8 Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for he who loves his fellowman has fulfilled the law. 9 The commandments, "Do not commit adultery," "Do not murder," "Do not steal," "Do not covet," and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: "Love your neighbor as yourself." 10 Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.
11 And do this, understanding the present time. The hour has come for you to wake up from your slumber, because our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed. 12 The night is nearly over; the day is almost here. So let us put aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light. 13 Let us behave decently, as in the daytime, not in orgies and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and debauchery, not in dissension and jealousy. 14 Rather, clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ, and do not think about how to gratify the desires of the sinful nature.
Wake Up!
Romans 13:8-14
Sermon
by King Duncan
Someone has said, “You know it’s going to be a bad day when your horoscope starts with . . . ‘Are you sitting down?’”
You know it’s going to be a bad day when you turn on the news and they are displaying emergency routes out of the city.
You know it’s going to be a bad day when you wake up in a hospital in traction and your insurance agent tells you that your accident policy covers falling off the roof, but not hitting the ground.
We might add one more: You know it’s going to be a bad day when your pastor says, “Wake up! Wake Up!” and you’ve barely gotten settled comfortably in your pew.
But that’s what St. Paul is saying to us on this first Sunday in Advent. He writes, “The hour has already come for you to wake up from your slumber, because our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed. The night is nearly over; the day is almost here . . .”
So no slumbering this morning. It is time for us to wake up! Our salvation is at hand.
I enjoyed a description that Dr. David Howeth once wrote of his former pastor, a Baptist pastor named Dr. Harry Roark. Roark, he says, was a real character. He smoked, for one thing, and he let the deacons know from the very beginning of his tenure there that he had no intention of quitting. He loved to play a domino game called forty-two. He enjoyed winning so much that, allegedly, he even cheated every now and then.
What I most enjoyed about Dr. Roark is that he had a horse named Pastoral Calls, which he kept at a church member’s ranch southeast of town. If you called the church office on Wednesday afternoons, his secretary, Louise Greer, would politely let you know that Dr. Roark was not in; he was out on Pastoral Calls. The church members understood exactly what that meant.
Dr. Roark had several other quirks or idiosyncrasies. One of them had to do with his preaching. Dr. Roark seemed to know that his congregation was not always paying close attention to him each Sunday, so when he eventually got to the point of his sermon, he always would preface it by asking the question, “Are you listening?” That was the congregation’s cue they knew it, and he knew it. He would then wait just long enough for them to wake up or stop making out their grocery lists or stop drawing on their bulletins or stop passing notes to their friends to tune in to what he was saying. When Dr. Roark asked the question, “Are you listening?” it was time to be alert and pay attention. “Are you listening?” was Dr. Roark’s “wake up” call to his congregation. (1)
Some people read Paul’s words to wake up in strictly a negative sense. “The world is going to hell on a roller coaster, folks,” some are prone to say, “Wake up before it’s too late.” And certainly there is a time for that.
New York Times columnist A.M. Rosenthal once wrote a column on the problem of drug addiction in this country. He began his column like this: “It is a familiar nightmare. We have all had it. The train is coming right down the track at somebody you know, and you scream ‘Get out of the way, get out the way!’ But he doesn’t move, and the train comes on and on and you wake up sweating.”
Then he adds these dramatic words, “A drug train is coming, but the people standing on the track simply do not seem able to jump out of the way or even hear the screeching whistle.”
Rosenthal was certainly right on target. The number of people with drug and alcohol addictions in our country and the recurring problems which they bring: crime, domestic violence, wasted lives, etc., are as deadly as an oncoming train. Some of you may already be waking up in the night sweating over someone you love who’s fighting this battle.
Comedian George Carlin was on Imus one time and told of growing up with an Irish father who fought a drinking problem all his life. When George grew up and found his own drinking problem, he went into detox and dried out. He came out proud as a peaco*ck and told his father, “I’ve beaten the drink.”
Carlin said that he never forgot his father’s reply: “George boy, you’re sober, and that’s wonderful. But there’s still the marriage and the kids and the job to deal with. The monkey may be off your back, but the circus is still in town.” (2)
And that’s true. Some people fight that battle every day of their lives. As one A.A. speaker put it, “If you do pick up another drink, don’t worry, someone will come for you. Look for the man dressed in blue, white, or black. That will be the cop, the EMT, or the coroner.”
There are many people who need a wake up call because they are engaging in self-destructive behavior. One day we’re going to wake up to the moral drift in our society concerning sexual behavior and wonder what in the world have we done to our children? What in the world have we done to our marriages? What in the world have we done to the very foundation of our society?
It is amusing to me that we point at gay people and call them a threat to marriage in this land. Friends, we heterosexuals are doing quite well destroying the institution of marriage all by ourselves. When was the last time you saw a depiction of a couple happily and wholesomely entering the state of matrimony on any of our popular television shows? I’m not being judgmental. I pride myself on being a preacher of grace. But I am concerned.
So was St. Paul. Listen to what he says next: “The hour has already come for you to wake up from your slumber, because our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed. The night is nearly over; the day is almost here. So let us put aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light. Let us behave decently, as in the daytime, not in carousing and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and debauchery, not in dissension and jealousy. Rather, clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ, and do not think about how to gratify the desires of the flesh.”
Rome in Paul’s time was not much different than America in our time. People are people. Unless someone is sounding the alarm from time to time, society has a tendency to deteriorate to be pulled down by those forces within our own nature those weaknesses of the flesh with which all of us are familiar. Paul was warning the church at Rome not to hit the snooze button when it came to the pull of destructive pleasures. Isn’t that what we do sometimes? Even with all our good intentions, we are not quite ready to face the morning with all its demands, and so we hit the snooze button.
According to USA Today, more than a third of American adults hit the snooze button every morning an average of three times. Snooziest group? The 25- to 34-year-olds 57 percent of them hit the snooze button daily. Peppiest risers? It’s the seniors. Only 10 percent of Americans over 65 regularly use their snooze button. Maybe that’s because seniors have finally come to the realization of how precious time is. Certainly it is time for us to wake up and to ask ourselves what we can do to make our society a healthier and more wholesome society. A society where families are healthy and strong. A society where everyone’s dignity is affirmed whether they are a part of a traditional family or not. A world where the love of Christ dwells in every heart.
It’s easy, as some do, to read Paul’s words in a negative way, and to hear only his message to wake up to the presence of sin in our world. But we also need to hear his summons to the presence of salvation in this world. Remember he starts off with these words: “The hour has already come for you to wake up from your slumber, because our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed. The night is nearly over; the day is almost here . . .”
Paul’s emphasis isn’t on the negative at all. It’s on the coming of light into a dark world. It is on preparing the world for Christ’s coming. And this is what Advent is all about. Advent has a two-fold emphasis. It is, of course, that time in the church year leading up to the celebration of Christ’s birth.
One comedian said that he wrapped his Christmas presents early this year, but he used the wrong paper. The paper he used said “Happy Birthday” on it. He said he didn’t want to waste it, so he just wrote “Jesus” on it.(3)
Advent is that time of year when we celebrate Christ’s birth. But it is also a time of waiting the fulfillment of God’s final saving act in Jesus Christ, the Day of Salvation, when earth shall be transformed and the kingdoms of this world shall become the Kingdom of our Christ. And there is nothing negative about that.
Before his death Roger Bush was a radio personality in Australia. He also was a serviceman in World War II. One of Roger’s friends was on an infamous prisoner of war ship from Java. Seventy‑five men were battened down in a hold of an old ship with no bedding or blankets, not enough room for them to lie down, with food being passed down in a slop bucket and bodies being passed up to be dumped into the sea. They were in that hold for three months unable to tell night from day.
Of seventy‑five men that went into the hold, only twenty‑six survived. Then the engines stopped. They had arrived at some port far away. Some soldiers ordered them at bayonet point down the gang‑plank and to a concrete building. The prisoners by this time were disoriented. One said to another: “Do you know what week it is?”
The prisoners didn’t even know what month it was! They were pushed into a concrete cell and their only thought was that they would all die.
Suddenly, they heard on the quiet night air the sound of bells . . . bells they found out later came from a Christian monastery high up in the hills. They looked at each other and threw their arms around each other and wept like children. The bells told them it was Christmas Day. “We knelt and listened to the message of the bells,” said Roger’s friend, “and somehow we found our faith again!” (4)
I hope when you hear bells this Advent season they will remind you of your faith and of your salvation. Or when you see the colored lights or lighted candles. Or the music of Christmas.
Dr. Don Collier tells of visiting his daughter in Seattle, Washington where he attended the Seattle Symphony Holiday Pops concert. This is how he describes the experience:
“It was a little different. There was music of the season, all right, including a Hanukkah song, various solo and dance performances accompanied by flying reindeer, Santa Claus fighting his way down the chimney, and the usual cadre of floating angels and dancing sugar-plum fairies. It was entertaining but hardly inspiring.
“Until,” says Dr. Collier, “quite unexpectedly, familiar words drifted out over the audience accompanied by the melodic sounds from the orchestra.
‘Do you see what I see?’
‘Do you hear what I hear?’
‘Do you know what I know?’”
A very simple carol presented in strikingly simple format. And, suddenly, says Don Collier, “for me it was Christmas! The old, old story presented in an incredibly up-to-date setting. Questions as old as the people of the Middle East and as contemporary as today’s conflicts.
“‘Do you see what I see?’ The star. The light of God illuminating the entire sky as the Almighty becomes incarnate then and now.
“‘Do you hear what I hear?’ The song. The very heavens singing in the gift of divine peace then and now.
“‘Do you know what I know?’ God present in human life life in the helplessness of the infant child and the power of the mighty king then and now.
“And to the people everywhere, the word: ‘Pray for peace, people everywhere. He will bring us goodness and light!’”
“So,” wrote Dr. Don Collier, “Christmas came for me this year in a symphony hall. As the trappings fell silent and still, and the truth sang forth: ‘This child, sleeping in the night, will bring us goodness and light.’” (5)
The key, says St. Paul, to being prepared for God’s salvation is to clothe ourselves with Christ.
Notice what Paul says at the end of this passage: “Let us behave decently, as in the daytime, not in carousing and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and debauchery, not in dissension and jealousy. Rather, clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ, and do not think about how to gratify the desires of the flesh.”
That is a beautiful image to me “Clothe yourself with the Lord Jesus Christ.”
Ronald Hall, a Lutheran Church pastor puts it like this: “Perhaps you can recall going out to get a Christmas tree late in the holiday season. Maybe you were too busy or too preoccupied, but the time slipped away. Finally you made it to the tree lot, but there wasn’t much left. You ended up with a scraggly looking tree that wasn’t very straight, but because you refused to pay the big prices they wanted for the pretty trees, that was it. Oh, well, you thought, maybe you could hide the bare spots in the corner and make it do. When the family saw the tree everyone complained about how bad it looked.
“But then you decorated it: the strings of lights, the beautiful balls and angels and the shiny tinsel. Then all the lights were turned out and the tree lights plugged in. ‘Wow!’ Everyone was hushed at the transformation that had taken place. ‘It’s beautiful.’
“God’s grace is like that,” says Pastor Hall. “It picks us up off the discard heap, covers us with the robe of righteousness and presents us spotless before God, magnificent in the splendor of gifts He has given and sparkling with the light that reflects His love.” That’s what it means to be clothed with Christ.
As Dr. Roark would say, “Are you listening?” I’m inviting you this Advent season to fall in love with Christ all over again. To wake up from your slumber and to clothe yourself with Christ that you might discover the joy of your salvation. Paul writes, “The hour has already come for you to wake up from your slumber, because our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed. The night is nearly over; the day is almost here . . .” Yes it is. Let the preparation continue.
1. http://www.schreiberumc.org/sermons/08-02-03.pdf.
2. THE J0KESMITH, Volume XXIII, Number 2, Spring, 2006.
3. Demetri Martin, Reader’s Digest.
4. Roger Bush, A Bush Christmas (Rigby, 1980). Cited by Rev. Dr. Gordon Moyes, http://www.wesleymission.org.au/ministry/sermons/011230.html.
5. The Vision, NYAC paper, 12-31-2004, p. 2. Contributed by Dr. John Bardsley.
ChristianGlobe Networks, Inc., Dynamic Preaching Fourth Quarter 2013, by King Duncan
Previously Paul has discussed relational righteousness with God (12:1-2), ourselves (3-8), others (9-11), and the state (13:1-7). Now he turns to two more:The Law and the Day of the Lord.
Relating to the Law (13:8-10): The only debt we owe to fellow believers is the continuing debt to love one another (13:8). The commandments are summed up in the one rule to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev. 19:18). We c…
The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016
8 Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for he who loves his fellowman has fulfilled the law. 9 The commandments, "Do not commit adultery," "Do not murder," "Do not steal," "Do not covet," and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: "Love your neighbor as yourself." 10 Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.
11 And do this, understanding the present time. The hour has come for you to wake up from your slumber, because our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed. 12 The night is nearly over; the day is almost here. So let us put aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light. 13 Let us behave decently, as in the daytime, not in orgies and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and debauchery, not in dissension and jealousy. 14 Rather, clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ, and do not think about how to gratify the desires of the sinful nature.
13:8–10 · Paul returns to love as the fundamental criterion of behavior. Loving others—being actively concerned for others, having affectionate regard for and interest in others—is an obligation (13:8a). The people to be loved are Christians, but also the neighbor who is the enemy (12:14, 17, 21). The reason and motivation for loving others is given in verses 8b–10. Believers who love others have fulfilled the law; they have properly done what the law asks (Rom. 8:4; cf. Matt. 5:17–20). The commandments of the law, which establish human relationships—no adultery, no murder, no stealing, no envious desires (cf. Exod. 20:13–17; Deut. 5:17–21)—are summed up in the commandment to love others as much as one loves oneself (Lev. 19:18, the most frequently cited passage of the Pentateuch in the New Testament; see Matt. 5:43; 19:19; 22:29; Mark 12:31; 12:33; Luke 10:27; Gal. 5:14; James 2:8). Paul does not reduce the law to one single commandment; he formulates the substance of proper obedience to the will of God.
13:11–14 · While the admonition to submit to governmental authorities and to pay taxes suggests that, in many ways, life goes on for Christians as it always has, Paul points out that the expected return of Jesus Christ is near. Final salvation is closer than it was a few years ago (13:11); the day of the revelation of God’s glory and the day of God’s judgment is near (13:12). Christians know that the last days have arrived (cf. Gal. 4:4; 1Cor. 10:11; Heb. 1:1–2; 9:26; James 5:9; 1Pet. 1:20). The nearness of the end, which is the beginning of the glorious inheritance of believers, who are united in Jesus Christ, should motivate them to live by the power of God, who raised Jesus from the dead. The present reality is described as night, works of darkness, and the evils of excessive feasting, drinking bouts, sexual promiscuity, violation of all bounds of what is socially acceptable, quarrels, jealousy, and the tendencies of the flesh. Christians live in the context of this reality, which they must confront (cf. 12:1–2). Paul calls them to be wide awake, to stop being involved in the evil practices and traditions of pagan society, to do battle with temptation and sinful values and lifestyles, to live honorably and transparently (“as in the daytime”), to be transformed by their union with Jesus Christ, who is Lord.
The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary by Gary M. Burge, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
Big Idea: Ethics and eschatology go hand in hand. Because the age to come has dawned, Christians participate in the new covenant; but because the present age continues, Christians must love others and not cater to the flesh. Indeed, the dawning of the age to come in Christ empowers believers to love others in the present age. The Old Testament law could not accomplish this.
Understanding the Text
Romans 13:8–14 resumes Paul’s discussion about Christian love in 12:9–21. At the same time, 13:8–14 anticipates Paul’s challenge to the Roman Christians to love one another in 14:1–15:13.
Romans 13:8–14 divides into two sections: the ethic of love (vv.8–10) and the dawning of the eschaton (vv.11–14). The two paragraphs are closely related: love is the power of the age to come, the stipulation of the new covenant; only it, not the law, can overcome the flesh of this present evil age.
I outline these two sections in this way:
1. The ethic of love (13:8–10)
a. The fulfillment of the law and the presence of the new covenant (13:8, 10)
b. Love is the fulfillment of the law in the way it treats one’s neighbor (13:8–10)
2. The dawning of the age to come (13:11–14)
a. The indicative of the age to come (13:11–12a)
b. The imperative needed for the present evil age (13:12b–14)
Historical and Cultural Background
Several traditions inform Paul’s ethic and eschatology in 13:8–14.
1.Jesus’ reduction of the law to loving God and loving one’s neighbor informs Paul’s command to love others (see Lev. 19:18; Mark 12:29–31; Matt. 22:37–39; Luke 10:27–28).
2.Paul’s language about taking off and putting on clothing is thought by many to allude to early Christian baptism.[1]
3.Romans 13:11–14 is thoroughly immersed in Jewish apocalypticism. Evald Lövestam points to a number of Jewish eschatological texts that undergird the passage.[2] I would add to Lövestam’s discussion that the texts he lists are informed by an apocalyptic reading of the Deuteronomic tradition, especially the pattern of sin, exile, and restoration that composes the story of Israel (see “The Theme of Romans” in the introduction). Thus, for example, Amos 5:18, 20 reverses the meaning of the day of the Lord for Israel, ascribing to it darkness and exile (Deuteronomic curses) because of their sin, not light and deliverance. One day, however, Israel will repent and obey the Lord, resulting in restoration and salvation (Deuteronomic blessings [Amos 9:13–15]). Similarly, Isaiah 60:19–20 envisions the lifting of God’s judgment upon Israel (Deuteronomic curses) and the subsequent restoration to the land, along with newfound obedience to God. It does so by employing the imagery of light and glory (Deuteronomic blessings [see Isa. 60:21–22]).3
I suggest that the preceding background sheds significant light on the Jewish underpinning of Romans 13:8–14: it is consonant with the hope that obedience to the Torah in this age (13:8–10) will bring about the age to come and the Deuteronomic blessings (13:11–14). Paul, however, reverses that tradition: only those whose faith is in Christ, not the law, and who thereby live a life of love (13:8–10) are participants in the Deuteronomic blessings of the age to come. This is what it means to put on Christ (13:14a). In doing so, Christians provide no opportunity for the flesh (13:14b). It is possible that because of the polemical nature of 13:8–13 (Paul extricates his gospel from the charge of libertinism), and because elsewhere in Romans Paul states that the law is no match for the flesh since it actually stirs up sin (3:20; 4:15; 7:7–11; 8:3), we are to understand Paul as saying in 13:14b that following the Torah is not the way to overcome the sinful nature (against the Judaizers). In reality, attempts to follow the Torah bring about disobedience and the Deuteronomic curses. If so, Paul’s reversal motif in 13:8–14 becomes clear: faith in Christ (who already obeyed and thereby terminated the Torah) brings the Deuteronomic blessings; but efforts to pursue the law in one’s own power do not lift the Deuteronomic curses.
Interpretive Insights
13:8–10 whoever loves others has fulfilled the law ... love is the fulfillment of the law. Verses 8–10 present the ethic of love. The key concept in this paragraph, that love is the fulfillment of the law, forms an inclusio (13:8, 10). Douglas Moo rightly points out that “fulfill” means for Paul the eschatological completion of the law, which was accomplished in Christ (as I argued above).[4] Christians, therefore, because they are in Christ and disseminate his love, need not worry about any other commandment. Romans 13:10b forms an inclusio with 13:8b and should be read in the same light: the Christian who loves, and who therefore does what the law requires (8:9–10a), has brought the Torah to its culmination. In other words, the new covenant has arrived, and its ethic is love.
But how does this relate to those commandments that Paul mentions in 13:9? There are three views. First, there is the traditional, or Lutheran, view stated above with reference to Moo. The law is finished in Christ. The Christian therefore is not obligated to any part of the law, certainly not the civil and ceremonial aspects, and not even the moral aspect—the Ten Commandments. Rather, the love of Christ flowing through the believer fulfills all that the law ever intended (though Moo perhaps allows for the continuing role of the law in the Christian life in light of human sinfulness). Second, there is the Calvinist view, which says that the Ten Commandments should function as a gauge of the Christian’s behavior. This is often called the “third use” of the law.[5] Third, James Dunn approaches 13:8–10 from the New Perspective on Paul. The curse of the law has been lifted in Christ so that now believers can obey the law in the power of the Spirit and guided by love.[6] The last two views seem to miss the eschatological significance of Paul’s statements in 13:8, 10 (love fulfills the law): Christ is the end of the law.
Verses9–10 state Leviticus 19:18 positively, “love your neighbor as yourself,” and negatively, “love does no harm to its neighbor.” The latter reminds one of the negative Golden Rule in Judaism (see Tob. 4:15; Sir. 10:6; Let. Aris. 168, 207).
13:11–14 The hour has already come ... clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ. These verses attest to the overlapping of the two ages in Paul’s theology. Verses11–12a emphasize the indicative aspect of salvation: by virtue of the Christ event, the age to come has drawn near and, with it, the salvation of believers. Three temporal clues in 13:11 confirm this to be the case: (1)the word “time” (kairos) is one of Paul’s choice terms for referring to the dawning of the eschaton (cf. Rom. 3:26; 5:6; 1Cor. 7:29); (2)the words “already the hour” (h?ra ?d?) convey a definite eschatological overtone, drawing their inspiration from Daniel’s idea that God has appointed a time for fulfilling his promise of the arrival of his kingdom (Dan. 8:17, 19; cf. 1John 2:18; Rev. 3:3, 10); (3)the words “our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed” are full of eschatological language. “Now” (nyn) refers to the presence of the age to come (cf. Rom 3:21; 5:9; 2Cor. 6:2), and “salvation” (s?t?ria) refers to the Christian’s redemptive wholeness and spiritual deliverance, a process begun by faith and soon to be culminated at the parousia. This salvation has drawn “nearer” (engyteron), a term recalling Jesus’ proclamation of the arrival of the kingdom of God, the age to come (Mark 1:15; 13:28–29; cf. James 5:8; 1Pet. 4:7).
