exlim/blb
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
blb/study/isbe/5000.html

114 lines
766 KiB
HTML
Raw Blame History

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html><head>
<script src="../../js/basepath.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
<script src="./js/nav.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
<script src="./js/MainHeader.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
<script type="text/javascript">
isbe = [];
isbe[5001]='Jeshimon`je-she\'-mon, jesh\'-i-mon (ha-yeshimon, "the desert," and in the Revised Version (British and American) so translated but in the King James Version, <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',21,20);">Nu 21:20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',23,28);">23:28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',23,19,24);">1Sa 23:19,24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',26,1,3);">26:1,3</a>, "Jeshimon" as a place-name. In Numbers, the Septuagint reads he eremos, "the desert"; in 1 Samuel, the Septuagint reads Iessaimon): In these passages probably two districts are referred to:<P>(1) The "desert" north of the Dead Sea, which was overlooked from Pisgah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',21,20);">Nu 21:20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',23,28);">23:28</a>). This is the bare and sterile land, saturated with salt, lying on each side of the Jordan north of the Dead Sea, where for miles practically no vegetable life can exist.<P>(2) The sterile plateau west of the steep cliffs bordering the western shores of the Dead Sea. Here between the lower slopes of the Judean hills, where thousands of Bedouin live and herd their flocks, and the more fertile borders of the sea with their oases (\'Ain Feshkhah, \'Ain Jidy, etc.), is a broad strip of utterly waterless land, the soft chalky hills of which are, for all but a few short weeks, destitute of practically any vegetation. The Hill of Hachilah was on the edge of this desert (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',23,19);">1Sa 23:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',26,1,3);">26:1,3</a>), and the Arabah was to its south (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',23,24);">1Sa 23:24</a>). It is possible that the references in Numbers may also apply to this region.<P>The word "Jeshimon" (yeshimon) is often used as a common noun in referring to the desert of Sinai (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',32,10);">De 32:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',78,40);">Ps 78:40</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',106,14);">106:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',43,19);">Isa 43:19</a>, etc.), and except in the first two of these references, when we have "wilderness," it is always translated "desert." Although used in 7 passages in poetical parallelism to midhbar, translated "wilderness," it really means a much more hopeless place; in a midhbar animals can be pastured, but a yeshimon is a desolate waste.``117';
isbe[5002]='Jeshishai`je-shish\'-a-i (yeshishay, "aged"): A Gadite chief (and family?) (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',5,14);">1Ch 5:14</a>).``1';
isbe[5003]='Jeshohaiah`jesh-o-ha\'-ya, jesh-o-hi\'-a (yeshochayah, meaning unknown): A prince in Simeon (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',4,36);">1Ch 4:36</a>).``1';
isbe[5004]='Jeshua`jesh\'-u-a, je-shu\'-a (yeshua\'): A place occupied by the children of Judah after their return from captivity (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',11,26);">Ne 11:26</a>), evidently, from the places named with it, in the extreme south of Judah. It may correspond with the Shema of <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',15,26);">Jos 15:26</a>, and possibly to the Sheba of 19:2. The site may be Khirbet Sa\'weh, a ruin upon a prominent hill, Tell es Sa\'weh, 12 miles east-northeast of Beersheba. The hill is surrounded by a wall of large blocks of stone. PEF, III, 409-10, Sh XXV.``1';
