Sermon and Worship Resources (2024)

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).

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.

The northern region of Israel. Determining the region’s precise boundaries is difficult, but in Jesus’ time it appears to have encompassed an area of about forty-five miles north to south and twenty-five miles east to west, with the Jordan River and the Sea of Galilee forming the eastern border. Josephus divides the region into Upper and Lower Galilee. Upper Galilee contains elevations of up to about four thousand feet and is composed mostly of rugged mountains, while Lower Galilee reaches a maximum height of about two thousand feet and is characterized by numerous fertile valleys. Lower Galilee was the site of most of Jesus’ ministry.

Galilee appears several times in the OT (e.g., Josh. 20:7; 1Kings 9:11; 1Chron. 6:76). It was part of the land given to the twelve tribes (Josh. 19). Since Galilee was distant from Jerusalem, which played the most prominent part in Jewish history, much of its history is not mentioned in the OT. Many of the references that do occur are military references, such as Joshua’s defeat of the kings at the waters of Merom (Josh. 11:19) and the Assyrian removal of the northern kingdom of Israel (Isa. 9:1). However, its great beauty, particularly of mountains such as Carmel, Hermon, and Lebanon, was the source of numerous images and metaphors in the poetic and prophetic literature (e.g., Ps. 133:3; Isa. 33:9; 35:2; Jer. 46:18).

Galilee figures more prominently in the NT. Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee and conducted much of his early ministry there. Luke specifically identifies Galilee as the place where Jesus’ ministry began before spreading to Judea (Luke 23:5; Acts 10:37). Galilee is also portrayed as the place where Jesus will reunite with his disciples following the resurrection (Mark 16:7) and where he gives them the Great Commission (Matt. 28:16–20).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The most prominent personal name of God is yahweh (YHWH), which is translated as “the Lord” in most English Bibles. At the burning bush in the wilderness of Horeb, God first revealed to Moses his personal name in sentence form: “I am who I am” (Exod. 3:1315). Though debated, the divine name “YHWH” seems to originate from an abbreviated form of this sentence. Yahweh, who was with Moses and his people at the time of exodus, is the God who was with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. According to Jesus’ testimony, “the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob” is identified as the God “of the living” (Matt. 22:32). Hence, the name “Yahweh” is closely tied to God’s self-revelation as the God of presence and life.

Many of God’s attributes are summarized in Exod. 34:6–7: “The Lord, the Lord, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A technical term for “promise” does not appear in the OT, but its concept is present throughout Scripture. God unfolds the history of redemption by employing the idea of promises. The writers of the NT repeatedly assert that Jesus Christ has fulfilled God’s promises in the OT (e.g., Luke 24:4448; 1Cor. 15:3–8).

Most remarkable is the promise that God made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Gen. 12:1–3; 13:14–17; 17:4–8; 22:17–18; 26:1–5; 28:13–15). God called Abraham in order to give him three specific blessings: the land, descendants, and the channel of blessing among the nations. As a sign of his promise, God made a covenant of circumcision with Abraham and his descendants (17:10–14). With Isaac (26:1–5) and Jacob (28:13–15), God repeatedly reconfirmed the promise made to Abraham. At the time of the exodus and later the settlement in Canaan, God’s promise to Abraham was partially fulfilled by multiplying his descendants into millions and by giving them the promised land.

The central message of the NT is that God’s promises in the OT are fulfilled with the coming of Jesus Christ. Matthew’s numerous citation formulas are evidence of this theme. In Luke 4:16–21 Jesus pronounces the fulfillment of Isaiah’s promise (about the Messiah’s ministry [Isa. 61:1–3]) in his own life. The book of Acts specifically states that Jesus’ suffering and resurrection and the coming of the Holy Spirit are the fulfillment of the OT promises (2:29–31; 13:32–34). Jesus’ identity both as the descendant of David (Acts 13:23) and as the prophet like Moses (Acts 3:21–26; cf. Deut. 18:15–18) is also regarded as the fulfillment of the OT.

Paul’s view of God’s promises is summarized in this statement: “For no matter how many promises God has made, they are ‘Yes’ in Christ” (2Cor. 1:20). According to Rom. 1:2–3, Paul regards the gospel as the message that God “promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures regarding his Son.” In Rom. 4 Abraham’s faith is described in terms of his trust in God’s promises, which leads to his righteousness. He is presented as our model of faith in God’s promises. The famous phrase “according to the Scriptures” in 1Cor. 15:3–4 is, in a sense, understood by Paul as the fulfillment of God’s promises regarding Christ’s death and resurrection.

In the NT, God makes new promises based on the work of Christ, including the final resurrection and the second coming of Christ (John 5:29; 11:25–26; 1Cor. 15:48–57; 2Cor. 4:14; 1Thess. 4:13–18). Furthermore, the message of the gospel is presented as multiple promises, including eternal life, the fullness of life in Christ, the forgiveness of sins, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, the peace of God, the knowledge of God, and the joy of God (Matt. 28:18–20; John 3:16; 10:10; 14:16, 27; 16:20–24; 17:25–26; Phil. 4:4–9; 1John 1:9).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

While in the OT suffering is regularly an indication of divine displeasure (Lev. 26:1636; Deut. 28:20–68; Ps. 44:10–12; Isa. 1:25; cf. Heb. 10:26–31), in the NT it becomes the means by which blessing comes to humanity.

The Bible 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 assume that 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 the final chapter of the book God commends Job and condemns his friends for their accusations (42:7–8; cf. 1:1, 22; 2:10). The writer makes clear that suffering is not necessarily evidence of sinfulness. Like Job’s friends, Jesus’ disciples assume that blindness is an indication of sinfulness (John 9:1–2). Jesus rejects this simplistic notion of retributive suffering (John 9:3, 6–7; cf. Luke 13:1–5).

The NT writers reveal that Jesus’ suffering was prophesied in the OT (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 presented as 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 price for sin (Rom. 4:25; 3:25–26), so that believers are set free from 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 suffer as his church suffers (Acts 9:4–5). (5)Christ provides hope of resurrection (Rom. 6:5; 1Cor. 15:20–26; Phil. 3:10–11) and a future life without suffering or death (Rev. 21:4).

The NT writers repeatedly mention the benefits of suffering, for it has become part of God’s work of redemption. The suffering of believers 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), and the crown of life (Rev. 2:10). It is an essential part of the development toward Christian maturity (Rom. 5:3–4; 2Cor. 4:11; Heb. 12:4; James 1:3–4; 1Pet. 1:7; 4:1).

Suffering is 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; James 1:2; 1Pet. 1:6; 4:13). Other positive results of Christian suffering include perseverance (Rom. 5:3; James 1:3), character and hope (Rom. 5:4), strength (2Cor. 12:10), and maturity and completeness (James 1:4). Present suffering is light and momentary when 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).

Throughout the Bible, believers are instructed to help those who suffer. The OT law 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). Jesus regularly 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 visit prisoners (Matt. 25:36, 43). See also Servant of the Lord.

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).

Cloudsand theophany. Thestorm god Baal occupied a central place in Canaanite religion, and soa cloud, especially a rain cloud, was considered a prominentmanifestation of the divine presence. In Ugaritic texts Baal isdescribed as the “rider on the cloud.”

TheOT depicts the God of Israel in similar terms, as riding on a cloud(Judg. 5:4; Isa. 19:1; Pss. 18:11–12; 68:4; 104:3), and as thecreator and sender of clouds: “Ask rain from the Lord in theseason of the spring rain; from the Lord who makes the storm clouds,and he will give them showers of rain, to everyone the vegetation inthe field” (Zech. 10:1 ESV [see also 1 Kings 18:44; Pss.135:7; 147:8; Prov. 8:28; Isa. 5:6; Jer. 10:13]). Divine judgment ispictured as a dark storm (Isa. 30:30; Lam. 2:1; Nah. 1:3; Zech.1:15). In his taunt against the king of Babylon, Isaiah attributes tothe king the arrogant intention of ascending “above the tops ofthe clouds,” that is, to the dwelling place of God (Isa.14:14).

Atseveral crucial points God manifested his presence among theIsraelites in the form of a cloud: in the wilderness (the “pillarof cloud” of Exod. 13:21 and elsewhere), on Mount Sinai (Exod.19:9; 24:15), in the tabernacle (Exod. 40:34), in the temple atJerusalem (1 Kings 8:10), and frequently in the visions ofEzekiel (e.g., Ezek. 1:4; 10:3).

TheNT continues the imagery of the cloud as a manifestation of divinepresence in the story of the transfiguration (Matt. 17:5; Mark 9:7;Luke 9:36), and also in depictions of Jesus as a cloud-rider in Matt.26:64; Rev. 14:14 (see Dan. 7:13). Jesus was hidden by a cloud whenhe ascended (Acts 1:9), and believers will be caught up by clouds athis return (1 Thess. 4:17; Rev. 11:12).

Cloudsin nature. Ahandful of biblical texts describe clouds appearing in the land ofIsrael from the west, from the Mediterranean Sea (1 Kings 18:14;Luke 12:54).

Cloudsstand for the highest point in the sky (Job 35:5; Jer. 51:9). Theywere understood to release their rain when full (Eccles. 11:3).Clouds are associated with rainbows (Gen. 9:13; Rev. 10:1).

Eschatology is the study of last things. The word “eschatology” comes from the Greek word eschatos, meaning “last.” From this same Greek word is derived the term “eschaton,” which is sometimes used to refer to the end times.

Eschatology deals with such future events as the end of the world, Jesus’ return, the resurrection, the final judgment, and the afterlife in heaven or hell. The tribulation and the millennium also belong to eschatology, but their timing and nature vary with different views. Although from one perspective human history entered its final phase in NT times so that people today are already living in the “last days,” eschatology normally focuses on the unfulfilled prophecies that remain still in the future for present-day believers.

Eschatology deals with questions regarding the future. Every religion and philosophy of life has offered answers to these questions. Plato taught about the immortality of the soul. Buddhism has its nirvana, Islam its sensual paradise, and Native Americans their happy hunting grounds. The belief that the soul survives death is widely held. Even atheists and materialists have their own views of eschatology. Yet only in Christianity does eschatology become the crown and capstone of everything else that God has been doing throughout history, when he will be perfectly glorified, Christ completely victorious, the power of sin entirely overcome, and the people of God given a complete salvation.

Yet it is difficult to find a topic on which Christians are more divided. Frequently, people studying eschatology fall into one of two opposite traps: unwarranted dogmatism or simple avoidance. Yet eschatology should be a source of comfort and hope to believers as well as an ongoing reminder of the lateness and urgency of the hour. Consequently, eschatology deserves most careful attention and should create a sense of excitement and anticipation.

Reasons for Controversy

Eschatology is by no means a simple discipline. The sheer magnitude of this topic is a significant challenge involving hundreds of different unfulfilled prophecies from virtually every book of the Bible. Difficulties in interpreting these prophecies with their figures of speech, apocalyptic language, and complicated symbolism create still greater complications. Then there is the challenge of organizing these individual prophecies together into a coherent timeline when each will be fulfilled. Discerning the period of fulfillment for some prophecies is relatively clear and easy, but for others it is much less certain.

Even the question of how many periods of future time remain in God’s timetable has often been the source of considerable debate. For example, will there be a future period of tribulation, or were these prophecies already fulfilled in AD 70, or perhaps more generally throughout church history, with its countless martyrs? Similar questions have been raised about the millennium: is this to be understood in a still future sense, as premillennialists assert, or is it already in the process of being fulfilled, as amillennialists and postmillennialists claim? The fact that there is no common agreement even on these fundamental questions virtually guarantees that believers will remain divided on this issue.

Then too there is the final step of trying to assign specific unfulfilled prophecies into this grid of prophetic time slots. For example, is the prophecy “The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox” (Isa. 65:25) a symbolic picture of God’s blessings in this present church age, in a future millennium, or in eternity itself? The vast majority of these unfulfilled prophecies contain few clues regarding the precise time of their fulfillment, and interpreters often are left with little to guide them. We should not be surprised that eschatology leaves believers more divided than do other areas of theology.

Jesus’ Return and the Tribulation

The fact of Jesus’ return is clear. When Jesus was taken up from his apostles at the end of his earthly ministry, two angels promised them, “This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11). Today believers look forward to Jesus’ second coming, as “the blessed hope” (Titus 2:13). The common understanding has always been that this return will be personal, visible, and bodily—just as real as his first coming two thousand yearsago.

Christians, however, have been divided over the timing of Jesus’ return and the tribulation. Here there are five interrelated questions.

1.The first question is whether Jesus’ return is a single event or will occur in two stages. Dispensationalists distinguish two phases to Jesus’ return: a secret rapture that removes the church from a period of intense tribulation involving Israel here on earth, and then a later public second coming in judgment at the end of the tribulation, when he will establish his kingdom. A number of recent “left behind” books and movies have popularized this approach. Yet this two-stage model is difficult to document in Scripture, and many understand Scripture to describe Jesus’ return as a single unified event.

2.How one answers this first question has implications for the second question of the timing of Jesus’ return relative to the tribulation. Here there are three popular options regarding the timing of Jesus’ return: pretribulational (before the tribulation), midtribulational (in the midst of the tribulation), and posttribulational (after the tribulation). Yet if Jesus’ return is pretribulational or midtribulational, logic would require that there be two phases to Jesus’ return: a secret rapture either before the tribulation (for pretribulationalism) or in the middle of it (for midtribulationalism), and then a separate public return at the conclusion of the tribulation to establish his kingdom. Thus, a two-stage return of Jesus goes hand in hand with pretribulationalism and midtribulationalism, and a single return with posttribulationalism.

3.A third question focuses on the nature of the tribulation period. There are three main views. Pretribulationalists assume that the tribulation will be a period (usually seven years) of great suffering such as this world has never seen. Midtribulationalists believe that Jesus will return after three and a half years of less intense tribulation, followed by a considerably more intense second period of three and a half years of wrath, from which believers will be spared. Posttribulationalists see this tribulation as the suffering and persecution of Christians at various times and places around the world, with possibly some intensification in the final days. Consequently, how one understands the intensity of the tribulation is another factor affecting the choice of one tribulational view or another.

4.A fourth interrelated question involves whether one believes that Jesus may return suddenly and unexpectedly at any moment (Matt. 24:42) or whether there are still unfulfilled prophecies that must take place first (initially including at least Peter’s death [John 21:19] and the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem). Pretribulationalists pride themselves on how their view of a secret rapture allows for Jesus to return imminently without any intervening signs or other warnings. Midtribulationalists believe that the church will need to experience three and a half years of moderate tribulation, so there is less emphasis on an imminent return (although one could argue that the first period of tribulation is potentially more ambiguous in nature). Posttribulationalists are divided into two groups. Many have held that the tribulation will be a period of significant tribulation, so typically they have downplayed the idea of imminence. However, other posttribulationalists (sometimes called “pasttribulationalists” or “imminent posttribulationalists”) assume that the tribulation described in Scripture may already be fulfilled either at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 or more generally throughout church history, and therefore Jesus may return at any time.

5.The fifth question focuses on how literally or figuratively one should interpret the two key passages of Scripture related to the nature of the tribulation: the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24 pars.) and Rev. 6–19. Much of the Olivet Discourse focuses on the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, and many have understood at least parts of Revelation as being fulfilled historically either in John’s own day or during church history. The more one assumes that at least portions of these prophecies were already fulfilled, the less one awaits a future fulfillment. A more literal approach to these prophecies will predispose one toward pretribulationalism or possibly midtribulationalism, and a more figurative approach toward posttribulationalism.

Hyperpreterism, or consistent preterism, has emerged in the last few decades with a still different approach to the timing of Jesus’ return. The driving force behind this movement is Jesus’ apparent promise to return within a generation of his death (Matt. 24:34). Consequently, hyperpreterism has assumed that all the future prophecies in the NT must have been fulfilled by the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, including Jesus’ return, the bodily resurrection, the final judgment, and the new heaven and new earth. The bottom line is that in order to take literally Jesus’ promise to return within a generation, everything else in eschatology needs to be reinterpreted as having been fulfilled in one way or another within that same generation. A more moderate preterism sees many, but not all, of these eschatological events fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Jesus returned as the Son of Man in judgment against Israel in these first-century events, but the final judgment of all people and the new heaven and new earth await his second coming.

The Resurrection and the Final Judgment

The bodily resurrection takes place at the time of Jesus’ return. Although many other religions and philosophies have assumed the immortality of the soul, whereby the nonmaterial part of human nature survives death, Christianity is distinctive in its strong commitment to the idea of a bodily resurrection. Death marks the separation of the body from the soul and the time when believers are immediately ushered into God’s presence (Eccles. 12:7). Thus, Jesus was able to promise the thief on the cross, “Today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43). However, people do not immediately receive new resurrection bodies at the time of death, but must wait until the time of Jesus’ return, when “the dead in Christ will rise first” (1Thess. 4:16). This bodily resurrection is the precursor to the final judgment of the saved and the lost, when “all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come out—those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil will rise to be condemned” (John 5:28–29). At that time, Christ “will judge the living and the dead” (2Tim.4:1).

This theme of judgment is foundational to Christianity, although Christians remain divided about the exact number and character of these judgments. Yet the time will come when all people will be judged, both “the living and the dead” (Acts 10:42), when “we will all stand before God’s judgment seat” (Rom. 14:10), and “each of us will give an account of ourselves to God” (14:12). God himself will be the judge, and Christ will be given a special place in presiding over the final judgment and separate those who truly belong to him from those who do not. Even though this judgment will be “according to what they have done” (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6; Rev. 22:12), these deeds are simply an outward demonstration of whether a living faith is present, so there is no contradiction between justification by faith and the necessary place for a changed life in the believer. Yet, as Jesus warns, some will be surprised: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 7:21). God’s judgment will be both just and inescapable.

Christians remain divided about the number of resurrections. Premillennialists who are also pretribulationalists or midtribulationalists would conclude that there is a minimum of a resurrection of believers at the time of the rapture, when Jesus returns for his church; another resurrection when Jesus returns at the end of the tribulation for believers who came to faith and died during the tribulation; as well as another resurrection at the end of the millennium for “the rest of the dead” (Rev. 20:5). Premillennialists who are also posttribulationalists would conclude that there are as few as two resurrections: one at Jesus’ return and another at the end of the millennium. An amillennialist or a postmillennialist would assume that there may be only a single bodily resurrection when Jesus returns and establishes his kingdom.

There is one other aspect that completes this theme: God’s judgment also includes the destruction of the devil in the lake of fire (Rev. 20:10). Someday sin and evil will be forever removed from God’s creation.

The Millennium

The millennium is a thousand-year reign of Christ described most clearly in Rev. 20. Again, there are sharp differences of opinion regarding this topic.

Premillennialists believe that Jesus’ return will be “pre” (before) the millennium, and that this millennial kingdom will be a golden age of unprecedented glory and splendor. Dispensational premillennialists, with their emphasis on the distinction between Israel and the church, have focused on the fulfillment of all the remaining OT prophecies made to Israel. Historic premillennialists, on the other hand, lack this sharp distinction between Israel and the church and see themselves as being in continuity with the view of a future reign of Christ on earth found throughout church history. In recent years, premillennialism has become the leading view in American Christianity.

Postmillennialists believe that God will build his church for “a thousand years” and then Jesus will return “post” (after) this millennium. The millennium here is comparable to a silver age involving significant and unprecedented advances of the gospel throughout the world. Postmillennialists remain divided about how literal this thousand-year period might be and whether this period has already begun or not. Postmillennialism has had a significant following throughout most of church history but more recently has become a minority view.

Amillennialists believe in a different kind of millennium. Here there are two different varieties. Some believe that those reigning with Christ in Rev. 20 are simply believers living here in this present life experiencing the intimacy of Christ’s presence in their daily lives. Others see this period as involving departed believers, who are currently reigning with Christ in the intermediate state between death and his return. The millennium here is neither the golden age of the premillennialist nor the silver age of the postmillennialist; it is simply life today.

Again there are predisposing factors. Those who place more weight on potentially unfulfilled OT prophecies will tend to be premillennial, whereas those who place more weight on the words of Jesus and Paul will tend to be amillennial or possibly postmillennial. Those who see more of a distinction between Israel and the church will tend to be dispensational premillennialists, whereas those who emphasize the unity among God’s people throughout redemptive history will choose one of the other alternatives. Those who tend toward a more literal approach to interpreting Scripture will tend to be premillennialists, whereas those who give more weight to symbolic and figurative language will choose one of the other options. Those who tend to be more pessimistic about the future and believe that things are getting worse will tend to be premillennialists, whereas those who are more optimistic about what God is doing in this world and who emphasize the transforming power of the gospel will tend to be postmillennialists. One’s eschatological convictions are the logical outgrowth of many other earlier commitments and persuasions.

Each of these millennial views also has implications for a number of other topics: the nature and intensity of Satan’s binding in Rev. 20, the number of different resurrections, and the number of different judgments. The ultimate question, again, is which approach does the best job of putting together all the prophecies of Scripture and consequently is most faithful to God’s word.

Heaven and Hell

God’s judgment inevitably leads either to final and permanent torment in hell or to untold blessings in the new heaven and new earth (Matt. 25:46).

The ultimate hope of believers involves the bodily resurrection and a new earth to go along with these glorified bodies. The glad time will come when God “will wipe every tear from their eyes” and “there will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain” (Rev. 21:4). There will be the joys of physical bodies healed and restored, seeing friends and loved ones, but the greatest joy of all will be seeing the Lord himself in all his glory and majesty.

Hell will be the very opposite, experienced by those who deliberately rejected and avoided God during their earthly lives. They will find themselves rejected by God and cut off from his presence (and all the blessings that go along with his presence). Although there are various debates about how literal or figurative some of the biblical descriptions of hell are in terms of unquenchable fire and worms that do not die (Mark 9:48), it seems safe to say that hell will be the greatest of all possible tragedies and far worse than any of these descriptions suggest.

Annihilationism or conditional immortality, with its assumption that the souls of the lost will cease to exist at some point after death, represents an attempt to soften the explicit teachings of Scripture. Universalism—the belief that ultimately everyone will be saved—is another human strategy to avoid the clear teaching of Scripture. Ultimately, there is a heaven, and there is a hell, and human choices do make a difference for time and eternity.

The Benefits of Eschatology

Eschatology should give balance and perspective to life so that the affairs and accomplishments of this present life do not take on an inappropriate importance. Whenever people are caught up with materialism and a this-worldly perspective on life or become complacent about their lack of spiritual growth or the spiritual condition of others, the underlying cause is often a lack of attention to eschatology. Although many difficult and controversial questions surround the nature and timing of the return of Jesus Christ, Scripture is clear about the fact of his return and the final judgment. A new life with Christ that will last for all eternity is described in Scripture as the greatest of all possible blessings. At the same time, a life apart from God both in this life and in the life to come is described as the greatest possible tragedy in life. Perhaps even the spiritual deception and confusion around us, whereby many “will abandon the faith” (1Tim. 4:1) and “not put up with sound doctrine” (2Tim. 4:3), are a sign of the lateness of the hour. A proper appreciation of eschatology can be a means that God uses to change people’s lives.

The giving of gifts in the Bible has several nuances. It can refer to a goodwill gift or a peace offering given to a friend or relative (Prov. 18:16; 21:14). Thus, when Jacob seeks to make peace with his brother Esau, he sends gifts to him before they meet (Gen. 32:13; 33:10). Similarly, when Abigail intercedes with David on behalf of Nabal, she gives David a gift (1Sam. 25:27).

Ezekiel 46:17 illustrates that some gifts are regulated if they came from an inheritance. There are several references in the NT to the gifts of one local church to another (Acts 11:30; 1Cor. 16:3; 2Cor. 8:12, 20; 9:5; Phil. 4:17). The giving of these gifts has a positive effect for both those in need and those who give the gift.

Gifts are a traditional part of bridal arrangements in the Bible. Thus, Shechem requests to know the bride-price and gift when he asks for Dinah as his wife (Gen. 34:11–12). Likewise, Pharaoh gives a captured city as a dowry for his daughter’s marriage to Solomon (1Kings 9:16).

Gifts are integral in honoring another in hospitality and in approaching someone about a service. Israel instructs his sons to take gifts to Pharaoh when they go to purchase food (Gen. 43:11). It is customary to bring a gift to a man of God or prophet when asking for advice or prophetic insight (1Sam. 9:7; 1Kings 13:7; 2Kings 5:15; 8:8–9). People bring Solomon gifts when they seek an audience with him (1Kings 10:25). Additionally, gifts are part of the process of establishing a treaty (1Kings 15:19; 2Kings 16:8; 20:12).

Of course, gifts can be used for ignoble purposes as well. David sends a gift to Uriah in an effort to cover up his own sin (2Sam. 11:8).

Sacrifices of every type are conceived of as a gift to the deity with the intent of seeking favor or making restitution for sin (Lev. 22:18; Num. 31:52). Even mandatory offerings and dedicated land are considered gifts under the notion that God, as the Creator, owns all (Ezek. 45:16; 48:12, 20). This idea of giving a gift to God demonstrates the cost involved in approaching the deity. Interestingly, the priests and Levites who are associated with the sacrifices are described as a gift from God to the rest of the people (Num. 18:6–7).

The intentions behind the gift are important to God. Jesus states that one cannot be giving gifts to God and simultaneously holding on to contention with another in the community of faith (Matt. 5:23–24). Jesus commands that thankfulness to God be followed with the prescribed sacrifice (Matt. 8:4). Yet, an unwillingness to help others should not be hidden behind an ostentatious dedication to giving to God (Matt. 15:5; Mark 7:11). Likewise, Jesus warns against being overly legalistic about gifts and their benefit (Matt. 23:18–19).

On a fundamental level, gift giving has its origin in the gracious nature of God. God is the giver of all good gifts (James 1:17). He gives children to mothers (Gen. 30:20). A good life and reward for work are also gifts from God (Eccles. 3:13; 5:19). Jesus describes himself as a gift of God (John 4:10). Likewise, the Holy Spirit is God’s gift (Acts 1:4; 2:38; 11:17) and cannot be purchased with money (Acts 8:20). This gift of the Holy Spirit is given to Jew and Gentile alike (Acts 10:45).

Both grace and salvation are gifts from God (Rom. 5:15–17; 6:23; Eph. 2:8; 3:7; Heb. 6:4; 1Pet. 3:7). Finally, spiritual gifts are part of God’s good gifts (Rom. 1:11). These gifts are meant to help the church so that nothing needed for ministry is lacking in the body of Christ (Rom. 12:6; 1Cor. 1:7; 7:7; 1Tim. 4:14; 2Tim. 1:6; 1Pet. 4:10). Spiritual gifts are all governed by the greatest gift, that of love (1Cor. 13:2; 14:1).

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

The Abode of God

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

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

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

The Final Dwelling Place for Believers

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

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

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

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

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

The Abode of God

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

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

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

The Final Dwelling Place for Believers

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

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

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

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

The kingdom of God is a major theme in the Bible. While thetheme is most fully developed in the NT, its originis the OT,where the emphasis falls on God’s king-ship. God is king ofIsrael (Exod. 15:18; Num. 23:21; Deut. 33:5; Isa. 43:15) and of allthe earth (2Kings 19:15; Pss. 29:10; 99:1–4; Isa. 6:5;Jer. 46:18). Juxtaposed to the concept of God’s present reignas king are references to a day when God will become king over hispeople (Isa. 24:23; 33:22; 52:7; Zeph. 3:15; Zech. 14:9). Thisemphasis on God’s kingship continues throughout Judaism andtakes on special significance in Jewish apocalypticism and itsanticipation of the kingdom of God in the age to come, whichabandoned any hope for present history. Only at the end of the agewill the kingdom of God come. This idea of God’s kingdom isfurther developed throughout the NT.

TheSynoptic Gospels

Inthe Synoptic Gospels the phrase “the kingdom of God”occurs over one hundred times in Mark, Luke, and Matthew (where“kingdom of heaven” is a synonym for “kingdom ofGod”). Three views have been defended regarding whether and towhat extent the kingdom of God was present in Jesus’ ministry.In other words, how are we to interpret the phrase “kingdom ofGod” in the Synoptics? The three views are consistenteschatology, realized eschatology, and inaugurated eschatology.

Consistenteschatology.Albert Schweitzer, a biblical scholar from the late nineteenthcentury, first popularized consistent eschatology. Here, “consistent”means consistent with the apocalyptic Judaism of Jesus’ day,which interpreted the kingdom of God as something coming in thefuture. Judaism at the time of Christ divided history into twoperiods: this age of sin, when sin rules, and the age to come, whenthe Messiah is expected to bring the kingdom of God to earth.Schweitzer concluded that an apocalyptic understanding of the kingdomwas foundational not only for Christ’s teaching, but also tounderstanding his life. Thus, Schweitzer maintained that Jesusbelieved that it was his vocation to become the coming Son of Man.Initially, Jesus revealed this messianic secret only to Peter, James,and John. Later, Peter told it to the rest of the Twelve. Judas toldthe secret to the high priest, who used it as the grounds for Jesus’execution (Mark 14:61–64; cf. Dan. 7:13).

Accordingto Schweitzer, when Jesus sent out the Twelve on a mission toproclaim the coming kingdom of God, he did not expect them to return.The Twelve were the “men of violence” (cf. Matt. 11:12)who would provoke the messianic tribulation that would herald thekingdom. Whereas some earlier scholars believed that one could onlywait passively for the kingdom, Schweitzer believed that the missionof Jesus was designed to provoke its coming. When this did nothappen, Jesus determined to give his own life as a ransom for many(Mark 10:45) and so cause the kingdom to come.

Accordingto Schweitzer, Jesus took matters into his own hands by precipitatinghis death, hoping that this would be the catalyst for God to make thewheel of history turn to its climax—the arrival of the kingdomof God. But, said Schweitzer, Jesus was wrong again, and he died indespair. So for Schweitzer, Jesus never witnessed the dawning of theage to come; it lay in the distant future, separated from thispresent age.

Onthe positive side, Schweitzer called attention to the fact that themessage of Jesus is rooted in first-century apocalyptic Judaism andits concept of the kingdom of God. This connection is stillfoundational to a proper understanding of biblical prophecy and theGospels today. On the negative side, Schweitzer’s selective useof evidence and rejection of the historicity of much of the Gospeltradition resulted in a skewed perspective on the present dimensionsof Jesus’ eschatology.

Realizedeschatology.In contrast to futurist eschatology, where the kingdom of God awaitsa final consummation at the end of history, realized eschatologyviews the kingdom of God as already realized in the person andmission of Jesus. The futurist aspects of Jesus’ teaching arereduced to a minimum, and his apocalyptic language is viewed assymbolic of theological truths.

Theperson most responsible for advocating this position is Britishscholar C.H. Dodd. In his 1935 book Parables of the Kingdom, hefocused on Jesus’ teachings that announced the arrival of thekingdom with his coming. For instance, in Luke 11:20 Jesus says, “Butif I drive out demons by the finger of God, then the kingdom of Godhas come upon you” (cf. Luke 17:21; Matt. 13). Eschatologybecomes a matter of the present experience rather than any kind offuture event. The kingdom has fully come in the messianic ministry ofJesus.

Mostinterpreters have criticized Dodd’s realized eschatology forignoring Jesus’ teachings that point to a future consummationof the kingdom (e.g., Matt. 24–25; Mark 13). When all of Jesus’teachings are considered, futurist eschatology balances realizedeschatology. To be sure, the kingdom arrived with Jesus, but Jesushimself taught that history still awaits a final completion. Thekingdom of God is both “already” and “not yet,”which leads us to the third view of the relationship of the kingdomof God to the ministry of Jesus Christ.

Inauguratedeschatology. Thethird view, inaugurated eschatology, is commonly connected with thetwentieth-century Swiss theologian Oscar Cullmann. Like others beforehim, Cullmann understood that the Jewish notion of the two agesformed an important background for understanding the message ofJesus. According to Judaism, history is divided into two periods:this age of sin and the age to come (i.e., the kingdom of God). ForJews the advent of the Messiah would effect the shift from the formerto the latter. In other words, Judaism viewed the two ages asconsecutive. According to Cullmann, Jesus Christ announced that theend of time, the kingdom of God, had arrived within history (see Mark1:15 pars.; esp. Luke 4:43; 6:20; 7:28; 8:1, 10; 9:2, 11, 27, 60, 62;10:9, 11; 11:20; 13:18, 20; 16:16; 17:20–21; 18:16–17,24–25, 29; Acts 28:31). Yet other passages suggest thatalthough the age to come had already dawned, it was not yet complete.It awaited the second coming for its full realization (Luke 13:28–29;14:15; 19:11; 21:31; 22:16, 18; 23:51; Acts 1:6). Hence the adjective“inaugurated” characterizes this eschatology. Such a viewis pervasive in the NT (see, e.g., Acts 2:17–21; 3:18, 24;1Cor. 15:24; 1Tim. 4:1; 2Tim. 3:1; Heb. 1:2; 1John2:18). So for inaugurated eschatology, the two ages are simultaneous:the age to come exists in the midst of this present age. Christianstherefore live in between the two ages until the parousia (secondcoming of Christ).

Wemay break down the data in the Synoptic Gospels regarding the“already/notyet” aspects concerning the kingdom ofGod in this manner: Mark, probably the first Gospel written, recordsJesus’ programmatic statement in 1:15: “The time hascome.... The kingdom of God has come near.”Mark, along with Luke and Matthew, then goes on to demonstrate thatJesus’ miracles, teachings, death, and resurrection inauguratedthe kingdom of God. Yet it is also clear from Matthew, Mark, and Lukethat the final manifestation of the kingdom has not yet happened. Wemay draw on Luke as representative of all three Synoptics. Luke’sGospel indicates that the kingdom was present for Jesus (Luke 7:28;8:10; 10:9–11; 11:20; 16:16; 17:20–21), but it alsoawaited the second coming for its completion (6:20–26; 11:2;12:49–50, 51–53; 13:24–30; 21:25–29;22:15–18, 30). The same dual aspect of the kingdom pertains toLuke’s second volume, Acts. The kingdom was present in Jesus’ministry and now through his disciples (Acts 1:3; 8:12; 19:8; 20:25;28:23–31), but it will not be completed until Christ comesagain (1:6; 14:22).

TheGospel of John

John’sGospel has only three references to the kingdom of God. Nicodemus wastold by Jesus that he needed to be born again to enter the kingdom ofGod (3:3–5). Yet Jesus’ kingdom is not worldly in nature,but spiritual (18:36). Although the Gospel of John contains both thepresent (“already”) aspect and the future (“notyet”) aspect, the focus is clearly on the present. This is whymany scholars label the Fourth Gospel the “Gospel of RealizedEschatology.” This emphasis on the “already” can beseen in John in the following ways: (1)Eternal life, orentrance into the kingdom of God, can be a present possession (3:5–6,36; 6:47, 51, 58; 8:51; 10:28; 11:24–26). (2)Theeschatological promise of sonship is granted to the believer in Jesusnow (1:12–13; 3:3–8; 4:14). (3)The generalresurrection has already begun (5:25). (4)The Spirit, the giftof the end time, currently indwells believers (7:37–39;14:15–31; 15:26–27; 16:5–16; 20:22–23).(5)Final judgment is determined by one’s present responseto Jesus (3:19; 5:22–24, 27, 30–38; 9:38; 12:31–33).(6)The spirit of antichrist has already entered the world sceneto oppose Christ (6:70; 13:2, 27). (7)Jesus’ death on thecross seems to absorb some elements of the messianic woes or aspectsof tribulation. In other words, Jesus’ passion was where theend-time holy war was waged, and his death and resurrection began theend of the forces of evil (15:18–16:11).

Onthe other hand, the Gospel of John also includes some typical future(“not yet”) aspects of eschatology. For example, thefuture resurrection is still expected (5:26–30). Likewise, thefuture second coming of Christ is alluded to (14:1–4; 21:22).Admittedly, however, the “already” aspect of the kingdomof God seems to overshadow the “not yet” perspective inthe Fourth Gospel.

PaulineLiterature

Thephrase “kingdom of God” and/or “kingdom of Christ”occurs twelve times in Paul’s writings.

Rom.14:17 – kingdom of God (present tense)

1Cor. 4:20 – kingdom of God (present tense)

1Cor. 6:9-10 – kingdom of God (2x) (future tense)

1Cor. 15:24 – kingdom of Christ/God (present/future tense)

1Cor. 15:50 – kingdom of God (future tense)

Gal.5:21 – kingdom of God (future tense)

Eph.5:5 – kingdom of Christ/God (future tense)

Col.1:13 – kingdom of the Son (present tense)

Col.4:11 – kingdom of God (present tense)

1Thess. 2:12 – his [God’s] kingdom (future tense)

2Thess. 1:5 – kingdom of God (future tense)

Threeobservations emerge from the chart: (1)The kingdom ofChrist/God is both present and future, already here and not yetcomplete. This is consistent with the Gospels and Acts. (2)Christand God are, in at least two instances, interchanged, suggestingequality of status between them (cf. Eph. 5:5; Rev. 11:15; 12:10).(3)In 1Cor. 15:24 we find the most precise description ofthe exact relationship between the kingdoms of Christ and God: theinterim messianic kingdom begun at the resurrection of Christ willone day give way to the eternal kingdom of God. Such a temporarykingdom is attested to in apocalyptic Judaism and may underlie Rev.20:1–6.

Christianstherefore live in between the two ages, in the messianic kingdom.

Hebrewsand the General Epistles

Hebrewsand the General Epistles continue the theme of the “already/notyet”aspects of the kingdom.

Hebrews.The following ideas associated in Second Temple Judaism with thearrival of God’s kingdom are seen by the author of Hebrews tohave been fulfilled at the first coming of Christ: (1)theappearance of the Messiah of the last days indicates the dawning ofthe kingdom of God (1:2; 9:9–10); (2)the greattribulation/messianic woes that were expected to occur in connectionwith the advent of the Messiah are now here (2:5–18; cf. 5:8–9;7:27–28; 10:12; 12:2); (3)the outpouring of the HolySpirit has happened (6:4–5); (4)the manifestation of theeschatological high priest at the end of history has taken place inJesus (7:26–28), who has also established the new covenant ofthe last days (8:6–13). Compare the preceding statements inHebrews with that author’s explicit mention of the presence ofthe kingdom of God in 12:18–28. And yet the kingdom of God isnot yet fully here. The church continues to suffer the messianicwoes, as is evidenced in the intermingling of Jesus’ sufferingof the great tribulation with the present afflictions of theChristian (2:5–18; 3:7–4:6; 5:7–6:12; 10:19–39;12:1–2; 13:11–16). Furthermore, the exhortations topersevere in the faith that punctuate the book of Hebrews (2:1–4;3:7–4:13; 5:11–6:12; 10:19–39; 12:14–29) area familiar theme in Jewish and Christian apocalyptic literature.

TheGeneral Epistles.The main message of James is that the last days are here (1:2; 5:3)and with it the messianic woes (1:2–12; 5:1–12).Therefore, believers will need to faithfully endure the greattribulation until the second coming of Christ. But there are twoindications that James also teaches that the kingdom of God hasdawned in the midst of the great tribulation. First, Christiansexperience even now the eschatological quality of joy (James 1:2–3;cf. Joel 2:21–27). Second, Christians also share in theend-time gift of wisdom (James 1:5–8).

FirstPeteris similar to James with regard to its inaugurated eschatology. Thus,the church suffers the messianic woes/great tribulation (1Pet.1:6, 11; 3:13–17; 4:12–19; 5:1–9). Nevertheless,the age to come/kingdom of God has broken into the midst of this age,as evidenced by the eschatological joy and God’s protectivepower that it brings (1:5–6).

SecondPeterdoes seem to stress the “not yet” aspect of the kingdomof God. Thus, the kingdom of God still waits to be entered (1:11), ishindered by end-time apostasy (2Pet. 2), and has been postponed(3:1–10). Yet the “already” aspect of the kingdomis not entirely absent. This is evidenced by the fact that thetransfiguration of Christ on the mountain was a display of the comingpower and glory of the age to come, a glory revealed to the discipleson the mountain and now communicated to all believers (1:16–19).

