1:14–16; Titus3:4–7), of blessing (Mark 10:13–16), and of forgiveness(Mark 2:10; Luke 23:34). Paul’s personal experience led him toconfess, “He saved us, not because of righteous things we haddone, but because of his mercy” (Titus 3:5). Jesus’character of mercy was most vividly manifested on the cross when heprayed for the forgiveness of the crucifying soldiers and the cursingcrowds (Luke 23:33–37).

HumanResponse to God’s Mercy

Whatis the proper response to God’s mercy and compassion? Godexpects believers to show the same kind of mercy toward other people.One of the best examples is the parable of the unmerciful servant(Matt. 18:23–35). The central focus of this parable is on theunmerciful servant, to whom a tremendous mercy is shown by the king,but who refuses to show a little mercy to his fellow servant. Theparable concludes with the king’s statement that no mercy willbe shown to those who do not show mercy and forgiveness to others.Hence, a forgiving attitude is a must for believers, who havereceived immeasurable mercy from God when he forgave their sins atthe time of repentance. The Lord’s Prayer also includes thebeliever’s forgiveness of others as being inseparably linked tothe request for forgiveness from God (Matt. 6:12). Jesus affirms thisidea in a subsequent statement: “For if you forgive otherpeople when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will alsoforgive you. But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Fatherwill not forgive your sins” (6:14–15).

Mercyis one of the eight blessings in the Beatitudes: “Blessed arethe merciful, for they will be shown mercy” (Matt. 5:7). Jesus’response to the critical Pharisees reveals that our merciful lifeshould precede our religious life (9:13). According to the parable ofthe good Samaritan (Luke 10:25–37), the true neighbor is theone who shows mercy to the afflicted. Its conclusion, “Go anddo likewise” (10:37), requires believers to show mercy to theirsuffering neighbors. At the last judgment the righteous arecharacterized by their lives of showing mercy to the hungry, thethirsty, the stranger, the unclothed, the sick, and the imprisoned(Matt. 25:37–40). In Luke 6:36, Jesus summarizes the law ofmercy: “Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.”According to James, “judgment without mercy will be shown toanyone who has not been merciful”; however, “mercytriumphs over judgment” (James 2:12–13). And according tothe prophets, a merciless life is characteristic of godless people(Isa. 13:18; Jer. 6:23; 21:7; 50:42; Amos 1:11–12).

Itis by God’s mercy that believers can persevere during the timeof suffering (2Cor. 4:1). Their prayer is the channel throughwhich they draw God’s mercy. Hence, the writer of Hebrewsexhorts believers to “approach God’s throne of grace withconfidence, so that we may receive mercy” (Heb. 4:16).

The Bible contains many references to minerals and metals.Minerals can encompass a wide array of topics, thus the focus here ison valuable minerals such as ornamental stones as well as preciousand useful metals. Gold is mentioned in the Bible as early as thegarden of Eden (Gen. 2:11) and at the end is pictured as making upthe streets of the new Jerusalem (Rev. 21:21). Among the metalsmentioned in Scripture are gold, silver, bronze, copper, tin, lead,and iron. Precious stones and minerals also appear in Scripture,often used to adorn items, such as the high priest’sbreastpiece (Exod. 28:15–21). Here these materials will bediscussed in chronological order of appearance.

Copper

Copperwas the first metal to be used for simple farm tools and weapons. Itwas used as early as the middle of the fourth millennium BC but wasnot in widespread use until approximately 3300 BC. Copper mines havebeen found on the Sinai Peninsula at places such as the Timna Valleyand Faynan and also extensively on the island of Cyprus, whichsupplied copper to the Egyptian, Greek, and Roman empires.

Referencesto copper within the Bible are few. Several passages discuss thebasic origins of copper, such as the gathering of ore or the smeltingprocess (Deut. 8:9; Job 28:2; Ezek. 22:18, 20; 24:11). Several NTpassages acknowledge the presence of minted copper coins as currency(Matt. 10:9; Mark 12:42; Luke 21:2). Pure copper, however, was hardto use, although it could be combined with tin to make the alloybronze.

Bronze

Theuse of bronze, an alloy made of copper and tin, in biblical landsdates to about 2300 BC. Bronze, compared to pure copper, is easier towork with and has a longer life. It can be worked with hammer andanvil or poured into a mold. It has the same available applicationsas copper; thus it was used to make all the tools and weapons thatwere made of copper. Bronze was widely used during the secondmillennium BC, encompassing the biblical time period from Abraham tothe judges, and its use continued as the raw materials wereavailable. It was the metal of choice until the advanced technologyof ironworking.

Thefirst biblical reference to bronze is found in Gen. 4:22, in which weare told that Tubal-Cain forged tools out of bronze and iron. Next,bronze is mentioned in its use in the tabernacle built in the desert.Among the bronze items included were the many bronze clasps and basesfor the tent construction (Exod. 26:11, 37; 27:10–11, 17–19).The altar and all its utensils were made of, or overlaid with, bronze(27:1–8). God also instructed Moses to make a bronze basin forwashing (30:18). Moses also made a snake out of bronze and placed iton top of his staff when the Israelites were struck with an abundanceof venomous snakes (Num. 21:9). Samson was bound with shackles ofbronze (Judg. 16:21), and Goliath wore armor and carried weapons ofbronze (1Sam. 17:5–6). Solomon used an extensive amountof bronze in his building of the temple (2Kings 25:16), andthere was bronze in the statue that Daniel dreamed of (Dan. 2:32,35). Many of the prophets used bronze as a way to discuss somethingthat was to be strong or strengthened by God (Isa. 45:2; Jer. 1:18;Ezek. 40:3).

Ironand Steel

Ironoriginally was found in meteorites and thus was scarce and worked asa precious metal. After a permanent source of iron ore was found,iron began to be worked in a few areas around 1200 BC. It increasedin popularity over time, and around 1000 BC, or roughly the time ofthe united monarchy, it was being extensively used. Phoeniciantraders were very active during this time, and they would havebrought much iron from the mines of southern Spain. Around the tenthcentury BC the technology to work iron into steel through thequenching and carbonization of the metal became commonplace. A largenumber of iron-producing sites have not been found in Palestine, andno deposits of the raw material have been located. Iron deposits havebeen found between the Jordan and the Euphrates rivers, but whetherthe ancients were aware of these deposits is unknown.

Oncethe technology to turn iron into steel became known, both becamehighly valued. At the same time, it is possible that copper hadbecome more difficult to obtain due to a change in internationaltrading routes. The first steel implement to be unearthed inPalestine was a pick found in Upper Galilee dating to the eleventhcenturyBC.

Oneof the earliest references to iron in Scripture is its use by theCanaanites to make chariots (Josh. 17:16, 18). This would have beenan early use of the metal in the Iron AgeI period (1200–1000BC). Also, Goliath’s spear, which was as big as a weaver’srod, is said to have had a head made of iron (1Sam. 17:7).Elisha’s miracle of making a borrowed ax head float (2Kings6:6) shows the continued value of the metal. In his latter days,David amassed iron among the goods to give Solomon to use in buildingthe temple (1Chron. 22:14; 29:2); Solomon later used thesematerials with the help of Huram-Abi (2Chron. 2:13–14).Ezekiel discusses the economic value of iron in the context oftrading (Ezek. 27:12, 19), and Daniel uses it as a metaphor fordiscussing strength (Dan. 2:40–41). The NT recognizes thestrength of iron when discussing Christ’s iron scepter (Rev.2:27; 19:15).

Tin

Tinwas initially used mainly to produce the copper alloy bronze. Tin wasnot used in its pure form until well into the Roman period, and eventhen seldom by itself. The sources of tin in the ancient world arecurrently debated. The tin from large deposits in Tarshish insouthern Spain (Ezek. 27:12) was available through Phoeniciantraders. Tin is also found in large deposits in Anatolia, but it iscurrently unknown whether these deposits had been discovered and usedduring biblical times. A third option is modern-day Afghanistan.Archaeologists have discovered in modern Turkey the remains of awrecked ship, dated to around 1350 BC, that was carrying ten tons ofcopper ingots and about one ton of tin ingots. These ingots possiblyoriginated in the area of modern-day Afghanistan and were bound forthe Mediterranean trade routes. Tin is mentioned only four times inScripture, always within a list of other metals (Num. 31:22; Ezek.22:18, 20; 27:12).

Lead

Leadwas used early in human history, but its applications were few. Itwould have been mined with copper and silver ore and then extractedas a by-product. The Romans used it for various implements, mostnotably wine vessels. It is referenced nine times within Scripture,either in a list or in reference to its weight. The only two times itis referenced as an object is when Job mentions a lead writingimplement (Job 19:24), and when Zechariah has the vision of a womansitting in the basket with a lead cover (Zech. 5:7, 8).

Goldand Silver

Soughtafter for much of human history, gold and silver have been worked byhumans for their ornamental value. The practical uses of these metalswithin the biblical setting were constrained mainly to their economicand ornamental value. Gold and silver jewelry were used as a form ofpayment and were minted into coins during the Greco-Roman era. Goldobjects are relatively scarce in archaeological finds, mainly becausemost gold items would have been part of a large treasury carried offas tribute or plunder. Silver appears in the archaeological recordmore frequently; a remarkable hoard of silver in lump form was foundat Eshtemoa (see 1Sam. 30:26–28). This silver has beendated to the time of the kingdom of Judah, after the northern kingdomof Israel had fallen. The silver in raw lump form was most likelyused as a monetary payment, even though it had not yet been mintedinto coins.

Goldin the ancient world came largely from Egypt and northern Africa. TheBible mentions Havilah as a land of gold (Gen. 2:11), as well asOphir (1Kings 9:28), but the exact location of both places isunknown. Silver was mined in southern Spain, along with other metals,and brought to the area through sea trading. The Athenians of theClassical period were also known for their vast silver-miningoperations.

Silverand gold are mentioned repeatedly in the OT in reference to theiruses in trading and their economic value. Most notably, theIsraelites asked their Egyptian neighbors to give them gold andsilver items just before they left Egypt (Exod. 3:22). The tabernaclewas highly ornamented with these two metals, as was the temple builtby Solomon. It is said that Solomon made the nation so wealthy thatsilver was considered as plentiful as stone (1Kings 10:27).Perhaps the most notorious articles of silver within Scripture arethose paid to Judas for his betrayal of Jesus (Matt. 26:15).

PreciousStones

Stonesof various origins were used in and around Palestine. The Bible makesfew references to their use. Like gold and silver, they were usedmainly for their ornamental value. Their scarcity made them highlyprized. One notable exception is turquoise. The Egyptian pharaohswere fascinated with turquoise, and they mined extensively for it onthe Sinai Peninsula. The remains of several turquoise mines have beenfound with Canaanite markings, indicating the presence of Canaaniteslaves working the Egyptian mines. There was also a line of fortsalong the northern edge of the Egyptian Empire, used presumably toprotect the pharaohs’ turquoise interests. Precious stones werealso found in Syria, where Phoenician traders would have been able tobring them from other parts of the known world.

Exodus28:17–21 describes twelve stones set in the breastpiece worn bythe Israelite high priest. Twelve stones likewise appear in thefoundations of the new Jerusalem (Rev. 21:19–20). Ezekiel usesnine of these same twelve stones to discuss the adornment of the kingof Tyre (Ezek. 28:13).

TheBible uses the blanket term “precious stones” to denote ahoard of riches, such as that owned by Solomon (1Kings 10:10).

Given the vast amount of human history covered by the storieswithin Scripture, it is difficult to completely discuss the fullhistory of mining. The techniques and the technology involvedadvanced extensively throughout the ages; thus it would be necessaryto bring into the discussion a full history of metals andmetalworking to be completely thorough. The discussion here willtherefore necessarily be brief and focused.

BiblicalReferences

Thereis only one clear reference to mining in the Bible, in Job 28:1–11:“Mortals put an end to the darkness; they search out thefarthest recesses for ore in the blackest darkness. Far from humandwellings they cut a shaft, in places untouched by human feet; farfrom other people they dangle and sway” (vv. 3–4). Thispassage describes the typical form of tunneling often found inancient mining. Included within the text of Job 28 are several typesof metals and minerals that were mined, including iron, gold, silver,copper, and sapphires. Tin and bronze were also known, with tin mostlikely being the last to be used by itself, despite its use in themaking of bronze. Most of the precious stones mentioned in Scriptureappear in the breastpiece of the high priest and in the foundationsof the new Jerusalem. There is also a list of precious stonesmentioned in Ezek. 28:13, but these largely replicate those mentionedin the breastpiece of the high priest (Exod. 28:17–21).

Methods

Theancients had two methods of mining ores. The first included findingore close to the surface and following the shaft of deposits as faras possible. Copper mines of this fashion have been found in Egypt,specifically in the northern regions. The tools used were picks andhoes. The shafts themselves were comparable to a coffin in size,allowing for little movement. If the ore was too hard to break apart,fires were lit in the shaft in order to heat and cool the ore, makingit more brittle. The shafts themselves extended up to two hundredfeet. After being broken, the ore was passed in baskets to thesurface, where it was crushed and separated. This job was done almostentirely by slaves who worked night and day until death took them, atwhich time other slaves replaced them. Remains of their huts havebeen found at Serabit el-Khadim on the Sinai Peninsula.

Themost infamous mines were run by the Greeks. Laurium was a veritableconcentration camp operated by the Athenians in order to slake theirthirst for silver. Known from ancient writings, Laurium is said to bethe death place of some thirty thousand slaves who were captured inthe various wars and battles undertaken by the Greek city-state.These slaves were owned mostly by wealthy Greeks who rented them outto the owners of the mines. Young boys appear to have been favoredminers due to their smaller size and thus their ability to fit withinthe shafts. The shafts were almost four hundred feet deep and roughlythe width of a coffin. There is also evidence up through the fifthcentury AD of forced slavery in mines as a penal sentence. Referencesconcerning religious persecutions mention victims penalized by beingsent to the mines. This would have happened throughout the Romanperiod and could have been the fate of some early Christians.

Panningfor tin and gold is also evidenced from ancient times. Pans have beendiscovered in Troy and Asshur that appear to have had this function,although little else is known of this form of mining. Surface miningwas undertaken by the Romans, but this method required large amountsof water to wash away the top layer and therefore was not used often.Iron ore was also extracted from meteorites, but because of itsscarcity, it was considered a precious metal and seldom used.

Sources

Copper.The geographical location of ancient mines is not always easy topinpoint. Several copper mines have been found on the SinaiPeninsula, which lies between Egypt and Palestine. Timna and Faynanare two of the most recent mines in this location to attractarchaeological attention. These mines lay close to the borders ofIsrael: Faynan closer to the Dead Sea, and Timna closer to the RedSea. It is clear that copper from these mines was mined during thelate Iron AgeI stage (1200–1000 BC), or the time of thejudges. These mines are in Edomite territory; thus trade with theneighboring enemy was scattered at best, but it is possible that thiscopper went to the Assyrian Empire as a trade item or as tribute.

Theisland of Cyprus has also been mined throughout history for itscopper ore. Until recently, most of the mining was thought to haveoccurred under the empires of Greece and Rome. However, earlier minesand copper-smelting sites have been found on the island. These minesdate to the Middle Bronze Age, or just before the time of thepatriarchs. There is also written evidence found in Egypt of copperbeing traded between Cyprus and Egypt during the time when theIsraelites are thought to have been in Egypt. In addition, researchinto trade routes and the technology of boats and seafaring vesselshas increased understanding of the widespread trade within theMediterranean region. For the Egyptians, the Nile served as a perfectharbor for connecting with other seaports, including those on Cyprusand along the coast of Israel. Copper was the only metal used fortools and weapons throughout the third and fourth millennia BC. Itwas not until around 2300 BC that bronze began to appear in theregion of Palestine, probably a result of Syrian influence. Copper,however, was still needed, as bronze is an alloy of copper and tin.

Tin.The location of tin mines is difficult to determine for the earlierperiod. There are large tin deposits in what is now Afghanistan, andsome scholars argue that this is the source of early tin ore for thebiblical region. This source would have depended upon a fairly largeoverland trade route in order to bring the ore to the Mediterranean.Such routes were not unheard of, and most likely it existed. Ashipwreck discovered by archaeologists in modern-day Turkey alsoprovides evidence for the marine trade of such minerals. The ship wascarrying a large load of copper and tin ingots thought to be frommodern-day Afghanistan. This shipment dates to about 1350 BC. Tindeposits have also been found in Anatolia, north of Israel; however,it is currently unknown whether these deposits were exploited by theancients. The only other resource for tin was southern Spain, whichwas accessible through the trade routes of the Phoenicians.

Gold.Egypt and, more broadly, northern Africa have been known throughouthistory to have large deposits of gold that have been mined formillennia. Also, the Assyrian and Babylonian empires facilitatedtrade with parts of India, allowing gold from that region to beaccessible in Israel. Gold was also mined in Arabia, and biblicalreferences include Havilah (Gen. 2:11), Ophir (1Kings 10:11),and Sheba (Ps. 72:15). Ophir is as of yet unfound; however, it wasmost likely located somewhere along the Red Sea, as indicated bySolomon’s sending a fleet to Tar-shish by way of Ophir fromEzion Geber (1Kings 9:26; 2Chron. 9:21; 20:36). EzionGeber sits on the Red Sea, which suggests that Solomon’s shipspossibly circumnavigated Africa to reach Tarshish in southern Spain(Ezek. 27:12).

Ironand silver.There has been some discussion about the source of Deut. 8:9, inwhich Palestine is mentioned as being “a land where the rocksare iron.” Palestine itself has no legitimate source of ore tobe mined. However, there is a possibility that Lebanon could beincluded in this description. Lebanon is known to have considerableiron deposits. Iron, however, was not used much until the twelfth toeleventh centuries BC. Earlier, iron was very expensive and hard tocome by and thus was used mainly for jewelry and a limited number ofweapons. However, once the technology to turn iron into steel becamewidely known, its uses increased dramatically. The earliest piece ofsteel found in Palestine dates from the eleventh century BC, butsteel was not widely used until the tenth century BC, with the riseof the united monarchy.

Underthe economic conditions of the monarchy, iron, steel, bronze, silver,and gold were all highly visible. Gold and silver articles, althoughmentioned often in the biblical narrative, have been few in number inarchaeological finds. The large hoards of gold and silver in thetemple probably were taken to Assyria or Babylon after these empires’invasions. It does appear that silver, mainly in the form of ingots,was the preferred method of payment during this time. A large hoardof silver has been found in Eshtemoa, in the southern Hebron Hills,dating to this period.

Asnoted above, the Greeks mined silver at Laurium. It is also positedthat as early as the period of the Phoenicians large amounts ofsilver were mined and traded out of southern Spain. Besides silver,southern Spain had large amounts of iron, lead, and tin.

Turquoise.Serabit el-Khadim has been identified as a location of Egyptianmining. Here archaeologists have found large mining operations forturquoise dating far earlier than the time of the patriarchs. Thesemines would have been in use during the period of the Israelites’sojourn in Egypt, and inscriptions of letters from the Canaanitealphabet (as opposed to Egyptian hieroglyphs) have been found at thesite. In addition, devices for copper smelting and molding deviceshave been found in this region, but it is suspected that the copperindustry was devoted strictly to making the appropriate tools to minethe turquoise. Egyptians used and highly desired the turquoise forits bluish color. It is found in the earliest of Egyptian tombs,which lack other precious items such as gold or silver.

Given the vast amount of human history covered by the storieswithin Scripture, it is difficult to completely discuss the fullhistory of mining. The techniques and the technology involvedadvanced extensively throughout the ages; thus it would be necessaryto bring into the discussion a full history of metals andmetalworking to be completely thorough. The discussion here willtherefore necessarily be brief and focused.

BiblicalReferences

Thereis only one clear reference to mining in the Bible, in Job 28:1–11:“Mortals put an end to the darkness; they search out thefarthest recesses for ore in the blackest darkness. Far from humandwellings they cut a shaft, in places untouched by human feet; farfrom other people they dangle and sway” (vv. 3–4). Thispassage describes the typical form of tunneling often found inancient mining. Included within the text of Job 28 are several typesof metals and minerals that were mined, including iron, gold, silver,copper, and sapphires. Tin and bronze were also known, with tin mostlikely being the last to be used by itself, despite its use in themaking of bronze. Most of the precious stones mentioned in Scriptureappear in the breastpiece of the high priest and in the foundationsof the new Jerusalem. There is also a list of precious stonesmentioned in Ezek. 28:13, but these largely replicate those mentionedin the breastpiece of the high priest (Exod. 28:17–21).

Methods

Theancients had two methods of mining ores. The first included findingore close to the surface and following the shaft of deposits as faras possible. Copper mines of this fashion have been found in Egypt,specifically in the northern regions. The tools used were picks andhoes. The shafts themselves were comparable to a coffin in size,allowing for little movement. If the ore was too hard to break apart,fires were lit in the shaft in order to heat and cool the ore, makingit more brittle. The shafts themselves extended up to two hundredfeet. After being broken, the ore was passed in baskets to thesurface, where it was crushed and separated. This job was done almostentirely by slaves who worked night and day until death took them, atwhich time other slaves replaced them. Remains of their huts havebeen found at Serabit el-Khadim on the Sinai Peninsula.

Themost infamous mines were run by the Greeks. Laurium was a veritableconcentration camp operated by the Athenians in order to slake theirthirst for silver. Known from ancient writings, Laurium is said to bethe death place of some thirty thousand slaves who were captured inthe various wars and battles undertaken by the Greek city-state.These slaves were owned mostly by wealthy Greeks who rented them outto the owners of the mines. Young boys appear to have been favoredminers due to their smaller size and thus their ability to fit withinthe shafts. The shafts were almost four hundred feet deep and roughlythe width of a coffin. There is also evidence up through the fifthcentury AD of forced slavery in mines as a penal sentence. Referencesconcerning religious persecutions mention victims penalized by beingsent to the mines. This would have happened throughout the Romanperiod and could have been the fate of some early Christians.

Panningfor tin and gold is also evidenced from ancient times. Pans have beendiscovered in Troy and Asshur that appear to have had this function,although little else is known of this form of mining. Surface miningwas undertaken by the Romans, but this method required large amountsof water to wash away the top layer and therefore was not used often.Iron ore was also extracted from meteorites, but because of itsscarcity, it was considered a precious metal and seldom used.

Sources

Copper.The geographical location of ancient mines is not always easy topinpoint. Several copper mines have been found on the SinaiPeninsula, which lies between Egypt and Palestine. Timna and Faynanare two of the most recent mines in this location to attractarchaeological attention. These mines lay close to the borders ofIsrael: Faynan closer to the Dead Sea, and Timna closer to the RedSea. It is clear that copper from these mines was mined during thelate Iron AgeI stage (1200–1000 BC), or the time of thejudges. These mines are in Edomite territory; thus trade with theneighboring enemy was scattered at best, but it is possible that thiscopper went to the Assyrian Empire as a trade item or as tribute.

Theisland of Cyprus has also been mined throughout history for itscopper ore. Until recently, most of the mining was thought to haveoccurred under the empires of Greece and Rome. However, earlier minesand copper-smelting sites have been found on the island. These minesdate to the Middle Bronze Age, or just before the time of thepatriarchs. There is also written evidence found in Egypt of copperbeing traded between Cyprus and Egypt during the time when theIsraelites are thought to have been in Egypt. In addition, researchinto trade routes and the technology of boats and seafaring vesselshas increased understanding of the widespread trade within theMediterranean region. For the Egyptians, the Nile served as a perfectharbor for connecting with other seaports, including those on Cyprusand along the coast of Israel. Copper was the only metal used fortools and weapons throughout the third and fourth millennia BC. Itwas not until around 2300 BC that bronze began to appear in theregion of Palestine, probably a result of Syrian influence. Copper,however, was still needed, as bronze is an alloy of copper and tin.

Tin.The location of tin mines is difficult to determine for the earlierperiod. There are large tin deposits in what is now Afghanistan, andsome scholars argue that this is the source of early tin ore for thebiblical region. This source would have depended upon a fairly largeoverland trade route in order to bring the ore to the Mediterranean.Such routes were not unheard of, and most likely it existed. Ashipwreck discovered by archaeologists in modern-day Turkey alsoprovides evidence for the marine trade of such minerals. The ship wascarrying a large load of copper and tin ingots thought to be frommodern-day Afghanistan. This shipment dates to about 1350 BC. Tindeposits have also been found in Anatolia, north of Israel; however,it is currently unknown whether these deposits were exploited by theancients. The only other resource for tin was southern Spain, whichwas accessible through the trade routes of the Phoenicians.