isbe[5005]='Jeshua; Jeshuah`jesh\'-u-a, je-shu\'-a (yeshua\', "Yahweh is deliverance" or "opulence"; compare <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JOSHUA">JOSHUA</a>):<P>(1) the King James Version "Jeshuah," head of the 9th course of priests, and possibly of "the house of Jeshua" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',24,11);">1Ch 24:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',2,36);">Ezr 2:36</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',7,39);">Ne 7:39</a>).<P>(2) A Levite of Hezekiah\'s time (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',31,15);">2Ch 31:15</a>).<P>(3) Son of Jozadak = Joshua the high priest (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',2,2);">Ezr 2:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',3,2,8);">3:2,8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',4,3);">4:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',5,2);">5:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',10,18);">10:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',7,7);">Ne 7:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',12,1,7,10,26);">12:1,7,10,26</a>); see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JOSHUA+(4)">JOSHUA (4)</a> = "Jesus" (1Esdras 5:48 and Sirach 49:12).<P>(4) A man of Pahath-moab, some of whose descendants returned from Babylon to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',2,6);">Ezr 2:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',7,11);">Ne 7:11</a>) = "Jesus" (1Esdras 58).<P>(5) Head of a Levitical house which had oversight of the workmen in the temple (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',2,40);">Ezr 2:40</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',3,9);">3:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',7,43);">Ne 7:43</a>). He is mentioned again in <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',8,7);">Ne 8:7</a> as taking part in explaining the Torah to the people, in <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',9,4);">Ne 9:4</a>f (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',12,8);">12:8</a>) as leading in the worship, and in <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',10,9);">10:9 (Hebrew 10)</a> as sealing the covenant; this Jeshua is called son of Azaniah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',10,9);">Ne 10:9</a>). To these references should be added probably <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',12,24);">Ne 12:24</a>, where commentators read, "Jeshua, Binnui, Kadmiel" for "Jeshua the son of Kadmiel." Perhaps Jozabad (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',8,33);">Ezr 8:33</a>) is a "son" of this same Jeshua; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',8,33);">Ezr 8:33</a> = 1Esdras 8:63, where the King James Version is "Jesu," the Revised Version (British and American) "Jesus." He is the same as Jessue (the King James Version), Jesus (Revised Version) (1Esdras 5:26).<P>(6) Father of Ezer, a repairer of the wall (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',3,19);">Ne 3:19</a>).<P>(7) <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JOSHUA">JOSHUA</a>, son of Nun (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',8,17);">Ne 8:17</a>) (which see).``149';
isbe[5006]='Jeshurun`je-shu\'-run, jesh\'-u-run (yeshurun, "upright one," <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',32,15);">De 32:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',33,5,26);">33:5,26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',44,2);">Isa 44:2</a>): Septuagint translates it "the beloved one" egapemenos, the perfect participle passive of agapao), and in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',44,2);">Isa 44:2</a> adds "Israel"; Vulgate (Jerome\'s Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) has dilectus in <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',32,15);">De 32:15</a>, elsewhere rectissimus; Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion have "upright." For the form, Duhm compares zebhulun, Zebulun.<P>(1) The name used to be explained as a diminutive form, a pet name, and some, e.g. Cornill, Schultz (Old Testament Theology, English translation, II,29,note 12) still explain it so, "the righteous little people." But there is no evidence that the ending -un had a diminutive force.