Judeis devoted to alerting Christians to the reality that they are in themidst of the end-time holy war (vv. 3, 20–23), as can be seenby their struggle with the false teaching of end-time apostasy (vv.5–19). Nevertheless, because believers possess theeschatological gift of the Holy Spirit, they will prevail to fullyenter the kingdom of God (v.20).

TheLetters of John attest to the overlapping of the two ages—thatis, inaugurated eschatology. Thus, on the one hand, the spirit ofantichrist is here (1John 2:18; 2John 7), along with thefalse teaching that it breeds (1John 2:20–29; cf. 2–3John); but on the other hand, the Johannine community has theend-time anointing of the Holy Spirit, which preserves believers fromevil and deception (1John 2:20–21; 3:1–10).Moreover, Christians presently have eternal life through Christ, oneof the blessings of the kingdom of God (1John 5:11–13).

Revelation

The“already/notyet” aspects of the kingdom of God aremanifested in Revelation in the following way: the kingdom of God hasalready dawned in heaven, but it has not yet appeared on earth.Regarding the former, it is clear from 1:9; 5:1–14; 12:1–6that Jesus’ death and resurrection inaugurated the advent ofthe kingdom of God in heaven. Thus, Jesus obediently underwent themessianic woes on the cross and was then raised to heavenly glory,triumphant over the great tribulation. There in heaven, Christ reignsas the invisible Lord over all (including Caesar). But that thekingdom of God has not yet descended to earth is clear in Revelationfrom two present realities. First, even though Jesus has endured thegreat tribulation/messianic woes, his followers continue to face manytrials (chaps. 6–18). There is no deliverance for them fromsuch affliction until the return of Christ in glory (chap. 19). Theonly possible exception to this is the divine protection of the144,000 (chaps. 7; 14). Second, the kingdom of God has not appearedon earth; that event awaits the parousia (chap. 20 [assuming that thepremillennial interpretation of that chapter is the most viablereading]). In all of this, it seems that the messianic woes/greattribulation are the divine means for purging the earth in preparationfor the future arrival of the temporal, messianic kingdom (chap. 20).After Christ’s one-thousand-year reign on earth, this temporalmessianic kingdom will give way to the eternal kingdom of God and itsnew earth and new heaven (chaps. 21–22). It must beacknowledged, however, that interpretations of chapters 20–22greatly vary, depending on whether one takes a premillennial,amillennial, or postmillennial perspective.

Conclusion

Thepreceding data thus seem to confirm that the most apt description ofthe relationship between the two ages and the kingdom of God thatinforms the NT is inaugurated eschatology: with the first coming ofChrist, the kingdom of God/the age to come dawned, but it will not beuntil the second coming of Christ that the age to come/kingdom of Godwill be complete. The church therefore lives in between the times.That is to say, the age to come has broken into this present age, andit is only through the eye of faith that one can now perceive thepresence of the kingdom of God.

A synonym of “strength.” “Power”often translates the Hebrew words koakh or ’az or the Greekword dynamis, all of which denote strength or might. The Hebrew wordyad (“hand”) may also denote power when it is used tospeak of the dominion of a ruler (e.g., 2Kings 17:7 [NASB:“hand of Pharaoh”; NIV: “power of Pharaoh”]).

Althoughhumans have a degree of power, God is omnipotent, all-powerful (Jer.32:17). He utilized his great power in creating the world (Jer.51:15; Rom. 1:20; Rev. 4:11). He has also displayed his power throughother mighty acts, such as delivering the Israelites from Egypt(Exod. 14:31; Deut. 9:26). The wisdom literature extols God’spower (Job 9:4; Pss. 20:6; 66:3; 147:5), as do the prophets (Isa.40:10; Jer. 27:5; Dan. 2:20; Nah. 1:3) and the letters of the NT(1Cor. 6:14; Eph. 1:18–21; Col. 2:10). God continues todisplay his power through the gospel (Rom. 1:16), not only inrescuing believers from their sins (1Cor. 1:24–25) butalso in empowering them to live holy lives (2Cor. 4:7).

TheHoly Spirit has acted and continues to act as the agent of God’spower (Judg. 14:6; 1Sam. 16:13; Acts 1:8). Just as the HolySpirit has done many powerful signs and wonders through Jesus and theapostles (Acts 10:38; Rom. 15:18–19), he gives rebirth to eachChristian through his power (Gal. 4:29). The Holy Spirit alsostrengthens Christians with power “so that Christ may dwell in[their] hearts through faith” (Eph. 3:17).

Samaria was the capital city of the northern kingdom ofIsrael. After the fall of JeroboamI’s dynasty, and thereigns of Baasha, Elah, and Zimri, the ruling center of the northernkingdom moved from Tirzah to Samaria during the rule of Omri (r.882–871 BC), the first king of northern Israel’s thirddynasty. He built a new capital and called it “Samaria,”based on “Shemer,” the name of the person from whom hebought the hill on which it was built (1Kings 16:24).

Samariaremained the capital of the northern kingdom of Israel until it fellto the Assyrians under SargonII in 721 BC, when he deportedmost of the population to other areas of the Assyrian Empire (2Kings17:6). According to Sargon’s annals, he improved the city andpopulated it with peoples deported from other countries that he hadconquered. The report of the fall of Samaria in 2Kings 17:24generally agrees with this. The populace of Samaria worshiped its owngods and the God of Israel as well.

Inthe Persian period, Samaria was ruled by an appointed governor,Sanballat the Horonite. The book of Nehemiah relates Sanballat’splots to keep the returned exiles from building the walls ofJerusalem. In the time of Herod the Great, the city of Samaria wasrebuilt and renamed “Sebaste.”

Besidesbeing the name of the capital city of the northern kingdom of Israel,“Samaria” was a name for the northern kingdom itself. Thenorthern kingdom was always politically and economically moreprosperous than Judah.

TheBible says that Samaria fell as a result of its worship of other godsand lifts up the “sin of Jeroboam” (1Kings 16:31),the establishment of golden calves in Bethel and Dan as a rivaltothe Jerusalem temple, as the chief sin. In Hos. 8:6, apronouncement of judgment against the golden calf at Bethel, the calfis called the “calf of Samaria.” All of the northernkings, even Jehu (r. 842–814 BC), who was relatively faithfulto Yahweh, did not remove the golden calves. SecondKings17:8–23 contains a catalog of the various ways in which thenorthern kingdom was unfaithful to Yahweh. In general, the prophetsdeclare God’s judgment on Samaria. For example, Hoseapronounces judgment on Samaria for moral and ethical sins (7:1–7).

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

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

The Abode of God

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

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

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

The Final Dwelling Place for Believers

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

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

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

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

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

OldTestament

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

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

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

NewTestament

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

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

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

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

HolySpirit

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

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

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

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).

The English term “witness” occurs in bothTestaments numerous times, with a wide range of meanings. One commonmeaning relates to someone who gives legal testimony and to thelegitimacy of that testimony (Num. 35:30; Deut. 17:6; 19:15–16,18; Prov. 12:17; Isa. 8:16, 20). Throughout the NT the term occursprimarily in the context of someone bearing witness—especiallyGod—or testifying to something (Rom. 1:9; 2Cor. 1:23;Phil. 1:8; 1Thess. 2:5, 10), though it also has a forensicdimension in regard to one who establishes legal testimony (e.g.,Acts 6:13; 7:58; 2Cor. 13:1; 1Tim. 5:19; Heb. 10:28).

Centralto the concept of witness is the truthfulness of the witness. Thiswas a vital component of the OT concept of witness. Thus, in legalproceedings a lone witness was insufficient to establish testimonyagainst anyone (Deut. 17:6). This principle carries over into the NT(cf. Matt. 18:16; 2Cor. 13:1). Such truthfulness was sosignificant that the ninth commandment expressly forbids bearingfalse witness (Exod. 20:16; Deut. 5:20; cf. Prov. 19:5, 9).

Truth-tellingwas not something that the people of Israel were called to merelyamong themselves. They were to be God’s witnesses to thenations (Isa. 43:10; 44:8). As witnesses of God’s existence andholiness, they were called to be separate from the nations (Exod.19:6) and to be a light to them (Isa. 49:6). Tragically, Israelfailed in this responsibility and was deemed “blind”(Isa. 42:19).

TheNT continues the concept that the people of God are to be God’switnesses. John the Baptist is commissioned “to testifyconcerning that light” (John 1:7). It is in this context thatJesus later declares himself to be “the light of the world”(John 8:12; 9:5). Jesus himself is the exemplar of a “faithfulwitness” (Rev. 1:5). And his followers, whom he has designatedas “the light of the world” (Matt. 5:14), are then calledto bear witness to the ends of the earth (Acts 1:8).

“Witness”is also employed in terms of a legal testimony regarding what one hasseen. That the disciples were intent on establishing such legaltestimony is evident in their stipulation that the person to replaceJudas Iscariot be someone from among those who had been with Jesusfrom the beginning of his ministry to his ascension, so that “oneof these must become a witness with us of his resurrection”(Acts 1:22). This forensic aspect of witness appears in the close ofthe Gospel of John: “This is the disciple who testifies tothese things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony istrue” (21:24). Paul demonstrates this forensic concern forwitnesses when he references Peter, the Twelve, some five hundredothers, and himself as among those who have witnessed theresurrection (1Cor. 15:3–8).

Whilelinguistically the Greek word martys(“witness”) has given rise to the English term “martyr,”at the time of the NT martysdid not connote physical martyrdom. Instead, it is likely that theuse of this term in the book of Revelation and its association withthe deaths of those who faithfully witnessed to Jesus Christ and thegospel in the face of persecution gave rise to its application in thetechnical sense of “martyr.”

ThroughoutRevelation there resides a direct link between Christians bearingwitness and suffering, and perhaps dying, as a consequence of thiswitness. This is evident in the mention of Antipas, who was martyred,and is then designated as “my faithful witness” (Rev.2:13). Also, the two unnamed witnesses in 11:1–12, whoexplicitly function as witnesses, are the subject of attack and areeventually murdered. Their murder occurs only after they havefinished “their testimony” (11:7).

Itis this association of persecution and martyrdom that likely leads tothe second-century employment of “martyr” as adesignation for those who bear witness to Christ to the point ofdeath. See also Martyr.

This book, commonly referred to simply as Acts, is the sequelto the Gospel of Luke and records the exciting history of the firstthree decades of the early church. The book begins with the ascensionof Jesus, followed by his sending of the Holy Spirit, and ends withthe gospel message being proclaimed by Paul as a prisoner in thecapital city of the Roman Empire. In the pages in between, the readeris introduced to the key people, places, and events of this strategicand crucial time of Christian history. The book of Acts providesinsightful and inspiring reading. It forms the backdrop forunderstanding much of the NT (especially Paul’s letters), andit provides important models for the contemporary church.

HistoricalBackground

Inorder to understand the book of Acts, one must become familiar withits historical background. This includes understanding the book’sauthorship, recipients, and setting. In terms of authorship, the booktechnically is anonymous; however, there are good reasons for holdingto church history’s traditional view that its author is Luke.This tradition dates back to the early second century and issupported by internal evidence. This evidence further reveals thatLuke was a physician and close companion of the apostle Paul (infact, Luke was actually with Paul for some of the events that herecords in Acts; see the “we” passages, found in16:10–17; 20:5–15; 21:8–18; 27:1–28:16). Lukewas well educated, well traveled, and familiar with both the Jewishand the Greco-​Roman worlds. He was a Hellenistic God-fearerand a Christian. He was also familiar with the Jewish Scriptures,Greco-Roman rhetoric, and ancient histories, thus making him theperfect candidate to write an accurate history of early Christianity.

Thespecific recipient of Acts is Theophilus (1:1). Theophilus could becharacterized as a relatively new believer of high social status, aperson educated in Greco-Roman rhetoric and history, and one whopossessed the financial means to promote and publish Luke’swork (both the Gospel of Luke and Acts). It is probable that in someway Theophilus served as a bridge to a wider readership. It seemslikely that Theophilus was Luke’s ideal reader (i.e., aninfluential Greco-Roman of high social standing).

Thespecific setting of Acts is difficult to determine; however, it seemsclear that the book was written during a time of crisis for thechurch. This crisis involved persecution and slander of Christians byboth Jews and Gentiles. Both groups were trying to persuade publicopinion against Christianity, including the opinion of Greco-Romanauthorities. The persecution and slander were taking their toll onthe church, and many Christians were demoralized and struggling toremain faithful as witnesses of Jesus. Christianity needed someone towrite a response to this crisis. This response had to do threethings: (1) accurately relate the history of the church toinfluential Greco-Romans of high social status; (2) show thatChristianity was an ancient religion (ancient religions wereconsidered to be legitimate by Roman authorities) and an asset to theRoman Empire, not a threat; (3) legitimize Christianity overagainst Judaism. The author of this reponse had to be someone who wasrespected both inside and outside of the Christian faith community,who knew the church’s history well, and who was educated inGreco-Roman rhetoric. What better authorial candidate than Luke?Finally, the church also needed a person of high social status andfinancial means to help publish and promote the work; thus,Theophilus was chosen.

Purpose

Thebook of Acts was written for a variety of purposes. These includeapologetics, legitimization, discipleship, and witness to salvation.The apologetic purpose of Acts focuses on how Christianity could berecognized as an ancient, honorable, and officially protectedreligion in the Roman Empire. Although Judaism had the status ofreligio licita (legal religion) with Roman authorities for most ofthe first century, Christianity encountered serious problems in thisrespect. Acts itself reveals a substantial amount of such evidence inthis regard. For example, 16:20–21 shows that at Philippi, Pauland Silas were charged with disturbing the peace by advocatingunlawful customs. In Thessalonica, the missionaries were accused ofdefying Caesar by promoting another king named “Jesus”(17:7). At Corinth, the charge was that of persuading the peopletoward unlawful worship (18:13). Later in Acts, Paul was charged bythe Jewish priestly leaders with being part of an unacceptable sectthat was stirring up riots in Jewish communities (24:5–9). In28:22, when Paul addressed the Roman Jews, they responded by sayingthat “people everywhere are talking against this sect[Christianity].” Such accusations, accompanied by the fact thatChristianity’s founder had been crucified by Roman authorities,made it difficult for the Christians to gain credibility.Christianity’s precarious position with Rome was furtherexacerbated by a strong Jewish campaign to separate from Christiansand to label them as sectarian. This strategy certainly intended forChristianity to be viewed by Rome as religio illicita (illegal orforbidden religion). Thus, Luke writes Acts to defend Christianity byshowing that it is not a replacement of Judaism, but rather itslegitimate continuation. Therefore, it should be accepted by theRoman authorities as a legal religion just as Judaism was accepted.

Luke’sapologetic message also appears to be directed inwardly, to astruggling church. This inward focus leads to Luke’s next mainpurpose: legitimization of the Christian faith for its adherents. Aspart of his defense, Luke intends to equip the church in the midst ofan identity crisis due to the constant threats of illegitimacy. Thisexplains Luke’s strategy of retelling the story of the church’sorigins so that followers of Christ would understand their trueposition from God’s perspective. Thus, Luke verifies fourthings: (1) the Jewish Scriptures prophesied a coming messiah,and Jesus matched these prophecies; (2) the resurrection wasforetold in Scripture and verified by eyewitnesses; (3) it wasGod’s plan all along for Gentiles to be included in God’sredemptive work; (4) Jews who rejected Jesus were acting in thesame way their ancestors did; therefore, believers should not besurprised by their negative reaction to Jesus. Luke uses stories suchas the one in Acts 2:41–47 to verify that salvation wasgenuinely being accomplished in the church and that Christians wereexperiencing the fulfillment of God’s ancient promises toIsrael. Luke’s writing is intended to encourage hiscontemporary church members to remain faithful in their service andwitness for the Lord. He reminds them that they are the true(legitimate) “people of God” and that God’s Spiritwill help them prevail and will give them abundant life even in themidst of hardship and persecution.

Anotherkey purpose of the book of Acts is to foster discipleship. Theprologues of both Luke’s Gospel and Acts verify that Luke iswriting to provide instruction and teaching for Theophilus (see Luke1:1–4; Acts 1:1–2). Part of this instruction reveals thatthe ascension of Jesus was not the end of his relationship with theworld, but rather a new beginning. Jesus’ departure did notmean abandonment; in fact, it meant just the opposite. Jesus verifieshis continuing presence and work in the world after his departurejust as he had lived and worked before. In other words, the sameSpirit who directed the ministry of Jesus is now going to direct theministry of Jesus’ followers. The rest of the book of Actsprovides instruction (with many personal examples) on how Christ canfulfill the ministry of believers through the power and direction ofthe Holy Spirit. Luke’s discipleship teaching includes helpingbelievers learn how to experience and follow God’s Spirit(chap. 2), to boldly witness for Christ in the midst of persecution(chaps. 3–4, 8, 14, 16–17, 19–28), to sacrificiallyshare resources with other Christians in need (chaps. 2, 4, 11), toresolve disputes within the church (chaps. 6, 15), and to take thegospel message of salvation to all people (chaps. 2, 11, 13–28).

Thebook of Acts places great emphasis on the message of salvation andthe responsibility given to believers to share this salvific messagewith all people. This salvation-witness concept is clearly one ofLuke’s key purposes for the book of Acts. The Pentecost eventof Acts 2 initiates the theme of salvation for all people and thussets the agenda for the rest of the book. In this passage, variousJews from many nations hear the good news in their own tongue, whichsuggests that this news is for peoples of all tongues and nations yetfor Jews first. The rest of Acts continues this theme of theuniversal scope of salvation. Luke makes it clear that this salvationcrosses all geographical, ethnic, and social boundaries. In Acts,Luke is bridging the gap between Jesus’ earthly ministry and alater generation of Christ followers who are to take the gospel to amuch wider geographical area with even greater ethnic diversity. Themessage of salvation should be joined with Luke’s emphasis onwitness. The centrality of the theme of witness in Acts is verifiedby Jesus’ words right before the ascension: “And you willbe my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and tothe ends of the earth” (1:8). The book of Acts tells the storyof how the early church received and obeyed the command of Jesus tobear witness of him to the ends of the earth.

LiteraryFeatures

Thesekey purposes of Acts are expounded through some distinctive literaryfeatures found in the book. One such literary feature is that thebook of Acts was written in a literary genre called “apologetichistoriography.” This genre can be defined as the story of asubgroup of people told by a member of the group who explains thegroup’s traditions and history while using Greco-Roman literaryfeatures. A good example of this literary genre is Josephus’sJewish Antiquities. Josephus tells the story of the Jews toGreco-Roman readers in hopes that they will better understand Jewishhistory and traditions and will accept the Jews in the largerGreco-Roman world. This appears to be exactly what Luke is doing inthe book of Acts for Christians. However, Luke is not giving adefense of a particular ethnic group; rather, he is defending amulticultural people who transcend ethnic and geographicalboundaries. In fact, this is a key part of Luke’s message.Throughout Acts, Luke is trying to explain why his religion is onethat crosses ethnic boundaries and is a universal religion inclusiveof all ethnicities. As Luke tells the story of Christianity, he iscareful to utilize Hellenistic literary features in order to connectwith his primary audience. Evidence of these Hellenistic literaryfeatures in the book of Acts includes a narrative style illustratingthe history through the personal experiences of key characters (Actstells the history of the early church through characters such asPeter and Paul), the frequent use of speeches, personal observationof at least part of the narrative while maintaining anonymity ofauthorship (the “we” passages of Acts), and the frequentuse of summaries to guide the narrative (Acts contains three majorsummaries [2:42–47; 4:32–37; 5:12–16] and a numberof minor summaries [6:7; 9:31; 12:24; 16:5; 19:20; 28:31]).

Outlineand Survey

Actscan be outlined according to Jesus’ final words, recorded in1:8: “You will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you;and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea andSamaria, and to the ends of the earth.”

I.Witnesses in Jerusalem (1:1–8:3)II. Witnesses in Judeaand Samaria (8:4–12:25)III. Witnesses to the Ends of theEarth (13:1–28:31)

I.Witnesses in Jerusalem (Acts 1:1–8:3).Immediately following his ascension, Jesus tells his followers toreturn to Jerusalem and wait for the coming of the Holy Spirit. Theypromptly obey, and after ten days of waiting, the disciples aredramatically filled with the Holy Spirit and begin to share thegospel with those around them. This event occurs at the JewishPentecost festival, which was attended by Jews and Jewish proselytesfrom throughout the Roman Empire. After the Spirit comes atPentecost, Peter boldly preaches to the crowds, and over threethousand people respond with saving faith (2:41).

Lukenext provides an exciting summary of the Spirit-led life within theearly church. This life is characterized by the early believers’participation together in the sharing of worship activities, materialpossessions, and spiritual blessings (2:42–47). This summary isfollowed by several dramatic healing miracles accomplished throughPeter and the subsequent arrest of Christian leaders by Jewishreligious authorities. Instead of squelching the Christian movement,however, these arrests only enhance the spiritual revival and itsaccompanying miracles. This revival is characterized by extremegenerosity and unity within the early church (4:32–37).

Therevival joy, however, is marred by the deceitful actions of Ananiasand Sapphira, who lie to the church and to the Holy Spirit and arejudged by God with immediate death (5:1–11). This story provesthat God will go to extreme lengths to protect the unity of hischurch. Following more persecution and miracles, the disciples chooseseven men to oversee distribution of food to Hellenistic widows whohave been neglected in daily food distributions (6:1–7). One ofthese leaders, Stephen, is arrested and brought before the Sanhedrin.Stephen testifies boldly before the Jewish leaders and is promptlyexecuted by stoning (chap. 7). This execution is endorsed by Saul, azealous Pharisee who begins to lead fierce persecution against thechurch in Jerusalem (8:1–3).

II.Witnesses in Judea and Samaria (Acts 8:4–12:25).Saul’s persecution forces many of the early church believers toleave Jerusalem. These believers scatter throughout the surroundingareas of Judea and Samaria. As they scatter, however, they continueto preach the gospel (8:4). Philip preaches in Samaria and performsmany miraculous signs, producing a spiritual revival in the region.Hearing about this, the apostles send Peter and John to Samaria tominister to the Samaritans (8:18–25), thus confirming thecross-cultural nature of the gospel (Samaritans traditionally werehated by the Jews). Next Luke tells of Philip’s evangelizing ofan Ethiopian eunuch (8:26–40).

Followingthe Ethiopian’s belief in Jesus, the narrative tells of Saul’sdramatic conversion while traveling to Damascus to persecuteChristians there (9:1–19). Saul’s dramatic turnaround ismet with suspicion by the other disciples, but eventually he isaccepted by the believers with the help of Barnabas (9:27–30).Next Peter travels to the Judean countryside and heals the paralyticAeneas and raises Dorcas from the dead (9:32–42). Thesemiracles produce an exciting spiritual revival in the region.Following this, God gives Peter a vision to go to the coastal city ofCaesarea in order to minister to Cornelius, a Roman army officer.Cornelius is a God-fearer, and through Peter’s witness heresponds to the gospel message and receives the Holy Spirit (chap.10). Peter explains his actions with Cornelius to his concernedJewish companions and verifies that God has indeed included theGentiles in his plan of salvation (11:1–18).

Thisverification is followed by the report of what is happening in thechurch at Antioch, where Jews begin to share the gospel with largergroups of Gentiles (11:19–21). This cross-cultural evangelismproduces a spiritual revival in Antioch, causing the Jerusalem churchto send Barnabas to the large Syrian city to investigate (11:22–30).Barnabas confirms that God is indeed at work in Antioch and invitesSaul to come and help him disciple the new Gentile believers(11:25–26). Next Luke reports more persecution breaking outagainst Christians in Jerusalem, resulting in the arrest of James andPeter by King Herod. James is executed, but Peter miraculouslyescapes from prison with the help of an angel (12:1–19), andthe church continues to increase, spreading throughout the RomanEmpire.

III.Witnesses to the ends of the earth (Acts 13:1–28:31).Starting with chapter 13, the narrative shifts its focus from theministry of Peter to that of Paul (formerly Saul). The church atAntioch begins to take center stage over the church at Jerusalem.This church commissions Paul and Barnabas and sends them off on theirfirst missionary journey, accompanied by Bar­na­bas’scousin John Mark. The missionaries first sail to Cyprus, where theypreach in synagogues and encounter a Jewish sorcerer, Bar-Jesus. Nextthey sail to Pamphylia, thus crossing into Asia Minor, and preach thegospel in Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe (this area wasknown as part of the region of Galatia). In these cities, Godprovides numerous miracles, and the missionaries experience a greatresponse to the gospel as well as much persecution because of thegospel. On one occasion, Paul is actually stoned and left for dead(14:19–20).

Unfazed,Paul and his team boldly continue their mission. Eventually, theyretrace their steps, strengthen the churches that they have started,and sail back to Syrian Antioch, where they give an exciting reportto the church (14:26–28). Following this report, Luke tells ofan important meeting of church leaders in Jerusalem. The subject ofthe meeting involves whether or not the new Gentile Christians shouldbe required to follow the Jewish laws and customs. After debating theissue, the leaders side with Paul, determining that the Gentilesshould not be burdened with Jewish laws and traditions, but simplymust live moral lives and not eat food that has been sacrificed toidols (chap. 15).

Followingthis meeting, Paul and Barnabas decide to make a second missionaryjourney. Unfortunately, the two missionaries get into a dispute overwhether to take John Mark with them again. The argument is such thatthe missionaries decide to separate, and Paul chooses a new partner,Silas. They travel by land back to Galatia. Barnabas takes John Markand sails to Cyprus. Paul and Silas return to Derbe and Lystra andthen make their way to Macedonia and Greece. They spend significanttime in Philippi, Thessalonica, and Corinth before returning toCaesarea and Antioch (chaps. 16–18). Following his return, Paulmakes a third missionary journey, revisiting churches in Galatia andPhrygia and staying in Ephesus for three years before visitingMacedonia and Greece for a second time.

Paulconcludes his third missionary journey with a trip to Jerusalem,where he is falsely accused of bringing a Gentile into the temple.This accusation creates a riot, and Paul is rescued by Romansoldiers, who arrest him and transfer him to a prison in Caesarea,where he spends two years awaiting trial under the rule of Felix andFestus (23:34–25:22). Paul eventually exercises his right as aRoman citizen to have his case heard by the emperor. He is sent toRome by boat and is shipwrecked on the island of Malta. Eventually hemakes his way to the capital city, where he is placed under housearrest. While in Rome, Paul maintains a rented house and is free toreceive visitors and write letters. In fact, it is thought that Paulpenned his “prison letters” during this time of housearrest (Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Philemon). The narrativeof Acts ends with Paul ministering boldly in Rome while awaiting histrial.

Actsand the Contemporary Church

Thebook of Acts provides a model for today’s church on numeroustopics. These include understanding the role of the Holy Spirit,practicing community life within the church, dealing with hardshipand persecution, overcoming social injustices, and carrying outmissions.

Actsreveals that the key issue for Christians is learning to experienceand follow God’s Holy Spirit, who enables believers to be boldin their witness for Christ, generous in their physical and spiritualsupport of each other, and effective in their ministries. Actsconsistently reveals that one’s joy, power, and purpose comefrom the Holy Spirit. According to Acts, learning to follow anddepend upon God’s Holy Spirit is the key to having a healthychurch.

Actsalso shows that the Holy Spirit produces a unique community lifecharacterized by worship, generosity, blessing, and unity. Luke callsthis Spirit-led common life koinōnia, which is explained andillustrated in the first five chapters of Acts (see esp. 2:42–47).It should be the desire and goal of every church to re-create thiskoinōnia community first experienced by the primitive church inActs.

Inaddition to its koinōnia, the book of Acts serves as a model forthe church in overcoming persecution and hardship. The narrative ofActs consistently reveals the sovereign power of God in overcomingopposition. The early church found great joy and growth in the midstof hardship and persecution, and today’s church can do thesame.

Anotherimportant example for the church provided by Acts is in the area ofsocial justice. Luke’s primitive church consistently removedethnic prejudices, eliminated social hierarchy and status within thechurch, and elevated the role of women. Acts provides inspiration andguidance for today’s church in facing these same social issues.

Inaddition to overcoming social injustices, the church in Acts providesan excellent example of mission ministry. These believersconsistently revealed God’s heart for the nations and made it apriority to share the gospel with all people everywhere. Acts’emphasis on the universal nature of the gospel, the responsibility ofindividual Christians to witness for Christ, and the importance ofplanting new churches and discipling new believers sets a pattern fortoday’s church in the area of missions.

Theseexamples should serve to inspire and guide the contemporary church asit seeks to follow and experience the Holy Spirit, who is sopowerfully revealed in the book of Acts.

The visible and bodily ascent of Jesus from earth to heavenconcluding his earthly ministry, which then continued through thepromised Holy Spirit, given at Pentecost.

Adetailed historical account of the ascension is given only by Luke(Luke 24:51; Acts 1:4–11 [cf. Mark 16:19, in the longer endingto Mark’s Gospel]). The event, however, was anticipated inJohn’s Gospel (John 6:62; 20:17).

Theascension is frequently implied throughout the NT by reference to thecomplex of events that began with the death of Jesus and ended withhis session at the right hand of God in glory. Paul writes of thedivine-human Christ’s ascent to the heavenly realms as thebeginning of his supreme cosmic reign in power (Eph. 1:20–23)and as the basis for holy living (Col. 3:1–4; 1 Tim.3:16). In Hebrews, the ascension is a crucial stage that marks offthe completed work of Jesus on earth, in which he offered himself asthe perfect and final sacrifice for sin (9:24–26), from hiscontinuing work in heaven as our great high priest, which isdescribed in terms of sympathy (4:14–16) and intercession(7:25). Peter makes the most direct reference to the ascension,explaining that Jesus, who suffered, is resurrected and “hasgone into heaven” (1 Pet. 3:22). Therefore, just as Jesus,the righteous sufferer, was vindicated by God, so too will his peoplewho suffer for doing good.

Paulunderstands the OT as predicting Christ’s ascension (Eph.4:7–10; cf. Ps. 68:18) and containing incidents that in someway prefigure it (2 Kings 2:11–12).

Theascension is significant for at least three reasons. First, Christ’sdeath could not have full effect until he entered the heavenlysanctuary. From heaven he acts as advocate and communicates tobelievers through the Holy Spirit all the gifts and blessings that hedied on the cross to gain (Heb. 4:14–16; 1 John 2:1).Second, glorified humanity is now in God’s presence,guaranteeing that we likewise will be raised up with body and soul toshare the glory yet to be revealed (John 14:2; 17:24; Eph. 2:4–6).Third, the ascension previews the manner of Christ’s secondcoming (Acts 1:11). Jesus’ ascension was followed by hisenthronement in heaven, where he reigns (1 Cor. 15:25) and fromwhich he will physically return in the same glorified body as judge(Luke 21:27). See also Advent, Second; Second Coming.

The outpouring of the Spirit that was prophesied in the OT totake place in the last days, in connection with the arrival of theMessiah.

Spiritbaptism in the Bible.The OT prophets had spoken of both the Spirit of God coming upon theMessiah (e.g., Isa. 11:2; 42:1; 61:1) and a giving or pouring out ofthe Spirit in the last days (e.g., Isa. 32:15; 44:3; Ezek. 36:27;37:14; 39:29; Joel 2:28). Peter connects the giving of the Spiritwith Jesus’ being received by the Father and being grantedmessianic authority (Acts 2:33–38). The experience of Corneliusin particular associates the pouring out of the Spirit (Acts 10:45)with a baptism with the Spirit (11:16).

Sevenpassages in the NT directly speak of someone being baptized in/withthe Spirit. Four of these passages refer to John the Baptist’sprediction that Jesus will baptize people in/with the Spirit incontrast to his own water baptism (Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16;John 1:33). In Matthew and Luke, Jesus’ baptism is referred toas a baptism with the Holy Spirit and with fire. Two passages referto Jesus’ prediction that the disciples would receive Spiritbaptism, which occurred at Pentecost. As recorded in Acts 2, tonguesof fire came to rest on each of them, they were filled with the HolySpirit, and they began to speak in other tongues. As the disciplesspoke to the Jews who had gathered in Jerusalem for the festival,three thousand were converted. Acts 1:5 contains Jesus’prediction of this baptism with the Spirit, which Peter recounts in11:16.

Thefinal reference occurs in 1 Cor. 12:13, where Paul says, “Forwe were all baptized by one Spirit so as to form one body—whetherJews or Gentiles, slave or free—and we were all given the oneSpirit to drink.” Thus, Christians form one body through theircommon experience of immersion in the one Spirit.

Asecond baptism?Whilein 1 Cor. 12 Paul seems to refer to an experience that allChristians undergo at conversion, there are several incidents in Actswhere the reception of the Spirit occurs after conversion. Thequestion then arises as to whether there is a separate “baptismin/with the Holy Spirit” distinct from the Spirit’sinitial work of regeneration and incorporation into the body ofChrist at conversion and whether this two-stage process is normativefor the church. This belief in a second baptism is particularlyprominent in Pentecostal traditions.

Examplessuch as Acts 2; 8; 10; 19 are commonly used to support the view of asecond and subsequent experience of Spirit baptism. In Acts 2 thedisciples are already converted and wait for the Spirit, who comes tothem at Pentecost. In Acts 8 the Samaritans first respond to Philip’spreaching and receive water baptism. However, they receive the Spiritonly after Peter and John come from Jerusalem and pray for them toreceive the Holy Spirit. In Acts 10 Cornelius is a God-fearingGentile, and after Peter visits him, the Spirit falls on hishousehold. In Acts 19 Paul finds some disciples in Ephesus. After helays hands on them, the Holy Spirit comes upon them, and they beginto speak in tongues and prophesy.

Inunderstanding these experiences, it must be remembered that Actsdescribes a transitional period for the church. Acts 2 in particularrecounts the initial giving of the Spirit under the new covenant. Itis possible, then, to see the events in Acts 8; 10 as the coming ofthe Spirit upon two other people groups, the Samaritans and theGentiles. Acts 2:38 and 5:32 indicate that the apostles expected thereception of the Spirit to accompany conversion, and this appears tobe the case in the rest of the book. Acts 19 narrates anincomplete conversion, where the people had only experienced John’sbaptism and receive the Spirit after Paul baptizes them “in thename of the Lord Jesus.”

Filledwith the Spirit.Although the NT does not support a theology of a second Spiritbaptism, it does commonly mention an experience of being “filled”with the Spirit. The concept of being “filled with the Spirit”frequently occurs in contexts referring to spiritual growth, such asin Eph. 5:18, where Paul exhorts, “Do not get drunk on wine,which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit.”Apparently, this filling can occur numerous times. It can lead toworship of and thanksgiving to God (Eph. 5:19–20). It can alsoresult in empowerment for ministry.

Theimmediate consequence of the disciples’ filling in Acts 2:4 isspeaking in tongues to the various Jews gathered in Jerusalem, and in4:31 they are empowered to speak “the word of God boldly.”Fullness of the Spirit can also be a characteristic of a believer’slife, such as in Acts 6:3, where the seven men chosen to look afterthe widows were to be men “known to be full of the Spirit.”

The outpouring of the Spirit that was prophesied in the OT totake place in the last days, in connection with the arrival of theMessiah.

Spiritbaptism in the Bible.The OT prophets had spoken of both the Spirit of God coming upon theMessiah (e.g., Isa. 11:2; 42:1; 61:1) and a giving or pouring out ofthe Spirit in the last days (e.g., Isa. 32:15; 44:3; Ezek. 36:27;37:14; 39:29; Joel 2:28). Peter connects the giving of the Spiritwith Jesus’ being received by the Father and being grantedmessianic authority (Acts 2:33–38). The experience of Corneliusin particular associates the pouring out of the Spirit (Acts 10:45)with a baptism with the Spirit (11:16).

Sevenpassages in the NT directly speak of someone being baptized in/withthe Spirit. Four of these passages refer to John the Baptist’sprediction that Jesus will baptize people in/with the Spirit incontrast to his own water baptism (Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16;John 1:33). In Matthew and Luke, Jesus’ baptism is referred toas a baptism with the Holy Spirit and with fire. Two passages referto Jesus’ prediction that the disciples would receive Spiritbaptism, which occurred at Pentecost. As recorded in Acts 2, tonguesof fire came to rest on each of them, they were filled with the HolySpirit, and they began to speak in other tongues. As the disciplesspoke to the Jews who had gathered in Jerusalem for the festival,three thousand were converted. Acts 1:5 contains Jesus’prediction of this baptism with the Spirit, which Peter recounts in11:16.

Thefinal reference occurs in 1 Cor. 12:13, where Paul says, “Forwe were all baptized by one Spirit so as to form one body—whetherJews or Gentiles, slave or free—and we were all given the oneSpirit to drink.” Thus, Christians form one body through theircommon experience of immersion in the one Spirit.

Asecond baptism?Whilein 1 Cor. 12 Paul seems to refer to an experience that allChristians undergo at conversion, there are several incidents in Actswhere the reception of the Spirit occurs after conversion. Thequestion then arises as to whether there is a separate “baptismin/with the Holy Spirit” distinct from the Spirit’sinitial work of regeneration and incorporation into the body ofChrist at conversion and whether this two-stage process is normativefor the church. This belief in a second baptism is particularlyprominent in Pentecostal traditions.

Examplessuch as Acts 2; 8; 10; 19 are commonly used to support the view of asecond and subsequent experience of Spirit baptism. In Acts 2 thedisciples are already converted and wait for the Spirit, who comes tothem at Pentecost. In Acts 8 the Samaritans first respond to Philip’spreaching and receive water baptism. However, they receive the Spiritonly after Peter and John come from Jerusalem and pray for them toreceive the Holy Spirit. In Acts 10 Cornelius is a God-fearingGentile, and after Peter visits him, the Spirit falls on hishousehold. In Acts 19 Paul finds some disciples in Ephesus. After helays hands on them, the Holy Spirit comes upon them, and they beginto speak in tongues and prophesy.

Inunderstanding these experiences, it must be remembered that Actsdescribes a transitional period for the church. Acts 2 in particularrecounts the initial giving of the Spirit under the new covenant. Itis possible, then, to see the events in Acts 8; 10 as the coming ofthe Spirit upon two other people groups, the Samaritans and theGentiles. Acts 2:38 and 5:32 indicate that the apostles expected thereception of the Spirit to accompany conversion, and this appears tobe the case in the rest of the book. Acts 19 narrates anincomplete conversion, where the people had only experienced John’sbaptism and receive the Spirit after Paul baptizes them “in thename of the Lord Jesus.”

Filledwith the Spirit.Although the NT does not support a theology of a second Spiritbaptism, it does commonly mention an experience of being “filled”with the Spirit. The concept of being “filled with the Spirit”frequently occurs in contexts referring to spiritual growth, such asin Eph. 5:18, where Paul exhorts, “Do not get drunk on wine,which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit.”Apparently, this filling can occur numerous times. It can lead toworship of and thanksgiving to God (Eph. 5:19–20). It can alsoresult in empowerment for ministry.

Theimmediate consequence of the disciples’ filling in Acts 2:4 isspeaking in tongues to the various Jews gathered in Jerusalem, and in4:31 they are empowered to speak “the word of God boldly.”Fullness of the Spirit can also be a characteristic of a believer’slife, such as in Acts 6:3, where the seven men chosen to look afterthe widows were to be men “known to be full of the Spirit.”

Simon Peter is the best-known and the most colorful of Jesus’twelve disciples. The name “Peter” means “rock”in Greek. In some biblical texts, he is also called “Cephas,”which is the Aramaic word for “rock” (see esp. John1:42). Despite the ups and downs of Peter’s spiritual life, Godwas able to use him as the foundational apostle for the establishmentof the NT church. Peter first met Jesus immediately after Jesus’baptism, when Peter’s brother, Andrew, heard John the Baptist’sidentification of Jesus as the Lamb of God (John 1:35). In classicmissionary style, “the first thing Andrew did was to find hisbrother Simon and tell him, ‘We have found the Messiah’ ”(John 1:41). Peter’s official call to ministry took placelater, when he was fishing on the Sea of Galilee and Jesus issued thewell-known invitation “Come, follow me, ... and Iwill send you out to fish for people” (Matt. 4:19).