These temporal terms, then, indicate that salvation and the end time have already dawned for the believer. However, the salvific message of 13:11–12a occurs in the context of this present age; hence Paul’s emphasis in 13:12b–14 on the necessity for Christians to live holy lives. It is clear that, for the apostle, eschatology forms the basis for Christian ethics. Accordingly, two general commands are issued: Christians are to put off the deeds of darkness and put on the weapons of light. This respective shedding of unrighteousness and donning of righteousness reflect the ongoing struggle that believers experience because they live in between the two epochs. The metaphor of the conflict between darkness and light brings to mind the eschatological battle between the unrighteous and the righteous envisioned in the Qumran literature (1QM 1.1, 8–14; 13.5–16; see also 1QS 1.9–10; 3.24–25; 4.7–13), as well as 1Thessalonians 5:1–9.7
Moreover, 13:11–14 should not be isolated from the earlier discussion of 13:8–10, for the former refers back to the love command in the latter: do this (fulfill the law by love), knowing that the eschaton has dawned (13:11–14). That connection is important because it provides the overarching logic of 13:8–14, which is that Paul is answering the polemics of his Judaizing opponents. Freedom from the law does not lead to licentious living; rather, Christian love alone provides victory over the flesh (11:14). This understanding accentuates the fact that, as far as the Christian is concerned, the law is terminated and now is replaced by love. The Torah, therefore, does not govern the Christian experience; rather, it is the new-covenant stipulation of love that does so.
Theological Insights
Several truths based on Romans 13:8–14 impact the Christian. First, the only debt that the believer owes is to love God and others. Paul’s command in 13:8–10 cannot be understood to prohibit, in our time, the (prudent) use of credit cards, mortgage, and so forth. Rather, it makes the point that loving others is an ongoing obligation for believers. Second, the Christian is under love, not law. But, as the Sermon on the Mount shows, loving others is more demanding and radical than the Torah itself. Only the power of the Holy Spirit can accomplish such behavior. Third, the power to love is available to the Christian because the age to come, the new covenant, and the kingdom of God (all similar concepts) have dawned. Thus, Christians love others (13:8–10) and God by pleasing him with holy lives (13:11–14).
Teaching the Text
I would use the title of this unit, “Ethics and Eschatology,” and the accompanying outline to teach or preach Romans 13:8–14. The basic point to be made is that eschatology—the dawning of the age to come—gives Christians the power to love God and others and thus the strength not to embrace an escapist mentality relative to this age. Regarding ethics, I noted above that 13:8–10 indicates that living a life of love for God and others fulfills the Old Testament law and even exceeds its requirements. So there is no room for licentiousness in the Christian life or for a cavalier attitude toward sin. And the power to live such a supernatural life of love has dawned in the person of Christ, who by his Spirit indwells his people (13:11–14). Yet we might also look again at Paul’s comments about ethics and eschatology from a slightly different perspective. Ethics obviously focuses on the here and now, while eschatology finds its ultimate fulfillment at the return of Christ. Assuming that to be the case, we can also detect that 13:8–14 offers a healthy balance toward life and eternity in the following ways.
If we as Christians focus only on ethics—the here and now—by trying to bring utopia to earth only through voting, social justice, transforming the structures of society with the gospel, and so forth, then probably we are in for a big disappointment. Theologians have tried to do that for centuries, from those who first legalized Christianity, to the Crusaders of the Middle Ages, to the theonomists of the twentieth century, to liberation theologians past and present. And all of them without exception have failed in their laudable attempts to usher in the kingdom of God through human effort. What is needed here is the humble recognition that only God himself will bring his kingdom to this planet.
But, on the other hand, if the church loses sight of its divine calling to be the salt and light of the earth by becoming obsessed with the date of the second coming or other eschatological phenomena, it will become so heavenly minded that it will be no earthly good. Therefore, Paul offers precisely the right balance to the church in 13:8–14: it should concentrate on preaching the gospel and loving others (ethics), all the while knowing that the final resolution awaits the return of Jesus Christ (eschatology).
Illustrating the Text
Our continuing debt is to love others.
Literature: Les Misérables, by Victor Hugo. In a well-known scene from this novel (1862), which has been made into a Broadway play and adapted for film, the escaped convict Jean Valjean is taken in by Bishop Myriel and given dignity and shelter. Nevertheless, Valjean steals the bishop’s silverware and escapes. When he is captured, the bishop protects Valjean, saying he had given the silverware to him and in fact wondered why Valjean had left the candlesticks. This act of love profoundly changes Valjean’s life forever, and he becomes a great force of love and generosity for the rest of his life.
Understanding eschatology, we must stop sinning and behave decently.
History: In his masterful book on New Testament eschatology, Christ and Time, Oscar Cullmann compared the first and second comings of Christ to D-Day and V-E Day of World WarII. Just as D-Day marked the beginning of the end for the Axis armies, so too the death and resurrection of Jesus signaled the victorious invasion of the age by the kingdom of God. Even after D-Day, however, there was another year of war and death before the final victory. So too, even after the triumph of Jesus’ resurrection, spiritual warfare will continue to be the lot of God’s people until the parousia. The outcome of the battle, however, is not in doubt; the Christian is on the victor’s side.
Church Fathers: Augustine, in his Confessions (AD397–98), reveals how he experienced his conversion to Christ by meditating on Romans 13:13–14 (Conf. 8.12.29). The challenge of Paul to put on the Lord Jesus Christ and make no provision for the flesh (the sinful nature) empowered Augustine to break with his past immorality and commit his life to Christ and his kingdom.
Teaching the Text by C. Marvin Pate, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
Direct Matches
One of the sins forbidden in the Ten Commandments (Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18). Narrowly interpreted, the prohibition forbids extramarital relations with a married woman (Lev. 20:10), but it is applied more broadly in Lev. 20 and Deut. 22 24 to cover a variety of sexual offenses.
The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesus followers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christ embodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in human history.
Birth and childhood. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem during the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesus was probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’s death (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of a virginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18; Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governor Quirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place in Bethlehem (2:15). Both the census and the governorship at the time of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars. Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to either confirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must be determined on the basis of one’s view regarding the general reliability of the Gospel tradition.
On the eighth day after his birth, Jesus was circumcised, in keeping with the Jewish law, at which time he officially was named “Jesus” (Luke 2:21). He spent his growing years in Nazareth, in the home of his parents, Joseph and Mary (2:40). Of the NT Gospels, the Gospel of Luke contains the only brief portrayal of Jesus’ growth in strength, wisdom, and favor with God and people (2:40, 52). Luke also contains the only account of Jesus as a young boy (2:41–49).
Baptism, temptation, and start of ministry. After Jesus was baptized by the prophet John the Baptist (Luke 3:21–22), God affirmed his pleasure with him by referring to him as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Jesus’ baptism did not launch him into fame and instant ministry success; instead, Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, where he was tempted for forty days (Matt. 4:1–11; Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). Mark stresses that the temptations immediately followed the baptism. Matthew and Luke identify three specific temptations by the devil, though their order for the last two is reversed. Both Matthew and Luke agree that Jesus was tempted to turn stones into bread, expect divine intervention after jumping off the temple portico, and receive all the world’s kingdoms for worshiping the devil. Jesus resisted all temptation, quoting Scripture in response.
Matthew and Mark record that Jesus began his ministry in Capernaum in Galilee, after the arrest of John the Baptist (Matt. 4:12–13; Mark 1:14). Luke says that Jesus started his ministry at about thirty years of age (3:23). This may be meant to indicate full maturity or perhaps correlate this age with the onset of the service of the Levites in the temple (cf. Num. 4:3). John narrates the beginning of Jesus’ ministry by focusing on the calling of the disciples and the sign performed at a wedding at Cana (1:35–2:11).
Galilean ministry. The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and around Galilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that the kingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment of prophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ first teaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30); the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for his calling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection and suffering.
All the Gospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in his Galilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke 5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioning of the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers is recorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministry is the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke 6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, in particular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synoptics focus on healings and exorcisms.
During Jesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with his identity. 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 of Beelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesus told parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growing kingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humble beginnings (4:1–32).
The Synoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful. No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority or ability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized many demons (5:1–13), raised the dead (5:35–42), fed five thousand (6:30–44), and walked on water (6:48–49).
In the later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew and traveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are not written with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns to Galilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fear resolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee, where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ disciples with lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed the Pharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents (7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demanding a sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, who confessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus did provide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).
Jesus withdrew from Galilee to Tyre and Sidon, where a Syrophoenician woman requested healing for her daughter. Jesus replied, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Galileans had long resented the Syrian provincial leadership partiality that allotted governmental funds in ways that made the Jews receive mere “crumbs.” Consequently, when the woman replied, “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table,” Jesus applauded her faith (Matt. 15:27–28). Healing a deaf-mute man in the Decapolis provided another example of Jesus’ ministry in Gentile territory (Mark 7:31–37). Peter’s confession of Jesus as the Christ took place during Jesus’ travel to Caesarea Philippi, a well-known Gentile territory. The city was the ancient center of worship of the Hellenistic god Pan.
Judean ministry. Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry as he resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually led to his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem into three phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27). The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of the journey. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, and the 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 journey toward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvation and judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase of the journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are the main themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).
Social conflicts with religious leaders increased throughout Jesus’ ministry. These conflicts led to lively challenge-riposte interactions concerning the Pharisaic schools of Shammai and Hillel (Matt. 19:1–12; Mark 10:1–12). Likewise, socioeconomic feathers were ruffled as Jesus welcomed young children, who had little value in society (Matt. 19:13–15; Mark 10:13–16; Luke 18:15–17).
Passion week, death, and resurrection. Each of the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with the crowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark 11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Luke describes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during which Jesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).
In Jerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17). Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because the whole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “began looking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segment of 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 own destruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, Judas Iscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’ arrest (14:10–11).
At the Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a new covenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29; Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned the disciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark 14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and later he prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agony and 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 by making 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).
To harbor an inordinate desire, especially for something belonging to someone else, often with intent to deprive that person of what is rightfully his or hers.
In the OT, the principal Hebrew term, khamad, indicates an unrestrained, selfish desire. A survey of its occurrences shows this desire directed most often toward things that belong to others or that are otherwise illicit (e.g., Josh. 7:21; Prov. 6:25; Mic. 2:2; but see Ps. 68:16: “God chooses”).
Notably, the tenth commandment prohibits coveting another’s possessions (Exod. 20:17; Deut. 5:21). It is unique among the Decalogue’s latter commandments (Exod. 20:1217) because it targets an inward attitude rather than outward acts.
In the NT, a principal Greek term, epithymeō, represents a strong desire generally. Paul uses it when referencing the tenth commandment (Rom. 7:7; 13:9), so that the Greek term is similar to the Hebrew one in meaning. In contrast, James 4:2 employs epithymeō broadly to refer to evil desires that promote strife. The exact meaning of this word is determined by context (cf. Matt. 13:17, where Jesus speaks of those who “longed” to experience what his disciples did).
The various Hebrew and Greek words that express the idea of fulfillment occur hundreds of times in the Bible, and the concept often is present even when the specific word is not. At the basic level, fulfillment indicates a relationship between two (or more) things in which the second is said to “fill up” the significance of the first. Frequently this takes the form of a specific promise that is said to be fulfilled when the person, object, or event referred to comes to pass. There are countless examples of this type of fulfillment, some of which even quote the specific promise that is being fulfilled. The seventy years of Babylonian captivity prophesied by Jeremiah (Jer. 29:10) are said to be fulfilled when Cyrus permits the Jews to return to the land (Ezra 1:14). Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem (Matt. 2:1–6) fulfills the promise of a ruler who will shepherd Israel (Mic. 5:2).
But the concept of fulfillment goes beyond specific promises that are then said to be fulfilled in a particular person, object, or event. In the broadest sense of the term, one can say that the NT fulfills what the OT promises. After his resurrection, Jesus reminds his disciples, “Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms” (Luke 24:44). He then provides a summary of the entire OT message: “The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance for the forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem” (Luke 24:46–47).
In general, Torah (Law) may be subdivided into three categories: judicial, ceremonial, and moral, though each of these may influence or overlap with the others. The OT associates the “giving of the Torah” with Moses’ first divine encounter at Mount Sinai (Exod. 1923) following the Israelites’ deliverance from the land of Egypt, though some body of customary legislation existed before this time (Exod. 18). These instructions find expansion and elucidation in other pentateuchal texts, such as Leviticus and Deut. 12–24, indicating that God’s teachings were intended as the code of conduct and worship for Israel not only during its wilderness wanderings but also when it settled in the land of Canaan following the conquest.
More specifically, the word “law” often denotes the Ten Commandments (or “the Decalogue,” lit., the “ten words”) (Exod. 34:28; Deut. 4:13; 10:4) that were delivered to Moses (Exod. 20:1–17; Deut. 5:6–21). These commandments reflect a summary statement of the covenant and may be divided into two parts, consistent with the two tablets of stone on which they were first recorded: the first four address the individual’s relationship to God, and the last six focus on instructions concerning human relationships. Despite the apparent simplistic expression of the Decalogue, the complexity of these guidelines extends beyond individual acts and attitudes, encompassing any and all incentives, enticements, and pressures leading up to a thing forbidden. Not only should the individual refrain from doing the prohibited thing, but also he or she is obligated to practice its opposite good in order to be in compliance.
God begins his creation with light, which precedes the creation of sun, moon, and stars and throughout Scripture is an unqualified good (Gen. 1:35, 15–18; Exod. 10:23; 13:21). In the ancient world, people rarely traveled at night and usually went to bed soon after sunset. The only light in the home was a small oil lamp set on a stand, which burned expensive olive oil. Light is a biblical synonym for life (Job 3:20; John 8:12). Seeing the light means living (Ps. 49:19; see also Job 33:30). Conversely, darkness is often a symbol of adversity, disaster, and death (Job 30:26; Isa. 8:22; Jer. 23:12; Lam. 3:2).
John, who offers perhaps the most profound meditations on light, claims that God is light (1John 1:5). The predicate appropriates the intrinsic beauty of light, a quality that draws people’s hearts back to the author of beauty. For the apostle, light represents truth and signifies God’s will in opposition to the deception of the world (John 1:9; 12:46). Light stands for purity and signifies God’s holiness as opposed to the unrighteousness of the world (John 3:19–21). Light is where God is, and it radiates from the place of fellowship between God and his creation (John 1:7).
“Salvation” is the broadest term used to refer to God’s actions to solve the plight brought about by humankind’s sinful rebellion and its consequences. It is one of the central themes of the entire Bible, running from Genesis through Revelation.
In many places in the OT, salvation refers to being rescued from physical rather than spiritual trouble. Fearing the possibility of retribution from his brother Esau, Jacob prays, “Save me, I pray, from the hand of my brother Esau” (Gen. 32:11). The actions of Joseph in Egypt saved many from famine (45:57; 47:25; 50:20). Frequently in the psalms, individuals pray for salvation from enemies that threaten one’s safety or life (Pss. 17:14; 18:3; 70:1–3; 71:1–4; 91:1–3).
Related to this usage are places where the nation of Israel and/or its king were saved from enemies. The defining example of this is the exodus, whereby God delivered his people from their enslavement to the Egyptians, culminating in the destruction of Pharaoh and his army (Exod. 14:1–23). From that point forward in the history of Israel, God repeatedly saved Israel from its enemies, whether through a judge (e.g., Judg. 2:16; 3:9), a king (2Kings 14:27), or even a shepherd boy (1Sam. 17:1–58).
But these examples of national deliverance had a profound spiritual component as well. God did not save his people from physical danger as an end in itself; it was the necessary means for his plan to save them from their sins. The OT recognizes the need for salvation from sin (Pss. 39:8; 51:14; 120:2) but, as the NT makes evident, does not provide a final solution (Heb. 9:1–10:18). One of the clearest places that physical and spiritual salvation come together is Isa. 40–55, where Judah’s exile from the land and prophesied return are seen as the physical manifestation of the much more fundamental spiritual exile that resulted from sin. To address that far greater reality, God announces the day when the Suffering Servant would once and for all take away the sins of his people (Isa. 52:13–53:12).
As in the OT, the NT has places where salvation refers to being rescued from physical difficulty. Paul, for example, speaks of being saved from various physical dangers, including execution (2Cor. 1:8–10; Phil. 1:19; 2Tim. 4:17). In the midst of a fierce storm, Jesus’ disciples cry out, “Lord, save us! We’re going to drown!” (Matt. 8:25). But far more prominent are the places in the Gospels and Acts where physical healings are described with the verb sōzō, used to speak of salvation from sin. The healing of the woman with the hemorrhage (Mark 5:25–34), the blind man along the road (Luke 18:35–43), and even the man possessed by a demon (Luke 8:26–39), just to name a few, are described with the verb sōzō. The same verb, however, is also used to refer to Jesus forgiving someone’s sins (Luke 7:36–50) and to his mission to save the lost from their sins (Luke 19:10). Such overlap is a foretaste of the holistic salvation (physical and spiritual) that will be completed in the new heaven and earth (Rev. 21–22). The NT Epistles give extensive descriptions of how the work of Jesus Christ saves his people from their sins.
The English term “witness” occurs in both Testaments numerous times, with a wide range of meanings. One common meaning relates to someone who gives legal testimony and to the legitimacy of that testimony (Num. 35:30; Deut. 17:6; 19:1516, 18; Prov. 12:17; Isa. 8:16, 20). Throughout the NT the term occurs primarily in the context of someone bearing witness—especially God—or testifying to something (Rom. 1:9; 2Cor. 1:23; Phil. 1:8; 1Thess. 2:5, 10), though it also has a forensic dimension in regard to one who establishes legal testimony (e.g., Acts 6:13; 7:58; 2Cor. 13:1; 1Tim. 5:19; Heb. 10:28).
Central to the concept of witness is the truthfulness of the witness. This was a vital component of the OT concept of witness. Thus, in legal proceedings a lone witness was insufficient to establish testimony against anyone (Deut. 17:6). This principle carries over into the NT (cf. Matt. 18:16; 2Cor. 13:1). Such truthfulness was so significant that the ninth commandment expressly forbids bearing false witness (Exod. 20:16; Deut. 5:20; cf. Prov. 19:5, 9).
Truth-telling was not something that the people of Israel were called to merely among themselves. They were to be God’s witnesses to the nations (Isa. 43:10; 44:8). As witnesses of God’s existence and holiness, they were called to be separate from the nations (Exod. 19:6) and to be a light to them (Isa. 49:6). Tragically, Israel failed in this responsibility and was deemed “blind” (Isa. 42:19).
The NT continues the concept that the people of God are to be God’s witnesses. John the Baptist is commissioned “to testify concerning that light” (John 1:7). It is in this context that Jesus later declares himself to be “the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5). Jesus himself is the exemplar of a “faithful witness” (Rev. 1:5). And his followers, whom he has designated as “the light of the world” (Matt. 5:14), are then called to bear witness to the ends of the earth (Acts 1:8).
“Witness” is also employed in terms of a legal testimony regarding what one has seen. That the disciples were intent on establishing such legal testimony is evident in their stipulation that the person to replace Judas Iscariot be someone from among those who had been with Jesus from the beginning of his ministry to his ascension, so that “one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection” (Acts 1:22). This forensic aspect of witness appears in the close of the Gospel of John: “This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true” (21:24). Paul demonstrates this forensic concern for witnesses when he references Peter, the Twelve, some five hundred others, and himself as among those who have witnessed the resurrection (1Cor. 15:3–8).
Throughout Revelation there resides a direct link between Christians bearing witness and suffering, and perhaps dying, as a consequence of this witness. 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, who explicitly function as witnesses, are the subject of attack and are eventually murdered. Their murder occurs only after they have finished “their testimony” (11:7).
It is this association of persecution and martyrdom that likely leads to the second-century employment of “martyr” as a designation for those who bear witness to Christ to the point of death.
“Word” is used in the Bible to refer to the speech of God in oral, written, or incarnate form. In each of these uses, God desires to make himself known to his people. The communication of God is always personal and relational, whether he speaks to call things into existence (Gen. 1) or to address an individual directly (Gen. 2:1617; Exod. 3:14). The prophets and the apostles received the word of God (Deut. 18:14–22; John 16:13), some of which was proclaimed but not recorded. The greatest revelation in this regard is the person of Jesus Christ, who is called the “Word” of God (John 1:1, 14).
The psalmist declared God’s word to be an eternal object of hope and trust that gives light and direction (Ps. 119), and Jesus declared the word to be truth (John 17:17). The word is particularized and intimately connected with God himself by means of the key phrases “your word,” “the word of God,” “the word of the Lord,” “word about Christ,” and “the word of Christ” (Rom. 10:17; Col. 3:16). Our understanding of the word is informed by a variety of terms and contexts in the canon of Scripture, a collection of which is found in Ps. 119.
The theme of the word in Ps. 119 is continued and clarified in the NT, accentuating the intimate connection between the word of God and God himself. The “Word” of God is the eternal Lord Jesus Christ (John 1:1; 1John 1:1–4), who took on flesh and blood so that we might see the glory of the eternal God. The sovereign glory of Christ as the Word of God is depicted in the vision of John in Rev. 19:13. As the Word of God, Jesus Christ ultimately gives us our lives (John 1:4; 6:33; 10:10), sustains our lives (John 5:24; 6:51, 54; 8:51), and ultimately renders a just judgment regarding our lives (John 5:30; 8:16, 26; 9:39; cf. Matt. 25:31–33; Heb. 4:12).