Gold.Egypt and, more broadly, northern Africa have been known throughouthistory to have large deposits of gold that have been mined formillennia. Also, the Assyrian and Babylonian empires facilitatedtrade with parts of India, allowing gold from that region to beaccessible in Israel. Gold was also mined in Arabia, and biblicalreferences include Havilah (Gen. 2:11), Ophir (1Kings 10:11),and Sheba (Ps. 72:15). Ophir is as of yet unfound; however, it wasmost likely located somewhere along the Red Sea, as indicated bySolomon’s sending a fleet to Tar-shish by way of Ophir fromEzion Geber (1Kings 9:26; 2Chron. 9:21; 20:36). EzionGeber sits on the Red Sea, which suggests that Solomon’s shipspossibly circumnavigated Africa to reach Tarshish in southern Spain(Ezek. 27:12).

Ironand silver.There has been some discussion about the source of Deut. 8:9, inwhich Palestine is mentioned as being “a land where the rocksare iron.” Palestine itself has no legitimate source of ore tobe mined. However, there is a possibility that Lebanon could beincluded in this description. Lebanon is known to have considerableiron deposits. Iron, however, was not used much until the twelfth toeleventh centuries BC. Earlier, iron was very expensive and hard tocome by and thus was used mainly for jewelry and a limited number ofweapons. However, once the technology to turn iron into steel becamewidely known, its uses increased dramatically. The earliest piece ofsteel found in Palestine dates from the eleventh century BC, butsteel was not widely used until the tenth century BC, with the riseof the united monarchy.

Underthe economic conditions of the monarchy, iron, steel, bronze, silver,and gold were all highly visible. Gold and silver articles, althoughmentioned often in the biblical narrative, have been few in number inarchaeological finds. The large hoards of gold and silver in thetemple probably were taken to Assyria or Babylon after these empires’invasions. It does appear that silver, mainly in the form of ingots,was the preferred method of payment during this time. A large hoardof silver has been found in Eshtemoa, in the southern Hebron Hills,dating to this period.

Asnoted above, the Greeks mined silver at Laurium. It is also positedthat as early as the period of the Phoenicians large amounts ofsilver were mined and traded out of southern Spain. Besides silver,southern Spain had large amounts of iron, lead, and tin.

Turquoise.Serabit el-Khadim has been identified as a location of Egyptianmining. Here archaeologists have found large mining operations forturquoise dating far earlier than the time of the patriarchs. Thesemines would have been in use during the period of the Israelites’sojourn in Egypt, and inscriptions of letters from the Canaanitealphabet (as opposed to Egyptian hieroglyphs) have been found at thesite. In addition, devices for copper smelting and molding deviceshave been found in this region, but it is suspected that the copperindustry was devoted strictly to making the appropriate tools to minethe turquoise. Egyptians used and highly desired the turquoise forits bluish color. It is found in the earliest of Egyptian tombs,which lack other precious items such as gold or silver.

Given the vast amount of human history covered by the storieswithin Scripture, it is difficult to completely discuss the fullhistory of mining. The techniques and the technology involvedadvanced extensively throughout the ages; thus it would be necessaryto bring into the discussion a full history of metals andmetalworking to be completely thorough. The discussion here willtherefore necessarily be brief and focused.

BiblicalReferences

Thereis only one clear reference to mining in the Bible, in Job 28:1–11:“Mortals put an end to the darkness; they search out thefarthest recesses for ore in the blackest darkness. Far from humandwellings they cut a shaft, in places untouched by human feet; farfrom other people they dangle and sway” (vv. 3–4). Thispassage describes the typical form of tunneling often found inancient mining. Included within the text of Job 28 are several typesof metals and minerals that were mined, including iron, gold, silver,copper, and sapphires. Tin and bronze were also known, with tin mostlikely being the last to be used by itself, despite its use in themaking of bronze. Most of the precious stones mentioned in Scriptureappear in the breastpiece of the high priest and in the foundationsof the new Jerusalem. There is also a list of precious stonesmentioned in Ezek. 28:13, but these largely replicate those mentionedin the breastpiece of the high priest (Exod. 28:17–21).

Methods

Theancients had two methods of mining ores. The first included findingore close to the surface and following the shaft of deposits as faras possible. Copper mines of this fashion have been found in Egypt,specifically in the northern regions. The tools used were picks andhoes. The shafts themselves were comparable to a coffin in size,allowing for little movement. If the ore was too hard to break apart,fires were lit in the shaft in order to heat and cool the ore, makingit more brittle. The shafts themselves extended up to two hundredfeet. After being broken, the ore was passed in baskets to thesurface, where it was crushed and separated. This job was done almostentirely by slaves who worked night and day until death took them, atwhich time other slaves replaced them. Remains of their huts havebeen found at Serabit el-Khadim on the Sinai Peninsula.

Themost infamous mines were run by the Greeks. Laurium was a veritableconcentration camp operated by the Athenians in order to slake theirthirst for silver. Known from ancient writings, Laurium is said to bethe death place of some thirty thousand slaves who were captured inthe various wars and battles undertaken by the Greek city-state.These slaves were owned mostly by wealthy Greeks who rented them outto the owners of the mines. Young boys appear to have been favoredminers due to their smaller size and thus their ability to fit withinthe shafts. The shafts were almost four hundred feet deep and roughlythe width of a coffin. There is also evidence up through the fifthcentury AD of forced slavery in mines as a penal sentence. Referencesconcerning religious persecutions mention victims penalized by beingsent to the mines. This would have happened throughout the Romanperiod and could have been the fate of some early Christians.

Panningfor tin and gold is also evidenced from ancient times. Pans have beendiscovered in Troy and Asshur that appear to have had this function,although little else is known of this form of mining. Surface miningwas undertaken by the Romans, but this method required large amountsof water to wash away the top layer and therefore was not used often.Iron ore was also extracted from meteorites, but because of itsscarcity, it was considered a precious metal and seldom used.

Sources

Copper.The geographical location of ancient mines is not always easy topinpoint. Several copper mines have been found on the SinaiPeninsula, which lies between Egypt and Palestine. Timna and Faynanare two of the most recent mines in this location to attractarchaeological attention. These mines lay close to the borders ofIsrael: Faynan closer to the Dead Sea, and Timna closer to the RedSea. It is clear that copper from these mines was mined during thelate Iron AgeI stage (1200–1000 BC), or the time of thejudges. These mines are in Edomite territory; thus trade with theneighboring enemy was scattered at best, but it is possible that thiscopper went to the Assyrian Empire as a trade item or as tribute.

Theisland of Cyprus has also been mined throughout history for itscopper ore. Until recently, most of the mining was thought to haveoccurred under the empires of Greece and Rome. However, earlier minesand copper-smelting sites have been found on the island. These minesdate to the Middle Bronze Age, or just before the time of thepatriarchs. There is also written evidence found in Egypt of copperbeing traded between Cyprus and Egypt during the time when theIsraelites are thought to have been in Egypt. In addition, researchinto trade routes and the technology of boats and seafaring vesselshas increased understanding of the widespread trade within theMediterranean region. For the Egyptians, the Nile served as a perfectharbor for connecting with other seaports, including those on Cyprusand along the coast of Israel. Copper was the only metal used fortools and weapons throughout the third and fourth millennia BC. Itwas not until around 2300 BC that bronze began to appear in theregion of Palestine, probably a result of Syrian influence. Copper,however, was still needed, as bronze is an alloy of copper and tin.

Tin.The location of tin mines is difficult to determine for the earlierperiod. There are large tin deposits in what is now Afghanistan, andsome scholars argue that this is the source of early tin ore for thebiblical region. This source would have depended upon a fairly largeoverland trade route in order to bring the ore to the Mediterranean.Such routes were not unheard of, and most likely it existed. Ashipwreck discovered by archaeologists in modern-day Turkey alsoprovides evidence for the marine trade of such minerals. The ship wascarrying a large load of copper and tin ingots thought to be frommodern-day Afghanistan. This shipment dates to about 1350 BC. Tindeposits have also been found in Anatolia, north of Israel; however,it is currently unknown whether these deposits were exploited by theancients. The only other resource for tin was southern Spain, whichwas accessible through the trade routes of the Phoenicians.

Gold.Egypt and, more broadly, northern Africa have been known throughouthistory to have large deposits of gold that have been mined formillennia. Also, the Assyrian and Babylonian empires facilitatedtrade with parts of India, allowing gold from that region to beaccessible in Israel. Gold was also mined in Arabia, and biblicalreferences include Havilah (Gen. 2:11), Ophir (1Kings 10:11),and Sheba (Ps. 72:15). Ophir is as of yet unfound; however, it wasmost likely located somewhere along the Red Sea, as indicated bySolomon’s sending a fleet to Tar-shish by way of Ophir fromEzion Geber (1Kings 9:26; 2Chron. 9:21; 20:36). EzionGeber sits on the Red Sea, which suggests that Solomon’s shipspossibly circumnavigated Africa to reach Tarshish in southern Spain(Ezek. 27:12).

Ironand silver.There has been some discussion about the source of Deut. 8:9, inwhich Palestine is mentioned as being “a land where the rocksare iron.” Palestine itself has no legitimate source of ore tobe mined. However, there is a possibility that Lebanon could beincluded in this description. Lebanon is known to have considerableiron deposits. Iron, however, was not used much until the twelfth toeleventh centuries BC. Earlier, iron was very expensive and hard tocome by and thus was used mainly for jewelry and a limited number ofweapons. However, once the technology to turn iron into steel becamewidely known, its uses increased dramatically. The earliest piece ofsteel found in Palestine dates from the eleventh century BC, butsteel was not widely used until the tenth century BC, with the riseof the united monarchy.

Underthe economic conditions of the monarchy, iron, steel, bronze, silver,and gold were all highly visible. Gold and silver articles, althoughmentioned often in the biblical narrative, have been few in number inarchaeological finds. The large hoards of gold and silver in thetemple probably were taken to Assyria or Babylon after these empires’invasions. It does appear that silver, mainly in the form of ingots,was the preferred method of payment during this time. A large hoardof silver has been found in Eshtemoa, in the southern Hebron Hills,dating to this period.

Asnoted above, the Greeks mined silver at Laurium. It is also positedthat as early as the period of the Phoenicians large amounts ofsilver were mined and traded out of southern Spain. Besides silver,southern Spain had large amounts of iron, lead, and tin.

Turquoise.Serabit el-Khadim has been identified as a location of Egyptianmining. Here archaeologists have found large mining operations forturquoise dating far earlier than the time of the patriarchs. Thesemines would have been in use during the period of the Israelites’sojourn in Egypt, and inscriptions of letters from the Canaanitealphabet (as opposed to Egyptian hieroglyphs) have been found at thesite. In addition, devices for copper smelting and molding deviceshave been found in this region, but it is suspected that the copperindustry was devoted strictly to making the appropriate tools to minethe turquoise. Egyptians used and highly desired the turquoise forits bluish color. It is found in the earliest of Egyptian tombs,which lack other precious items such as gold or silver.

Geography

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

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

Symbolism

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

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

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

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

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

Mentioned only in the OT in most Bible versions (MSG uses“nose” in the NT as part of English idioms; e.g., Matt.13:57; 21:32), the nose often is referred to in the context ofjewelry, as nose rings for women were a fine adornment in ancientHebrew culture (Gen. 24:47; Ezek. 16:12), in some cases indicative ofextravagance (Isa. 3:16–24). Other times, a stronger partywould direct a weaker party by means of a hook or a cord in theirnose (2Kings 19:28; 2Chron. 33:11; Job 40:24).

TheHebrew word for nose, ’ap, could be used metaphorically foranger, much as English speakers might say that an angry person “hassteam coming out of his nose.” Thus, the NIV’s “[he]became angry” can translate the Hebrew phrase “[his] noseburned” (Gen. 30:2; Judg. 10:7). The same Hebrew term can alsorefer to nostrils. The NIV uses the translation “nostrils”several times in the OT, often in poetry, usually in connection withbreath (Gen. 2:7; 7:22; 2Sam. 22:16 [cf. Ps. 18:15]; Job 27:3)or as a source of smoke (2Sam. 22:9 [cf. Ps. 18:8]; Job 41:20).

TheHebrews also used ’ap to refer to the entire face, normallywhen a person was bowing facedown. In such instances, “boweddown with his face to the ground” translates the Hebrew phrase“bowed down with nostrils [’appayim] toward the ground”(Gen. 19:1; 1Sam. 25:41).

All numbers in the original languages of the Bible arewritten using words, not numerals. Neither the biblical Hebrew northe Koine Greek writing system had distinct written numeral forms torepresent numbers. Preexilic Hebrew inscriptions record numberswritten either with words or in Egyptian hieratic number glyphs.During the exile, exposure to Aramaic resulted in the adoption of theAramaic script to write Hebrew, but there are no clear indicationsthat an Aramaic number system (as reflected in, e.g., the Elephantineinscriptions) was adopted. Hebrew later emulated Greek in assigningto the letters of the alphabet numerical values and so employing themto record numbers, although the practice of assigning numericalvalues to glyphs is also attested in pre-Hellenistic times. InMesopotamia, for example, the practice of assigning numerical valuesto characters from their syllabic writing system seems to haveexisted at least as far back as the eighth century BC. The earliestevidence of this practice in Hebrew dates to no earlier than themiddle of the second century BC, when it was used on Hasmonean coins.

Thevalue and importance of numbers was widely recognized throughout theancient world. Sophisticated mathematical texts are attested in bothMesopotamia and Egypt, although no such texts have been discoveredoriginating in ancient Israel. The use of hieratic numbers inpreexilic Israel suggests that mathematical knowledge may have beenimported, particularly from Egypt. The Akkadian language adapted fromSumerian a hybrid sexagesimal number system, which used cuneiformsymbols to represent numbers. Numbers were written in paired glyphs,one representing the values from 1 to 9, the second representing themultiples of 10 up to 50. For example, 59 was written by combiningthe glyph for 50 with that for 9. Larger numbers were then composedof sets of these paired glyphs. The impact of the sex-a-ges-i-malsystem can still be seen in the division of hours and minutes intosixty parts. Most other Near Eastern cultures, including that ofancient Egypt and Israel, used a decimal system.

Thedecimal system was also used in the Greek-speaking world, and theGreek language, since before the NT era, had employed letters torepresent numbers. The use of archaic letters that had otherwisedisappeared from general usage by NT times gave the Greek alphabettwenty-seven letters, which provided the basis for representingranges 1–9, 10–90, 100–900. Numbers wererepresented by adding letters together, so that the order of letterswas unimportant.

WhenHebrew started using letters to represent numbers, a similar schemewas adopted, although it necessarily stopped at 400 because theHebrew alphabet has only twenty-two letters. For some, this suggeststhat Hebrew may have appropriated the system from Greek, but the samesequence of values in earlier counting indicates that the associationof values 1–9, 10–90, 100–900 with the letters ofthe alphabet was itself not a Greek innovation.

NumberSymbolism

Numbersoften are used with symbolic significance in the Bible. Particularlyprominent are the numbers 7 and 12, together with variations scaledby powers of 10. Other numbers occur frequently and also appear tohave some symbolic significance, including 4, 40, and 1,000. A noteof warning is pertinent, however, because there is a danger both offinding number symbolism where there is none and of overlooking thesymbolic significance of numbers where it is appropriate.

Perhapsthe most prominent symbolic association in the Bible occurs with thenumber seven. Broadly speaking, seven denotes completeness,perfection, or consummation. The number first appears in the creationaccount in association with the first Sabbath, in which it is tied tocompletion and rest. Linked to this are the working week, whichconcluded with a Sabbath, the sabbatical year for the land (Lev.25:2–7), the duration of the major feasts over seven days(e.g., Passover [cf. Lev. 23:6, 34; Ezek. 45:21]), even the number ofyears Jacob worked for Leah and then Rachel (Gen. 29:15–30).God’s promise of comprehensive vengeance upon those who harmCain is reflected in the use of seven (Gen. 4:15; cf. Pss. 12:6;79:12; Prov. 6:31; Isa. 30:26). The idea that seven representscompleteness can be seen in the seventy nations recorded in Gen. 10and in the description of Yahweh as having seven eyes (Zech. 4:10).In the NT, the symbolic use of seven is expanded: it is used by Jesusin explaining unlimited forgiveness (Matt. 18:21–22) and mostextensively by the author of Revelation, where reference is made toseven churches (1:4, 11, 20), spirits (1:4; 3:1; 5:6), goldenlampstands (1:12; 2:1), stars (1:16; 2:1), seals (5:5; 6:1), eyes(5:6), angels (8:2, 6; 15:6, 7, 8; 16:1; 17:1; 21:9), trumpets (8:2,6), thunderclaps (10:3, 4), crowns (12:3), heads (12:3; 13:1; 17:3,7, 9), plagues (15:6, 8; 21:9), golden bowls (15:7; 16:1; 17:1),mountains (17:9), and kings (17:10).

Arisingout of the observations relating to the symbolic use of the numberseven are the manner in which its significance also applied torelated numbers such as 7×7 =49 (cf. Lev.25:8–55) and 7×10 =70 (cf. Exod. 24:1,9; Jer. 25:12; 29:10; Dan. 9:2, 24; Luke 10:1–17).

Thenext most significant number with symbolic associations is twelve. Inthe OT, the primary association is with the tribes of Israel, andthis association later develops to encompass God’s people intheir entirety. It is likely that such an association is deliberatelymade in Jesus’ choice of twelve apostles.

Thenumber ten is also associated with the practice of tithing, which wascommon throughout the ancient Near East. The number ten alone doesnot have a clear symbolic usage, although when a power of ten (e.g.,1,000 or 10,000) is used, these can represent any vast or unnumberedquantity (see “Large Numbers” below). Ten is also used incombination with other symbolic values to express the same symbolicnotion emphatically; for example, 70 (7×10) or 77(7×10 +7) become emphatic affirmations ofcompleteness, perfection, or consummation (e.g., Gen. 4:24; Matt.18:22).

Thenumber four appears to have some symbolic significance, perhaps dueto the typical enumeration of the four cardinal directions,suggesting geographical or cosmological entirety (cf. Isa. 11:12;Jer. 49:36; Zech. 6:5). For example, four rivers leave Eden to waterthe entire land (Gen. 2:10–14).

Thenumber forty appears frequently in association with long periods ofendurance, such as Moses on the mountain (forty days [Exod. 24:18]),the time in the wilderness (forty years [Exod. 16:35]), Elijah’sjourney to Horeb (forty days [1Kings 19:8]), Jesus’ timein the wilderness (forty days/nights [Matt. 4:2; Mark 1:13; Luke4:2]), and his time with his disciples following the resurrection(forty days [Acts 1:3]).

LargeNumbers

Somescholars have argued that the large numbers in the OT present aparticular problem in several places. Based on the figures in Num. 1,for example, there were 603,550 men of fighting age among those inthe exodus, suggesting a total population of between one and threemillion (not counting livestock). Taken at face value, this numberpresents some difficulties: based on estimates of Egyptianpopulation, it represents a very significant proportion of the entirepopulation of that country; taken in conjunction with the number offirstborn recorded in Num. 3:43, it implies a very large averagefamily size; it seems difficult to reconcile with the claim that theseven nations in the land of Canaan were greater than Israel (Deut.4:38; 7:1; 9:1–2); and the logistics of moving that many peoplewould pose significant problems.

However,if the observation made by Pharaoh in Exod. 1:9, that the Hebrewswere more numerous than the Egyptians, was even approximatelyaccurate, then a population of between one and two million would beappropriate. Nonetheless, various attempts have been made to mitigatethe perceived difficulties by suggesting approaches that interpretthe text in ways that result in significantly smaller populationestimates for the Israelites.

Thelargest single-number word used in the OT is rebabah, which is usedto represent large values greater than ten thousand but otherwiseoften lacks precision and is better understood to refer to a vastunnumbered multitude (e.g., Pss. 3:6; 91:7; Song 5:10). Similarly,the number one thousand can be used rhetorically without demandingmathematical precision (e.g., 2Pet. 3:8, which should not beunderstood to provide a mathematical equation). It is this latternumber that appears in the difficult passages in Numbers. The bestsolution to the problems lies in the meaning of the Hebrew term inquestion, ’elep (“thousand”). Several scholars havesuggested that ’elep can also refer to a military unit or someother group (cf. Num. 1:16). Although the precise numbers in questionare debated according to varying understandings of the sizes of thegroups, the best solutions put the total number of Israelites in theexodus at around thirty thousand.

Gematria

Gematriais a system for calculating numerical values for words by assigningspecific values to the letters of an alphabet. As noted above, thepractice was used for legitimate numerical notation in Greek and, insome periods, in Hebrew. Letters were assigned values based on theirorder within the alphabet, the first nine letters assigned values1–9, the next nine assigned values 10–90, and thesubsequent letters assigned multiples of 100.

Althoughnumerology of various forms, and in particular gematria, has formedthe basis of many misguided attempts to discover hidden meaningswithin the biblical text, there appear to be explicit uses ofgematria in Rev. 13:18 and, some suggest, in John 21:11. If thenumber 666 is an actual example of gematria, no consensus has beenreached over the identity of the referent.

Mostof the other supposed examples of gematria within the pages of theBible are unconvincing, largely because the texts wherein suchexamples are found make good sense without resorting to obscure anduncertain interpretations, and partly because it runs counter to thenotion that God speaks to make his will known (e.g., Deut. 29:29).

An occupation or profession is the usual work or business inwhich a person engages for the sake of earning a living. In biblicaltimes, family or social standing most often determined occupation.This was particularly true for occupations tied to land, such asplanting crops and raising animals, since land in ancient Israel waspassed down within the tribe, normally from fathers to sons (Josh.14:9; Ezek. 46:18). Sometimes daughters also received a share in thefamily inheritance (Josh. 17:6). Most people gained their livelihoodfrom their family’s land, and those who did not have land hiredthemselves out to work for wages (Deut. 24:14). A son normallylearned his trade from his father (Gen. 47:3; 2Kings 4:18;Matt. 4:21) and continued in that occupation unless called into God’sservice (1Kings 19:19–21; Jer. 1:5; Matt. 4:22).

Cicero,writing around the time of the NT, considered occupations such as taxcollector, laborer, and fisherman to be vulgar. Conversely,professions such as teacher, doctor, and wholesale trader were morehonorable, with landowner being the most respectable and profitableprofession (Off. 1.42).

Agricultureand Farming

Farmingis the earliest recorded occupation in the Bible, as the first manwas called to work and keep the garden (Gen. 2:15). Even after theexile from Eden because of sin, Adam worked the ground for food, asdid Cain, his firstborn son (Gen. 3:17–18; 4:2). The openingchapters of the Bible establish a fundamental link between “man”(’adam) and the “ground” (’adamah). After theflood, Noah established himself as a “man of the soil”(’ish ha’adamah) by planting a vineyard (Gen. 9:20). KingUzziah “loved the soil” (’oheb ’adamah) andso employed people to work in his fields and vineyards (2Chron.26:10).

Goddemonstrated his covenant commitment to Isaac by blessing him with anincredible harvest (Gen. 26:12), and he promised to prosper Israel’sfarms if the people obeyed him (Deut. 28:4) and to curse the fruit oftheir ground if they disobeyed (Deut. 28:18). The OT ideal was foreveryone to live “under their own vine and under their own figtree” (1Kings 4:25; Mic. 4:4). According to Prov. 28:19,the diligent farmer would have abundant food.

Jesus’parables frequently employed agricultural imagery that would havebeen readily understandable in first-century Palestine, where manypeople were farmers (cf. Mark 4:1–9; 12:1–11) and someowned land (Acts 4:34). The people living around Jerusalem at thistime engaged in agriculture, soil cultivation, and cattle raising(Let. Aris. 107–112).

Herdingand Hunting

Herdinganimals is the second-oldest occupation recorded in Scripture (afterfarming), and raising flocks and herds continued to be one of themost common and important professions throughout biblical times. Abelis the first “keeper of sheep” in the Bible (Gen. 4:2NRSV). Several generations later, Jabal pioneered the nomadic herdinglifestyle (Gen. 4:20). The patriarchs were shepherds (Gen. 47:3), aswere Moses (Exod. 3:1), David (1Sam. 17:34), and many others inthe OT. Josephus acknowledged that “feeding of sheep was theemployment of our forefathers in the most ancient ages”(Ag.Ap. 1.91). While men typically worked as shepherds andherdsmen, the occupation was also open to women, such as Rachel,whose fathers owned sheep (Gen. 29:9). Shepherds were present atJesus’ birth (Luke 2:8–20), and Jesus’ teachingsuggests that shepherding was a common occupation in Palestine (cf.Matt. 18:12; John 10:1–30).