Peterwas the chief spokesman for the disciples at Caesarea Philippi whenJesus asked them, “Who do people say the Son of Man is?”(Matt. 16:13). Peter responded, “You are the Messiah, the Sonof the living God,” an insight given him by God the Father(16:16–17). Jesus promised him, “I tell you that you arePeter [petros], and on this rock [petra] I will build my church, andthe gates of Hades will not overcome it” (16:18). Yet Peteralmost immediately became a “stumbling block” to Jesuswhen he chided Jesus for saying that he must go to Jerusalem andsuffer many things and be killed (16:21–22). Another majorfailure by Peter came with his threefold denial of Jesus after Jesushad warned him, “This very night, before the rooster crows, youwill disown me three times” (Matt. 26:34). Fortunately, therewere tears of repentance, and Peter was forgiven and restored afterJesus’ threefold question (“Do you love me?” [John21:15–19]).

Jesus’death and resurrection, as well as the giving of the Holy Spirit onthe day of Pentecost, had stabilizing effects on Peter. After Jesus’ascension, Peter exercised primary leadership among the otherdisciples during the upper room prayer meetings and the choosing ofthe replacement for Judas (Acts 1). Peter clearly was the publicspokesman for the apostles on the day of Pentecost and a key playerin the establishment of the church in Jerusalem (Acts 2–5), inreceiving the first Samaritan converts (Acts 8:14–25), and inreceiving Cornelius as the first Gentile convert (Acts 10–11).Following Peter’s miraculous deliverance from prison in Acts12, he essentially disappears from recorded history. By the time ofthe Jerusalem council (Acts 15), Peter reappeared briefly, but bythis time he had been replaced by James as the leader of theJerusalem church. Peter apparently continued to live as a missionary(1Cor. 9:5), specifically “to the circumcised”(Gal. 2:7–8), for the rest of his life. Yet Peter was stillhuman, and on one occasion Paul gave him a stinging rebuke (Gal.2:11–21).

Duringhis travels, Peter undoubtedly visited the recipients of his laterletter 1Peter (and possibly 2Peter) in north central AsiaMinor (the regions of “Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia andBithynia” [1Pet. 1:1]), possibly Corinth (1Cor.1:12; 3:22), and, at least by the end of his life, Rome itself.According to tradition, he was put to death by Nero between AD 64 and68, apparently by being crucified upside down (cf. John 21:18–19).Peter’s life is a vivid illustration of the Christian’sfight for faith, God’s gracious provision, and Jesus’intercession on his behalf (“I have prayed for you, Simon, thatyour faith may not fail” [Luke 22:32]).

The NT begins with the claim that Jesus is the “son” or descendant of King David, presupposing the significance of the biblical narrative about the kings of Israel for understanding the gospel (Matt. 1:1, 6; see also Rom. 1:3; 2Tim. 2:8). The epithet also creates an almost immediate conflict with Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1–2), who was given the title “King of the Jews” by the Roman senate in 40 BC, although he was not a Jew. Herod unsuccessfully attempts to kill the infant king, but Jesus finally is executed by the Roman prefect Pontius Pilate as “King of the Jews” (Matt. 27:37 pars.).

Greco-Roman and Jewish Backgrounds

The conflict between the king and the child somewhat parallels a more extensive Greco-Roman motif. Virgil, in his Fourth Bucolic, offers a vision of a golden age to attend the birth of a child king. (Christians in the Middle Ages interpreted his poem as a prophecy of Christ’s birth.) The threat upon Jesus’ life also resembles Herodotus’s account of Cyrus: King Astyages has a dream vision that the magi interpret to be a prophecy that the child of his daughter will eventually rule in his place. He commands Harpagus, his most faithful servant, to take the male child, “adorned for its death,” and kill him. Overcome with emotion, Harpagus pawns the child off to a cowherd, Mitradates, who is instructed to lay the child “in the most desolate part of the mountains.” When Mitradates’s wife sees the beauty of the child, she pleads for his life and devises a plan to switch her stillborn child with Cyrus. They then raise Cyrus under a pseudonym as their own (Herodotus, Hist. 1.107–30). Interestingly, the prophet Isaiah refers to Cyrus as the Lord’s “messiah” or “anointed” (Isa. 45:1), a uniquely positive role for a non-Israelite king. By God’s power, Cyrus will free the exiles (Isa. 45:13).

In the OT, God promises David, the king of Israel, an eternal reign for his “offspring” (2Sam. 7:12–16). After the fall of the Davidic monarchy, the prophets reiterate the promise in visions of God’s future salvation (Isa. 55:3; Hos. 3:5; Amos 9:11; Mic. 4:8; 5:1–5 [cited in Matt. 2:5–6]; Zech. 3:8). By the first century, “son of David” had become a popular messianic title, signifying a warrior who would free the Jews from Roman oppression and establish an everlasting kingdom. Although not viewed as a supernatural being, the Davidic messiah, some claimed, would be without sin, ruling with perfect wisdom, justice, mercy, and power—different from his predecessors. He would restore the ancient tribal divisions and regather the Diaspora, Jews living outside Judea and Galilee. The nations (non-Jews) would pay him homage (see Psalms of Solomon).

Jesus’ Kingship

The popular Jewish emphasis on a violent overthrow of Rome probably explains why in the Gospels Jesus himself does not emphasize his kingship in his ministry, except for the explicit fulfillment of Zechariah’s prophecy of a humble king riding into Jerusalem on a donkey (Matt. 21:1–9 pars.; cf. Zech. 9:9; see also Isa. 62:11). However, following his resurrection and final instructions to his disciples, Jesus ascends to the right hand of the Father (Luke 24:50–51; Acts 1:6–11; 2:33–36), a coronation ceremony foretold in the psalms (Pss. 2; 110). He presently reigns from heaven (Rev. 1:5; cf. Matt. 28:18), but he will return to make his authority explicit on earth, which includes the dispensing of justice (2Thess. 1:5–12). His rule is present, however, in the lives of those who obey him and wherever the Holy Spirit is manifested. Through his ministry, the God of Israel comes near so as to once again exercise sovereign power on behalf of God’s people. For Christians, Jesus alone is Lord and Savior (Phil. 3:20). Paul presents Jesus as the “Savior of all people” (1Tim. 4:10). This title was given to the Roman emperors. (The preamble to a decree by the council of the province of Asia describes Augustus as “the father who gives us happy life; the savior of all mankind.”)

The Western church has largely maintained a distinction between two spheres of authority: political and ecclesiastical. Hosius, bishop of Cordova (AD 296–357), wrote to Emperor Constantius, “For into your hands God has put the kingdom; the affairs of his Church he has committed to us.... We are not permitted to exercise an earthly rule; and you, Sire, are not authorized to burn incense.” Paul affirms the continuing role of government despite the overarching lordship of Jesus Christ, who preferred to speak of the kingdom of God, a restored theocracy that incorporates yet transcends the Davidic covenant (Rom. 13:1–7; cf. John 18:36). But this process does begin a delegitimizing of all contrary claims to authority and will lead to their complete withdrawal. For this reason, the kingdom of God cannot be separated from the political, economic, and religious conflicts taking place in Roman Palestine in the first century and wherever similar conflicts occur today.

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

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

Thefollowing colors have particular significance or symbolic meaning inthe Bible:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In Gen. 3 the serpent entices humankind to sin. Not untilRev. 12:9 are we told explicitly that the serpent is Satan. InEnglish, “Satan” is a name, whereas in the Bible thisentity does not have a name. Rather, he is identified through asystem of descriptive name-calling labels. In Hebrew, satan means“opponent”—in war, an enemy; in court, an accuser.The verb satan means “to be an adversary, to oppose”someone or something. Most commonly, satan refers to human enemies,and so 1Chron. 21:1 simply refers to “an enemy”(not “Satan,” as the NIV reads) who “rose upagainst Israel” (cf. 1Kings 11:14). It is only as “thesatan” (Job 1–2; Zech. 3:1–2; NIV: “Satan”)that we meet the one we know from the NT as “the devil.”

Thewidely held myth of Satan having been an angel who rebelled is notfound in the Bible. Origen (AD 185–254) was the first toallegorize Isa. 14:3–23 and Ezek. 28:1–10 in this way,and Jerome (AD 345–420) the first to translate “theMorning Star” as the name “Lucifer” (cf. Isa.14:12; Rev. 22:16). The Bible tells us nothing of Satan’sorigins.

Inthe OT, “evil spirit” may be a heavenly being sent by God(1Sam. 16:14–23; 18:10; 19:9; cf. 1Kings 22:22–23).The OT engages in extensive rebuke of the superstitions of thesurrounding nations that included belief in demons (Deut. 32:17; Ps.106:37; perhaps Isa. 13:21; cf. Rev. 18:2).

Around200 BC, works falsely attributed to Enoch began to appear, presentingevil and mortality as essential aspects of all physical creatures.Understanding “sons of God” (Gen. 6:1–4) as angels,these books tell of angels marrying women and producing murderousgiants. In response, God imprisoned the fallen angels, caused thegiants to slaughter one another, and cleansed the earth with theflood. The spirits of the giants then reappear as demons havingcontrol of the Gentile nations, appearing to them as gods, worshipedas idols. The book Jubilees (c. 160 BC) introduced a leader of thesedemons and labeled him “Mastema” (“hatred,enmity”).

Pickingup on these ideas, the Qumran literature speaks of many satans andexpands the number of abusive labels used to refer to the ruler ofthe demons—for example, “Belial” (“worthlessone”). In the same way, the LXX uses “slanderer”(diabolos) as a translation of satan. The word satan also was takenover into LXX Greek as a loanword to mean “enemy” or“adversary” (1Kings 11:14). Both satanas anddiabolos are used in the NT.

Jesus’encounter with the devil in the wilderness recalls Adam and Eve’sencounter with the serpent in Eden. The setting, significantly, isnow a wasteland. The second man to walk the earth with no sin claimsthe right to take back the dominion that Adam passed to the serpent.Jesus can have the whole world (without the cross) if only he willsubmit to the devil’s rule (Luke 4:5–7). Jesus rejectsthe offer. Later, he sees Satan’s fall from heaven to earth(Luke 10:18; cf. Rev. 12:5–12). Whereas once the devil hadaccess to God’s courtroom, now his case is lost. His onlyrecourse is murderous persecution. Between the ascension of the Sonof Man (Acts 1:9) and the final judgment, this is understood to bethe experience of Christ’s people (Dan. 7:25; Rev. 12:17; cf.1Pet.5:8).

Whereasthe OT provides sparse information about Satan and his angels/demons,the NT opens with an intensity of activity. Demons are also called“evil spirits,” and they are associated with physicalillness, madness, and fortune-telling. In Acts 17:22 Paul describeshis pagan Athenian listeners as “demon-fearers” (NIV:“religious”). Jesus’ miracles demonstrate hislordship over Satan’s regime as the demons flee in terrorbefore him (Mark 1:23–26; 5:1–15). According to Paul,Christians are temples of the Holy Spirit (1Cor. 6:19), andJohn urges believers to “test the spirits to see whether theyare from God” (1John 4:1), assuring them that they neednot fear Satan or his forces, “because the one who is in you isgreater than the one who is in the world” (1John 4:4). Onjudgment day Satan will be cast into the lake of fire (Rev. 20:14–15)along with all of God’s enemies.

In Gen. 3 the serpent entices humankind to sin. Not untilRev. 12:9 are we told explicitly that the serpent is Satan. InEnglish, “Satan” is a name, whereas in the Bible thisentity does not have a name. Rather, he is identified through asystem of descriptive name-calling labels. In Hebrew, satan means“opponent”—in war, an enemy; in court, an accuser.The verb satan means “to be an adversary, to oppose”someone or something. Most commonly, satan refers to human enemies,and so 1Chron. 21:1 simply refers to “an enemy”(not “Satan,” as the NIV reads) who “rose upagainst Israel” (cf. 1Kings 11:14). It is only as “thesatan” (Job 1–2; Zech. 3:1–2; NIV: “Satan”)that we meet the one we know from the NT as “the devil.”

Thewidely held myth of Satan having been an angel who rebelled is notfound in the Bible. Origen (AD 185–254) was the first toallegorize Isa. 14:3–23 and Ezek. 28:1–10 in this way,and Jerome (AD 345–420) the first to translate “theMorning Star” as the name “Lucifer” (cf. Isa.14:12; Rev. 22:16). The Bible tells us nothing of Satan’sorigins.

Inthe OT, “evil spirit” may be a heavenly being sent by God(1Sam. 16:14–23; 18:10; 19:9; cf. 1Kings 22:22–23).The OT engages in extensive rebuke of the superstitions of thesurrounding nations that included belief in demons (Deut. 32:17; Ps.106:37; perhaps Isa. 13:21; cf. Rev. 18:2).

Around200 BC, works falsely attributed to Enoch began to appear, presentingevil and mortality as essential aspects of all physical creatures.Understanding “sons of God” (Gen. 6:1–4) as angels,these books tell of angels marrying women and producing murderousgiants. In response, God imprisoned the fallen angels, caused thegiants to slaughter one another, and cleansed the earth with theflood. The spirits of the giants then reappear as demons havingcontrol of the Gentile nations, appearing to them as gods, worshipedas idols. The book Jubilees (c. 160 BC) introduced a leader of thesedemons and labeled him “Mastema” (“hatred,enmity”).

Pickingup on these ideas, the Qumran literature speaks of many satans andexpands the number of abusive labels used to refer to the ruler ofthe demons—for example, “Belial” (“worthlessone”). In the same way, the LXX uses “slanderer”(diabolos) as a translation of satan. The word satan also was takenover into LXX Greek as a loanword to mean “enemy” or“adversary” (1Kings 11:14). Both satanas anddiabolos are used in the NT.

Jesus’encounter with the devil in the wilderness recalls Adam and Eve’sencounter with the serpent in Eden. The setting, significantly, isnow a wasteland. The second man to walk the earth with no sin claimsthe right to take back the dominion that Adam passed to the serpent.Jesus can have the whole world (without the cross) if only he willsubmit to the devil’s rule (Luke 4:5–7). Jesus rejectsthe offer. Later, he sees Satan’s fall from heaven to earth(Luke 10:18; cf. Rev. 12:5–12). Whereas once the devil hadaccess to God’s courtroom, now his case is lost. His onlyrecourse is murderous persecution. Between the ascension of the Sonof Man (Acts 1:9) and the final judgment, this is understood to bethe experience of Christ’s people (Dan. 7:25; Rev. 12:17; cf.1Pet.5:8).

Whereasthe OT provides sparse information about Satan and his angels/demons,the NT opens with an intensity of activity. Demons are also called“evil spirits,” and they are associated with physicalillness, madness, and fortune-telling. In Acts 17:22 Paul describeshis pagan Athenian listeners as “demon-fearers” (NIV:“religious”). Jesus’ miracles demonstrate hislordship over Satan’s regime as the demons flee in terrorbefore him (Mark 1:23–26; 5:1–15). According to Paul,Christians are temples of the Holy Spirit (1Cor. 6:19), andJohn urges believers to “test the spirits to see whether theyare from God” (1John 4:1), assuring them that they neednot fear Satan or his forces, “because the one who is in you isgreater than the one who is in the world” (1John 4:4). Onjudgment day Satan will be cast into the lake of fire (Rev. 20:14–15)along with all of God’s enemies.

In Gen. 3 the serpent entices humankind to sin. Not untilRev. 12:9 are we told explicitly that the serpent is Satan. InEnglish, “Satan” is a name, whereas in the Bible thisentity does not have a name. Rather, he is identified through asystem of descriptive name-calling labels. In Hebrew, satan means“opponent”—in war, an enemy; in court, an accuser.The verb satan means “to be an adversary, to oppose”someone or something. Most commonly, satan refers to human enemies,and so 1Chron. 21:1 simply refers to “an enemy”(not “Satan,” as the NIV reads) who “rose upagainst Israel” (cf. 1Kings 11:14). It is only as “thesatan” (Job 1–2; Zech. 3:1–2; NIV: “Satan”)that we meet the one we know from the NT as “the devil.”

Thewidely held myth of Satan having been an angel who rebelled is notfound in the Bible. Origen (AD 185–254) was the first toallegorize Isa. 14:3–23 and Ezek. 28:1–10 in this way,and Jerome (AD 345–420) the first to translate “theMorning Star” as the name “Lucifer” (cf. Isa.14:12; Rev. 22:16). The Bible tells us nothing of Satan’sorigins.

Inthe OT, “evil spirit” may be a heavenly being sent by God(1Sam. 16:14–23; 18:10; 19:9; cf. 1Kings 22:22–23).The OT engages in extensive rebuke of the superstitions of thesurrounding nations that included belief in demons (Deut. 32:17; Ps.106:37; perhaps Isa. 13:21; cf. Rev. 18:2).

Around200 BC, works falsely attributed to Enoch began to appear, presentingevil and mortality as essential aspects of all physical creatures.Understanding “sons of God” (Gen. 6:1–4) as angels,these books tell of angels marrying women and producing murderousgiants. In response, God imprisoned the fallen angels, caused thegiants to slaughter one another, and cleansed the earth with theflood. The spirits of the giants then reappear as demons havingcontrol of the Gentile nations, appearing to them as gods, worshipedas idols. The book Jubilees (c. 160 BC) introduced a leader of thesedemons and labeled him “Mastema” (“hatred,enmity”).

Pickingup on these ideas, the Qumran literature speaks of many satans andexpands the number of abusive labels used to refer to the ruler ofthe demons—for example, “Belial” (“worthlessone”). In the same way, the LXX uses “slanderer”(diabolos) as a translation of satan. The word satan also was takenover into LXX Greek as a loanword to mean “enemy” or“adversary” (1Kings 11:14). Both satanas anddiabolos are used in the NT.

Jesus’encounter with the devil in the wilderness recalls Adam and Eve’sencounter with the serpent in Eden. The setting, significantly, isnow a wasteland. The second man to walk the earth with no sin claimsthe right to take back the dominion that Adam passed to the serpent.Jesus can have the whole world (without the cross) if only he willsubmit to the devil’s rule (Luke 4:5–7). Jesus rejectsthe offer. Later, he sees Satan’s fall from heaven to earth(Luke 10:18; cf. Rev. 12:5–12). Whereas once the devil hadaccess to God’s courtroom, now his case is lost. His onlyrecourse is murderous persecution. Between the ascension of the Sonof Man (Acts 1:9) and the final judgment, this is understood to bethe experience of Christ’s people (Dan. 7:25; Rev. 12:17; cf.1Pet.5:8).

Whereasthe OT provides sparse information about Satan and his angels/demons,the NT opens with an intensity of activity. Demons are also called“evil spirits,” and they are associated with physicalillness, madness, and fortune-telling. In Acts 17:22 Paul describeshis pagan Athenian listeners as “demon-fearers” (NIV:“religious”). Jesus’ miracles demonstrate hislordship over Satan’s regime as the demons flee in terrorbefore him (Mark 1:23–26; 5:1–15). According to Paul,Christians are temples of the Holy Spirit (1Cor. 6:19), andJohn urges believers to “test the spirits to see whether theyare from God” (1John 4:1), assuring them that they neednot fear Satan or his forces, “because the one who is in you isgreater than the one who is in the world” (1John 4:4). Onjudgment day Satan will be cast into the lake of fire (Rev. 20:14–15)along with all of God’s enemies.

The Greek term for “disciple,” mathētēs,means “student.” Like other rabbis and religious figuresof the time, Jesus taught a group of such students (Matt. 9:14;22:16; Mark 2:16; John 1:35; 4:1). The forms of address that Jesus’disciples used for him reflect the nature of the relationship:“rabbi” (Mark 9:5), “teacher” (Mark 9:38),and “master” (Luke 5:5). In addition to receivinginstruction from Jesus, his disciples took care of his physical needs(Matt. 21:1; John 4:8), ate with him (Matt. 9:10; 26:18), performedexorcisms and healings (Matt. 10:1; Luke 10:17), baptized (John 4:2),controlled access to Jesus (Matt. 19:13; John 12:21), and traveledwith him (Luke 8:1; John 2:12). On one occasion Jesus visited thehouse of Peter and healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt. 8:14),which suggests that although the Gospels do not generally depict theprivate lives of Jesus or his disciples apart from their publicministry, the relationship among these men did not prevent thedisciples from maintaining their own homes, families, and, probably,occupations.

Inthe Gospels Jesus is depicted with variously sized groups ofdisciples and followers. A prominent tradition in the Gospelsindicates that there was an inner group of twelve (Matt. 10:1; 26:20;Mark 3:14; 4:10; 6:7; John 6:70), each of whom is known by name. Thisis the group most traditionally understood as “the disciples”of Jesus. As an authority, the group of twelve persisted beyond theascension of Jesus (Acts 6:2). Following the death of Judas Iscariot,Matthias was chosen to take his place among the Twelve (Acts 1:26).Other passages specify a group of seventy or seventy-two (Luke 10:1,16), and often the number of disciples is indeterminate. Severalpassages name disciples beyond the Twelve (Matt. 27:57; Luke 24:18;Acts 9:10; 9:36; 16:1; 21:16), and some later authors attempted tolist the names of the seventy by drawing names from the book of Acts,the Epistles, and other early Christian traditions (e.g., thethirteenth-century Syriac compilation The Book of the Bee). The bookof Acts often refers to any follower of Christ as “disciple,”including those in cities throughout the Roman Empire.

TheGospels tend to present Jesus as a charismatic teacher who couldattract adherents with little overt persuasion. The calling ofseveral disciples is narrated, including that of the brothers SimonPeter and Andrew, the brothers James and John the sons of Zebedee(Mark 1:16–20; John 1:40–41), Philip and Nathanael (John1:44–45), and Matthew/Levi (Mark 2:13–17 pars.). TheGospel of John presents Andrew as a former disciple of John theBaptist.

TheTwelve

Eachof the Synoptic Gospels has a list of the Twelve (Matt. 10:1–4;Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16; cf. the list of eleven inActs 1:13), and the Gospel of John mentions “the Twelve”several times without providing a list. With some slightharmonizations, it is possible to come up with a single list oftwelve disciples based on the three Synoptic lists.

(1)Allthree Synoptic Gospels agree in placing Simon Peter first in thelist. (2)His brother Andrew is second, though Mark has placedAndrew farther down the list and does not identify him as Peter’sbrother. (3)James the son of Zebedee and (4)John thebrother of James are next. Mark adds that the two were also named“Boanerges,” meaning “sons of thunder.” Theplacement of Peter, James, and John at the head of the listcorresponds with the prominence of these three disciples in the storyof Jesus’ arrest at Gethsemane, where these three were present(Matt. 26:37// Mark 14:33). Perhaps the order of Mark’slist reflects the prestige of these three disciples, with Matthew andLuke bringing Andrew to the head of the list not because of anyparticular importance but so that he is listed with his brotherPeter.

Thelists continue with (5)Philip, (6)Bartholomew, and(7)Matthew, further identified in Matt. 10:3 as a “taxcollector.” The calling of Matthew is narrated in Matt. 9:9–13and also in Mark 2:13–17; Luke 5:27–32, where Matthew iscalled “Levi.” (8)Thomas is next (Matt. 10:3 listsThomas before Matthew; in John 20:24 he is also called “Didymus”),followed by (9)James the son of Alphaeus (Mark 2:14 also callsLevi “son of Alphaeus”), so named to avoid confusion withJames the son of Zebedee. (10)Simon the Cananaean (Matt. 10:4;Mark 3:18 NRSV) or Zealot (Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13) is so designated toavoid confusion with Simon Peter. The precise meaning of the term“Cananaean” is uncertain (see Cananaean). (11)Thaddaeus(who precedes Simon the Cananaean in Matthew and Mark) probablyshould be identified with the eleventh disciple in Luke’s list,Judas the son of James. The names of Thaddaeus and Judas son of Jamesrepresent the greatest single discrepancy among the three lists, butit may be mitigated somewhat by the fact that some manuscriptsidentify “Thaddaeus” as a surname (though they give thisdisciple’s other name as “Lebbaeus,” not “Judas”).All three lists agree in listing (12)Judas Iscariot as the lastdisciple in the list, and all note that he betrayed Jesus or became atraitor. The fact that Judas Iscariot bears a second name(“Iscariot”) may suggest that there was another Judasamong the Twelve from whom it was necessary to distinguish him, as inthe case of the two Simons and the two Jameses. This observationlends some weight to the notion that Thaddaeus was also named“Judas.”

TheDisciples as Apostles

Atvarious points in his ministry Jesus sent out his disciples to preachand perform miracles, hence they are also referred to as “apostles”(i.e., emissaries). The connection between these two terms is madeclear in Luke 6:13: “When morning came, he called his disciplesto him and chose twelve of them, whom he also designated apostles.”In the NT Epistles the title “apostle” is applied toseveral individuals who were not among Jesus’ twelve disciples,most notably Paul. In sum, both “disciple” and “apostle”have narrow and broad meanings in the NT, though there is substantialcontinuity between “the Twelve” disciples or apostles ofJesus and the narrow definition of “apostle” in the earlychapters of Acts.

TheLater Careers of the Disciples

Afterhis resurrection, Jesus told his disciples (“the apostles hehad chosen” [Acts 1:2]) that they would be his witnesses “inJerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of theearth” (Acts 1:8). Stories about the subsequent careers of theTwelve exist in both the NT and other early Christian sources. Thefirst half of Acts largely focuses on the career of Simon Peter,before attention shifts to the career of Paul in the eastern RomanEmpire. Extracanonical books and local legends trace the latercareers of Jesus’ twelve disciples, placing them in Rome(Peter), Scythia (Andrew), Spain (James), Ephesus (John), Phrygia(Philip), Armenia (Bartholomew and Thaddaeus), India (Thomas),Ethiopia (Matthew), and North Africa (Simon the Cananaean). Piouslocal traditions attribute martyrdom to a number of the Twelve,though in the NT we know only of the deaths of Judas Iscariot (Matt.27:3–10; Acts 1:16–20) and James the son of Zebedee (Acts12:1–2).

Eschatology is the study of last things. The word “eschatology” comes from the Greek word eschatos, meaning “last.” From this same Greek word is derived the term “eschaton,” which is sometimes used to refer to the end times.

Eschatology deals with such future events as the end of the world, Jesus’ return, the resurrection, the final judgment, and the afterlife in heaven or hell. The tribulation and the millennium also belong to eschatology, but their timing and nature vary with different views. Although from one perspective human history entered its final phase in NT times so that people today are already living in the “last days,” eschatology normally focuses on the unfulfilled prophecies that remain still in the future for present-day believers.

Eschatology deals with questions regarding the future. Every religion and philosophy of life has offered answers to these questions. Plato taught about the immortality of the soul. Buddhism has its nirvana, Islam its sensual paradise, and Native Americans their happy hunting grounds. The belief that the soul survives death is widely held. Even atheists and materialists have their own views of eschatology. Yet only in Christianity does eschatology become the crown and capstone of everything else that God has been doing throughout history, when he will be perfectly glorified, Christ completely victorious, the power of sin entirely overcome, and the people of God given a complete salvation.

Yet it is difficult to find a topic on which Christians are more divided. Frequently, people studying eschatology fall into one of two opposite traps: unwarranted dogmatism or simple avoidance. Yet eschatology should be a source of comfort and hope to believers as well as an ongoing reminder of the lateness and urgency of the hour. Consequently, eschatology deserves most careful attention and should create a sense of excitement and anticipation.

Reasons for Controversy

Eschatology is by no means a simple discipline. The sheer magnitude of this topic is a significant challenge involving hundreds of different unfulfilled prophecies from virtually every book of the Bible. Difficulties in interpreting these prophecies with their figures of speech, apocalyptic language, and complicated symbolism create still greater complications. Then there is the challenge of organizing these individual prophecies together into a coherent timeline when each will be fulfilled. Discerning the period of fulfillment for some prophecies is relatively clear and easy, but for others it is much less certain.

Even the question of how many periods of future time remain in God’s timetable has often been the source of considerable debate. For example, will there be a future period of tribulation, or were these prophecies already fulfilled in AD 70, or perhaps more generally throughout church history, with its countless martyrs? Similar questions have been raised about the millennium: is this to be understood in a still future sense, as premillennialists assert, or is it already in the process of being fulfilled, as amillennialists and postmillennialists claim? The fact that there is no common agreement even on these fundamental questions virtually guarantees that believers will remain divided on this issue.

Then too there is the final step of trying to assign specific unfulfilled prophecies into this grid of prophetic time slots. For example, is the prophecy “The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox” (Isa. 65:25) a symbolic picture of God’s blessings in this present church age, in a future millennium, or in eternity itself? The vast majority of these unfulfilled prophecies contain few clues regarding the precise time of their fulfillment, and interpreters often are left with little to guide them. We should not be surprised that eschatology leaves believers more divided than do other areas of theology.

Jesus’ Return and the Tribulation

The fact of Jesus’ return is clear. When Jesus was taken up from his apostles at the end of his earthly ministry, two angels promised them, “This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11). Today believers look forward to Jesus’ second coming, as “the blessed hope” (Titus 2:13). The common understanding has always been that this return will be personal, visible, and bodily—just as real as his first coming two thousand yearsago.

Christians, however, have been divided over the timing of Jesus’ return and the tribulation. Here there are five interrelated questions.

1.The first question is whether Jesus’ return is a single event or will occur in two stages. Dispensationalists distinguish two phases to Jesus’ return: a secret rapture that removes the church from a period of intense tribulation involving Israel here on earth, and then a later public second coming in judgment at the end of the tribulation, when he will establish his kingdom. A number of recent “left behind” books and movies have popularized this approach. Yet this two-stage model is difficult to document in Scripture, and many understand Scripture to describe Jesus’ return as a single unified event.

2.How one answers this first question has implications for the second question of the timing of Jesus’ return relative to the tribulation. Here there are three popular options regarding the timing of Jesus’ return: pretribulational (before the tribulation), midtribulational (in the midst of the tribulation), and posttribulational (after the tribulation). Yet if Jesus’ return is pretribulational or midtribulational, logic would require that there be two phases to Jesus’ return: a secret rapture either before the tribulation (for pretribulationalism) or in the middle of it (for midtribulationalism), and then a separate public return at the conclusion of the tribulation to establish his kingdom. Thus, a two-stage return of Jesus goes hand in hand with pretribulationalism and midtribulationalism, and a single return with posttribulationalism.

3.A third question focuses on the nature of the tribulation period. There are three main views. Pretribulationalists assume that the tribulation will be a period (usually seven years) of great suffering such as this world has never seen. Midtribulationalists believe that Jesus will return after three and a half years of less intense tribulation, followed by a considerably more intense second period of three and a half years of wrath, from which believers will be spared. Posttribulationalists see this tribulation as the suffering and persecution of Christians at various times and places around the world, with possibly some intensification in the final days. Consequently, how one understands the intensity of the tribulation is another factor affecting the choice of one tribulational view or another.

4.A fourth interrelated question involves whether one believes that Jesus may return suddenly and unexpectedly at any moment (Matt. 24:42) or whether there are still unfulfilled prophecies that must take place first (initially including at least Peter’s death [John 21:19] and the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem). Pretribulationalists pride themselves on how their view of a secret rapture allows for Jesus to return imminently without any intervening signs or other warnings. Midtribulationalists believe that the church will need to experience three and a half years of moderate tribulation, so there is less emphasis on an imminent return (although one could argue that the first period of tribulation is potentially more ambiguous in nature). Posttribulationalists are divided into two groups. Many have held that the tribulation will be a period of significant tribulation, so typically they have downplayed the idea of imminence. However, other posttribulationalists (sometimes called “pasttribulationalists” or “imminent posttribulationalists”) assume that the tribulation described in Scripture may already be fulfilled either at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 or more generally throughout church history, and therefore Jesus may return at any time.

5.The fifth question focuses on how literally or figuratively one should interpret the two key passages of Scripture related to the nature of the tribulation: the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24 pars.) and Rev. 6–19. Much of the Olivet Discourse focuses on the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, and many have understood at least parts of Revelation as being fulfilled historically either in John’s own day or during church history. The more one assumes that at least portions of these prophecies were already fulfilled, the less one awaits a future fulfillment. A more literal approach to these prophecies will predispose one toward pretribulationalism or possibly midtribulationalism, and a more figurative approach toward posttribulationalism.

Hyperpreterism, or consistent preterism, has emerged in the last few decades with a still different approach to the timing of Jesus’ return. The driving force behind this movement is Jesus’ apparent promise to return within a generation of his death (Matt. 24:34). Consequently, hyperpreterism has assumed that all the future prophecies in the NT must have been fulfilled by the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, including Jesus’ return, the bodily resurrection, the final judgment, and the new heaven and new earth. The bottom line is that in order to take literally Jesus’ promise to return within a generation, everything else in eschatology needs to be reinterpreted as having been fulfilled in one way or another within that same generation. A more moderate preterism sees many, but not all, of these eschatological events fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Jesus returned as the Son of Man in judgment against Israel in these first-century events, but the final judgment of all people and the new heaven and new earth await his second coming.

The Resurrection and the Final Judgment

The bodily resurrection takes place at the time of Jesus’ return. Although many other religions and philosophies have assumed the immortality of the soul, whereby the nonmaterial part of human nature survives death, Christianity is distinctive in its strong commitment to the idea of a bodily resurrection. Death marks the separation of the body from the soul and the time when believers are immediately ushered into God’s presence (Eccles. 12:7). Thus, Jesus was able to promise the thief on the cross, “Today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43). However, people do not immediately receive new resurrection bodies at the time of death, but must wait until the time of Jesus’ return, when “the dead in Christ will rise first” (1Thess. 4:16). This bodily resurrection is the precursor to the final judgment of the saved and the lost, when “all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come out—those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil will rise to be condemned” (John 5:28–29). At that time, Christ “will judge the living and the dead” (2Tim.4:1).

This theme of judgment is foundational to Christianity, although Christians remain divided about the exact number and character of these judgments. Yet the time will come when all people will be judged, both “the living and the dead” (Acts 10:42), when “we will all stand before God’s judgment seat” (Rom. 14:10), and “each of us will give an account of ourselves to God” (14:12). God himself will be the judge, and Christ will be given a special place in presiding over the final judgment and separate those who truly belong to him from those who do not. Even though this judgment will be “according to what they have done” (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6; Rev. 22:12), these deeds are simply an outward demonstration of whether a living faith is present, so there is no contradiction between justification by faith and the necessary place for a changed life in the believer. Yet, as Jesus warns, some will be surprised: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 7:21). God’s judgment will be both just and inescapable.

Christians remain divided about the number of resurrections. Premillennialists who are also pretribulationalists or midtribulationalists would conclude that there is a minimum of a resurrection of believers at the time of the rapture, when Jesus returns for his church; another resurrection when Jesus returns at the end of the tribulation for believers who came to faith and died during the tribulation; as well as another resurrection at the end of the millennium for “the rest of the dead” (Rev. 20:5). Premillennialists who are also posttribulationalists would conclude that there are as few as two resurrections: one at Jesus’ return and another at the end of the millennium. An amillennialist or a postmillennialist would assume that there may be only a single bodily resurrection when Jesus returns and establishes his kingdom.

There is one other aspect that completes this theme: God’s judgment also includes the destruction of the devil in the lake of fire (Rev. 20:10). Someday sin and evil will be forever removed from God’s creation.

The Millennium

The millennium is a thousand-year reign of Christ described most clearly in Rev. 20. Again, there are sharp differences of opinion regarding this topic.

Premillennialists believe that Jesus’ return will be “pre” (before) the millennium, and that this millennial kingdom will be a golden age of unprecedented glory and splendor. Dispensational premillennialists, with their emphasis on the distinction between Israel and the church, have focused on the fulfillment of all the remaining OT prophecies made to Israel. Historic premillennialists, on the other hand, lack this sharp distinction between Israel and the church and see themselves as being in continuity with the view of a future reign of Christ on earth found throughout church history. In recent years, premillennialism has become the leading view in American Christianity.

Postmillennialists believe that God will build his church for “a thousand years” and then Jesus will return “post” (after) this millennium. The millennium here is comparable to a silver age involving significant and unprecedented advances of the gospel throughout the world. Postmillennialists remain divided about how literal this thousand-year period might be and whether this period has already begun or not. Postmillennialism has had a significant following throughout most of church history but more recently has become a minority view.

Amillennialists believe in a different kind of millennium. Here there are two different varieties. Some believe that those reigning with Christ in Rev. 20 are simply believers living here in this present life experiencing the intimacy of Christ’s presence in their daily lives. Others see this period as involving departed believers, who are currently reigning with Christ in the intermediate state between death and his return. The millennium here is neither the golden age of the premillennialist nor the silver age of the postmillennialist; it is simply life today.

Again there are predisposing factors. Those who place more weight on potentially unfulfilled OT prophecies will tend to be premillennial, whereas those who place more weight on the words of Jesus and Paul will tend to be amillennial or possibly postmillennial. Those who see more of a distinction between Israel and the church will tend to be dispensational premillennialists, whereas those who emphasize the unity among God’s people throughout redemptive history will choose one of the other alternatives. Those who tend toward a more literal approach to interpreting Scripture will tend to be premillennialists, whereas those who give more weight to symbolic and figurative language will choose one of the other options. Those who tend to be more pessimistic about the future and believe that things are getting worse will tend to be premillennialists, whereas those who are more optimistic about what God is doing in this world and who emphasize the transforming power of the gospel will tend to be postmillennialists. One’s eschatological convictions are the logical outgrowth of many other earlier commitments and persuasions.

Each of these millennial views also has implications for a number of other topics: the nature and intensity of Satan’s binding in Rev. 20, the number of different resurrections, and the number of different judgments. The ultimate question, again, is which approach does the best job of putting together all the prophecies of Scripture and consequently is most faithful to God’s word.

Heaven and Hell

God’s judgment inevitably leads either to final and permanent torment in hell or to untold blessings in the new heaven and new earth (Matt. 25:46).

The ultimate hope of believers involves the bodily resurrection and a new earth to go along with these glorified bodies. The glad time will come when God “will wipe every tear from their eyes” and “there will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain” (Rev. 21:4). There will be the joys of physical bodies healed and restored, seeing friends and loved ones, but the greatest joy of all will be seeing the Lord himself in all his glory and majesty.

Hell will be the very opposite, experienced by those who deliberately rejected and avoided God during their earthly lives. They will find themselves rejected by God and cut off from his presence (and all the blessings that go along with his presence). Although there are various debates about how literal or figurative some of the biblical descriptions of hell are in terms of unquenchable fire and worms that do not die (Mark 9:48), it seems safe to say that hell will be the greatest of all possible tragedies and far worse than any of these descriptions suggest.

Annihilationism or conditional immortality, with its assumption that the souls of the lost will cease to exist at some point after death, represents an attempt to soften the explicit teachings of Scripture. Universalism—the belief that ultimately everyone will be saved—is another human strategy to avoid the clear teaching of Scripture. Ultimately, there is a heaven, and there is a hell, and human choices do make a difference for time and eternity.

The Benefits of Eschatology

Eschatology should give balance and perspective to life so that the affairs and accomplishments of this present life do not take on an inappropriate importance. Whenever people are caught up with materialism and a this-worldly perspective on life or become complacent about their lack of spiritual growth or the spiritual condition of others, the underlying cause is often a lack of attention to eschatology. Although many difficult and controversial questions surround the nature and timing of the return of Jesus Christ, Scripture is clear about the fact of his return and the final judgment. A new life with Christ that will last for all eternity is described in Scripture as the greatest of all possible blessings. At the same time, a life apart from God both in this life and in the life to come is described as the greatest possible tragedy in life. Perhaps even the spiritual deception and confusion around us, whereby many “will abandon the faith” (1Tim. 4:1) and “not put up with sound doctrine” (2Tim. 4:3), are a sign of the lateness of the hour. A proper appreciation of eschatology can be a means that God uses to change people’s lives.