The Bible has much to say about works, and an understanding of the topic is important because works play a role in most religions. In the most generic sense, “works” refers to the products or activities of human moral agents in the context of religious discussion. God’s works are frequently mentioned in Scripture, and they are always good. His works include creation (Gen. 2:23; Isa. 40:28; 42:5), sustenance of the earth (Ps. 104; Heb. 1:3), and redemption (Exod. 6:6; Ps. 111:9; Rom. 8:23). Human works, therefore, should be in alignment with God’s works, though obviously of a different sort. Works in the Bible usually reflect a moral polarity: good or evil, righteous or unrighteous, just or unjust. The context of the passage often determines the moral character of the works (e.g., Isa. 3:10–11; 2Cor. 11:15).
Important questions follow from the existence of works and their moral quality. Do good works merit God’s favor or please him? Can good works save at the time of God’s judgment? When people asked Jesus, “What must we do to do the works God requires?” he answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent” (John 6:28–29). Without faith it is impossible to please God (Heb. 11:6). The people from the OT commended in Heb. 11 did their works in the precondition of faith. Explicitly in the NT and often implicitly in the OT, faith is the condition for truly good works. God elects out of his mercy, not out of human works (Rom. 9:12, 16; Titus 3:5; cf. Rom. 11:2). Works not done in faith, even if considered “good” by human standards, are not commendable to God, since all humankind is under sin (Rom. 3:9) and no person is righteous or does good (Rom. 3:10–18; cf. Isa. 64:6). Works cannot save; salvation is a gift to be received by faith (Eph. 2:8–9; 2Tim. 1:9; cf. Rom. 4:2–6). Even works of the Mosaic law are not salvific (Rom. 3:20, 27–28; Gal. 2:16; 3:2; 5:4). Good works follow from faith (2Cor. 9:8; Eph. 2:10; 1Thess. 1:3; James 2:18, 22; cf. Acts 26:20). The works of those who have faith will be judged, but this judgment appears to be related to rewards, not salvation (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6; 2Cor. 5:10; cf. Rom. 14:10; 1Cor. 3:13–15).
Direct Matches
One of the sins forbidden in the Ten Commandments (Exod.20:14; Deut. 5:18). Narrowly interpreted, the prohibition forbidsextramarital relations with a married woman (Lev. 20:10), but it isapplied more broadly in Lev. 20 and Deut. 22–24 to cover avariety of sexual offenses.
Theprophets invoked the commandment in condemning God’s waywardpeople (Hos. 4:2; Jer. 7:9). They also used it as a metaphor forspiritual unfaithfulness to the God of the covenant (Hos. 3–4;Ezek. 16:30–34), as does Revelation for succumbing to falseteaching (Rev. 2:22).
Jesusbrought out the original force of the commandment, saying that alustful look amounted to adultery (Matt. 5:27–30). He listedthis commandment in Mark 10:19 (and pars.) when talking to the richyoung ruler. Paul and James also made clear that the prohibition wasstill in force (Rom. 2:22; 13:9; James 2:11). Jesus taught thatadultery springs from the unregenerate heart (Matt. 15:19 pars.), andfor Paul adultery was one of “the acts of the flesh”(Gal. 5:19).
TheOT penalty for adultery was stoning (Deut. 22:22–24), though itis not clear how rigorously this was enforced. Jesus forgave thewoman “caught in adultery” (John 8:3–11) and toldher not to repeat her sin. His leniency may have been motivated inpart by the hypocrisy of her accusers, who had let the guilty man gofree.
Theexception clause in Jesus’ teaching that forbids divorce andremarriage (“except for sexual immorality,” whichincludes adultery) is found in Matt. 5:32; 19:9. Matthew only spellsout what is implicit in Mark 10:11–12; Luke 16:18. Jesus statedthat if a man divorces his wife so as to marry another woman (moreattractive to him for some reason), this is nothing but legalizedadultery. The notorious example of Herod’s marriage to Herodiasmay be part of the background to this teaching (Mark 6:17).
The KJV uses this word in Rom. 13:13 to refer to illicitsexual activity (NIV: “sexual immorality”; NRSV:“debauchery”).
Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.
In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).
Articles of Clothing
A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.
In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).
Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).
The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).
In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).
Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).
Special Functions of Clothing
According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).
Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).
Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).
Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.
Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).
Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.
In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).
Articles of Clothing
A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.
In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).
Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).
The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).
In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).
Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).
Special Functions of Clothing
According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).
Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).
Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).
Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.
Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).
Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.
In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).
Articles of Clothing
A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.
In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).
Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).
The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).
In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).
Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).
Special Functions of Clothing
According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).
Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).
Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).
Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.
Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).
To harbor an inordinate desire, especially for something belonging to someone else, often with intent to deprive that person of what is rightfully his or hers. English Bible versions differ on which biblical terms bear this sense and how best to render them.
In the OT, the principal Hebrew term, khamad, indicates an unrestrained, selfish desire. A survey of its occurrences shows this desire directed most often toward things that belong to others or that are otherwise illicit (e.g., Josh. 7:21; Prov. 6:25; Mic. 2:2; but see Ps. 68:16: “God chooses”).
Notably, the tenth commandment prohibits coveting another’s possessions (Exod. 20:17; Deut. 5:21). It is unique among the Decalogue’s latter commandments (Exod. 20:12–17) because it targets an inward attitude rather than outward acts. This reflects awareness that covetousness, when permitted, prompts the very acts that the Decalogue condemns. The OT is replete with corresponding examples: Achan coveted plunder devoted to Yahweh and stole some (Josh. 7); David coveted Bathsheba, thus committing adultery and instigating murder (2 Sam. 11); Ahab coveted Naboth’s vineyard, and he got it when Jezebel had Naboth falsely accused (1 Kings 21).
In the NT, a principal Greek term, epithymeō, represents a strong desire generally. Paul (following the LXX) uses it when referencing the tenth commandment (Rom. 7:7; 13:9), so that the Greek term is similar to the Hebrew one in meaning. In contrast, James 4:2 employs epithymeō broadly to refer to evil desires that promote strife. The exact meaning of this word is determined by context (cf. Matt. 13:17, where Jesus speaks of those who “longed” to experience what his disciples did).
In Rom. 13:9 Paul expands Jesus’ summation of the Decalogue: coveting is the antithesis of loving one’s neighbor as oneself.
To harbor an inordinate desire, especially for something belonging to someone else, often with intent to deprive that person of what is rightfully his or hers. English Bible versions differ on which biblical terms bear this sense and how best to render them.
In the OT, the principal Hebrew term, khamad, indicates an unrestrained, selfish desire. A survey of its occurrences shows this desire directed most often toward things that belong to others or that are otherwise illicit (e.g., Josh. 7:21; Prov. 6:25; Mic. 2:2; but see Ps. 68:16: “God chooses”).
Notably, the tenth commandment prohibits coveting another’s possessions (Exod. 20:17; Deut. 5:21). It is unique among the Decalogue’s latter commandments (Exod. 20:12–17) because it targets an inward attitude rather than outward acts. This reflects awareness that covetousness, when permitted, prompts the very acts that the Decalogue condemns. The OT is replete with corresponding examples: Achan coveted plunder devoted to Yahweh and stole some (Josh. 7); David coveted Bathsheba, thus committing adultery and instigating murder (2 Sam. 11); Ahab coveted Naboth’s vineyard, and he got it when Jezebel had Naboth falsely accused (1 Kings 21).
In the NT, a principal Greek term, epithymeō, represents a strong desire generally. Paul (following the LXX) uses it when referencing the tenth commandment (Rom. 7:7; 13:9), so that the Greek term is similar to the Hebrew one in meaning. In contrast, James 4:2 employs epithymeō broadly to refer to evil desires that promote strife. The exact meaning of this word is determined by context (cf. Matt. 13:17, where Jesus speaks of those who “longed” to experience what his disciples did).
In Rom. 13:9 Paul expands Jesus’ summation of the Decalogue: coveting is the antithesis of loving one’s neighbor as oneself.
Jealousy has both positive and negative connotations in theBible. Positively, jealousy is an attribute of God, who desires theexclusive worship of his people: “Do not worship any other god,for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God” (Exod.34:14; cf. Exod. 20:5; Deut. 4:24; 1Cor. 10:22). Chief amongthe acts that provoke God to jealousy is the worship of idols (Deut.32:16; Ps. 78:58), to which God responds with anger and fury (Nah.1:2; Zeph. 1:18). God’s jealousy for his people (Joel 2:18;Zech. 1:14) is conceptually akin to the love of a husband for hiswife (2Cor. 11:2). Moreover, the language of jealousy isclosely related to pious “zeal” (Num. 25:11; 1Kings19:10). Negatively, jealousy is a human vice. Paul lists jealousyamong the “acts of the flesh” (Gal. 5:19–20; cf.1Cor. 3:3; Rom. 13:13). Biblical antagonists are often depictedas the victims of jealousy, including Joseph (Gen. 37:11; Acts 7:9)and Paul (Acts 17:5).
In the OT, “neighbor” is derived from the verb“to associate with.” This is an important connectionbecause relationships of various kinds are central to the issue ofneighbor. Depending on the context, a neighbor can include a friend(2Sam. 13:3), a rival (1Sam. 28:17), a lover (Jer. 3:1),or a spouse (Jer. 3:20). However, “neighbor” essentiallydefines someone who lives and works nearby, those with shared ethicalresponsibilities, rather than a family member (Prov. 3:29).Eventually, “neighbor” acquired the more technicalmeaning of “covenant member” or “fellow Israelite”(=“brother” [Jer. 31:34]). The legal literatureprohibits bearing false witness against a neighbor (Deut. 5:20) aswell as coveting a neighbor’s house, animal, slave, or wife(Deut. 5:21). Fraud, stealing, or withholding from a neighbor areprohibited (Lev. 19:13; Ps. 15:3). These are the negativestipulations. The theological ethics that arise from Lev. 19 areclimactic—ethically, politically, socially, and economically.Positively, Israelites are to judge their neighbors justly (Lev.19:15), loving their neighbors as themselves (19:18). Even theresident alien is to be protected by these core moral virtues (Lev.19:33–34; cf. Exod. 12:43–49).
Whenthe NT addresses the topic, not surprisingly it is Lev. 19:18 that isroutinely cited. Asked about the greatest commandment, Jesus quotesLev. 19:18 as the horizontal counterpart to loving the Lord (Matt.19:16–30). A lawyer’s question put to Jesus, “Whois my neighbor?” elicits the parable of the good Samaritan(Luke 10:29). Jesus teaches that extending mercy is more importantthan conveniently defining “neighbor.” A neighbor wasanyone someone met in need—Jew, Gentile, or Samaritan (Luke10:25–37). Jewish law came to define “neighbor” inpurely legal terms within Judaism. Jesus addressed the limits ofone’s responsibility, challenging the particularism of Judaism,denouncing prejudiced love, and including non-Jews. Beyond “in”or “out” groups, believers are now to pray for theirenemies (Matt. 5:43–48). Mission work continues to expandsocial, political, and economic boundaries. The OT reality ofrelationships is still in force, but “neighbor” in the NTnow prioritizes fellow believers (Rom. 13:8–10; 15:2; Gal.6:10; Eph. 4:25; James 2:8).
God created and named the darkness “night” (Gen.1:5). OT writers associated night with aberrant behavior, fear,suffering, sorrow, and terror (Pss. 6:6; 30:5; 42:3; 77:2; 91:5), butthey also knew that God worked throughout the night to deliver hispeople (Exod. 12:29–32; Deut. 16:1). Night is also associatedwith secrecy and danger, as seen in the Israelite exodus (Exod.12:31) and the holy family’s flight to Egypt (Matt. 2:14). InOT times night was divided into three watches, but four in the NTRoman world. Night often was chosen to highlight divine activity(Matt. 2:12, 22; Acts 5:19; 12:6–7), but it also served todepict Judas’s betrayal of Jesus as a deed of spiritualdarkness (John 13:30). Figuratively, night is used to refer to thispresent age (Rom. 13:12), and people of the world “belong tothe night” (1Thess. 5:5). There will be “no night”in the new heaven and earth (Rev. 21:25; 22:5).
Secondary Matches
The following suggestions occured because
Romans 13:8-14
is mentioned in the definition.
Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.
In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).
Articles of Clothing
A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.
In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).
Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).
The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).
In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).
Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).
Special Functions of Clothing
According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).
Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).
Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).
Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.
Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).
The historical origins of Christianity need to be set against Jewish history, beliefs, and culture in Palestine and the eastern Mediterranean, but they also need to be set in the context of the wider Greco-Roman world that was dominated politically and militarily by the Roman Empire.
From Republic to Empire
Rome began as a city-state but soon became a transcontinental empire reaching over parts of Europe, Africa, and Asia. Rome emerged as the most dominant force in the Mediterranean after it defeated Carthage in the Second Punic War (218–201 BC). Thereafter, Rome began to expand its control and power over the various Hellenistic city-states in the east, including Macedonia, Illyria, and Asia Minor. By the mid-first century AD, Rome had also conquered or annexed Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Cyrene, Gaul, Spain, North Africa, and Armenia.
The transition from the Roman Republic to the Roman Empire took place under the Roman emperors beginning with Julius Caesar (100–44 BC), who, after crossing the Rubicon and defeating Pompey, was proclaimed dictator perpetuus (“dictator for life”). The period after Julius Caesar’s assassination (44 BC) was a time of political upheaval as Rome was marred by a series of civil wars. The first was between Octavius and Antony against Caesar’s assassins Brutus and Cassius. This climaxed in the Battle of Philippi (42 BC), which the former allies of Julius Caesar won. The second was between Octavius and Antony, where Antony and Cleopatra were defeated at the Battle of Actium in 31 BC, leaving Octavius as the undisputed leader of Rome.
Octavius was given the honorific name “Augustus” by the senate. His reign (31 BC–AD 14) marked a period of consolidation, reorganization, and renewal of the Roman Empire. Augustus embarked on an empire-wide policy of fiscal rationalization, developed a constitutional settlement for Rome, centralized his military authority over the various provinces, and had Julius Caesar deified. Writers and artists of the era heralded Augustus’s reign as a time of unprecedented peace and security—peace from civil war and security from the Germanic tribes in the north and the Parthian Empire in the east. Worship of the emperor became more frequent especially in the Roman East, although Augustus did not permit it in Rome. What is most significant about Augustus is that it is with his reign that the Roman Empire essentially began. He was the emperor at the time of Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:1). It was under Trajan (AD 98–117), however, that the Roman Empire expanded to its largest area, encompassing parts of Britain and Persia.
Emperors (AD 14–98)
Tiberius, Augustus’s adopted heir, reigned in the years AD 14–37. He was a highly successful military general, but as emperor he was remembered as being gloomy and melancholic. Tiberius even went into a self-imposed exile for a time, leaving the praetorian prefect Sejanus in charge until Tiberius finally had him executed for treason. It was during the reign of Tiberius that Jesus conducted his ministry in Palestine.
Tiberius was succeeded by his adopted grandson Caligula, who reigned in the years AD 37–41. Caligula was the son of the popular Roman general Germanicus, who died in Antioch in AD 19. Historical sources are not favorably disposed toward Caligula, who was remembered as a malevolent tyrant given to self-aggrandizement and sexual perversity. In AD 39/40 Caligula departed from imperial policy that permitted emperor worship in the east and veneration of deceased emperors in Rome, and he often appeared dressed as a god in public and demanded worship as a living god. During this time he deposed Herod Antipas, the tetrarch of Galilee and Perea, on suspicion of consorting with Parthia (Josephus, Ant. 18.7). Caligula also ordered that his statue be placed in the holy of holies in the Jerusalem temple (Philo, Embassy 203). Petronius, the governor of Syria, knowing that such an act would lead to civil war, refused to comply and appealed to Caligula to reverse the order. In response, Caligula sent an order to Petronius that he commit suicide. Fortunately, news of Caligula’s assassination by a conspiracy involving the praetorian guard and senators reached Petronius first.
Claudius, Caligula’s uncle, reigned in the years AD 41–54, and his rule was defined by numerous public works, a reordering of the judicial system, a torrid series of marriages, the conquest of Britain, and a number of attempted coups by the Roman senate. In AD 49 he expelled the Jews from Rome because of disputes about a certain “Chrestus,” probably Christ (cf. Acts 18:2). No one is sure whether Claudius was murdered or died of old age, but he remained a sharp contrast to the brutal excesses of Caligula and Nero.
Nero, the stepson of Claudius, reigned in the years AD 54–68. The early period of his rule was marked by cultural endeavors and diplomatic efforts. The later years were, in contrast, distinguished by tyranny and self-aggrandizement. There was a Jewish revolt against Rome in Judea (AD 66–70) during Nero’s reign, and Vespasian was sent to pacify the territory. According to ancient sources, Nero accused Christians of starting the fire of Rome in AD 64 and subjected them to the cruelest of punishments, including crucifixion, being thrown to wild animals, and even being burned alive. It probably was during this time that the apostles Peter and Paul were martyred in Rome. Nero eventually was declared a public enemy by the Roman senate, and he committed suicide before he could be captured in AD 68. There arose a “Nero redivivus” legend, whereby many hoped or feared that Nero had not died in AD 68 but had fled to Parthia and would return to Rome in order to destroy it (Sib.Or. 4.119–124; 5.137–141, 361–396), and this arguably stands behind the imagery of Rev. 13:3; 17:8–11.
The suicide of Nero left a power vacuum in Rome, and AD 69 saw no less than four emperors ascend the throne: Galba, Otho, Vitellius, and finally Vespasian. Galba was governor of Hispania Tarraconensis and was invited to become emperor by the senate, but he was killed by the praetorian guard after they were bribed by the praetor Otho. Otho himself committed suicide after his forces were defeated by Vitellius, the commander of the legions on the Rhine. Vitellius became emperor, but he was fiscally irresponsible and murdered many of his rivals. The legions in the Danube, Egypt, Syria, and Judea had declared Vespasian emperor and marched on Rome. Vespasian controlled the grain supplies to Rome from Egypt and had a superior force. Vitellius’s forces were defeated at Bedriacum, and Vitellius went into hiding but eventually was killed in Rome. Vespasian was declared emperor by the senate, and so began the Flavian dynasty, which restored order after the chaos of civil war.
The Flavians ruled in the years AD 69–96. Vespasian (r. AD 69–79) consolidated the empire after its year of strife and instituted new taxes, such as the fiscus judaicus, a war reparation tax placed on all Jews and paid to the temple of Jupiter in lieu of the Jerusalem temple tax. Vespasian was succeeded by his sons Titus (r.AD 79–81) and Domitian (r. AD 81–96). When Vespasian sailed to Rome from Judea, Titus was left in charge of the siege of Jerusalem, which he completed and celebrated in a triumph in Rome in AD 72. This triumph is memorialized in the Arch of Titus, which depicts Roman soldiers bringing the vessels of the temple to Rome as part of the booty taken. Later Roman writers regarded Domitian as a malevolent and malicious tyrant (e.g., Tacitus, Suetonius), but this probably is an exaggeration caused partly by a desire to highlight the greatness of succeeding emperors such as Nerva and Trajan. It probably was during the reign of Domitian that some Christians in Asia Minor were being persecuted for their failure to worship the emperor, as depicted in the book of Revelation.
Table 7. Roman Emperors (31 BC–AD 117)
31 BC-AD 14 – Augustus
AD 14-37 – Tiberius
AD 37-41 – Caligula
AD 41-54 – Claudius
AD 54-68 – Nero
AD 68-69 – Galba
AD 69 – Otho
AD 69 – Vitellius
AD 69-79 – Vespasian
AD 79-81 – Titus
AD 81-96 – Domitian
AD 96-98 – Nerva
AD 98-117 – Trajan
Military
Military expeditions expanded Rome’s control of foreign territories and safeguarded its borders from incursion, most threateningly from the Germanic tribes east of the Rhine River and north of the Danube River and from the Parthian (=Neo-Persian) Empire east of the Euphrates River. A Roman legion consisted of around six thousand men, including cavalry. Under Tiberius, there were twenty-five legions stationed across the empire: eight on the Rhine, three in Spain, two in Egypt, four in Syria, two in Africa, and six in the Danube region. In terms of command structures, the legions were under the control of certain regional commands by men of consular rank, including two on the Rhine, one in Spain, one in Syria, and three in the Balkans (Tacitus, Ann. 4.5). These were among the most powerful persons outside the ruling family and could be kingmakers or contenders during times of civil war. A legion was divided into ten cohorts and commanded by a legate, usually of senatorial rank. Units of one hundred were commanded by centurions, and service in the legions was set at between twenty and twenty-five years. Upon recruitment, the soldier swore an oath of loyalty to the emperor (sacramentum) that was renewed annually. During times of peace, Roman soldiers could perform a number of civil tasks relating to taxation, building projects, and policing.
Centurions are mentioned several times in the NT (e.g., Matt. 8:5; Mark 15:39; Acts 10:1; 21:32; 27:1). There is a mention of a “legion” of demons that oppressed the Gerasene demoniac (Mark 5:9), and Jesus refers to the possibility of the Father sending him “legions” of angels (Matt. 26:53). Military terminology is very apparent in Paul’s letters, where he refers to fighting armor (Rom. 13:11–13; 2Cor. 6:7; Eph. 6:10–18), compares commitment to Christ to military service (2Tim. 2:4), refers to his coworkers as “soldiers” or “fellow soldiers” (Phil. 2:25; Philem. 2; 2Tim. 2:3), and likens ministerial remuneration to a soldier being paid his salarium (1Cor. 9:7).