Manypeople in biblical times hunted, either for food, sport, orprotection. The first recorded hunter is Nimrod, “a mightyhunter before the Lord” (Gen. 10:9). Ishmael was “anexpert with the bow” (Gen. 21:20 NRSV), while Esau was “askillful hunter, a man of the open country” who brought backwild game for food (25:27–28). The name of Pokereth-Hazzebaim,included in the genealogy of Solomon’s servants in Ezra 2:57,reflects his occupation as a “gazelle catcher” (cf.1Kings 4:23).

Buildersand Craftsmen

Cainwas the first person in the Bible to build a city (Gen. 4:17), andhis descendant Tubal-Cain was the first metalworker (4:22). Nimrodbuilt a number of cities (10:11–12), and the beginning ofNimrod’s kingdom was Babel (10:10), where the people gatheredtogether to build a city with brick (11:3). Builders in Mesopotamiaused baked brick and asphalt, while Israelite builders usuallypreferred the more readily available stone and mortar. After Joseph’sdeath, Israel was conscripted into forced labor in Egypt, whichinvolved building cities of brick and mortar (Exod. 1:11).

Therole of craftsmen in the construction of the tabernacle wasparticularly significant. Bezalel and Oholiab were “skilledworkers and designers” empowered by God for work on thetabernacle (Exod. 35:35). They engaged in “all kinds ofcrafts,” including artistic metalworking, masonry, carpentry,and weaving (Exod. 31:4–5; 38:23).

Kingsin Israel often commissioned important building projects (1Kings12:25; 15:22; 16:24; 2Chron. 26:9; Josephus, J.W. 1.401–2).Carpenters and stonemasons worked on David’s palace (2Sam.5:11). Solomon conscripted laborers to build the temple and alsoemployed carriers, stonecutters, craftsmen, and foremen to supervisethe work (1Kings 5:13–18). After the Babylonian exile,many Israelites were involved in rebuilding the temple and the wallof Jerusalem, which had been destroyed (Ezra 3:8; Neh. 4:16–18).These projects, directed by Zerubbabel and Nehemiah, utilized masons,carpenters, and other workers (Ezra 3:7).

Jesusis referred to as a tektōn (Mark 6:3) and as the son of a tektōn(Matt. 13:55), with tektōn usually translated “carpenter”by English versions. However,recent scholarshiphas demonstrated that Jesus was likely a builder, not a carpenter inthe modern sense of the term. In the LXX, the word tektōntypically translates a Hebrew word, kharash, used broadly to refer tocraftsmen working with stone, wood, or metal.

Musicians

Thefirst musician recorded in Scripture is Jubal, “the father ofall who play the stringed instruments and pipes” (Gen. 4:21).Musicians performed a variety of roles in ancient society, as they dotoday. Singers and instrumentalists were employed to celebratefestive occasions, often to provide accompaniment for dancing (Gen.31:27; Luke 15:25), to soothe the sick or distressed (1Sam.16:16), and to express lamentation (Job 30:31).

Musiciansplayed an important role in leading God’s people in worship.The “director of music” is mentioned in the headings offifty-five psalms and Hab. 3:19. The most famous musician inScripture is David, “the singer of Israel’s psalms”(2Sam. 23:1 GW), who played the harp (1Sam. 16:18) andwrote or inspired at least seventy-three canonical psalms. Solomonwas also a notable songwriter and lover of music (1Kings 4:32).David appointed many Levites as singers and musicians to lead Israelin worship (1Chron. 15:16; 23:5). The musicians played lyres,harps, cymbals, and trumpets (2Chron. 5:12).

Government,Politics, and Military

Beforethe monarchy, there were no formal government offices. Under Moses, agroup of seventy elders in Israel served as leaders and officials,and these men were to carry out Moses’ decrees and judge thepeople on most matters (Exod. 18:20–22; Num. 11:16). AfterJoshua’s death, God raised up judges to rescue Israel fromforeign enemies and lead the people (Judg. 2:16) until the time ofSamuel, when Saul was made king (1Sam. 11:15).

Kingsin Israel employed various officials. In 2Sam. 8:16–18,Joab is listed first among David’s officials, which suggeststhat the military commander was second in authority after the king.Under Solomon, the leader of the army is called “commander inchief” (1Kings 4:4). The royal cabinet included a numberof key advisers, including the recorder, the secretary, and the“confidant” of the king (cf. 2Sam. 16:16). The OTdoes not specify the precise roles of these officials. The recorderwas among the highest governmental positions and served as a royalcounselor. In Hebrew, mazkir (“recorder”) is a cognatenoun to the verb zkr (“to remember”), which suggests thatthis official may have managed and preserved public records (2Kings18:18; Isa. 36:22). The main task of the king’s secretary orscribe (sop̱er)was to write down (sapar) official state documents (2Sam.8:17), and he advised the king and also provided financial oversight(2Kings 12:10). Recorders and secretaries apparently were welleducated and multilingual, as was the palace administrator (2Kings18:18, 26). Solomon’s officials included supervisors of thepalace and the forced labor, as well as governors who suppliedprovisions for the king’s household (1Kings 4:6–7).The OT mentions cupbearers in Israel’s government and in otheradministrations (Gen. 40:1; 1Kings 10:5; Neh. 1:11). Thecupbearer served as the royal wine taster; he protected the king frombeing poisoned and had direct access to the monarch.

Inthe Roman Empire, the emperor was absolute ruler (1Pet. 2:17),with the senate next in authority. Proconsuls held judicial andmilitary authority over larger provinces (Acts 18:12), prefects(governors) administered smaller provinces (Matt. 27:2), withtetrarchs over one-fourth of a province (Luke 3:1).

Christiansin NT times engaged in civil service. Erastus was a financial officerin Corinth (Rom. 16:23), and he may be the same Erastus commemoratedin an inscription from this period who held the office of aedile. Theproconsul Sergius Paulus (Acts 13:7); Manaen, a close friend of HerodAntipas (Acts 13:1); and members of Caesar’s household (Phil.4:22) were also Christian public leaders.

Tradeand Economics

Fromearliest times, people have exchanged goods and property. WhenAbraham purchased Ephron’s field, his silver was measured“according to the weight current among the merchants”(Gen. 23:16), which suggests that a recognized system of publictrading was in place during the time of the patriarchs. Traders ofcommodities such as spices traveled along caravan routes betweensouthern Arabia and Egypt, and these traders often acquired slavesalong the way (Gen. 37:28). Solomon employed royal merchants to buyand sell goods (1Kings 10:28).

Inthe first century, Jews were engaged broadly in economic life aslandowners, artisans, merchants, traders, bankers, and slaves.Several of Jesus’ disciples were fishermen (Matt. 4:18). Lukewas a physician, a well-educated and respectable professional (Col.4:14). Lydia was a dealer in purple cloth (Acts 16:14). Paul, Aquila,and Priscilla worked as tentmakers (Acts 18:3). In the Roman Empire,commerce and pagan religion often intermingled. Merchants oftenformed trade guilds, where membership sometimes required religiousand moral compromise. In Ephesus, silversmiths and craftsmen inrelated trades turned significant profit through their connectionswith the local Artemis cult (Acts 19:24–27).

Jesusfrequently spent time with tax collectors, such as Levi (also called“Matthew”) (Matt. 9:9; Mark 2:14). Tax collectors were adespised group because often they became wealthy by taking advantageof the Roman taxation system, which allowed them to charge commissionon taxes collected (Luke 19:2, 8). Jesus’ parable of thetalents references bankers who offered interest on deposits collected(Matt. 25:27), and Rev. 3:17–18 alludes to the fact thatLaodicea was a financial center with a significant banking system.

Servantsand Slaves

Inthe OT, ’ebed most often designates a slave or servant, whoseoccupation involves work (’abad ) as a subordinate. Someservants held very important positions in their master’shousehold (Gen. 24:2), while many others toiled in hard labor (Job7:2). Israelites were not to enslave their kinfolk, but they couldtake slaves from other nations. Fellow Israelites who became poorcould serve as hired workers, but they were to be released along withtheir children at the Jubilee because God had brought Israel out fromEgyptian slavery and they belonged to God as his servants (Lev.25:39–46).

Slavesin the Roman world were property like goods or cattle, possessed byanother (Dio Chrysostom, 2Serv. lib. 24). Unlike modern slaverypractices, race played no factor in the Roman institution of slavery.Slaves were kidnapped and sold in NT times (1Tim. 1:10; Rev.18:13), but the majority of slaves were so by birth. The mostprominent slave in the NT is Onesimus, for whom Paul intercedes withhis master, Philemon (Philem. 10, 16). Believing slaves were to obeytheir earthly masters “as slaves of Christ” (Eph. 6:5–6),but the NT stressed the equality of slave and free in Christ (Gal.3:28). Paul called himself a “servant [doulos] of Christ Jesus”(Rom. 1:1).

ReligiousService

MostIsraelites engaged in professional religious service were Levites(Num. 3:12), including Moses, Aaron, and the priests in Aaron’sline (Exod. 6:19–20; 35:19). The priests offered sacrifices toGod on behalf of the people (Heb. 5:1). Under the priests’direction, the Levites were charged with caring for the tabernacleand its furnishings (Num. 1:49; 1Chron. 23:32) and carrying theark of the covenant (1Chron. 15:2). They were set apart toserve in God’s presence (Deut. 18:7) and to lead the people inworship (2Chron. 5:12). Further, priests often played animportant advisory role to Israel’s kings (2Sam. 8:17;1Kings 4:5; 2Kings 12:2).

InIsrael, people went to seers and prophets to inquire of God (1Sam.9:9), for they received and communicated God’s word (2Sam.24:11; Jer. 37:6). Sometimes individuals are mentioned as prophets,and other times the prophets are discussed as an organized group(1Sam. 19:20; 1Kings 22:6).

TheNT references a number of ministerial offices (1Cor. 12:28;Eph. 4:11; 1Tim. 3:1–12). Not all ministers were paid,though teachers and preachers had a right to “receive theirliving from the gospel” (1Cor. 9:14–15; cf. 1Tim.5:17). Apostles were those sent out by Jesus as his representatives.The term apostolos refers particularly to the twelve apostles whowere with Jesus during his earthly ministry and who were witnesses ofhis resurrection (Acts 1:21–22). Paul referred to himself as anapostle (Gal. 1:1; 1Cor. 1:1), and he calls Epaph-ro-di-tus andothers “messengers” (apostoloi) in the churches (2Cor.8:23; Phil. 2:25). Prophets have the spiritual gift of prophecy andspeak to strengthen, encourage, and comfort the church (Acts 15:32;1Cor. 14:3). Overseers (also called “elders” or“pastors”) are qualified leaders who teach, shepherd, andexercise authority in the church (1Tim. 3:1; 1Pet. 5:2).Evangelists and missionaries proclaim the gospel and aim to winconverts to Christ (Acts 21:8; 2Tim. 4:5). Those ministers whoare faithful to the gospel deserve support (3John8).

An occupation or profession is the usual work or business inwhich a person engages for the sake of earning a living. In biblicaltimes, family or social standing most often determined occupation.This was particularly true for occupations tied to land, such asplanting crops and raising animals, since land in ancient Israel waspassed down within the tribe, normally from fathers to sons (Josh.14:9; Ezek. 46:18). Sometimes daughters also received a share in thefamily inheritance (Josh. 17:6). Most people gained their livelihoodfrom their family’s land, and those who did not have land hiredthemselves out to work for wages (Deut. 24:14). A son normallylearned his trade from his father (Gen. 47:3; 2Kings 4:18;Matt. 4:21) and continued in that occupation unless called into God’sservice (1Kings 19:19–21; Jer. 1:5; Matt. 4:22).

Cicero,writing around the time of the NT, considered occupations such as taxcollector, laborer, and fisherman to be vulgar. Conversely,professions such as teacher, doctor, and wholesale trader were morehonorable, with landowner being the most respectable and profitableprofession (Off. 1.42).

Agricultureand Farming

Farmingis the earliest recorded occupation in the Bible, as the first manwas called to work and keep the garden (Gen. 2:15). Even after theexile from Eden because of sin, Adam worked the ground for food, asdid Cain, his firstborn son (Gen. 3:17–18; 4:2). The openingchapters of the Bible establish a fundamental link between “man”(’adam) and the “ground” (’adamah). After theflood, Noah established himself as a “man of the soil”(’ish ha’adamah) by planting a vineyard (Gen. 9:20). KingUzziah “loved the soil” (’oheb ’adamah) andso employed people to work in his fields and vineyards (2Chron.26:10).

Goddemonstrated his covenant commitment to Isaac by blessing him with anincredible harvest (Gen. 26:12), and he promised to prosper Israel’sfarms if the people obeyed him (Deut. 28:4) and to curse the fruit oftheir ground if they disobeyed (Deut. 28:18). The OT ideal was foreveryone to live “under their own vine and under their own figtree” (1Kings 4:25; Mic. 4:4). According to Prov. 28:19,the diligent farmer would have abundant food.

Jesus’parables frequently employed agricultural imagery that would havebeen readily understandable in first-century Palestine, where manypeople were farmers (cf. Mark 4:1–9; 12:1–11) and someowned land (Acts 4:34). The people living around Jerusalem at thistime engaged in agriculture, soil cultivation, and cattle raising(Let. Aris. 107–112).

Herdingand Hunting

Herdinganimals is the second-oldest occupation recorded in Scripture (afterfarming), and raising flocks and herds continued to be one of themost common and important professions throughout biblical times. Abelis the first “keeper of sheep” in the Bible (Gen. 4:2NRSV). Several generations later, Jabal pioneered the nomadic herdinglifestyle (Gen. 4:20). The patriarchs were shepherds (Gen. 47:3), aswere Moses (Exod. 3:1), David (1Sam. 17:34), and many others inthe OT. Josephus acknowledged that “feeding of sheep was theemployment of our forefathers in the most ancient ages”(Ag.Ap. 1.91). While men typically worked as shepherds andherdsmen, the occupation was also open to women, such as Rachel,whose fathers owned sheep (Gen. 29:9). Shepherds were present atJesus’ birth (Luke 2:8–20), and Jesus’ teachingsuggests that shepherding was a common occupation in Palestine (cf.Matt. 18:12; John 10:1–30).

Manypeople in biblical times hunted, either for food, sport, orprotection. The first recorded hunter is Nimrod, “a mightyhunter before the Lord” (Gen. 10:9). Ishmael was “anexpert with the bow” (Gen. 21:20 NRSV), while Esau was “askillful hunter, a man of the open country” who brought backwild game for food (25:27–28). The name of Pokereth-Hazzebaim,included in the genealogy of Solomon’s servants in Ezra 2:57,reflects his occupation as a “gazelle catcher” (cf.1Kings 4:23).

Buildersand Craftsmen

Cainwas the first person in the Bible to build a city (Gen. 4:17), andhis descendant Tubal-Cain was the first metalworker (4:22). Nimrodbuilt a number of cities (10:11–12), and the beginning ofNimrod’s kingdom was Babel (10:10), where the people gatheredtogether to build a city with brick (11:3). Builders in Mesopotamiaused baked brick and asphalt, while Israelite builders usuallypreferred the more readily available stone and mortar. After Joseph’sdeath, Israel was conscripted into forced labor in Egypt, whichinvolved building cities of brick and mortar (Exod. 1:11).

Therole of craftsmen in the construction of the tabernacle wasparticularly significant. Bezalel and Oholiab were “skilledworkers and designers” empowered by God for work on thetabernacle (Exod. 35:35). They engaged in “all kinds ofcrafts,” including artistic metalworking, masonry, carpentry,and weaving (Exod. 31:4–5; 38:23).

Kingsin Israel often commissioned important building projects (1Kings12:25; 15:22; 16:24; 2Chron. 26:9; Josephus, J.W. 1.401–2).Carpenters and stonemasons worked on David’s palace (2Sam.5:11). Solomon conscripted laborers to build the temple and alsoemployed carriers, stonecutters, craftsmen, and foremen to supervisethe work (1Kings 5:13–18). After the Babylonian exile,many Israelites were involved in rebuilding the temple and the wallof Jerusalem, which had been destroyed (Ezra 3:8; Neh. 4:16–18).These projects, directed by Zerubbabel and Nehemiah, utilized masons,carpenters, and other workers (Ezra 3:7).

Jesusis referred to as a tektōn (Mark 6:3) and as the son of a tektōn(Matt. 13:55), with tektōn usually translated “carpenter”by English versions. However,recent scholarshiphas demonstrated that Jesus was likely a builder, not a carpenter inthe modern sense of the term. In the LXX, the word tektōntypically translates a Hebrew word, kharash, used broadly to refer tocraftsmen working with stone, wood, or metal.

Musicians

Thefirst musician recorded in Scripture is Jubal, “the father ofall who play the stringed instruments and pipes” (Gen. 4:21).Musicians performed a variety of roles in ancient society, as they dotoday. Singers and instrumentalists were employed to celebratefestive occasions, often to provide accompaniment for dancing (Gen.31:27; Luke 15:25), to soothe the sick or distressed (1Sam.16:16), and to express lamentation (Job 30:31).

Musiciansplayed an important role in leading God’s people in worship.The “director of music” is mentioned in the headings offifty-five psalms and Hab. 3:19. The most famous musician inScripture is David, “the singer of Israel’s psalms”(2Sam. 23:1 GW), who played the harp (1Sam. 16:18) andwrote or inspired at least seventy-three canonical psalms. Solomonwas also a notable songwriter and lover of music (1Kings 4:32).David appointed many Levites as singers and musicians to lead Israelin worship (1Chron. 15:16; 23:5). The musicians played lyres,harps, cymbals, and trumpets (2Chron. 5:12).

Government,Politics, and Military

Beforethe monarchy, there were no formal government offices. Under Moses, agroup of seventy elders in Israel served as leaders and officials,and these men were to carry out Moses’ decrees and judge thepeople on most matters (Exod. 18:20–22; Num. 11:16). AfterJoshua’s death, God raised up judges to rescue Israel fromforeign enemies and lead the people (Judg. 2:16) until the time ofSamuel, when Saul was made king (1Sam. 11:15).

Kingsin Israel employed various officials. In 2Sam. 8:16–18,Joab is listed first among David’s officials, which suggeststhat the military commander was second in authority after the king.Under Solomon, the leader of the army is called “commander inchief” (1Kings 4:4). The royal cabinet included a numberof key advisers, including the recorder, the secretary, and the“confidant” of the king (cf. 2Sam. 16:16). The OTdoes not specify the precise roles of these officials. The recorderwas among the highest governmental positions and served as a royalcounselor. In Hebrew, mazkir (“recorder”) is a cognatenoun to the verb zkr (“to remember”), which suggests thatthis official may have managed and preserved public records (2Kings18:18; Isa. 36:22). The main task of the king’s secretary orscribe (sop̱er)was to write down (sapar) official state documents (2Sam.8:17), and he advised the king and also provided financial oversight(2Kings 12:10). Recorders and secretaries apparently were welleducated and multilingual, as was the palace administrator (2Kings18:18, 26). Solomon’s officials included supervisors of thepalace and the forced labor, as well as governors who suppliedprovisions for the king’s household (1Kings 4:6–7).The OT mentions cupbearers in Israel’s government and in otheradministrations (Gen. 40:1; 1Kings 10:5; Neh. 1:11). Thecupbearer served as the royal wine taster; he protected the king frombeing poisoned and had direct access to the monarch.

Inthe Roman Empire, the emperor was absolute ruler (1Pet. 2:17),with the senate next in authority. Proconsuls held judicial andmilitary authority over larger provinces (Acts 18:12), prefects(governors) administered smaller provinces (Matt. 27:2), withtetrarchs over one-fourth of a province (Luke 3:1).

Christiansin NT times engaged in civil service. Erastus was a financial officerin Corinth (Rom. 16:23), and he may be the same Erastus commemoratedin an inscription from this period who held the office of aedile. Theproconsul Sergius Paulus (Acts 13:7); Manaen, a close friend of HerodAntipas (Acts 13:1); and members of Caesar’s household (Phil.4:22) were also Christian public leaders.

Tradeand Economics

Fromearliest times, people have exchanged goods and property. WhenAbraham purchased Ephron’s field, his silver was measured“according to the weight current among the merchants”(Gen. 23:16), which suggests that a recognized system of publictrading was in place during the time of the patriarchs. Traders ofcommodities such as spices traveled along caravan routes betweensouthern Arabia and Egypt, and these traders often acquired slavesalong the way (Gen. 37:28). Solomon employed royal merchants to buyand sell goods (1Kings 10:28).

Inthe first century, Jews were engaged broadly in economic life aslandowners, artisans, merchants, traders, bankers, and slaves.Several of Jesus’ disciples were fishermen (Matt. 4:18). Lukewas a physician, a well-educated and respectable professional (Col.4:14). Lydia was a dealer in purple cloth (Acts 16:14). Paul, Aquila,and Priscilla worked as tentmakers (Acts 18:3). In the Roman Empire,commerce and pagan religion often intermingled. Merchants oftenformed trade guilds, where membership sometimes required religiousand moral compromise. In Ephesus, silversmiths and craftsmen inrelated trades turned significant profit through their connectionswith the local Artemis cult (Acts 19:24–27).

Jesusfrequently spent time with tax collectors, such as Levi (also called“Matthew”) (Matt. 9:9; Mark 2:14). Tax collectors were adespised group because often they became wealthy by taking advantageof the Roman taxation system, which allowed them to charge commissionon taxes collected (Luke 19:2, 8). Jesus’ parable of thetalents references bankers who offered interest on deposits collected(Matt. 25:27), and Rev. 3:17–18 alludes to the fact thatLaodicea was a financial center with a significant banking system.

Servantsand Slaves

Inthe OT, ’ebed most often designates a slave or servant, whoseoccupation involves work (’abad ) as a subordinate. Someservants held very important positions in their master’shousehold (Gen. 24:2), while many others toiled in hard labor (Job7:2). Israelites were not to enslave their kinfolk, but they couldtake slaves from other nations. Fellow Israelites who became poorcould serve as hired workers, but they were to be released along withtheir children at the Jubilee because God had brought Israel out fromEgyptian slavery and they belonged to God as his servants (Lev.25:39–46).

Slavesin the Roman world were property like goods or cattle, possessed byanother (Dio Chrysostom, 2Serv. lib. 24). Unlike modern slaverypractices, race played no factor in the Roman institution of slavery.Slaves were kidnapped and sold in NT times (1Tim. 1:10; Rev.18:13), but the majority of slaves were so by birth. The mostprominent slave in the NT is Onesimus, for whom Paul intercedes withhis master, Philemon (Philem. 10, 16). Believing slaves were to obeytheir earthly masters “as slaves of Christ” (Eph. 6:5–6),but the NT stressed the equality of slave and free in Christ (Gal.3:28). Paul called himself a “servant [doulos] of Christ Jesus”(Rom. 1:1).

ReligiousService

MostIsraelites engaged in professional religious service were Levites(Num. 3:12), including Moses, Aaron, and the priests in Aaron’sline (Exod. 6:19–20; 35:19). The priests offered sacrifices toGod on behalf of the people (Heb. 5:1). Under the priests’direction, the Levites were charged with caring for the tabernacleand its furnishings (Num. 1:49; 1Chron. 23:32) and carrying theark of the covenant (1Chron. 15:2). They were set apart toserve in God’s presence (Deut. 18:7) and to lead the people inworship (2Chron. 5:12). Further, priests often played animportant advisory role to Israel’s kings (2Sam. 8:17;1Kings 4:5; 2Kings 12:2).

InIsrael, people went to seers and prophets to inquire of God (1Sam.9:9), for they received and communicated God’s word (2Sam.24:11; Jer. 37:6). Sometimes individuals are mentioned as prophets,and other times the prophets are discussed as an organized group(1Sam. 19:20; 1Kings 22:6).