Eschatology is the study of last things. The word “eschatology” comes from the Greek word eschatos, meaning “last.” From this same Greek word is derived the term “eschaton,” which is sometimes used to refer to the end times.

Eschatology deals with such future events as the end of the world, Jesus’ return, the resurrection, the final judgment, and the afterlife in heaven or hell. The tribulation and the millennium also belong to eschatology, but their timing and nature vary with different views. Although from one perspective human history entered its final phase in NT times so that people today are already living in the “last days,” eschatology normally focuses on the unfulfilled prophecies that remain still in the future for present-day believers.

Eschatology deals with questions regarding the future. Every religion and philosophy of life has offered answers to these questions. Plato taught about the immortality of the soul. Buddhism has its nirvana, Islam its sensual paradise, and Native Americans their happy hunting grounds. The belief that the soul survives death is widely held. Even atheists and materialists have their own views of eschatology. Yet only in Christianity does eschatology become the crown and capstone of everything else that God has been doing throughout history, when he will be perfectly glorified, Christ completely victorious, the power of sin entirely overcome, and the people of God given a complete salvation.

Yet it is difficult to find a topic on which Christians are more divided. Frequently, people studying eschatology fall into one of two opposite traps: unwarranted dogmatism or simple avoidance. Yet eschatology should be a source of comfort and hope to believers as well as an ongoing reminder of the lateness and urgency of the hour. Consequently, eschatology deserves most careful attention and should create a sense of excitement and anticipation.

Reasons for Controversy

Eschatology is by no means a simple discipline. The sheer magnitude of this topic is a significant challenge involving hundreds of different unfulfilled prophecies from virtually every book of the Bible. Difficulties in interpreting these prophecies with their figures of speech, apocalyptic language, and complicated symbolism create still greater complications. Then there is the challenge of organizing these individual prophecies together into a coherent timeline when each will be fulfilled. Discerning the period of fulfillment for some prophecies is relatively clear and easy, but for others it is much less certain.

Even the question of how many periods of future time remain in God’s timetable has often been the source of considerable debate. For example, will there be a future period of tribulation, or were these prophecies already fulfilled in AD 70, or perhaps more generally throughout church history, with its countless martyrs? Similar questions have been raised about the millennium: is this to be understood in a still future sense, as premillennialists assert, or is it already in the process of being fulfilled, as amillennialists and postmillennialists claim? The fact that there is no common agreement even on these fundamental questions virtually guarantees that believers will remain divided on this issue.

Then too there is the final step of trying to assign specific unfulfilled prophecies into this grid of prophetic time slots. For example, is the prophecy “The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox” (Isa. 65:25) a symbolic picture of God’s blessings in this present church age, in a future millennium, or in eternity itself? The vast majority of these unfulfilled prophecies contain few clues regarding the precise time of their fulfillment, and interpreters often are left with little to guide them. We should not be surprised that eschatology leaves believers more divided than do other areas of theology.

Jesus’ Return and the Tribulation

The fact of Jesus’ return is clear. When Jesus was taken up from his apostles at the end of his earthly ministry, two angels promised them, “This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11). Today believers look forward to Jesus’ second coming, as “the blessed hope” (Titus 2:13). The common understanding has always been that this return will be personal, visible, and bodily—just as real as his first coming two thousand yearsago.

Christians, however, have been divided over the timing of Jesus’ return and the tribulation. Here there are five interrelated questions.

1.The first question is whether Jesus’ return is a single event or will occur in two stages. Dispensationalists distinguish two phases to Jesus’ return: a secret rapture that removes the church from a period of intense tribulation involving Israel here on earth, and then a later public second coming in judgment at the end of the tribulation, when he will establish his kingdom. A number of recent “left behind” books and movies have popularized this approach. Yet this two-stage model is difficult to document in Scripture, and many understand Scripture to describe Jesus’ return as a single unified event.

2.How one answers this first question has implications for the second question of the timing of Jesus’ return relative to the tribulation. Here there are three popular options regarding the timing of Jesus’ return: pretribulational (before the tribulation), midtribulational (in the midst of the tribulation), and posttribulational (after the tribulation). Yet if Jesus’ return is pretribulational or midtribulational, logic would require that there be two phases to Jesus’ return: a secret rapture either before the tribulation (for pretribulationalism) or in the middle of it (for midtribulationalism), and then a separate public return at the conclusion of the tribulation to establish his kingdom. Thus, a two-stage return of Jesus goes hand in hand with pretribulationalism and midtribulationalism, and a single return with posttribulationalism.

3.A third question focuses on the nature of the tribulation period. There are three main views. Pretribulationalists assume that the tribulation will be a period (usually seven years) of great suffering such as this world has never seen. Midtribulationalists believe that Jesus will return after three and a half years of less intense tribulation, followed by a considerably more intense second period of three and a half years of wrath, from which believers will be spared. Posttribulationalists see this tribulation as the suffering and persecution of Christians at various times and places around the world, with possibly some intensification in the final days. Consequently, how one understands the intensity of the tribulation is another factor affecting the choice of one tribulational view or another.

4.A fourth interrelated question involves whether one believes that Jesus may return suddenly and unexpectedly at any moment (Matt. 24:42) or whether there are still unfulfilled prophecies that must take place first (initially including at least Peter’s death [John 21:19] and the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem). Pretribulationalists pride themselves on how their view of a secret rapture allows for Jesus to return imminently without any intervening signs or other warnings. Midtribulationalists believe that the church will need to experience three and a half years of moderate tribulation, so there is less emphasis on an imminent return (although one could argue that the first period of tribulation is potentially more ambiguous in nature). Posttribulationalists are divided into two groups. Many have held that the tribulation will be a period of significant tribulation, so typically they have downplayed the idea of imminence. However, other posttribulationalists (sometimes called “pasttribulationalists” or “imminent posttribulationalists”) assume that the tribulation described in Scripture may already be fulfilled either at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 or more generally throughout church history, and therefore Jesus may return at any time.

5.The fifth question focuses on how literally or figuratively one should interpret the two key passages of Scripture related to the nature of the tribulation: the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24 pars.) and Rev. 6–19. Much of the Olivet Discourse focuses on the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, and many have understood at least parts of Revelation as being fulfilled historically either in John’s own day or during church history. The more one assumes that at least portions of these prophecies were already fulfilled, the less one awaits a future fulfillment. A more literal approach to these prophecies will predispose one toward pretribulationalism or possibly midtribulationalism, and a more figurative approach toward posttribulationalism.

Hyperpreterism, or consistent preterism, has emerged in the last few decades with a still different approach to the timing of Jesus’ return. The driving force behind this movement is Jesus’ apparent promise to return within a generation of his death (Matt. 24:34). Consequently, hyperpreterism has assumed that all the future prophecies in the NT must have been fulfilled by the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, including Jesus’ return, the bodily resurrection, the final judgment, and the new heaven and new earth. The bottom line is that in order to take literally Jesus’ promise to return within a generation, everything else in eschatology needs to be reinterpreted as having been fulfilled in one way or another within that same generation. A more moderate preterism sees many, but not all, of these eschatological events fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Jesus returned as the Son of Man in judgment against Israel in these first-century events, but the final judgment of all people and the new heaven and new earth await his second coming.

The Resurrection and the Final Judgment

The bodily resurrection takes place at the time of Jesus’ return. Although many other religions and philosophies have assumed the immortality of the soul, whereby the nonmaterial part of human nature survives death, Christianity is distinctive in its strong commitment to the idea of a bodily resurrection. Death marks the separation of the body from the soul and the time when believers are immediately ushered into God’s presence (Eccles. 12:7). Thus, Jesus was able to promise the thief on the cross, “Today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43). However, people do not immediately receive new resurrection bodies at the time of death, but must wait until the time of Jesus’ return, when “the dead in Christ will rise first” (1Thess. 4:16). This bodily resurrection is the precursor to the final judgment of the saved and the lost, when “all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come out—those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil will rise to be condemned” (John 5:28–29). At that time, Christ “will judge the living and the dead” (2Tim.4:1).

This theme of judgment is foundational to Christianity, although Christians remain divided about the exact number and character of these judgments. Yet the time will come when all people will be judged, both “the living and the dead” (Acts 10:42), when “we will all stand before God’s judgment seat” (Rom. 14:10), and “each of us will give an account of ourselves to God” (14:12). God himself will be the judge, and Christ will be given a special place in presiding over the final judgment and separate those who truly belong to him from those who do not. Even though this judgment will be “according to what they have done” (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6; Rev. 22:12), these deeds are simply an outward demonstration of whether a living faith is present, so there is no contradiction between justification by faith and the necessary place for a changed life in the believer. Yet, as Jesus warns, some will be surprised: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 7:21). God’s judgment will be both just and inescapable.

Christians remain divided about the number of resurrections. Premillennialists who are also pretribulationalists or midtribulationalists would conclude that there is a minimum of a resurrection of believers at the time of the rapture, when Jesus returns for his church; another resurrection when Jesus returns at the end of the tribulation for believers who came to faith and died during the tribulation; as well as another resurrection at the end of the millennium for “the rest of the dead” (Rev. 20:5). Premillennialists who are also posttribulationalists would conclude that there are as few as two resurrections: one at Jesus’ return and another at the end of the millennium. An amillennialist or a postmillennialist would assume that there may be only a single bodily resurrection when Jesus returns and establishes his kingdom.

There is one other aspect that completes this theme: God’s judgment also includes the destruction of the devil in the lake of fire (Rev. 20:10). Someday sin and evil will be forever removed from God’s creation.

The Millennium

The millennium is a thousand-year reign of Christ described most clearly in Rev. 20. Again, there are sharp differences of opinion regarding this topic.

Premillennialists believe that Jesus’ return will be “pre” (before) the millennium, and that this millennial kingdom will be a golden age of unprecedented glory and splendor. Dispensational premillennialists, with their emphasis on the distinction between Israel and the church, have focused on the fulfillment of all the remaining OT prophecies made to Israel. Historic premillennialists, on the other hand, lack this sharp distinction between Israel and the church and see themselves as being in continuity with the view of a future reign of Christ on earth found throughout church history. In recent years, premillennialism has become the leading view in American Christianity.

Postmillennialists believe that God will build his church for “a thousand years” and then Jesus will return “post” (after) this millennium. The millennium here is comparable to a silver age involving significant and unprecedented advances of the gospel throughout the world. Postmillennialists remain divided about how literal this thousand-year period might be and whether this period has already begun or not. Postmillennialism has had a significant following throughout most of church history but more recently has become a minority view.

Amillennialists believe in a different kind of millennium. Here there are two different varieties. Some believe that those reigning with Christ in Rev. 20 are simply believers living here in this present life experiencing the intimacy of Christ’s presence in their daily lives. Others see this period as involving departed believers, who are currently reigning with Christ in the intermediate state between death and his return. The millennium here is neither the golden age of the premillennialist nor the silver age of the postmillennialist; it is simply life today.

Again there are predisposing factors. Those who place more weight on potentially unfulfilled OT prophecies will tend to be premillennial, whereas those who place more weight on the words of Jesus and Paul will tend to be amillennial or possibly postmillennial. Those who see more of a distinction between Israel and the church will tend to be dispensational premillennialists, whereas those who emphasize the unity among God’s people throughout redemptive history will choose one of the other alternatives. Those who tend toward a more literal approach to interpreting Scripture will tend to be premillennialists, whereas those who give more weight to symbolic and figurative language will choose one of the other options. Those who tend to be more pessimistic about the future and believe that things are getting worse will tend to be premillennialists, whereas those who are more optimistic about what God is doing in this world and who emphasize the transforming power of the gospel will tend to be postmillennialists. One’s eschatological convictions are the logical outgrowth of many other earlier commitments and persuasions.

Each of these millennial views also has implications for a number of other topics: the nature and intensity of Satan’s binding in Rev. 20, the number of different resurrections, and the number of different judgments. The ultimate question, again, is which approach does the best job of putting together all the prophecies of Scripture and consequently is most faithful to God’s word.

Heaven and Hell

God’s judgment inevitably leads either to final and permanent torment in hell or to untold blessings in the new heaven and new earth (Matt. 25:46).

The ultimate hope of believers involves the bodily resurrection and a new earth to go along with these glorified bodies. The glad time will come when God “will wipe every tear from their eyes” and “there will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain” (Rev. 21:4). There will be the joys of physical bodies healed and restored, seeing friends and loved ones, but the greatest joy of all will be seeing the Lord himself in all his glory and majesty.

Hell will be the very opposite, experienced by those who deliberately rejected and avoided God during their earthly lives. They will find themselves rejected by God and cut off from his presence (and all the blessings that go along with his presence). Although there are various debates about how literal or figurative some of the biblical descriptions of hell are in terms of unquenchable fire and worms that do not die (Mark 9:48), it seems safe to say that hell will be the greatest of all possible tragedies and far worse than any of these descriptions suggest.

Annihilationism or conditional immortality, with its assumption that the souls of the lost will cease to exist at some point after death, represents an attempt to soften the explicit teachings of Scripture. Universalism—the belief that ultimately everyone will be saved—is another human strategy to avoid the clear teaching of Scripture. Ultimately, there is a heaven, and there is a hell, and human choices do make a difference for time and eternity.

The Benefits of Eschatology

Eschatology should give balance and perspective to life so that the affairs and accomplishments of this present life do not take on an inappropriate importance. Whenever people are caught up with materialism and a this-worldly perspective on life or become complacent about their lack of spiritual growth or the spiritual condition of others, the underlying cause is often a lack of attention to eschatology. Although many difficult and controversial questions surround the nature and timing of the return of Jesus Christ, Scripture is clear about the fact of his return and the final judgment. A new life with Christ that will last for all eternity is described in Scripture as the greatest of all possible blessings. At the same time, a life apart from God both in this life and in the life to come is described as the greatest possible tragedy in life. Perhaps even the spiritual deception and confusion around us, whereby many “will abandon the faith” (1Tim. 4:1) and “not put up with sound doctrine” (2Tim. 4:3), are a sign of the lateness of the hour. A proper appreciation of eschatology can be a means that God uses to change people’s lives.

The Ethiopian eunuch, who appears in Acts 8:26–40, isfrom an African kingdom centered at the city of Meroe, located on theNile just to the south of Egypt. Acts 8:27 states that he is incharge of the treasury of the Kandake, queen of the Ethiopians.“Candace” was the name used by all the queens of theCush*te kingdom at Meroe. Roman records from 23 BC documentnegotiations between the Roman general Gaius Petronius and a queennamed “Candace” ruling over a kingdom at Meroe, on theNile River.

Theconversion of a black African early in the book of Acts issignificant, for as the story unfolds in Acts, “Ethiopia”probably represents the “ends of the earth,” a phrasefrom the opening promise of Christ to the disciples in Acts 1:8.Thus, the conversion of this Ethiopian eunuch symbolizes theinclusion of the Gentiles, which will become a central part of thebook of Acts in later chapters.

The outpouring of the Spirit that was prophesied in the OT totake place in the last days, in connection with the arrival of theMessiah.

Spiritbaptism in the Bible.The OT prophets had spoken of both the Spirit of God coming upon theMessiah (e.g., Isa. 11:2; 42:1; 61:1) and a giving or pouring out ofthe Spirit in the last days (e.g., Isa. 32:15; 44:3; Ezek. 36:27;37:14; 39:29; Joel 2:28). Peter connects the giving of the Spiritwith Jesus’ being received by the Father and being grantedmessianic authority (Acts 2:33–38). The experience of Corneliusin particular associates the pouring out of the Spirit (Acts 10:45)with a baptism with the Spirit (11:16).

Sevenpassages in the NT directly speak of someone being baptized in/withthe Spirit. Four of these passages refer to John the Baptist’sprediction that Jesus will baptize people in/with the Spirit incontrast to his own water baptism (Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16;John 1:33). In Matthew and Luke, Jesus’ baptism is referred toas a baptism with the Holy Spirit and with fire. Two passages referto Jesus’ prediction that the disciples would receive Spiritbaptism, which occurred at Pentecost. As recorded in Acts 2, tonguesof fire came to rest on each of them, they were filled with the HolySpirit, and they began to speak in other tongues. As the disciplesspoke to the Jews who had gathered in Jerusalem for the festival,three thousand were converted. Acts 1:5 contains Jesus’prediction of this baptism with the Spirit, which Peter recounts in11:16.

Thefinal reference occurs in 1 Cor. 12:13, where Paul says, “Forwe were all baptized by one Spirit so as to form one body—whetherJews or Gentiles, slave or free—and we were all given the oneSpirit to drink.” Thus, Christians form one body through theircommon experience of immersion in the one Spirit.

Asecond baptism?Whilein 1 Cor. 12 Paul seems to refer to an experience that allChristians undergo at conversion, there are several incidents in Actswhere the reception of the Spirit occurs after conversion. Thequestion then arises as to whether there is a separate “baptismin/with the Holy Spirit” distinct from the Spirit’sinitial work of regeneration and incorporation into the body ofChrist at conversion and whether this two-stage process is normativefor the church. This belief in a second baptism is particularlyprominent in Pentecostal traditions.

Examplessuch as Acts 2; 8; 10; 19 are commonly used to support the view of asecond and subsequent experience of Spirit baptism. In Acts 2 thedisciples are already converted and wait for the Spirit, who comes tothem at Pentecost. In Acts 8 the Samaritans first respond to Philip’spreaching and receive water baptism. However, they receive the Spiritonly after Peter and John come from Jerusalem and pray for them toreceive the Holy Spirit. In Acts 10 Cornelius is a God-fearingGentile, and after Peter visits him, the Spirit falls on hishousehold. In Acts 19 Paul finds some disciples in Ephesus. After helays hands on them, the Holy Spirit comes upon them, and they beginto speak in tongues and prophesy.

Inunderstanding these experiences, it must be remembered that Actsdescribes a transitional period for the church. Acts 2 in particularrecounts the initial giving of the Spirit under the new covenant. Itis possible, then, to see the events in Acts 8; 10 as the coming ofthe Spirit upon two other people groups, the Samaritans and theGentiles. Acts 2:38 and 5:32 indicate that the apostles expected thereception of the Spirit to accompany conversion, and this appears tobe the case in the rest of the book. Acts 19 narrates anincomplete conversion, where the people had only experienced John’sbaptism and receive the Spirit after Paul baptizes them “in thename of the Lord Jesus.”

Filledwith the Spirit.Although the NT does not support a theology of a second Spiritbaptism, it does commonly mention an experience of being “filled”with the Spirit. The concept of being “filled with the Spirit”frequently occurs in contexts referring to spiritual growth, such asin Eph. 5:18, where Paul exhorts, “Do not get drunk on wine,which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit.”Apparently, this filling can occur numerous times. It can lead toworship of and thanksgiving to God (Eph. 5:19–20). It can alsoresult in empowerment for ministry.

Theimmediate consequence of the disciples’ filling in Acts 2:4 isspeaking in tongues to the various Jews gathered in Jerusalem, and in4:31 they are empowered to speak “the word of God boldly.”Fullness of the Spirit can also be a characteristic of a believer’slife, such as in Acts 6:3, where the seven men chosen to look afterthe widows were to be men “known to be full of the Spirit.”

This expression appears in Gal. 4:4; Eph. 1:10 NRSV (althoughwith variation in the Greek: chronos in the former, kairos in thelatter). In Gal. 4 the context suggests that God sent Christ at themost opportune time. In Eph. 1 the expression is more apocalyptic andlooks forward to the occasion when this fullness takes place. Thereit designates the entirety of the era from the coming of Christ tothe final culmination of all things. In Ephesians the fullness isboth already present and awaiting its ultimate arrival when Christreturns and finalizes his rule.

Twofactors appear to have especially made the time of the incarnation ofChrist and the subsequent commissioning of the church to proclaim thegospel “to the ends of the earth” (Acts 1:8) the mostopportune time in history. First was the Roman conquest of theMediterranean world and the subsequent establishment of the PaxRomana (“peace of Rome”). As a result, travel was bothvery accessible and relatively safe. Second was the establishment ofGreek as the common tongue. In fact, Greek-speaking Jews resided innearly every major city of the Roman world. These two factors madethe Roman world of the first century one of the most opportune placesin human history for travelers such as Paul and Silas to traverse theMediterranean region and proclaim the gospel.

Otherfactors further contributed to the ripeness of the era. Among themwas the heavy cloud of anticipation among Jews in Palestine, awaitinga messianic deliverer who would free them from Roman oppression.

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).

The giving of gifts in the Bible has several nuances. It can refer to a goodwill gift or a peace offering given to a friend or relative (Prov. 18:16; 21:14). Thus, when Jacob seeks to make peace with his brother Esau, he sends gifts to him before they meet (Gen. 32:13; 33:10). Similarly, when Abigail intercedes with David on behalf of Nabal, she gives David a gift (1Sam. 25:27).

Ezekiel 46:17 illustrates that some gifts are regulated if they came from an inheritance. There are several references in the NT to the gifts of one local church to another (Acts 11:30; 1Cor. 16:3; 2Cor. 8:12, 20; 9:5; Phil. 4:17). The giving of these gifts has a positive effect for both those in need and those who give the gift.

Gifts are a traditional part of bridal arrangements in the Bible. Thus, Shechem requests to know the bride-price and gift when he asks for Dinah as his wife (Gen. 34:11–12). Likewise, Pharaoh gives a captured city as a dowry for his daughter’s marriage to Solomon (1Kings 9:16).

Gifts are integral in honoring another in hospitality and in approaching someone about a service. Israel instructs his sons to take gifts to Pharaoh when they go to purchase food (Gen. 43:11). It is customary to bring a gift to a man of God or prophet when asking for advice or prophetic insight (1Sam. 9:7; 1Kings 13:7; 2Kings 5:15; 8:8–9). People bring Solomon gifts when they seek an audience with him (1Kings 10:25). Additionally, gifts are part of the process of establishing a treaty (1Kings 15:19; 2Kings 16:8; 20:12).

Of course, gifts can be used for ignoble purposes as well. David sends a gift to Uriah in an effort to cover up his own sin (2Sam. 11:8).

Sacrifices of every type are conceived of as a gift to the deity with the intent of seeking favor or making restitution for sin (Lev. 22:18; Num. 31:52). Even mandatory offerings and dedicated land are considered gifts under the notion that God, as the Creator, owns all (Ezek. 45:16; 48:12, 20). This idea of giving a gift to God demonstrates the cost involved in approaching the deity. Interestingly, the priests and Levites who are associated with the sacrifices are described as a gift from God to the rest of the people (Num. 18:6–7).

The intentions behind the gift are important to God. Jesus states that one cannot be giving gifts to God and simultaneously holding on to contention with another in the community of faith (Matt. 5:23–24). Jesus commands that thankfulness to God be followed with the prescribed sacrifice (Matt. 8:4). Yet, an unwillingness to help others should not be hidden behind an ostentatious dedication to giving to God (Matt. 15:5; Mark 7:11). Likewise, Jesus warns against being overly legalistic about gifts and their benefit (Matt. 23:18–19).

On a fundamental level, gift giving has its origin in the gracious nature of God. God is the giver of all good gifts (James 1:17). He gives children to mothers (Gen. 30:20). A good life and reward for work are also gifts from God (Eccles. 3:13; 5:19). Jesus describes himself as a gift of God (John 4:10). Likewise, the Holy Spirit is God’s gift (Acts 1:4; 2:38; 11:17) and cannot be purchased with money (Acts 8:20). This gift of the Holy Spirit is given to Jew and Gentile alike (Acts 10:45).

Both grace and salvation are gifts from God (Rom. 5:15–17; 6:23; Eph. 2:8; 3:7; Heb. 6:4; 1Pet. 3:7). Finally, spiritual gifts are part of God’s good gifts (Rom. 1:11). These gifts are meant to help the church so that nothing needed for ministry is lacking in the body of Christ (Rom. 12:6; 1Cor. 1:7; 7:7; 1Tim. 4:14; 2Tim. 1:6; 1Pet. 4:10). Spiritual gifts are all governed by the greatest gift, that of love (1Cor. 13:2; 14:1).

Theme

TheGospel of Luke has been traditionally known as the Gospel thatportrays Jesus as the perfect man who came to bring salvation to allhumanity (2:32; 3:6; 4:25–27; 9:54; 24:47). This thematic focusis captured in the frequent use of the words “gospel” or“good news” (1:19; 2:10; 3:18; 4:18, 43; 7:22; 8:1; 9:6;16:16; 20:1) and “salvation” (1:69, 71, 77; 3:6; 19:9).By way of contrast, the word “salvation” does not appearin either the Gospel of Matthew or the Gospel of Mark. The authoraptly summarizes the focus of the third Gospel in Luke 19:10: “Forthe Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.”

Authorship,Recipient(s), Date

Theauthor of this Gospel also penned the book of Acts (cf. Luke 1:1–4;Acts 1:1–3). These two books comprise almost one-third of theNT. Luke is not directly named as the author of this Gospel, but theearly church attributed it as well as the book of Acts to him. Theauthor of Acts included himself in the “we” passages ofthat book (Acts 16:10–17; 20:5–15; 21:1–18;27:1–28:16). According to these passages, the narrator was acompanion of Paul. This harmonizes with other Scriptures in whichPaul identified Luke as one of his coworkers (Col. 4:14; 2Tim.4:11; Philem. 24). Luke accompanied Paul on part of his secondmissionary journey (Acts 16:10–17) and on his journey to Romewhen the apostle experienced shipwreck on the island of Malta (Acts27–28). Even after some of the other missionaries desertedPaul, Luke remained at his side to minister to his needs (2Tim.4:11). Apparently, Luke was a Gentile physician (Col. 4:14). Thiswould explain why he described sicknesses with such precision.

Lukeaddressed his Gospel to Theophilus, who possibly was a patron orgovernment official and undoubtedly a believer and follower ofChrist. His name means “lover of God.” AlthoughTheophilus was the immediate recipient, Luke no doubt had a largeraudience in view.

Thedating of the Gospel of Luke is contingent upon the date ascribed tothe book of Acts, which was written after the Gospel account (cf.Luke 1:1–4; Acts 1:1). In his Gospel, Luke portrays thedestruction of Jerusalem as a future event (Luke 21). This impliesthat the Gospel was written before AD 70. In addition, Acts waswritten probably before the death of Paul, since the apostle wasstill alive in Rome at the end of that account (Acts 28:30). It istraditionally held that Paul was executed during his secondimprisonment in Rome around AD 67 (2Tim. 4:6). Leaving time forPaul’s travels and ministry between his first and second Romanimprisonments would place the writing of Acts around AD 63. WhilePaul was a prisoner in Caesarea, Luke would have had a two-yearperiod to interview witnesses and research sources in order to writehis former account (Acts 24:27). This would place the authorship ofthe Gospel of Luke around AD 60 in either Caesarea or Rome.

Purpose

Lukeis unique among the Gospel writers in declaring his purpose at theoutset of his writing. He informs his readers that he has usedseveral sources available to him when composing his Gospel. Thesesources were written by “eyewitnesses and servants of the word”and were already being handed down to others (1:2). Luke maintainsthat he investigated these sources thoroughly and gleaned from themthe information that he then put into an “orderly account”(1:3). Luke’s purpose was to instruct Theophilus about the“certainty” of the events that surrounded the life andministry of Jesus the Messiah (1:4). The chronological data providedin 1:1–4; 2:1; 3:1–2 reinforce this purpose.

Beyondhis specific instructions to Theophilus, the content of this Gospelreveals that Luke had a universal audience in mind. Although hisaudience likely included Jews, he appears to be writing primarily forGentiles (2:32; 3:6; 4:25–27; 9:54; 24:47). The followingobservations make this clear: he explains the location and names ofplaces that would have been common knowledge to the Jews (8:26;21:37; 23:51; 24:13); he locates John’s ministry in the reignof the Roman caesar (1:5; 2:1); he uses words that Gentiles wouldunderstand, such as “teacher” instead of “master”or “rabbi” (3:12; 6:40; 7:40; 8:49; 9:38; 10:25; 11:45;18:18; 19:39; 21:7; 22:11); he usually quotes from the LXX, the Greektranslation of the Hebrew Scriptures (2:23–24; 3:4–6;4:4, 8, 10–12, 18–19; 10:27; 18:20; 19:46; 20:17, 28, 37,42–43; 22:37). Luke seeks to show that the life, death, andresurrection of Jesus are indeed the fulfillment of God’spromises to Israel, but the salvation that he has accomplished is forall people everywhere.

Luke’sNarrative

Jesus’childhood.Scholars have praised Luke’s literary excellence, historicalsensitivity, and social concern. Luke records more information aboutthe birth and early years of Jesus than any of the other canonicalGospels. The account begins some four hundred years after the lastevents of the OT with the angel of the Lord announcing to Zechariahthe birth of John the Baptist, the forerunner of the Messiah (1:11).Six months later the angel Gabriel announces to Mary the birth ofJesus, the heir to the throne of David who “will reign overJacob’s descendants forever” and whose “kingdomwill never end” (1:26, 31–33). Historically, Luke tiesJesus’ birth to the reign ofCaesar Augustus and hisministry to the rule of Tiberius Caesar (2:1; 3:1). Hisinterpretationof these events is that God has preparedsalvation “in the sight of all nations” (2:30–31)and “all people will see God’s salvation” (3:6). Inthese early chapters the narrator links Christ’s humanity andhis salvation purpose all the way back to Adam (3:23–38). Yetthe humanity of Jesus is carefully balanced with his deity. The term“Lord” is used nineteen times in reference to God at thebeginning of the Gospel, but it is also applied to Christ in 2:11. InGabriel’s announcement to Mary, the child is called “theSon of the Most High” (1:32). He was recognized as such also bydemons (4:34, 41; 8:28), by Jesus himself (10:22; 22:70), and by Godthe Father (3:22; 9:35).

Thewriter also accentuates the ministry of the Holy Spirit by revealingthat key characters such as John the Baptist, Mary, Elizabeth,Zechariah, Simeon, and Jesus were filled with the power of the Spirit(1:15, 35, 41, 67; 2:25–27; 3:16, 22; 4:1, 14, 18; 24:49).

Jesus’ministry in Galilee.In chapters 4–9, Luke chronicles Jesus’ ministry inGalilee. His early miracles and ministry serve as messianiccredentials that substantiate his authority and message,demonstrating that he is the Messiah and that in him the kingdom ofGod has drawn near (1:33; 4:40–43; 6:20; 7:28; 8:1, 10; 9:2,11, 27, 60, 62). Prayer is a discipline that Jesus practices from thebeginning of his ministry to the end (3:21; 5:16; 6:12; 9:18, 29;22:32, 40–42). The Messiah’s initial popularity iscountered by jealousy and growing opposition, especially from thereligious establishment (4:28–30, 36–37; 5:15, 20–22,26; 6:11; 7:16, 30, 39). In these early chapters, Jesus calls hisdisciples and begins to prepare them for the full implication of whatit will mean to follow him (5:1–11, 27; 6:12–16).

Jesus’journey to Jerusalem.In 9:51–19:27, Luke records an extended account of Jesus’journey toward Jerusalem from Galilee. This section contains severalparables and narratives not found in any of the other Gospels.Throughout this section the narratives, miracles, and parables pointto a Messiah who came expressly to seek out and save the lost,especially the disadvantaged, the underprivileged, and those outsidethe Jewish establishment, such as the Samaritans, women, children,notorious sinners, and the poor. Luke records more about Jesus’view of money and material things than any other book of the NT. Joyand salvation characterize the ministry of the Messiah (1:14; 8:13;10:17, 21; 13:17; 15:5, 9, 32; 17:15–16; 19:37). But theestablishment in Israel, particularly the Pharisees, rejects hisclaims (4:28–29; 5:21–24, 30; 6:7–11; 7:30, 39;8:36–37; 9:7–9, 53; 10:25, 29; 11:15–16, 37–53;13:31; 14:1; 15:1; 16:14). As this rejection and opposition increase,he begins to reveal to his followers his coming death and calls themto an ever-increasing commitment to his purpose and person (9:22–26,57–62; 10:1–3; 14:25–35).

Jesus’death and resurrection.Once Jesus reaches Jerusalem, the stage is set for the officialpresentation of the king to the nation (19:28–44). But ratherthan joyfully accepting the Messiah, the nation’s leaders hotlycontest his claims (19:39; 20:1–2, 19, 20, 27). Jesus weepsover the city (19:41) and announces its future judgment and hisfuture coming in glory (21:6–36). Luke brings his narrative ofJesus’ ministry to a close by recording the events that lead upto the death of the Messiah: the betrayal by Judas (2:1–6), theLast Supper (22:7–23), Jesus’ arrest (22:47–53),the denial by Peter (22:54–62), Jesus’ crucifixion, andfinally his death and burial (23:26–56). However, this unjustand tragic end is trumped by Jesus’ glorious resurrection(24:1–12). Luke alone records the postresurrection conversationon the Emmaus road, where Jesus reveals himself to the two disciplesand subsequently explains his victory over death (24:25–26,45–49). The account closes with the Messiah’s ascensioninto heaven (24:50–53), preparing the reader for the sequelthat continues in the book of Acts (Acts 1:1–5).

Outline

I.The Prologue (1:1–4)

II.The Birth and Childhood of Jesus Christ (1:5–2:52)

III.John Prepares the Way for Christ (3:1–4:13)

IV.The Ministry of the Son of Man in Galilee (4:14–9:50)

V.The Son of Man Faces Rejection on His Way to Jerusalem (9:51–19:27)

VI.The Ministry of the Son of Man in Jerusalem (19:28–21:38)

VII.The Passion of the Son of Man (22:1–23:56)

VIII.The Resurrection of the Son of Man (24:1–53)

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

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

Thefollowing colors have particular significance or symbolic meaning inthe Bible:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

To seek guidance from God. In the OT, this usually was donethrough an intermediary such as a prophet, priest, or seer (Exod.18:15; Judg. 18:5; 1Sam. 9:9; 22:15; 2Kings 8:8; 22:18;Jer. 37:7). The priests could also inquire of God through the use ofthe ephod and the Urim and Thummim, which were God-ordained lots(Num. 27:21; 1Sam. 23:9–13; 28:6). Warfare, health, andgovernance were primary concerns for inquiries to God but were by nomeans the only issues (1Sam. 23:2; 2Sam. 5:23; 2Kings3:11; 2Chron. 18:4, 6–7). Of course, inquiring of God didnot guarantee a favorable answer or any answer at all (Ezek. 20:3).Only certain avenues of inquiry were acceptable to God. For example,the Israelites were prohibited from consulting wizards, mediums, andnecromancers (Deut. 18:10–11; 1Sam. 28:3, 7). Naturally,the Israelites were forbidden to inquire of other deities, such asBaal-Zebub, and doing so had harmful consequences (2Kings1:2–6). Although people were dependent on God’sself-revelation, God did not need to wait on them to inquire. Hecould communicate in dreams, visions, by sending a prophet or anangel, or more directly (Gen. 20:3; Exod.3:2).

Theavenues to inquiring of God changed with the advent of Jesus and theloss of the second temple. This change was foreshadowed in Jesus’conversation with the Samaritan woman in John 4. Previously, accessto God involved seeking him at the proper place. With no temple,access to God was severely limited. As a result, in rabbinic Judaism,Torah study and interpretation became the primary means for inquiringof God. In the NT, when Christ’s death tore in half thetemple’s curtain, and when the Spirit came, access to Godbecame open to all who were believers (Matt. 27:51; Acts 1:5, 8;2:33; Heb. 6:19–20). Thus, for the disciple of Jesus, toinquire of God is as simple as asking (John 11:22; James 1:5).

The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesusfollowers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christembodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in humanhistory.

Introduction

Name.Early Christians combined the name “Jesus” with the title“Christ” (Acts 5:42; NIV: “Messiah”). Thename “Jesus,” from the Hebrew Yehoshua or Yeshua, was acommon male name in first-century Judaism. The title “Christ”is from the Greek christos, a translation of the Hebrew mashiakh(“anointed one, messiah”). Christians eventually werenamed after Jesus’ title (Acts 11:26). During the ministry ofJesus, Peter was the first disciple to recognize Jesus as the Messiah(Matt. 16:16; Mark 9:29; Luke 9:20).

Sources.From the viewpoint of Christianity, the life and ministry of Jesusconstitute the turning point in human history. From a historicalperspective, ample early source materials would be expected. Indeed,both Christian and non-Christian first-century and earlysecond-century literary sources are extant, but they are few innumber. In part, this low incidence is due to society’s initialresistance to the Jesus followers’ movement. The ancient Romanhistorian Tacitus called Christianity “a superstition,”since its beliefs did not fit with the culture’s prevailingworldview and thus were considered antisocial. Early literary sourcestherefore are either in-group documents or allusions in non-Christiansources.

TheNT Gospels are the principal sources for the life and ministry ofJesus. They consist of Matthew, Mark, Luke (the Synoptic Gospels),and John. Most scholars adhere to the so-called Four SourceHypothesis. In this theory, Mark was written first and was used as asource by Matthew and Luke, who also used the sayings source Q (fromGerman Quelle, meaning “source”) as well as their ownindividual sources M (Matthew) and L (Luke). John used additionalsources.

Theearly church tried to put together singular accounts, so-calledGospel harmonies, of the life of Jesus. The Gospel of the Ebionitesrepresents one such attempt based on the Synoptic Gospels. Anotherharmony, the Diatessaron, based on all four Gospels, was producedaround AD 170 by Tatian. Additional source materials concerning thelife of Christ are provided in the NT in texts such as Acts, thePauline Epistles, the General Epistles, and the Revelation of John.Paul wrote to the Galatians, “But when the time had fully come,God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law” (Gal. 4:4).The first narrative about Jesus by the Christian community was apassion narrative, the account of his death and resurrection. Thefirst extant references to this tradition are found in Paul’sletters (1Cor. 2:2; Gal. 3:1). The resurrection was recognizedfrom the beginning as the cornerstone of the Christian faith (1Cor.15:13–14).

Amongnon-Christian sources, the earliest reference to Jesus is found in aletter written circa AD 112 by Pliny the Younger, the Roman governorof Bithynia-Pontus (Ep. 10.96). The Roman historian Tacitus mentionsChristians and Jesus around AD 115 in his famous work about thehistory of Rome (Ann. 15.44). Another Roman historian, Suetonius,wrote around the same time concerning unrest among the Jews in Romebecause of a certain “Chrestos” (Claud. 25.4). Somescholars conclude that “Chrestos” is a misspelling of“Christos,” a reference to Jesus.

TheJewish author Josephus (first century AD) mentions Jesus in a storyabout the Jewish high priest Ananus and James the brother of Jesus(Ant. 20.200). A controversial reference to Jesus appears in adifferent part of the same work, where Josephus affirms that Jesus isthe Messiah and that he rose from the dead (Ant. 18.63–64). Themajority of scholars consider this passage to be authentic butheavily edited by later Christian copyists. Another Jewish source,the Talmud, also mentions Jesus in several places, but thesereferences are very late and of little historical value.

NoncanonicalGospels that mention Jesus include, for example, the Infancy Gospelof Thomas, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel ofJames, the Gospel of Judas Iscariot, the Gospel of the Hebrews, theEgerton Gospel, and the Gospel of Judas. Although some of these maycontain an occasional authentic saying or event, for the most partthey are late and unreliable.

Jesus’Life

Birthand childhood. TheGospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehemduring the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesuswas probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’sdeath (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of avirginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18;Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governorQuirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place inBethlehem (2:1–5). Both the census and the governorship at thetime of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars.Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to eitherconfirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must bedetermined on the basis of one’s view regarding the generalreliability of the Gospel tradition.

Onthe eighth day after his birth, Jesus was circumcised, in keepingwith the Jewish law, at which time he officially was named “Jesus”(Luke 2:21). He spent his growing years in Nazareth, in the home ofhis parents, Joseph and Mary (2:40). Of the NT Gospels, the Gospel ofLuke contains the only brief portrayal of Jesus’ growth instrength, wisdom, and favor with God and people (2:40, 52). Luke alsocontains the only account of Jesus as a young boy (2:41–49).