Culture and Religion
One of the primary reasons for Rome’s rise and dominance, militarily and culturally, was its capacity to absorb other peoples and even other gods into its constituency and pantheon. Its constantly growing pantheon, application of the rule of law, and superior military force made Rome what it was: a melting pot of all cultures and a Romanizer of other cultures.
Roman society was heavily stratified, but social mobility, upward and downward, was possible. Wealth, marriage, education, and military exploits were the primary means to social advancement. The senatorial class represented the wealthy nobility of Rome and provided the primary cohort of civil and military administrators. The equestrian class (or “knights,” as they are sometimes called) were a larger group of less wealthy Roman citizens. Decurions were members of civil councils in provincial cities who often acted as magistrates and were leaders of local communities. The plebeians represented the general citizenry of Rome, who, until the time of Tiberius, had some power in electing officials. Finally, there were freedmen, who were ex-slaves usually in a relationship with their former master, and also slaves, who were regarded as little more than property.
The ancient Roman religions focused on the numen, the somewhat impersonal divine power associated with certain localities. From the third century BC, Greek deities were assimilated and Romanized, so that Zeus became Jupiter, and Vesta was identified as Hestia. The Capitoline Hill was crowned with a temple that was dedicated around 500 BC to Jupiter, Minerva, and Juno. These were the principal gods of Rome, although others were added to the pantheon as the Romans conquered other peoples and adopted their gods. Other gods also received greater honor, such as the goddess Pax, the personification of peace (based on the Greek goddess Eirene); Vespasian built and dedicated a temple in her honor in Rome in AD 75. The Roman emperor was the Pontifex Maximus and supreme high priest of Rome and the empire. In the mid- to late first century AD, the fastest-growing religion was the imperial cult, the worship of (usually) deceased Roman emperors. This cult became popular in the eastern Mediterranean cities, where worship of rulers was commonplace, but was regarded with indifference in Rome.
Religions and philosophies from all over the known world eventually made their way to Rome. Egyptian rites and religions gained followings, Mithraism acquired currency within the ranks of the military and among public servants, Judaism entered Rome probably with the Hasmonean delegation sent there around 139 BC, and Christianity came to Rome probably during the late 30s and early 40s of the first century AD through Jewish pilgrims visiting the east and through Judean immigration to Rome. Many Roman intellectuals lamented the fact that so many foreign superstitions had found their way to Rome, and that Roman peoples found them more attractive than their own state religion. Roman religion was largely controlled by the state through a set calendar and the appointment of priests and vestal virgins. It was practiced in public and in the home. As such, religious life was very much intertwined with social and political life. Roman religion engendered the need for its citizens to act with pietas, the honoring of one’s obligations to the gods, and with religio, which designated appropriate scruples and rites in the presence of the gods.
Summary
The birth of the church and the growth of Christianity took place within the wider social, religious, and cultural context of the Greco-Roman world. The politics and power of the Roman Empire provide the backdrop for the birth of Jesus (Luke 2:1), and since Rome was considered to be the center of the world, it was necessary that Paul himself testify to Jesus Christ there (Acts 19:21). The history, literature, and cultural background of Rome form an important background to the NT and should be studied along with the history and literature of Judaism during the time of Jesus and the apostles. Although the Romans were the primary threat to the survival of Christians in the ancient world, after the conversion of Constantine in the fourth century AD, they became the primary means by which Christianity spread to the rest of Europe and western Asia. See also Roman Law.
Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.
In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).
Articles of Clothing
A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.
In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).
Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).
The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).
In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).
Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).
Special Functions of Clothing
According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).
Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).
Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).
Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.
Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).
Hope is one of the main themes of Scripture, and many ofthese hopes focus on the future. For example, Jeremiah gave hisfellow countrymen in the Babylonian captivity this promise: “ ‘ForI know the plans I have for you,’ declares the Lord, ‘plansto prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and afuture’ ” (Jer. 29:11). The apostle Paul picks upthis theme of hope: “May the God of hope fill you with all joyand peace as you trust in him, so that you may overflow with hope bythe power of the Holy Spirit” (Rom. 15:13).
HopeBased on Promises
Abeliever’s hope focuses on several different kinds of promises.First, there are many promises of God’s assistance in thestruggles and difficulties of life. Paul, for example, concludes,“For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angelsnor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers,neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will beable to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus ourLord” (Rom. 8:38–39). Christians can have the confidencethat “no temptation has overtaken you except what is common tomankind. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyondwhat you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide away out so that you can endure it” (1Cor. 10:13).
Second,believers also have promises that God will be with them and go withthem through the future experiences of physical suffering and death.Here the classic promise is found in words of the psalmist: “Eventhough I walk through the darkest valley, I will fear no evil, foryou are with me; your rod and your staff, they comfort me” (Ps.23:4). It is because of promises such as this that Paul can wonderwhether it is better to die or to keep on living: “I am tornbetween the two: I desire to depart and be with Christ, which isbetter by far” (Phil. 1:23).
Third,there are promises related to the whole constellation of eventssurrounding Jesus’ return and the conclusion of human historyas we know it. Jesus’ return is described as “the blessedhope” (Titus 2:13). Furthermore, the trials and struggles ofthis present life will be over, and God will complete all histransforming work in our lives in one final moment of glorification.John describes this process this way: “When Christ appears, weshall be like him, for we shall see him as he is” (in 1John3:2). The classic depiction of the future hope is in Rev. 21–22,when “ ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes.There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, forthe old order of things has passed away” (21:4).
ThePresent World and the Future Hope
Atthe same time, it is no secret that the broader culture does notaccept this future hope. Paul foresees, “The time will comewhen people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suittheir own desires, they will gather around them a great number ofteachers to say what their itching ears want to hear” (2Tim.4:3). Peter warns, “In the last days scoffers will come,scoffing and following their own evil desires. They will say, ‘Whereis this “coming” he promised? Ever since our ancestorsdied, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation’ ”(2Pet. 3:3–4). There is always the danger that “theworries of this life and the deceitfulness of wealth” (Matt.13:22) will choke out and negate whatever positive spiritualinfluences a person has received in this present life.
Christiansare called to protect themselves from this danger of beingsidetracked by the attractions of this present world by learning tolive life with a daily sense of expectation for Jesus’ return.Three verbs stand out in the description of this proper lifestyle:(1)“watch,” in the sense of being spiritually alertand ready at any time (Matt. 25:13: “Therefore keep watch,because you do not know the day or the hour”; 1Thess.5:6: “So then, let us not be like others, who are asleep, butlet us be awake and sober”); (2)“wait,” inthe sense of being prepared for a long wait (see the story of thefive foolish virgins in Matt. 25:1–13); and (3)“work,”making the best use of our time (see the parable of the talents inMatt. 25:14–30). Truly, “our salvation is nearer now thanwhen we first believed” (Rom. 13:11). The biblical teachings oneschatology are given not merely as information but rather totransform us. The future hope described in Scripture is repeatedlyused as the basis for exhortations as to how we should live our liveshere in the present. Jesus did not simply affirm that these greatevents were to occur; he also emphasized the appropriate behavior inlight of this future reality. “He who testifies to these thingssays, ‘Yes, I am coming soon.’ Amen. Come, Lord Jesus”(Rev. 22:20).
Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.
In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).
Articles of Clothing
A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.
In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).
Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).
The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).
In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).
Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).
Special Functions of Clothing
According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).
Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).
Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).
Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.
Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).
The historical origins of Christianity need to be set against Jewish history, beliefs, and culture in Palestine and the eastern Mediterranean, but they also need to be set in the context of the wider Greco-Roman world that was dominated politically and militarily by the Roman Empire.
From Republic to Empire
Rome began as a city-state but soon became a transcontinental empire reaching over parts of Europe, Africa, and Asia. Rome emerged as the most dominant force in the Mediterranean after it defeated Carthage in the Second Punic War (218–201 BC). Thereafter, Rome began to expand its control and power over the various Hellenistic city-states in the east, including Macedonia, Illyria, and Asia Minor. By the mid-first century AD, Rome had also conquered or annexed Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Cyrene, Gaul, Spain, North Africa, and Armenia.
The transition from the Roman Republic to the Roman Empire took place under the Roman emperors beginning with Julius Caesar (100–44 BC), who, after crossing the Rubicon and defeating Pompey, was proclaimed dictator perpetuus (“dictator for life”). The period after Julius Caesar’s assassination (44 BC) was a time of political upheaval as Rome was marred by a series of civil wars. The first was between Octavius and Antony against Caesar’s assassins Brutus and Cassius. This climaxed in the Battle of Philippi (42 BC), which the former allies of Julius Caesar won. The second was between Octavius and Antony, where Antony and Cleopatra were defeated at the Battle of Actium in 31 BC, leaving Octavius as the undisputed leader of Rome.
Octavius was given the honorific name “Augustus” by the senate. His reign (31 BC–AD 14) marked a period of consolidation, reorganization, and renewal of the Roman Empire. Augustus embarked on an empire-wide policy of fiscal rationalization, developed a constitutional settlement for Rome, centralized his military authority over the various provinces, and had Julius Caesar deified. Writers and artists of the era heralded Augustus’s reign as a time of unprecedented peace and security—peace from civil war and security from the Germanic tribes in the north and the Parthian Empire in the east. Worship of the emperor became more frequent especially in the Roman East, although Augustus did not permit it in Rome. What is most significant about Augustus is that it is with his reign that the Roman Empire essentially began. He was the emperor at the time of Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:1). It was under Trajan (AD 98–117), however, that the Roman Empire expanded to its largest area, encompassing parts of Britain and Persia.
Emperors (AD 14–98)
Tiberius, Augustus’s adopted heir, reigned in the years AD 14–37. He was a highly successful military general, but as emperor he was remembered as being gloomy and melancholic. Tiberius even went into a self-imposed exile for a time, leaving the praetorian prefect Sejanus in charge until Tiberius finally had him executed for treason. It was during the reign of Tiberius that Jesus conducted his ministry in Palestine.
Tiberius was succeeded by his adopted grandson Caligula, who reigned in the years AD 37–41. Caligula was the son of the popular Roman general Germanicus, who died in Antioch in AD 19. Historical sources are not favorably disposed toward Caligula, who was remembered as a malevolent tyrant given to self-aggrandizement and sexual perversity. In AD 39/40 Caligula departed from imperial policy that permitted emperor worship in the east and veneration of deceased emperors in Rome, and he often appeared dressed as a god in public and demanded worship as a living god. During this time he deposed Herod Antipas, the tetrarch of Galilee and Perea, on suspicion of consorting with Parthia (Josephus, Ant. 18.7). Caligula also ordered that his statue be placed in the holy of holies in the Jerusalem temple (Philo, Embassy 203). Petronius, the governor of Syria, knowing that such an act would lead to civil war, refused to comply and appealed to Caligula to reverse the order. In response, Caligula sent an order to Petronius that he commit suicide. Fortunately, news of Caligula’s assassination by a conspiracy involving the praetorian guard and senators reached Petronius first.
Claudius, Caligula’s uncle, reigned in the years AD 41–54, and his rule was defined by numerous public works, a reordering of the judicial system, a torrid series of marriages, the conquest of Britain, and a number of attempted coups by the Roman senate. In AD 49 he expelled the Jews from Rome because of disputes about a certain “Chrestus,” probably Christ (cf. Acts 18:2). No one is sure whether Claudius was murdered or died of old age, but he remained a sharp contrast to the brutal excesses of Caligula and Nero.
Nero, the stepson of Claudius, reigned in the years AD 54–68. The early period of his rule was marked by cultural endeavors and diplomatic efforts. The later years were, in contrast, distinguished by tyranny and self-aggrandizement. There was a Jewish revolt against Rome in Judea (AD 66–70) during Nero’s reign, and Vespasian was sent to pacify the territory. According to ancient sources, Nero accused Christians of starting the fire of Rome in AD 64 and subjected them to the cruelest of punishments, including crucifixion, being thrown to wild animals, and even being burned alive. It probably was during this time that the apostles Peter and Paul were martyred in Rome. Nero eventually was declared a public enemy by the Roman senate, and he committed suicide before he could be captured in AD 68. There arose a “Nero redivivus” legend, whereby many hoped or feared that Nero had not died in AD 68 but had fled to Parthia and would return to Rome in order to destroy it (Sib.Or. 4.119–124; 5.137–141, 361–396), and this arguably stands behind the imagery of Rev. 13:3; 17:8–11.
The suicide of Nero left a power vacuum in Rome, and AD 69 saw no less than four emperors ascend the throne: Galba, Otho, Vitellius, and finally Vespasian. Galba was governor of Hispania Tarraconensis and was invited to become emperor by the senate, but he was killed by the praetorian guard after they were bribed by the praetor Otho. Otho himself committed suicide after his forces were defeated by Vitellius, the commander of the legions on the Rhine. Vitellius became emperor, but he was fiscally irresponsible and murdered many of his rivals. The legions in the Danube, Egypt, Syria, and Judea had declared Vespasian emperor and marched on Rome. Vespasian controlled the grain supplies to Rome from Egypt and had a superior force. Vitellius’s forces were defeated at Bedriacum, and Vitellius went into hiding but eventually was killed in Rome. Vespasian was declared emperor by the senate, and so began the Flavian dynasty, which restored order after the chaos of civil war.
The Flavians ruled in the years AD 69–96. Vespasian (r. AD 69–79) consolidated the empire after its year of strife and instituted new taxes, such as the fiscus judaicus, a war reparation tax placed on all Jews and paid to the temple of Jupiter in lieu of the Jerusalem temple tax. Vespasian was succeeded by his sons Titus (r.AD 79–81) and Domitian (r. AD 81–96). When Vespasian sailed to Rome from Judea, Titus was left in charge of the siege of Jerusalem, which he completed and celebrated in a triumph in Rome in AD 72. This triumph is memorialized in the Arch of Titus, which depicts Roman soldiers bringing the vessels of the temple to Rome as part of the booty taken. Later Roman writers regarded Domitian as a malevolent and malicious tyrant (e.g., Tacitus, Suetonius), but this probably is an exaggeration caused partly by a desire to highlight the greatness of succeeding emperors such as Nerva and Trajan. It probably was during the reign of Domitian that some Christians in Asia Minor were being persecuted for their failure to worship the emperor, as depicted in the book of Revelation.
Table 7. Roman Emperors (31 BC–AD 117)
31 BC-AD 14 – Augustus
AD 14-37 – Tiberius
AD 37-41 – Caligula
AD 41-54 – Claudius
AD 54-68 – Nero
AD 68-69 – Galba
AD 69 – Otho
AD 69 – Vitellius
AD 69-79 – Vespasian
AD 79-81 – Titus
AD 81-96 – Domitian
AD 96-98 – Nerva
AD 98-117 – Trajan
Military
Military expeditions expanded Rome’s control of foreign territories and safeguarded its borders from incursion, most threateningly from the Germanic tribes east of the Rhine River and north of the Danube River and from the Parthian (=Neo-Persian) Empire east of the Euphrates River. A Roman legion consisted of around six thousand men, including cavalry. Under Tiberius, there were twenty-five legions stationed across the empire: eight on the Rhine, three in Spain, two in Egypt, four in Syria, two in Africa, and six in the Danube region. In terms of command structures, the legions were under the control of certain regional commands by men of consular rank, including two on the Rhine, one in Spain, one in Syria, and three in the Balkans (Tacitus, Ann. 4.5). These were among the most powerful persons outside the ruling family and could be kingmakers or contenders during times of civil war. A legion was divided into ten cohorts and commanded by a legate, usually of senatorial rank. Units of one hundred were commanded by centurions, and service in the legions was set at between twenty and twenty-five years. Upon recruitment, the soldier swore an oath of loyalty to the emperor (sacramentum) that was renewed annually. During times of peace, Roman soldiers could perform a number of civil tasks relating to taxation, building projects, and policing.
Centurions are mentioned several times in the NT (e.g., Matt. 8:5; Mark 15:39; Acts 10:1; 21:32; 27:1). There is a mention of a “legion” of demons that oppressed the Gerasene demoniac (Mark 5:9), and Jesus refers to the possibility of the Father sending him “legions” of angels (Matt. 26:53). Military terminology is very apparent in Paul’s letters, where he refers to fighting armor (Rom. 13:11–13; 2Cor. 6:7; Eph. 6:10–18), compares commitment to Christ to military service (2Tim. 2:4), refers to his coworkers as “soldiers” or “fellow soldiers” (Phil. 2:25; Philem. 2; 2Tim. 2:3), and likens ministerial remuneration to a soldier being paid his salarium (1Cor. 9:7).
Culture and Religion
One of the primary reasons for Rome’s rise and dominance, militarily and culturally, was its capacity to absorb other peoples and even other gods into its constituency and pantheon. Its constantly growing pantheon, application of the rule of law, and superior military force made Rome what it was: a melting pot of all cultures and a Romanizer of other cultures.
Roman society was heavily stratified, but social mobility, upward and downward, was possible. Wealth, marriage, education, and military exploits were the primary means to social advancement. The senatorial class represented the wealthy nobility of Rome and provided the primary cohort of civil and military administrators. The equestrian class (or “knights,” as they are sometimes called) were a larger group of less wealthy Roman citizens. Decurions were members of civil councils in provincial cities who often acted as magistrates and were leaders of local communities. The plebeians represented the general citizenry of Rome, who, until the time of Tiberius, had some power in electing officials. Finally, there were freedmen, who were ex-slaves usually in a relationship with their former master, and also slaves, who were regarded as little more than property.
The ancient Roman religions focused on the numen, the somewhat impersonal divine power associated with certain localities. From the third century BC, Greek deities were assimilated and Romanized, so that Zeus became Jupiter, and Vesta was identified as Hestia. The Capitoline Hill was crowned with a temple that was dedicated around 500 BC to Jupiter, Minerva, and Juno. These were the principal gods of Rome, although others were added to the pantheon as the Romans conquered other peoples and adopted their gods. Other gods also received greater honor, such as the goddess Pax, the personification of peace (based on the Greek goddess Eirene); Vespasian built and dedicated a temple in her honor in Rome in AD 75. The Roman emperor was the Pontifex Maximus and supreme high priest of Rome and the empire. In the mid- to late first century AD, the fastest-growing religion was the imperial cult, the worship of (usually) deceased Roman emperors. This cult became popular in the eastern Mediterranean cities, where worship of rulers was commonplace, but was regarded with indifference in Rome.
Religions and philosophies from all over the known world eventually made their way to Rome. Egyptian rites and religions gained followings, Mithraism acquired currency within the ranks of the military and among public servants, Judaism entered Rome probably with the Hasmonean delegation sent there around 139 BC, and Christianity came to Rome probably during the late 30s and early 40s of the first century AD through Jewish pilgrims visiting the east and through Judean immigration to Rome. Many Roman intellectuals lamented the fact that so many foreign superstitions had found their way to Rome, and that Roman peoples found them more attractive than their own state religion. Roman religion was largely controlled by the state through a set calendar and the appointment of priests and vestal virgins. It was practiced in public and in the home. As such, religious life was very much intertwined with social and political life. Roman religion engendered the need for its citizens to act with pietas, the honoring of one’s obligations to the gods, and with religio, which designated appropriate scruples and rites in the presence of the gods.
Summary
The birth of the church and the growth of Christianity took place within the wider social, religious, and cultural context of the Greco-Roman world. The politics and power of the Roman Empire provide the backdrop for the birth of Jesus (Luke 2:1), and since Rome was considered to be the center of the world, it was necessary that Paul himself testify to Jesus Christ there (Acts 19:21). The history, literature, and cultural background of Rome form an important background to the NT and should be studied along with the history and literature of Judaism during the time of Jesus and the apostles. Although the Romans were the primary threat to the survival of Christians in the ancient world, after the conversion of Constantine in the fourth century AD, they became the primary means by which Christianity spread to the rest of Europe and western Asia. See also Roman Law.
The historical origins of Christianity need to be set against Jewish history, beliefs, and culture in Palestine and the eastern Mediterranean, but they also need to be set in the context of the wider Greco-Roman world that was dominated politically and militarily by the Roman Empire.
From Republic to Empire
Rome began as a city-state but soon became a transcontinental empire reaching over parts of Europe, Africa, and Asia. Rome emerged as the most dominant force in the Mediterranean after it defeated Carthage in the Second Punic War (218–201 BC). Thereafter, Rome began to expand its control and power over the various Hellenistic city-states in the east, including Macedonia, Illyria, and Asia Minor. By the mid-first century AD, Rome had also conquered or annexed Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Cyrene, Gaul, Spain, North Africa, and Armenia.
The transition from the Roman Republic to the Roman Empire took place under the Roman emperors beginning with Julius Caesar (100–44 BC), who, after crossing the Rubicon and defeating Pompey, was proclaimed dictator perpetuus (“dictator for life”). The period after Julius Caesar’s assassination (44 BC) was a time of political upheaval as Rome was marred by a series of civil wars. The first was between Octavius and Antony against Caesar’s assassins Brutus and Cassius. This climaxed in the Battle of Philippi (42 BC), which the former allies of Julius Caesar won. The second was between Octavius and Antony, where Antony and Cleopatra were defeated at the Battle of Actium in 31 BC, leaving Octavius as the undisputed leader of Rome.