TheNT references a number of ministerial offices (1Cor. 12:28;Eph. 4:11; 1Tim. 3:1–12). Not all ministers were paid,though teachers and preachers had a right to “receive theirliving from the gospel” (1Cor. 9:14–15; cf. 1Tim.5:17). Apostles were those sent out by Jesus as his representatives.The term apostolos refers particularly to the twelve apostles whowere with Jesus during his earthly ministry and who were witnesses ofhis resurrection (Acts 1:21–22). Paul referred to himself as anapostle (Gal. 1:1; 1Cor. 1:1), and he calls Epaph-ro-di-tus andothers “messengers” (apostoloi) in the churches (2Cor.8:23; Phil. 2:25). Prophets have the spiritual gift of prophecy andspeak to strengthen, encourage, and comfort the church (Acts 15:32;1Cor. 14:3). Overseers (also called “elders” or“pastors”) are qualified leaders who teach, shepherd, andexercise authority in the church (1Tim. 3:1; 1Pet. 5:2).Evangelists and missionaries proclaim the gospel and aim to winconverts to Christ (Acts 21:8; 2Tim. 4:5). Those ministers whoare faithful to the gospel deserve support (3John8).

Both Testaments proclaim, “The earth is the Lord’s,and everything in it” (Ps. 24:1; 1Cor. 10:26). Only theLord and Creator of the universe can rightfully claim ownership overanything, be it physical, spiritual, or moral (Job 41:11). Thus,“every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down fromthe Father of the heavenly lights” (James 1:17). He even ownshuman beings themselves. In a biblical worldview, God alone exercisesownership. People, however, exercise stewardship over what he hasgiven.

Scriptureguides and regulates human relationships with respect to owningproperty. While people are ultimately only stewards, they must neverwrongly take or desire what God has entrusted to others. ThereforeGod commands, “You shall not steal” (Exod. 20:15) and“You shall not covet” (20:17). The book of Proverbsexplains how to wisely dispose of one’s goods (Prov. 3:9, 10;11:25; 22:9), as does Jesus’ parable of the talents (Matt.25:14–30). Numerous passages teach that human “ownership”should be earned through work, if possible (Jer. 29:5–7;2Thess. 3:10). People should acknowledge their possessions asgifts from God by giving to the poor (Eph. 4:28) and to God’sappointed leaders, both secular and Christian: “Give back toCaesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s”(Mark 12:17 [cf. Rom. 13:6; 1Tim. 5:18]).

Infact, the whole Bible can be read as the drama of the divine ownerrelating to his human stewards. At creation, God charges Adam and Eve“to work ... and take care of” the garden(Gen. 2:15), thereby entrusting all creation to human care. Indisobedience they abuse their stewardship, as will their offspring.In the fall, humankind forfeits God’s benefits in paradise(Gen. 3); he disowns his unfaithful stewards. The rest of Scripturerelates how God redeems a people for himself, adopting thedisinherited back into his household. He begins by promising Abrahamthat his offspring, Israel, will possess a land, Canaan (Gen. 17:8),which will be a kind of new paradise (Exod. 3:8). The Israelitesconquer the territory, but over time they prove to be unfaithfulstewards. After breaking God’s covenant, they lose the land inexile.

Jesus’parable of the landowner in Matt. 21:33–44 is basically acapsule version of this grand biblical story. Both come to a climaxwhen God sends his Son, Jesus Christ. He comes to “buy back”his people from their sins as the one faithful servant (Mark 10:45),even unto death on a cross (Phil. 2:8). Jesus pays for his elect’sadoption with his blood, so now believers partake in God’sownership over all things. “All things are yours, whether ...the world or life or death or the present or the future—all areyours, and you are of Christ, and Christ is of God” (1Cor.3:21–23).

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

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

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

Authorshipand Composition

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

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

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

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

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

PrimevalHistory (Gen. 1–11)

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

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

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

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

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

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

Patriarchs(Gen. 12–50)

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

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

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

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

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

Liberationfrom Egypt (Exod. 1–18)

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

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

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

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

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

Sinai(Exod. 19:1–Num. 10:10)

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

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

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

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

WildernessJourney (Num. 10:11–36:13)

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

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

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

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

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

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

Moses’Farewell (Deuteronomy)

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

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

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

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

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

TheOrigin of Humankind

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

TheNature of Humankind

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

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

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

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

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

Oral, ceremonial, or physical defilement, desecration,corruption, contamination; to make morally, ceremonially, orphysically unclean or impure; to make filthy (Num. 35:33; 2Chron.36:14; Ezra 2:62; Neh. 7:64; Ps. 106:38; Prov. 25:26; Isa. 24:5; Jer.3:1, 2, 9; 16:18; Ezek. 23:30; Zeph. 3:1, 4; Mal. 1:7, 12; Acts15:20; 2Pet. 2:10, 20). The choice of “pollution/pollute”rather than a synonym is a translation decision. The word occurs manyother places in certain versions.

Pollutionin modern secular usage generally refers to the dirtying ofenvironmental spaces as a result of human activity, for example, airand water pollution. Proverbs 25:26 employs this understanding. Moregenerally, the stewardship mandate given to humanity by God in Gen.2:15 provides biblical support for the importance of caring for theenvironment. This would include reducing or eliminating knownpolluting activities and cleaning up previously polluted spaces. Seealso Clean, Cleanness.

Oral, ceremonial, or physical defilement, desecration,corruption, contamination; to make morally, ceremonially, orphysically unclean or impure; to make filthy (Num. 35:33; 2Chron.36:14; Ezra 2:62; Neh. 7:64; Ps. 106:38; Prov. 25:26; Isa. 24:5; Jer.3:1, 2, 9; 16:18; Ezek. 23:30; Zeph. 3:1, 4; Mal. 1:7, 12; Acts15:20; 2Pet. 2:10, 20). The choice of “pollution/pollute”rather than a synonym is a translation decision. The word occurs manyother places in certain versions.

Pollutionin modern secular usage generally refers to the dirtying ofenvironmental spaces as a result of human activity, for example, airand water pollution. Proverbs 25:26 employs this understanding. Moregenerally, the stewardship mandate given to humanity by God in Gen.2:15 provides biblical support for the importance of caring for theenvironment. This would include reducing or eliminating knownpolluting activities and cleaning up previously polluted spaces. Seealso Clean, Cleanness.

Oral, ceremonial, or physical defilement, desecration,corruption, contamination; to make morally, ceremonially, orphysically unclean or impure; to make filthy (Num. 35:33; 2Chron.36:14; Ezra 2:62; Neh. 7:64; Ps. 106:38; Prov. 25:26; Isa. 24:5; Jer.3:1, 2, 9; 16:18; Ezek. 23:30; Zeph. 3:1, 4; Mal. 1:7, 12; Acts15:20; 2Pet. 2:10, 20). The choice of “pollution/pollute”rather than a synonym is a translation decision. The word occurs manyother places in certain versions.

Pollutionin modern secular usage generally refers to the dirtying ofenvironmental spaces as a result of human activity, for example, airand water pollution. Proverbs 25:26 employs this understanding. Moregenerally, the stewardship mandate given to humanity by God in Gen.2:15 provides biblical support for the importance of caring for theenvironment. This would include reducing or eliminating knownpolluting activities and cleaning up previously polluted spaces. Seealso Clean, Cleanness.

An intimate, exclusive, lifelong covenant relationshipbetween a man and a woman wherein a new family is established.

Theologyof Marriage

Thebiblical basis for marriage is recorded in Gen. 2:18–24, whichestablishes a number of important points relating to marriage.

First,in Gen. 2:18 God highlights the first expressed inadequacy withincreation: the man is alone. The solution to the man’s solitudeis found not among the animals (a fact demonstrated by the carefulsearch expressed by having the man name each of them) but in acreature specifically created to address the problem of his solitude:woman. She is created from his “rib” (a bettertranslation is “side”), so that she is more like him thanany of the animals. In spite of this, she is not a clone, but rathera complement to him. She is described as a “helper suitable forhim,” which highlights her fulfillment of the inadequacy Godhad previously identified.

Second,the role of the wife is not restricted to providing a means by whichto fulfill the command to fill the earth (through bearing children),for the problem identified in Gen. 2:18 cannot be reduced to thisalone. The OT establishes that human beings are relational andsocial, and that isolation is not good, quite aside fromconsiderations relating to childbearing. Indeed, when marriage isemployed as a metaphor for the relationship between God and hispeople (see below), it can be conceptualized quite apart from thenotion of procreation, suggesting that the latter should not beconsidered the primary purpose of marriage.

Third,Gen. 2:23 describes the relationship between the man and the woman interms strongly reminiscent of the traditional kinship formula usedwith reference to family members elsewhere in the OT: “bone ofmy bones, and flesh of my flesh” (cf., e.g., Gen. 29:14; Judg.9:2; 2Sam. 5:1; 19:13–14—similar to the modernEnglish expression “my flesh and blood”; see also Matt.19:5; Eph. 5:31). Although “be united” (othertranslations use “cleave”) and “one flesh”are frequently understood to refer to sexual union, this is not theonly, or even the primary, implication of the words. Genesis 2:24expresses the unification of the husband and the wife as theantithesis of the man’s leaving his father and mother. Theseterms (“leave” or “forsake,” “beunited” or “cleave”) are used elsewhere incovenantal contexts. “Cleave” is usually used of peoplein the sense of clinging to another out of affection and loyalty(Gen. 34:3; Ruth 1:14; 2Sam. 20:2; 1Kings 11:2). It isalso frequently used of Israel clinging to God (Deut. 10:20; 11:22;13:5; 30:20; Josh. 22:5; 23:8). “Forsake” is used ofbreaking covenants (Deut. 12:19; 14:27; 29:25; Jer. 1:16; 2:13, 17,19; 5:7; 16:11; 17:13; 19:4; 22:9). The verb also appears in thecontext of marital divorce in Prov. 2:16–17; Isa. 54:6; 62:4.

Theimplication of Gen. 2:24 is that the man was formerly “united”to his parents in a familial relationship, but when he marries, thecovenantal relationship with his parents is superseded by the newrelationship with his wife. Thus, in establishing the covenantalrelationship of marriage, the man and the woman form a new familyunit (they become “one flesh,” which parallels thekinship formula more fully expressed in Gen. 2:23). It is noteworthythat Gen. 2 thus defines a family as husband and wife; a family isformed before any children are born. Furthermore, the emphasis on thepriority of the relationship between husband and wife is particularlystriking, given both the importance of honoring one’s parents(Exod. 20:12; Deut. 5:16) and the distinctly patrilocal nature ofinheritance whereby sons would remain in the parents’ householdafter marriage and ultimately inherit a share of it, but daughterswould leave their parents’ house to be with their husbands.

Fourth,the description of the woman as the man’s “helper”cannot alone be used to demonstrate that the wife’s role waseither subordinate or superior to her husband’s. Although theterm is elsewhere often used as a description of God, it is also usedof subordinate helpers, and other contextual indications determinethe relative status of the helper aside from the use of the termitself.

Marriagein the Old Testament

TheBible presents few formal legal, liturgical, or cultic requirementsfor marriage (whereas there are specific laws dealing with divorce),although it does record some details of specific marriages from whichsome insight into marriage practices can be gleaned. Marriages oftenwere established through an arrangement between the parents of thehusband and those of the wife or between the husband and the parentsof his prospective wife (e.g., Gen. 24; 38:6), but there appears tobe some diversity, with examples of a man choosing his own wife(e.g., Judah in Gen. 38:2) or instances when the consent of the womanis sought (e.g., Gen. 24:8, 58). The requirement of a formalcertificate for divorce (Deut. 24:1, 3), together with examples ofmarriage contracts from the ancient Near East, are possible evidencethat marriage within Israel required certification, although there isno explicit confirmation of this in the OT or in Israel prior to therabbinic period. The marriages recorded in the OT often involvedfeasts of varying duration (Gen. 29:22; Judg. 14:12), the bride beingaccompanied to her home in a festive procession that included musicand singing (Ps. 78:63; Jer. 7:34; 16:9), and a blessing pronouncedover the bride that she might bear many children (Gen. 24:60; Ruth4:11). Deuteronomy 22:15 suggests that evidence of the bride’svirginity was retained by the wife’s family to guard againstfalse accusations by a husband seeking divorce.

Anotheraspect of marriage that appears to have been normative although notlegislated was the payment of a mohar, or “bride-price”(Gen. 34:12; Exod. 22:16; 1Sam. 18:25), as well as theprovision of a dowry (1Kings 9:16). The former was a paymentmade by the groom’s family to the bride’s family, thelatter an amount given by the father to his daughter. Typically, theformer appears to have exceeded the latter in value. The bride-price,at least in later times, functioned as insurance should the wife bedivorced.

TheBible does not issue any specific age constraints upon those beingmarried, indicating that the OT practice probably did not differsignificantly from that of other nations in the ancient Near East,where girls were considered ready for marriage once they had reachedpuberty or the age of twelve, and boys were generally slightly older.Constraints were placed on the eligibility of marriage partners, andgenerally marriages were endogamous: marriage partners were chosenfrom within the clan, tribe, or nation (e.g., Gen. 24:1–9;27:46–28:5; cf. Deut. 7:3, which prohibits marriage with some,but not all, foreigners, and Deut. 21:10–14, which permitsIsraelite warriors to take a wife from among female prisoners ofwar). While there were exceptions to this constraint (e.g., Mosesmarried a Midianite; Bathsheba was married to a Hittite; Boaz marriedRuth, a Moabite), in later times the restriction was given legalsanction under Ezra and Nehemiah (Ezra 9:2, 12; Neh. 13:25; cf. Luke14:26; 18:29).

Inspite of the likelihood that many marriages in the OT and the ancientworld in general were arranged, the notion of romantic love as bothan ideal for marriage and a basis for choosing one’s spouseclearly was known and even regarded as desirable. This is reflectedin the approbation given romantic love in Song of Songs as well as instories such as that of Jacob (Gen. 29:18; see also Judg. 14:1–3;1Sam. 18:20).

Socially,marriage was of particular import for a woman in the ancient world,for her well-being usually depended on her place within the house ofeither her father or her husband. Because inheritance was passed downthe male line, women without connection to the house of a man were ina very tenuous state. Inheritance itself was also an important issuein the ancient world, and so great value was placed not just onmarriage but also on bearing children (particularly male [see alsoFirstborn]). Associated with these social functions of marriage inancient Israel is the fact that the OT permits and records a numberof instances of polygamy (always polygyny, never polyandry). Thisafforded social security to widows (see also Levirate Law, LevirateMarriage) and helped ensure the line of inheritance. It should benoted, however, that neither the welfare aspect of marriage nor therelated acceptance of polygamy is based on the biblical foundationfor marriage in Gen. 2, and consequently, polygamy does not reflectthe biblical ideal for marriage.

Thefundamental importance of the marriage relationship is alsohighlighted by the severity of the penalties for adultery (e.g.,Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18; 22:22–24; see also Adultery).

Marriagein the New Testament

Jesusreinforces the importance of marriage, emphasizing its divine originand lifelong nature (Matt. 19:6; Mark 10:9) as well as itsinviolability (Mark 10:2–12). In light of this, Jesus’assertion that at the resurrection there will be no marriage issurprising (Matt. 22:30). Although Jesus offers no explanation as towhy there will be no marriage following the resurrection, it isperhaps likely that the fundamental need identified by God in Gen.2:18 (the man was alone) will be solved in a different manner in theage to come: the intimate help and companionship ideally found inmarriage will be provided in perfected relationship with God and allothers.

Paulelaborates somewhat on marriage in the Christian community. Christianmarriage ought to be characterized by mutual submission in somerespects (1Cor. 7:4; Eph. 5:21) while reflecting someasymmetrical aspects of the relationship between Christ and thechurch in others (Eph. 5:22–33). Christians ought to marrywithin the church (2Cor. 6:14–18, although this passageis not restricted to marriage); however, those who are married tononbelievers are not to seek divorce, but are to remain faithful totheir spouses for the sake of both the spouse and their children(1Cor. 7:10–16).

TheNT makes reference to some of the marriage customs of the day,including sharing a feast (Matt. 22:2–12; Luke 12:36; John2:1–11), the expectation that guests be suitably attired (Matt.22:11–12), and a procession to the groom’s home (Matt.25:1–13; Luke 12:35–38).

SymbolicUse of Marriage

Marriageis used figuratively in both Testaments. The relationship between Godand his people is described with marriage language (Isa. 62:4–5;Jer. 2:2). By using such language, the prophets emphasize theintimacy and unity inherent in the relationship between God and hischosen people, as well as the devastating betrayal when the covenantis broken. The use of the marriage metaphor is thus extended to theuse of divorce language to describe God’s treatment ofunfaithful Israel (Jer. 3:8), and the notion of adultery andpromiscuity is equated with the worship of foreign gods (Ezek. 16;23). The prophet Hosea’s marriage is itself a graphicrepresentation of God’s relationship with his people and, inparticular, their faithlessness; however, it also holds out theanticipation of a new covenant, one wherein God declares, “Youwill call me ‘my husband’; you will no longer call me ‘mymaster’ ” (Hos. 2:16). The metaphorical use ofmarriage to image the relationship between God and his people alsoreflects the implicit belief in the asymmetrical nature of therelationship between husband and wife in the ancient world.

TheNT primarily identifies the church as the bride and Christ as thehusband when using marriage language figuratively (e.g., Eph.5:22–33). In so doing, the NT affirms Christ’s deity byexplicitly depicting him in the place occupied by God in the OT’suse of marriage symbolism. Jesus uses marriage in his parabolicteaching about the kingdom of God (Matt. 22:2–14; 25:1–12),as well as in reference to himself as bridegroom when explaining thebehavior of his disciples (Mark 2:19–20; Luke 5:34–35).Revelation depicts the return of Christ as the time of the marriagebetween the bride and the bridegroom (Rev. 19:7; 21:9).

In contrast to ascetics who view the physical as inferior tothe “spiritual” and self-serving hedonists who reduce sexto a physical commodity, Scripture has a high view of the sex act.Yet the sex act was created as an act of intimacy between a man and awoman within a marital relationship (Gen. 2:24). Marriage involvesgiving one’s whole person—body, soul, and spirit—toanother person (of the opposite sex) through a formal covenantratified by God. Nakedness symbolizes complete vulnerability andtransparency. Covenant creates the conditions for trust and intimacyto grow. Sex is an act whereby the two celebrate this spiritual unionthrough physical union.

Whilein certain cultural contexts God has at times condescended to allowvariations on monogamy, including polygamy and the taking ofconcubines (secondary wives; e.g., Gen. 30:3–6, 18), these werenever God’s created standard for sexual relations, which is amonogamous heterosexual relationship between one man and one woman(Gen. 2:24).

Paulinforms the unmarried that it is better to marry than to burn withsexual desire (1Cor. 7:8–9). By implication, marriage isthe appropriate context for fulfilling one’s sexual desire. Tohave sex outside the context of marriage is sexual immorality, sinceone has not given total allegiance—emotionally, socially,economically, and personally—to one’s partner. God’swill is that each one honors him by avoiding sexual immorality andexercising self-control over one’s body. Unrepentant sexualimmorality brings divine judgment (1Thess. 4:3–7; Heb.13:4). See also Sex, Sexuality.

In the most basic sense, a priest is mediator between God andhumanity. Although there are hints in Gen. 1–2 that Adam andEve performed a priestly role in the garden, when the OT speaks ofthe priesthood, it most frequently refers to those involved in theservice of the tabernacle or temple under the Mosaic covenant. Butbefore the formal institution of the Mosaic covenant, God commandedMoses to tell the people of Israel, “If you obey me fully andkeep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasuredpossession. Although the whole earth is mine, you will be for me akingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exod. 19:5–6). Godintends all Israel to be a conduit of his presence to a lost andrebellious world. The rest of the Pentateuch indicates that Israelwas to do this in three ways: (1)practice the law of God as anexample of his holiness; (2)proclaim the mighty deeds of God asa testimony to his power; (3)preserve the word of God as ademonstration of his faithfulness. This, then, was the responsibilityof each Israelite individually and corporately as a people.

Asthe OT unfolds, Israel clearly fails to live up to this loftycalling. But the prophet Isaiah looks forward to a day when God’sredeemed people “will be called priests of the Lord, you willbe named ministers of our God” (Isa. 61:6). This will happen asa result of the Spirit-anointed figure who brings good news to thepoor and the year of God’s favor (Isa. 61:1–4). Jesusclaims that his life, ministry, and death are the fulfillment of thispromise (Luke 4:16–21), which suggests that now is the timethat God’s people can rightly be said to be “priests ofthe Lord.”

Thisconclusion is confirmed in 1Pet. 2:4–10. In the midst ofseveral quotations of and allusions to OT passages, Peter takes upthe language of Exod. 19:6 when he says to believers, “You area chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’sspecial possession, that you may declare the praises of him whocalled you out of darkness into his wonderful light” (v.9).What Israel failed to be because of its persistent rebellion againstGod, believers are. But believers are not a royal priesthood becausethey are somehow better than Israel; they are a royal priesthoodbecause they are united to Jesus Christ. Peter emphasizes this whenearlier in the passage he refers to believers as living stones “beingbuilt into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offeringspiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ”(v.5). Because Jesus is the great high priest who offered hisown blood for the sins of his people (Heb. 9:11–14), believersmust “continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise—thefruit of lips that openly profess his name. And do not forget to dogood and to share with others, for with such sacrifices God ispleased” (Heb. 13:15–16).

Thereare at least three practical ramifications of the priesthood ofbelievers. First, each believer is to be a channel through whichGod’s presence and character are made known in this world.Second, everything that the believer does, even down to eating anddrinking, should be done to reflect the character and glory of God(1Cor. 10:31; Col. 3:17). Third, each believer has a role toplay in the advancement of God’s kingdom.

In the most basic sense, a priest is mediator between God andhumanity. Although there are hints in Gen. 1–2 that Adam andEve performed a priestly role in the garden, when the OT speaks ofthe priesthood, it most frequently refers to those involved in theservice of the tabernacle or temple under the Mosaic covenant. Butbefore the formal institution of the Mosaic covenant, God commandedMoses to tell the people of Israel, “If you obey me fully andkeep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasuredpossession. Although the whole earth is mine, you will be for me akingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exod. 19:5–6). Godintends all Israel to be a conduit of his presence to a lost andrebellious world. The rest of the Pentateuch indicates that Israelwas to do this in three ways: (1)practice the law of God as anexample of his holiness; (2)proclaim the mighty deeds of God asa testimony to his power; (3)preserve the word of God as ademonstration of his faithfulness. This, then, was the responsibilityof each Israelite individually and corporately as a people.

Asthe OT unfolds, Israel clearly fails to live up to this loftycalling. But the prophet Isaiah looks forward to a day when God’sredeemed people “will be called priests of the Lord, you willbe named ministers of our God” (Isa. 61:6). This will happen asa result of the Spirit-anointed figure who brings good news to thepoor and the year of God’s favor (Isa. 61:1–4). Jesusclaims that his life, ministry, and death are the fulfillment of thispromise (Luke 4:16–21), which suggests that now is the timethat God’s people can rightly be said to be “priests ofthe Lord.”

Thisconclusion is confirmed in 1Pet. 2:4–10. In the midst ofseveral quotations of and allusions to OT passages, Peter takes upthe language of Exod. 19:6 when he says to believers, “You area chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’sspecial possession, that you may declare the praises of him whocalled you out of darkness into his wonderful light” (v.9).What Israel failed to be because of its persistent rebellion againstGod, believers are. But believers are not a royal priesthood becausethey are somehow better than Israel; they are a royal priesthoodbecause they are united to Jesus Christ. Peter emphasizes this whenearlier in the passage he refers to believers as living stones “beingbuilt into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offeringspiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ”(v.5). Because Jesus is the great high priest who offered hisown blood for the sins of his people (Heb. 9:11–14), believersmust “continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise—thefruit of lips that openly profess his name. And do not forget to dogood and to share with others, for with such sacrifices God ispleased” (Heb. 13:15–16).

Thereare at least three practical ramifications of the priesthood ofbelievers. First, each believer is to be a channel through whichGod’s presence and character are made known in this world.Second, everything that the believer does, even down to eating anddrinking, should be done to reflect the character and glory of God(1Cor. 10:31; Col. 3:17). Third, each believer has a role toplay in the advancement of God’s kingdom.

An occupation or profession is the usual work or business inwhich a person engages for the sake of earning a living. In biblicaltimes, family or social standing most often determined occupation.This was particularly true for occupations tied to land, such asplanting crops and raising animals, since land in ancient Israel waspassed down within the tribe, normally from fathers to sons (Josh.14:9; Ezek. 46:18). Sometimes daughters also received a share in thefamily inheritance (Josh. 17:6). Most people gained their livelihoodfrom their family’s land, and those who did not have land hiredthemselves out to work for wages (Deut. 24:14). A son normallylearned his trade from his father (Gen. 47:3; 2Kings 4:18;Matt. 4:21) and continued in that occupation unless called into God’sservice (1Kings 19:19–21; Jer. 1:5; Matt. 4:22).