Jesuswas born in a lower socioeconomic setting. His parents offered atemple sacrifice appropriate for those who could not afford tosacrifice a sheep (Luke 2:22–24; cf. Lev. 12:8). Joseph, Jesus’earthly father, was a carpenter or an artisan in wood, stone, ormetal (Matt. 13:55). From a geographical perspective, Nazareth wasnot a prominent place for settling, since it lacked fertile ground.Jesus’ disciple Nathanael expressed an apparently commonfirst-century sentiment concerning Nazareth: “Nazareth! Cananything good come from there?” (John 1:46).

Jesuswas also born in a context of scandal. Questions of illegitimacy weresurely raised, since his mother Mary was discovered to be pregnantbefore her marriage to Joseph. According to Matthew, only theintervention of an angel convinced Joseph not to break his betrothal(Matt. 1:18–24). Jesus’ birth took place in Bethlehem,far from his parents’ home in Nazareth. According to kinshiphospitality customs, Joseph and Mary would have expected to stay withdistant relatives in Bethlehem. It is likely that they were unwelcomebecause of Jesus’ status as an illegitimate child; thus Maryhad to give birth elsewhere and place the infant Jesus in a feedingtrough (Luke 2:7). A similar response was seen years later inNazareth when Jesus was identified as “Mary’s son”(Mark 6:3) rather than through his paternal line, thereby shaming himas one who was born an illegitimate child. Jesus was likewiserejected at the end of his life as the crowds cried, “Crucifyhim!” (Matt. 27:22–23; Mark 15:13–14; Luke 23:21;John 19:6, 15). When Jesus was arrested, most of his followers fled(Matt. 26:56; Mark 14:50–52), and a core disciple, Peter,vehemently denied knowing him (Matt. 26:69–74; Mark 14:66–71;Luke 22:55–60; John 18:15–17, 25–27). His ownsiblings did not believe in him (John 7:5) and were evidently ashamedof his fate, since from the cross Jesus placed the care of his motherinto the hands of “the disciple whom he loved” (19:26–27)rather than the next brother in line, as was customary.

Baptism,temptation, and start of ministry.After Jesus was baptized by the prophet John the Baptist (Luke3:21–22), God affirmed his pleasure with him by referring tohim as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22).Jesus’ baptism did not launch him into fame and instantministry success; instead, Jesus was led by the Spirit into thewilderness, where he was tempted for forty days (Matt. 4:1–11;Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). Mark stresses that thetemptations immediately followed the baptism. Matthew and Lukeidentify three specific temptations by the devil, though their orderfor the last two is reversed. Both Matthew and Luke agree that Jesuswas tempted to turn stones into bread, expect divine interventionafter jumping off the temple portico, and receive all the world’skingdoms for worshiping the devil. Jesus resisted all temptation,quoting Scripture in response.

Matthewand Mark record that Jesus began his ministry in Capernaum inGalilee, after the arrest of John the Baptist (Matt. 4:12–13;Mark 1:14). Luke says that Jesus started his ministry at about thirtyyears of age (3:23). This may be meant to indicate full maturity orperhaps correlate this age with the onset of the service of theLevites in the temple (cf. Num. 4:3). John narrates the beginning ofJesus’ ministry by focusing on the calling of the disciples andthe sign performed at a wedding at Cana (1:35–2:11).

Jesus’public ministry: chronology.Jesus’ ministry started in Galilee, probably around AD 27/28,and ended with his death around AD 30 in Jerusalem. The temple hadbeen forty-six years in construction (generally interpreted as thetemple itself and the wider temple complex) when Jesus drove out themoney changers (John 2:20). According to Josephus, the rebuilding andexpansion of the second temple had started in 20/19 BC, during theeighteenth year of Herod’s reign (Ant. 15.380). The ministry ofJohn the Baptist had commenced in the fifteenth year of Tiberius(Luke 3:1–2), who had become a coregent in AD 11/12. From thesedates of the start of the temple building and the correlation of thereign of Tiberius to John the Baptist’s ministry, the onset ofJesus’ ministry can probably be dated to AD 27/28.

TheGospel of John mentions three Passovers and another unnamed feast inJohn 5:1. The length of Jesus’ ministry thus extended overthree or four Passovers, equaling about three or three and a halfyears. Passover, which took place on the fifteenth of Nisan, came ona Friday in AD 30 and 33. The year of Jesus’ death wastherefore probably AD 30.

Jesus’ministry years may be divided broadly into his Galilean and hisJudean ministries. The Synoptic Gospels describe the ministry inGalilee from various angles but converge again as Jesus enters Judea.

Galileanministry.The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and aroundGalilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that thekingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment ofprophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ firstteaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30);the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for hiscalling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection andsuffering.

AllGospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in hisGalilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioningof the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers isrecorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministryis the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, inparticular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synopticsfocus on healings and exorcisms.

DuringJesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with hisidentity. However, evil spirits knew him to be of supreme authority(Mark 3:11). Jesus was criticized by outsiders and by his own family(3:21). The scribes from Jerusalem identified him as a partner ofBeelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesustold parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growingkingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humblebeginnings (4:1–32).

TheSynoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful.No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority orability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized manydemons (Mark 5:1–13), raised the dead (Mark 5:35–42), fedfive thousand (Mark 6:30–44), and walked on water (Mark6:48–49).

Inthe later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew andtraveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are notwritten with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns toGalilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey toJerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fearresolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee,where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ discipleswith lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed thePharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents(7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demandinga sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, whoconfessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus didprovide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).

Jesuswithdrew from Galilee to Tyre and Sidon, where a Syrophoenician womanrequested healing for her daughter. Jesus replied, “I was sentonly to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Galileans hadlong resented the Syrian provincial leadership partiality thatallotted governmental funds in ways that made the Jews receive mere“crumbs.” Consequently, when the woman replied, “Eventhe dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table,”Jesus applauded her faith (Matt. 15:27–28). Healing a deaf-muteman in the Decapolis provided another example of Jesus’ministry in Gentile territory (Mark 7:31–37). Peter’sconfession of Jesus as the Christ took place during Jesus’travel to Caesarea Philippi, a well-known Gentile territory. The citywas the ancient center of worship of the Hellenistic god Pan.

Judeanministry.Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry ashe resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually ledto his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem intothree phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27).The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of thejourney. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, andthe demands on discipleship intensified as Jesus approached Jerusalem(Matt. 20:17–19, 26–28; Mark 10:38–39, 43–45;Luke 14:25–35). Luke presents the second phase of the journeytoward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvationand judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase ofthe journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are themain themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).

Socialconflicts with religious leaders increased throughout Jesus’ministry. These conflicts led to lively challenge-riposteinteractions concerning the Pharisaic schools of Shammai and Hillel(Matt. 19:1–12; Mark 10:1–12). Likewise, socioeconomicfeathers were ruffled as Jesus welcomed young children, who hadlittle value in society (Matt. 19:13–15; Mark 10:13–16;Luke 18:15–17).

PassionWeek, death, and resurrection. Eachof the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with thecrowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Lukedescribes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during whichJesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).

InJerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17).Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because thewhole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “beganlooking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segmentof Jerusalem’s temple leadership inquired about Jesus’authority (11:27–33). Jesus replied with cunning questions(12:16, 35–36), stories (12:1–12), denunciation(12:38–44), and a prediction of Jerusalem’s owndestruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, JudasIscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’arrest (14:10–11).

Atthe Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a newcovenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29;Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned thedisciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and laterhe prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agonyand submissiveness in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–42;Mark 14:32–42; Luke 22:39–42). His arrest, trial,crucifixion, death, and resurrection followed (Matt. 26:46–28:15;Mark 14:43–16:8; Luke 22:47–24:9; John 18:1–20:18).Jesus finally commissioned his disciples to continue his mission bymaking disciples of all the nations (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 1:8)and ascended to heaven with the promise that he will one day return(Luke 24:50–53; Acts 1:9–11).

TheIdentity of Jesus Christ

Variousaspects of Jesus’ identity are stressed in the four NT Gospels,depending on their target audiences. In the Gospels the witnesses toJesus’ ministry are portrayed as constantly questioning andexamining his identity (Matt. 11:2–5; 12:24; 26:63; 27:11; Mark3:22; 8:11; 11:28; 14:61; Luke 7:18–20; 11:15; 22:67, 70;23:39; John 7:20, 25–27; 18:37). Only beings of the spiritualrealm are certain of his divinity (Mark 1:34; 3:11; Luke 4:41). AtJesus’ baptism, God referred to him as his Son, whom he loved(Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Likewise, when Jesus wastransfigured in the presence of Peter, James, and John, a voiceaffirmed, “This is my Son, whom I love” (Matt. 17:5; Mark9:7). At the moment of his death, the questioning of Jesus’identity culminated in a confession by a Roman centurion and otherguards: “Surely he was the Son of God!” (Matt. 27:54; cf.Mark 15:39).

Miracleworker.In the first-century setting, folk healers and miracle workers werepart of the fabric of society. Jesus, however, performed signs andmiracles in order to demonstrate the authority of the kingdom of Godover various realms: disease, illness, the spiritual world, nature,and even future events. Especially in the Gospel of John, Jesus’signs and miracles are used to show his authority and thus hisidentity.

Nochallenge superseded Jesus’ authority. Among his ample miraclesand signs, he changed water into wine (John 2:7–9), calmed astorm in the sea (Matt. 8:23–27; Mark 4:35–39; Luke8:22–25), exorcized demons (Matt. 9:32–34; Mark 5:1–13;Luke 9:42–43), healed the sick (Mark 1:40–44), raised thedead (Matt. 9:23–25; Mark 5:35–42; Luke 7:1–16;8:49–54; John 11:17, 38–44), performed miraculousfeedings (Matt. 14:17–21; 15:34–38; Mark 6:30–44;8:5–9; Luke 9:10–17; John 6:8–13), and walked onwater (Matt. 14:25–26; Mark 6:48–49; John 6:19).

ThePharisees requested miracles as evidence of his authority (Mark8:11–12). Jesus refused, claiming that a wicked and adulterousgeneration asks for a miraculous sign (Matt. 12:38–39; 16:1–4).The only sign that he would give was the sign of Jonah—hisdeath and resurrection three days later—a personal sacrifice,taking upon himself the judgment of the world (Matt. 12:39–41).

Rabbi/teacher.Jesus’ teaching style was similar to other first-century rabbisor Pharisees (Mark 9:5; 10:51; John 1:38; 3:2). What distinguishedhim was that he spoke with great personal authority (Matt. 5:22, 28,32, 39, 44; Mark 1:22). Like other rabbis of his day, Jesus gathereddisciples. He called these men to observe his lifestyle and to joinhim in his ministry of teaching, healing, and exorcism (Matt. 10:1–4;Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16).

Jesusused a variety of teaching methods. He frequently spoke in parables(Matt. 6:24; 13:24–52; 18:10–14, 23–35;21:28–22:14; 24:32–36, 45–51; 25:14–30; Mark4:1–34; 12:1–12; 13:28–34; Luke 8:4–18;12:41–46; 13:18–21; 14:15–24; 15:1–16:15,19–31; 18:1–14; 19:11–27; 20:9–19; 21:29–33),used figures of speech (John 10:9), hyperbole (Matt. 19:24; Mark10:25; Luke 18:25), argumentation (Matt. 26:11), object lessons(Matt. 24:32), frequent repetition (Matt. 13:44–47; Luke13:18–21), practical examples, and personal guidance.

Majorthemes in Jesus’ teaching include the kingdom of God, the costof discipleship, internal righteousness, the end of the age, hisidentity, his mission, and his approaching death. In his teachings,observance of Torah was given new context and meaning because God’skingdom had “come near” (Matt. 3:2). Jesus had come tofulfill the law (Matt. 5:17).

Jesus’teaching ministry often took place amid social conflict. Theseconflicts were couched in so-called challenge-riposte interactions inwhich the honor status of those involved was at stake. Jesus usedthese interactions as teachable moments. When questioned, Jesus gavereplies that reveal omniscience or intimate knowledge of God’swill, especially in the Gospel of John. In the Synoptic Gospels,Jesus’ answers are both ethical and practical in nature. TheSynoptics portray Jesus as challenged repeatedly with accusations ofviolating customs specified in the Jewish law. Jesus’ answersto such accusations often echoed the essence of 1Sam. 15:22,“To obey is better than sacrifice,” phrased by Jesus as“I desire mercy, not sacrifice” (Matt. 9:13; 12:7). Anoverall “better than” ethic was common in Jesus’public teaching.

TheSermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7) contains a “better than”ethic in which internal obedience is better than mere outwardobedience. For example, Jesus said that anger without cause is equalto murder (Matt. 5:21–22), that looking at a woman lustfullyamounts to adultery (Matt. 5:28), and that instead of revengingwrongs one must reciprocate with love (Matt. 5:38–48). Jesusvalued compassion above traditions and customs, even those containedwithin the OT law. He desired internal obedience above the letter ofthe law.

Jesus’teachings found their authority in the reality of God’simminent kingdom (Matt. 3:2; 10:7; Mark 1:15; Luke 10:9),necessitating repentance (Matt. 3:2), belief (Mark 1:15), dependence(Matt. 18:3–5; Mark 10:15), and loyalty to a new community—thefamily of Jesus followers (Mark 3:34; 10:29–30). Jesus urged,“Seek first [God’s] kingdom and his righteousness”(Matt. 6:33). Preaching with such urgency was common among propheticteachers of the intertestamental period. Jesus, however, had his owngrounds for urgency. He held that God deeply valued all humans (Matt.10:31) and would bring judgment swiftly (Matt. 25:31–46).

Examplesof a “greater good” ethic in the Synoptics include theoccasions when Jesus ate with sinners (Mark 2:16–17). Jesusused an aphorism in response to accusations about his associationswith sinners, saying, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor,but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners”(Mark 2:17). He advocated harvesting and healing on the Sabbath (Mark2:23–28; 3:1–6), and when he was accused of breaking thelaw, he pointed to an OT exception (1Sam. 21:1–6) todeclare compassion appropriate for the Sabbath. Jesus also appliedthe “greater good” ethic in the case of divorce, sincewomen suffered the societal stigma of adultery and commonly becameoutcasts following divorce (Matt. 19:8–9; Mark 10:5–9).

Jesus’kingdom teachings were simultaneously spiritual, ethical, andeschatological in application. The teachings were aimed at internaltransformation (Matt. 5:3–9; 18:3; Mark 10:15) and spurring onlove (Matt. 5:44; 7:21). The Spirit of the Lord had called Jesus tobless the hurting ones as they aspired to a godly character. Jesustaught, “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father isperfect” (Matt. 5:48), and “Be merciful, just as yourFather is merciful” (Luke 6:36). The “blessed” onesin Jesus’ teachings are poor of spirit, peace driven, mournful,and hungry for righteousness, consumed with emulating godlycharacter.

Somescholars believe that Jesus promoted an “interim ethic”for the kingdom, intended only for a short period prior to the end oftime. However, he was explicit regarding the longevity of histeachings: “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words willnever pass away” (Matt. 24:35; Luke 16:17).

Messiah.The concept of an anointed one, a messiah, who would restore theglories of David’s kingdom and bring political stability wascommon in Jewish expectation. Both before and after the Babyloniancaptivity, many Jews longed for one who would bring peace andprotection. Israel’s prophets had spoken of a coming deliverer,one who would restore David’s kingdom and reign in justice andrighteousness (2Sam. 7:11–16; Isa. 9:1–7; 11:1–16;Jer. 23:5–6; 33:15–16; Ezek. 37:25; Dan. 2:44; Mic. 5:2;Zech. 9:9). Isaiah’s description of the servant (Isa. 53) whosesuffering healed the nation provided a slightly different angle ofexpectation in terms of a deliverer.

Jesus’authority and popularity as a miracle worker called up messianicimages in first-century Jewish minds. On several occasions hearerscalled him “Son of David,” hoping for the Messiah (Matt.12:23; 21:9). Simon Peter was the first follower who confessed Jesusas the Christ, the “Messiah” (Matt. 16:16; Mark 8:29). Inline with Isaiah’s model of the Suffering Servant, Jesusfocused not on political ends but rather on spiritual regenerationthrough his own sacrificial death (Mark 10:45).

Eschatologicalprophet.Many scholars claim that Jesus is best understood as a Jewishapocalypticist, an eschatological prophet who expected God tointervene in history, destroy the wicked, and bring in the kingdom ofGod. Central in this understanding are Jesus’ propheciesconcerning the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem (Matt. 24:1–2,15–22; Mark 13:1; Luke 21:5–24; John 2:19; Acts 6:14). Inaddition, it is noted that Jesus had twelve disciples, representativeof the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:2–28; Luke 22:23–30).Certain of Jesus’ parables, those with apocalyptic images ofcoming judgment, present Jesus as an eschatological prophet (Matt.24:45–25:30; Luke 12:41–46; 19:11–27).

SufferingSon of God.Jesus’ first recorded teaching in a synagogue in Nazareth wasparadigmatic (Luke 4:16–21). He attributed the reading, Isa.61:1–2, to his personal calling to serve, and in doing so herevealed a trajectory of suffering. The Gospel of Mark likewise aptlyportrays Jesus as the suffering Son of God. Jesus’ ownteachings incorporated his upcoming suffering (Mark 8:31; 9:12–13,31; 10:33–34). He summarized his mission by declaring, “TheSon of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give hislife as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). His earthly careerended with a trial in Jerusalem consisting of both Roman and Jewishcomponents (Matt. 26:57–68; 27:1–31; Mark 14:53–65;15:1–20; Luke 22:54–23:25; John 18:19–24;18:28–19:16). He was insulted, scourged, mocked, and crucified.

Jesus’suffering culminated in his humiliating death by crucifixion (Matt.27:33–50; Mark 15:22–37; Luke 23:33–46; John19:16–30). Crucifixion was a death of unimaginable horror,bringing shame and humiliation to the victim and his family. Anyonehanging on a tree was considered cursed (Deut. 21:23; Gal. 3:13).Thus, especially in a Jewish society, anyone associated with acrucified person bore the shame of following one who was executed asa lowly slave and left as a cursed corpse. The apostle Paul referredto this shame of the cross when he stated, “I am not ashamed ofthe gospel” (Rom. 1:16).

ExaltedLord.Jesus had prophesied that he would rise again (Matt. 16:21; 17:9, 23;20:19; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:34; Luke 9:22; 18:33; 24:7, 46).The testimony of the Synoptics is that the resurrection of JesusChrist indeed occurred on the third day, Christ having died on Friday(Mark 15:42–45; Luke 23:52–54; John 19:30–33) andrisen again on Sunday (Matt. 28:1–7; Mark 16:2–7; Luke24:1–7; John 20:1–16). The resurrected Jesus waswitnessed by the women (Matt. 28:8–9), the eleven disciples(Matt. 28:16–17; Luke 24:36–43), and travelers on theroad to Emmaus (Luke 24:31–32). According to Paul, he appearedto as many as five hundred others (1Cor. 15:6). He appeared inbodily form, spoke, showed his scars, and ate (Luke 24:39–43;John 20:27; Acts 1:4). After forty postresurrection days, Jesusascended into the heavenly realm (Acts 1:9).

Asmuch as Jesus’ death was the epitome of shame, his victory overdeath was his ultimate exaltation (Phil. 2:5–11). At Pentecost,Peter proclaimed that in the resurrection God fulfilled OT promises(Ps. 16:10) by raising his Son from the grave (Acts 2:30–31).Furthermore, Christ provided freedom from the law through hisresurrection (Rom. 5:13–14), God’s approval of his lifeand work (Phil. 2:8–9), and God’s designation of him asLord over all the earth, the living and the dead (Acts 17:30–31;Phil. 2:10; Heb. 1:3), and over all his enemies (Eph. 1:20–23).

Jesus’exaltation commenced the beginning of forgiveness and justification(Luke 24:46–47; Acts 13:30–39; Rom. 4:25) and hisintercession for the people of God (Rom. 8:34). His ascensionsignaled the coming of the Holy Spirit as comforter and teacher (John14:26; Acts 2:33) and was accompanied by the promise of his return inglory (Luke 24:51), at which time he will render judgment (Matt.19:28; 24:31; Rev. 20:11–15) and establish his eternal kingdom(1Cor. 15:24; 2Tim. 4:1; Rev. 11:15; 22:5).

Jesus’Purpose and Community

Inthe Gospel of Matthew, Jesus is the long-awaited Messiah, whopreaches the good news of the kingdom, urging people to repent(4:17–23). Repentance and belief allow one to enter thekingdom. The call into the kingdom is a call into a new covenant, onemade in Jesus’ blood (26:28).

Inthe prologue to the Gospel of Mark, the narrator reveals the identityof Jesus (1:1). Jesus is presented as the one who brings good tidingsof salvation (cf. Isa. 40:9; 52:7; 61:1). The centrality of thegospel, the good news (Mark 1:14–15), is evident.

Lukelikewise presents the preaching of the good news as a main purpose ofJesus’ ministry (4:43). The content of this good news is thekingdom of God (4:43; 8:1; 16:16). When the disciples of John theBaptist asked Jesus if he was the one who was to come (7:20), Jesusanswered, “Go back and report to John what you have seen andheard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosyare cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good newsis proclaimed to the poor” (7:22). The kingdom of God, aspresented in Luke, brings freedom for the prisoners, recovery ofsight for the blind, and release for the oppressed (4:18). Jesus’healings and exorcisms announce the coming kingdom of God alreadypresent in the ministry of Jesus (4:40–44; 6:18–20;8:1–2; 9:2; 10:8–9).

Inthe Gospel of John, Jesus testifies to the good news by way of signsthroughout his ministry. These signs point to Jesus’ glory, hisidentity, and the significance of his ministry. Jesus is the Messiah,the Son of God, who offers eternal and abundant life. This abundantlife is lived out in community.

Inthe Gospel of John, the disciples of Jesus represent the community ofGod (17:21). The disciples did not belong to the world, but theycontinued to live in the world (17:14–16). Throughout hisministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a callto loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38;Luke 9:23–26), a call to the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50;Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock Iwill build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call tocommunity. Jesus’ presence as the head of the community wasreplaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18).

Jesus’ministry continued in the community of Jesus’ followers, God’sfamily—the church. Entrance into the community was obtained byadopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and through theinitiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26;Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–62; John 1:12; 3:16;10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9).

TheQuests for the Historical Jesus

Thequest for the historical Jesus, or seeking who Jesus was from ahistorical perspective, is a modern phenomenon deemed necessary byscholars who claim that the NT Gospels were written long after Jesus’death and were heavily influenced by the post-Easter understanding ofthe church.

Thebeginning of this quest is often dated to 1770, when the lecturenotes of Hermann Samuel Reimarus were published posthumously.Reimarus had launched an inquiry into the identity of Jesus thatrejected as inauthentic all supernatural elements in the Gospels. Heconcluded that the disciples invented Jesus’ miracles,prophecies, ritualistic religion, and resurrection. Reimarus’sconclusions were not widely accepted, but they set off a flurry ofrationalistic research into the historical Jesus that continuedthroughout the nineteenth century. This became known as the “firstquest” for the historical Jesus.

In1906 German theologian Albert Schweit-zer published The Quest of theHistorical Jesus (German title: Von Reimarus zu Wrede: EineGeschichte der Leben-Jesu-Forschung), a scathing indictment of thefirst quest. Schweitzer’s work showed that nineteenth-centuryresearchers re-created Jesus in their own image, transforming thehistorical Jesus into a modern philanthropist preaching aninoffensive message of love and brotherhood. Schweitzer’sconclusions marked the beginning of the end for this first quest.Schweitzer himself concluded that the historical Jesus was aneschatological prophet whose purposes failed during his last days inJerusalem.

Withthe demise of the first quest, some NT scholars, such as RudolfBultmann, rejected any claim to being able to discover the historicalJesus. This trend continued until 1953, when some of Bultmann’sformer students launched what has come to be known as the “newquest” for the historical Jesus (1953–c. 1970). Thisquest created new interest in the historical Jesus but was stilldominated by the view that the portrait of Jesus in the Gospels islargely a creation of the church in a post-Easter setting.

Asthe rebuilding years of the post–World WarII era wanedand scholars started to reap academic fruit from major archaeologicalfinds such as the DSS, research on the historical Jesus moved on towhat has been called the “third quest.” This quest seeksespecially to research and understand Jesus in his social andcultural setting.

The keys of the kingdom picture the power and authorityentrusted to Simon Peter by Jesus immediately after Peter’sconfession of faith (Matt. 16:16). Jesus responded, “I tell youthat you are Peter [petros], and on this rock [petra] I will build mychurch, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it” (Matt.16:18). It is at this point that Jesus tells Peter, “I willgive you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind onearth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth willbe loosed in heaven” (16:19). Roman Catholics have understoodthese keys, along with this symbolism of loosing and binding, torefer to a special authority in the forgiveness of sins and in thepractices of penance and absolution given to the apostle Peter, andby extension to the institution of the papacy as his spiritual heir.Protestants have often understood this power as involving theapostles in general, or perhaps even the entire church (see 18:18).

Thesymbolism of keys is normally used in the Bible to refer to a meansof entry. Jesus is addressing Peter in particular in Matt. 16:19, notthe apostles as a whole, since the “you” is singular inthe Greek text. Perhaps the best way to understand this phrase is tointerpret it in its original context of something that Peter was todo in the initial establishment of the NT church. Significantly,Peter is given an unparalleled initiatory role in the spread of thegospel. Peter is the one who takes on leadership in the upper roomprayer meeting in Acts 1 and also in the process of finding anotherapostle to replace Judas Iscariot. Peter is the spokesman for theapostles on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2) as well as in thesubsequent events involving the Jerusalem church (Acts 3–5).Peter (along with John) goes down to Samaria to examine the newbelievers in Samaria and to be the human channel through which theywould receive the Spirit (Acts 8:14–17). Peter is the one whois entrusted by God with reaching out to Cornelius, the first Gentileconvert (Acts 10–11). At every step along the way, Peter is theone whom God used to open the door to new groups of people in thespread of the gospel.

Eschatology is the study of last things. The word “eschatology” comes from the Greek word eschatos, meaning “last.” From this same Greek word is derived the term “eschaton,” which is sometimes used to refer to the end times.

Eschatology deals with such future events as the end of the world, Jesus’ return, the resurrection, the final judgment, and the afterlife in heaven or hell. The tribulation and the millennium also belong to eschatology, but their timing and nature vary with different views. Although from one perspective human history entered its final phase in NT times so that people today are already living in the “last days,” eschatology normally focuses on the unfulfilled prophecies that remain still in the future for present-day believers.

Eschatology deals with questions regarding the future. Every religion and philosophy of life has offered answers to these questions. Plato taught about the immortality of the soul. Buddhism has its nirvana, Islam its sensual paradise, and Native Americans their happy hunting grounds. The belief that the soul survives death is widely held. Even atheists and materialists have their own views of eschatology. Yet only in Christianity does eschatology become the crown and capstone of everything else that God has been doing throughout history, when he will be perfectly glorified, Christ completely victorious, the power of sin entirely overcome, and the people of God given a complete salvation.

Yet it is difficult to find a topic on which Christians are more divided. Frequently, people studying eschatology fall into one of two opposite traps: unwarranted dogmatism or simple avoidance. Yet eschatology should be a source of comfort and hope to believers as well as an ongoing reminder of the lateness and urgency of the hour. Consequently, eschatology deserves most careful attention and should create a sense of excitement and anticipation.

Reasons for Controversy

Eschatology is by no means a simple discipline. The sheer magnitude of this topic is a significant challenge involving hundreds of different unfulfilled prophecies from virtually every book of the Bible. Difficulties in interpreting these prophecies with their figures of speech, apocalyptic language, and complicated symbolism create still greater complications. Then there is the challenge of organizing these individual prophecies together into a coherent timeline when each will be fulfilled. Discerning the period of fulfillment for some prophecies is relatively clear and easy, but for others it is much less certain.

Even the question of how many periods of future time remain in God’s timetable has often been the source of considerable debate. For example, will there be a future period of tribulation, or were these prophecies already fulfilled in AD 70, or perhaps more generally throughout church history, with its countless martyrs? Similar questions have been raised about the millennium: is this to be understood in a still future sense, as premillennialists assert, or is it already in the process of being fulfilled, as amillennialists and postmillennialists claim? The fact that there is no common agreement even on these fundamental questions virtually guarantees that believers will remain divided on this issue.

Then too there is the final step of trying to assign specific unfulfilled prophecies into this grid of prophetic time slots. For example, is the prophecy “The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox” (Isa. 65:25) a symbolic picture of God’s blessings in this present church age, in a future millennium, or in eternity itself? The vast majority of these unfulfilled prophecies contain few clues regarding the precise time of their fulfillment, and interpreters often are left with little to guide them. We should not be surprised that eschatology leaves believers more divided than do other areas of theology.

Jesus’ Return and the Tribulation

The fact of Jesus’ return is clear. When Jesus was taken up from his apostles at the end of his earthly ministry, two angels promised them, “This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11). Today believers look forward to Jesus’ second coming, as “the blessed hope” (Titus 2:13). The common understanding has always been that this return will be personal, visible, and bodily—just as real as his first coming two thousand yearsago.

Christians, however, have been divided over the timing of Jesus’ return and the tribulation. Here there are five interrelated questions.

1.The first question is whether Jesus’ return is a single event or will occur in two stages. Dispensationalists distinguish two phases to Jesus’ return: a secret rapture that removes the church from a period of intense tribulation involving Israel here on earth, and then a later public second coming in judgment at the end of the tribulation, when he will establish his kingdom. A number of recent “left behind” books and movies have popularized this approach. Yet this two-stage model is difficult to document in Scripture, and many understand Scripture to describe Jesus’ return as a single unified event.

2.How one answers this first question has implications for the second question of the timing of Jesus’ return relative to the tribulation. Here there are three popular options regarding the timing of Jesus’ return: pretribulational (before the tribulation), midtribulational (in the midst of the tribulation), and posttribulational (after the tribulation). Yet if Jesus’ return is pretribulational or midtribulational, logic would require that there be two phases to Jesus’ return: a secret rapture either before the tribulation (for pretribulationalism) or in the middle of it (for midtribulationalism), and then a separate public return at the conclusion of the tribulation to establish his kingdom. Thus, a two-stage return of Jesus goes hand in hand with pretribulationalism and midtribulationalism, and a single return with posttribulationalism.

3.A third question focuses on the nature of the tribulation period. There are three main views. Pretribulationalists assume that the tribulation will be a period (usually seven years) of great suffering such as this world has never seen. Midtribulationalists believe that Jesus will return after three and a half years of less intense tribulation, followed by a considerably more intense second period of three and a half years of wrath, from which believers will be spared. Posttribulationalists see this tribulation as the suffering and persecution of Christians at various times and places around the world, with possibly some intensification in the final days. Consequently, how one understands the intensity of the tribulation is another factor affecting the choice of one tribulational view or another.

4.A fourth interrelated question involves whether one believes that Jesus may return suddenly and unexpectedly at any moment (Matt. 24:42) or whether there are still unfulfilled prophecies that must take place first (initially including at least Peter’s death [John 21:19] and the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem). Pretribulationalists pride themselves on how their view of a secret rapture allows for Jesus to return imminently without any intervening signs or other warnings. Midtribulationalists believe that the church will need to experience three and a half years of moderate tribulation, so there is less emphasis on an imminent return (although one could argue that the first period of tribulation is potentially more ambiguous in nature). Posttribulationalists are divided into two groups. Many have held that the tribulation will be a period of significant tribulation, so typically they have downplayed the idea of imminence. However, other posttribulationalists (sometimes called “pasttribulationalists” or “imminent posttribulationalists”) assume that the tribulation described in Scripture may already be fulfilled either at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 or more generally throughout church history, and therefore Jesus may return at any time.

5.The fifth question focuses on how literally or figuratively one should interpret the two key passages of Scripture related to the nature of the tribulation: the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24 pars.) and Rev. 6–19. Much of the Olivet Discourse focuses on the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, and many have understood at least parts of Revelation as being fulfilled historically either in John’s own day or during church history. The more one assumes that at least portions of these prophecies were already fulfilled, the less one awaits a future fulfillment. A more literal approach to these prophecies will predispose one toward pretribulationalism or possibly midtribulationalism, and a more figurative approach toward posttribulationalism.

Hyperpreterism, or consistent preterism, has emerged in the last few decades with a still different approach to the timing of Jesus’ return. The driving force behind this movement is Jesus’ apparent promise to return within a generation of his death (Matt. 24:34). Consequently, hyperpreterism has assumed that all the future prophecies in the NT must have been fulfilled by the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, including Jesus’ return, the bodily resurrection, the final judgment, and the new heaven and new earth. The bottom line is that in order to take literally Jesus’ promise to return within a generation, everything else in eschatology needs to be reinterpreted as having been fulfilled in one way or another within that same generation. A more moderate preterism sees many, but not all, of these eschatological events fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Jesus returned as the Son of Man in judgment against Israel in these first-century events, but the final judgment of all people and the new heaven and new earth await his second coming.

The Resurrection and the Final Judgment

The bodily resurrection takes place at the time of Jesus’ return. Although many other religions and philosophies have assumed the immortality of the soul, whereby the nonmaterial part of human nature survives death, Christianity is distinctive in its strong commitment to the idea of a bodily resurrection. Death marks the separation of the body from the soul and the time when believers are immediately ushered into God’s presence (Eccles. 12:7). Thus, Jesus was able to promise the thief on the cross, “Today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43). However, people do not immediately receive new resurrection bodies at the time of death, but must wait until the time of Jesus’ return, when “the dead in Christ will rise first” (1Thess. 4:16). This bodily resurrection is the precursor to the final judgment of the saved and the lost, when “all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come out—those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil will rise to be condemned” (John 5:28–29). At that time, Christ “will judge the living and the dead” (2Tim.4:1).

This theme of judgment is foundational to Christianity, although Christians remain divided about the exact number and character of these judgments. Yet the time will come when all people will be judged, both “the living and the dead” (Acts 10:42), when “we will all stand before God’s judgment seat” (Rom. 14:10), and “each of us will give an account of ourselves to God” (14:12). God himself will be the judge, and Christ will be given a special place in presiding over the final judgment and separate those who truly belong to him from those who do not. Even though this judgment will be “according to what they have done” (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6; Rev. 22:12), these deeds are simply an outward demonstration of whether a living faith is present, so there is no contradiction between justification by faith and the necessary place for a changed life in the believer. Yet, as Jesus warns, some will be surprised: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 7:21). God’s judgment will be both just and inescapable.

Christians remain divided about the number of resurrections. Premillennialists who are also pretribulationalists or midtribulationalists would conclude that there is a minimum of a resurrection of believers at the time of the rapture, when Jesus returns for his church; another resurrection when Jesus returns at the end of the tribulation for believers who came to faith and died during the tribulation; as well as another resurrection at the end of the millennium for “the rest of the dead” (Rev. 20:5). Premillennialists who are also posttribulationalists would conclude that there are as few as two resurrections: one at Jesus’ return and another at the end of the millennium. An amillennialist or a postmillennialist would assume that there may be only a single bodily resurrection when Jesus returns and establishes his kingdom.

There is one other aspect that completes this theme: God’s judgment also includes the destruction of the devil in the lake of fire (Rev. 20:10). Someday sin and evil will be forever removed from God’s creation.

The Millennium

The millennium is a thousand-year reign of Christ described most clearly in Rev. 20. Again, there are sharp differences of opinion regarding this topic.

Premillennialists believe that Jesus’ return will be “pre” (before) the millennium, and that this millennial kingdom will be a golden age of unprecedented glory and splendor. Dispensational premillennialists, with their emphasis on the distinction between Israel and the church, have focused on the fulfillment of all the remaining OT prophecies made to Israel. Historic premillennialists, on the other hand, lack this sharp distinction between Israel and the church and see themselves as being in continuity with the view of a future reign of Christ on earth found throughout church history. In recent years, premillennialism has become the leading view in American Christianity.

Postmillennialists believe that God will build his church for “a thousand years” and then Jesus will return “post” (after) this millennium. The millennium here is comparable to a silver age involving significant and unprecedented advances of the gospel throughout the world. Postmillennialists remain divided about how literal this thousand-year period might be and whether this period has already begun or not. Postmillennialism has had a significant following throughout most of church history but more recently has become a minority view.

Amillennialists believe in a different kind of millennium. Here there are two different varieties. Some believe that those reigning with Christ in Rev. 20 are simply believers living here in this present life experiencing the intimacy of Christ’s presence in their daily lives. Others see this period as involving departed believers, who are currently reigning with Christ in the intermediate state between death and his return. The millennium here is neither the golden age of the premillennialist nor the silver age of the postmillennialist; it is simply life today.

Again there are predisposing factors. Those who place more weight on potentially unfulfilled OT prophecies will tend to be premillennial, whereas those who place more weight on the words of Jesus and Paul will tend to be amillennial or possibly postmillennial. Those who see more of a distinction between Israel and the church will tend to be dispensational premillennialists, whereas those who emphasize the unity among God’s people throughout redemptive history will choose one of the other alternatives. Those who tend toward a more literal approach to interpreting Scripture will tend to be premillennialists, whereas those who give more weight to symbolic and figurative language will choose one of the other options. Those who tend to be more pessimistic about the future and believe that things are getting worse will tend to be premillennialists, whereas those who are more optimistic about what God is doing in this world and who emphasize the transforming power of the gospel will tend to be postmillennialists. One’s eschatological convictions are the logical outgrowth of many other earlier commitments and persuasions.

Each of these millennial views also has implications for a number of other topics: the nature and intensity of Satan’s binding in Rev. 20, the number of different resurrections, and the number of different judgments. The ultimate question, again, is which approach does the best job of putting together all the prophecies of Scripture and consequently is most faithful to God’s word.

Heaven and Hell

God’s judgment inevitably leads either to final and permanent torment in hell or to untold blessings in the new heaven and new earth (Matt. 25:46).

The ultimate hope of believers involves the bodily resurrection and a new earth to go along with these glorified bodies. The glad time will come when God “will wipe every tear from their eyes” and “there will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain” (Rev. 21:4). There will be the joys of physical bodies healed and restored, seeing friends and loved ones, but the greatest joy of all will be seeing the Lord himself in all his glory and majesty.

Hell will be the very opposite, experienced by those who deliberately rejected and avoided God during their earthly lives. They will find themselves rejected by God and cut off from his presence (and all the blessings that go along with his presence). Although there are various debates about how literal or figurative some of the biblical descriptions of hell are in terms of unquenchable fire and worms that do not die (Mark 9:48), it seems safe to say that hell will be the greatest of all possible tragedies and far worse than any of these descriptions suggest.

Annihilationism or conditional immortality, with its assumption that the souls of the lost will cease to exist at some point after death, represents an attempt to soften the explicit teachings of Scripture. Universalism—the belief that ultimately everyone will be saved—is another human strategy to avoid the clear teaching of Scripture. Ultimately, there is a heaven, and there is a hell, and human choices do make a difference for time and eternity.

The Benefits of Eschatology

Eschatology should give balance and perspective to life so that the affairs and accomplishments of this present life do not take on an inappropriate importance. Whenever people are caught up with materialism and a this-worldly perspective on life or become complacent about their lack of spiritual growth or the spiritual condition of others, the underlying cause is often a lack of attention to eschatology. Although many difficult and controversial questions surround the nature and timing of the return of Jesus Christ, Scripture is clear about the fact of his return and the final judgment. A new life with Christ that will last for all eternity is described in Scripture as the greatest of all possible blessings. At the same time, a life apart from God both in this life and in the life to come is described as the greatest possible tragedy in life. Perhaps even the spiritual deception and confusion around us, whereby many “will abandon the faith” (1Tim. 4:1) and “not put up with sound doctrine” (2Tim. 4:3), are a sign of the lateness of the hour. A proper appreciation of eschatology can be a means that God uses to change people’s lives.

Eschatology is the study of last things. The word “eschatology” comes from the Greek word eschatos, meaning “last.” From this same Greek word is derived the term “eschaton,” which is sometimes used to refer to the end times.