Octavius was given the honorific name “Augustus” by the senate. His reign (31 BC–AD 14) marked a period of consolidation, reorganization, and renewal of the Roman Empire. Augustus embarked on an empire-wide policy of fiscal rationalization, developed a constitutional settlement for Rome, centralized his military authority over the various provinces, and had Julius Caesar deified. Writers and artists of the era heralded Augustus’s reign as a time of unprecedented peace and security—peace from civil war and security from the Germanic tribes in the north and the Parthian Empire in the east. Worship of the emperor became more frequent especially in the Roman East, although Augustus did not permit it in Rome. What is most significant about Augustus is that it is with his reign that the Roman Empire essentially began. He was the emperor at the time of Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:1). It was under Trajan (AD 98–117), however, that the Roman Empire expanded to its largest area, encompassing parts of Britain and Persia.
Emperors (AD 14–98)
Tiberius, Augustus’s adopted heir, reigned in the years AD 14–37. He was a highly successful military general, but as emperor he was remembered as being gloomy and melancholic. Tiberius even went into a self-imposed exile for a time, leaving the praetorian prefect Sejanus in charge until Tiberius finally had him executed for treason. It was during the reign of Tiberius that Jesus conducted his ministry in Palestine.
Tiberius was succeeded by his adopted grandson Caligula, who reigned in the years AD 37–41. Caligula was the son of the popular Roman general Germanicus, who died in Antioch in AD 19. Historical sources are not favorably disposed toward Caligula, who was remembered as a malevolent tyrant given to self-aggrandizement and sexual perversity. In AD 39/40 Caligula departed from imperial policy that permitted emperor worship in the east and veneration of deceased emperors in Rome, and he often appeared dressed as a god in public and demanded worship as a living god. During this time he deposed Herod Antipas, the tetrarch of Galilee and Perea, on suspicion of consorting with Parthia (Josephus, Ant. 18.7). Caligula also ordered that his statue be placed in the holy of holies in the Jerusalem temple (Philo, Embassy 203). Petronius, the governor of Syria, knowing that such an act would lead to civil war, refused to comply and appealed to Caligula to reverse the order. In response, Caligula sent an order to Petronius that he commit suicide. Fortunately, news of Caligula’s assassination by a conspiracy involving the praetorian guard and senators reached Petronius first.
Claudius, Caligula’s uncle, reigned in the years AD 41–54, and his rule was defined by numerous public works, a reordering of the judicial system, a torrid series of marriages, the conquest of Britain, and a number of attempted coups by the Roman senate. In AD 49 he expelled the Jews from Rome because of disputes about a certain “Chrestus,” probably Christ (cf. Acts 18:2). No one is sure whether Claudius was murdered or died of old age, but he remained a sharp contrast to the brutal excesses of Caligula and Nero.
Nero, the stepson of Claudius, reigned in the years AD 54–68. The early period of his rule was marked by cultural endeavors and diplomatic efforts. The later years were, in contrast, distinguished by tyranny and self-aggrandizement. There was a Jewish revolt against Rome in Judea (AD 66–70) during Nero’s reign, and Vespasian was sent to pacify the territory. According to ancient sources, Nero accused Christians of starting the fire of Rome in AD 64 and subjected them to the cruelest of punishments, including crucifixion, being thrown to wild animals, and even being burned alive. It probably was during this time that the apostles Peter and Paul were martyred in Rome. Nero eventually was declared a public enemy by the Roman senate, and he committed suicide before he could be captured in AD 68. There arose a “Nero redivivus” legend, whereby many hoped or feared that Nero had not died in AD 68 but had fled to Parthia and would return to Rome in order to destroy it (Sib.Or. 4.119–124; 5.137–141, 361–396), and this arguably stands behind the imagery of Rev. 13:3; 17:8–11.
The suicide of Nero left a power vacuum in Rome, and AD 69 saw no less than four emperors ascend the throne: Galba, Otho, Vitellius, and finally Vespasian. Galba was governor of Hispania Tarraconensis and was invited to become emperor by the senate, but he was killed by the praetorian guard after they were bribed by the praetor Otho. Otho himself committed suicide after his forces were defeated by Vitellius, the commander of the legions on the Rhine. Vitellius became emperor, but he was fiscally irresponsible and murdered many of his rivals. The legions in the Danube, Egypt, Syria, and Judea had declared Vespasian emperor and marched on Rome. Vespasian controlled the grain supplies to Rome from Egypt and had a superior force. Vitellius’s forces were defeated at Bedriacum, and Vitellius went into hiding but eventually was killed in Rome. Vespasian was declared emperor by the senate, and so began the Flavian dynasty, which restored order after the chaos of civil war.
The Flavians ruled in the years AD 69–96. Vespasian (r. AD 69–79) consolidated the empire after its year of strife and instituted new taxes, such as the fiscus judaicus, a war reparation tax placed on all Jews and paid to the temple of Jupiter in lieu of the Jerusalem temple tax. Vespasian was succeeded by his sons Titus (r.AD 79–81) and Domitian (r. AD 81–96). When Vespasian sailed to Rome from Judea, Titus was left in charge of the siege of Jerusalem, which he completed and celebrated in a triumph in Rome in AD 72. This triumph is memorialized in the Arch of Titus, which depicts Roman soldiers bringing the vessels of the temple to Rome as part of the booty taken. Later Roman writers regarded Domitian as a malevolent and malicious tyrant (e.g., Tacitus, Suetonius), but this probably is an exaggeration caused partly by a desire to highlight the greatness of succeeding emperors such as Nerva and Trajan. It probably was during the reign of Domitian that some Christians in Asia Minor were being persecuted for their failure to worship the emperor, as depicted in the book of Revelation.
Table 7. Roman Emperors (31 BC–AD 117)
31 BC-AD 14 – Augustus
AD 14-37 – Tiberius
AD 37-41 – Caligula
AD 41-54 – Claudius
AD 54-68 – Nero
AD 68-69 – Galba
AD 69 – Otho
AD 69 – Vitellius
AD 69-79 – Vespasian
AD 79-81 – Titus
AD 81-96 – Domitian
AD 96-98 – Nerva
AD 98-117 – Trajan
Military
Military expeditions expanded Rome’s control of foreign territories and safeguarded its borders from incursion, most threateningly from the Germanic tribes east of the Rhine River and north of the Danube River and from the Parthian (=Neo-Persian) Empire east of the Euphrates River. A Roman legion consisted of around six thousand men, including cavalry. Under Tiberius, there were twenty-five legions stationed across the empire: eight on the Rhine, three in Spain, two in Egypt, four in Syria, two in Africa, and six in the Danube region. In terms of command structures, the legions were under the control of certain regional commands by men of consular rank, including two on the Rhine, one in Spain, one in Syria, and three in the Balkans (Tacitus, Ann. 4.5). These were among the most powerful persons outside the ruling family and could be kingmakers or contenders during times of civil war. A legion was divided into ten cohorts and commanded by a legate, usually of senatorial rank. Units of one hundred were commanded by centurions, and service in the legions was set at between twenty and twenty-five years. Upon recruitment, the soldier swore an oath of loyalty to the emperor (sacramentum) that was renewed annually. During times of peace, Roman soldiers could perform a number of civil tasks relating to taxation, building projects, and policing.
Centurions are mentioned several times in the NT (e.g., Matt. 8:5; Mark 15:39; Acts 10:1; 21:32; 27:1). There is a mention of a “legion” of demons that oppressed the Gerasene demoniac (Mark 5:9), and Jesus refers to the possibility of the Father sending him “legions” of angels (Matt. 26:53). Military terminology is very apparent in Paul’s letters, where he refers to fighting armor (Rom. 13:11–13; 2Cor. 6:7; Eph. 6:10–18), compares commitment to Christ to military service (2Tim. 2:4), refers to his coworkers as “soldiers” or “fellow soldiers” (Phil. 2:25; Philem. 2; 2Tim. 2:3), and likens ministerial remuneration to a soldier being paid his salarium (1Cor. 9:7).
Culture and Religion
One of the primary reasons for Rome’s rise and dominance, militarily and culturally, was its capacity to absorb other peoples and even other gods into its constituency and pantheon. Its constantly growing pantheon, application of the rule of law, and superior military force made Rome what it was: a melting pot of all cultures and a Romanizer of other cultures.
Roman society was heavily stratified, but social mobility, upward and downward, was possible. Wealth, marriage, education, and military exploits were the primary means to social advancement. The senatorial class represented the wealthy nobility of Rome and provided the primary cohort of civil and military administrators. The equestrian class (or “knights,” as they are sometimes called) were a larger group of less wealthy Roman citizens. Decurions were members of civil councils in provincial cities who often acted as magistrates and were leaders of local communities. The plebeians represented the general citizenry of Rome, who, until the time of Tiberius, had some power in electing officials. Finally, there were freedmen, who were ex-slaves usually in a relationship with their former master, and also slaves, who were regarded as little more than property.
The ancient Roman religions focused on the numen, the somewhat impersonal divine power associated with certain localities. From the third century BC, Greek deities were assimilated and Romanized, so that Zeus became Jupiter, and Vesta was identified as Hestia. The Capitoline Hill was crowned with a temple that was dedicated around 500 BC to Jupiter, Minerva, and Juno. These were the principal gods of Rome, although others were added to the pantheon as the Romans conquered other peoples and adopted their gods. Other gods also received greater honor, such as the goddess Pax, the personification of peace (based on the Greek goddess Eirene); Vespasian built and dedicated a temple in her honor in Rome in AD 75. The Roman emperor was the Pontifex Maximus and supreme high priest of Rome and the empire. In the mid- to late first century AD, the fastest-growing religion was the imperial cult, the worship of (usually) deceased Roman emperors. This cult became popular in the eastern Mediterranean cities, where worship of rulers was commonplace, but was regarded with indifference in Rome.
Religions and philosophies from all over the known world eventually made their way to Rome. Egyptian rites and religions gained followings, Mithraism acquired currency within the ranks of the military and among public servants, Judaism entered Rome probably with the Hasmonean delegation sent there around 139 BC, and Christianity came to Rome probably during the late 30s and early 40s of the first century AD through Jewish pilgrims visiting the east and through Judean immigration to Rome. Many Roman intellectuals lamented the fact that so many foreign superstitions had found their way to Rome, and that Roman peoples found them more attractive than their own state religion. Roman religion was largely controlled by the state through a set calendar and the appointment of priests and vestal virgins. It was practiced in public and in the home. As such, religious life was very much intertwined with social and political life. Roman religion engendered the need for its citizens to act with pietas, the honoring of one’s obligations to the gods, and with religio, which designated appropriate scruples and rites in the presence of the gods.
Summary
The birth of the church and the growth of Christianity took place within the wider social, religious, and cultural context of the Greco-Roman world. The politics and power of the Roman Empire provide the backdrop for the birth of Jesus (Luke 2:1), and since Rome was considered to be the center of the world, it was necessary that Paul himself testify to Jesus Christ there (Acts 19:21). The history, literature, and cultural background of Rome form an important background to the NT and should be studied along with the history and literature of Judaism during the time of Jesus and the apostles. Although the Romans were the primary threat to the survival of Christians in the ancient world, after the conversion of Constantine in the fourth century AD, they became the primary means by which Christianity spread to the rest of Europe and western Asia. See also Roman Law.
Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.
In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).
Articles of Clothing
A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.
In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).
Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).
The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).
In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).
Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).
Special Functions of Clothing
According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).
Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).
Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).
Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.
Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).
Showing
1
to
50
of144
results
1. But Not Yet
Illustration
David Zersen
"O God, give me purity – but not yet." So the young Augustine prayed as he resisted his mother Monica and her Christian witness. One day in his garden, Augustine had one of the most famous self-confrontations in history. "Suddenly I heard a voice from some nearby house, a boy's voice or a girl's voice, I do not know. But it was a sort of sing-song, repeated again and again, " Tolle lege, tolle lege," "Take and read, take and read." I ceased weeping, and immediately began to search my mind most carefully as to whether children were accustomed to chant these words in any kind of game, and I could not remember that I had ever heard such a thing. Damming back the flood of my tears, I arose, interpreting the incident as quite certainly a divine command to open my book of Scripture, and read the passage at which I should open." Augustine took up the Bible and opened it to Romans 13:13 "Let us conduct ourselves becomingly as in the day, not in reveling and drunkenness, not in debauchery and licentiousness, not in quarreling and jealousy, but put on Christ." The life of Augustine was changed and with it the course of world history.
2. THE BEAUTY OF SELF-LOVE
Illustration
John H. Krahn
When we are emotionally healthy, all of us have a rather high regard of ourselves. It is natural and normal to enjoy the beauty of self-love. Although the Bible does not stroke self-love, it does not deny its validity either. What it speaks out against is selfish love, a love of ourselves that is exclusive of God and of others ... a love that has its priorities wrong. Whereas self-love is beautiful, selfish love is not.
In order to have the beauty of self-love, the Bible states that we must get our love priorities in order. The first object of our love must be God. The love God wishes demands the action of our whole personality. All of our being: moral, emotional, intellectual, and physical must go into our love of God. Only this is completely acceptable to God, and only this is adequate for his shaping of our lives. When we give God a mere fraction of ourselves, God himself becomes a mere fraction of what he might be to us.
Jesus not only wants to be in our lives but desires to be the master of our lives. He wants to be in the driver’s seat. If your life were likened to your automobile, where would Jesus’ place be in it? Would he be in the trunk like the spare tire only to be called forth in an emergency? Would he be in the back seat only being consulted occasionally for advice? Or, does he sit beside you, one with whom you have regular conversation? Or is he in the driver’s seat, at the controls, guiding your life in the direction he wants it to go?
When God is loved first and foremost and when we enjoy the beauty of a loving God, we can then enjoy the beauty of loving our neighbor. The word love in the Bible does not necessarily mean a personal liking, a sentimental affection, but rather it suggests our active good will in behalf of our neighbor. In other words, God says we are to love everyone even when we might not be able to like everyone.
Jesus’ parable of the Good Samaritan is a great model of neighborly love. The Samaritan overstepped all existing borders to do concrete costly acts of love, even to one considered an enemy. The teaching of Jesus is clear - the love of a neighbor has no boundaries.
Now we are at the point of insight. When we love God completely and have him guiding our lives and when we are enabled by God’s love for us to extend our love to all neighbors, we are now more able to enjoy the beauty of self-love. For we see our importance and our worth with the eyes of God, a God whose Son was not too high a price to pay to reclaim us. If God loved us so much, we can certainly love ourselves.
We are also able to love ourselves more when we let God rid our lives of feelings of hate for other people through the practice of neighborly love. And as we hate others less, as we are uncomfortable with others less, as we love others more, psychologically we will hate ourselves less, can be more comfortable with ourselves, and enjoy more of the beauty of self-love.
Innately we all have a sense of self-love essential for preservation. He has given us the gift of eternity through our Lord Jesus Christ and wants to bless us daily as we love and devote ourselves to him. And as we love God and our neighbor, our natural self-love moves out of the realm of selfishness. For you see, it is no longer exclusive, directing all energies inward. Now it is inclusive, for it is a love with priorities straight. God first, others second, and ourselves third. The beauty of God-love, the beauty of neighbor-love, the beauty of self-love, together they comprise the beauty of Christian love.
3. ARMOR - BEARER
Illustration
Stephen Stewart
Jeremiah 9:54 - "Then he called hastily to the young man his armorbearer, and said to him, ‘Draw your sword and kill me, lest men say of me, "A woman killed him." ’ And his young man thrust him through, and he died."
1 Samuel 14:7 - "And his armor-bearer said to him, ‘Do all that your mind inclines to; behold, I am with you; as is your mind, so is mine.’ "
2 Samuel 23:37 - "Zelek the Ammonite, Naharai of Beeroth, the armor-bearer of Joab the son of Zeruiah."
1 Chronicles 10:4 - "Then Saul said to his armor-bearer, ‘Draw your sword and thrust me through with it, lest these uncircumcised come and make sport of me.’ But his armor-bearer would not; for he feared greatly. Therefore Saul took his own sword, and fell upon it."
The armor-bearer in early times was the personal attendant of a warrior chieftain, just as today the aide-de-camp is an officer who is attached to the person of a general to assist him in his duties, transmit orders, and collect information. The armor-bearer of the Old Testament, however, had additional duties, rather more similar to those of an officer’s aid today, which including caring for his master’s weapons and other equipment. He also carried his master’s weapons and other equipment. He also carried his master’s weapons and fought along side him in battle.
Strangely enough, the armor-bearer is referred to only in early Old Testament times, as a servant of Abimelech, Jonathan, Saul, and J oab. As we can see by reading the material which includes our texts, both Abimelech and Saul ordered their armor-bearers to kill them so that they would not be captured by the enemy.
In the account in 1 Samuel, Jonathan’s armor-bearer is said to have killed those who had been bested by Jonathan. David himself served for a time as the armor-bearer of King Saul.
And how were these armor-bearers chosen? If we let our minds wander back to the period of chivalry, during the Middle Ages, we can recall the standards upon which selection for such high honor was based. This probably wasn’t so involved in the times of which we are speaking. Most likely the merits upon which the armor-bearer was chosen were bravery, loyalty, and skill in warfare.
We find this picked out for us by the third of our biblical texts. Joab’s armor-bearer, Haharai of Beeroth, was himself a mighty warrior, being one of the "Mighty Men" of David (cf. 2 Samuel 23:37; 1 Chronicles 11:39).
We see, then, that these men were heroes in their own right. And I think there is one further point that we should make. They were not only servants of their masters, but also personal friends as well. It may seem to us that a friend would never deliberately kill another, but if we consider the alternatives that were offered; if the enemy captured the master, I would say that friendship demanded the ultimate act. And so they reacted!
4. A Deep Love for God, A Deep Love for Neighbors
Illustration
Billy D. Strayhorn
There is an Irish legend about a king, who had no children to succeed him on the throne. So, he had his messengers post signs in every town and village of his kingdom inviting qualified young men to apply for an interview with the king. This way the king hoped to be able to choose a successor before he died.
Two qualifications, especially, were stressed. The person must have a deep love for God and a deep love for his neighbor.
A young man saw one of the signs. He indeed had a deep love for God and neighbor. He felt a kind of inner voice telling him to apply for an interview.
But the young man was so poor that he didn't have decent clothes to wear to an interview. He also didn't have any money to buy provisions for the long journey to the king's castle.
So the young man prayed over the matter. He finally decided to beg for the clothes and the provisions he needed. When everything was ready, he set out. After a month of travel, one day the young man caught sight of the king's castle. It sat high on a hill in the distance.
At about the same time, he also caught sight of a poor old beggar sitting by the side of the road. The beggar held out his hands and pleaded for help. "I'm hungry and cold," he said in a weak voice. "Could you give me something warm to wear and something nourishing to eat?"
The sight of the beggar moved the young man. He stripped off his warm outer clothes and exchanged them for the tattered old coat of the beggar. He also gave the beggar most of the provisions he had been carrying in his backpack for the return journey. Then, somewhat uncertainly, he walked on to the castle in tattered clothes and without enough food for his return trip.
When the young man arrived at the castle, guards met him at the gate. They took him to the visitors' area. After a long wait, the young man was led into see the king.
He bowed low before the throne. When he straightened up, the young man could hardly believe his eyes. He said to the king. "You were the beggar beside the road."
"That's right," said the king.
"Why did you do this to me?" asked the young man.
The king said, "I had to find out if you really did love God and neighbor." And then the king told him he had proved himself and was the new heir. What a surprise.
5. Whatever It Takes
Illustration
Gary Nicolosi
A motivational speaker once said there are two kinds of people in this world: those who say "whatever" and those who say, "whatever it takes." "Whatever" is the response of the shrug. It's a "who cares?" attitude, one of indifference and apathy. "Whatever it takes" is the response of the committed. It's a "can do" attitude that refuses to give up or give in. Think about those two responses when it comes to the Church's mission. Jesus said to love your neighbor. Whatever. Jesus said to go and make disciples of all people. Whatever. Jesus said there is more rejoicing over one sinner who is found than 99 that stayed within the fold. Whatever.
Now, let's change that response to "Whatever it takes." Jesus said to love your neighbor. Whatever it takes. Jesus said to go and make disciples of all people. Whatever it takes. Jesus said there is more rejoicing over one sinner who is found than 99 that stayed within the fold. Whatever it takes. Are you and I, like Paul, willing to do whatever it takes to win the world to Christ?
6. Just a Person across the Way
Illustration
Brett Blair
Edgar Guest, a renowned American poet at the turn of the century, tells of a neighbor by the name of Jim Potter. Mr. Potter ran the drug store in the small town where Edgar Guest lived. Guest recalled that daily he would pass his neighbor and how they would smile and exchange greetings. But it was a mere casual relationship.
Then came that tragic night in the life of Edgar Guest when his first born child died. He felt lonely and defeated. These were grim days for him and he was overcome with grief. Several days later Guest had reason to go to the drug store run by his neighbor, and when he entered Jim Potter motioned for him to come behind the counter. "Eddie," he said, "I really can't express to you the great sympathy that I have for you at this time. All I can say is that I am terribly sorry, and if you need for me to do anything, you can count on me."
Many years later Edgar Guest wrote of that encounter in one of his books. This is how he worded it: "Just a person across the way a passing acquaintance. Jim Potter may have long since forgotten that moment when he extended his hand to me in sympathy, but I shall never forget it never in all my life. To me it stands out like the silhouette of a lonely tree against a crimson sunset."
[Suggestion for personal application ofthis story]
I have wondered how it is that I want people to remember me when I come to end of my life's journey.
[name some personal accomplishments each followed by]
But I really don't care if someone remembers me for that. I really don't.
I do hope that people are able to say of me at the end of my life's pilgrimage: When we were sick he came to us; when we needed help, he was there; when I was down, he lifted me up. In short, I hope that my ministry is remembered for simple acts of kindness. For if that is the case, then my life would have been worth it and I might have come close to fulfilling the greatest commandment in life: Love God and love your neighbor.