Cicero,writing around the time of the NT, considered occupations such as taxcollector, laborer, and fisherman to be vulgar. Conversely,professions such as teacher, doctor, and wholesale trader were morehonorable, with landowner being the most respectable and profitableprofession (Off. 1.42).

Agricultureand Farming

Farmingis the earliest recorded occupation in the Bible, as the first manwas called to work and keep the garden (Gen. 2:15). Even after theexile from Eden because of sin, Adam worked the ground for food, asdid Cain, his firstborn son (Gen. 3:17–18; 4:2). The openingchapters of the Bible establish a fundamental link between “man”(’adam) and the “ground” (’adamah). After theflood, Noah established himself as a “man of the soil”(’ish ha’adamah) by planting a vineyard (Gen. 9:20). KingUzziah “loved the soil” (’oheb ’adamah) andso employed people to work in his fields and vineyards (2Chron.26:10).

Goddemonstrated his covenant commitment to Isaac by blessing him with anincredible harvest (Gen. 26:12), and he promised to prosper Israel’sfarms if the people obeyed him (Deut. 28:4) and to curse the fruit oftheir ground if they disobeyed (Deut. 28:18). The OT ideal was foreveryone to live “under their own vine and under their own figtree” (1Kings 4:25; Mic. 4:4). According to Prov. 28:19,the diligent farmer would have abundant food.

Jesus’parables frequently employed agricultural imagery that would havebeen readily understandable in first-century Palestine, where manypeople were farmers (cf. Mark 4:1–9; 12:1–11) and someowned land (Acts 4:34). The people living around Jerusalem at thistime engaged in agriculture, soil cultivation, and cattle raising(Let. Aris. 107–112).

Herdingand Hunting

Herdinganimals is the second-oldest occupation recorded in Scripture (afterfarming), and raising flocks and herds continued to be one of themost common and important professions throughout biblical times. Abelis the first “keeper of sheep” in the Bible (Gen. 4:2NRSV). Several generations later, Jabal pioneered the nomadic herdinglifestyle (Gen. 4:20). The patriarchs were shepherds (Gen. 47:3), aswere Moses (Exod. 3:1), David (1Sam. 17:34), and many others inthe OT. Josephus acknowledged that “feeding of sheep was theemployment of our forefathers in the most ancient ages”(Ag.Ap. 1.91). While men typically worked as shepherds andherdsmen, the occupation was also open to women, such as Rachel,whose fathers owned sheep (Gen. 29:9). Shepherds were present atJesus’ birth (Luke 2:8–20), and Jesus’ teachingsuggests that shepherding was a common occupation in Palestine (cf.Matt. 18:12; John 10:1–30).

Manypeople in biblical times hunted, either for food, sport, orprotection. The first recorded hunter is Nimrod, “a mightyhunter before the Lord” (Gen. 10:9). Ishmael was “anexpert with the bow” (Gen. 21:20 NRSV), while Esau was “askillful hunter, a man of the open country” who brought backwild game for food (25:27–28). The name of Pokereth-Hazzebaim,included in the genealogy of Solomon’s servants in Ezra 2:57,reflects his occupation as a “gazelle catcher” (cf.1Kings 4:23).

Buildersand Craftsmen

Cainwas the first person in the Bible to build a city (Gen. 4:17), andhis descendant Tubal-Cain was the first metalworker (4:22). Nimrodbuilt a number of cities (10:11–12), and the beginning ofNimrod’s kingdom was Babel (10:10), where the people gatheredtogether to build a city with brick (11:3). Builders in Mesopotamiaused baked brick and asphalt, while Israelite builders usuallypreferred the more readily available stone and mortar. After Joseph’sdeath, Israel was conscripted into forced labor in Egypt, whichinvolved building cities of brick and mortar (Exod. 1:11).

Therole of craftsmen in the construction of the tabernacle wasparticularly significant. Bezalel and Oholiab were “skilledworkers and designers” empowered by God for work on thetabernacle (Exod. 35:35). They engaged in “all kinds ofcrafts,” including artistic metalworking, masonry, carpentry,and weaving (Exod. 31:4–5; 38:23).

Kingsin Israel often commissioned important building projects (1Kings12:25; 15:22; 16:24; 2Chron. 26:9; Josephus, J.W. 1.401–2).Carpenters and stonemasons worked on David’s palace (2Sam.5:11). Solomon conscripted laborers to build the temple and alsoemployed carriers, stonecutters, craftsmen, and foremen to supervisethe work (1Kings 5:13–18). After the Babylonian exile,many Israelites were involved in rebuilding the temple and the wallof Jerusalem, which had been destroyed (Ezra 3:8; Neh. 4:16–18).These projects, directed by Zerubbabel and Nehemiah, utilized masons,carpenters, and other workers (Ezra 3:7).

Jesusis referred to as a tektōn (Mark 6:3) and as the son of a tektōn(Matt. 13:55), with tektōn usually translated “carpenter”by English versions. However,recent scholarshiphas demonstrated that Jesus was likely a builder, not a carpenter inthe modern sense of the term. In the LXX, the word tektōntypically translates a Hebrew word, kharash, used broadly to refer tocraftsmen working with stone, wood, or metal.

Musicians

Thefirst musician recorded in Scripture is Jubal, “the father ofall who play the stringed instruments and pipes” (Gen. 4:21).Musicians performed a variety of roles in ancient society, as they dotoday. Singers and instrumentalists were employed to celebratefestive occasions, often to provide accompaniment for dancing (Gen.31:27; Luke 15:25), to soothe the sick or distressed (1Sam.16:16), and to express lamentation (Job 30:31).

Musiciansplayed an important role in leading God’s people in worship.The “director of music” is mentioned in the headings offifty-five psalms and Hab. 3:19. The most famous musician inScripture is David, “the singer of Israel’s psalms”(2Sam. 23:1 GW), who played the harp (1Sam. 16:18) andwrote or inspired at least seventy-three canonical psalms. Solomonwas also a notable songwriter and lover of music (1Kings 4:32).David appointed many Levites as singers and musicians to lead Israelin worship (1Chron. 15:16; 23:5). The musicians played lyres,harps, cymbals, and trumpets (2Chron. 5:12).

Government,Politics, and Military

Beforethe monarchy, there were no formal government offices. Under Moses, agroup of seventy elders in Israel served as leaders and officials,and these men were to carry out Moses’ decrees and judge thepeople on most matters (Exod. 18:20–22; Num. 11:16). AfterJoshua’s death, God raised up judges to rescue Israel fromforeign enemies and lead the people (Judg. 2:16) until the time ofSamuel, when Saul was made king (1Sam. 11:15).

Kingsin Israel employed various officials. In 2Sam. 8:16–18,Joab is listed first among David’s officials, which suggeststhat the military commander was second in authority after the king.Under Solomon, the leader of the army is called “commander inchief” (1Kings 4:4). The royal cabinet included a numberof key advisers, including the recorder, the secretary, and the“confidant” of the king (cf. 2Sam. 16:16). The OTdoes not specify the precise roles of these officials. The recorderwas among the highest governmental positions and served as a royalcounselor. In Hebrew, mazkir (“recorder”) is a cognatenoun to the verb zkr (“to remember”), which suggests thatthis official may have managed and preserved public records (2Kings18:18; Isa. 36:22). The main task of the king’s secretary orscribe (sop̱er)was to write down (sapar) official state documents (2Sam.8:17), and he advised the king and also provided financial oversight(2Kings 12:10). Recorders and secretaries apparently were welleducated and multilingual, as was the palace administrator (2Kings18:18, 26). Solomon’s officials included supervisors of thepalace and the forced labor, as well as governors who suppliedprovisions for the king’s household (1Kings 4:6–7).The OT mentions cupbearers in Israel’s government and in otheradministrations (Gen. 40:1; 1Kings 10:5; Neh. 1:11). Thecupbearer served as the royal wine taster; he protected the king frombeing poisoned and had direct access to the monarch.

Inthe Roman Empire, the emperor was absolute ruler (1Pet. 2:17),with the senate next in authority. Proconsuls held judicial andmilitary authority over larger provinces (Acts 18:12), prefects(governors) administered smaller provinces (Matt. 27:2), withtetrarchs over one-fourth of a province (Luke 3:1).

Christiansin NT times engaged in civil service. Erastus was a financial officerin Corinth (Rom. 16:23), and he may be the same Erastus commemoratedin an inscription from this period who held the office of aedile. Theproconsul Sergius Paulus (Acts 13:7); Manaen, a close friend of HerodAntipas (Acts 13:1); and members of Caesar’s household (Phil.4:22) were also Christian public leaders.

Tradeand Economics

Fromearliest times, people have exchanged goods and property. WhenAbraham purchased Ephron’s field, his silver was measured“according to the weight current among the merchants”(Gen. 23:16), which suggests that a recognized system of publictrading was in place during the time of the patriarchs. Traders ofcommodities such as spices traveled along caravan routes betweensouthern Arabia and Egypt, and these traders often acquired slavesalong the way (Gen. 37:28). Solomon employed royal merchants to buyand sell goods (1Kings 10:28).

Inthe first century, Jews were engaged broadly in economic life aslandowners, artisans, merchants, traders, bankers, and slaves.Several of Jesus’ disciples were fishermen (Matt. 4:18). Lukewas a physician, a well-educated and respectable professional (Col.4:14). Lydia was a dealer in purple cloth (Acts 16:14). Paul, Aquila,and Priscilla worked as tentmakers (Acts 18:3). In the Roman Empire,commerce and pagan religion often intermingled. Merchants oftenformed trade guilds, where membership sometimes required religiousand moral compromise. In Ephesus, silversmiths and craftsmen inrelated trades turned significant profit through their connectionswith the local Artemis cult (Acts 19:24–27).

Jesusfrequently spent time with tax collectors, such as Levi (also called“Matthew”) (Matt. 9:9; Mark 2:14). Tax collectors were adespised group because often they became wealthy by taking advantageof the Roman taxation system, which allowed them to charge commissionon taxes collected (Luke 19:2, 8). Jesus’ parable of thetalents references bankers who offered interest on deposits collected(Matt. 25:27), and Rev. 3:17–18 alludes to the fact thatLaodicea was a financial center with a significant banking system.

Servantsand Slaves

Inthe OT, ’ebed most often designates a slave or servant, whoseoccupation involves work (’abad ) as a subordinate. Someservants held very important positions in their master’shousehold (Gen. 24:2), while many others toiled in hard labor (Job7:2). Israelites were not to enslave their kinfolk, but they couldtake slaves from other nations. Fellow Israelites who became poorcould serve as hired workers, but they were to be released along withtheir children at the Jubilee because God had brought Israel out fromEgyptian slavery and they belonged to God as his servants (Lev.25:39–46).

Slavesin the Roman world were property like goods or cattle, possessed byanother (Dio Chrysostom, 2Serv. lib. 24). Unlike modern slaverypractices, race played no factor in the Roman institution of slavery.Slaves were kidnapped and sold in NT times (1Tim. 1:10; Rev.18:13), but the majority of slaves were so by birth. The mostprominent slave in the NT is Onesimus, for whom Paul intercedes withhis master, Philemon (Philem. 10, 16). Believing slaves were to obeytheir earthly masters “as slaves of Christ” (Eph. 6:5–6),but the NT stressed the equality of slave and free in Christ (Gal.3:28). Paul called himself a “servant [doulos] of Christ Jesus”(Rom. 1:1).

ReligiousService

MostIsraelites engaged in professional religious service were Levites(Num. 3:12), including Moses, Aaron, and the priests in Aaron’sline (Exod. 6:19–20; 35:19). The priests offered sacrifices toGod on behalf of the people (Heb. 5:1). Under the priests’direction, the Levites were charged with caring for the tabernacleand its furnishings (Num. 1:49; 1Chron. 23:32) and carrying theark of the covenant (1Chron. 15:2). They were set apart toserve in God’s presence (Deut. 18:7) and to lead the people inworship (2Chron. 5:12). Further, priests often played animportant advisory role to Israel’s kings (2Sam. 8:17;1Kings 4:5; 2Kings 12:2).

InIsrael, people went to seers and prophets to inquire of God (1Sam.9:9), for they received and communicated God’s word (2Sam.24:11; Jer. 37:6). Sometimes individuals are mentioned as prophets,and other times the prophets are discussed as an organized group(1Sam. 19:20; 1Kings 22:6).

TheNT references a number of ministerial offices (1Cor. 12:28;Eph. 4:11; 1Tim. 3:1–12). Not all ministers were paid,though teachers and preachers had a right to “receive theirliving from the gospel” (1Cor. 9:14–15; cf. 1Tim.5:17). Apostles were those sent out by Jesus as his representatives.The term apostolos refers particularly to the twelve apostles whowere with Jesus during his earthly ministry and who were witnesses ofhis resurrection (Acts 1:21–22). Paul referred to himself as anapostle (Gal. 1:1; 1Cor. 1:1), and he calls Epaph-ro-di-tus andothers “messengers” (apostoloi) in the churches (2Cor.8:23; Phil. 2:25). Prophets have the spiritual gift of prophecy andspeak to strengthen, encourage, and comfort the church (Acts 15:32;1Cor. 14:3). Overseers (also called “elders” or“pastors”) are qualified leaders who teach, shepherd, andexercise authority in the church (1Tim. 3:1; 1Pet. 5:2).Evangelists and missionaries proclaim the gospel and aim to winconverts to Christ (Acts 21:8; 2Tim. 4:5). Those ministers whoare faithful to the gospel deserve support (3John8).

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

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

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

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

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

Genreand Historical Context

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

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

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

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

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

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

Purposeand Interpretation

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

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

Outlineand Structure

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

Whatyou have seen (past) (1:1–20)

Whatis now (present) (2:1–3:21)

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

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

Prologue(1:1–8)

Act1: Seven Oracles (1:9–3:22)

Act2: Seven Seals (6:1–17)

Act3: Seven Trumpets (8:1–9:21)

Act4: Seven Signs (12:1–14:20)

Act5: Seven Bowls (16:1–21)

Act6: Seven Visions (19:1–20:15)

Act7: Seven Prophecies (21:2–22:17)

Epilogue(22:18–21)

Thefollowing outline provides an overview of Revelation in ten stages:

I.Introduction (1:1–20)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

IX.God’s Ultimate Victory (19:6–22:5)

X.Conclusion (22:6–21)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Charactersand Themes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Riversin Cosmology

Genesis2:10–14 describes the garden in Eden as the source of anunnamed river that subsequently divided into four “headwaters”:the Pishon, the Gihon, the Tigris, and the Euphrates. Thisdescription defies any attempt to locate the purported site of Edenin terms of historical geography. The Tigris and the Euphrates do notdiverge from a common source, but instead converge before emptyinginto the Persian Gulf. Moreover, the Gihon, if it is to be identifiedwith the sacred spring of the same name in Jerusalem (1Kings1:45), is several hundred miles away from the Tigris and theEuphrates. The Pishon is otherwise unknown. If, as variouscommentators since antiquity have suggested, the Gihon and the Pishonare to be identified with other great rivers in the same class ofimportance as the Tigris and the Euphrates (the Nile, the Ganges,etc.), then this would further confound any attempt to understandGen. 2:10–14 in terms of historical geography. The image offour rivers emanating from a primordial garden and dividingunnaturalistically from a common source is attested in ancient NearEastern art, notably in the eighteenth-century BC wall paintingillustrating the investiture of Zimri-Lim. In this image, twogoddesses stand in a paradisiacal garden, guarded by mythical,sphinxlike creatures (cf. the cherubim in Gen. 3:24), holding vesselsfrom which four rivers flow.

Inhis vision of the restored land of Israel, Ezekiel sees a great riveremanating from the temple in Jerusalem, flowing into the Judeandesert, and ultimately turning the Dead Sea into freshwater (Ezek.47:1–12). Along the banks of the river, Ezekiel sees fishermenand perpetually fruitful trees. Similarly, the vision of the newJerusalem in Rev. 22:1–2 describes a river of the “waterof life” flowing through the city and watering trees that bearfruit in every month. In both cases, the visions draw on the notionthat Jerusalem is the cultic and religious center of the world andtherefore endow its spring—geologically speaking, aninsignificant body of water—with a cosmological significance.It was perhaps this same impulse that led the author of Gen. 2:13,probably himself a Jerusalemite, to mention the Gihon in the sameclass as the Tigris and the Euphrates.

InPs. 89:25, in the context of a poem describing the adoption of theDavidic king as a divine son, God is described as promising to “sethis hand over the sea, his right hand over the rivers.” Likethe sea, a symbol of cosmic chaos in ancient Near Eastern mythology,the rivers represent a force that is overcome by the divine warriorand then placed under the subjection of his human representative, thebeloved king. In this connection, it is significant that theexodus—in many ways the preeminent foundational moment of theIsraelite religion—involved the splitting of both a sea (Exod.14:21–22) and a river (Josh. 3:16; Ps. 114:3) and thesubsequent passage of the Israelites on dry ground. Thispeople-creating deliverance, in turn, is comparable to the account ofcreation in Gen. 1, where the Creator God drives back the waters toprepare a dry-ground habitation for humanity (vv. 9–10). InUgaritic mythology, Yamm, the sea god, also bore the epithet “judgeriver,” underscoring the cosmological connection between seaand river. As we will see, prophetic oracles of divine judgment,especially when they are directed against the river-basedcivilization of Egypt, often recapitulate the theme of the God ofIsrael fighting against the river.

TheNile River

TheNile (Heb. ye’or) is fed by two major tributaries: the WhiteNile, which begins at Lake Victoria, and the Blue Nile, which beginsin Ethiopia. At over four thousand miles, the Nile is the longestriver in the world. The ancient civilization of Egypt dependedentirely on the flow of the Nile and upon its annual flood (the “giftof the Nile”) for irrigation of crops. Even today, arable landalong the Nile is confined in some places to an area no more than afew miles from its banks.

Giventhe dependence of Egyptian civilization on the Nile, especially itsannual flood and the accompanying deposit of silt, it is notsurprising that the river figured prominently in Egyptian mythologyand religion. In particular, the story of the dying and rising godOsiris was linked with the annual ebb and flow of the great river.The annual inundation is still impressive today; an ancientimpression may be gleaned from Amos 9:5, where the prophet appeals tothe rising and falling of the Nile as a description of divine,earth-melting judgment.

Twoof the plagues sent by God upon the Egyptians took place at the Nile,an appropriate setting for a confrontation between the God of Israeland the Egyptian pharaoh, himself a living representation of theEgyptian pantheon. In Ezek. 29:3 the God of Israel says to Pharaoh,“I am against you, Pharaoh king of Egypt, you great monsterlying among your streams. You say, ‘The Nile belongs to me; Imade it for myself.’  ” Since the Nile wasperhaps the preeminent natural or environmental symbol of Egyptianculture, the God of Israel’s assertion of control of that riverwould have been understood as an unmistakable claim to sovereignty.At the time of the birth of Moses, the Nile was a place of extinctionfor the Israelites, for Pharaoh had commanded that every boy born tothe Hebrews be thrown into the Nile (Exod. 1:22). Ironically, Moseswas saved when his mother put him in the Nile in a pitch-coatedbasket, where he was found by the royal daughter of Pharaoh, who hadcome to the Nile to bathe (2:3, 5).

Godtold Moses to confront Pharaoh at the Nile (Exod. 7:15), and thefirst plague with which God afflicted the Egyptians consisted ofturning the Nile into blood, causing its fish to die and renderingits water unsuitable for drinking. The Egyptians were forced to digwells along its banks (7:20–21). The second plague involved themultiplication of frogs in the Nile, to the point of greatinconvenience (8:3).

Isaiahcontinues the theme of God punishing the Egyptians by attacking theNile: “The waters of the river will dry up, and the riverbedwill be parched and dry. The canals will stink; the streams of Egyptwill dwindle and dry up. The reeds and rushes will wither, also theplants along the Nile” (Isa. 19:5–7). The passage goes onto underscore the importance of the Nile as a source of irrigationwater and fishing and the devastation that results from the failureof the Nile to flood as expected. In other texts, where the emphasisis on the better fortunes of Egypt, the power of Egypt is symbolizedby the mighty Nile: “Who is this that rises like the Nile, likerivers of surging waters? Egypt rises like the Nile....She says, ‘I will rise and cover the earth; I will destroycities and their people’  ” (Jer. 46:7–8).

TheEuphrates River

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

Inthe Bible, the Euphrates represents the northern boundary of theterritory granted to Abraham (Gen. 15:18; see also Exod. 23:31).David extended his territory as far as the Euphrates when he foughtthe Aramean king Hada-de-zer (2Sam. 8:3), and so the dimensionsof Israel at its apex under Solomon are described as controlling allthe kingdoms “from the Euphrates River to the land of thePhilistines, as far as the border of Egypt [i.e., the southern limitof his realm]” (1Kings 4:21).

Inaddition to its significance as a political boundary, the Euphratesmarked an important cultural boundary in Israelite thought. Abrahamand his family are remembered as having come from “beyond theEuphrates River” (Josh. 24:2). The exile was described as ascattering “beyond the Euphrates River,” an expressionthat underscores complete dispossession from Israel’s own land(1Kings 14:15). Interestingly, the cultures to the east of theEuphrates shared the notion that this river marked a major boundary,as evident from the convention among the Neo-Assyrians and thePersians of referring to western lands by the name “Beyond theRiver” or “Trans-Euphrates” (Akk. eber-nari; Aram.abar nahara). This was the name of the province encompassing the landof Israel in the time of Ezra (see Ezra 4:10).

Isaiahmade use of the association between the Euphrates and theMesopotamian empires when he likened the king of Assyria to themighty waters of the river (Isa. 8:7). The Euphrates figuresprominently in Revelation, where it restrains punishment from thenorth, a punishment that is released when God dries up the river,allowing “kings from the East” to cross over (Rev. 9:14;16:12).

TheTigris River

Alongwith the Euphrates, the Tigris (Heb. khiddeqel ) was one ofthe two rivers of ancient Mesopotamia. The Tigris lies east of theEuphrates and runs over a course of approximately 1,150 miles fromnorthwest to southeast, finally joining with the Euphrates andemptying into the Persian Gulf. In antiquity, the cities of Calah,Nineveh, and Ashur lay along the Tigris. The Tigris is mentionedtwice in the Bible: first, as one of the four headwaters emanatingfrom the garden of Eden (Gen. 2:14) and, second, as the location ofDaniel’s visionary experience (Dan. 10:4).

TheJordan River

TheJordan (Heb. yarden) runs southward from the Hula Valley into the Seaof Galilee (also known as the Sea of Tiberias; modern Lake Kinneret)and from there through a river valley (the “plain of theJordan” [see Gen. 13:10]) to the Dead Sea. Over its course ofapproximately 150 miles, it descends dramatically from an elevationof approximately 200 feet in the Hula Valley to an elevation of 690feet below sea level at the Sea of Galilee, and then farther downwardto an elevation of 1,385 feet below sea level at the Dead Sea.Fittingly, the name “Jordan” is related to the Hebrewword yarad(“to go down”).

Inthe story of the exodus and conquest, the Jordan River marked theboundary of the “promised land,” despite the fact thattwo and a half tribes received inheritances on the eastern side ofthe river (the Transjordan [see Num. 32:32; 34:12, 15]). For thoseliving in the land of Israel, the river marked the boundary betweenthem and what they termed “the other side of the Jordan”(Heb. ’eber hayyarden [Num. 32:19; Deut. 1:5]).

Inthe OT, several memorable stories are set near the Jordan. Inaddition to Joshua’s dramatic crossing of the Jordan (Josh.3:1–17), the “fords of the Jordan” were strategiclocations, and it was there that the Gileadites slaughtered forty-twothousand Ephraimites as they attempted to return to their territoryon the western side of the Jordan (Judg. 12:5). Elisha instructedNaaman, the leprous Aramean general, to bathe seven times in theJordan for the healing of his condition (2Kings 5:10). WhenElisha’s companions wished to build shelters for themselves,they went to the Jordan, where they knew they would find abundantvegetation and poles (2Kings 6:2; cf. Zech. 11:3). When one ofthem dropped an iron ax head into the water, Elisha caused it tofloat to the surface (2Kings 6:6–7).