Eschatology deals with such future events as the end of the world, Jesus’ return, the resurrection, the final judgment, and the afterlife in heaven or hell. The tribulation and the millennium also belong to eschatology, but their timing and nature vary with different views. Although from one perspective human history entered its final phase in NT times so that people today are already living in the “last days,” eschatology normally focuses on the unfulfilled prophecies that remain still in the future for present-day believers.

Eschatology deals with questions regarding the future. Every religion and philosophy of life has offered answers to these questions. Plato taught about the immortality of the soul. Buddhism has its nirvana, Islam its sensual paradise, and Native Americans their happy hunting grounds. The belief that the soul survives death is widely held. Even atheists and materialists have their own views of eschatology. Yet only in Christianity does eschatology become the crown and capstone of everything else that God has been doing throughout history, when he will be perfectly glorified, Christ completely victorious, the power of sin entirely overcome, and the people of God given a complete salvation.

Yet it is difficult to find a topic on which Christians are more divided. Frequently, people studying eschatology fall into one of two opposite traps: unwarranted dogmatism or simple avoidance. Yet eschatology should be a source of comfort and hope to believers as well as an ongoing reminder of the lateness and urgency of the hour. Consequently, eschatology deserves most careful attention and should create a sense of excitement and anticipation.

Reasons for Controversy

Eschatology is by no means a simple discipline. The sheer magnitude of this topic is a significant challenge involving hundreds of different unfulfilled prophecies from virtually every book of the Bible. Difficulties in interpreting these prophecies with their figures of speech, apocalyptic language, and complicated symbolism create still greater complications. Then there is the challenge of organizing these individual prophecies together into a coherent timeline when each will be fulfilled. Discerning the period of fulfillment for some prophecies is relatively clear and easy, but for others it is much less certain.

Even the question of how many periods of future time remain in God’s timetable has often been the source of considerable debate. For example, will there be a future period of tribulation, or were these prophecies already fulfilled in AD 70, or perhaps more generally throughout church history, with its countless martyrs? Similar questions have been raised about the millennium: is this to be understood in a still future sense, as premillennialists assert, or is it already in the process of being fulfilled, as amillennialists and postmillennialists claim? The fact that there is no common agreement even on these fundamental questions virtually guarantees that believers will remain divided on this issue.

Then too there is the final step of trying to assign specific unfulfilled prophecies into this grid of prophetic time slots. For example, is the prophecy “The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox” (Isa. 65:25) a symbolic picture of God’s blessings in this present church age, in a future millennium, or in eternity itself? The vast majority of these unfulfilled prophecies contain few clues regarding the precise time of their fulfillment, and interpreters often are left with little to guide them. We should not be surprised that eschatology leaves believers more divided than do other areas of theology.

Jesus’ Return and the Tribulation

The fact of Jesus’ return is clear. When Jesus was taken up from his apostles at the end of his earthly ministry, two angels promised them, “This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11). Today believers look forward to Jesus’ second coming, as “the blessed hope” (Titus 2:13). The common understanding has always been that this return will be personal, visible, and bodily—just as real as his first coming two thousand yearsago.

Christians, however, have been divided over the timing of Jesus’ return and the tribulation. Here there are five interrelated questions.

1.The first question is whether Jesus’ return is a single event or will occur in two stages. Dispensationalists distinguish two phases to Jesus’ return: a secret rapture that removes the church from a period of intense tribulation involving Israel here on earth, and then a later public second coming in judgment at the end of the tribulation, when he will establish his kingdom. A number of recent “left behind” books and movies have popularized this approach. Yet this two-stage model is difficult to document in Scripture, and many understand Scripture to describe Jesus’ return as a single unified event.

2.How one answers this first question has implications for the second question of the timing of Jesus’ return relative to the tribulation. Here there are three popular options regarding the timing of Jesus’ return: pretribulational (before the tribulation), midtribulational (in the midst of the tribulation), and posttribulational (after the tribulation). Yet if Jesus’ return is pretribulational or midtribulational, logic would require that there be two phases to Jesus’ return: a secret rapture either before the tribulation (for pretribulationalism) or in the middle of it (for midtribulationalism), and then a separate public return at the conclusion of the tribulation to establish his kingdom. Thus, a two-stage return of Jesus goes hand in hand with pretribulationalism and midtribulationalism, and a single return with posttribulationalism.

3.A third question focuses on the nature of the tribulation period. There are three main views. Pretribulationalists assume that the tribulation will be a period (usually seven years) of great suffering such as this world has never seen. Midtribulationalists believe that Jesus will return after three and a half years of less intense tribulation, followed by a considerably more intense second period of three and a half years of wrath, from which believers will be spared. Posttribulationalists see this tribulation as the suffering and persecution of Christians at various times and places around the world, with possibly some intensification in the final days. Consequently, how one understands the intensity of the tribulation is another factor affecting the choice of one tribulational view or another.

4.A fourth interrelated question involves whether one believes that Jesus may return suddenly and unexpectedly at any moment (Matt. 24:42) or whether there are still unfulfilled prophecies that must take place first (initially including at least Peter’s death [John 21:19] and the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem). Pretribulationalists pride themselves on how their view of a secret rapture allows for Jesus to return imminently without any intervening signs or other warnings. Midtribulationalists believe that the church will need to experience three and a half years of moderate tribulation, so there is less emphasis on an imminent return (although one could argue that the first period of tribulation is potentially more ambiguous in nature). Posttribulationalists are divided into two groups. Many have held that the tribulation will be a period of significant tribulation, so typically they have downplayed the idea of imminence. However, other posttribulationalists (sometimes called “pasttribulationalists” or “imminent posttribulationalists”) assume that the tribulation described in Scripture may already be fulfilled either at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 or more generally throughout church history, and therefore Jesus may return at any time.

5.The fifth question focuses on how literally or figuratively one should interpret the two key passages of Scripture related to the nature of the tribulation: the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24 pars.) and Rev. 6–19. Much of the Olivet Discourse focuses on the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, and many have understood at least parts of Revelation as being fulfilled historically either in John’s own day or during church history. The more one assumes that at least portions of these prophecies were already fulfilled, the less one awaits a future fulfillment. A more literal approach to these prophecies will predispose one toward pretribulationalism or possibly midtribulationalism, and a more figurative approach toward posttribulationalism.

Hyperpreterism, or consistent preterism, has emerged in the last few decades with a still different approach to the timing of Jesus’ return. The driving force behind this movement is Jesus’ apparent promise to return within a generation of his death (Matt. 24:34). Consequently, hyperpreterism has assumed that all the future prophecies in the NT must have been fulfilled by the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, including Jesus’ return, the bodily resurrection, the final judgment, and the new heaven and new earth. The bottom line is that in order to take literally Jesus’ promise to return within a generation, everything else in eschatology needs to be reinterpreted as having been fulfilled in one way or another within that same generation. A more moderate preterism sees many, but not all, of these eschatological events fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Jesus returned as the Son of Man in judgment against Israel in these first-century events, but the final judgment of all people and the new heaven and new earth await his second coming.

The Resurrection and the Final Judgment

The bodily resurrection takes place at the time of Jesus’ return. Although many other religions and philosophies have assumed the immortality of the soul, whereby the nonmaterial part of human nature survives death, Christianity is distinctive in its strong commitment to the idea of a bodily resurrection. Death marks the separation of the body from the soul and the time when believers are immediately ushered into God’s presence (Eccles. 12:7). Thus, Jesus was able to promise the thief on the cross, “Today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43). However, people do not immediately receive new resurrection bodies at the time of death, but must wait until the time of Jesus’ return, when “the dead in Christ will rise first” (1Thess. 4:16). This bodily resurrection is the precursor to the final judgment of the saved and the lost, when “all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come out—those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil will rise to be condemned” (John 5:28–29). At that time, Christ “will judge the living and the dead” (2Tim.4:1).

This theme of judgment is foundational to Christianity, although Christians remain divided about the exact number and character of these judgments. Yet the time will come when all people will be judged, both “the living and the dead” (Acts 10:42), when “we will all stand before God’s judgment seat” (Rom. 14:10), and “each of us will give an account of ourselves to God” (14:12). God himself will be the judge, and Christ will be given a special place in presiding over the final judgment and separate those who truly belong to him from those who do not. Even though this judgment will be “according to what they have done” (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6; Rev. 22:12), these deeds are simply an outward demonstration of whether a living faith is present, so there is no contradiction between justification by faith and the necessary place for a changed life in the believer. Yet, as Jesus warns, some will be surprised: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 7:21). God’s judgment will be both just and inescapable.

Christians remain divided about the number of resurrections. Premillennialists who are also pretribulationalists or midtribulationalists would conclude that there is a minimum of a resurrection of believers at the time of the rapture, when Jesus returns for his church; another resurrection when Jesus returns at the end of the tribulation for believers who came to faith and died during the tribulation; as well as another resurrection at the end of the millennium for “the rest of the dead” (Rev. 20:5). Premillennialists who are also posttribulationalists would conclude that there are as few as two resurrections: one at Jesus’ return and another at the end of the millennium. An amillennialist or a postmillennialist would assume that there may be only a single bodily resurrection when Jesus returns and establishes his kingdom.

There is one other aspect that completes this theme: God’s judgment also includes the destruction of the devil in the lake of fire (Rev. 20:10). Someday sin and evil will be forever removed from God’s creation.

The Millennium

The millennium is a thousand-year reign of Christ described most clearly in Rev. 20. Again, there are sharp differences of opinion regarding this topic.

Premillennialists believe that Jesus’ return will be “pre” (before) the millennium, and that this millennial kingdom will be a golden age of unprecedented glory and splendor. Dispensational premillennialists, with their emphasis on the distinction between Israel and the church, have focused on the fulfillment of all the remaining OT prophecies made to Israel. Historic premillennialists, on the other hand, lack this sharp distinction between Israel and the church and see themselves as being in continuity with the view of a future reign of Christ on earth found throughout church history. In recent years, premillennialism has become the leading view in American Christianity.

Postmillennialists believe that God will build his church for “a thousand years” and then Jesus will return “post” (after) this millennium. The millennium here is comparable to a silver age involving significant and unprecedented advances of the gospel throughout the world. Postmillennialists remain divided about how literal this thousand-year period might be and whether this period has already begun or not. Postmillennialism has had a significant following throughout most of church history but more recently has become a minority view.

Amillennialists believe in a different kind of millennium. Here there are two different varieties. Some believe that those reigning with Christ in Rev. 20 are simply believers living here in this present life experiencing the intimacy of Christ’s presence in their daily lives. Others see this period as involving departed believers, who are currently reigning with Christ in the intermediate state between death and his return. The millennium here is neither the golden age of the premillennialist nor the silver age of the postmillennialist; it is simply life today.

Again there are predisposing factors. Those who place more weight on potentially unfulfilled OT prophecies will tend to be premillennial, whereas those who place more weight on the words of Jesus and Paul will tend to be amillennial or possibly postmillennial. Those who see more of a distinction between Israel and the church will tend to be dispensational premillennialists, whereas those who emphasize the unity among God’s people throughout redemptive history will choose one of the other alternatives. Those who tend toward a more literal approach to interpreting Scripture will tend to be premillennialists, whereas those who give more weight to symbolic and figurative language will choose one of the other options. Those who tend to be more pessimistic about the future and believe that things are getting worse will tend to be premillennialists, whereas those who are more optimistic about what God is doing in this world and who emphasize the transforming power of the gospel will tend to be postmillennialists. One’s eschatological convictions are the logical outgrowth of many other earlier commitments and persuasions.

Each of these millennial views also has implications for a number of other topics: the nature and intensity of Satan’s binding in Rev. 20, the number of different resurrections, and the number of different judgments. The ultimate question, again, is which approach does the best job of putting together all the prophecies of Scripture and consequently is most faithful to God’s word.

Heaven and Hell

God’s judgment inevitably leads either to final and permanent torment in hell or to untold blessings in the new heaven and new earth (Matt. 25:46).

The ultimate hope of believers involves the bodily resurrection and a new earth to go along with these glorified bodies. The glad time will come when God “will wipe every tear from their eyes” and “there will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain” (Rev. 21:4). There will be the joys of physical bodies healed and restored, seeing friends and loved ones, but the greatest joy of all will be seeing the Lord himself in all his glory and majesty.

Hell will be the very opposite, experienced by those who deliberately rejected and avoided God during their earthly lives. They will find themselves rejected by God and cut off from his presence (and all the blessings that go along with his presence). Although there are various debates about how literal or figurative some of the biblical descriptions of hell are in terms of unquenchable fire and worms that do not die (Mark 9:48), it seems safe to say that hell will be the greatest of all possible tragedies and far worse than any of these descriptions suggest.

Annihilationism or conditional immortality, with its assumption that the souls of the lost will cease to exist at some point after death, represents an attempt to soften the explicit teachings of Scripture. Universalism—the belief that ultimately everyone will be saved—is another human strategy to avoid the clear teaching of Scripture. Ultimately, there is a heaven, and there is a hell, and human choices do make a difference for time and eternity.

The Benefits of Eschatology

Eschatology should give balance and perspective to life so that the affairs and accomplishments of this present life do not take on an inappropriate importance. Whenever people are caught up with materialism and a this-worldly perspective on life or become complacent about their lack of spiritual growth or the spiritual condition of others, the underlying cause is often a lack of attention to eschatology. Although many difficult and controversial questions surround the nature and timing of the return of Jesus Christ, Scripture is clear about the fact of his return and the final judgment. A new life with Christ that will last for all eternity is described in Scripture as the greatest of all possible blessings. At the same time, a life apart from God both in this life and in the life to come is described as the greatest possible tragedy in life. Perhaps even the spiritual deception and confusion around us, whereby many “will abandon the faith” (1Tim. 4:1) and “not put up with sound doctrine” (2Tim. 4:3), are a sign of the lateness of the hour. A proper appreciation of eschatology can be a means that God uses to change people’s lives.

Eschatology is the study of last things. The word “eschatology” comes from the Greek word eschatos, meaning “last.” From this same Greek word is derived the term “eschaton,” which is sometimes used to refer to the end times.

Eschatology deals with such future events as the end of the world, Jesus’ return, the resurrection, the final judgment, and the afterlife in heaven or hell. The tribulation and the millennium also belong to eschatology, but their timing and nature vary with different views. Although from one perspective human history entered its final phase in NT times so that people today are already living in the “last days,” eschatology normally focuses on the unfulfilled prophecies that remain still in the future for present-day believers.

Eschatology deals with questions regarding the future. Every religion and philosophy of life has offered answers to these questions. Plato taught about the immortality of the soul. Buddhism has its nirvana, Islam its sensual paradise, and Native Americans their happy hunting grounds. The belief that the soul survives death is widely held. Even atheists and materialists have their own views of eschatology. Yet only in Christianity does eschatology become the crown and capstone of everything else that God has been doing throughout history, when he will be perfectly glorified, Christ completely victorious, the power of sin entirely overcome, and the people of God given a complete salvation.

Yet it is difficult to find a topic on which Christians are more divided. Frequently, people studying eschatology fall into one of two opposite traps: unwarranted dogmatism or simple avoidance. Yet eschatology should be a source of comfort and hope to believers as well as an ongoing reminder of the lateness and urgency of the hour. Consequently, eschatology deserves most careful attention and should create a sense of excitement and anticipation.

Reasons for Controversy

Eschatology is by no means a simple discipline. The sheer magnitude of this topic is a significant challenge involving hundreds of different unfulfilled prophecies from virtually every book of the Bible. Difficulties in interpreting these prophecies with their figures of speech, apocalyptic language, and complicated symbolism create still greater complications. Then there is the challenge of organizing these individual prophecies together into a coherent timeline when each will be fulfilled. Discerning the period of fulfillment for some prophecies is relatively clear and easy, but for others it is much less certain.

Even the question of how many periods of future time remain in God’s timetable has often been the source of considerable debate. For example, will there be a future period of tribulation, or were these prophecies already fulfilled in AD 70, or perhaps more generally throughout church history, with its countless martyrs? Similar questions have been raised about the millennium: is this to be understood in a still future sense, as premillennialists assert, or is it already in the process of being fulfilled, as amillennialists and postmillennialists claim? The fact that there is no common agreement even on these fundamental questions virtually guarantees that believers will remain divided on this issue.

Then too there is the final step of trying to assign specific unfulfilled prophecies into this grid of prophetic time slots. For example, is the prophecy “The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox” (Isa. 65:25) a symbolic picture of God’s blessings in this present church age, in a future millennium, or in eternity itself? The vast majority of these unfulfilled prophecies contain few clues regarding the precise time of their fulfillment, and interpreters often are left with little to guide them. We should not be surprised that eschatology leaves believers more divided than do other areas of theology.

Jesus’ Return and the Tribulation

The fact of Jesus’ return is clear. When Jesus was taken up from his apostles at the end of his earthly ministry, two angels promised them, “This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11). Today believers look forward to Jesus’ second coming, as “the blessed hope” (Titus 2:13). The common understanding has always been that this return will be personal, visible, and bodily—just as real as his first coming two thousand yearsago.

Christians, however, have been divided over the timing of Jesus’ return and the tribulation. Here there are five interrelated questions.

1.The first question is whether Jesus’ return is a single event or will occur in two stages. Dispensationalists distinguish two phases to Jesus’ return: a secret rapture that removes the church from a period of intense tribulation involving Israel here on earth, and then a later public second coming in judgment at the end of the tribulation, when he will establish his kingdom. A number of recent “left behind” books and movies have popularized this approach. Yet this two-stage model is difficult to document in Scripture, and many understand Scripture to describe Jesus’ return as a single unified event.

2.How one answers this first question has implications for the second question of the timing of Jesus’ return relative to the tribulation. Here there are three popular options regarding the timing of Jesus’ return: pretribulational (before the tribulation), midtribulational (in the midst of the tribulation), and posttribulational (after the tribulation). Yet if Jesus’ return is pretribulational or midtribulational, logic would require that there be two phases to Jesus’ return: a secret rapture either before the tribulation (for pretribulationalism) or in the middle of it (for midtribulationalism), and then a separate public return at the conclusion of the tribulation to establish his kingdom. Thus, a two-stage return of Jesus goes hand in hand with pretribulationalism and midtribulationalism, and a single return with posttribulationalism.

3.A third question focuses on the nature of the tribulation period. There are three main views. Pretribulationalists assume that the tribulation will be a period (usually seven years) of great suffering such as this world has never seen. Midtribulationalists believe that Jesus will return after three and a half years of less intense tribulation, followed by a considerably more intense second period of three and a half years of wrath, from which believers will be spared. Posttribulationalists see this tribulation as the suffering and persecution of Christians at various times and places around the world, with possibly some intensification in the final days. Consequently, how one understands the intensity of the tribulation is another factor affecting the choice of one tribulational view or another.

4.A fourth interrelated question involves whether one believes that Jesus may return suddenly and unexpectedly at any moment (Matt. 24:42) or whether there are still unfulfilled prophecies that must take place first (initially including at least Peter’s death [John 21:19] and the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem). Pretribulationalists pride themselves on how their view of a secret rapture allows for Jesus to return imminently without any intervening signs or other warnings. Midtribulationalists believe that the church will need to experience three and a half years of moderate tribulation, so there is less emphasis on an imminent return (although one could argue that the first period of tribulation is potentially more ambiguous in nature). Posttribulationalists are divided into two groups. Many have held that the tribulation will be a period of significant tribulation, so typically they have downplayed the idea of imminence. However, other posttribulationalists (sometimes called “pasttribulationalists” or “imminent posttribulationalists”) assume that the tribulation described in Scripture may already be fulfilled either at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 or more generally throughout church history, and therefore Jesus may return at any time.

5.The fifth question focuses on how literally or figuratively one should interpret the two key passages of Scripture related to the nature of the tribulation: the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24 pars.) and Rev. 6–19. Much of the Olivet Discourse focuses on the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, and many have understood at least parts of Revelation as being fulfilled historically either in John’s own day or during church history. The more one assumes that at least portions of these prophecies were already fulfilled, the less one awaits a future fulfillment. A more literal approach to these prophecies will predispose one toward pretribulationalism or possibly midtribulationalism, and a more figurative approach toward posttribulationalism.

Hyperpreterism, or consistent preterism, has emerged in the last few decades with a still different approach to the timing of Jesus’ return. The driving force behind this movement is Jesus’ apparent promise to return within a generation of his death (Matt. 24:34). Consequently, hyperpreterism has assumed that all the future prophecies in the NT must have been fulfilled by the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, including Jesus’ return, the bodily resurrection, the final judgment, and the new heaven and new earth. The bottom line is that in order to take literally Jesus’ promise to return within a generation, everything else in eschatology needs to be reinterpreted as having been fulfilled in one way or another within that same generation. A more moderate preterism sees many, but not all, of these eschatological events fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Jesus returned as the Son of Man in judgment against Israel in these first-century events, but the final judgment of all people and the new heaven and new earth await his second coming.

The Resurrection and the Final Judgment

The bodily resurrection takes place at the time of Jesus’ return. Although many other religions and philosophies have assumed the immortality of the soul, whereby the nonmaterial part of human nature survives death, Christianity is distinctive in its strong commitment to the idea of a bodily resurrection. Death marks the separation of the body from the soul and the time when believers are immediately ushered into God’s presence (Eccles. 12:7). Thus, Jesus was able to promise the thief on the cross, “Today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43). However, people do not immediately receive new resurrection bodies at the time of death, but must wait until the time of Jesus’ return, when “the dead in Christ will rise first” (1Thess. 4:16). This bodily resurrection is the precursor to the final judgment of the saved and the lost, when “all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come out—those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil will rise to be condemned” (John 5:28–29). At that time, Christ “will judge the living and the dead” (2Tim.4:1).

This theme of judgment is foundational to Christianity, although Christians remain divided about the exact number and character of these judgments. Yet the time will come when all people will be judged, both “the living and the dead” (Acts 10:42), when “we will all stand before God’s judgment seat” (Rom. 14:10), and “each of us will give an account of ourselves to God” (14:12). God himself will be the judge, and Christ will be given a special place in presiding over the final judgment and separate those who truly belong to him from those who do not. Even though this judgment will be “according to what they have done” (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6; Rev. 22:12), these deeds are simply an outward demonstration of whether a living faith is present, so there is no contradiction between justification by faith and the necessary place for a changed life in the believer. Yet, as Jesus warns, some will be surprised: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 7:21). God’s judgment will be both just and inescapable.

Christians remain divided about the number of resurrections. Premillennialists who are also pretribulationalists or midtribulationalists would conclude that there is a minimum of a resurrection of believers at the time of the rapture, when Jesus returns for his church; another resurrection when Jesus returns at the end of the tribulation for believers who came to faith and died during the tribulation; as well as another resurrection at the end of the millennium for “the rest of the dead” (Rev. 20:5). Premillennialists who are also posttribulationalists would conclude that there are as few as two resurrections: one at Jesus’ return and another at the end of the millennium. An amillennialist or a postmillennialist would assume that there may be only a single bodily resurrection when Jesus returns and establishes his kingdom.

There is one other aspect that completes this theme: God’s judgment also includes the destruction of the devil in the lake of fire (Rev. 20:10). Someday sin and evil will be forever removed from God’s creation.

The Millennium

The millennium is a thousand-year reign of Christ described most clearly in Rev. 20. Again, there are sharp differences of opinion regarding this topic.

Premillennialists believe that Jesus’ return will be “pre” (before) the millennium, and that this millennial kingdom will be a golden age of unprecedented glory and splendor. Dispensational premillennialists, with their emphasis on the distinction between Israel and the church, have focused on the fulfillment of all the remaining OT prophecies made to Israel. Historic premillennialists, on the other hand, lack this sharp distinction between Israel and the church and see themselves as being in continuity with the view of a future reign of Christ on earth found throughout church history. In recent years, premillennialism has become the leading view in American Christianity.

Postmillennialists believe that God will build his church for “a thousand years” and then Jesus will return “post” (after) this millennium. The millennium here is comparable to a silver age involving significant and unprecedented advances of the gospel throughout the world. Postmillennialists remain divided about how literal this thousand-year period might be and whether this period has already begun or not. Postmillennialism has had a significant following throughout most of church history but more recently has become a minority view.

Amillennialists believe in a different kind of millennium. Here there are two different varieties. Some believe that those reigning with Christ in Rev. 20 are simply believers living here in this present life experiencing the intimacy of Christ’s presence in their daily lives. Others see this period as involving departed believers, who are currently reigning with Christ in the intermediate state between death and his return. The millennium here is neither the golden age of the premillennialist nor the silver age of the postmillennialist; it is simply life today.

Again there are predisposing factors. Those who place more weight on potentially unfulfilled OT prophecies will tend to be premillennial, whereas those who place more weight on the words of Jesus and Paul will tend to be amillennial or possibly postmillennial. Those who see more of a distinction between Israel and the church will tend to be dispensational premillennialists, whereas those who emphasize the unity among God’s people throughout redemptive history will choose one of the other alternatives. Those who tend toward a more literal approach to interpreting Scripture will tend to be premillennialists, whereas those who give more weight to symbolic and figurative language will choose one of the other options. Those who tend to be more pessimistic about the future and believe that things are getting worse will tend to be premillennialists, whereas those who are more optimistic about what God is doing in this world and who emphasize the transforming power of the gospel will tend to be postmillennialists. One’s eschatological convictions are the logical outgrowth of many other earlier commitments and persuasions.

Each of these millennial views also has implications for a number of other topics: the nature and intensity of Satan’s binding in Rev. 20, the number of different resurrections, and the number of different judgments. The ultimate question, again, is which approach does the best job of putting together all the prophecies of Scripture and consequently is most faithful to God’s word.

Heaven and Hell

God’s judgment inevitably leads either to final and permanent torment in hell or to untold blessings in the new heaven and new earth (Matt. 25:46).

The ultimate hope of believers involves the bodily resurrection and a new earth to go along with these glorified bodies. The glad time will come when God “will wipe every tear from their eyes” and “there will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain” (Rev. 21:4). There will be the joys of physical bodies healed and restored, seeing friends and loved ones, but the greatest joy of all will be seeing the Lord himself in all his glory and majesty.

Hell will be the very opposite, experienced by those who deliberately rejected and avoided God during their earthly lives. They will find themselves rejected by God and cut off from his presence (and all the blessings that go along with his presence). Although there are various debates about how literal or figurative some of the biblical descriptions of hell are in terms of unquenchable fire and worms that do not die (Mark 9:48), it seems safe to say that hell will be the greatest of all possible tragedies and far worse than any of these descriptions suggest.

Annihilationism or conditional immortality, with its assumption that the souls of the lost will cease to exist at some point after death, represents an attempt to soften the explicit teachings of Scripture. Universalism—the belief that ultimately everyone will be saved—is another human strategy to avoid the clear teaching of Scripture. Ultimately, there is a heaven, and there is a hell, and human choices do make a difference for time and eternity.

The Benefits of Eschatology

Eschatology should give balance and perspective to life so that the affairs and accomplishments of this present life do not take on an inappropriate importance. Whenever people are caught up with materialism and a this-worldly perspective on life or become complacent about their lack of spiritual growth or the spiritual condition of others, the underlying cause is often a lack of attention to eschatology. Although many difficult and controversial questions surround the nature and timing of the return of Jesus Christ, Scripture is clear about the fact of his return and the final judgment. A new life with Christ that will last for all eternity is described in Scripture as the greatest of all possible blessings. At the same time, a life apart from God both in this life and in the life to come is described as the greatest possible tragedy in life. Perhaps even the spiritual deception and confusion around us, whereby many “will abandon the faith” (1Tim. 4:1) and “not put up with sound doctrine” (2Tim. 4:3), are a sign of the lateness of the hour. A proper appreciation of eschatology can be a means that God uses to change people’s lives.

Eschatology is the study of last things. The word “eschatology” comes from the Greek word eschatos, meaning “last.” From this same Greek word is derived the term “eschaton,” which is sometimes used to refer to the end times.

Eschatology deals with such future events as the end of the world, Jesus’ return, the resurrection, the final judgment, and the afterlife in heaven or hell. The tribulation and the millennium also belong to eschatology, but their timing and nature vary with different views. Although from one perspective human history entered its final phase in NT times so that people today are already living in the “last days,” eschatology normally focuses on the unfulfilled prophecies that remain still in the future for present-day believers.

Eschatology deals with questions regarding the future. Every religion and philosophy of life has offered answers to these questions. Plato taught about the immortality of the soul. Buddhism has its nirvana, Islam its sensual paradise, and Native Americans their happy hunting grounds. The belief that the soul survives death is widely held. Even atheists and materialists have their own views of eschatology. Yet only in Christianity does eschatology become the crown and capstone of everything else that God has been doing throughout history, when he will be perfectly glorified, Christ completely victorious, the power of sin entirely overcome, and the people of God given a complete salvation.

Yet it is difficult to find a topic on which Christians are more divided. Frequently, people studying eschatology fall into one of two opposite traps: unwarranted dogmatism or simple avoidance. Yet eschatology should be a source of comfort and hope to believers as well as an ongoing reminder of the lateness and urgency of the hour. Consequently, eschatology deserves most careful attention and should create a sense of excitement and anticipation.

Reasons for Controversy

Eschatology is by no means a simple discipline. The sheer magnitude of this topic is a significant challenge involving hundreds of different unfulfilled prophecies from virtually every book of the Bible. Difficulties in interpreting these prophecies with their figures of speech, apocalyptic language, and complicated symbolism create still greater complications. Then there is the challenge of organizing these individual prophecies together into a coherent timeline when each will be fulfilled. Discerning the period of fulfillment for some prophecies is relatively clear and easy, but for others it is much less certain.

Even the question of how many periods of future time remain in God’s timetable has often been the source of considerable debate. For example, will there be a future period of tribulation, or were these prophecies already fulfilled in AD 70, or perhaps more generally throughout church history, with its countless martyrs? Similar questions have been raised about the millennium: is this to be understood in a still future sense, as premillennialists assert, or is it already in the process of being fulfilled, as amillennialists and postmillennialists claim? The fact that there is no common agreement even on these fundamental questions virtually guarantees that believers will remain divided on this issue.

Then too there is the final step of trying to assign specific unfulfilled prophecies into this grid of prophetic time slots. For example, is the prophecy “The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox” (Isa. 65:25) a symbolic picture of God’s blessings in this present church age, in a future millennium, or in eternity itself? The vast majority of these unfulfilled prophecies contain few clues regarding the precise time of their fulfillment, and interpreters often are left with little to guide them. We should not be surprised that eschatology leaves believers more divided than do other areas of theology.

Jesus’ Return and the Tribulation

The fact of Jesus’ return is clear. When Jesus was taken up from his apostles at the end of his earthly ministry, two angels promised them, “This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11). Today believers look forward to Jesus’ second coming, as “the blessed hope” (Titus 2:13). The common understanding has always been that this return will be personal, visible, and bodily—just as real as his first coming two thousand yearsago.

Christians, however, have been divided over the timing of Jesus’ return and the tribulation. Here there are five interrelated questions.

1.The first question is whether Jesus’ return is a single event or will occur in two stages. Dispensationalists distinguish two phases to Jesus’ return: a secret rapture that removes the church from a period of intense tribulation involving Israel here on earth, and then a later public second coming in judgment at the end of the tribulation, when he will establish his kingdom. A number of recent “left behind” books and movies have popularized this approach. Yet this two-stage model is difficult to document in Scripture, and many understand Scripture to describe Jesus’ return as a single unified event.

2.How one answers this first question has implications for the second question of the timing of Jesus’ return relative to the tribulation. Here there are three popular options regarding the timing of Jesus’ return: pretribulational (before the tribulation), midtribulational (in the midst of the tribulation), and posttribulational (after the tribulation). Yet if Jesus’ return is pretribulational or midtribulational, logic would require that there be two phases to Jesus’ return: a secret rapture either before the tribulation (for pretribulationalism) or in the middle of it (for midtribulationalism), and then a separate public return at the conclusion of the tribulation to establish his kingdom. Thus, a two-stage return of Jesus goes hand in hand with pretribulationalism and midtribulationalism, and a single return with posttribulationalism.

3.A third question focuses on the nature of the tribulation period. There are three main views. Pretribulationalists assume that the tribulation will be a period (usually seven years) of great suffering such as this world has never seen. Midtribulationalists believe that Jesus will return after three and a half years of less intense tribulation, followed by a considerably more intense second period of three and a half years of wrath, from which believers will be spared. Posttribulationalists see this tribulation as the suffering and persecution of Christians at various times and places around the world, with possibly some intensification in the final days. Consequently, how one understands the intensity of the tribulation is another factor affecting the choice of one tribulational view or another.

4.A fourth interrelated question involves whether one believes that Jesus may return suddenly and unexpectedly at any moment (Matt. 24:42) or whether there are still unfulfilled prophecies that must take place first (initially including at least Peter’s death [John 21:19] and the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem). Pretribulationalists pride themselves on how their view of a secret rapture allows for Jesus to return imminently without any intervening signs or other warnings. Midtribulationalists believe that the church will need to experience three and a half years of moderate tribulation, so there is less emphasis on an imminent return (although one could argue that the first period of tribulation is potentially more ambiguous in nature). Posttribulationalists are divided into two groups. Many have held that the tribulation will be a period of significant tribulation, so typically they have downplayed the idea of imminence. However, other posttribulationalists (sometimes called “pasttribulationalists” or “imminent posttribulationalists”) assume that the tribulation described in Scripture may already be fulfilled either at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 or more generally throughout church history, and therefore Jesus may return at any time.

5.The fifth question focuses on how literally or figuratively one should interpret the two key passages of Scripture related to the nature of the tribulation: the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24 pars.) and Rev. 6–19. Much of the Olivet Discourse focuses on the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, and many have understood at least parts of Revelation as being fulfilled historically either in John’s own day or during church history. The more one assumes that at least portions of these prophecies were already fulfilled, the less one awaits a future fulfillment. A more literal approach to these prophecies will predispose one toward pretribulationalism or possibly midtribulationalism, and a more figurative approach toward posttribulationalism.

Hyperpreterism, or consistent preterism, has emerged in the last few decades with a still different approach to the timing of Jesus’ return. The driving force behind this movement is Jesus’ apparent promise to return within a generation of his death (Matt. 24:34). Consequently, hyperpreterism has assumed that all the future prophecies in the NT must have been fulfilled by the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, including Jesus’ return, the bodily resurrection, the final judgment, and the new heaven and new earth. The bottom line is that in order to take literally Jesus’ promise to return within a generation, everything else in eschatology needs to be reinterpreted as having been fulfilled in one way or another within that same generation. A more moderate preterism sees many, but not all, of these eschatological events fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Jesus returned as the Son of Man in judgment against Israel in these first-century events, but the final judgment of all people and the new heaven and new earth await his second coming.

The Resurrection and the Final Judgment

The bodily resurrection takes place at the time of Jesus’ return. Although many other religions and philosophies have assumed the immortality of the soul, whereby the nonmaterial part of human nature survives death, Christianity is distinctive in its strong commitment to the idea of a bodily resurrection. Death marks the separation of the body from the soul and the time when believers are immediately ushered into God’s presence (Eccles. 12:7). Thus, Jesus was able to promise the thief on the cross, “Today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43). However, people do not immediately receive new resurrection bodies at the time of death, but must wait until the time of Jesus’ return, when “the dead in Christ will rise first” (1Thess. 4:16). This bodily resurrection is the precursor to the final judgment of the saved and the lost, when “all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come out—those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil will rise to be condemned” (John 5:28–29). At that time, Christ “will judge the living and the dead” (2Tim.4:1).

This theme of judgment is foundational to Christianity, although Christians remain divided about the exact number and character of these judgments. Yet the time will come when all people will be judged, both “the living and the dead” (Acts 10:42), when “we will all stand before God’s judgment seat” (Rom. 14:10), and “each of us will give an account of ourselves to God” (14:12). God himself will be the judge, and Christ will be given a special place in presiding over the final judgment and separate those who truly belong to him from those who do not. Even though this judgment will be “according to what they have done” (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6; Rev. 22:12), these deeds are simply an outward demonstration of whether a living faith is present, so there is no contradiction between justification by faith and the necessary place for a changed life in the believer. Yet, as Jesus warns, some will be surprised: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 7:21). God’s judgment will be both just and inescapable.

Christians remain divided about the number of resurrections. Premillennialists who are also pretribulationalists or midtribulationalists would conclude that there is a minimum of a resurrection of believers at the time of the rapture, when Jesus returns for his church; another resurrection when Jesus returns at the end of the tribulation for believers who came to faith and died during the tribulation; as well as another resurrection at the end of the millennium for “the rest of the dead” (Rev. 20:5). Premillennialists who are also posttribulationalists would conclude that there are as few as two resurrections: one at Jesus’ return and another at the end of the millennium. An amillennialist or a postmillennialist would assume that there may be only a single bodily resurrection when Jesus returns and establishes his kingdom.

There is one other aspect that completes this theme: God’s judgment also includes the destruction of the devil in the lake of fire (Rev. 20:10). Someday sin and evil will be forever removed from God’s creation.

The Millennium

The millennium is a thousand-year reign of Christ described most clearly in Rev. 20. Again, there are sharp differences of opinion regarding this topic.

Premillennialists believe that Jesus’ return will be “pre” (before) the millennium, and that this millennial kingdom will be a golden age of unprecedented glory and splendor. Dispensational premillennialists, with their emphasis on the distinction between Israel and the church, have focused on the fulfillment of all the remaining OT prophecies made to Israel. Historic premillennialists, on the other hand, lack this sharp distinction between Israel and the church and see themselves as being in continuity with the view of a future reign of Christ on earth found throughout church history. In recent years, premillennialism has become the leading view in American Christianity.

Postmillennialists believe that God will build his church for “a thousand years” and then Jesus will return “post” (after) this millennium. The millennium here is comparable to a silver age involving significant and unprecedented advances of the gospel throughout the world. Postmillennialists remain divided about how literal this thousand-year period might be and whether this period has already begun or not. Postmillennialism has had a significant following throughout most of church history but more recently has become a minority view.

Amillennialists believe in a different kind of millennium. Here there are two different varieties. Some believe that those reigning with Christ in Rev. 20 are simply believers living here in this present life experiencing the intimacy of Christ’s presence in their daily lives. Others see this period as involving departed believers, who are currently reigning with Christ in the intermediate state between death and his return. The millennium here is neither the golden age of the premillennialist nor the silver age of the postmillennialist; it is simply life today.

Again there are predisposing factors. Those who place more weight on potentially unfulfilled OT prophecies will tend to be premillennial, whereas those who place more weight on the words of Jesus and Paul will tend to be amillennial or possibly postmillennial. Those who see more of a distinction between Israel and the church will tend to be dispensational premillennialists, whereas those who emphasize the unity among God’s people throughout redemptive history will choose one of the other alternatives. Those who tend toward a more literal approach to interpreting Scripture will tend to be premillennialists, whereas those who give more weight to symbolic and figurative language will choose one of the other options. Those who tend to be more pessimistic about the future and believe that things are getting worse will tend to be premillennialists, whereas those who are more optimistic about what God is doing in this world and who emphasize the transforming power of the gospel will tend to be postmillennialists. One’s eschatological convictions are the logical outgrowth of many other earlier commitments and persuasions.

Each of these millennial views also has implications for a number of other topics: the nature and intensity of Satan’s binding in Rev. 20, the number of different resurrections, and the number of different judgments. The ultimate question, again, is which approach does the best job of putting together all the prophecies of Scripture and consequently is most faithful to God’s word.

Heaven and Hell

God’s judgment inevitably leads either to final and permanent torment in hell or to untold blessings in the new heaven and new earth (Matt. 25:46).

The ultimate hope of believers involves the bodily resurrection and a new earth to go along with these glorified bodies. The glad time will come when God “will wipe every tear from their eyes” and “there will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain” (Rev. 21:4). There will be the joys of physical bodies healed and restored, seeing friends and loved ones, but the greatest joy of all will be seeing the Lord himself in all his glory and majesty.