<P>(2) Most moderns take it as a poetical or ideal title of Israel, derived from yashar, "upright"; it is held to contain a tacit reference to the word Israel (yisra\'el), of which the first three consonants are almost the same as those of "Jeshurun"; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',23,10);">Nu 23:10</a> the term "the righteous ones" (yesharim) is supposed to contain a similar reference. Most commentators compare also "the Book of Jashar," and it has been held that "Jashar" is similarly a name by which Israel is called.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JASHAR">JASHAR</a>.<P>Following Bacher (ZATW, 1885, 161ff), commentators hold that in Isaiah this new name, a coinage due to the author of Second Isaiah and adopted in Deuteronomy, stands in contrast to Jacob, "the supplanter," as his name was explained by the Hebrews (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',12,\'2-4\');">Ho 12:2-4</a>). Israel is here given a new name, "the upright, pious one," and with the new name goes new chance in life, to live up to its meaning. Driver (Deuteronomy, 361) says that in <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',32,15);">De 32:15</a> "where the context is of declension from its ideal (it is) applied reproachfully. \'Nomen Recti pro Israele ponens, ironice eos perstringit qui a rectitudine defecerant\' (Calv.). Elsewhere it is used as a title of honor." the King James Version has "Jesurun" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',44,2);">Isa 44:2</a>.``149';
isbe[5007]='Jesiah`je-si\'-a (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',23,20);">1Ch 23:20</a> the King James Version).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ISSHIAH">ISSHIAH</a>`1';
isbe[5008]='Jesias`je-si\'-as (Iesias; the King James Version Josias (1Esdras 8:33)): Corresponding to Jeshaiah, son of Athaliah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',8,7);">Ezr 8:7</a>).``1';
isbe[5009]='Jesimiel`je-sim\'-i-el (yesimi\'el, "God establishes"): A prince of Simeon (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',4,36);">1Ch 4:36</a>).``1';
isbe[5010]='Jesse`jes\'-e (yishay, meaning doubtful; according to Gesenius it = "wealthy"; Olshausen, Gram., sections 277f; conjectures yesh yah, "Yahweh exists"; Wellhausen (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',14,49);">1Sa 14:49</a>) explains it as \'abhishay (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ABISHAI">ABISHAI</a>); Iessai; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rth\',4,17,22);">Ru 4:17,22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',16,\'1-\');">1Sa 16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',17,\'1-\');">17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',20,\'1-\');">20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',22,\'1-\');">22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',25,10);">25:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',20,1);">2Sa 20:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',23,1);">23:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',12,16);">1Ki 12:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',10,14);">1Ch 10:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',12,18);">12:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',72,20);">Ps 72:20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',11,1,10);">Isa 11:1,10</a> (= <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',15,12);">Ro 15:12</a>)); <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',1,5,6);">Mt 1:5,6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',13,22);">Ac 13:22</a>): Son of Obed, grandson of Boaz, and father of King David. The grouping of the references to Jesse in 1 Samuel is bound up with that of the grouping of the whole narrative of David and Saul. See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SAMUEL,+BOOKS+OF">SAMUEL, BOOKS OF</a>. There seem to be three main veins in the narrative, so far as Jesse is concerned.<P>(1) In <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',16,\'1-13\');">1Sa 16:1-13</a>, where Jesse is called the Bethlehemite. Samuel is sent to seek among Jesse\'s sons successor to Saul.<P>Both Samuel and Jesse fail to discern at first Yahweh\'s choice, Samuel thinking that it would be the eldest son (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',16,6);">1Sa 16:6</a>), while Jesse had not thought it worth while to call the youngest to the feast (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',16,11);">1Sa 16:11</a>).