7. What Is the Will of God?
Illustration
Rudolf Bultmann
"What, positively, is the will of God? The demand for love. "You shall love your neighbor as yourself!" as the second greatest commandment belongs together with the first: "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength" (Mk. 12:28-34) There is no obedience to God which does not have to prove itself in the concrete situation of meeting one's neighbor, as in Luke (10:29-37), probably unhistorical but with the right of correct understanding of the subject matter, makes clear by combining the illustrative narrative of the Good Samaritan with Jesus' discussion of the greatest commandment. The demand for love surpasses every legal demand; it knows no boundary of limit; it holds even in regard to one's enemy (Mt. 5:43-48).
8. The Good Samaritan - Sermon Starter
Illustration
Brett Blair
The parable of the Good Samaritan arises out of a discussion between Jesus and a Pharisee. Here is a religious lawyer and he is asking a question on the nature of the law. The stage is set by Luke with these words: "Behold a lawyer stood up to put him to the test." Well, it's not the first time and probably won't be the last time that a lawyer phrased a trick question. It was the kind of question in which any kind of an answer would pose still further problems. It was a test question: "Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life." Now right away we know that this man was a Pharisee, because the Pharisees believed in eternal life and the Sadducees did not. Jesus could tell that this man was an astute student of the law so he asked him: "What is written?" In other words, use your own mind to discern the essence of the law. Jesus, like a good discussion leader, throws the question right back in his lap.
The lawyer had a good answer. He said: "You shall love the Lord your God with all of your heart and soul and mind and strength and you shall love your neighbor as yourself." This was a direct quote from Deuteronomy 6. It was part of the Shema, a confession regularly made in Jewish worship. Jesus says: "Excellent. You are correct." If he were a teacher I suppose he would have said: "You get A+." I have no complaint with this says Jesus. Do this and you shall live. You have not only penetrated to the essence of the law but you have worded it succinctly.
The question had been asked and the answer given. You would think that the man would be pleased and go home. But lawyers are never happy. A lawyer's responsibility is to define the limits of liability. "But he, desiring to justify himself, asked ‘Who is my neighbor.'" In other words, where does my responsibility stop? Who exactly am I responsible for?"
At this point, instead of further defining the question, Jesus tells a story. A way of indirect teaching.
A certain rich man was going from Jerusalem to Jericho. We can surmise that this man was probably a Jew because this was a road going right through the heart of Judea. He had probably been up to Jerusalem to worship and now he's going back to the City of Palm Trees. It was a very long serpentine road starting at Jerusalem, the highest point, 2,500 feet above sea level, and going straight down to Jericho, nearly 800 feet below Sea Level. The lowest place on the face of the earth not covered by water the deepest city in the world.
The Jericho Road was a notoriously thief-infested stretch of rocky mountain road, a long, lonely seventeen miles crowded with caves and danger. Since the road was so often traveled by religious pilgrims and businessmen and because it was so crooked, robbers frequented the road often. In fact, the route was so ripe for pillage that it had been nicknamed "The Bloody Pass". By the time you rounded a bend the bandits were there and you really had no chance to escape. I suppose if there had been newspapers it would not have been unusual to read about the latest mugging on the Jericho Road.
And so, too, the particular traveler in Jesus story fell victim. He was ambushed, robbed, beaten, stripped, and left to die in a pool of crimson red. Now, the question in the story is who is going to stop and help? Who is it that will not fall prey to the temptation to pass by on the other side?
1. The Priest Passes By
2. The Levite Passes By
3. The Samaritan Stops
9. The Right Kind of Devotion
Illustration
In order that we may know how to love ourselves, an end has been established for us to which we are to refer all our action, so that we may attain to bliss. For if we love ourselves, our one wish is to achieve blessedness. Now this end is to cling to God. Thus, if we know how to love ourselves, the commandant to love our neighbor bids us to do all we can to bring our neighbor to love God. This is the worship of God; this is true religion; this is the right kind of devotion; this is the service which is owed to God alone.
10. Watching Out for Us
Illustration
Keith Wagner
Jesus wants us to love God and others with our soul. The soul is that part of us that denies logic. It is a mystery. Loving with our souls goes beyond what people would consider as normal. We give forth our love because we want to and it probably makes no sense to outsiders.
During the course of earning her master's degree, a woman found it necessary to commute several times a week from Victory, Vermont to the state university in Burlington, a good hundred miles away. Coming home late at night, she would see an old man sitting by the side of her road. He was always there, in sub zero temperatures, in stormy weather, no matter how late she returned. He made no acknowledgment of her passing. The snow settled on his cap and shoulders as if he were merely another gnarled old tree. She often wondered what brought him to that same spot every evening. Perhaps it was a stubborn habit, private grief or a mental disorder.
Finally, she asked a neighbor of hers, "Have you ever seen an old man who sits by the road late at night?" "Oh, yes," said her neighbor, "many times." "Is he a little touched upstairs? Does he ever go home?" The neighbor laughed and said, "He's no more touched than you or me. And he goes home right after you do. You see, he doesn't like the idea of you driving by yourself out late all alone on these back roads, so every night he walks out to wait for you. When he sees your taillights disappear around the bend, and he knows you're okay, he goes home to bed."
11. The Word Love
Illustration
Brian Stoffregen
In his commentary on Matthew ProfessorDouglas Harewrites: In an age when the word 'love' is greatly abused, it is important to remember that the primary component of biblical love is not affection but commitment. Warm feelings of gratitude may fill our consciousness as we consider all that God has done for us, but it is not warm feelings that Deut. 6:5 demands of us but rather stubborn, unwavering commitment. Similarly, to love our neighbor, including our enemies, does not mean that we must feel affection for them. To love the neighbor is to imitate God by taking their needs seriously.
12. In the Quiet of the Wilderness
Illustration
Edward F. Markquart
The wilderness is silence and quiet. It is the elimination of the sounds of television, the radio, the stereo, the iPod, the cell phone. It is the elimination of the voices of mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, friends. It is the elimination of the racing tape of your own mind that absorbs your thoughts. The wilderness is quiet. It is utter stillness. It is being alone with God. It is for a moment, for a minute, for a month, being still - absolutely still - …and listening. God speaks in the wilderness of silence. The city is so noisy; so busy; so crowded. The wilderness is silence and God speaks to us through the silence.
In the wilderness, you actually hear the voice of God speaking, "Be washed. Be cleansed of the pollution of resentment, anger, fear, and vengeance. Be washed of whatever is hurting your life and the lives of those around you."Hear the voice that says, "Your sins are forgiven; go and sin no more." Hear the voice that says, "Love one another as I have loved you." Hear the voice that says, "You shall love the Lord your God with all that is in you, all your heart, all your mind, all your soul and all your strength…and love your neighbor as you love yourself."
Be quiet. Be still. In the wilderness, you finally can see the stars and hear the sounds of the wind that are blocked out by the cacophonous noise of the city. In the quietness of the wilderness. Be still and you will hear the voice of God.
13. The Universality of the Golden Rule
Illustration
Carl Jech
Despairing of the possibility of ever bringing about religious unity through doctrinal, philosophical or theological dialogue, a great many people have latched onto the Golden Rule as the ultimate expression of their faith. It is provocative and inspiring to discover the remarkable universality of this ethical principle. In Hinduism it is stated like this: "Those gifted with intelligence should always treat others as they themselves wish to be treated." The Shinto version is: "The suffering of others is my suffering; the good of others is my good." In Buddhism it is: "A person can minister to friends and familiars by ... treating them as he treats himself." Taoists say: "Regard your neighbor's gain as your own gain and regard your neighbor's loss as your own loss." In Islam: "None of you is a believer until he loves for his brother what he loves for himself." For Sikhs it is: "As thou deemest thyself so deem others. Then shalt thou become a partner in heaven." In Confucianism and Zoroastrianism the rule is stated in the same way as in the New Testament except that it is couched in negative terms: "Do not unto others what you would not they should do unto you." The Jewish equivalent in Leviticus 19:18 is "You shall love your neighbor as yourself."
14. Number One on the List
Illustration
Brett Blair
Ivy Lee (1877–1934) was an American publicity expert and worked as a consultant for a number of businesses. One of those was for Charles Schwab, who was then president of Bethlehem Steel. Schwab was obsessed with efficiency and wanted Bethlehem Steel to become more productive. Ivy Lee was brought in.
Schwab asked: “Show me a way to get more things done.”
Lee: “Give me 15 minutes with each of your executives”
Schwab: “How much will it cost me?”
Lee: “Nothing. Unless it works. After three months, you can send me a check for whatever you feel it’s worth to you.”
Schwab agreed and during those 15 minutes with each executive, Lee laid out the following five step method:
- At the end of each working day, write down the fivemost important things you need to accomplish tomorrow. Do not write down more than fivetasks.
- Prioritize thoseitems in order of their true importance.
- When you arrive tomorrow, concentrate only on the first task. Work until the first task is finished before moving on to the second task.
- Approach the rest of your list in the same way. Don’t worry if you’ve only finished one or two by the end of the day; the others can wait.
- Repeat this process every working day.
It’s simple right? Well, Schwab and his team starting using this method. It worked well, very well. After a couple months of outstanding production from his staff Schwab senta $25,000 check to Lee. Adjusted for inflation that's $400,000 today!
Today this simple approach is called theThe Ivy Lee Method. It's amillion dollar productivity approachfor a lot of companies. If we were to apply the Ivy Lee Method to Christianity what would it look like?I think all of would agree that Love God and Love your neighbor would be #1 on the list. But after that? What would come after that. I think this text is a good candidate for #2: So do not worry, saying, 'What shall we eat?' or 'What shall we drink?' or 'What shall we wear?' Rather seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you. Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.
In fact isn't that the Ivy Lee method itself?Let's call it the Jesus Method:Trust in God; pursue what is Good, and don't worry about tomorrow. And today your needs will be met.
15. The Gospel According to the Hebrews
Illustration
William Barclay
There is an apocryphal gospel called "The Gospel According to the Hebrews" most of which is lost; in one of the fragments which remain there is an account of this incident which sheds a little light on its meaning. Here is how that ancient text records this story:
The rich man said to Jesus, "Master, what good thing must I do really to live?" Jesus said to him, "Man, obey the law and the prophets." He said, "I have done so." Jesus said to him, "Go, sell all that you possess, distribute it among the poor, and come, follow me!" The rich man began to scratch his head because he did not like this command. The Lord said to him, Why do you say that you have obeyed the law and the prophets? For it is written in the law, "You must love your neighbor as yourself," and look you there are many brothers of yours, sons of Abraham, who are dying of hunger, and your house is full of many good things, and not one single thing goes out of it to them." And he turned and said to Simon, his Disciple, who was sitting beside him, "Simon, son of Jonas, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven."
There we have the secret and the tragedy of the rich young ruler. He was living utterly selfishly. He was rich, and yet he gave nothing away. His real God was comfort, and what he really worshiped were his own possessions and his wealth. That is why Jesus told him to give it all away.
16. Everything He Says Is True
Illustration
Ray Pritchard & Brett Blair
When you read the story about the Pharisee, a number of specific statements are made about his piety. Please note this. Everything the man says about himself is true. For instance, when he says, "I thank you that I am not like other men," indeed he wasn't like other men. He had a standard of morality that was far above the standard of that day.
- When he said, "I fast twice a week;" it happens to be literally true. The Pharisees fasted on Monday and Thursday of every week.
- When he says, "I give tithes of all I possess," he means he tithes on the gross and not on the net. He went beyond the Law of Moses. That's no big deal; all the Pharisees did that.
- When he says, "I am not a crook," he really isn't a crook.
- When he says, "I am not like this filthy tax collector," he's really not like that guy.
- When he says, "I do not commit adultery," he really doesn't commit adultery. He is faithful to his wife.
- When he says, "I am honest, I am faithful, I am zealous for my religion," he means it and every word of it is true. He truly is a genuinely good man.
What we are to understand is this. When he prayed he was telling the truth. When he said, "Lord, you're lucky to have a guy like me, because I'm one of the best guys I know," it was really true. He really was a wonderful guy.
While he prayed, people would be standing around watching. And they would say, "Yep, he's a fine man." While he prayed, they probably applauded. He was the kind of guy you'd want living next door to you. A good citizen. A law-abiding man. A good, religious kind of person. If he were to come to this church today we'd love him because he would be faithful, loyal, and give us a lot of money. We'd probably make him an elder or a deacon. He's just that kind of guy. He looks really good on the outside. Everything he says about himself is absolutely true.
So what's wrong? Well, for all his goodness he isn't perfect, no one is, and the Law requires perfection. I like to call this narcissistic righteousness. What good is all the law if you don't have love?If you are not reaching out to those around you. If the center of your righteousness is You, you've missed the center. The center is love God and love your neighbor.
17. A Brain, A Heart, A Home, The Nerve
Illustration
Mickey Anders
One of the disadvantages of growing up in a very religious home like I did was that you never knew the end of Sunday night TV movies. When the annual showing of The Wizard Oz came on television every year, I sat through the tornado, saw the house that smashed the wicked witch of the East, and heard the munchkins sing about the yellow brick road. But then just as it got to the exciting parts, my parents announced that it was time for Training Union and Sunday night worship. In spite of all my protests, my parents packed me off to church. I didn't get to see the wizard or learn how Dorothy managed to get back home until I was an adult!
One of my favorite songs in that delightful musical is the one where the scarecrow, the tin man and the lion take turns singing, "If I Only Had…" It's a game that many of us still play today. "If I Only Had…" In the movie, each character had a different need. The scarecrow wanted a brain; the tin man wanted a heart; the lion wanted courage. And through it all Dorothy was looking for a home.
Like us, they were not complete persons. Each one needed something to balance out their personality or their lives. Like us, they seemed to emphasize one part of the personality to the exclusion of another. But it is only when a person develops wholeness that they truly find themselves. Only in wholeness are we at home with ourselves and with God.
Our Scripture passage for today reminded me of the song from the Wizard of Oz. In the text, Jesus makes a reference to the various parts of us in a way very similar to the musical's division of brain, heart, home, and nerve. Jesus says it this way: "Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one; you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength, and you shall love your neighbor as yourself."
18. Truth: The Most Powerful Idea
Illustration
Max Anders
Marilyn vos Savant, the brilliant woman who reportedly has the highest I.Q. ever recorded, writes a syndicated column in which she answers tricky questions from people who want the benefit of her intelligence. Someone wrote to ask what she thought is the most powerful idea. Marilyn vos Savant replied that "truth" was the most powerful idea she knew of, because it is not affected by how we relate to it. Whether or not we know it, or whether or not we agree with it, doesn't matter, because truth is still true.
Ms. vos Savant is right on target. Truth is powerful. You and I believe that truth is from God.
What is the Good News of the Gospel anyway? I believe it can be summed up in three verses: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" (Genesis 1:1); "God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life" (John 3:16), and "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind; and, Love your neighbor as yourself" (Luke 10:27).
You and I may believe this thing and that about Scripture and about life in general, but these three statements are incontrovertible! They are true.
They don't need to be defended; they only need to be lived. There are people in our society who spend too much of their energy and time defending God as if God needed it.
Note:Marilyn vos Savant still has the recorded highest IQ according to Guinness because they have since retired thecategory
19. First, Greatest, and last
Illustration
The first command Jesus gave his discipleswas "Follow me!" The greatest commandment Jesus gave us was "Love the Lord your God and love your neighbor and love each other, too." The last commandment Jesus gave before he was taken from our sight was, "Be my witnesses."
20. A Life of Despair
Illustration
Brett Blair
Two of his daughters and a son-in-law committed suicide. Three of his children died of malnutrition. Marx felt no obligation to earn a living, but instead lived by begging from Engels. He fathered an illegitimate child by his maidservant. He drank heavily. He was a paid informer of the Austrian police, spying on revolutionaries. Though Marx and his wife were poor, he kept investing in the stock market where he constantly lost. His wife left him twice, but returned. When she died, he didn't attend her funeral. His correspondence with Engels was full of obscenities. His favorite daughter, Eleanor, with her father's approval, married Edward Eveling, a man who advocated blasphemy and worshiped Satan. Daughter Eleanor committed suicide, poisoning herself with cyanide. Karl Marx died in despair.
Laura Marx, Karl's other daughter committed suicide together with her husband on25 November 1911. The coupledecided they had nothing left to give to the movement to which they had devoted their lives. Laura was 66 and her husband Paul Lafargue was 69. In their suicide letter, which Paul wrote,they explained why they committed suicide.It reads:
"Healthy in body and mind, I end my life before pitiless old age which has taken from me my pleasures and joys one after another; and which has been stripping me of my physical and mental powers, can paralyse my energy and break my will, making me a burden to myself and to others. For some years I had promised myself not to live beyond 70; and I fixed the exact year for my departure from life. I prepared the method for the execution of our resolution, it was a hypodermic of cyanide acid. I die with the supreme joy of knowing that at some future time, the cause to which I have been devoted for forty-five years will triumph. Long live Communism! Long Live the international socialism!"
Vladimir Lenin was one of the speakers at the funeral. He would later write the following to his wife: "If one cannot work for the Party any longer, one must be able to look truth in the face and die like the Lafargues."
Is it any wonder things ended this way for the Marx family?When you look at the tenets of Marxism, where else would you end up but in despair? Listen to these 10 basic principles:
- Abolition of private property
- A heavy progressiveincome tax.
- Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
- Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
- State control of banks.
- State controlof communication and the press.
- State owned businesses.
- Equal liability of all to work, establishingindustrial armies
- Equal distribution of the populace over the country.
- Combination of education with industrial production.
What is there left to live for? This world would lead to the despair that caused the Marx family to take their lives. They stand in contrast to the Greatest Commandment to love God and love your neighbor and to the admonitionof the Beatitudes. Christianity frees and affirms; Marxism controls and demands. It's life or death isn't it? It's God's offer to the Israelites: I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live
21. Why Must We Carry a Cross? - Sermon Starter
Illustration
Brett Blair
Canpeople change instantly at salvation?Some traditions call it repentance and renewal. Some call it Sanctification of the believer. Whatever you call it most traditions expect some quick fix to sin. According to this belief, when someone gives his or her life to Christ, there is an immediate, substantive, in-depth, miraculous change in habits, attitudes, and character. We go to church as if we are going to the grocery store: Powdered Christians. Just add water and disciples are born not made.
Unfortunately, there is no such powder and disciples of Jesus Christ are not instantly born. They are slowly raised through many trials, suffering, and temptations. A study has found that only 11 percent of churchgoing teenagers have a well-developed faith, rising to only 32 percent for churchgoing adults. Why? Because true life change only begins at salvation, takes more than just time, is about training, trying, suffering, and even dying (adapted from James Emery White, Rethinking the Church, Baker, 1997, p. 55-57).
Peter took Jesus aside and rebuked him. Why? Peter believes the kingdom of God can be obtained instantly by force. Peter has a worldly view of the Kingdom and Jesus is speaking about a heavenly kingdom. For a moment I would like you to listen to this story with new ears and see Jesus through the eyes of Peter and the rest of the disciples. Get rid of all your notions about who Jesus is. Take away from your mind Jesus as the Son of God. Strip from your memory that he died on the Cross and that he did that for your sins. Forget that Jesus ever said love your enemies or love your neighbor.
Now I want you to think of Jesus only as a military leader like Norman Swartscoff. Imagine that your country has been invaded and is being ruled by godless men. Sense, now, that the tension is mounting and you about to go into battle. That you are about to conduct a coup d'etat. That you and this band of ruffians are going to attempt to overthrow this government by a sudden violent strike. That the odds are stacked against you but you have a very strong belief that God is on your side despite the overwhelming odds.
Now you are thinking like Peter. Jesus comes before his disciples and lays out his military strategy. Look at verse 31. Jesus says, "We are going to march into Jerusalem and your General will suffer many things. We are not going to get any help from our Jewish brothers the Elders. Even the Chief Priest and the Saducees will not join us. Our government the Sanhedrin is corrupt and can be of no help to us. We are going it alone and I will die in this battle.
On this day Jesus spoke plainly to his disciples about the events soon to transpire and even though it was plain language it was not plain enough. Peter was not able to shake his understanding of Jesus as his General so he pulls Jesus aside and rebukes him. He says, "Sir, this is not a very good military strategy. You are not going to die, don't say that. It's not good for morale. We are going to be there with you and we will fight to the end and we will throw these godless Romans out of Israel, you will ascend to the throne in place of Herod, and we will be at your right and left hand as the new leaders of Palestine.
It is fascinating to note that just before Jesus rebukes Peter he turns and looks at his disciples. It is as if Jesus is putting two and two together and realizes the disciples have put Peter up to this. It is a perilous moment in the life of Christ. He must dispel this error from their minds and teach them the meaning of his mission. So, he rejects Peter outright calling him a tool of Satan and says, you do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men.
Jesus is up against a formidable foe. And in the end this foe may posses more power then he. But the foe is not Peter and it's not the Sanhedrin or Pontius Pilate, or Rome. This formidable foe is not even Satan himself. The powerful enemy of Jesus is our quest for positions of rank and status.
To address the confusion Jesus pulls his disciples together and brings them before a crowd. And in front of the crowd he corrects the disciples aspirations for privilege, rank, and power and he gives them this simple little directive: You must take up your cross and follow me. This morning I would like to ask the question "Why must we carry a cross?" and give three reasons we must do so. We must carry a cross to remind us that…
- We are not the center of the Universe.
- There are others who suffer and we must fight for justice in the lives of others.
- We are responsible in part for the cross that Jesus carried.