Hell will be the very opposite, experienced by those who deliberately rejected and avoided God during their earthly lives. They will find themselves rejected by God and cut off from his presence (and all the blessings that go along with his presence). Although there are various debates about how literal or figurative some of the biblical descriptions of hell are in terms of unquenchable fire and worms that do not die (Mark 9:48), it seems safe to say that hell will be the greatest of all possible tragedies and far worse than any of these descriptions suggest.

Annihilationism or conditional immortality, with its assumption that the souls of the lost will cease to exist at some point after death, represents an attempt to soften the explicit teachings of Scripture. Universalism—the belief that ultimately everyone will be saved—is another human strategy to avoid the clear teaching of Scripture. Ultimately, there is a heaven, and there is a hell, and human choices do make a difference for time and eternity.

The Benefits of Eschatology

Eschatology should give balance and perspective to life so that the affairs and accomplishments of this present life do not take on an inappropriate importance. Whenever people are caught up with materialism and a this-worldly perspective on life or become complacent about their lack of spiritual growth or the spiritual condition of others, the underlying cause is often a lack of attention to eschatology. Although many difficult and controversial questions surround the nature and timing of the return of Jesus Christ, Scripture is clear about the fact of his return and the final judgment. A new life with Christ that will last for all eternity is described in Scripture as the greatest of all possible blessings. At the same time, a life apart from God both in this life and in the life to come is described as the greatest possible tragedy in life. Perhaps even the spiritual deception and confusion around us, whereby many “will abandon the faith” (1Tim. 4:1) and “not put up with sound doctrine” (2Tim. 4:3), are a sign of the lateness of the hour. A proper appreciation of eschatology can be a means that God uses to change people’s lives.

The Letter of James has been hailed as possibly the earliest,most Jewish, and most practical of all NT letters. James 3:13 aptlycommunicates the book’s theme: “Who is wise andunderstanding among you? Let them show it by their good life, bydeeds done in humility that comes from wisdom.” The terms“wise” and “wisdom” occur five times in thebook (1:5; 3:13 [2×], 15, 17). Hence, the author instructed hisreaders on leading a life of faith that was characterized by a wisdomexpressed through speech and actions (2:12).

LiteraryFeatures

Theauthor’s employment of picturesque, concrete language has closeaffinities to OT wisdom literature and reflects Jesus’ teachingin the Sermon on the Mount.

James1:2 – Matthew 5:10-12

James1:4 – Matthew 5:48

James1:5; 5:15 – Matthew 7:7-12

James1:9 – Matthew 5:3

James1:20 – Matthew 5:22

James1:22 – Matthew 7:21

James2:5 – Matthew 5:3

James2:13 – Matthew 5:7; 6:14-15

James2:14-16 – Matthew 7:21-23

James3:12 – Matthew 7:16

James3:17-18 – Matthew 5:9

James4:4 – Matthew 6:24

James4:10 – Matthew 5:3-4

James4:11 – Matthew 7:1-2

James5:2 – Matthew 6:19

James5:10 – Matthew 5:12

James5:12 – Matthew 5:33-37

Likethe OT wisdom literature, the teaching in James has a stronglypractical orientation. Although the book contains some lengthierparagraphs, much of it consists of sequential admonishments andethical maxims that in some cases are only loosely related to oneanother. The sentences generally are short and direct. There arefifty-four verbs in the imperative. Connection between sentences issometimes created through repeated words. Yet the overall topic ofpractical faith and wisdom links these exhortations together.

Backgroundand Occasion

Afterthe death of Stephen, many disciples were scattered into the regionsof Judea and Samaria (Acts 7:54–8:3). In Acts 11:19 thenarrator notes, “Now those who had been scattered by thepersecution that broke out when Stephen was killed traveled as far asPhoenicia, Cyprus and Antioch, spreading the word only among Jews.”James may have written this letter to instruct and comfort thosescattered believers, as he addressed his letter to “the twelvetribes dispersed abroad” (1:1 NET). These Jewish Christians nolonger had direct contact with the apostles in Jerusalem and neededto be instructed and admonished in their tribulations. Apparently,the rich were taking advantage of them (2:6; 5:1–6), and theirtrials had led to worldliness, rash words, and strained relationships(2:1; 4:1, 11; 5:9). In view of persecution, some may have beentempted to hide their faith (5:10–11). James exhorted them todemonstrate a lifestyle that would reflect their faith.

James’sView on Works and Salvation

Somereaders of this letter have observed a seeming contradiction betweenJames’s call for good works and Paul’s insistence onsalvation by grace through faith apart from works (cf. James 2:14–26with Eph. 2:8–10). The discussion is complicated by James’sargument that a faith without works cannot “save” and byhis observation that Abraham was justified by what he did, not byfaith alone (James 2:14, 20–24). Paul, by contrast, maintainsthat Abraham was justified exclusively by faith (Rom. 4:1–3).

Referringrhetorically to people who claim to have faith but have no deeds,James asks, “Can such faith save them?” (2:14). That is,can the kind of faith that results in no works be genuine? Theexpected answer is no. The kind of faith that produces no workscannot be genuine faith; rather, it is “dead” (2:17, 26)and “useless” (2:20). This kind of faith is “byitself,” meaning that it produces no lasting fruit (2:17).James’s point is that genuine faith will produce good works inthe believer’s life. By way of contrast, a mere profession isnot necessarily an indication of genuine faith. Even demons believein God, but they are not saved; the kind of belief that they exhibitis merely an acknowledgment of God’s existence (2:19).

Accordingto James, Abraham was justified not in the sense of first beingdeclared righteous, but rather in the sense that his faith wasdemonstrated as genuine when he offered up Isaac (2:21). Paul, on theother hand, argues that salvation is obtained not through works butrather by faith alone. He quotes Gen. 15:6 to show that Abrahamtrusted God and was declared righteous several years before heoffered up Isaac (Rom. 4:3).

Accordingto Paul, Abraham was justified (declared righteous) before God whenhe believed God’s promise (Gen. 15:6), but for James, he wasjustified in the sense of giving observable proof of salvationthrough his obedience to God. Whereas Paul refers to the point andmeans of positional salvation, James refers to a subsequent eventthat confirmed that Abraham was justified.

I.Faith

A.Paul (Romans 4:1-3):

1.Is personal trust in God

2.Justifies one before God

3.Is not proof of Salvation

B.James (2:14-26)

1.Is a mere claim if there is no resulting fruit

II.Works

A.Paul (Romans 4:1-3):

1.Precede salvation

2.Attempt to merit salvation

3.Cannot justify before God

B.James (2:14-26)

1.Follow conversion

2.Are evidence of salvation

3.Confirm one’s salvation

Itis important to keep in mind that each author wrote with a differentpurpose. Paul wrote against Judaizers, who taught that a man had tobe circumcised and keep the OT law to be saved. James was warningagainst a mere profession of faith that leads to self-deception(1:22). John Calvin correctly expressed the biblical teaching thatfaith alone saves, but that kind of faith does not remain alone; itproduces good works (cf. Rom. 3:21–6:14; Eph. 2:8–10;Titus 2:11–14; 3:4–7).

Authorship

Theauthor identifies himself as “James, a servant of God and ofthe Lord Jesus Christ” (1:1). The NT mentions five personshaving the name “James”: (1)James the son ofZebedee and the brother of John (Matt. 4:21); (2)James the sonof Alphaeus (Matt. 10:3); (3)James “the younger”(Mark 15:40); (4)James the father of the apostle Judas (notJudas Iscariot; Luke 6:16); and (5)James the brother of Jesus(Matt. 13:55; Mark 6:3; Gal. 1:19).

Jamesthe brother of John was executed by Herod AgrippaI, who died inAD 44 (Acts 12:2). Since the Letter of James probably was writtenafter this date, the brother of John could not have written it.Neither James the son of Alphaeus, James the younger, nor James thefather of Judas was as prominent in the early church as the writer ofthis letter, who simply identified himself and assumed that hisreaders would know him (1:1). James the son of Alphaeus is mentionedfor the last time in Acts 1:13, and nothing is known of James thefather of Judas apart from the listing of his name in Luke 6:15; Acts1:13. (It is uncertain whether James the younger should be identifiedwith one of the other four or is a separate figure.) Thus, it isunlikely that any of them wrote the book. James the brother of Jesusis most likely the author of this letter.

Jamesthe Brother of the Lord

Atthe beginning of Jesus’ ministry, James, as well as hisbrothers Joses (Joseph), Judas, and Simon, did not believe that Jesuswas the Messiah (Matt. 13:55; Mark 6:3; John 7:5). However, they cameto believe in him after the resurrection (Acts 1:14; 1Cor.15:7). Paul called James, along with Peter and John, the “pillars”of the church (Gal. 2:9). James does not claim to be an apostle inthis letter; however, he is identified as one in Gal. 1:19. But therethe term “apostle” probably refers to a group of leadingdisciples outside the Twelve (cf. Acts 14:4, 14; 1Cor. 15:7;Gal. 2:9). Since the author of this letter employed many imperatives,his readers clearly accepted his authority. James, the brother ofJesus, who also became a key leader of the church in Jerusalem,possessed such authority (Acts 12:17; 15:13, 19; 21:18; Gal. 1:18–19;2:9).

Date

Somescholars hold that the Letter of James was written around AD 62,while others argue that James wrote this letter sometime in AD 45–50.Those who favor the earlier dates point out that the Jewish characterof this letter fits with this period when the church was mainlyJewish, based on the following criteria: (1)There is no mentionof Gentile Christians in the letter. (2)The author does notrefer to the teachings of the Judaizers. If the letter had beenwritten at a later date, we would expect the author to address theissue of circumcision among Christians. (3)The mention of“teachers” (3:1) and “elders” (5:14) as theleaders in the church reflects the structure of the primitive church.(4)The word “meeting” in 2:2 is the same Greek wordas for “synagogue.” It describes the gathering place ofthe early church. This implies a time when the congregation was stillprimarily Jewish (Acts 1–7).

Outline

I.Introduction (1:1)

II.The Wise Christian Is Patient in Trials (1:2–18)

A.How the Christian should face trials (1:2–12)

B.The source of temptations (1:13–18)

III.The Wise Christian Is a Practical Doer of the Word (1:19–2:26)

A.Hearers and doers of the word (1:19–25)

B.True religion (1:26–27)

C.Prejudice in the church (2:1–13)

D.Faith that works (2:14–26)

IV.The Wise Christian Masters the Tongue (3:1–18)

A.The power of the tongue (3:1–12)

B.The wisdom from above (3:13–18)

V.The Wise Christian Seeks Peace in Relationships (4:1–17)

A.The cause of quarrels (4:1–3)

B.Warning against worldliness (4:4–10)

C.Warning against slander (4:11–12)

D.Warning against boasting and self-sufficiency (4:13–17)

VI.The Wise Christian Is Patient and Prays When Facing Difficulties(5:1–20)

A.Warning to the rich (5:1–6)

B.Exhortation to patience (5:7–12)

C.The power of prayer (5:13–18)

D.The benefit of correcting those in error (5:19–20)

The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesusfollowers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christembodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in humanhistory.

Introduction

Name.Early Christians combined the name “Jesus” with the title“Christ” (Acts 5:42; NIV: “Messiah”). Thename “Jesus,” from the Hebrew Yehoshua or Yeshua, was acommon male name in first-century Judaism. The title “Christ”is from the Greek christos, a translation of the Hebrew mashiakh(“anointed one, messiah”). Christians eventually werenamed after Jesus’ title (Acts 11:26). During the ministry ofJesus, Peter was the first disciple to recognize Jesus as the Messiah(Matt. 16:16; Mark 9:29; Luke 9:20).

Sources.From the viewpoint of Christianity, the life and ministry of Jesusconstitute the turning point in human history. From a historicalperspective, ample early source materials would be expected. Indeed,both Christian and non-Christian first-century and earlysecond-century literary sources are extant, but they are few innumber. In part, this low incidence is due to society’s initialresistance to the Jesus followers’ movement. The ancient Romanhistorian Tacitus called Christianity “a superstition,”since its beliefs did not fit with the culture’s prevailingworldview and thus were considered antisocial. Early literary sourcestherefore are either in-group documents or allusions in non-Christiansources.

TheNT Gospels are the principal sources for the life and ministry ofJesus. They consist of Matthew, Mark, Luke (the Synoptic Gospels),and John. Most scholars adhere to the so-called Four SourceHypothesis. In this theory, Mark was written first and was used as asource by Matthew and Luke, who also used the sayings source Q (fromGerman Quelle, meaning “source”) as well as their ownindividual sources M (Matthew) and L (Luke). John used additionalsources.

Theearly church tried to put together singular accounts, so-calledGospel harmonies, of the life of Jesus. The Gospel of the Ebionitesrepresents one such attempt based on the Synoptic Gospels. Anotherharmony, the Diatessaron, based on all four Gospels, was producedaround AD 170 by Tatian. Additional source materials concerning thelife of Christ are provided in the NT in texts such as Acts, thePauline Epistles, the General Epistles, and the Revelation of John.Paul wrote to the Galatians, “But when the time had fully come,God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law” (Gal. 4:4).The first narrative about Jesus by the Christian community was apassion narrative, the account of his death and resurrection. Thefirst extant references to this tradition are found in Paul’sletters (1Cor. 2:2; Gal. 3:1). The resurrection was recognizedfrom the beginning as the cornerstone of the Christian faith (1Cor.15:13–14).

Amongnon-Christian sources, the earliest reference to Jesus is found in aletter written circa AD 112 by Pliny the Younger, the Roman governorof Bithynia-Pontus (Ep. 10.96). The Roman historian Tacitus mentionsChristians and Jesus around AD 115 in his famous work about thehistory of Rome (Ann. 15.44). Another Roman historian, Suetonius,wrote around the same time concerning unrest among the Jews in Romebecause of a certain “Chrestos” (Claud. 25.4). Somescholars conclude that “Chrestos” is a misspelling of“Christos,” a reference to Jesus.

TheJewish author Josephus (first century AD) mentions Jesus in a storyabout the Jewish high priest Ananus and James the brother of Jesus(Ant. 20.200). A controversial reference to Jesus appears in adifferent part of the same work, where Josephus affirms that Jesus isthe Messiah and that he rose from the dead (Ant. 18.63–64). Themajority of scholars consider this passage to be authentic butheavily edited by later Christian copyists. Another Jewish source,the Talmud, also mentions Jesus in several places, but thesereferences are very late and of little historical value.

NoncanonicalGospels that mention Jesus include, for example, the Infancy Gospelof Thomas, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel ofJames, the Gospel of Judas Iscariot, the Gospel of the Hebrews, theEgerton Gospel, and the Gospel of Judas. Although some of these maycontain an occasional authentic saying or event, for the most partthey are late and unreliable.

Jesus’Life

Birthand childhood. TheGospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehemduring the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesuswas probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’sdeath (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of avirginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18;Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governorQuirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place inBethlehem (2:1–5). Both the census and the governorship at thetime of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars.Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to eitherconfirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must bedetermined on the basis of one’s view regarding the generalreliability of the Gospel tradition.

Onthe eighth day after his birth, Jesus was circumcised, in keepingwith the Jewish law, at which time he officially was named “Jesus”(Luke 2:21). He spent his growing years in Nazareth, in the home ofhis parents, Joseph and Mary (2:40). Of the NT Gospels, the Gospel ofLuke contains the only brief portrayal of Jesus’ growth instrength, wisdom, and favor with God and people (2:40, 52). Luke alsocontains the only account of Jesus as a young boy (2:41–49).

Jesuswas born in a lower socioeconomic setting. His parents offered atemple sacrifice appropriate for those who could not afford tosacrifice a sheep (Luke 2:22–24; cf. Lev. 12:8). Joseph, Jesus’earthly father, was a carpenter or an artisan in wood, stone, ormetal (Matt. 13:55). From a geographical perspective, Nazareth wasnot a prominent place for settling, since it lacked fertile ground.Jesus’ disciple Nathanael expressed an apparently commonfirst-century sentiment concerning Nazareth: “Nazareth! Cananything good come from there?” (John 1:46).

Jesuswas also born in a context of scandal. Questions of illegitimacy weresurely raised, since his mother Mary was discovered to be pregnantbefore her marriage to Joseph. According to Matthew, only theintervention of an angel convinced Joseph not to break his betrothal(Matt. 1:18–24). Jesus’ birth took place in Bethlehem,far from his parents’ home in Nazareth. According to kinshiphospitality customs, Joseph and Mary would have expected to stay withdistant relatives in Bethlehem. It is likely that they were unwelcomebecause of Jesus’ status as an illegitimate child; thus Maryhad to give birth elsewhere and place the infant Jesus in a feedingtrough (Luke 2:7). A similar response was seen years later inNazareth when Jesus was identified as “Mary’s son”(Mark 6:3) rather than through his paternal line, thereby shaming himas one who was born an illegitimate child. Jesus was likewiserejected at the end of his life as the crowds cried, “Crucifyhim!” (Matt. 27:22–23; Mark 15:13–14; Luke 23:21;John 19:6, 15). When Jesus was arrested, most of his followers fled(Matt. 26:56; Mark 14:50–52), and a core disciple, Peter,vehemently denied knowing him (Matt. 26:69–74; Mark 14:66–71;Luke 22:55–60; John 18:15–17, 25–27). His ownsiblings did not believe in him (John 7:5) and were evidently ashamedof his fate, since from the cross Jesus placed the care of his motherinto the hands of “the disciple whom he loved” (19:26–27)rather than the next brother in line, as was customary.

Baptism,temptation, and start of ministry.After Jesus was baptized by the prophet John the Baptist (Luke3:21–22), God affirmed his pleasure with him by referring tohim as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22).Jesus’ baptism did not launch him into fame and instantministry success; instead, Jesus was led by the Spirit into thewilderness, where he was tempted for forty days (Matt. 4:1–11;Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). Mark stresses that thetemptations immediately followed the baptism. Matthew and Lukeidentify three specific temptations by the devil, though their orderfor the last two is reversed. Both Matthew and Luke agree that Jesuswas tempted to turn stones into bread, expect divine interventionafter jumping off the temple portico, and receive all the world’skingdoms for worshiping the devil. Jesus resisted all temptation,quoting Scripture in response.

Matthewand Mark record that Jesus began his ministry in Capernaum inGalilee, after the arrest of John the Baptist (Matt. 4:12–13;Mark 1:14). Luke says that Jesus started his ministry at about thirtyyears of age (3:23). This may be meant to indicate full maturity orperhaps correlate this age with the onset of the service of theLevites in the temple (cf. Num. 4:3). John narrates the beginning ofJesus’ ministry by focusing on the calling of the disciples andthe sign performed at a wedding at Cana (1:35–2:11).

Jesus’public ministry: chronology.Jesus’ ministry started in Galilee, probably around AD 27/28,and ended with his death around AD 30 in Jerusalem. The temple hadbeen forty-six years in construction (generally interpreted as thetemple itself and the wider temple complex) when Jesus drove out themoney changers (John 2:20). According to Josephus, the rebuilding andexpansion of the second temple had started in 20/19 BC, during theeighteenth year of Herod’s reign (Ant. 15.380). The ministry ofJohn the Baptist had commenced in the fifteenth year of Tiberius(Luke 3:1–2), who had become a coregent in AD 11/12. From thesedates of the start of the temple building and the correlation of thereign of Tiberius to John the Baptist’s ministry, the onset ofJesus’ ministry can probably be dated to AD 27/28.

TheGospel of John mentions three Passovers and another unnamed feast inJohn 5:1. The length of Jesus’ ministry thus extended overthree or four Passovers, equaling about three or three and a halfyears. Passover, which took place on the fifteenth of Nisan, came ona Friday in AD 30 and 33. The year of Jesus’ death wastherefore probably AD 30.

Jesus’ministry years may be divided broadly into his Galilean and hisJudean ministries. The Synoptic Gospels describe the ministry inGalilee from various angles but converge again as Jesus enters Judea.

Galileanministry.The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and aroundGalilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that thekingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment ofprophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ firstteaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30);the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for hiscalling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection andsuffering.

AllGospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in hisGalilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioningof the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers isrecorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministryis the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, inparticular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synopticsfocus on healings and exorcisms.

DuringJesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with hisidentity. However, evil spirits knew him to be of supreme authority(Mark 3:11). Jesus was criticized by outsiders and by his own family(3:21). The scribes from Jerusalem identified him as a partner ofBeelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesustold parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growingkingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humblebeginnings (4:1–32).

TheSynoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful.No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority orability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized manydemons (Mark 5:1–13), raised the dead (Mark 5:35–42), fedfive thousand (Mark 6:30–44), and walked on water (Mark6:48–49).

Inthe later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew andtraveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are notwritten with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns toGalilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey toJerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fearresolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee,where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ discipleswith lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed thePharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents(7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demandinga sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, whoconfessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus didprovide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).

Jesuswithdrew from Galilee to Tyre and Sidon, where a Syrophoenician womanrequested healing for her daughter. Jesus replied, “I was sentonly to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Galileans hadlong resented the Syrian provincial leadership partiality thatallotted governmental funds in ways that made the Jews receive mere“crumbs.” Consequently, when the woman replied, “Eventhe dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table,”Jesus applauded her faith (Matt. 15:27–28). Healing a deaf-muteman in the Decapolis provided another example of Jesus’ministry in Gentile territory (Mark 7:31–37). Peter’sconfession of Jesus as the Christ took place during Jesus’travel to Caesarea Philippi, a well-known Gentile territory. The citywas the ancient center of worship of the Hellenistic god Pan.

Judeanministry.Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry ashe resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually ledto his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem intothree phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27).The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of thejourney. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, andthe demands on discipleship intensified as Jesus approached Jerusalem(Matt. 20:17–19, 26–28; Mark 10:38–39, 43–45;Luke 14:25–35). Luke presents the second phase of the journeytoward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvationand judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase ofthe journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are themain themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).

Socialconflicts with religious leaders increased throughout Jesus’ministry. These conflicts led to lively challenge-riposteinteractions concerning the Pharisaic schools of Shammai and Hillel(Matt. 19:1–12; Mark 10:1–12). Likewise, socioeconomicfeathers were ruffled as Jesus welcomed young children, who hadlittle value in society (Matt. 19:13–15; Mark 10:13–16;Luke 18:15–17).

PassionWeek, death, and resurrection. Eachof the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with thecrowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Lukedescribes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during whichJesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).

InJerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17).Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because thewhole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “beganlooking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segmentof Jerusalem’s temple leadership inquired about Jesus’authority (11:27–33). Jesus replied with cunning questions(12:16, 35–36), stories (12:1–12), denunciation(12:38–44), and a prediction of Jerusalem’s owndestruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, JudasIscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’arrest (14:10–11).

Atthe Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a newcovenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29;Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned thedisciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and laterhe prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agonyand submissiveness in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–42;Mark 14:32–42; Luke 22:39–42). His arrest, trial,crucifixion, death, and resurrection followed (Matt. 26:46–28:15;Mark 14:43–16:8; Luke 22:47–24:9; John 18:1–20:18).Jesus finally commissioned his disciples to continue his mission bymaking disciples of all the nations (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 1:8)and ascended to heaven with the promise that he will one day return(Luke 24:50–53; Acts 1:9–11).

TheIdentity of Jesus Christ

Variousaspects of Jesus’ identity are stressed in the four NT Gospels,depending on their target audiences. In the Gospels the witnesses toJesus’ ministry are portrayed as constantly questioning andexamining his identity (Matt. 11:2–5; 12:24; 26:63; 27:11; Mark3:22; 8:11; 11:28; 14:61; Luke 7:18–20; 11:15; 22:67, 70;23:39; John 7:20, 25–27; 18:37). Only beings of the spiritualrealm are certain of his divinity (Mark 1:34; 3:11; Luke 4:41). AtJesus’ baptism, God referred to him as his Son, whom he loved(Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Likewise, when Jesus wastransfigured in the presence of Peter, James, and John, a voiceaffirmed, “This is my Son, whom I love” (Matt. 17:5; Mark9:7). At the moment of his death, the questioning of Jesus’identity culminated in a confession by a Roman centurion and otherguards: “Surely he was the Son of God!” (Matt. 27:54; cf.Mark 15:39).

Miracleworker.In the first-century setting, folk healers and miracle workers werepart of the fabric of society. Jesus, however, performed signs andmiracles in order to demonstrate the authority of the kingdom of Godover various realms: disease, illness, the spiritual world, nature,and even future events. Especially in the Gospel of John, Jesus’signs and miracles are used to show his authority and thus hisidentity.

Nochallenge superseded Jesus’ authority. Among his ample miraclesand signs, he changed water into wine (John 2:7–9), calmed astorm in the sea (Matt. 8:23–27; Mark 4:35–39; Luke8:22–25), exorcized demons (Matt. 9:32–34; Mark 5:1–13;Luke 9:42–43), healed the sick (Mark 1:40–44), raised thedead (Matt. 9:23–25; Mark 5:35–42; Luke 7:1–16;8:49–54; John 11:17, 38–44), performed miraculousfeedings (Matt. 14:17–21; 15:34–38; Mark 6:30–44;8:5–9; Luke 9:10–17; John 6:8–13), and walked onwater (Matt. 14:25–26; Mark 6:48–49; John 6:19).

ThePharisees requested miracles as evidence of his authority (Mark8:11–12). Jesus refused, claiming that a wicked and adulterousgeneration asks for a miraculous sign (Matt. 12:38–39; 16:1–4).The only sign that he would give was the sign of Jonah—hisdeath and resurrection three days later—a personal sacrifice,taking upon himself the judgment of the world (Matt. 12:39–41).

Rabbi/teacher.Jesus’ teaching style was similar to other first-century rabbisor Pharisees (Mark 9:5; 10:51; John 1:38; 3:2). What distinguishedhim was that he spoke with great personal authority (Matt. 5:22, 28,32, 39, 44; Mark 1:22). Like other rabbis of his day, Jesus gathereddisciples. He called these men to observe his lifestyle and to joinhim in his ministry of teaching, healing, and exorcism (Matt. 10:1–4;Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16).

Jesusused a variety of teaching methods. He frequently spoke in parables(Matt. 6:24; 13:24–52; 18:10–14, 23–35;21:28–22:14; 24:32–36, 45–51; 25:14–30; Mark4:1–34; 12:1–12; 13:28–34; Luke 8:4–18;12:41–46; 13:18–21; 14:15–24; 15:1–16:15,19–31; 18:1–14; 19:11–27; 20:9–19; 21:29–33),used figures of speech (John 10:9), hyperbole (Matt. 19:24; Mark10:25; Luke 18:25), argumentation (Matt. 26:11), object lessons(Matt. 24:32), frequent repetition (Matt. 13:44–47; Luke13:18–21), practical examples, and personal guidance.

Majorthemes in Jesus’ teaching include the kingdom of God, the costof discipleship, internal righteousness, the end of the age, hisidentity, his mission, and his approaching death. In his teachings,observance of Torah was given new context and meaning because God’skingdom had “come near” (Matt. 3:2). Jesus had come tofulfill the law (Matt. 5:17).

Jesus’teaching ministry often took place amid social conflict. Theseconflicts were couched in so-called challenge-riposte interactions inwhich the honor status of those involved was at stake. Jesus usedthese interactions as teachable moments. When questioned, Jesus gavereplies that reveal omniscience or intimate knowledge of God’swill, especially in the Gospel of John. In the Synoptic Gospels,Jesus’ answers are both ethical and practical in nature. TheSynoptics portray Jesus as challenged repeatedly with accusations ofviolating customs specified in the Jewish law. Jesus’ answersto such accusations often echoed the essence of 1Sam. 15:22,“To obey is better than sacrifice,” phrased by Jesus as“I desire mercy, not sacrifice” (Matt. 9:13; 12:7). Anoverall “better than” ethic was common in Jesus’public teaching.

TheSermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7) contains a “better than”ethic in which internal obedience is better than mere outwardobedience. For example, Jesus said that anger without cause is equalto murder (Matt. 5:21–22), that looking at a woman lustfullyamounts to adultery (Matt. 5:28), and that instead of revengingwrongs one must reciprocate with love (Matt. 5:38–48). Jesusvalued compassion above traditions and customs, even those containedwithin the OT law. He desired internal obedience above the letter ofthe law.

Jesus’teachings found their authority in the reality of God’simminent kingdom (Matt. 3:2; 10:7; Mark 1:15; Luke 10:9),necessitating repentance (Matt. 3:2), belief (Mark 1:15), dependence(Matt. 18:3–5; Mark 10:15), and loyalty to a new community—thefamily of Jesus followers (Mark 3:34; 10:29–30). Jesus urged,“Seek first [God’s] kingdom and his righteousness”(Matt. 6:33). Preaching with such urgency was common among propheticteachers of the intertestamental period. Jesus, however, had his owngrounds for urgency. He held that God deeply valued all humans (Matt.10:31) and would bring judgment swiftly (Matt. 25:31–46).

Examplesof a “greater good” ethic in the Synoptics include theoccasions when Jesus ate with sinners (Mark 2:16–17). Jesusused an aphorism in response to accusations about his associationswith sinners, saying, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor,but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners”(Mark 2:17). He advocated harvesting and healing on the Sabbath (Mark2:23–28; 3:1–6), and when he was accused of breaking thelaw, he pointed to an OT exception (1Sam. 21:1–6) todeclare compassion appropriate for the Sabbath. Jesus also appliedthe “greater good” ethic in the case of divorce, sincewomen suffered the societal stigma of adultery and commonly becameoutcasts following divorce (Matt. 19:8–9; Mark 10:5–9).

Jesus’kingdom teachings were simultaneously spiritual, ethical, andeschatological in application. The teachings were aimed at internaltransformation (Matt. 5:3–9; 18:3; Mark 10:15) and spurring onlove (Matt. 5:44; 7:21). The Spirit of the Lord had called Jesus tobless the hurting ones as they aspired to a godly character. Jesustaught, “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father isperfect” (Matt. 5:48), and “Be merciful, just as yourFather is merciful” (Luke 6:36). The “blessed” onesin Jesus’ teachings are poor of spirit, peace driven, mournful,and hungry for righteousness, consumed with emulating godlycharacter.

Somescholars believe that Jesus promoted an “interim ethic”for the kingdom, intended only for a short period prior to the end oftime. However, he was explicit regarding the longevity of histeachings: “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words willnever pass away” (Matt. 24:35; Luke 16:17).

Messiah.The concept of an anointed one, a messiah, who would restore theglories of David’s kingdom and bring political stability wascommon in Jewish expectation. Both before and after the Babyloniancaptivity, many Jews longed for one who would bring peace andprotection. Israel’s prophets had spoken of a coming deliverer,one who would restore David’s kingdom and reign in justice andrighteousness (2Sam. 7:11–16; Isa. 9:1–7; 11:1–16;Jer. 23:5–6; 33:15–16; Ezek. 37:25; Dan. 2:44; Mic. 5:2;Zech. 9:9). Isaiah’s description of the servant (Isa. 53) whosesuffering healed the nation provided a slightly different angle ofexpectation in terms of a deliverer.

Jesus’authority and popularity as a miracle worker called up messianicimages in first-century Jewish minds. On several occasions hearerscalled him “Son of David,” hoping for the Messiah (Matt.12:23; 21:9). Simon Peter was the first follower who confessed Jesusas the Christ, the “Messiah” (Matt. 16:16; Mark 8:29). Inline with Isaiah’s model of the Suffering Servant, Jesusfocused not on political ends but rather on spiritual regenerationthrough his own sacrificial death (Mark 10:45).

Eschatologicalprophet.Many scholars claim that Jesus is best understood as a Jewishapocalypticist, an eschatological prophet who expected God tointervene in history, destroy the wicked, and bring in the kingdom ofGod. Central in this understanding are Jesus’ propheciesconcerning the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem (Matt. 24:1–2,15–22; Mark 13:1; Luke 21:5–24; John 2:19; Acts 6:14). Inaddition, it is noted that Jesus had twelve disciples, representativeof the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:2–28; Luke 22:23–30).Certain of Jesus’ parables, those with apocalyptic images ofcoming judgment, present Jesus as an eschatological prophet (Matt.24:45–25:30; Luke 12:41–46; 19:11–27).

SufferingSon of God.Jesus’ first recorded teaching in a synagogue in Nazareth wasparadigmatic (Luke 4:16–21). He attributed the reading, Isa.61:1–2, to his personal calling to serve, and in doing so herevealed a trajectory of suffering. The Gospel of Mark likewise aptlyportrays Jesus as the suffering Son of God. Jesus’ ownteachings incorporated his upcoming suffering (Mark 8:31; 9:12–13,31; 10:33–34). He summarized his mission by declaring, “TheSon of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give hislife as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). His earthly careerended with a trial in Jerusalem consisting of both Roman and Jewishcomponents (Matt. 26:57–68; 27:1–31; Mark 14:53–65;15:1–20; Luke 22:54–23:25; John 18:19–24;18:28–19:16). He was insulted, scourged, mocked, and crucified.

Jesus’suffering culminated in his humiliating death by crucifixion (Matt.27:33–50; Mark 15:22–37; Luke 23:33–46; John19:16–30). Crucifixion was a death of unimaginable horror,bringing shame and humiliation to the victim and his family. Anyonehanging on a tree was considered cursed (Deut. 21:23; Gal. 3:13).Thus, especially in a Jewish society, anyone associated with acrucified person bore the shame of following one who was executed asa lowly slave and left as a cursed corpse. The apostle Paul referredto this shame of the cross when he stated, “I am not ashamed ofthe gospel” (Rom. 1:16).

ExaltedLord.Jesus had prophesied that he would rise again (Matt. 16:21; 17:9, 23;20:19; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:34; Luke 9:22; 18:33; 24:7, 46).The testimony of the Synoptics is that the resurrection of JesusChrist indeed occurred on the third day, Christ having died on Friday(Mark 15:42–45; Luke 23:52–54; John 19:30–33) andrisen again on Sunday (Matt. 28:1–7; Mark 16:2–7; Luke24:1–7; John 20:1–16). The resurrected Jesus waswitnessed by the women (Matt. 28:8–9), the eleven disciples(Matt. 28:16–17; Luke 24:36–43), and travelers on theroad to Emmaus (Luke 24:31–32). According to Paul, he appearedto as many as five hundred others (1Cor. 15:6). He appeared inbodily form, spoke, showed his scars, and ate (Luke 24:39–43;John 20:27; Acts 1:4). After forty postresurrection days, Jesusascended into the heavenly realm (Acts 1:9).

Asmuch as Jesus’ death was the epitome of shame, his victory overdeath was his ultimate exaltation (Phil. 2:5–11). At Pentecost,Peter proclaimed that in the resurrection God fulfilled OT promises(Ps. 16:10) by raising his Son from the grave (Acts 2:30–31).Furthermore, Christ provided freedom from the law through hisresurrection (Rom. 5:13–14), God’s approval of his lifeand work (Phil. 2:8–9), and God’s designation of him asLord over all the earth, the living and the dead (Acts 17:30–31;Phil. 2:10; Heb. 1:3), and over all his enemies (Eph. 1:20–23).

Jesus’exaltation commenced the beginning of forgiveness and justification(Luke 24:46–47; Acts 13:30–39; Rom. 4:25) and hisintercession for the people of God (Rom. 8:34). His ascensionsignaled the coming of the Holy Spirit as comforter and teacher (John14:26; Acts 2:33) and was accompanied by the promise of his return inglory (Luke 24:51), at which time he will render judgment (Matt.19:28; 24:31; Rev. 20:11–15) and establish his eternal kingdom(1Cor. 15:24; 2Tim. 4:1; Rev. 11:15; 22:5).

Jesus’Purpose and Community

Inthe Gospel of Matthew, Jesus is the long-awaited Messiah, whopreaches the good news of the kingdom, urging people to repent(4:17–23). Repentance and belief allow one to enter thekingdom. The call into the kingdom is a call into a new covenant, onemade in Jesus’ blood (26:28).

Inthe prologue to the Gospel of Mark, the narrator reveals the identityof Jesus (1:1). Jesus is presented as the one who brings good tidingsof salvation (cf. Isa. 40:9; 52:7; 61:1). The centrality of thegospel, the good news (Mark 1:14–15), is evident.

Lukelikewise presents the preaching of the good news as a main purpose ofJesus’ ministry (4:43). The content of this good news is thekingdom of God (4:43; 8:1; 16:16). When the disciples of John theBaptist asked Jesus if he was the one who was to come (7:20), Jesusanswered, “Go back and report to John what you have seen andheard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosyare cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good newsis proclaimed to the poor” (7:22). The kingdom of God, aspresented in Luke, brings freedom for the prisoners, recovery ofsight for the blind, and release for the oppressed (4:18). Jesus’healings and exorcisms announce the coming kingdom of God alreadypresent in the ministry of Jesus (4:40–44; 6:18–20;8:1–2; 9:2; 10:8–9).

Inthe Gospel of John, Jesus testifies to the good news by way of signsthroughout his ministry. These signs point to Jesus’ glory, hisidentity, and the significance of his ministry. Jesus is the Messiah,the Son of God, who offers eternal and abundant life. This abundantlife is lived out in community.

Inthe Gospel of John, the disciples of Jesus represent the community ofGod (17:21). The disciples did not belong to the world, but theycontinued to live in the world (17:14–16). Throughout hisministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a callto loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38;Luke 9:23–26), a call to the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50;Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock Iwill build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call tocommunity. Jesus’ presence as the head of the community wasreplaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18).

Jesus’ministry continued in the community of Jesus’ followers, God’sfamily—the church. Entrance into the community was obtained byadopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and through theinitiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26;Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–62; John 1:12; 3:16;10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9).

TheQuests for the Historical Jesus

Thequest for the historical Jesus, or seeking who Jesus was from ahistorical perspective, is a modern phenomenon deemed necessary byscholars who claim that the NT Gospels were written long after Jesus’death and were heavily influenced by the post-Easter understanding ofthe church.

Thebeginning of this quest is often dated to 1770, when the lecturenotes of Hermann Samuel Reimarus were published posthumously.Reimarus had launched an inquiry into the identity of Jesus thatrejected as inauthentic all supernatural elements in the Gospels. Heconcluded that the disciples invented Jesus’ miracles,prophecies, ritualistic religion, and resurrection. Reimarus’sconclusions were not widely accepted, but they set off a flurry ofrationalistic research into the historical Jesus that continuedthroughout the nineteenth century. This became known as the “firstquest” for the historical Jesus.

In1906 German theologian Albert Schweit-zer published The Quest of theHistorical Jesus (German title: Von Reimarus zu Wrede: EineGeschichte der Leben-Jesu-Forschung), a scathing indictment of thefirst quest. Schweitzer’s work showed that nineteenth-centuryresearchers re-created Jesus in their own image, transforming thehistorical Jesus into a modern philanthropist preaching aninoffensive message of love and brotherhood. Schweitzer’sconclusions marked the beginning of the end for this first quest.Schweitzer himself concluded that the historical Jesus was aneschatological prophet whose purposes failed during his last days inJerusalem.

Withthe demise of the first quest, some NT scholars, such as RudolfBultmann, rejected any claim to being able to discover the historicalJesus. This trend continued until 1953, when some of Bultmann’sformer students launched what has come to be known as the “newquest” for the historical Jesus (1953–c. 1970). Thisquest created new interest in the historical Jesus but was stilldominated by the view that the portrait of Jesus in the Gospels islargely a creation of the church in a post-Easter setting.

Asthe rebuilding years of the post–World WarII era wanedand scholars started to reap academic fruit from major archaeologicalfinds such as the DSS, research on the historical Jesus moved on towhat has been called the “third quest.” This quest seeksespecially to research and understand Jesus in his social andcultural setting.

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).