<P>(2) (a) In <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',16,\'14-23\');">1Sa 16:14-23</a>, Saul is mentally disturbed, and is advised to get a harpist. David "the son of Jesse the Bethlehemite" is recommended by a courtier, and Saul sends to Jesse for David.<P>"And Jesse took ten loaves (so emend and translate, and not as the Revised Version (British and American), "an ass laden with bread"), and a (skin) bottle of wine, and a kid, and sent them" to Saul as a present with David, who becomes a courtier of Saul\'s with his father\'s consent.<P>(b) The next mention of Jesse is in three contemptuous references by Saul to David as "the son of Jesse" in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',20,27,30);">1Sa 20:27,30,31</a>, part of the quarrel-scene between Saul and Jonathan. (But it is not quite certain if <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',20,\'1-\');">1Sa 20</a> belongs to the same source as <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',16,\'14-23\');">16:14-23</A>.) In answer to the first reference, Jonathan calls his friend "David," and Saul repeats the phrase "the son of Jesse," abusing Jonathan personally (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',20,30);">1Sa 20:30</a>, where the meaning is uncertain). The reference to David as "the son of Jesse" here and in the following verse is contemptuous, not because of any reproach that might attach itself to Jesse, but, as Budde remarks, because "an upstart is always contemptuously referred to under his father\'s name" in courts and society. History repeats itself!<P>(c) Further references of a like kind are in the passage, <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',22,\'6-23\');">1Sa 22:6-23</a>, namely, in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',22,7,8,13);">22:7,8,13</a> by Saul, and repeated by Doeg in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',22,9);">22:9</a>.<P>(d) The final one of this group is in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',25,10);">1Sa 25:10</a>, where Nabal sarcastically asks "Who is David? and who is the son of Jesse?"<P>(3) The parts of <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',17,\'1-\');">1Sa 17</A>-<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',18,\'1-5\');">18:5</a> which are omitted by Septuagint B, i.e. <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',17,\'12-31\',41,48,50,55);">17:12-31,41,48b,50,55</A>-<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',18,\'1-6\');">18:6a</a>. Here Jesse is mentioned as "an Ephrathite of Beth-lehem-judah" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',17,12);">17:12</A>, not "that" Ephrathite, which is a grammatically impossible translation of the Massoretic Text), Ephrath or Ephrathah being another name for Bethlehem, or rather for the district. He is further said to have eight sons (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',17,12);">17:12</a>), of whom the three eldest had followed Saul to the war (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',17,13);">17:13</A>).<P>Jesse sends David, the shepherd, to his brothers with provisions (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',17,17);">1Sa 17:17</a>). Afterward David, on being brought to Saul and asked who he is, answers, "I am the son of thy servant Jesse the Bethlehemite" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',17,58);">1Sa 17:58</a>). Jesse is also described (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',17,12);">1Sa 17:12</a>) as being "in the days of Saul an old man, advanced in years" (so emend and translate, not as the Revised Version (British and American), "stricken in years among men"). The mention of his having 8 sons in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',17,12);">1Sa 17:12</a> is not in agreement with <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',2,\'13-15\');">1Ch 2:13-15</a>, which gives only 7 sons with two sisters, but where Syriac gives 8, adding, from <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',27,18);">27:18</A>, Elihu which Massoretic Text has there probably by corruption (Curtis, Chronicles, 88). <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',16,10);">1Sa 16:10</a> should be translated "and Jesse made his 7 sons to pass before Samuel" (not as the Revised Version (British and American), the King