22. Sadness in the Heart of God
Illustration
John Claypool
There is a Jewish parable that both parallels and illumines Jesus' story, and it has helped to clarify my understanding greatly. This one is about a "farmer who lived in Poland. For generations before him, his family had been very poor. One night he was awakened by an angel of the Lord, who said: "You have found favor in the eyes of your Maker. He wants to do for you what he did for your ancestor Abraham. He wants to bless you. Therefore, make any three requests that you will of God, and he will be pleased to give them to you. There is only one condition: your neighbor will get a double portion of everything that is bequeathed to you."
The farmer was startled by this revelation and woke up his wife to tell her all about it. She suggested that they put the whole thing to a test. So they prayed. "Oh, blessed God, if we could just have a herd of a thousand cattle, that would enable us to break out of the poverty in which we have lived for generations. That would be wonderful." No sooner had they said these words than they heard the sound of animal noises outside. Lo and behold, all around the house were a thousand magnificent animals!
During the next two days, the farmer's feet hardly touched the ground. He divided his time between praising God for such great generosity and beginning to make practical provisions for his newly acquired affluence. On the third afternoon, he was up on a hill behind his house trying to decide where to build a new barn when he looked across at his neighbor's field, and there standing on the green hillside were two thousand magnificent cattle. For the first time since the angel of the Lord had appeared, the joy within him evaporated and a scowl of envy took its place. He went home that evening in a foul mood, refused to eat supper, and went to bed in an absolute rage. He could not fall asleep because every time he closed his eyes, all he could see were his neighbor's two thousand cattle.
Deep in the night, however, he remembered that the angel had said he could make three wishes. With that, he shifted his focus away from his neighbor and back to his own situation, and the old joy quickly returned. Digging deep into his own heart to find out what else he really wanted, he began to realize that in addition to some kind of material security, he always wanted descendants to carry his name into the future. So he prayed a second time: "Gracious God, if it please thee, give me a child that I may have descendants." With that, he and his wife made love, and because of his experience with the cattle, he was not too surprised shortly thereafter to learn that she was expecting.
The next months were passed in unbroken joy. The farmer was busy assimilating his newly acquired affluence and looking forward to the great grace of becoming a parent. On the night his first child was born, he was absolutely overjoyed. The next day was the Sabbath. He went to the synagogue, and at the time of the prayers of the people, he stood up and shared with the gathered community his great good fortune: now at last a child had been born into their home. He had hardly sat down, however, when his neighbor got up and said, "God has indeed been gracious to our little community. I had twin sons born last night. Thanks be to God." On hearing that, the farmer went home in an utterly different mood than the one in which he came. Instead of being joyful once again he was filled with the canker of jealousy.
This time, however, his envy did not abate. Late that evening, he made his third request of God: "Please, gouge out my right eye."
No sooner had he said these words than the angel who had initiated the whole process appeared again and asked, "Why, son of Abraham, have you turned to such vengeful desirings?" With pent-up rage, the farmer replied, "I cannot stand to see my neighbor prosper. I'll gladly sacrifice half of my vision for the satisfaction of knowing that he will never be able to look on what he has."
Those words were followed by a long silence, and as the farmer looked, he saw tears forming in the eyes of the angel. "Why, O son of Abraham, have you turned an occasion for blessing into a time of hurting? Your third request will not be granted, not because the Lord lacks integrity, but because God is full of mercy. However, know this, O foolish one, you have brought sadness not only to yourself, but to the very heart of God."
23. Messages From God
Illustration
Brett Blair
A few years ago there were billboards scattered throughout the United States with messages from God. Some guy had purchased the space and conducted an advertising campaign for God. Actually, the person responsible for these "Messages from God" chose to remain anonymous. The Smith Agency in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, launched the advertising campaign in September 1998.
Andrew Smith, the agency's president, said that an individual simply appeared in their office one day and hired them on the spot. He said that their agreement with this individual prohibited them from releasing his name but he did say that the person is quite well known.
These 15 messages signed by God appeared on billboards and buses:
- Let's Meet at My House Sunday Before the Game.--God
- C'mon Over and Bring the Kids.--God
- What Part of "Thou Shalt Not ..." Didn't You Understand?--God
- We Need to Talk.--God
- Keep Using My Name in Vain And I'll Make Rush Hour Longer.--God (This add is placed in congested Urban areas).
- Loved the Wedding, Invite Me to the Marriage.--God
- That "Love Thy Neighbor" Thing, I Meant It.--God
- I Love You ... I Love You ... I Love You.--God
- Will The Road You're on Get You to My Place?--God
- Follow Me.--God
- My Way Is the Highway.--God
- Need Directions?--God
- You Think It's Hot Here?--God (During the Summer)
- Tell the Kids I Love Them.--God
- Have You Read My #1 Best Seller? There Will Be a Test.--God
It's a cute campaign and clever and it would be nice if God actually would spend a little more time advertising his thoughts. But this is the fault in us humans. We want a definitive answer. We want some rules to go by and we want to be told how to behave and what we should do. The Ten Commandments do this for us but we slowly found out --through centuries and centuries of countless sins and human atrocities--that we were not able to abide by them, not perfectly.
So what is God to do? Take out an add campaign on our city buses and billboards? No, I don't think so. Instead he does something very different. He says, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased." What a difference! Instead of rules written on tablets, buses, and billboards, he says, "I'd like to introduce you to someone special. Here, I want you to meet my son. I love him a great deal. I am so proud of him."
What do you do about that? It's one thing to forget a commandment. It's quite another to slam the door in the face of relative.
24. The Complexity of the Situation
Illustration
The Constitution of the United States started off with only 7 articles and 21 sections that took up only four handwritten pages including signatures! 4 pages! But to that we added 27 amendments.
Today, the United States Code, which is all of the laws in this country, fills up around 80 volumes of books, nearly 800,000 pages, and this doesn't even include the Federal Regulations. In 1942, the Virginia Code was a single book that had 2800 pages. Today, the Virginia Code is a 25-volume set of books with 15,000 pages, nearly 20,000 separate laws! And that is just Virginia!
But, let's not think for a moment that we are the only ones to take something simple and make it complex. God gave the Israelites something simple to follow, the Ten Commandments. Just ten simple rules to follow. Nothing complex about it. But were the Israelites content with just ten commandments? Oh, no. They ended up making 613 separate commandments, 365 negative and 248 positive. Sounds like a lot doesn't it? Try following all those laws in order to be considered faithful and righteous, and you probably thought the original ten was hard enough.
For the lawyer and the Pharisees there was certainly a complex issue at stake. The Israelites were under assault from a man who claimed to be God, and who did God-like things. But this man was a Jew; he should have known better, no one is God, but God. Yet, he was a man who knew and quoted the Hebrew scripture, who knew the laws and commandments better than any religious leader.
The Pharisees had to put a stop to it, the situation was getting out of control, it was becoming too complex to let it go on much longer. This man must be stopped and the only why to stop him was to discredit him. And what better way to discredit Jesus, the Jew, than to ask him such a question, on a complex issue about the greatest commandment, that any answer he gave would spell defeat.
25. Wouldn’t It Be Great?
Illustration
David Beckett
Wouldn't it be great if I won a million dollars? Well, maybe it wouldn't be so great. Not everyone has the same idea of a great time. One person's wish may be another's nightmare. Take, for example, the story of three men who were sailing together in the Pacific Ocean. Their vessel was wrecked and they found themselves on an island. They had plenty of food, but their existence was in every way different from what their lives had been in the past. The men were walking by the seashore one day after they had been there for some months and found an ancient lantern. One man picked it up. As he began to rub it and clean it, a genie popped out and said, "Well, since you have been good enough to release me, I will give each of you one wish."
The first man said, "Oh, that's perfectly marvelous. I'm a cattleman from Wyoming and I wish I were back on my ranch." Poof! He was back on his ranch.
The second man said, "Well, I'm a stockbroker from New York, and I wish that I were back in Manhattan." Poof! He was back in Manhattan with his papers, his telephones, his clients and his computers.
The third fellow was somewhat more relaxed about life and actually had rather enjoyed life there on the island. He said, "Well, I am quite happy here. I just wish my two friends were back." Poof! Poof! Everybody's idea of a "great time" isn't the same!
So is it true? Are many Americans sitting around wishing, "Now wouldn't it be great ...if I won the lottery...if I had my dream house...if I was famous...." As Christians...as the people of God...what if instead of wishing for money or fame or success or more "things," we could just as earnestly wish with all our hearts and souls and minds and strength that we could love the Lord our God and love our neighbor as ourselves?
26. Building Bridges
Illustration
Staff
Once upon a time two brothers who lived on adjoining farms fell into conflict. It was the first serious rift in 40 years in farming side by side, sharing machinery, and trading labor and goods as needed without a hitch. Then the long collaboration fell apart. It began with a small misunderstanding and it grew into a major difference, and finally it exploded into an exchange of bitter words followed by weeks of silence.
One morning there was a knock on John's door. He opened it to find a man with a carpenter's toolbox. "I'm looking for a few days work," he said. "Perhaps you would have a few small jobs here and there. Could I help you?"
"Yes," said the older brother. "I do have a job for you. Look across the creek at that farm. That's my neighbor, in fact, it's my younger brother. Last week there was a meadow between us and he took his bulldozer to the river levee and now it is a creek between us. Well, he may have done this to spite me, but I'll go him one better. See that pile of lumber curing by the barn? I want you to build me a fence an 8-foot fence so I won't need to see his place anymore. Cool him down anyhow."
The carpenter said, "I think I understand the situation. Show me the nails and the post hole digger and I'll be able to do a job that pleases you." The older brother had to go to town for supplies, so he helped the carpenter get the materials ready and then he was off for the day. The carpenter worked hard all that day measuring, sawing, nailing.
About sunset when the farmer returned, the carpenter had just finished his job. The farmer's eyes opened wide, his jaw dropped. There was no fence there at all. It was a bridge, a bridge stretching from one side of the creek to the other. A fine piece of work handrails and all and the neighbor, his younger brother, was coming across, his hand outstretched. "You are quite a fellow to build this bridge after all I've said and done." The two brothers stood at each end of the bridge and then they met in the middle, took each other's hand. They turned to see the carpenter hoist his toolbox on his shoulder, "No wait, stay a few days. I've a lot of other projects for you," said the older brother.
"I'd love to stay on," the carpenter said, "but, I have otherbridges to build."
27. He Made Me Whole
Illustration
Keith Wagner
Alfred Adler (1870-1937) was one of the early contributors to the field of counseling. He believed that people are social creatures and we need interaction with one another to survive. He stressed our responsibility for others and held to the religious principle of "Love thy neighbor." Adler believed that the social environment, especially the one that a person is raised in, affects their personality. A lack of human contact and interaction will make it difficult for an individual to have healthy relationships and can result in the person having an inferiority complex.
For Adler, a "malajusted" child is not a sick child, but a very discouraged one. When a person suffers from discouragement, they need love, hope and encouragement. They need to be "touched" by other human beings. In other words, anyone who is isolated from the community in which they live will not only feel inferior but could even develop certain neuroses. Thus they are labeled "sick." Alfred Adler believed that people needed to be "touched" and included socially to develop healthy lives. His theory was in direct opposition to Sigmund Freud's, which was popular at that time. But, Adler believed in a different approach and introduced an entirely new concept, one that requires a loving contact between us humans.
You may wonder why this was so important to Adler. When Adler was a small child he was very clumsy and children often made fun of him. He developed "rickets" at an early age, another one of those despicable diseases during the 19th century. As a child he once contracted pneumonia and almost died. He spent much of his early years isolated from his peers. Because of his lack of coordination and weak condition he was run over by a horse and wagon, not once but twice.
Adler understood the need to be touched. Fortunately for him, his parents were extremely supportive and very social people. With their help, not to mention their faith, Adler was able to rise above his situation and encourage his followers to do the same. Like the man in our story, he too could say, "He touched me," and made me whole.
28. BE DIFFERENT!
Illustration
John H. Krahn
I am told that some people in Massachusetts organized what they called an Apathy Club. The club has no dues, holds no meetings, elects no officers, takes no stand on anything, and makes no contributions of any kind to anything. Does that sound like something you would like? Forget it! If you are interested, that shows you are not qualified for membership.
Some people lead a life worthy of an organization like this. But the Apathy Club is not a viable choice for the Christian. Those who are willing to put their hand in the hand of the Man from Galilee must also be willing to get involved in the Father’s world.
Jesus’ message was profoundly simple. If you have two coats and meet a chap with none, give him one of them. Consider first your own faults before trying to change the other fellow’s shortcomings. If someone asks you to give him a hand with something, do twice as much as is expected of you. Say a prayer for those you find difficult to love. Jesus was different!
Christianity is an action word. The Christian has no choice but to get involved with another’s suffering. You must not be like Charlie Brown of the Peanuts comic strip who concludes, "There’s no problem so big that you can’t run away from it." Instead realize that your neighbor’s misery needs your company.
In his novel, Too Late the Phalarope, Alan Paton begins with the painful words, "Perhaps I could have saved him, with only a word, two words, out of my mouth. Perhaps I could have saved us all, but I never spoke them." Such a commentary should never be written about the Christian. You must be different.
29. Give Me Jesus
Illustration
King Duncan
Dr. Paul Wee, a staff member of the Lutheran World Federation, recalls standing at the bedside of dying archbishop, Janis Matulis, of Latvia. A visitor had just sung, at Matulis' request, an old spiritual with the words, "Oh, when I am alone, when I am alone, give me Jesus." Matulis then asked those around his bed:
"Do you know why this song means so much to me? Three times war passed over Latvia, killing two-fifths of our people. They burned down my church and destroyed Bibles and hymnals. They took away my wife, and I never saw her again. When it was all gone, I realized that I had nothing else in this world but Jesus Christ. [That realization] was like a breath of freedom. From that moment on, I learned how to use whatever came my way--little bits of medicine left over, a piece of coal, apples, spices--so that somehow the sacrament of God's love would be shared with the larger community because of Jesus Christ."
That's what happens when we love God with all our heart, soul, and mind, and love our neighbor as ourselves. We come to a new understanding of who Christ is.
30. Act Like You Mean It
Illustration
In his book Mere Christianity, C.S. Lewis wrote, "Do not waste your time bothering whether you 'love' your neighbor; act as if you did. As soon as we do this, we find one of the great secrets. When you are behaving as if you loved someone, you will presently come to love him. If you injure someone you dislike, you will find yourself disliking him more. If you do him a good turn, you will find yourself disliking him less."
31. The Strong, Saving Love
Illustration
Cathy A. Ammlung
I think it was Charlie Brown who said, "I love humanity! It is people I can't stand!" Yet the costly love that Jesus embodies involves an intimate encounter with God's fierce and holy love. It involves pouring out self for real people, sinners all, with all their real-life quirks, faults, smells, and flesh-and-blood sins.
That harried young mother in the doctor's waiting room (or maybe the next pew): perhaps loving her as yourself means offering to watch the toddler while she feeds the baby. That person in line at the bank who's stumbling over the English language and struggling to understand deposits and withdrawals: could loving him mean stepping out of line and helping him get it straight? That next-door neighbor struggling to keep his marriage together, that daughter who pushes your buttons every ten minutes, that husband scared of being laid off these are the ones who desperately need the strong saving love, the compassion and mercy, the challenge and holiness and presence of Jesus. In those moments, dare to risk being rebuffed or inconvenienced. Dare to look foolish and make mistakes. Dare to love God and that person, even if it wrings your heart with pain to do so. It's what we've been created, redeemed, and commanded to do. Hang your whole life on love, for the truth is, it's God's love, active in you. And his love will never fail.
32. Undistracted and Committed
Illustration
Tim Zingale
There's a legend of a king who had one beautiful daughter. She had many offers of marriage, but she couldn't make up her mind. A romantic girl, she wanted a man who would love her more than he loved anything else.
Finally, she devised a way to test the love of her suitors. An announcement was made and sent throughout the kingdom that on a certain day, there would be a race. The winner of the race would marry the princess. The race was open to every man in the kingdom, regardless of his position. All that was required was that the man had to profess to love the princess more than he loved anything else.
On the chosen day, men rich and poor gathered for the race. Each professed wholehearted love for the princess. They gathered at the starting line, prepared to run the course of many miles that had been marked for the race. Each man was told that the princess waited at the finish line. Whoever reached her first could take her as his bride.
Just before the race was to begin, an announcement was made. The king, they were reminded, was a wealthy man with treasures gathered from all over the world. Not wanting any man to run in vain, it was announced, the king had liberally scattered some of his finest treasures along the course. Each runner was welcome to take as many as he liked.
The race was begun. Almost immediately, the runners began to come across great gems and bags of gold. There were necklaces and pendants and jewel encrusted cups and swords and knives. One by one, the runners, princes and paupers alike, turned aside to fill their pockets and carry off what treasures they could. Blinded by the immediate promise of wealth, they forgot the princess and all their professions of love.
All except one! He pressed on, ignoring what to him were trinkets when compared to incomparable beauty of the princess and the prospect of gaining her hand in marriage, finally crossing the finish line.
That is the way temptation works. It places things in our path meant to blind our eyes to the kind of life God wants us to live.
With God’s grace we can learn to avoid temptation, we can learn to walk away from those things that would be gods in our life. With God’s grace, we can keep our focus on Him and the love we have for Him. With God’s grace, we can turn to loving our neighbor. We can learn to love others instead of loving ourselves.
33. Love of Enemies
Illustration
Joyce Hollyday
Sarah Corson, a founder of Servant in faith and Technology (SIFAT) in Alabama, was on a mission in theSouth American jungles to set up an agricultural project in a village where she and her husband had earlier started a church and built a fish hatchery. She was with seventeen young people, including two of her sons. One Thursday night, around midnight, thirty soldiers rushed toward the house where they were all staying. Sarah was paralyzed with shock as the soldiers stormed over the clearing leading to the house. She remembered with fear that earlier that day, a neighbor had overheard a conversation near the military camp in which soldiers had blamed Americans for recent resistance to a military takeover of the country. The soldiers had vowed to exterminate all Americans in the region.
Sarah Corson prepared to die. But as the soldiers approached, she found herself offering them warm words of welcome. The commander shoved his rifle against her stomach and pushed her into the house. The soldiers began pulling everything off the shelves and out of drawers. Sarah calmly explained that she and the others were there only to set up projects and teach the Bible. The commander, stating that he had never read the Bible, said, 'Maybe it is a communist book, for all I know.' Sarah asked him to let her talk about it.
While he kept his gun pointed at her and the other soldiers continued ransacking the house, Sarah opened a Spanish Bible the Sermon on the Mount. She read about Jesus' command to love one's enemies.
'That's humanly impossible!' the commander shouted.
'That's true, sir,' she answered. 'It isn't humanly possible, but with God's help it is possible.' She challenged him to let her prove it by killing her slowly: 'Cut me to pieces little by little, and you will see you cannot make me hate you. I will die praying for you because God loves you.'
The commander lowered his gun and stepped back. Then he ordered everyone in the house to march to a truck. But before they reached the truck, he turned around and led the women back to the house. He told Sarah that the women would be raped repeatedly in the jungle camp, so he could not take them there. He also told her that this was the first time he had disobeyed an order from a superior officer-and that he would pay with his life if he were found out. He said as he left, 'I could have fought any mount of guns you might have had, but there is something here I cannot understand. I cannot fight it.'
The village waited in agony for word of the men who had been taken. The local people insisted that the church service not be held on Sunday, because soldiers considered any gathering a source of political agitation. But on Saturday night, a messenger arrived with word from the commander of the attack that he would be in church on Sunday. He wanted Sarah to come and get him; if she did not, he would walk the ten miles. It sounded to Sarah like a threat. She sent a message throughout the town that night. 'We will have the service after all,' she said, 'but you are not obligated to come. In fact you may lose your life by coming. No one knows what this solider will do. Do not come when the church bell rings unless you are sure God wants you to come.'
Sarah picked up the commander and his bodyguard at the military camp. Holding their rifles they marched coldly into the church and sat down. The church was packed before the first hymn was over. The people came in fear and trembling, but they came.
It was the church custom to welcome visitors by inviting them to the platform, singing a welcome song, and waving to them. Then the congregation would line up to shake the visitors' hands, embrace them, and offer a personal greeting. Sarah decided only to offer the commander and his bodyguard the song. Stunned to be invited up front, the two soldiers stood with their guns across their backs. The people sang weakly and waved timidly. But then, the first man on the front seat came forward and put out his hand. As he bent over to hug the soldiers, Sarah overheard him saying, 'Brother, we don't like what you did to our village, but this is the house of God, and God loves you, so you are welcome here.' Every person in the church followed his example, even the women whose eyes were red from weeping for their loved ones whom the commander had taken prisoner.
The commander was incredulous. He marched to the pulpit and said, 'Never have I dreamed that I could raid a town, come back, and have that town welcome me as a brother.' Pointing to Sarah, he said, 'That sister told me Thursday night that Christians love their enemies, but I did not believe her then. You have proven it to me this morning. . . I never believed there was a God before, but what I have just felt is so strong that I will never doubt the existence of God as long as I live.'
The commander stayed for lunch with the congregation and offered money from his own pocket to parishioners who had loved ones taken away. Two weeks later, all of the men who had been taken were released from the basem*nt cell where they had been imprisoned and some had been tortured.
Sarah Corson was overcome with gratitude to God for putting divine love in her heart for a person she could not love on her own. She remembers the last words the commander said to her: 'I have fought many battles and killed many people. It was nothing to me. It was just my job to exterminate them. But I never knew them personally. This is the first time I ever knew my enemy face to face. And I believe that if we knew each other, our guns would not be necessary.'"