Simon Peter is the best-known and the most colorful of Jesus’twelve disciples. The name “Peter” means “rock”in Greek. In some biblical texts, he is also called “Cephas,”which is the Aramaic word for “rock” (see esp. John1:42). Despite the ups and downs of Peter’s spiritual life, Godwas able to use him as the foundational apostle for the establishmentof the NT church. Peter first met Jesus immediately after Jesus’baptism, when Peter’s brother, Andrew, heard John the Baptist’sidentification of Jesus as the Lamb of God (John 1:35). In classicmissionary style, “the first thing Andrew did was to find hisbrother Simon and tell him, ‘We have found the Messiah’ ”(John 1:41). Peter’s official call to ministry took placelater, when he was fishing on the Sea of Galilee and Jesus issued thewell-known invitation “Come, follow me, ... and Iwill send you out to fish for people” (Matt. 4:19).

Peterwas the chief spokesman for the disciples at Caesarea Philippi whenJesus asked them, “Who do people say the Son of Man is?”(Matt. 16:13). Peter responded, “You are the Messiah, the Sonof the living God,” an insight given him by God the Father(16:16–17). Jesus promised him, “I tell you that you arePeter [petros], and on this rock [petra] I will build my church, andthe gates of Hades will not overcome it” (16:18). Yet Peteralmost immediately became a “stumbling block” to Jesuswhen he chided Jesus for saying that he must go to Jerusalem andsuffer many things and be killed (16:21–22). Another majorfailure by Peter came with his threefold denial of Jesus after Jesushad warned him, “This very night, before the rooster crows, youwill disown me three times” (Matt. 26:34). Fortunately, therewere tears of repentance, and Peter was forgiven and restored afterJesus’ threefold question (“Do you love me?” [John21:15–19]).

Jesus’death and resurrection, as well as the giving of the Holy Spirit onthe day of Pentecost, had stabilizing effects on Peter. After Jesus’ascension, Peter exercised primary leadership among the otherdisciples during the upper room prayer meetings and the choosing ofthe replacement for Judas (Acts 1). Peter clearly was the publicspokesman for the apostles on the day of Pentecost and a key playerin the establishment of the church in Jerusalem (Acts 2–5), inreceiving the first Samaritan converts (Acts 8:14–25), and inreceiving Cornelius as the first Gentile convert (Acts 10–11).Following Peter’s miraculous deliverance from prison in Acts12, he essentially disappears from recorded history. By the time ofthe Jerusalem council (Acts 15), Peter reappeared briefly, but bythis time he had been replaced by James as the leader of theJerusalem church. Peter apparently continued to live as a missionary(1Cor. 9:5), specifically “to the circumcised”(Gal. 2:7–8), for the rest of his life. Yet Peter was stillhuman, and on one occasion Paul gave him a stinging rebuke (Gal.2:11–21).

Duringhis travels, Peter undoubtedly visited the recipients of his laterletter 1Peter (and possibly 2Peter) in north central AsiaMinor (the regions of “Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia andBithynia” [1Pet. 1:1]), possibly Corinth (1Cor.1:12; 3:22), and, at least by the end of his life, Rome itself.According to tradition, he was put to death by Nero between AD 64 and68, apparently by being crucified upside down (cf. John 21:18–19).Peter’s life is a vivid illustration of the Christian’sfight for faith, God’s gracious provision, and Jesus’intercession on his behalf (“I have prayed for you, Simon, thatyour faith may not fail” [Luke 22:32]).

Eschatology is the study of last things. The word “eschatology” comes from the Greek word eschatos, meaning “last.” From this same Greek word is derived the term “eschaton,” which is sometimes used to refer to the end times.

Eschatology deals with such future events as the end of the world, Jesus’ return, the resurrection, the final judgment, and the afterlife in heaven or hell. The tribulation and the millennium also belong to eschatology, but their timing and nature vary with different views. Although from one perspective human history entered its final phase in NT times so that people today are already living in the “last days,” eschatology normally focuses on the unfulfilled prophecies that remain still in the future for present-day believers.

Eschatology deals with questions regarding the future. Every religion and philosophy of life has offered answers to these questions. Plato taught about the immortality of the soul. Buddhism has its nirvana, Islam its sensual paradise, and Native Americans their happy hunting grounds. The belief that the soul survives death is widely held. Even atheists and materialists have their own views of eschatology. Yet only in Christianity does eschatology become the crown and capstone of everything else that God has been doing throughout history, when he will be perfectly glorified, Christ completely victorious, the power of sin entirely overcome, and the people of God given a complete salvation.

Yet it is difficult to find a topic on which Christians are more divided. Frequently, people studying eschatology fall into one of two opposite traps: unwarranted dogmatism or simple avoidance. Yet eschatology should be a source of comfort and hope to believers as well as an ongoing reminder of the lateness and urgency of the hour. Consequently, eschatology deserves most careful attention and should create a sense of excitement and anticipation.

Reasons for Controversy

Eschatology is by no means a simple discipline. The sheer magnitude of this topic is a significant challenge involving hundreds of different unfulfilled prophecies from virtually every book of the Bible. Difficulties in interpreting these prophecies with their figures of speech, apocalyptic language, and complicated symbolism create still greater complications. Then there is the challenge of organizing these individual prophecies together into a coherent timeline when each will be fulfilled. Discerning the period of fulfillment for some prophecies is relatively clear and easy, but for others it is much less certain.

Even the question of how many periods of future time remain in God’s timetable has often been the source of considerable debate. For example, will there be a future period of tribulation, or were these prophecies already fulfilled in AD 70, or perhaps more generally throughout church history, with its countless martyrs? Similar questions have been raised about the millennium: is this to be understood in a still future sense, as premillennialists assert, or is it already in the process of being fulfilled, as amillennialists and postmillennialists claim? The fact that there is no common agreement even on these fundamental questions virtually guarantees that believers will remain divided on this issue.

Then too there is the final step of trying to assign specific unfulfilled prophecies into this grid of prophetic time slots. For example, is the prophecy “The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox” (Isa. 65:25) a symbolic picture of God’s blessings in this present church age, in a future millennium, or in eternity itself? The vast majority of these unfulfilled prophecies contain few clues regarding the precise time of their fulfillment, and interpreters often are left with little to guide them. We should not be surprised that eschatology leaves believers more divided than do other areas of theology.

Jesus’ Return and the Tribulation

The fact of Jesus’ return is clear. When Jesus was taken up from his apostles at the end of his earthly ministry, two angels promised them, “This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11). Today believers look forward to Jesus’ second coming, as “the blessed hope” (Titus 2:13). The common understanding has always been that this return will be personal, visible, and bodily—just as real as his first coming two thousand yearsago.

Christians, however, have been divided over the timing of Jesus’ return and the tribulation. Here there are five interrelated questions.

1.The first question is whether Jesus’ return is a single event or will occur in two stages. Dispensationalists distinguish two phases to Jesus’ return: a secret rapture that removes the church from a period of intense tribulation involving Israel here on earth, and then a later public second coming in judgment at the end of the tribulation, when he will establish his kingdom. A number of recent “left behind” books and movies have popularized this approach. Yet this two-stage model is difficult to document in Scripture, and many understand Scripture to describe Jesus’ return as a single unified event.

2.How one answers this first question has implications for the second question of the timing of Jesus’ return relative to the tribulation. Here there are three popular options regarding the timing of Jesus’ return: pretribulational (before the tribulation), midtribulational (in the midst of the tribulation), and posttribulational (after the tribulation). Yet if Jesus’ return is pretribulational or midtribulational, logic would require that there be two phases to Jesus’ return: a secret rapture either before the tribulation (for pretribulationalism) or in the middle of it (for midtribulationalism), and then a separate public return at the conclusion of the tribulation to establish his kingdom. Thus, a two-stage return of Jesus goes hand in hand with pretribulationalism and midtribulationalism, and a single return with posttribulationalism.

3.A third question focuses on the nature of the tribulation period. There are three main views. Pretribulationalists assume that the tribulation will be a period (usually seven years) of great suffering such as this world has never seen. Midtribulationalists believe that Jesus will return after three and a half years of less intense tribulation, followed by a considerably more intense second period of three and a half years of wrath, from which believers will be spared. Posttribulationalists see this tribulation as the suffering and persecution of Christians at various times and places around the world, with possibly some intensification in the final days. Consequently, how one understands the intensity of the tribulation is another factor affecting the choice of one tribulational view or another.

4.A fourth interrelated question involves whether one believes that Jesus may return suddenly and unexpectedly at any moment (Matt. 24:42) or whether there are still unfulfilled prophecies that must take place first (initially including at least Peter’s death [John 21:19] and the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem). Pretribulationalists pride themselves on how their view of a secret rapture allows for Jesus to return imminently without any intervening signs or other warnings. Midtribulationalists believe that the church will need to experience three and a half years of moderate tribulation, so there is less emphasis on an imminent return (although one could argue that the first period of tribulation is potentially more ambiguous in nature). Posttribulationalists are divided into two groups. Many have held that the tribulation will be a period of significant tribulation, so typically they have downplayed the idea of imminence. However, other posttribulationalists (sometimes called “pasttribulationalists” or “imminent posttribulationalists”) assume that the tribulation described in Scripture may already be fulfilled either at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 or more generally throughout church history, and therefore Jesus may return at any time.

5.The fifth question focuses on how literally or figuratively one should interpret the two key passages of Scripture related to the nature of the tribulation: the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24 pars.) and Rev. 6–19. Much of the Olivet Discourse focuses on the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, and many have understood at least parts of Revelation as being fulfilled historically either in John’s own day or during church history. The more one assumes that at least portions of these prophecies were already fulfilled, the less one awaits a future fulfillment. A more literal approach to these prophecies will predispose one toward pretribulationalism or possibly midtribulationalism, and a more figurative approach toward posttribulationalism.

Hyperpreterism, or consistent preterism, has emerged in the last few decades with a still different approach to the timing of Jesus’ return. The driving force behind this movement is Jesus’ apparent promise to return within a generation of his death (Matt. 24:34). Consequently, hyperpreterism has assumed that all the future prophecies in the NT must have been fulfilled by the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, including Jesus’ return, the bodily resurrection, the final judgment, and the new heaven and new earth. The bottom line is that in order to take literally Jesus’ promise to return within a generation, everything else in eschatology needs to be reinterpreted as having been fulfilled in one way or another within that same generation. A more moderate preterism sees many, but not all, of these eschatological events fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Jesus returned as the Son of Man in judgment against Israel in these first-century events, but the final judgment of all people and the new heaven and new earth await his second coming.

The Resurrection and the Final Judgment

The bodily resurrection takes place at the time of Jesus’ return. Although many other religions and philosophies have assumed the immortality of the soul, whereby the nonmaterial part of human nature survives death, Christianity is distinctive in its strong commitment to the idea of a bodily resurrection. Death marks the separation of the body from the soul and the time when believers are immediately ushered into God’s presence (Eccles. 12:7). Thus, Jesus was able to promise the thief on the cross, “Today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43). However, people do not immediately receive new resurrection bodies at the time of death, but must wait until the time of Jesus’ return, when “the dead in Christ will rise first” (1Thess. 4:16). This bodily resurrection is the precursor to the final judgment of the saved and the lost, when “all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come out—those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil will rise to be condemned” (John 5:28–29). At that time, Christ “will judge the living and the dead” (2Tim.4:1).

This theme of judgment is foundational to Christianity, although Christians remain divided about the exact number and character of these judgments. Yet the time will come when all people will be judged, both “the living and the dead” (Acts 10:42), when “we will all stand before God’s judgment seat” (Rom. 14:10), and “each of us will give an account of ourselves to God” (14:12). God himself will be the judge, and Christ will be given a special place in presiding over the final judgment and separate those who truly belong to him from those who do not. Even though this judgment will be “according to what they have done” (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6; Rev. 22:12), these deeds are simply an outward demonstration of whether a living faith is present, so there is no contradiction between justification by faith and the necessary place for a changed life in the believer. Yet, as Jesus warns, some will be surprised: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 7:21). God’s judgment will be both just and inescapable.

Christians remain divided about the number of resurrections. Premillennialists who are also pretribulationalists or midtribulationalists would conclude that there is a minimum of a resurrection of believers at the time of the rapture, when Jesus returns for his church; another resurrection when Jesus returns at the end of the tribulation for believers who came to faith and died during the tribulation; as well as another resurrection at the end of the millennium for “the rest of the dead” (Rev. 20:5). Premillennialists who are also posttribulationalists would conclude that there are as few as two resurrections: one at Jesus’ return and another at the end of the millennium. An amillennialist or a postmillennialist would assume that there may be only a single bodily resurrection when Jesus returns and establishes his kingdom.

There is one other aspect that completes this theme: God’s judgment also includes the destruction of the devil in the lake of fire (Rev. 20:10). Someday sin and evil will be forever removed from God’s creation.

The Millennium

The millennium is a thousand-year reign of Christ described most clearly in Rev. 20. Again, there are sharp differences of opinion regarding this topic.

Premillennialists believe that Jesus’ return will be “pre” (before) the millennium, and that this millennial kingdom will be a golden age of unprecedented glory and splendor. Dispensational premillennialists, with their emphasis on the distinction between Israel and the church, have focused on the fulfillment of all the remaining OT prophecies made to Israel. Historic premillennialists, on the other hand, lack this sharp distinction between Israel and the church and see themselves as being in continuity with the view of a future reign of Christ on earth found throughout church history. In recent years, premillennialism has become the leading view in American Christianity.

Postmillennialists believe that God will build his church for “a thousand years” and then Jesus will return “post” (after) this millennium. The millennium here is comparable to a silver age involving significant and unprecedented advances of the gospel throughout the world. Postmillennialists remain divided about how literal this thousand-year period might be and whether this period has already begun or not. Postmillennialism has had a significant following throughout most of church history but more recently has become a minority view.

Amillennialists believe in a different kind of millennium. Here there are two different varieties. Some believe that those reigning with Christ in Rev. 20 are simply believers living here in this present life experiencing the intimacy of Christ’s presence in their daily lives. Others see this period as involving departed believers, who are currently reigning with Christ in the intermediate state between death and his return. The millennium here is neither the golden age of the premillennialist nor the silver age of the postmillennialist; it is simply life today.

Again there are predisposing factors. Those who place more weight on potentially unfulfilled OT prophecies will tend to be premillennial, whereas those who place more weight on the words of Jesus and Paul will tend to be amillennial or possibly postmillennial. Those who see more of a distinction between Israel and the church will tend to be dispensational premillennialists, whereas those who emphasize the unity among God’s people throughout redemptive history will choose one of the other alternatives. Those who tend toward a more literal approach to interpreting Scripture will tend to be premillennialists, whereas those who give more weight to symbolic and figurative language will choose one of the other options. Those who tend to be more pessimistic about the future and believe that things are getting worse will tend to be premillennialists, whereas those who are more optimistic about what God is doing in this world and who emphasize the transforming power of the gospel will tend to be postmillennialists. One’s eschatological convictions are the logical outgrowth of many other earlier commitments and persuasions.

Each of these millennial views also has implications for a number of other topics: the nature and intensity of Satan’s binding in Rev. 20, the number of different resurrections, and the number of different judgments. The ultimate question, again, is which approach does the best job of putting together all the prophecies of Scripture and consequently is most faithful to God’s word.

Heaven and Hell

God’s judgment inevitably leads either to final and permanent torment in hell or to untold blessings in the new heaven and new earth (Matt. 25:46).

The ultimate hope of believers involves the bodily resurrection and a new earth to go along with these glorified bodies. The glad time will come when God “will wipe every tear from their eyes” and “there will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain” (Rev. 21:4). There will be the joys of physical bodies healed and restored, seeing friends and loved ones, but the greatest joy of all will be seeing the Lord himself in all his glory and majesty.

Hell will be the very opposite, experienced by those who deliberately rejected and avoided God during their earthly lives. They will find themselves rejected by God and cut off from his presence (and all the blessings that go along with his presence). Although there are various debates about how literal or figurative some of the biblical descriptions of hell are in terms of unquenchable fire and worms that do not die (Mark 9:48), it seems safe to say that hell will be the greatest of all possible tragedies and far worse than any of these descriptions suggest.

Annihilationism or conditional immortality, with its assumption that the souls of the lost will cease to exist at some point after death, represents an attempt to soften the explicit teachings of Scripture. Universalism—the belief that ultimately everyone will be saved—is another human strategy to avoid the clear teaching of Scripture. Ultimately, there is a heaven, and there is a hell, and human choices do make a difference for time and eternity.

The Benefits of Eschatology

Eschatology should give balance and perspective to life so that the affairs and accomplishments of this present life do not take on an inappropriate importance. Whenever people are caught up with materialism and a this-worldly perspective on life or become complacent about their lack of spiritual growth or the spiritual condition of others, the underlying cause is often a lack of attention to eschatology. Although many difficult and controversial questions surround the nature and timing of the return of Jesus Christ, Scripture is clear about the fact of his return and the final judgment. A new life with Christ that will last for all eternity is described in Scripture as the greatest of all possible blessings. At the same time, a life apart from God both in this life and in the life to come is described as the greatest possible tragedy in life. Perhaps even the spiritual deception and confusion around us, whereby many “will abandon the faith” (1Tim. 4:1) and “not put up with sound doctrine” (2Tim. 4:3), are a sign of the lateness of the hour. A proper appreciation of eschatology can be a means that God uses to change people’s lives.

Sanctificationand Holiness

Inthe biblical sense, the word “sanctification” relatesdirectly to the Hebrew and Greek words for “holy” (qadoshand hagiosrespectively). One may even argue that “holy-fication”would be preferable to “sanctification” to underscore theintertwined nature of these terms. In Scripture, English terms suchas “holy”/“holiness,”“consecrate”/“consecration,” and“sanctify”/“sanc-ti-fi-cation”/“saints”express cognates of qadosh/hagios.

Despitecontinued emphasis by many writers that “holy” speaks toseparation and that “to be holy” means “to be setapart,” the biblical terms are relational and speak primarilyof belonging. “To be holy” (sanctified) means “tobelong to God”; separation follows only as the exclusivity ofthis relationship demands it.

Qadoshis God’s adjective. God’s character defines the meaningof “holy,” not the other way around. Holy, then, cannotbe reduced to religious notions of purity (and/or exclusivity) butrather must be understood in light of the full expression of God’scharacter and will. While other adjectives such as “great,”“majestic,” and “powerful” can also describehumans, God exclusively determines the meaning of the adjectiveqadosh(hagios).“Holy” has no meaning apart from God. Humans (and things)become holy only as they belong to God. For example, an ordinarytable dedicated to God becomes aholy table. The peoplebelonging to God area holypeople. Different from otherspirits, the Holy Spirit belongs to God and expresses his presenceexclusively (cf. Isa. 6:3; 52:1).

Itfollows that holiness and divine presence are tightly interwoven. Godopens the door into his presence, enabling sanctification (John17:18; 1Cor. 1:2; Heb. 10:10), and he calls for his people notto violate his relational presence (2Cor. 7:1; 2Tim.2:21; Heb. 12:14). Sanctification, then, is not as much an intrinsic“either/or” quality (granted or not granted) as it is arelational “more or less” quality based on God’sdynamic presence. Put differently, the biblical perspective onholiness resists reduction to a mere “holy versus profane”dichotomy and cannot be reduced to a simple declaration (granted!) orto a specific list of godly requirements (dos and don’ts).

OldTestament

Thegradation of the OT priesthood into levels of holiness that enabledentrance and service in weaker or stronger intensities of God’spresence underscores further this dynamic quality of holiness.Although all the people of Israel were holy (belonging to God), thepriests enjoyed a higher degree of holiness than the ordinaryIsraelite. Within the ranks of the priests, the high priest wentthrough stricter rituals of consecration (Exod. 29:1–8, 20–21;Lev. 8:7–24; 21:13–15), since he alone could minister inthe most intensive presence of God (Lev. 16:1–17). Less holywere those of the Aaronic lineage born with physical defects.Although sufficiently holy to eat from the most holy offerings, theycould not serve at the altar (Lev. 21:16–23).

AverageIsraelites possessed a lower level of holiness than Levites andpriests but could, as individuals, acquire greater levels of holinessthrough obedience (Lev. 11:44–45; Num. 15:40–41).Moreover, special vows, like that of the Nazirite, enhanced theaverage Israelite’s quality as holy. The Nazirite vow (Num.6:1–21) did not transfer priestly status to any person, but itdid elevate one’s holiness to a comparable level during theperiod of dedication.

Thisdynamic connection between divine presence and sanctification becomeseven more evident in the prophets. They were “holy men”because they were endowed with the divine spirit, and as the level ofthis endowment varied from prophet to prophet, so did theireffectiveness as God’s messengers. False prophets still carriedthe name, but their lack of devotion to Israel’s God causedinaccuracy in their message (e.g., Jer. 6:13–14).

NewTestament

Thisdynamic relationship between divine presence and holiness translatesdirectly to the NT use of hagiasmos (and cognates). Although theGospels rarely use “sanctification” vocabulary, Jesus’ongoing polemic against the Pharisees, who had turned their piety(holiness) into a question of mere conspicuous behavior, makes thesame point. John’s correlation of Jesus’ sanctificationas God’s Son with the disciples’ experience of theSpirit’s empowerment (John 10:34–38; 17:17–19)indicates the same. Sanctification could not be separated frompurpose and sending (20:21–23) and could not be reduced to aprocess of learning specified “Christian” behaviors.This, again, follows the pattern outlined in Acts; it was theoutpouring of the Spirit that enabled the disciples to live theChristian life, which required the dynamic, creative power of God’spresence (Acts 1:8; 2:1–21).

Paul’sconversion exemplifies this tight connection between divine presenceand sanctification (holiness). Not attaining the experience of Godthat he expected from keeping the law, Paul found the law-promisedaccess to God in Christ. This turned him into a theologian of theSpirit who focused on the relational quality of God’s presence.In Paul’s vernacular “divine presence,” asexpressed through the language of holiness or sanctification, stemsfrom the relational work of the Holy Spirit. Accordingly,sanctification centers on deepening the relationship between God andthe Spirit-filled Christian. Sanctification as a process of“learning” ethics surfaces only as a derivative; ethicsis a by-product of divine presence, not vice versa. The antidote tothe vices of the flesh (Gal. 5:18–21) is not a contrasting listof virtues of the Spirit but rather a fruit, the product or result,of living in God’s presence (Gal. 5:22–23).

ForPaul, Spirit possession was synonymous with being a Christian (Rom.8:9). His concern involved the intensity of the Spirit’spresence. The Spirit could be grieved and his presence quenched—adevastating situation to the Christian’s power and sanctity(Eph. 4:30; 1Thess. 5:19).

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

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

Thefollowing colors have particular significance or symbolic meaning inthe Bible:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jesus’ personal return to earth at the end of history.Three main Greek terms are used in the NT to describe this event:parousia, apokalypsis, and epiphaneia. The word parousia means“presence” or “arrival” and was used inancient times to describe the arrival of a ruler or king (e.g., Matt.24:3, 27, 37, 39; 1Cor. 15:23; 1Thess. 3:13; 4:15; 5:23;2Thess. 2:1, 8; James 5:7–8; 2Pet. 3:4, 12; 1John2:28). The term apokalypsis refers to an “unveiling” or“revealing” of Jesus Christ at the end of the age (Rom.2:5; 1Cor. 1:7; 2Thess. 1:7; 1Pet. 1:7, 13; 4:13;cf. Rev. 1:1). The word epiphaneia speaks of an “appearing”or “manifestation” and refers to the visible, earthlyappearance of Jesus (2Thess. 2:8; 1Tim. 6:14; 2Tim.4:1, 8; Titus 2:13).

Jesusclearly predicted his second coming in his Olivet Discourse: “Thenwill appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all thepeoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man comingon the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory” (Matt.24:30). Jesus uses the word “come” in this discourse tospeak about his return (Matt. 24:39, 42–44, 46; 25:19, 27, 31).Jesus’ return is also predicted by angels (e.g., Acts 1:11) andapostles (Phil. 3:20; Acts 3:20–21; 1Cor. 11:26; Heb.9:28).

TheNT describes certain events that will precede Jesus’ coming.There will be wars, famines, earthquakes, and other cosmicdisturbances (Matt. 24:6–8, 29). Believers will be persecutedand hated (Matt. 24:9–13, 21–22). Many erstwhilebelievers will turn away from the faith (Matt. 24:10–13; 1Tim.4:1; 2Tim. 3:1–5; 2Pet. 3:3–4). There will befalse messiahs and false prophets who will deceive many through signsand wonders (Matt. 24:11, 23–26). The “man oflawlessness” (sometimes referred to as the antichrist) will berevealed (2Thess. 2:1–12). In addition, the gospel willbe preached to all nations (Matt. 24:14).

AlthoughJesus’ coming is certain, its exact time is uncertain in thesense that it cannot be predicted. Jesus himself said, “Butabout that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven,nor the Son, but only the Father” (Matt. 24:36 [cf. Acts 1:7;3:21; 2Pet. 3:4, 8–9]).

WhenJesus comes again, his return will be visible to all, like “lightningthat comes from the east is visible even in the west” (Matt.24:27). The last trumpet will announce his coming in awesome powerand great glory with his holy angels (Matt. 16:27; 24:30–31;25:31; 1Cor. 15:52; 1Thess. 3:13; 4:16; 2Thess.1:7; 2:8; Jude 14). His coming will also be sudden and unexpected,“like a thief in the night” (1Thess. 5:1–2;see also Matt. 24:37–39, 43–44; 2Pet. 3:10; Rev.16:15).

Jesuswill come again for several reasons. He will raise the dead (John5:28–29; 1Cor. 15:22–23, 52; 1Thess. 4:16)and separate the wicked from the righteous (Matt. 24:40–41;25:31–32). He will transform the bodies of believers intoglorious resurrection bodies (1Cor. 15:51–53; Phil.3:20–21), gather his followers to himself (1Thess. 4:17;2Thess. 2:1), and reward them for their faithfulness (Matt.16:27; 24:46–47; 1Thess. 2:19; 2Tim. 4:8; 1Pet.5:4; Rev. 22:12). The believer’s suffering will be replacedwith the Lord’s praise (2Thess. 1:7; 1Pet. 1:7;4:13) and the full experience of salvation (Heb. 9:28). By contrast,Jesus’ second advent means wrath for the wicked (Matt. 24:51;Rom. 2:5; 2Thess. 1:8–9; Jude 15; Rev. 20:11–15)and destruction for God’s enemies (1Cor. 15:25–26;2Thess. 2:8; Rev. 19:11–21; 20:7–10).

Sincehis coming is imminent but its timing uncertain, believers shouldeagerly expect his return (1Cor. 1:7; 11:26; 16:22; Phil. 3:20;James 5:7–8; Rev. 22:20). Remaining watchful and ready consistsof being faithfully engaged in doing what Jesus instructed (Matt.24:46; 25:14–30; 1John 2:28), even if this meanssuffering (Matt. 24:13; 1Pet. 1:6–7). Believers arecalled to live holy and blameless lives in anticipation of meetingJesus face-to-face (1Thess. 3:13; 5:23; 1Tim. 6:14;1Pet. 1:13; 2Pet. 3:11–14; 1John 2:28–29;3:2–3). The promise of Jesus’ return is a motivation formission (2Tim. 4:1–2; 2Pet. 3:12) and obedience(Rev. 22:7, 12, 17). It is, in short, the “blessed hope”of the believer (Titus 2:13).

Simon Peter is the best-known and the most colorful of Jesus’twelve disciples. The name “Peter” means “rock”in Greek. In some biblical texts, he is also called “Cephas,”which is the Aramaic word for “rock” (see esp. John1:42). Despite the ups and downs of Peter’s spiritual life, Godwas able to use him as the foundational apostle for the establishmentof the NT church. Peter first met Jesus immediately after Jesus’baptism, when Peter’s brother, Andrew, heard John the Baptist’sidentification of Jesus as the Lamb of God (John 1:35). In classicmissionary style, “the first thing Andrew did was to find hisbrother Simon and tell him, ‘We have found the Messiah’ ”(John 1:41). Peter’s official call to ministry took placelater, when he was fishing on the Sea of Galilee and Jesus issued thewell-known invitation “Come, follow me, ... and Iwill send you out to fish for people” (Matt. 4:19).

Peterwas the chief spokesman for the disciples at Caesarea Philippi whenJesus asked them, “Who do people say the Son of Man is?”(Matt. 16:13). Peter responded, “You are the Messiah, the Sonof the living God,” an insight given him by God the Father(16:16–17). Jesus promised him, “I tell you that you arePeter [petros], and on this rock [petra] I will build my church, andthe gates of Hades will not overcome it” (16:18). Yet Peteralmost immediately became a “stumbling block” to Jesuswhen he chided Jesus for saying that he must go to Jerusalem andsuffer many things and be killed (16:21–22). Another majorfailure by Peter came with his threefold denial of Jesus after Jesushad warned him, “This very night, before the rooster crows, youwill disown me three times” (Matt. 26:34). Fortunately, therewere tears of repentance, and Peter was forgiven and restored afterJesus’ threefold question (“Do you love me?” [John21:15–19]).

Jesus’death and resurrection, as well as the giving of the Holy Spirit onthe day of Pentecost, had stabilizing effects on Peter. After Jesus’ascension, Peter exercised primary leadership among the otherdisciples during the upper room prayer meetings and the choosing ofthe replacement for Judas (Acts 1). Peter clearly was the publicspokesman for the apostles on the day of Pentecost and a key playerin the establishment of the church in Jerusalem (Acts 2–5), inreceiving the first Samaritan converts (Acts 8:14–25), and inreceiving Cornelius as the first Gentile convert (Acts 10–11).Following Peter’s miraculous deliverance from prison in Acts12, he essentially disappears from recorded history. By the time ofthe Jerusalem council (Acts 15), Peter reappeared briefly, but bythis time he had been replaced by James as the leader of theJerusalem church. Peter apparently continued to live as a missionary(1Cor. 9:5), specifically “to the circumcised”(Gal. 2:7–8), for the rest of his life. Yet Peter was stillhuman, and on one occasion Paul gave him a stinging rebuke (Gal.2:11–21).

Duringhis travels, Peter undoubtedly visited the recipients of his laterletter 1Peter (and possibly 2Peter) in north central AsiaMinor (the regions of “Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia andBithynia” [1Pet. 1:1]), possibly Corinth (1Cor.1:12; 3:22), and, at least by the end of his life, Rome itself.According to tradition, he was put to death by Nero between AD 64 and68, apparently by being crucified upside down (cf. John 21:18–19).Peter’s life is a vivid illustration of the Christian’sfight for faith, God’s gracious provision, and Jesus’intercession on his behalf (“I have prayed for you, Simon, thatyour faith may not fail” [Luke 22:32]).

The outpouring of the Spirit that was prophesied in the OT totake place in the last days, in connection with the arrival of theMessiah.

Spiritbaptism in the Bible.The OT prophets had spoken of both the Spirit of God coming upon theMessiah (e.g., Isa. 11:2; 42:1; 61:1) and a giving or pouring out ofthe Spirit in the last days (e.g., Isa. 32:15; 44:3; Ezek. 36:27;37:14; 39:29; Joel 2:28). Peter connects the giving of the Spiritwith Jesus’ being received by the Father and being grantedmessianic authority (Acts 2:33–38). The experience of Corneliusin particular associates the pouring out of the Spirit (Acts 10:45)with a baptism with the Spirit (11:16).

Sevenpassages in the NT directly speak of someone being baptized in/withthe Spirit. Four of these passages refer to John the Baptist’sprediction that Jesus will baptize people in/with the Spirit incontrast to his own water baptism (Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16;John 1:33). In Matthew and Luke, Jesus’ baptism is referred toas a baptism with the Holy Spirit and with fire. Two passages referto Jesus’ prediction that the disciples would receive Spiritbaptism, which occurred at Pentecost. As recorded in Acts 2, tonguesof fire came to rest on each of them, they were filled with the HolySpirit, and they began to speak in other tongues. As the disciplesspoke to the Jews who had gathered in Jerusalem for the festival,three thousand were converted. Acts 1:5 contains Jesus’prediction of this baptism with the Spirit, which Peter recounts in11:16.

Thefinal reference occurs in 1 Cor. 12:13, where Paul says, “Forwe were all baptized by one Spirit so as to form one body—whetherJews or Gentiles, slave or free—and we were all given the oneSpirit to drink.” Thus, Christians form one body through theircommon experience of immersion in the one Spirit.

Asecond baptism?Whilein 1 Cor. 12 Paul seems to refer to an experience that allChristians undergo at conversion, there are several incidents in Actswhere the reception of the Spirit occurs after conversion. Thequestion then arises as to whether there is a separate “baptismin/with the Holy Spirit” distinct from the Spirit’sinitial work of regeneration and incorporation into the body ofChrist at conversion and whether this two-stage process is normativefor the church. This belief in a second baptism is particularlyprominent in Pentecostal traditions.

Examplessuch as Acts 2; 8; 10; 19 are commonly used to support the view of asecond and subsequent experience of Spirit baptism. In Acts 2 thedisciples are already converted and wait for the Spirit, who comes tothem at Pentecost. In Acts 8 the Samaritans first respond to Philip’spreaching and receive water baptism. However, they receive the Spiritonly after Peter and John come from Jerusalem and pray for them toreceive the Holy Spirit. In Acts 10 Cornelius is a God-fearingGentile, and after Peter visits him, the Spirit falls on hishousehold. In Acts 19 Paul finds some disciples in Ephesus. After helays hands on them, the Holy Spirit comes upon them, and they beginto speak in tongues and prophesy.

Inunderstanding these experiences, it must be remembered that Actsdescribes a transitional period for the church. Acts 2 in particularrecounts the initial giving of the Spirit under the new covenant. Itis possible, then, to see the events in Acts 8; 10 as the coming ofthe Spirit upon two other people groups, the Samaritans and theGentiles. Acts 2:38 and 5:32 indicate that the apostles expected thereception of the Spirit to accompany conversion, and this appears tobe the case in the rest of the book. Acts 19 narrates anincomplete conversion, where the people had only experienced John’sbaptism and receive the Spirit after Paul baptizes them “in thename of the Lord Jesus.”

Filledwith the Spirit.Although the NT does not support a theology of a second Spiritbaptism, it does commonly mention an experience of being “filled”with the Spirit. The concept of being “filled with the Spirit”frequently occurs in contexts referring to spiritual growth, such asin Eph. 5:18, where Paul exhorts, “Do not get drunk on wine,which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit.”Apparently, this filling can occur numerous times. It can lead toworship of and thanksgiving to God (Eph. 5:19–20). It can alsoresult in empowerment for ministry.

Theimmediate consequence of the disciples’ filling in Acts 2:4 isspeaking in tongues to the various Jews gathered in Jerusalem, and in4:31 they are empowered to speak “the word of God boldly.”Fullness of the Spirit can also be a characteristic of a believer’slife, such as in Acts 6:3, where the seven men chosen to look afterthe widows were to be men “known to be full of the Spirit.”

A form of government that acknowledges God’s kingship.God functions as the ultimate king in every era of biblical history,regardless of the form of human government.

Inthe book of Deuteronomy, theocracy is indicated in affirmations thatYahweh is Israel’s commander in chief. Yahweh goes before hispeople and fights battles on their behalf (1:30, 33; 3:22; 7:1,22–24; 9:3–5; 11:23). An important passage thatanticipates the monarchy prescribes that God chooses the human king(17:15). That king should neither turn the people back to Egypt noramass horses, wives, or riches (17:16–17). Rather, the king isto keep God’s law with him and must “read it all the daysof his life so that he may learn to revere the Lord his God andfollow carefully all the words of this law ... and notconsider himself better than his fellow Israelites” (17:19–20).

Thebook of Judges recounts a series of leaders who fail to uphold thetheocratic ideal of Deuteronomy. Both the tribes and leadersrepeatedly “did evil in the eyes of the Lord” (2:11; 3:7,12; 4:1; 6:1; 10:6; 13:1). The closing chapters of Judges state, “Inthose days Israel had no king; everyone did as they saw fit”(17:6; 21:25; cf. 18:1; 19:1). These refrains show that Israel needsa human king who will help the people to do what is right (ratherthan evil) “in the eyes of the Lord.” Israel mustmaintain theocracy if it is to avoid foreign oppression.

Thesame issue is at stake in the account of Saul’s rise tokingship. The Israelites’ request for a king is problematic notonly because they desired to be like “all the other nations,”but also because they desired a human king who would go before themand fight their battles (1Sam. 8:5, 20). By asking for a kingwho would serve in the role of commander in chief, they effectivelysupplant Yahweh and reject theocracy (1Sam. 8:7; 10:19; 12:12).In keeping with Deuteronomy, Samuel explains that both king andpeople are to fear, serve, and obey Yahweh if they are to experienceblessing (1Sam. 12:14–15, 25; cf. Deut. 17:19–20).Since Saul has failed to uphold theocracy, God rejects him as king(1Sam. 13:14; 15:11, 23, 26–28, 35) and seeks out a manwho meets his own criteria for kingship (13:14; cf. 15:28). ThatDavid has a proper perspective on God’s authority is evident instatements such as “the battle is the Lord’s”(1Sam. 17:47). David especially acknowledges God’skingship by installing the ark in Jerusalem and desiring to build thetemple (2Sam. 6–7), actions that lead to the Davidiccovenant (7:4–17).

TheDavidic covenant is foundational for a biblical theology of God’skingdom. Numerous psalms are devoted to God’s kingship (Pss. 2;20; 21; 47; 93; 145), and eschatological prophecies reveal much aboutthe messianic king/kingdom (Isa. 9; 11; Jer. 23; 30; 33; Ezek. 37;Dan. 2; 7; 9; Mic. 5; Zech. 9; 14). The NT shows that God’skingdom has arrived in part at the first coming of Jesus but awaitsits full consummation at his second coming (Matt. 3:17; 12:28; Mark1:14–15; Luke 17:20–21; Acts 1:6–8).

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

OldTestament

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

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

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

NewTestament

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

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

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

Relationshipsbetween Father, Son, and Spirit

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

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

TrinitarianHeresies

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

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

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

The idea of unity has always been significant for God’speople and their relatedness to one another. In the OT, unitycentered on the covenant and on Yahweh, who is the heart of thecovenant. In 2Chron. 30:12 the hand of God was on the people togive them unity to carry out the tasks that had been ordered by theking at God’s command. In Ps. 133:1 the psalmist notes thegoodness of the unity of the extended family, no doubt also to beextended to the unity of God’s people, Israel.

Inthe NT, unity centers on Jesus Christ, who is the heart of the newcovenant. John emphasizes this unity as he records the teaching ofJesus on the relationship of the Father and the Son (John 14). TheFather is in the Son, and the Son is in the Father. In John 16 Jesusnotes that this is the standard by which oneness is to be compared;the disciples are to be one, just as the Father and theSon areone. There will also be oneness between the triune God and his peopleas the Holy Spirit comes to reside in the disciples. Unity and itsvarious outcomes are the subject of Jesus’ final prayer in thegarden (John 17).

InActs 1 Luke notes that the disciples were unified after theresurrection and ascension as they worshiped and prayed together inthe upper room (v.14 NASB, NET: “with one mind”[hom*othymadon]). Luke uses the same word in Acts 2:46 when he notesthe same unity for the early church as they gathered for the sake ofworship and praise to God in the temple (cf. 4:24 [unison prayer forpower from God]; 5:12 [meeting together at Solomon’sColonnade]; 15:25 [unanimity in a decision to send representatives toAntioch]). Indeed, the story of the beginning of the early church isthe story of the fulfillment of Christ’s command to be unified.It is sometimes supposed, probably correctly, that the apostles fromJerusalem went to the Samaritan church to lay on hands for thebestowal of the Spirit in order that the long-standingJewish-Samaritan rift might not destroy the unity of the growing body(see Acts 8:14–17).

InEph. 4:3 Paul commands the believers to be zealous to keep theirunity based in the Spirit as they are bound together by the peacethat Christ gives. Later, in 4:13, Paul notes that God has givengifted people to the body of Christ so that the believers may betrained for the ministry of building up that body. This has its goalin the unity of believers and maturity of the faith in the knowledgeof Christ—so that the body might be like him. So the unity ofbelievers here is linked to the ubiquitous NT goal of Christlikeness.This also entails rejecting false teaching (4:14).