James Version, "seven of his sons"). Budde (Kurz. Hand-Komm., "Samuel," 114) holds <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',16,\'1-13\');">1Sa 16:1-13</a> to be a late Midrash, and (ibid., 123f) omits<P class="in15">(a) "that" in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',17,12);">17:12</A>;<P class="in15">(b) also "and he had 8 sons" as due to a wrong inference from <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',16,10);">16:10</a>;<P class="in15">(c) the names of the 3 eldest in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',17,13);">17:13</a>;<P class="in15">(d) <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',17,14);">17:14b</A>; he then changes <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',17,15);">17:15a</a>, and reads thus: (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',17,12);">12</a>) "Now David was the son of an Ephrathite of Bethlehem-Judah, whose name was Jesse who was ....(years) old at the time of Saul. (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',17,13);">13</a>) And the 3 eldest sons of Jesse had marched with Saul to the war, (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',17,14);">14</a>) and David was the youngest, (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',17,15);">15</A>) and David had remained to feed his father\'s sheep at Bethlehem. (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',17,16);">16</A>) Now the Philistines came," etc.<P>According to all these narratives in 1 Samuel, whether all 3 be entirely independent of one another or not, Jesse had land in Bethlehem, probably outside the town wall, like Boaz (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=BOAZ">BOAZ</a>) his grandfather (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rth\',4,17);">Ru 4:17</a>). In <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',22,3,4);">1Sa 22:3,4</a> David entrusts his father and mother to the care of the king of Moab, but from <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',20,29);">20:29</A> some have inferred that Jesse was dead (although most critics assign <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',22,3);">22:3</a> at any rate to the same stratum as chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',20,\'1-\');">20</a>).<P>Jonathan tells Saul that David wanted to attend a family sacrificial feast at Bethlehem (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',20,29);">1Sa 20:29</a>). Massoretic Text reads, "And he, my brother, has commanded me," whereas we should probably read with Septuagint, "and my brethren have commanded me," i.e. the members of the clan, as we have farther on in the verse, "Let me get away, I pray thee, and see my brethren." As to Jesse\'s daughters, see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ABIGAIL">ABIGAIL</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=NAHASH">NAHASH</a>.<P>(4) Of the other references to Jesse, the most noteworthy is that in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',11,1);">Isa 11:1</a>: "There shall come forth a shoot out of the stock of Jesse, and a branch out of his roots shall bear fruit," i.e. out of Jesse\'s roots (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',5,5);">Re 5:5</a>). "Why Jesse and not David?" asks Duhm; and he answers, "Because the Messiah will be a second David, rather than a descendant of David." Marti explains it to mean that he will be, not from David, but from a collateral line of descent. Duhm\'s explanation suggests a parallelism between David and Christ, of whom the former may be treated as a type similar to Aaron and Melchizedek in He. Saul might pour contempt upon "the son of Jesse," but Isaiah has given Jesse here a name above all Hebrew names, and thus does Providence mock "society."`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ROOT+OF+JESSE">ROOT OF JESSE</a>`149';
isbe[5011]='Jesting`jest\'-ing: Used from Tyndale down as the translation of eutrapelia (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',5,4);">Eph 5:4</a>). Aristotle uses the original in his Ethics iv.14 as an equivalent of "quick-witted," from its root meaning "something easily turned," adding that, since the majority of people love excessive jesting, the word is apt to be degraded. This is the case here, where it clearly has a flavor of the coarse or licentious.``1';