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

Tributariesof the Jordan

Southof the Sea of Galilee, the Jordan is fed by several tributaries. TheYarmuk River joins the Jordan just south of the lake, draining thebiblical region of Bashan to the east. The Wadi Far’ah joinsthe Jordan from the west, halfway between the Sea of Galilee and theDead Sea, and drains the hill country of Ephraim. Nearly across fromthe Wadi Far’ah, the biblical Jabbok River (Wadi Zerqa) entersthe Jordan from the east. In biblical times, the Jabbok was the limitof Ammonite territory (Num. 21:23–24). The Arnon River (WadiMujib), not a tributary of the Jordan, enters the Dead Sea from theeast, opposite En Gedi. It was the border between the Moabites andthe Amorites (Num. 21:13).

TheWadi of Egypt

Ina number of texts the “wadi of Egypt” (or “brook ofEgypt”) represents the far southern limit of Israeliteterritory. Some ancient interpreters understood this as referring tothe Pelusian branch of the Nile River delta, while most modernscholars favor the Besor River, farther east, in present-day Israel.Besides the Bible, Assyrian texts also refer to the Wadi of Egypt. In733 BC Tiglath-pileserIII set up a victory stela there, perhapsto advertise to the Egyptians the southern extent of the territorythat he claimed for Assyria.

Severalbiblical passages refer to the Shihor River as marking a boundarybetween Egypt and Israelite territory (Josh. 13:3; 19:26; 1Chron.13:5; Isa. 23:3; Jer. 2:18).

TheOrontes River

Althoughit is not mentioned in the Bible, the Orontes marked an importantinternational boundary in the biblical world. The Orontes begins inthe Bekaa Valley in present-day Lebanon, then flows northward betweenthe Lebanon and the Anti-Lebanon mountain ranges before turningsharply westward to empty into the Mediterranean Sea. Along theOrontes lay the kingdom of Hamath (see, e.g., 2Sam. 8:9;2Chron. 8:3; Jer. 39:5). Because it ran through a valley thatwas an artery of travel from north to south, the Orontes was theperennial focus of strategic interest, and several important battleswere fought at or near the Orontes. In 1274 BC the Egyptian pharaohRamessesII fought the Hittite king MuwatallisII at theBattle of Kadesh. In 853 BC the Assyrian king ShalmaneserIIIwas challenged at Qarqar on the Orontes by a coalition led byHadadezer of Damascus and including King Ahab of Israel.

Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.

In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).

Articles of Clothing

A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.

In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).

Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).

The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il  ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).

In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).

Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).

Special Functions of Clothing

According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).

Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).

Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).

Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.

Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).

Self-control involves the willingness to submit to theboundaries of nature, society, and family that God places in theworld to bring about order and harmony in relationships. Theself-restraint of an individual’s thoughts, words, and actionsreflects the ordered discipline of God’s creation (Gen. 1–3;8:22; Prov. 6:6–8). Discipline of the self is essential to livea productive life in community (Prov. 25:28).

“Self-control”is one of the terms that Luke uses to summarize Paul’s messageto Felix (Acts 24:25). God’s people must exercise self-control(1Thess. 5:6; 2Tim. 1:7; 2Pet. 1:6). Ultimately,self-control is a gift, a fruit that comes from being in submissionto God’s Spirit (Gal. 5:22–23).

When God creates humans, he pronounces them “verygood/beautiful” (Gen. 1:31). They are designed to bemagnificent visual displays of God’s character (1:26–27).Human sexuality originally is set in a context of overwhelmingbeauty. God’s first command is to reproduce and extend thisparadise throughout the earth (1:28). Human sexuality is not simply amechanism for reproduction. From the outset it has been aboutcompletion, without which there is loneliness (2:18).

Althoughthe Bible does not define the distinctives of masculinity andfemininity in any detail, it does defend that there are distinctionsbetween the genders. Behaviors that confuse the genders areexplicitly condemned (Deut. 22:5; 1Cor. 6:9; 11:4–16).

hom*osexualintercourse (Lev. 18:22; 20:13; Rom. 1:24–27; 1Cor. 6:9;1Tim. 1:10) and intercourse with an animal (Exod. 22:19; Lev.18:23; 20:15–16; Deut. 27:21) are violations of God’screated order.

Nakedness

“Nakedness”is confined to the genitals and buttocks (Exod. 20:26; Isa. 20:2–4;Ezek. 23:18, 29; Nah. 3:5) and, after the fall, is synonymous withshame (Gen. 3:7–10; 1Sam. 20:30; Isa. 47:3; Jer. 13:26;Mic. 1:11; Nah. 3:5; Rev. 3:18; cf. Rom. 1:23–24; 1Cor.12:23–24). A woman’s breasts are recognized as erotic(Prov. 5:19; Ezek. 23:3, 21) but not shameful. God slaughters ananimal in order to cover nakedness (Gen. 3:21). Ultimately, when sinand death are removed and the body raised, the redeemed will have noshame and will be clothed only in their righteousness (Rev. 19:5–9).

Exposingnakedness is an action used to humiliate enemies (2Sam. 10:4–5;1Chron. 10:9; Isa. 47:3). Jesus is stripped naked (Matt. 27:28,35–36). Violating another’s nakedness includes touchingor seeing (Deut. 25:11) and produces extreme personal disgrace (Lev.18:6–19 NASB; Hab. 2:15–16). It is an act of grace tocover another’s nakedness (Isa. 58:7; Ezek. 18:7, 16). To eventalk or laugh about inappropriate exposure brings dishonor (Gen.9:21–23). The overarching principle is purity (Lev. 18:24).

Marriageand Adultery

Althoughdamaged by sin, marriage continues to be the ultimate humanrelationship involving intimacy, privacy, and liberty. Marriage isdefined by a covenant—a contract witnessed and enforceable, notjust a promise made in private. The couple separate from theirparents to become “one flesh” (Gen. 2:24).

Oncethe marriage contract is agreed upon, the couple are married. Theycannot consummate the marriage until the economic commitments of thecontract have been delivered (Matt. 1:18; 25:1–13). This iscelebrated with a feast. Jesus uses this custom as an analogy for hisdeparture and return (John 14:1–3).

Paulcommands husbands to love their wives (Eph. 5:25–33; cf. Gen.24:67; 29:20; 1Sam. 1:5; Eccles. 9:9; Song 8:6–7).Nowhere in the Bible is a wife commanded to love her husband, thougholder women should teach younger women to do so (Titus 2:3–4).Love is the husband’s responsibility. Love is a command thatcan be obeyed, not just a pleasurable feeling over which one has nocontrol. The model of husbandly love is Jesus laying down his lifefor his people.

Theecstasy of making love is celebrated in the erotic Song of Songs,which holds out the hope of such marital delight even now. The axiomof marriage is a righteous jealousy (cf. Exod. 20:5; 34:14; Num.5:14, 30; Prov. 6:34).

Thefirst year of marriage is especially important and is protected byexemption from military service (Deut. 20:7; 24:5).

Whena man dies without a male heir, his widow’s possession of thatpart of the family estate can result in her marrying a man fromanother family and so alienating that land. This can be resolvedeither by the injustice of eviction or by the device of leviratemarriage. The nearest male relative of the deceased husband marriesthe widow, and their son then inherits the deceased husband’sname and title to the land (Deut. 25:5–10; cf. Gen. 38; Ruth).

Concubinesare wives from poor families, slaves, or captives, and theirmarriages are protected (Exod. 21:7–9; Deut. 21:11–14).

Rapeof a married woman constitutes adultery by the rapist, not thevictim. Consensual sex with a married woman is adultery by bothparties. Rape of a single woman is treated as fornication, with noblame attached to the woman. Her father has the option of letting hermarry the man or receiving significant financial compensation (Exod.22:16–17; Deut. 22:23–27). Her father has the right totake the money and refuse the marriage. To falsely accuse a woman ofadultery is a crime (Deut. 22:13–21).

Prostitutionis an extreme form of adultery or fornication and totally forbidden(Lev. 19:29; Deut. 23:17). Under the new covenant, this warning isheightened by the reality of the gift of the Holy Spirit transformingeach believer into the temple of the Lord (1Cor. 6:15–20).

Originally,marriage between siblings is implied (Gen. 4:17, 26; 5:4). Abrammarried his half sister, Sarai (Gen. 20:12; cf. Gen. 11:29; Num.26:59). The Mosaic covenant at Sinai bans marriage to bloodrelationships closer than first cousins and to in-laws (Lev. 18:6–30;cf. 2Sam. 13; 1Cor. 5:1).

Polygamyoccurs soon after the fall (Gen. 4:19–24). It is neverexplicitly forbidden in the Bible, but it is managed by OT law so asto restrain further injustice and damage. It is always seen as lessthan satisfactory (cf. Gen. 29–30; 1Sam. 1:6; 2Sam.13; 1Kings 1–2; 11). In the NT, monogamy is mandatory forthose who would lead the church (1Tim. 3:2, 12; Titus 1:6).(See also Premarital and Extramarital Sex.)

Self-Controland Purity

Theviolation of sexual purity is a decision of the heart (Ezek. 23:11;Matt. 5:28). The biblical concept of lust entails more than justphysical arousal. It involves a strong desire for/coveting of (cf.James 1:14–15) something that one has no right to acquire. Thisestablishes both the need for self-control (Titus 2:5–6) andthe availability of appropriate options (1Cor. 7:2, 5, 9).Masturbation is nowhere mentioned in the Bible (Gen. 38:9 is aboutfailure to fulfill the levirate). The critical issue is lust.

Sexualmisconduct is never the responsibility of the victim (Deut. 22:25).Nevertheless, for reasons of personal safety as well as out ofconcern for one another, the family of Christ must practice modestyin dress (1Tim. 2:9) and consider how to build one another uprather than put stumbling blocks in each other’s way.

Godalways provides the believer with what is necessary to resisttemptation and make the right choices (1Cor. 10:13).Consequently, a significant aspect of every parent’s role is toteach godly sexual wisdom to children before they face suchchallenges (cf. Prov. 1–9).

Thegospel requires us to view sexuality from a wider perspective.Reproduction also occurs through the preaching of the gospel, callingforth new birth and a new people (Matt. 28:18–20). This gospelcall will divide families (Luke 12:53). Singleness is no barrier toone’s ability to fulfill the command to multiply and fill theearth (Isa. 56:3–8). In times of distress it may be better toremain single (1Cor. 7, esp. v.26). This is also a giftof God (1Cor. 7:7), given to equip one for the fulfillment ofthe gospel commission.

When God creates humans, he pronounces them “verygood/beautiful” (Gen. 1:31). They are designed to bemagnificent visual displays of God’s character (1:26–27).Human sexuality originally is set in a context of overwhelmingbeauty. God’s first command is to reproduce and extend thisparadise throughout the earth (1:28). Human sexuality is not simply amechanism for reproduction. From the outset it has been aboutcompletion, without which there is loneliness (2:18).

Althoughthe Bible does not define the distinctives of masculinity andfemininity in any detail, it does defend that there are distinctionsbetween the genders. Behaviors that confuse the genders areexplicitly condemned (Deut. 22:5; 1Cor. 6:9; 11:4–16).

hom*osexualintercourse (Lev. 18:22; 20:13; Rom. 1:24–27; 1Cor. 6:9;1Tim. 1:10) and intercourse with an animal (Exod. 22:19; Lev.18:23; 20:15–16; Deut. 27:21) are violations of God’screated order.

Nakedness

“Nakedness”is confined to the genitals and buttocks (Exod. 20:26; Isa. 20:2–4;Ezek. 23:18, 29; Nah. 3:5) and, after the fall, is synonymous withshame (Gen. 3:7–10; 1Sam. 20:30; Isa. 47:3; Jer. 13:26;Mic. 1:11; Nah. 3:5; Rev. 3:18; cf. Rom. 1:23–24; 1Cor.12:23–24). A woman’s breasts are recognized as erotic(Prov. 5:19; Ezek. 23:3, 21) but not shameful. God slaughters ananimal in order to cover nakedness (Gen. 3:21). Ultimately, when sinand death are removed and the body raised, the redeemed will have noshame and will be clothed only in their righteousness (Rev. 19:5–9).

Exposingnakedness is an action used to humiliate enemies (2Sam. 10:4–5;1Chron. 10:9; Isa. 47:3). Jesus is stripped naked (Matt. 27:28,35–36). Violating another’s nakedness includes touchingor seeing (Deut. 25:11) and produces extreme personal disgrace (Lev.18:6–19 NASB; Hab. 2:15–16). It is an act of grace tocover another’s nakedness (Isa. 58:7; Ezek. 18:7, 16). To eventalk or laugh about inappropriate exposure brings dishonor (Gen.9:21–23). The overarching principle is purity (Lev. 18:24).

Marriageand Adultery

Althoughdamaged by sin, marriage continues to be the ultimate humanrelationship involving intimacy, privacy, and liberty. Marriage isdefined by a covenant—a contract witnessed and enforceable, notjust a promise made in private. The couple separate from theirparents to become “one flesh” (Gen. 2:24).

Oncethe marriage contract is agreed upon, the couple are married. Theycannot consummate the marriage until the economic commitments of thecontract have been delivered (Matt. 1:18; 25:1–13). This iscelebrated with a feast. Jesus uses this custom as an analogy for hisdeparture and return (John 14:1–3).

Paulcommands husbands to love their wives (Eph. 5:25–33; cf. Gen.24:67; 29:20; 1Sam. 1:5; Eccles. 9:9; Song 8:6–7).Nowhere in the Bible is a wife commanded to love her husband, thougholder women should teach younger women to do so (Titus 2:3–4).Love is the husband’s responsibility. Love is a command thatcan be obeyed, not just a pleasurable feeling over which one has nocontrol. The model of husbandly love is Jesus laying down his lifefor his people.

Theecstasy of making love is celebrated in the erotic Song of Songs,which holds out the hope of such marital delight even now. The axiomof marriage is a righteous jealousy (cf. Exod. 20:5; 34:14; Num.5:14, 30; Prov. 6:34).

Thefirst year of marriage is especially important and is protected byexemption from military service (Deut. 20:7; 24:5).

Whena man dies without a male heir, his widow’s possession of thatpart of the family estate can result in her marrying a man fromanother family and so alienating that land. This can be resolvedeither by the injustice of eviction or by the device of leviratemarriage. The nearest male relative of the deceased husband marriesthe widow, and their son then inherits the deceased husband’sname and title to the land (Deut. 25:5–10; cf. Gen. 38; Ruth).

Concubinesare wives from poor families, slaves, or captives, and theirmarriages are protected (Exod. 21:7–9; Deut. 21:11–14).

Rapeof a married woman constitutes adultery by the rapist, not thevictim. Consensual sex with a married woman is adultery by bothparties. Rape of a single woman is treated as fornication, with noblame attached to the woman. Her father has the option of letting hermarry the man or receiving significant financial compensation (Exod.22:16–17; Deut. 22:23–27). Her father has the right totake the money and refuse the marriage. To falsely accuse a woman ofadultery is a crime (Deut. 22:13–21).

Prostitutionis an extreme form of adultery or fornication and totally forbidden(Lev. 19:29; Deut. 23:17). Under the new covenant, this warning isheightened by the reality of the gift of the Holy Spirit transformingeach believer into the temple of the Lord (1Cor. 6:15–20).

Originally,marriage between siblings is implied (Gen. 4:17, 26; 5:4). Abrammarried his half sister, Sarai (Gen. 20:12; cf. Gen. 11:29; Num.26:59). The Mosaic covenant at Sinai bans marriage to bloodrelationships closer than first cousins and to in-laws (Lev. 18:6–30;cf. 2Sam. 13; 1Cor. 5:1).

Polygamyoccurs soon after the fall (Gen. 4:19–24). It is neverexplicitly forbidden in the Bible, but it is managed by OT law so asto restrain further injustice and damage. It is always seen as lessthan satisfactory (cf. Gen. 29–30; 1Sam. 1:6; 2Sam.13; 1Kings 1–2; 11). In the NT, monogamy is mandatory forthose who would lead the church (1Tim. 3:2, 12; Titus 1:6).(See also Premarital and Extramarital Sex.)

Self-Controland Purity

Theviolation of sexual purity is a decision of the heart (Ezek. 23:11;Matt. 5:28). The biblical concept of lust entails more than justphysical arousal. It involves a strong desire for/coveting of (cf.James 1:14–15) something that one has no right to acquire. Thisestablishes both the need for self-control (Titus 2:5–6) andthe availability of appropriate options (1Cor. 7:2, 5, 9).Masturbation is nowhere mentioned in the Bible (Gen. 38:9 is aboutfailure to fulfill the levirate). The critical issue is lust.

Sexualmisconduct is never the responsibility of the victim (Deut. 22:25).Nevertheless, for reasons of personal safety as well as out ofconcern for one another, the family of Christ must practice modestyin dress (1Tim. 2:9) and consider how to build one another uprather than put stumbling blocks in each other’s way.

Godalways provides the believer with what is necessary to resisttemptation and make the right choices (1Cor. 10:13).Consequently, a significant aspect of every parent’s role is toteach godly sexual wisdom to children before they face suchchallenges (cf. Prov. 1–9).

Thegospel requires us to view sexuality from a wider perspective.Reproduction also occurs through the preaching of the gospel, callingforth new birth and a new people (Matt. 28:18–20). This gospelcall will divide families (Luke 12:53). Singleness is no barrier toone’s ability to fulfill the command to multiply and fill theearth (Isa. 56:3–8). In times of distress it may be better toremain single (1Cor. 7, esp. v.26). This is also a giftof God (1Cor. 7:7), given to equip one for the fulfillment ofthe gospel commission.

There are few subjects more prominent in the Bible than sin;hardly a page can be found where sin is not mentioned, described, orportrayed. As the survey that follows demonstrates, sin is one of thedriving forces of the entire Bible.

Sinin the Bible

OldTestament.Sin enters the biblical story in Gen. 3. Despite God’scommandment to the contrary (2:16–17), Eve ate from the tree ofthe knowledge of good and evil at the prompting of the serpent. WhenAdam joined Eve in eating the fruit, their rebellion was complete.They attempted to cover their guilt and shame, but the fig leaveswere inadequate. God confronted them and was unimpressed with theirattempts to shift the blame. Judgment fell heavily on the serpent,Eve, and Adam; even creation itself was affected (3:17–18).

Inthe midst of judgment, God made it clear in two specific ways thatsin did not have the last word. First, God cryptically promised toput hostility between the offspring of the serpent and that of thewoman (Gen. 3:15). Although the serpent would inflict a severe blowupon the offspring of the woman, the offspring ofthe womanwould defeat the serpent. Second, God replaced the inadequatecovering of the fig leaves with animal skins (3:21). The implicationis that the death of the animal functioned as a substitute for Adamand Eve, covering their sin.

InGen. 4–11 the disastrous effects of sin and death are on fulldisplay. Not even the cataclysmic judgment of the flood was able toeradicate the wickedness of the human heart (6:5; 8:21). Humansgathered in rebellion at the tower of Babel in an effort to make aname for themselves and thwart God’s intention for them toscatter across the earth (11:1–9).

Inone sense, the rest of the OT hangs on this question: How will a holyGod satisfy his wrath against human sin and restore his relationshipwith human beings without compromising his justice? The short answeris: through Abraham and his offspring (Gen. 12:1–3), whoeventually multiplied into the nation of Israel. After God redeemedthem from their slavery in Egypt (Exod. 1–15), he brought themto Sinai to make a covenant with them that was predicated onobedience (19:5–6). A central component of this covenant wasthe sacrificial system (e.g., Lev. 1–7), which God provided asa means of dealing with sin. In addition to the regular sacrificesmade for sin throughout the year, God set apart one day a year toatone for Israel’s sins (Lev. 16). On this Day of Atonement thehigh priest took the blood of a goat into the holy of holies andsprinkled it on the mercy seat as a sin offering. Afterward he took asecond goat and confessed “all the iniquities of the people ofIsrael, and all their transgressions, all their sins, putting them onthe head of the goat, and sending it away into the wilderness....The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to a barrenregion; and the goat shall be set free in the wilderness” (Lev.16:21–22 NRSV). In order for the holy God to dwell with sinfulpeople, extensive provisions had to be made to enable fellowship.

Despitethese provisions, Israel repeatedly and persistently broke itscovenant with God. Even at the highest points of prosperity under thereign of David and his son Solomon, sin plagued God’s people,including the kings themselves. David committed adultery and murder(2Sam. 11:1–27). Solomon had hundreds of foreign wivesand concubines, who turned his heart away from Yahweh to other gods(1Kings 11:1–8). Once the nation split into two (Israeland Judah), sin and its consequences accelerated. Idolatry becamerampant. The result was exile from the land (Israel in 722 BC, Judahin 586 BC). But God refused to give up on his people. He promised toraise up a servant who would suffer for the sins of his people as aguilt offering (Isa. 52:13–53:12).

AfterGod’s people returned from exile, hopes remained high that thegreat prophetic promises, including the final remission of sins, wereat hand. But disillusionment quickly set in as the returnees remainedunder foreign oppression, the rebuilt temple was but a shell ofSolomon’s, and a Davidic king was nowhere to be found. Beforelong, God’s people were back to their old ways, turning awayfrom him. Even the priests, who were charged with the administrationof the sacrificial system dealing with the sin of the people, failedto properly carry out their duties (Mal. 1:6–2:9).

NewTestament.During the next four hundred years of prophetic silence, the longingfor God to finally put away the sins of his people grew. At last,when the conception and birth of Jesus were announced, it wasrevealed that he would “save his people from their sins”(Matt. 1:21). In the days before the public ministry of Jesus, Johnthe Baptist prepared the way for him by “preaching a baptism ofrepentance for the forgiveness of sins” (Luke 3:3). Whereasboth Adam and Israel were disobedient sons of God, Jesus proved to bethe obedient Son by his faithfulness to God in the face of temptation(Matt. 2:13–15; 4:1–11; 26:36–46; Luke 3:23–4:13;Rom. 5:12–21; Phil. 2:8; Heb. 5:8–10). He was also theSuffering Servant who gave his life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45;cf. Isa. 52:13–53:12). On the cross Jesus experienced the wrathof God that God’s people rightly deserved for their sin. Withhis justice fully satisfied, God was free to forgive and justify allwho are identified with Christ by faith (Rom. 3:21–26). Whatneither the law nor the blood of bulls and goats could do, JesusChrist did with his own blood (Rom. 8:3–4; Heb. 9:1–10:18).

Afterhis resurrection and ascension, Jesus’ followers beganproclaiming the “good news” (gospel) of what Jesus didand calling to people, “Repent and be baptized, every one ofyou, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins”(Acts 2:38). As people began to experience God’s forgiveness,they were so transformed that they forgave those who sinned againstthem (Matt. 6:12; 18:15–20; Col. 3:13). Although believerscontinue to struggle with sin in this life (Rom. 8:12–13; Gal.5:16–25), sin is no longer master over them (Rom. 6:1–23).The Holy Spirit empowers them to fight sin as they long for the newheaven and earth, where there will be no sin, no death, and no curse(Rom. 8:12–30; Rev. 21–22).

Aseven this very brief survey of the biblical story line from Genesisto Revelation shows, sin is a fundamental aspect of the Bible’splot. Sin generates the conflict that drives the biblical narrative;it is the fundamental “problem” that must be solved inorder for God’s purposes in creation to be completed.

Definitionand Terminology

Definitionof sin. Althoughno definition can capture completely the breadth and depth of theconcept of sin, it seems best to regard sin as a failure to conformto God’s law in thought, feeling, attitude, word, action,orientation, or nature. In this definition it must be remembered thatGod’s law is an expression of his perfect and holy character,so sin is not merely the violation of an impersonal law but rather isa personal offense against the Creator. Sin cannot be limited toactions. Desires (Exod. 20:17; Matt. 5:27–30), emotions (Gen.4:6–7; Matt. 5:21–26), and even our fallen nature ashuman beings (Ps. 51:5; Eph. 2:1–3) can be sinful as well.

Terminology.TheBible uses dozens of terms to speak of sin. Neatly classifying themis not easy, as there is significant overlap in the meaning and useof the various terms. Nonetheless, many of the terms fit in one ofthe following four categories.