Note: the full story can be found here -https://sifat.org/pdfs/Welcoming_the_Enemy.pdf
34. WASHED ANY FEET LATELY?
Illustration
John H. Krahn
As Jesus and his disciples gathered in the upper room, something seemed to be wrong. Although it is not explicitly stated in the narrative, we can surmise what it might have been. But first let us set the stage. In the Lord’s day when people gathered for a meal, it was the slave’s duty to wash the people’s feet before the meal began. The Lord and his disciples were poor; therefore the disciples probably took turns washing off the dust of the roads from the sandaled feet of the little brotherhood. Normally they did it willingly as a matter of course. But tonight, all of them sat stubbornly in their places and would have none of the menial duty. Perhaps on their journey to the upper room they continued to argue with each other as to whom would have the position of honor when Jesus ushered in the kingdom of God. Perhaps with ruffled tempers and with sore feelings, they trooped into the upper room like a group of sulking schoolboys, not one among them willing to see the pitcher and basin and towel set out for their use. And so, for once, the customary little courtesy was not carried out, and they began their meal with feet still travel-stained. An uncompromising spirit prevailed.
Wanting to clear the air and cleanse this childishness out of their hearts, the Lord took the role of the servant, rose and carried through his dramatic action. The disciples were shocked, as clearly demonstrated by Peter’s challenging the appropriateness of the Lord’s action. In the foot washing, Jesus demonstrated his earlier words spoken just before he entered into Jerusalem, "Whoever would be great among you must be your servant ... even as the Son of man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."
Have you washed any feet lately? I am not referring to your own, although good personal hygiene is laudable. Have you been like the Lord, humbled yourself and done an act of servanthood that was uncalled for, unexpected, yet very Christlike? An act like shoveling the sidewalk of a neighbor who often lets his dog run all over your property. An act like continuing to speak well of someone who constantly knifes you in the back. Continuing to love your kids when they do things that make you dislike them. Coming to the church to help paint twice in one week when you notice that many of your fellow parishioners did not care enough to pitch in once. It means giving the extra needed ... be it forgiveness, monetary offerings, service, or what have you ... because you have been touched by Jesus and have felt his love for you.
The Lord of the universe has knelt at our feet, has been our slave, our brother, our friend, and our salvation. Are any of us better than he? Are we more important than he? Should our knees be deprived of the opportunity of touching the floor in order that we can also be in a position to do a little foot washing?
35. Why Do You Wear that Battered Cloak?
Illustration
Don Schwager
When a young 4th century Roman soldier and seeker of the Christian faith by the name of Martin of Toursmet an unclothed man begging for alms in the freezing cold, he stopped and cut his coat in two and gave half to the stranger. That night he dreamt he saw the heavenly court with Jesus robed in a torn cloak. One of the angels present asked, "Master, why do you wear that battered cloak?" Jesus replied, "My servant Martin gave it to me."
Martin's disciple and biographer Sulpicius Severus states that as a consequence of this vision Martin "flew to be baptized". God is gracious and merciful; his love compels us to treat others with mercy and kindness. When we do something for one of Christ's little ones, we do it for Christ. Do you treat your neighbor with mercy and love as Christ has treated you?
36. The Greatest Law
Illustration
Maxie Dunnam
Dick Hyman is a newspaper feature columnist who writes humorously about laws that are still on the books but outrageously irrelevant. For instance, did you know that in Waterloo, Nebraska, barbers are forbidden by law to eat onions between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m.? In Kentucky, there is a state law that orders all citizens to take a bath at least once a year.
All these laws seem ridiculous to us now. We laugh at them because it’s foolish to keep laws which have long outlived their usefulness. But have you thought lately about that law which will never be outdated? Jesus said it was the greatest law: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength, and your neighbor as yourself.”
If we lived by this twin-pronged law of Jesus, we would not have to legislate in so many areas of life.
37. The Disposition and the Dinner Table
Illustration
"I like to eat at your table," said the young lad. "Somehow the food always tastes better."
"We are always glad to have you with us," said the neighbor lady.
Even the same foods at home don't taste quite as good," effervesced Jerry. "The things you say with what you eat at your table make everything taste better."
Many lessons of life are learned at the dinner table. Not only the food we eat physically but the spiritual food we eat adds beauty to life or may give indigestion.
Solomon said, "The parents have eaten sour grapes and set the children's teeth on edge."
Everywhere Christian leaders, preachers and teachers are needed. The opportunity is great but the laborers are few.
Be sure your meal table breeds optimism, faith and love for God's kingdom. Don't be lazy in your religious endeavors. Don't be easily offended in a good cause.
You may send forth lazy children or real workers for righteousness. Children do reflect their parents. What disposition is developed at your dinner table?
38. The Paradox of Our Time
Illustration
Jeff Dickson
The paradox of our time in history is that:
We have taller buildings but shorter tempers, wider freeways, but narrower viewpoints.
We spend more, but have less. We buy more, but enjoy less.
We have bigger houses and smaller families, more conveniences, but less time.
We have more degrees but less sense, more knowledge, but less judgment, more experts, yet more problems, more medicine, but less wellness.
We drink too much, smoke too much, spend too recklessly, laugh too little, drive too fast, get too angry, stay up too late, get up too tired, read too little, watch TV too much, and pray too seldom.
We have multiplied our possessions, but reduced our values.
We talk too much, love too seldom, and hate too often.
We've learned how to make a living, but not a life. We've added years to life not life to years!
We've been all the way to the moon and back, but have trouble crossing the street to meet a new neighbor.
We've done larger things, but not better things.
We've cleaned up the air, but polluted the soul.
We've conquered the atom, but not our prejudice.
We write more, but learn less.
We plan more, but accomplish less.
We've learned to rush, but not to wait.
We build more computers to hold more information, to produce more copies than ever, but we communicate less and less.
39. Little By Little Love
Illustration
Staff
Fred Craddock says that we have a glorified version of consecration. The problem is it's a lot more practical than we'd liek to think. He spoke of it this way:
"To give my life for Christ appears glorious," he said. "To pour myself out for others. . . to pay the ultimate price of martyrdom I'll do it. I'm ready, Lord, to go out in a blaze of glory. "We think giving our all to the Lord is like taking $l,000 bill and laying it on the table 'Here's my life, Lord. I'm giving it all.' But the reality for most of us is that he sends us to the bank and has us cash in the $l,000 for quarters. We go through life putting out 25 cents here and 50 cents there. Listen to the neighbor kid's troubles instead of saying, 'Get lost.' Go to a committee meeting. Give a cup of water to a shaky old man in a nursing home. Usually giving our life to Christ isn't glorious. It's done in all those little acts of love, 25 cents at at time. It would be easy to go out in a flash of glory; it's harder to live the Christian life little by little over the long haul."
40. Virtue in Anxious Times
Illustration
Paul J. Wadell
Anxiety's central message is that we cannot afford to share because we can never have enough. Put more strongly, in a culture marked by anxiety and fear, the very things we have traditionally called sins or vices (hoarding, greed, suspicion) become wise and prudent virtues. Fear, rather than love, governs our lives. But such fear is a kind of idolatry because it suggests we are giving more attention to our own security than we are giving to God. As Scott Bader-Saye warns, "the ethic of security produces a skewed moral vision. It suggests that suspicion, preemption, and accumulation are virtues insofar as they help us feel safe. But when seen from a Christian perspective, such ‘virtues' fail to be true virtues, since they do not orient us to the true good—love of God and neighbor. In fact, they turn us away from the true good, tempting us to love safety more than we love God."
The "human way out" of the despair of our age is through hospitality because a person well practiced in Christian hospitality chooses love over fear, trust over suspicion, and even risk over security.
41. Heaven Sent
Illustration
Angela Akers
According to a news story in USA Today some time back, a woman in California found a package on her doorstep that contained a car key and a note. The note quoted Bible verses and ended with these words, “This is a gift for you because I love you.” It was signed, “An angel of the Lord.”
In her driveway the woman found an almost new car. It was just what she needed to replace her unreliable, twenty-year-old automobile. A neighbor child asked, “Did God just drop the car down from heaven?” That would be scary.
The woman’s answer was not reported, but she did hang a poster on her garage that said, “THANK YOU, GOD.”
Mark DeHaan shares this woman’s story in the devotional book Bless the Lord, O My Soul. He writes, “Putting up that sign didn’t mean the woman actually thought the car had fallen out of the sky without touching human hands. But notice that her sign did not say, “THANK YOU, MY ANONYMOUS FRIEND.”
“She was acknowledging that all things ultimately come from God.”[1]
1. 365 Devotions for Prayer and Worship. Our Daily Bread Ministries, Our Daily Bread Publishing. Kindle Edition.
42. Parable of Giants and Pygmies
Illustration
The writer of "Gulliver's Travels" was able to criticize the pettiness of the king's court by making himself a giant on the shores of a little kingdom.
The Lilliputians were able to capture the sleeping giant by putting thousands of threads as their cables that pegged him down to earth.
As the giant he was able to see the selfishness and ridiculous behavior of petty people in big places.
Perhaps the writer was unaware of the parallel of truth found in the fact that a giant may be pegged down to earth and made prisoner by thousands of little habits which imprison great men.
God has made everyone of His children with tremendous possibilities, but so many of us let our lives be imprisoned by countless time-consuming activities that are of no consequence.
We are meant to serve Almighty God and the heavenly kingdom, but we often are expended in ways of social security.
The measure of a Christian man is not how large he may be physically or socially, but whether he is able to be big about his daily life. Qualities of a great spirit are the ability to forgive, the ability to be generous and the ability to be helpful.
The youth in their scouting days learn laws of greatness but as we move toward adulthood many are caught in the tiny threads of social fallacy. The ways of man and of God can be vastly different.
Can you forgive your neighbor? Can you love your enemy? Have you room for new ideas? Are you a spiritual giant or a pygmy?
43. Chip It Away!
Illustration
James W. Moore
There is a story about a man who had a huge boulder in his front yard. He grew weary of this big, unattractive stone in the center of his lawn, so he decided to take advantage of it and turn it into an object of art. He went to work on it with hammer and chisel, and chipped away at the huge boulder until it became a beautiful stone elephant. When he finished, it was gorgeous, breath-taking.
A neighbor asked, "How did you ever carve such a marvelous likeness of an elephant?"
The man answered, "I just chipped away everything that didn't look like an elephant!"
If you have anything in your life right now that doesn't look like love, then, with the help of God, chip it away! If you have anything in your life that doesn't look like compassion or mercy or empathy, then, with the help of God, chip it away! If you have hatred or prejudice or vengeance or envy in your heart, for God's sake, and the for the other person's sake, and for your sake, get rid of it! Let God chip everything out of your life that doesn't look like tenderheartedness.
44. What Kind of a Kingdom has Jesus?
Illustration
Andrew Daughters
What kind of a Kingdom has Jesus? No castle nor palace has he. No congress nor parliament sitting, deciding what laws there will be. Perhaps he has need of but two laws: Love God and your neighbor as well. To obey them is all that is needed, as all of the saintly can tell.
He has neither army nor navy, no air force to guard the frontiers to keep out the strangers unwanted and maintain the enemy's fears. Immigration he seems to encourage, of some quite disreputable, like fishermen, publicans, sinners. To such he is hospitable.
It seems there's no revenue service or taxes we must calculate. He surely cannot run a kingdom on what we put into the plate! No 1040 form comes in April to fill out before the fifteenth, with penalties charged for nonpayment, beginning upon the sixteenth.
No currency's here with his picture, no coinage engraved with his name. And where are the posters and slogans proclaiming his power and fame? And I see no trappings of kingship, no robes made of velvet and fur, no crown made of gold set with diamonds, to befit our supreme arbiter.
Jesus said that his kingdom was really not what Pilate had thought it had been. It was not of this world. And its glory was not of the kind to be seen. For those of us here in his kingdom, there is one other thing we have known: of the kingdoms around in his lifetime, it's the only one left with a throne.
45. Put God First
Illustration
Kristin Borsgard Wee
Some of us grew up watching the afternoon television program, "Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood." Others of us may be reluctant to admit that we sat down with our children and watched it too. I think Mr. Rogers exemplified in a gentle way what Jesus wanted to teach us about love and what it means to value each other. When Mr. Rogers changed into his sweater and took off his shoes, it was a biblical gesture of self-emptying humility and a welcome to all of us in TV land. Then he sang the litany we loved to hear, "It's a beautiful day in this neighborhood, a beautiful day for a neighbor, would you be mine? Could you be mine? Would you be my neighbor?" Even Mr. McFeely, the postal carrier, went around from house to house making a neighborhood out of what would have been a bunch of separate houses divided by hedges and picket fences. The family values we saw in Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood were courtesy,kindness, and curiosity. In one episode, Mr. Rogers took us to a sneaker factory where there was an assembly line of workers. He watched one woman working, and he wondered out loud if she ever thought about the people who would wear the shoes she made. The values of Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood came right through that television screen and into our family room. That woman making sneakers became my neighbor, as well as the unknown people buying the shoes she made.
You and I may differ on definitions of family and what constitutes family values, but we all know, we can learn something indispensable from Jesus. He teaches us to put God first. When you fall back into the habit of loving flesh and blood more than God, don't worry too much. God is always at work redeeming and expanding our earth-bound loves to make them heaven-sent.
46. When You Insult Your Neighbor, You Are Insulting God
Illustration
King Duncan
We need to so fill our hearts and our minds with the love of God that there is no room for hatred and resentment of others.
Robert A. Schuller, young Robert, tells of getting into an argument with his older sister when he was eight. "You're a pig!" he screamed when she refused to give him one of his own toys. Their dad, television preacher Robert H. Schuller, heard what was going on. He came into the room and said to young Bob, "Robert, don't you ever call your sister a pig again."
"But, Dad, she is!" he objected.
"If you call her a pig, Robert, you're calling me a pig, too!" said the older Schuller. Young Bob had to think about that for a while. He certainly didn't think his dad was a pig. His father could tell that he didn't fully understand what he was saying. "Robert, if your sister is a pig, then I'm a pig. She is my child! I can't have a pig for a child unless I'm a pig. When you insult your sister, you're insulting me, too. When you mock or belittle yourself, you're doing the same thing to me. You're my son.
"The same thing is true for you and God or for your brothers and sisters in the human race and God. When you belittle yourself, you're belittling God. When you insult your neighbor, you're insulting God." Young Robert said he never forgot that lesson.
It's a lesson all of us need to learn. Can't we all get along? We can if each of us will open our hearts to the love of Jesus Christ.
47. Listen for the Questions
Illustration
Joel D. Kline
The Scriptures include a significant number of life-and-death questions about meaning, purpose and value in life. Consider some of the questions posed by Scripture:
- What will it profit us if we gain the whole world but forfeit our life? (Matthew 16:26)
- Who do you say that I am? (Matthew 16:15)
- What are you looking for? (John 1:38)
- Who is my neighbor? (Like 10:29)
- What must I do to inherit eternal life? (Mark 10:17)
- Who can separate us from the love of Christ? (Romans 8:35)
- Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with? (Mark 10:38)
- Which commandment is the first of all? (Mark 12:28)
- Where can I go from your Spirit? (Psalm 139:7).
- What is this new teaching, with authority? (Mark 1:27)
- Who is this about whom I hear such things? (Luke 9:9)
- What is truth? (John 18:38)
And this morning's Gospel lesson ends with the question, "Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey him?" Who is this Jesus, the one who speaks with a new level of authority, the one who is able to bring calm into the storms of life, the one who comes among us as prince of peace, suffering servant, fount of compassion and grace?
48. A Matter of Excess
Illustration
Larry Powell
Before commentingdirectly about Mark 6:30-44, allow me to direct your attention to two Old Testament stories.
1. The first story is found in 2 Kings 4:1-7 and concerns the widow of a prophet whose creditors were about to foreclose her outstanding debt. Additionally, her two sons were to be carried away as slaves. Beside herself, the widow cried out to Elisha for help. Elisha asked her if she had anything in the house of value which might be sold to provide money toward the debt. "Only a partially filled jar of oil," she answered. Elisha surprisingly instructed her to go throughout the community collecting jars to be filled with her oil. We are probably safe to assume that if she did not feel rather foolish, there is a good chance her sons did. Here she went, gathering empty jars to hold the little bit of oil which did not nearly fill the jar it was in. When it was all said and done however, there was more oil than jars to put it in, enough money was available to pay the creditor, and the excess was sufficient for the widow and her boys to live on.
2. The other story is also found in 2 Kings and again deals with excess. A man brought Elisha twenty loaves of barley bread and was instructed by the prophet to feed a rather sizeable gathering. The man asked, "How can I feed 100 men with only twenty loaves of bread?" To make a long story short, let’s read the conclusion of the account: "Then he set it before them and they ate and had some left over" (2 Kings 4:42-44).
The account in Mark 6:30-44 bears striking similarities to the incidents mentioned above, especially the latter. For this reason, the feeding of the 5,000 is understood by many to be Jesus’ confirmation that his ministry was in the prophetic tradition of Elisha and under the authority of God. That is one way to interpret the miracle.
Another explanation was offered years ago by the distinguished Christian, Albert Schweitzer, who believed that the feeding of the 5,000 was an "eschatological sacrament" which was in fact a foretaste, or preview, of the greater feast to be held in the approaching Kingdom of God.
Of course, the simplest explanation is that Jesus was addressing a specific need at a specific time, and that that is the whole of it. However, let us not overlook the emphasis that Mark places upon the miracles of Christ as signs of his authority. We would perhaps be well within the mark to accept all three possibilities as legitimate.
I particularly like the quantity measure in the Elisha stories, the feeding of the 5,000 and other incidents throughout the Scriptures. The provisions were not merely sufficient for the immediate need, but always resulted in excess. Surely that must suggest something to us of the mind of God. His grace and love are more than sufficient for our needs.
49. The Real Meaning of Christmas
Illustration
The late columnist, Sydney Harris, put his finger on the real meaning of Christmas when he wrote that the real meaning can be summed up in two sentences from Jesus' lips: "If anyone says 'I love God' and hates his neighbor, he is a liar." John 4:20 and "Inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these, you did it to me." Matthew 25:40.
He went on to say, "You cannot love God without loving every fellow creature He made; and an act of contempt or rejection or injustice or neglect towards the least, the lowest, the weakest, the dumbest, the poorest, is an act against Him."
50. Every Man Our Neighbor
Illustration
John Wesley
Let us go and do likewise, regarding every man as our neighbor who needs our assistance. Let us renounce that bigotry and party-zeal which would contract our hearts into an insensibility for all the human race, but a small number whose sentiments and practices are so much our own, that our love to them is but self-love reflected. With an honest openness of mind, let us always remember the kindred between man and man; and cultivate that happy instinct whereby, in the original constitution of our nature, God has strongly bound us to each other.
Showing
1
to
50
of
144
results
- Cliques, exclusion top reasons Americans aren't getting more involved in their churches: survey
- Megachurch pastor to pay ex-wife $12K per month in alimony after 33 years of marriage
- This week in Christian history: All-Russian Church Council opens, James Strong born
- Nicaragua exiles 7 priests amid new wave of detentions targeting Catholic leaders
- 5 things to know about Tim Walz's faith, church and the ELCA
- Sydney McLaughlin-Levrone credits God after doing what no woman has done before: 'Let me be the vessel'
- Worship artist Kim Walker-Smith on why she took a break from music, how God inspired her to return
- Rwanda shuts down thousands of churches after failed inspections
- UMC says 'several hundred' Nigerian churches will stay in denomination despite LGBT affirmation
- Is Trump the candidate who best represents a Christian worldview? 'Politics in the Pews' podcast explores
- The Olympics’ Most Iconic Photo Has a Christian Message
- Died: Doris Brougham, Missionary Who Taught English to Taiwan
- Walz’s Brand Is More Left than Lutheran Among Minnesota Evangelicals
- Why Changes to India’s Colonial Criminal Code Concern Christians
- Gordon College Loses Religious Liberty Case for Loan Forgiveness
- Yes, Fiji Olympians Are Singing Hymns
- Churches Find a Homelessness Solution in Their Own Backyards
- Venezuelan Churches Brace for Migration Wave After Disputed Maduro Election
- Black Christian Leaders Find Hope with Kamala Harris
- Choctaw Bibles Connect Christians with Native American Heritage
- Ancient Babylonian Tablets Are Finally Deciphered. They’re Full of Bad News
- 9 Facts About Tim Walz’s Church
- hom*osexuality in the Bible: Here's what six passages say and how to interpret them.
- The Druze Religion, Explained
- Young Jewish man stabbed in NYC by attacker yelling ‘Free Palestine’
- Makeup-free Kim Kardashian ditches glam for casual outing with sons Saint, 8, and Psalm, 6, at burger joint
- 'Lord, make them die an awful death': Prisoner's dark pleas found etched into Roman-era prison
- Kim Kardashian shows off natural beauty as she goes makeup-free to son Saint's basketball game
- Megachurch pastor to pay ex-wife $12K per month in alimony after 33 years of marriage
- The Reeducation of Josh Shapiro
- What Protestants Can Learn From Catholics
- Rwanda Govt Shuts More than 5,000 Churches, Claiming Code Violations
- Walz's Brand Is More Left than Lutheran Among Minnesota Evangelicals
- Paris Blasphemy: What Took the Vatican So Long to Respond?
- Vatican Loosens Stance on Food, Water for Patients in Vegetative State
- An Open Call to Murder Jews in a Belgian Magazine
- The Nagasaki Mission House Built by St. Maximilian Kolbe
- 'Father Anne' Sees Signs of Opening for Catholic Women Priests
- The Leader as Servant
- I'm Agnostic. Here's Why I Went Back to Church