isbe[5012]='Jesui`jes\'-u-i.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ISHVI">ISHVI</a>`1';
isbe[5013]='Jesuites`jes\'-u-its.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ISHVI">ISHVI</a>`1';
isbe[5014]='Jesurun`je-su\'-run, jes\'-u-run.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JESHURUN">JESHURUN</a>`1';
isbe[5015]='Jesus`je\'-zus (Iesous, for yehoshua\'):<P>(1) Joshua, son of Nun (the King James Version <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',7,45);">Ac 7:45</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',4,8);">Heb 4:8</a>; compare 1Macc 2:55; 2Esdras 7:37).<P>(2) (3) High priest and Levite.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JESHUA">JESHUA, 2, 5</a>.<P>(4) Son of Sirach.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SIRACH">SIRACH</a>.<P>(5) An ancestor of Jesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,29);">Lu 3:29</a>, the King James Version "Jose").`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JESUS+CHRIST+1">JESUS CHRIST 1</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JESUS+CHRIST+2">JESUS CHRIST 2</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JESUS+CHRIST+3">JESUS CHRIST 3</a>`1';
isbe[5016]='Jesus Christ, 1 Outline`je\'-zus krist (Iesous Christos):<p><b>I. THE NAMES</b><p><b>II. ORDER OF TREATMENT</b><p><b>PART I. INTRODUCTORY</b><p><b>I. THE SOURCES</b><P class="in15">1. In General<P class="in15">2. Denial of Existence of Jesus<P class="in15">3. Extra-Christian Notices<P class="in15">4. The Gospels<P class="in30">(1) The Synoptics<P class="in30">(2) The Fourth Gospel<p><b>II. THE PREPARATION</b><P class="in15">1. Both Gentile and Jewish<P class="in15">2. Old Testament Preparation<P class="in15">3. Post-exilic Preparation<p><b>III. THE OUTWARD SITUATION</b><P class="in15">1. The Land<P class="in30">Its Divisions<P class="in15">2. Political Situation<P class="in30">Changes in Territory<P class="in15">3. The Religious Sects<P class="in30">(1) The Scribes<P class="in30">(2) The Pharisees<P class="in30">(3) The Sadducees<P class="in30">(4) The Essenes<p><b>IV. THE CHRONOLOGY</b><P class="in15">1. Date of the Birth of Jesus<P class="in15">2. Date of His Baptism<P class="in15">3. Length of Ministry<P class="in15">4. Date of Christ\'s Death<p><b>PART II. THE PROBLEMS OF THE LIFE OF JESUS</b><p><b>I. THE MIRACLES</b><P class="in15">1. The "Modern" Attitude<P class="in15">2. Supernatural in the Gospels<p><b>II. THE MESSIAHSHIP</b><P class="in15">1. Reserve of Jesus and Modern Criticism<P class="in15">2. A Growing Revelation<p><b>III. KINGDOM AND APOCALYPSE</b><P class="in15">1. The Kingdom<6F>Present or Future?<P class="in15">2. Apocalyptic Beliefs<p><b>IV. THE CHARACTER AND CLAIMS</b><P class="in15">1. Denial of Christ\'s Moral Perfection<P class="in15">2. Sinlessness and the Messianic Claim<p><b>PART III. COURSE OF THE EARTHLY LIFE OF JESUS</b><P class="in15">1. Divisions of the History<P class="in15">2. Not a Complete "Life"<p><b>A. FROM THE NATIVITY TO THE BAPTISM AND TEMPTATION</b><p><b>I. THE NATIVITY</b><P class="in15">1. Hidden Piety in Judaism<P class="in15">2. Birth of the Baptist<P class="in15">3. The Annunciation and Its Results<P class="in15">4. The Birth at Bethlehem<P class="in30">(1) The Census of Quirinius<P class="in30">(2) Jesus Born<P class="in15">5. The Incidents of the Infancy<P class="in30">(1) The Visit of the Shepherds<P class="in30">(2) The Circumcision and Presentation in the Temple<P class="in30">(3) Visit of the Magi<P class="in15">6. Flight to Egypt and Return to Nazareth<P class="in15">7. Questions and Objections<P class="in30">(1) The Virgin Birth<P class="in30">(2) The Genealogies<p><b>II. THE YEARS OF SILENCE<43>THE TWELFTH YEAR</b><P class="in15">1. The Human Development<P class="in15">2. Jesus in the Temple<p><b>IlI. THE FORERUNNER AND THE BAPTISM</b><P class="in15">1. The Preaching of John<P class="in30">The Coming Christ<P class="in15">2. Jesus Is Baptized<p><b>IV. THE TEMPTATION</b><P class="in15">1. Temptation Follows Baptism<P class="in15">2. Nature of the Temptation<P class="in15">3. Stages of the Temptation<P class="in30">Its Typical Character<p><b>B. THE EARLY JUDAEAN MINISTRY</b><p><b>I. THE TESTIMONIES OF THE BAPTIST</b><P class="in15">1. The Synoptics and John<P class="in15">2. Threefold Witness of the