1.Personal. Sin is an act of rebellion against God as the creator andruler of the universe. Rather than recognizing God’sself-revelation in nature and expressing gratitude, humankindfoolishly worships the creation rather than the Creator (Rom.1:19–23). The abundant love, grace, and mercy that God shows tohumans make their rebellion all the more stunning (Isa. 1:2–31).Another way of expressing the personal nature of sin is ungodlinessor impiety, which refers to lack of devotion to God (Ps. 35:16; Isa.9:17; 1Pet. 4:18).

2.Legal. A variety of words portray sin in terms drawn from thelawcourts. Words such as “transgression” and “trespass”picture sin as the violation of a specific command of God or thecrossing of a boundary that God has established (Num. 14:41–42;Rom. 4:7, 15). When individuals do things that are contrary to God’slaw, they are deemed unrighteous or unjust (Isa. 10:1; Matt. 5:45;Rom. 3:5). Breaking the covenant with God is described as violatinghis statutes and disobeying his laws (Isa. 24:5). The result isguilt, an objective legal status that is present whenever God’slaw is violated regardless of whether the individual subjectivelyfeels guilt.

3.Moral. In the most basic sense, sin is evil, the opposite of what isgood. Therefore, God’s people are to hate evil and love what isgood (Amos 5:14–15; Rom. 12:9). Similarly, Scripture contraststhe upright and the wicked (Prov. 11:11; 12:6; 14:11). One could alsoinclude here the term “iniquity,” which is used to speakof perversity or crookedness (Pss. 51:2; 78:38; Isa. 59:2). Frequentmention is also made of sexual immorality as an especially grievousdeparture from God’s ways (Num. 25:1; Rom. 1:26–27;1Cor. 5:1–11).

4.Cultic. In order for a person to approach a holy God, that individualhad to be in a state of purity before him. While a person couldbecome impure without necessarily sinning (e.g., a menstruating womanwas impure but not sinful), in some cases the term “impurity”clearly refers to a sinful state (Lev. 20:21; Isa. 1:25; Ezek.24:13). The same is true of the term “unclean.” Althoughit is frequently used in Leviticus to speak of ritual purity, inother places it clearly refers to sinful actions or states (Ps. 51:7;Prov. 20:9; Isa. 6:5; 64:6).

Metaphors

Inaddition to specific terms used for “sin,” the Bible usesseveral metaphors or images to describe it. The following four areamong the more prominent.

Missingthe mark.In both Hebrew and Greek, two of the most common words for “sin”have the sense of missing the mark. But this does not mean that sinis reduced to a mistake or an oversight. The point is not that aperson simply misses the mark of what God requires; instead, it isthat he or she is aiming for the wrong target altogether (Exod. 34:9;Deut. 9:18). Regardless of whether missing the mark is intentional ornot, the individual is still responsible (Lev. 4:2–31; Num.15:30).

Departingfrom the way.Sin as departing from God’s way is especially prominent in thewisdom literature. Contrasts are drawn between the way of therighteous and the way of the wicked (Ps. 1:1, 6; Prov. 4:11–19).Wisdom is pictured as a woman who summons people to walk in her ways,but fools ignore her and depart from her ways (Prov. 9:1–18).Those who do not walk in God’s ways are eventually destroyed bytheir own wickedness (Prov. 11:5; 12:26; 13:15).

Adultery.Since God’s relationship with his people is described as amarriage (Isa. 62:4–5; Ezek. 16:8–14; Eph. 5:25–32),it is not surprising that the Bible describes their unfaithfulness asadultery. The prophet Hosea’s marriage to an adulterous womanvividly portrays Israel’s unfaithfulness to Yahweh (Hos. 1–3).When the Israelites chase after other gods, Yahweh accuses them ofspiritual adultery in extremely graphic terms (Ezek. 16:15–52).When Christians join themselves to a prostitute or participate inidolatry, they too are engaged in spiritual adultery (1Cor.6:12–20; 10:1–22).

Slavery.Sin is portrayed as a power that enslaves. The prophets make it clearthat Israel’s bondage to foreign powers is in fact a picture ofits far greater enslavement to sin (Isa. 42:8; 43:4–7;49:1–12). Paul makes a similar point when he refers to thosewho do not know Christ as slaves to sin, unable to do anything thatpleases God (Rom. 6:1–23; 8:5–8). Sin is a cosmic powerthat is capable of using even the law to entrap people in its snare(Rom. 7:7–25).

Scopeand Consequences

Sindoes not travel alone; it brings a large collection of baggage alongwith it. Here we briefly examine its scope and consequences.

Scope.The stain of sin extends to every part of the created order. As aresult of Adam’s sin, the ground was cursed to resist humanefforts to cultivate it, producing thorns and thistles (Gen.3:17–18). The promised land is described as groaning under theweight of Israel’s sin and in need of Sabbath rest (2Chron.36:21; Jer. 12:4); Paul applies the same language to all creation aswell (Rom. 8:19–22).

Sinaffects every aspect of the individual: mind, heart, will, emotions,motives, actions, and nature (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Jer. 17:9; Rom.3:9–18). Sometimes this reality is referred to as “totaldepravity.” This phrase means not that people are as sinful asthey could be but rather that every aspect of their lives is taintedby sin. As a descendant of Adam, every person enters the world as asinner who then sins (Rom. 5:12–21). Sin also pollutes societalstructures, corrupting culture, governments, nations, and economicmarkets, to name but a few.

Consequences.Since the two greatest commandments are to love God and to love one’sneighbor as oneself (Matt. 22:34–40), it makes sense that sinhas consequences on both the vertical and the horizontal level.Vertically, sin results in both physical and spiritual death (Gen.2:16–17; Rom. 5:12–14). It renders humanity guilty inGod’s court of law, turns us into God’s enemies, andsubjects us to God’s righteous wrath (Rom. 1:18; 3:19–20;5:6–11). On the horizontal level, sin causes conflict betweenindividuals and harms relationships of every kind. It breedsmistrust, jealousy, and selfishness that infect even the closestrelationships.

Conclusion

Nosubject is more unpleasant than sin. But a proper understanding ofsin is essential for understanding the gospel of Jesus Christ. As thePuritan Thomas Watson put it, “Until sin be bitter, Christ willnot be sweet.”

By its title, Song of Songs claims to be the most sublime song of all. The history of its interpretation also reveals that it may be the most misunderstood song as well. The reader of this book is dazzled by its intensity and honest expression of desire for intimate relationship. No wonder that early theologians who thought that the body was only a temporary casing for the all-important spirit felt that this book could not be talking about what it appeared to be talking about. Thus, for example, when the woman describes the man as a sachet of myrrh lodged between her breasts (1:13), this had to be a reference to Christ spanning the OT and the NT (so Cyril of Alexandria). But over time this book could not be suppressed by such interpretive strategies. Today most readily acknowledge that Song of Songs is love poetry that articulates human desires as well as our joys and worries.

Genre, Structure, and Outline

As implied by the preceding paragraph, Song of Songs is not an allegory. It is love poetry, in which a man and a woman express their deepest longings and desires to each other. They want to be in each other’s passionate embrace. This book celebrates love between a man and a woman.

Some interpreters believe that Song of Songs is a drama or at least tells a story of a particular love relationship. Although there are almost as many different suggestions of a story as there are advocates of the so-called dramatic approach, two main types emerge. One approach believes that there are two characters, a lover and his beloved, and the plot entails their growing relationship, sometimes following the pattern of courtship, engagement, marriage, honeymoon, and so forth. Occasionally this plot is given a historical background, usually with Solomon as the man (thanks to the superscription in 1:1) and a woman who goes by the name of the “Shulammite” (6:13 [curiously, apparently a feminine form of the name “Solomon”]). On the other hand, other interpretations introduce yet a third character, an unnamed shepherd boy, who is the woman’s true love. Thus, the story is that of a love triangle. Solomon is trying or has succeeded in adding the woman to his harem, but she retains her true love toward the shepherd boy. Thus, Song of Songs is the story of true love’s triumph over power and wealth.

Other interpreters point out that if it is difficult to determine how many characters are in this supposed plot or the exact contour of the story, then interpreters must be reading too much into the book to make it work. After all, there is no narrator in the book providing narrative guidelines to the reader. Indeed, there are not even indications of who is speaking when (thus modern translations insert italicized text headings such as “Beloved,” “Lover,” and “Friends” to identify speakers).

Such interpreters argue that Song of Songs does not tell a story but rather is a kind of “love Psalter” containing a number of different love poems. In other words, it is an anthology, a collection, of love poems united by a consistency of character and imagery as well as the occasional recurrent refrain. The book is truly a “Song [composed] of [many] Songs.” The exact number of poems in this anthology can be debated and is unimportant for their interpretation. The important point is that readers do not force connections between poems that are not there. However, the following division, after the superscription (1:1) into twenty-three poems may not be far off the mark.

I. Superscription (1:1)

II. Poem 1 (1:2–4)

III. Poem 2 (1:5–6)

IV. Poem 3 (1:7–8)

V. Poem 4 (1:9–11)

VI. Poem 5 (1:12–14)

VII. Poem 6 (1:15–17)

VIII. Poem 7 (2:1–7)

IX. Poem 8 (2:8–17)

X. Poem 9 (3:1–5)

XI. Poem 10 (3:6–11)

XII. Poem 11 (4:1–7)

XIII. Poem 12 (4:8–9)

XIV. Poem 13 (4:10–5:1)

XV. Poem 14 (5:2–6:3)

XVI. Poem 15 (6:4–10)

XVII. Poem 16 (6:11–12)

XVIII. Poem 17 (6:13–7:10)

XIX. Poem 18 (7:11–13)

XX. Poem 19 (8:1–4)

XXI. Poem 20 (8:5–7)

XXII. Poem 21 (8:8–10)

XXIII. Poem 22 (8:11–12)

XXIV. Poem 23 (8:13–14)

Date and Authorship

The conclusion that Song of Songs is a collection of love poems has implications for the date and authorship of the book. It is true that the superscription (1:1) associates the book with Solomon, and this connection must be taken seriously because there is no indication that the superscription is not a part of the canonical final form of the book. In light of a similar superscription in the book of Proverbs, however, this does not mean that Solomon wrote the entire book or that it is about him. Indeed, Solomon’s track record in love is dubious both in the book (Song 8:11–12) and outside it (1Kings 11:1–13). Perhaps as in Proverbs, he is considered the fountainhead of the composition of the book, and like Psalms and Proverbs, the book came into existence over a lengthy period of time and as a result of several composers. If so, the final form bears the mark of a single editor who brought it all together at an unknown date within the period of the formation of the OT.

Theological Message

Song of Songs celebrates love between a man and a woman. It reminds the people of God that intimate relationship is a divine gift that should be enjoyed. Although joy is indeed the dominant note of the book, the reader is warned that love is a powerful emotion that has its disappointments (so begins the poem in 5:2–6:3). Accordingly, the woman makes sure that the young girls who are watching and looking at her understand that it is important not to hurry love (2:7; 3:5; 8:4).

But we must not read Song of Songs in isolation from the rest of the canon. This book describes the man and the woman in the garden as naked and enjoying each other. How can the reader not think of the garden of Eden? God created a man and a woman and established marriage as a source of mutual joy (Gen. 2:23–25). The next chapter, however, narrates the fall, where the rebellion against God results in alienation not only between God and Adam and Eve, but also between Adam and Eve. Their estrangement results in their efforts to cover themselves from the gaze of the other and their ejection from the garden. The poems of Song of Songs, then, may be seen as the story of the “already but not yet” redemption of sexuality.

Last, the broader canon frequently uses marriage as a metaphor of the relationship between God and his creatures (e.g., Ezek. 16; 23; Hos. 1–3). In other words, the more we learn about intimate marital relationships, the more we learn about our intimate relationship with God. Thus, Song of Songs may be read in a way that deepens our understanding of God and his love toward his people (cf. Eph. 5:21–33).

Continuing Significance

The opening chapters of Genesis describe human beings as creatures who were created for relationship, relationship with God to be sure, but also relationship with other people. Genesis 2:18–25 narrates the origin of the institution that formalizes the most intimate of human relationships, that between a man and a woman in marriage. The story continues in Gen. 3 on a tragic note when, because of sin, a barrier is erected between the man and the woman. Song of Songs poetically celebrates the redemption of the marriage relationship and encourages couples to grow closer to each other. The poems are not a how-to manual for courtship or intimate behavior, but they invite couples to cultivate their own love language and intimacies.

Geography

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

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

Symbolism

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

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

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

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

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

Spousal abuse is most succinctly defined as mistreatment ofone’s marriage partner through physical or emotional means. Thesource of abuse can be traced to the fall, as both partners strugglefor control of the relationship (Gen. 3:16b). As such, abuse is anexpression of a relational problem with God as well as with one’sspouse.

Becauseabuse is rooted in the desire to exploit another, it can never beunderstood as consistent with the biblical understanding of marriage.Marriage is expressed in Scripture as a covenant between twoindividuals who were intended to work together as persons who“correspond” to each other and are “one flesh”(Gen. 2:18 NET; 2:24). The exploitation inherent in abuse is alsocounter to the ideas of mutual submission and of each person in amarriage belonging to the other. Neither person is to be driven byselfish motivations (1Cor. 7:3–5; Eph. 5:21). Ultimately,abuse is counter to the Christian message because it cannot be anexpression of the nature of love (1Cor. 13) or the fruits ofthe Spirit (Gal. 5:22–23). Although abuse can be perpetratedupon either the husband or the wife, Scripture takes special care toinstruct the husband to be gentle in relation to his wife, calling onhim to treat her as Christ does the church and to be mindful of hissignificant role for the wife’s well-being (Eph. 5:28–31;1Pet. 3:7).

The management of available resources in the recognition thatGod is the owner and provider of all things. The Bible is clear thatGod is the maker and owner of all things. The psalmist wrote, “Theearth is the Lord’s, and everything in it, the world, and allwho live in it” (Ps. 24:1). God told Job, “Everythingunder heaven belongs to me” (Job 41:11). In the same way, Godsays, “The silver is mine and the gold is mine” (Hag.2:8). Stewardship is based upon the principle that God is the makerof all things. Since God is the creator and owner of all things,God’s followers are charged with managing what he has given.

Theterm “steward” is used in the OT to refer to Joseph’ssteward (Gen. 43:19; 44:1, 4) and to Arza, who was the steward ofBaasha’s son Elah, who reigned over Israel (1Kings 16:9KJV). The steward was the manager who oversaw all householdoperations. Having a great deal of responsibility, the slave orservant in this position had to be someone whom the owner trusted.Jesus used similar terms in referring to a household manager in someof his parables (Matt. 20:8; Luke 16:1, 3). The concept ofstewardship is applied to the believer as God’s servant.Believers are stewards for God in the sense that they manage God’sresources in this world.

Thebiblical concept of stewardship begins with Adam and Eve beingcharged with the responsibility of caring for the creative work ofGod (Gen. 2:15). In the garden of Eden, humankind was given theresponsibility to care for the earth, manage it, and have dominionover it. On an individual level, all that Christians possess isintended to be used for God’s purposes and glory. Biblicalstewardship involves more than financial resources, althoughcertainly those are included. Proper stewardship involves managingevery resource (time, talent, finances, opportunity) under theleadership of God, who owns it all.

Regardingfinancial matters, the Bible teaches that a tithe (one-tenth) ofone’s income should be returned to God as a reminder that allone has comes from him (Lev. 27:30). The OT concept of the tithe isassumed by Jesus in Matt. 23:23 when he rebukes the scribes and thePharisees for tithing and yet neglecting more important things suchas justice and mercy. However, the tithe is not frequently mentionedin the NT. Rather than focusing on tithing, the NT focuses on theattitude of the believer in giving. Believers are encouraged to givesacrificially (Mark 12:41–44; Acts 2:44–45). In addition,Paul stresses giving in love with generosity (2Cor. 9:6–8).Giving to others in need is a reflection of trust that God willprovide for our own needs as we give to meet the needs of others. Godexpects that everything that one has will be used in ways that honorhim.

The Bible has much to say about suffering. While in the OTsuffering is regularly an indication of divine displeasure (Lev.26:16–36; Deut. 28:20–68; Ps. 44:10–12; Isa. 1:25;cf. Heb. 10:26–31), in the NT it becomes the means by whichblessing comes to humanity.

TheBible often shows that sinfulness results in suffering (Gen. 2:17;6:5–7; Exod. 32:33; 2Sam. 12:13–18; Rom. 1:18;1Cor. 11:27–30). Job’s friends mistakenly assumethat he has suffered because of disobedience (Job 4:7–9; 8:3–4,20; 11:6). Job passionately defends himself (12:4; 23:10), and in thefinal chapter of the book God commends Job and condemns his friendsfor their accusations (42:7–8; cf. 1:1, 22; 2:10). The writermakes clear that suffering is not necessarily evidence of sinfulness.Like Job’s friends, Jesus’ disciples assume thatblindness is an indication of sinfulness (John 9:1–2). Jesusrejects this simplistic notion of retributive suffering (John 9:3,6–7; cf. Luke 13:1–5).

Theprayers of suffering people are expressed in the sixteen communal andthirty-seven individual laments in the book of Psalms. Within thelaments the writers describe their problems, express feelings, makerequests, ask questions (“How long, Lord?” [13:1]; “Whyhave you forsaken me?” [22:1]), and lodge complaints againstGod (“My eyes fail, looking for my God [69:3]), enemies (“Youhave made us an object of derision to our neighbors, and our enemiesmock us” [80:6]), and even themselves (“I am a worm andnot a man” [22:6]).

TheNT writers reveal that Jesus’ suffering was prophesied in theOT (Mark 9:12; 14:21; Luke 18:31–32; 24:46; Acts 3:18; 17:3;26:22–23; 1Pet. 1:11; referring to OT texts such as Ps.22; Isa. 52:13–53:12; Zech. 13:7). The Lord Jesus is presentedas the answer to human suffering: (1)Through the incarnation,God’s Son personally experienced human suffering (Phil. 2:6–8;Heb. 2:9; 5:8). (2)Through his suffering, Christ paid the pricefor sin (Rom. 4:25; 3:25–26), so that believers are set freefrom sin (Rom. 6:6, 18, 22) and helped in temptation (Heb. 2:18).(3)Christ Jesus intercedes for his suffering followers (Rom.8:34–35). (4)Christ is the example in suffering (1Pet.2:21; 4:1; cf. Phil. 3:10; 2Cor. 1:5; 4:10; 1Pet. 4:13),and though he died once for sins (Heb. 10:12), he continues to sufferas his church suffers (Acts 9:4–5). (5)Christ provideshope of resurrection (Rom. 6:5; 1Cor. 15:20–26; Phil.3:10–11) and a future life without suffering or death (Rev.21:4).

Thereare many NT examples of suffering believers (John 15:20–21;Acts 4:3; 5:18; 7:57–60; 8:1–3; 12:1–5; 14:19;16:22–24; 18:17; 2Cor. 6:4–5, 8–10; Heb.10:32; 1Pet. 5:9; Rev. 2:10). Suffering is part of God’splan for his people (Acts 9:16; 1Thess. 3:2–4) and ispart of what it means to be a follower of Christ Jesus (Acts 14:22;Rom. 8:17; Phil. 1:29; 1Pet. 2:21; 4:12).

TheNT writers repeatedly mention the benefits of suffering, for it hasbecome part of God’s work of redemption. The suffering ofbelievers accompanies the proclamation and advancement of the gospel(Acts 5:41–42; 9:15–16; 2Cor. 4:10–11;6:2–10; Phil. 1:12, 27–29; 1Thess. 2:14–16;2Tim. 1:8; 4:5) and results in salvation (Matt. 10:22; 2Cor.1:6; 1Thess. 2:16; 2Tim. 2:10; Heb. 10:39), faith (Heb.10:32–34, 38–39; 1Pet. 1:7), the kingdom of God(Acts 14:22), resurrection from the dead (Phil. 3:10–11), andthe crown of life (Rev. 2:10). It is an essential part of thedevelopment toward Christian maturity (Rom. 5:3–4; 2Cor.4:11; Heb. 12:4; James 1:3–4; 1Pet. 1:7; 4:1).

Sufferingis associated with knowing Christ (Phil. 3:10); daily inward renewal(2Cor. 4:16); purity, understanding, patience, kindness,sincere love, truthful speech, the power of God (2Cor. 4:4–10);comfort and endurance (2Cor. 1:6); obedience (Heb. 5:8);blessing (1Pet. 3:14; 4:14); glory (Rom. 8:17; 2Cor.4:17); and joy (Matt. 5:12; Acts 5:41; 2Cor. 6:10; 12:10; James1:2; 1Pet. 1:6; 4:13). Other positive results of Christiansuffering include perseverance (Rom. 5:3; James 1:3), character andhope (Rom. 5:4), strength (2Cor. 12:10), and maturity andcompleteness (James 1:4). Present suffering is light and momentarywhen compared to future glory (Matt. 5:10–12; Acts 14:22; Rom.8:18; 2Cor. 4:17; Heb. 10:34–36; 1Pet. 1:5–7;4:12–13).

Throughoutthe Bible, believers are instructed to help those who suffer. The OTlaw provides principles for assisting the poor, the disadvantaged,and the oppressed (Exod. 20:10; 21:2; 23:11; Lev. 19:13, 34; 25:10,35; Deut. 14:28–29; 15:1–2; 24:19–21). Jesusregularly taught his followers to help the poor (Matt. 5:42; 6:3;19:21; 25:34–36; Luke 4:18; 12:33; 14:13, 21). It is believers’responsibility to show mercy (Matt. 5:7; 9:13), be generous (Rom.12:8; 2Cor. 8:7; 1Tim. 6:18), mourn with mourners (Rom.12:15), carry other’s burdens (Gal. 6:1–2), and visitprisoners (Matt. 25:36, 43). See also Servant of the Lord.

Self-control involves the willingness to submit to theboundaries of nature, society, and family that God places in theworld to bring about order and harmony in relationships. Theself-restraint of an individual’s thoughts, words, and actionsreflects the ordered discipline of God’s creation (Gen. 1–3;8:22; Prov. 6:6–8). Discipline of the self is essential to livea productive life in community (Prov. 25:28).

“Self-control”is one of the terms that Luke uses to summarize Paul’s messageto Felix (Acts 24:25). God’s people must exercise self-control(1Thess. 5:6; 2Tim. 1:7; 2Pet. 1:6). Ultimately,self-control is a gift, a fruit that comes from being in submissionto God’s Spirit (Gal. 5:22–23).

Godthe Worker

Abiblical theology of work starts with God as the creator of allthings. In the OT, the verb bara’ (“to create”) isused only with God as subject. The first verb in the Bible (Gen.1:1), it occurs also in many other texts that describe Godaccomplishing what only God can do. Other terms such as yatsar (“toform, fashion”) and ’asah (“to make, do”) areused numerous times throughout the OT with either God or humans assubjects.

Thesethree terms reinforce the portrayal of God as worker in Gen. 1–2(cf. Isa. 45:7). God creates light and darkness; sky and earth; sun,moon, and stars; land and sea; plant and animal life; andhumankind—in sum, all that is. He forms the “man”(Heb. ’adam) from the dust of the ground, bringing him to lifeby breathing into him the breath of life.

Elsewherein the OT God is said to build, build up, or rebuild/restore (Heb.banah [e.g., Pss. 102:16; 147:2; Jer. 24:6; Amos 9:11]).Interestingly, God takes a rib from the man, which he then makes(lit., “builds into” [Heb. banah+ le]) a woman(Gen. 2:22). He founds (Heb. kun) the earth (Isa. 45:18) andstretches out (Heb. natah) the heavens (Zech. 12:1). Further, wisdomis God’s “craftsman” (Heb. ’amon), takingpart in the world’s creation (Prov. 8:30). The NT revealsChrist as the one through whom God creates all things (John 1:1–3;Col. 1:16). This brief sketch suggests the range of ways in whichGod’s work is described.

HumanLabor

Ideally,work is performed as service to God (Col. 3:17, 22–24). Work isone way we express the divine image. God’s creation mandate tofill, subdue, and rule the earth implies work (Gen. 1:26–28),and God places the man in the garden “to work it and take careof it” (Gen. 2:15). The importance of work for human dignity aswell as survival undergirds the laws of gleaning that make provisionfor the poor to gather their own food (e.g., Deut. 24:19–22).The expansion of human technologies and occupations (mela’kah[see Exod. 12:16]) reflects that dignity and God’s own diverseworkmanship. Job 28 celebrates human industry and achievement whilesubordinating all to the prevailing value of wisdom, rooted in “thefear of the Lord.” Given the indispensable role of work withinthe limits of human life, diligence is commended (Eccles. 3:9–10),idleness condemned (Prov. 10:4; 12:24; 21:5; 2Thess. 3:6–10).Work is essentially God’s good gift to us in creation.