Baptist<p><b>II. THE FIRST DISCIPLES</b><P class="in15">1. Spiritual Accretion<P class="in15">2. "Son of Man" and "Son of God"<p><b>III. THE FIRST EVENTS</b><P class="in15">1. The First Miracle<P class="in15">2. The First Passover, and Cleansing of the Temple<P class="in15">3. The Visit of Nicodemus<P class="in15">4. Jesus and John<p><b>IV. JOURNEY TO GALILEE<45>THE WOMAN OF SAMARIA</b><P class="in15">1. Withdrawal to Galilee<P class="in15">2. The Living Water<P class="in15">3. The True Worship<P class="in15">4. Work and Its Reward<p><b>C. THE GALILEAN MINISTRY AND VISITS TO THE FEASTS</b><P class="in15">1. The Scene<P class="in15">2. The Time<P><b>FIRST PERIOD<4F>FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE TILL THE MISSION OF THE TWELVE</b><p><b>I. OPENING INCIDENTS</b><P class="in15">1. Healing of Nobleman\'s Son<P class="in15">2. The Visit to Nazareth<P class="in15">3. Call of the Four Disciples<P class="in15">4. At Capernaum<P class="in45">a) Christ\'s Teaching<P class="in45">b) The Demoniac in the Synagogue<P class="in60">Demon-Possession: Its Reality<P class="in45">c) Peter\'s Wife\'s Mother<P class="in45">d) The Eventful Evening<p><b>II. FROM THE FIRST GALILEAN CIRCUIT TILL THE CHOICE OF THE APOSTLES</b><P class="in15">1. The First Circuit<P class="in15">2. Capernaum Incidents<P class="in45">a) Cure of the Paralytic<P class="in45">b) Call and Feast of Matthew<P class="in15">3. The Unnamed Jerusalem Feast<P class="in45">a) The Healing at Bethesda<P class="in45">b) Son and Father<P class="in45">c) The Threefold Witness<P class="in15">4. Sabbath Controversies<P class="in45">a) Plucking of the Ears of Grain<P class="in45">b) The Man with the Withered Hand<P class="in45">c) Withdrawal to the Sea<P class="in15">5. The Choosing of the Twelve<P class="in45">a) The Apostolic Function<P class="in45">b) The Lists<P class="in45">c) The Men<p><b>III. FROM THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT WILL THE PARABLES OF THE KINGDOM<4F>A SECOND CIRCUIT</b><P class="in15">1. The Sermon on the Mount<P class="in45">a) The Blessings<P class="in45">b) True Righteousness<73>the Old and the New Law<P class="in45">c) Religion and Hypocrisy<73>True and False Motive<P class="in45">d) The True Good and Cure for Care<P class="in45">e) Relation to the World\'s Evil<69>the Conclusion<P class="in15">2. Intervening Incidents<P class="in45">a) Healing of the Centurion\'s Servant<P class="in45">b) The Widow of Nain\'s Son Raised<P class="in45">c) Embassy of John\'s Disciples<65>Christ and His Generation<P class="in45">d) The First Anointing<6E>the Woman who Was a Sinner<P class="in15">3. Second Galilean Circuit<69>Events at Capernaum<P class="in45">a) Galilee Revisited<P class="in45">b) Cure of Demoniac<61>Discourse on Blasphemy<P class="in60">The Sign of Jonah<P class="in45">c) Christ\'s Mother and Brethren<P class="in15">4. Teaching in Parables<P class="in45">Parables of the Kingdom<p><b>IV. FROM THE CROSSING TO GADARA TO THE MISSION OF THE TWELVE<56>A THIRD CIRCUIT</b><P class="in15">1. Crossing of the Lake<6B>Stilling of the Storm<P class="in45">a) Aspirants for Discipleship<P class="in45">b) The Storm Calmed<P class="in15">2. The Gadarene (Gerasene) Demoniac<P class="in15">3. Jairus\' Daughter Raised<65>Woman with Issue of Blood<P class="in45">a) Jairus\' Appeal and Its Result<P class="in45">b) The Afflicted Woman Cured<P class="in15">4. Incidents of Third Circuit<P class="in15">5. The Twelve Sent Forth<74>Discourse of Jesus<P class="in45">a) The Commission<P class="in45">b) Counsels and Warnings<P><b>SECOND PERIOD<4F>AFTER THE MISSION OF THE TWELVE TILL THE DEPARTURE FROM GALILEE</b><p><b>I. FROM THE DEATH OF THE BAPTIST TILL THE DISCOURSE ON THE BREAD OF LIFE</b><P class="in15">1. The Murder of the Baptist and Herod\'s Alarms<P class="in15">2. The Feeding of the Five Thousand<P class="in15">3. Walking on the Sea<P class="in15">4. Gennesaret<65>Discourse on the Bread of Life<P class="in30">Peter\'s First Confession<p><b>II. FROM DISPUTES WITH THE PHARISEES TILL THE TRANSFIGURATION</b><P class="in15">1. Jesus and Tradition<6F>Outward and Inward Purity<P class="in15">2. Retirement to Tyre and Sidon<6F>the Syrophoenician Woman<P class="in15">3. At Decapolis<69>New Miracles<P class="in45">a) The Deaf Man<P class="in45">b) Feeding of the Four Thousand<P class="in15">4. Leaven of the Pharisees, etc.