Butwork now has negative aspects. In response to Adam’s sin, Godcurses the ground, introducing “painful toil” into thework cycle (Gen. 3:17–19; 5:29). We now eke out our living byhardship, finding frustration instead of bounty—a lifelongreminder that we are made of dust and will return to dust. The bookof Ecclesiastes echoes this note of futility and raises sharpquestions about the lasting value of human labor (1:2–3, 14;2:4–11, 17–23; 3:9; 4:4–6; 8:16–17). Sin anddeath haunt the unfolding occupations in Gen. 4, and the episode ofthe tower of Babel in Gen. 11 signals God’s judgment on humanpretension (cf. James 4:13–16). Excessive toil (workaholism) isa pitfall, not a virtue, for it expresses reliance on self ratherthan on God, who builds, protects, and gives rest (Ps. 127:1–2).Oppressive, unjust working conditions are cause for lament, and theyincur God’s judgment (Exod. 5:6–19; Prov. 14:31; James5:4–6).

Thus,Israel’s labor policy is to reflect God’s covenantfaithfulness, generosity, and concern for the vulnerable. Moses’law places limits on employers/masters to protect employees, slaves,and foreign workers from exploitation. The primary limit is God’scommand that Israel keep the Sabbath holy by a complete cessation oflabor (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15). This moveprioritizes God’s covenant above human labor and sets a rhythmof work and rest. Exodus grounds the Sabbath in God’s rest fromhis work of creation on the seventh day. Deuteronomy ties it toIsrael’s history of slavery in Egypt and deliverance by God; bykeeping the Sabbath, Israel shows gratitude to God and guards againstreplicating Egypt’s oppressive policies.

Exodus31–32 portrays work in its best and worst lights. The properinterplay of work and rest is seen in chapter 31, which narrates thedivinely empowered work on the tabernacle, followed by a strongreminder to keep the Sabbath as a “sign” between God andIsrael. In contrast, chapter 32 portrays artisanship put to the worstuse, the making of a golden idol. Aaron fashions gold with a tool andmakes the calf image, but later he tells Moses, “I threw [theirgold jewelry] into the fire, and out came this calf!” (32:24).This remark anticipates the prophets’ later mockery ofidol-makers (e.g., Isa. 44:9–20) and raises the issue ofpersonal responsibility for the outcome of one’s labor: Aaronseeks to avoid being implicated in Israel’s idolatry byconcealing his own role in the project.

Publiclabor issues increase in complexity when Israel adopts human kingshipand engages in international trade (e.g., 1Sam. 8; 1Kings9:15–23). Babylon deals a decisive blow to Judah’sstatehood by deporting leaders and skilled workers. Many of theseestablish such viable, productive new lives in Babylon that whenCyrus later allows the exiled Judeans to return, they choose toremain.

TheNT assumes the legitimacy of work and adopts the OT’s view thatwithin proper limits work is a good gift of God. Jesus, however, hascome to do his Father’s “work” (John 5:16–18),which entails calling some people away from their normal occupationsto follow him, as well as a new approach to Sabbath observance (Mark2:21–27; 3:4). These moves signal the urgency and newness ofthe kingdom of God. Consequently, the apostles are “co-workersin God’s service” (1Cor. 3:9), and Christians are“God’s handiwork” (Eph. 2:10). In light of theresurrection, we offer to God work (Gk. ergon) and labor (Gk. kopos),not in futility but in hope (1Cor. 15:58; cf. Rev. 14:13).

A “type” (from Gk. typos) can be defined as abiblical event, person, or institution that serves as an example orpattern for events, persons, or institutions in the later OT or inthe NT. Typology is based on the assumption that there is a patternin God’s work in the OT and in the NT that forms apromise-fulfillment relationship. In the OT there are shadows ofthings that will be more fully revealed in the NT. Thus, the OT flowsinto the NT as part of a continuous story of salvation history. Whatis promised in the OT is fulfilled in the NT. This can beaccomplished through prophetic word or through propheticaction/event. The use of prophetic action/event to predict orforeshadow future actions/events involves typology. Typology is partof the promise-fulfillment scheme that connects the two Testaments.

Anumber of biblical interpreters note that three primarycharacteristics of types can be identified. First, there must be somenotable point of resemblance or analogy between the type and itsantitype. Second, there must be evidence that the type was appointedby God to represent the thing typified. Here one must avoid the twoextremes of, on the one hand, saying that a type is a type only whenthe Scripture explicitly calls it such, and, on the other hand, offinding a type “behind every tree.” Third, a type shouldprefigure something in the future. Thus, antitypes in the NT mustpresent truth more fully realized than in the OT.

Typologicalinterpretation of the OT is different from allegorizing a text. Theformer restricts itself to the meaning intended by the originalauthor, whereas the latter reads things into the OT passage (usuallyin connection with messianic prophecy) not initially intended. On theother hand, it should be noted that the OT authors may not alwayshave fully comprehended the long-range fulfillment of theirprophecies. Thus, for example, Ps. 22 reveals King David’strials and tribulations that are later viewed by NT authors asapplicable to the crucifixion of Christ (e.g., the quotation of Ps.22:18 in John 19:24 regarding the soldiers casting lots for Jesus’clothes). David probably did not envision his situation as predictiveof the sufferings of the coming Christ. But the Holy Spirit did, andhe allowed the Gospel authors to make the connection. Thus, typologyis a special form of biblical prophecy, which Jesus seemed to useextensively. Hence, the type is found in the OT, and its antitypeoccurs in the NT.

Moreparticularly, Jesus seemed to perceive himself as the antitype to allthree of the aforementioned possible types. First, Jesus fulfilled inhimself persons in the OT who were types. Thus, Jesus is the ultimateDavid, Solomon, Elijah, Elisha, Jonah, the heavenly Son of Man ofDan. 7, and the Suffering Servant of Isa. 52:13–53:12. Second,with regard to famous OT events, Jesus reenacted the new exodus andpassed the test in the new wilderness wanderings (Matt. 4:1–11pars.), and then he proclaimed a new law from the mountain, as didMoses (Matt. 5–7). Third, Jesus revised or replaced OTinstitutions such as the sacrificial system and the feasts of Yahweh(most notably Passover) at his death, and at his resurrection hebecame the new temple of God.

TheNT continues Jesus’ typological interpretation of the OT,seeing in him the supreme antitype of OT symbolism. Thus, forexample, Paul sees Christ as the second Adam (Rom. 5:12–21),whose church is the new Israel, the eschatological people of God(1Cor. 10:1–13). Matthew perceives Jesus to be the newMoses (Matt. 1–10). Note the following comparisons:

Moses,the Old Testament Type vs. Jesus, Matthew’s Antitype to Moses:

Moseswas born to deliver his people. Jesus was born to save his people.

Pharoahtried to kill the infant Moses. Herod tried to kill the infant Jesus.

Moseswas “baptized” in the exodus. Jesus was baptized in thenew “exodus.”

Moseswas tempted in the wilderness. Jesus was tempted in the wildnerness.

Mosesperformed ten plagues. Jesus performed ten miracles.

Mosesreceived the law on the mount. Jesus gave a new law on the mount.

Lukeunderstands Jesus to be the new David (Luke 1:32). Hebrews assertsthat Jesus has inaugurated the new covenant (chap. 8), the truepriesthood (chaps. 7–8; 10), whose death is the fulfillment andreplacement of the sacrificial system of the OT (chaps. 9–10).But perhaps the most extensive usage of typology in the NT occurs inRev. 21–22 (cf. Rev. 19), where the new creation is theantitype of the old creation of Gen. 1–3 (see table 10).

Table10. New Creation Typology in Revelation 21–22

Sinfulpeople are scattered (Gen. 1-3). God’s people unite to singhis praises (Rev. 21-22; cf. 19:6-7).

The“marriage” of Adam and Eve takes place in the garden(Gen. 1-3). The marriage of the second Adam and his bride, thechurch has come (Rev. 21-22; cf. 19:7, 21:2, 9).

Godis abandoned by sinful people (Gen. 1-3). God’s people (newJerusalem, bride of Christ) are made ready for God; marriage of theLamb. (Rev. 21-22; cf. 19:7-8, 21:2, 9-21).

Exclusionfrom bounty of Eden (Gen. 1-3). Invitation to marriage supper ofLamb (Rev. 21-22; cf. 19:9).

Satanintroduces sin into world (Gen. 1-3). Satan and sin are judged (Rev.21-22; cf. 19:11-21, 20:7-10).

Theserpent deceives humankind (Gen. 1-3). The ancient serpent is bound“to keep him from deceiving the nations (Rev. 21-22; cf.20:2-3).

Godgives humans dominion over the earth (Gen. 1-3). God’s peoplewill reign with him forever (Rev. 21-22; cf. 20:4, 6, 22:5).

Peoplerebel against the true God, resulting in physical and spiritual death(Gen. 1-3). God’s people risk death to worship the true Godand thus experience life (Rev. 21-22; cf. 20:4-6).

Sinfulpeople are sent away from life (Gen. 1-3). God’s people havetheir names written in the book of life (Rev. 20:4-6, 15; 21:6, 27).

Deathenters the world (Gen. 1-3). Death is put to death (Rev. 20:14;21:4).

Godcreates the first heaven and earth, eventually cursed by sin (Gen.1-3). God creates a new heaven and earth, where sin is nowhere to befound (Rev. 21:1)/

Watersymbolizes chaos (Gen. 1-3). There is no longer any sea (Rev. 21:1).

Sinbrings pain and tears (Gen. 1-3). God comforts his people andremoves crying and pain (Rev. 21:4).

Sinfulhumanity is cursed with wandering (exile) (Gen. 1-3). God’speople are given a permanent home (Rev. 21:3).

Communityis forfeited (Gen. 1-3). Genuine community is experienced (Rev.21-22; cf. 21:3, 7).

Sinfulpeople are banished from the presence of God (Gen. 1-3). God livesamong his people (Rev. 21:3, 7, 22; 22:4).

Creationbegins to grow old and die (Gen. 1-3). All things are made new (Rev.21:5).

Wateris used to destroy wicked humanity (Gen. 1-3). God quenches thirstwith water from the spring of life (Rev. 21:6; 22:1).

“Inthe beginning, God…” (Gen. 1-3). “I am the Alphaand the Omega, the beginning and the end.” (Rev. 21:6).

Sinfulhumanity suffers a wandering exile in the land (Gen. 1-3). God giveshis children an inheritance (Rev. 21:7).

Sinenters the world (Gen. 1-3). Sin is banished from God’s city(Rev. 21:8, 27; 22:15).

Sinfulhumanity is separated from the presence of the holy God (Gen. 1-3). God’s people experience God’s holiness (cubed city = holyof holies) (Rev. 21:15-21).

Godcreates light and separates it from darkness (Gen. 1-3). No morenight or natural light; God himself is the source of light (Rev.21:23; 22:5)

Languagesof sinful humanity are confused (Gen. 1-3). God’s people is amulticultural people (Rev. 21:24, 26; 22:2).

Sinfulpeople are sent away from the garden (Gen. 1-3). The newheaven/earth includes a garden (Rev. 22:2).

Sinfulpeople are forbidden to eat from the tree of life (Gen. 1-3). God’speople may eat freely from the tree of life (Rev. 22:2, 14).

Sinresults in spiritual sickness (Gen. 1-3). God heals the nations(Rev. 22:2).

Sinfulpeople are cursed (Gen. 1-3). The curse is removed from redeemedhumanity, and people become a blessing (Rev. 22:3).

Sinfulpeople refuse to serve/obey God (Gen. 1-3). God’s people servehim (Rev. 22:3).

Sinfulpeople are ashamed in God’s presence (Gen. 1-3). God’speople will “see his face” (Rev. 22:4).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Those who offer themselves freely and willingly, withoutcompulsion or consideration of value in return, to perform a task,make a vow, or serve another. In the OT, volunteers usually serve God(Deut. 23:23; 2Chron. 17:16; Ps. 110:3), Israel (Ezra 7:13;Neh. 11:2), or a leader in Israel (Judg. 5:2, 9; 1Chron.28:21). God himself is the ultimate volunteer, as he freely givesplace, purpose, and a partner to Adam (Gen. 2:15–22);unilaterally covenants with Abram to give him descendants, blessing,and land (Gen. 12:2–3; 15:17–21); liberates Israel frombondage in Egypt (Exod. 6:6–8; Deut. 20:1; Josh. 24:17; Ps.81:10); and remains faithful to Israel despite its repeated failures(Pss. 68:35; 106:44–46).

Inthe NT, God is also the sender of Jesus (Matt. 10:40; Mark 9:37; Luke4:18–21; John 4:34; 5:24, 30, 36–37), who heals of hisown volition (Luke 5:13), gives rest to the weary (Matt. 11:28), andlays down his life of his own accord for our redemption (Mark 10:45;John 10:18; Gal. 3:13–14; Eph. 5:2; Titus 2:14; 1Pet.1:18–19). With Jesus as the standard, the concept of willinglygiving of oneself and one’s possessions runs throughout the NT(Eph. 5:1–2). Christians are called to love and serve oneanother in spiritual and practical ways (Acts 2:44–45; Rom.12:9–21; 1Thess. 5:15–18; Philem. 14). They arealso to love their enemies and pray for their persecutors (Matt.5:44; Luke 6:27, 35). Those who wish to lead must first volunteerthemselves as servants to others (Matt. 20:27; Mark 9:35; Luke22:26). Elders are to shepherd voluntarily (1Pet. 5:2). Paul,who urges Christians to offer their bodies as living sacrifices (Rom.12:1), is himself a model of volunteerism and self-sacrifice (Acts20:34–35; 21:13; 1Cor. 9:19–23; 2Cor. 4:5;11:23–27).

Geography

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

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

Symbolism

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

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

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

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

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

“Word” is used in the Bible to refer to thespeech of God in oral, written, or incarnate form. In each of theseuses, God desires to make himself known to his people. Thecommunication of God is always personal and relational, whether hespeaks to call things into existence (Gen. 1) or to address anindividual directly (Gen. 2:16–17; Exod. 3:14). The prophetsand the apostles received the word of God (Deut. 18:14–22; John16:13), some of which was proclaimed but not recorded. The greatestrevelation in this regard is the person of Jesus Christ, who iscalled the “Word” of God (John 1:1, 14).

Theprimary focus of this article is the written form of the word of God,the Bible. The psalmist declared God’s word to be an eternalobject of hope and trust that gives light and direction (Ps. 119),and Jesus declared the word to be truth (John 17:17). The word isparticularized and intimately connected with God himself by means ofthe key phrases “your word,” “the word of God,”“the word of the Lord,” “word about Christ,”and “the word of Christ” (Rom. 10:17; Col. 3:16). Ourunderstanding of the word is informed by a variety of terms andcontexts in the canon of Scripture, a collection of which is found inPsalm 119.

Theologyof the Word

Fromthe perspective of many systematic theologians, the word of God isdefined with several essential labels. The word is the specialrevelation of God to humans—specifically, truth communicatedfrom God to his human creatures by supernatural intervention,including a disclosure of his mind and will, his attributes, and hisredemptive plans. This revealed word is inspired. Inspiration is anact of the Holy Spirit of God whereby he superintended the biblicalauthors so that they composed the canonical books of Scripture.Inspiration is verbal and plenary in that it extends to every part ofthe Bible and includes the choice of words used by the authors.

Theword of God is inerrant, free from error in every matter addressed,and infallible, true in every matter addressed. The locus ofinspiration, inerrancy, and infallibility is the original manuscriptsand not the translations. A translation is reliable when itaccurately reflects the meaning of the inspired originals (Matt.5:18; cf. John 10:35; 17:17; 2Tim. 3:16; 2Pet. 1:21). Andfinally, the word is authoritative. Because the Bible is the divinelyinspired word of God reliably composed in the originals withouterror, it is binding upon people in their relationship with their Godas well as their relationships with their fellow human beings.Biblical authority derives from the eternal character of the divineauthor and the revelatory content of the Scriptures.

Psalm119

Akey OT text extolling the word is Psalm 119 (cf. Pss. 1; 19). Thewriter glorifies God, his word, and his divine directions to peopleby means of an acrostic format that covers the subject of Torahmeditation. Eight synonyms are used for the “word” in thepsalm. The eight are translated in the NIV as “words”(v.57), “promise” (v.58), “statutes”(v.59), “commands” (v.60), “law”(v.61), “laws” (v.62), “precepts”(v.63), and “decrees” (v.64).

ThePs. 119 word vocabulary informs us that God has pierced the darknessof our existence with the light of his word to make himself known tous. The word is his word spoken to us and preserved for us. The psalmalso instructs us that the word is the will of God. When God piercedour darkness, he lit the path of freedom for us with his word. Hedescribed himself, defined righteousness, declared his love,announced his promises, and issued his warnings. Finally, thevocabulary establishes the authority of his word in our lives.Directions, commandments, laws, charges, and divine will ring withthe sound of authority. The word of God is an authoritativeproclamation from God to us that must be obeyed, that must be sought,that cannot be ignored.

Finally,Ps. 119 makes an intimate connection between the content of the word,things spoken, and the author of the things spoken. This connectionbetter enables us to understand the “Word” as the personof Jesus Christ in John 1. The progressive development of verses 1–2of Ps. 119 intimately connects the law of God, his statutes, and him,the one sought with all the heart. Verses 89–96 emphasize thedurability and eternality of the word in keeping with the eternalcharacter of God. In verse 114 the writer parallels God as refugewith putting hope in his word. Here the writer intimately connectsGod as a refuge with his word. In the Hebrew text “you”and “your word” stand side by side. In verses 137–44the writer aligns the righteous God with a righteous word. Accordingto verses 105, 130, 135, God and God’s word give light. Thelife-giving quality of the word and the Lord are proclaimed in verse93. Just as God is to be feared, so is his word (vv. 63, 120).

TheWord of God

Thetheme of the word in Ps. 119 is continued and clarified in the NT,accentuating the intimate connection between the word of God and Godhimself. The “Word” of God is the eternal Lord JesusChrist (John 1:1; 1John 1:1–4), who took on flesh andblood so that we might see the glory of the eternal God. Thesovereign glory of Christ as the Word of God is depicted in thevision of John in Rev. 19:13. As the Word of God, Jesus Christultimately gives us our lives (John 1:4; 6:33; 10:10), sustains ourlives (John 5:24; 6:51, 54; 8:51), and ultimately renders a justjudgment regarding our lives (John 5:30; 8:16, 26; 9:39; cf. Matt.25:31–33; Heb. 4:12).

In classical Greek, “world” (kosmos)communicated the idea that the external universe is a well-orderedsystem. In early Greek usage, the term was used with reference tospecific types of social orderings, such as the seating order ofrowers (Homer, Od. 13.77), the order of soldiers (Homer, Il. 12.225),and well-ordered political states such as Sparta (Herodotus, Hist.1.65).

CreatedWorld

Inthe OT, the notion of the created “world” departed fromthe Greek understanding specifically in that creation is never seenas an independent entity controlled by an impersonal, all-embracingorder. Rather, the universe, usually described with the phrase “theheavens and the earth” (Gen. 1:1; 2:1, 4; Ps. 113:6; Jer.10:11) or at times the “all” or “all things”(Ps. 103:19; Jer. 10:16), is always understood in its relationship toits creator: “He who created the heavens, he is God; he whofashioned and made the earth, he founded it; he did not create it tobe empty, but formed it to be inhabited—he says: ‘I amthe Lord, and there is no other’ ” (Isa. 45:18).Here, the “world” (“earth”) refers to thematerial elements that make up the planet (see also Jer. 32:17; Zech.12:1) and the sum total of the entire universe (cf. Acts 17:24). Evenin the account of creation in Gen. 1:1–2:4, where many of theelements of the physical world are mentioned (waters, firmament,stars, etc.), the primary intent of the account is to convey that Godis Lord over everything because he is the Creator. Often thesecreated elements that make up the world are praised not for their owninherent beauty, but as a testimony to the majesty, supremacy, andomnipotence of the Creator (Pss. 8; 19:1–6; 33:6–9). InPs. 148:3–6 the elements within the natural order (kosmos) areinstructed to praise God: “Praise him, sun and moon; praisehim, all you shining stars. Praise him, you highest heavens and youwaters above the skies. Let them praise the name of the Lord, for athis command they were created, and he established them for ever andever—he issued a decree that will never pass away.”

Thoughnot providing a comprehensive description, the OT does at times referto how the world is constructed as a whole. The “vault”(Gen. 1:6–20 [RSV: “firmament”]) of heavenseparates the waters above from the waters below (which arerestrained by God’s sovereign care [Gen. 1:7; 7:11; 49:25]),and this area or chamber rests on “pillars” (Job 26:11).At times the earth is described as a disc with the sanctuary as itscenter point (Judg. 9:37; Ezek. 38:12), which rests on pillars (Job9:6). There is an underworld, from which there is no return (Job10:21); however, the OT does not engage in the kind of speculationregarding the underworld as is evident in the Greco-Roman tradition.

Earthand Its Inhabitants

Theterm “world” conveys other nuances in the Bible. It oftenrefers to the inhabitants of the earth or the place of human life:“He rules the world in righteousness and judges the peopleswith equity” (Ps. 9:8 [cf. Pss. 96:13; 98:9]); or, “Comenear, you nations, and listen; pay attention, you peoples! Let theearth hear, and all that is in it, the world, and all that comes outof it!” (Isa. 34:1). Also, in the Gospels “world”is used in this way: “What good is it for someone to gain thewhole world, yet forfeit their soul?” (Mark 8:36). Matthew 4:8refers to all the kingdoms of the world. Also the expressions “cominginto the world” (John 1:9; 3:19), “in the world”(John 1:10; 2Cor. 1:12), and “leave this world”(1Cor. 5:10) can be understood as referring to the sphere ofhuman life.

UngodlyCulture and Worldview

“World”can also refer to something more than the material world or humanityin general; it can refer to the entire cultural value system or worldorder that is hostile toward God. The “world” is a commonbiblical way of referring to the ungodly worldview and lifestyle thatcharacterize human life in its rebellion against the Creator. Thecourse of the world is profoundly affected by fallen humans, throughwhom death came into the world and rules over it (Rom. 5:12).Therefore, Paul can claim that “the whole world” hasbecome guilty before God (Rom. 3:19), and even the created world isaffected by such rebellion (8:20–22). Paul especially links“this world” with “this age” (1Cor.3:19; 5:10; Eph. 2:2 NET), which God has judged (Rom. 3:6). Johndeclares that Satan is the “prince of this world” (John12:31; 14:30; 16:11). Paul refers to Satan as the “god of thisworld” (2Cor. 4:4 ESV, NRSV, NASB), who is able to blindindividuals to the truth and who animates human rebellion (Eph. 2:2).In this sense, God and the world are strictly separate: “Don’tyou know that friendship with the world means enmity against God?Therefore, anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes anenemy of God” (James 4:4). Because of this call to an exclusiverelationship with God, believers are mandated to resist and evenconfront the world. Followers of Christ must not be taken captive byphilosophy or the “elemental spiritual forces of this world”(Col. 2:8, 20), since, as Paul says, “the worldhas beencrucified to me, and I to the world” (Gal. 6:14).

Butit is the world that designates the location and object of God’ssaving activity. Indeed, God sent his Son into this world in order toreconcile it to himself (2Cor. 5:19). Jesus, the sacrificialLamb of God, “takes away the sins of the world” (John1:29). Out of love for this world, God sent his Son (John 3:1), notto judge it but to save it: “God did not send his Son into theworld to condemn the world, but to save the world through him”(John 3:17).

Althoughbelievers live in the world (1Cor. 5:10; Phil. 2:15) and musthave dealings with the world, ultimately they are not of the world(John 17:14). Remaining in Christ, believers are able to demonstratein the world the belief and practice of the new commandment to love(John 13:34; 15:9). Therefore, Christians must maintain a criticaldistance from the world’s system: “Do not love the worldor anythingin the world. If anyone loves the world, love forthe Father is not in them. For everything inthe world—thelust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—comesnot from the Father but from the world” (1John 2:15–16[cf. James 1:27; 4:4]). Believers are to avoid the seductive power ofthe world and not abandon themselves to it; they are to follow theirLord in proclaiming God’s project of reconciling the world tohimself through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (2Cor.5:18).