<2E>Cure of Blind Man<P class="in15">5. At Caesarea Philippi<70>the Great Confession<6F>First Announcement of Passion<P class="in15">6. The Transfiguration<6F>the Epileptic Boy<p><b>III. FROM PRIVATE JOURNEY THROUGH GALILEE TILL RETURN FROM THE FEAST OF TABERNACLES</b><P class="in15">1. Galilee and Capernaum<P class="in45">a) Second Announcement of the Passion<P class="in45">b) The Temple Tax<P class="in45">c) Discourse on Greatness and Forgiveness<P class="in30">(1) Greatness in Humility<P class="in30">(2) Tolerance<P class="in30">(3) The Erring Brother<P class="in30">(4) Parable of Unmerciful Servant<P class="in15">2. The Feast of Tabernacles<65>Discourses, etc.<P class="in45">a) The Private Journey<65>Divided Opinions<P class="in45">b) Christ\'s Self-Witness<P class="in45">c) The Woman Taken in Adultery<P class="in45">d) The Cure of the Blind Man.<P class="in45">e) The Good Shepherd<P class="in15">Chronological Note<p><b>D. LAST JOURNEY TO JERUSALEM<45>JESUS IN PERAEA</b><p><b>I. FROM LEAVING GALILEE TILL THE FEAST OF THE DEDICATION</b><P class="in15">1. Rejected by Samaria<P class="in15">2. Mission of the Seventy<P class="in15">3. The Lawyer\'s Question<6F>Parable of Good Samaritan<P class="in15">4. Discourses, Parables, and Miracles<P class="in45">a) Original to Luke<P class="in45">b) The Infirm Woman<61>the Dropsied Man<P class="in45">c) Parable of the Great Supper<P class="in45">d) Counting the Cost<P class="in15">5. Martha and Mary<P class="in15">6. Feast of the Dedication<p><b>II. FROM THE ABODE AT BETHABARA TILL THE RAISING OF LAZARUS</b><P class="in15">1. Parables of Lost Sheep, Lost Piece of Silver and Prodigal Son<P class="in15">2. Parables of the Unjust Steward and the Rich Man and Lazarus<P class="in15">3. The Summons to Bethany<6E>Raising of Lazarus<p><b>III. FROM THE RETIREMENT TO EPHRAIM TILL THE ARRIVAL AT BETHANY</b><P class="in15">1. Retreat to Ephraim<P class="in15">2. The Journey Resumed<P class="in15">3. Cure of the Lepers<P class="in15">4. Pharisaic Questionings<P class="in45">a) Divorce<P class="in45">b) Coming of the Kingdom<P class="in45">c) Parable of the Unjust Judge<P class="in15">5. The Spirit of the Kingdom<P class="in45">a) Parable of Pharisee and Publican<P class="in45">b) Blessing of the Babies<P class="in45">c) The Rich Young Ruler<P class="in15">6. Third Announcement of the Passion<P class="in15">7. The Rewards of the Kingdom<P class="in45">a) Parable of the Laborers in the Vineyard<P class="in45">b) The Sons of Zebedee<P class="in15">8. Jesus at Jericho<P class="in45">a) The Cure of Bartimeus<P class="in45">b) Zaccheus the Publican<P class="in45">c) Parable of the Pounds<P class="in30">Arrival at Bethany<p><b>E. THE PASSION WEEK<45>BETRAYAL, TRIAL, AND CRUCIFIXION</b><p><b>I. THE EVENTS PRECEDING THE LAST SUPPER</b><P class="in15">1. The Chronology<P class="in15">2. The Anointing at Bethany<P class="in15">3. The Entry into Jerusalem<P class="in30">Jesus Weeping over Jerusalem<65>Return to Bethany<P class="in15">4. Cursing of the Fig Tree<65>Second Cleansing of the Temple<P class="in30">Were There Two Cleansings?<P class="in15">5. The Eventful Tuesday<P class="in45">a) The Demand for Authority<74>Parables<P class="in60">The Two Sons<6E>the Wicked Husbandmen<65>the Marriage of the King\'s Son<P class="in45">b) Ensnaring Questions, etc.<P class="in60">(1) Tribute to Caesar<61>the Resurrection<6F>the Great Commandment<P class="in60">(2) David\'s Son and Lord<P class="in45">c) The Great Denunciation<P class="in45">d) The Widow\'s Offering<P class="in60">e) The Visit of the Greeks<P class="in45">f) Discourse on the Last Things<P class="in45">g) Parables of Ten Virgins, Talents and Last Judgment<P class="in15">6. A Day of Retirement<P class="in15">7. An Atmosphere of Plotting<6E>Judas and the Priests<p><b>II. FROM THE LAST SUPPER TILL THE CROSS</b><P class="in15">1. The Chronology<P class="in15">2. The Last Supper<P class="in45">a) The Preparation<P class="in45">b) Dispute about Precedence<63>Washing of the Disciples\' Feet<65>Departure of Judas<P class="in45">c) The Lord\'s Supper<P class="in45">d) The Last Discourses<65>Intercessory Prayer<P class="in45">e) The Departure and Warning<P class="in15">3. Gethsemane<6E>the Betrayal and Arrest<P class="in45">a) Agony in the Garden<P class="in45">b) Betrayal by Judas<61>Jesus Arrested<P class="in15">4. Trial before the Sanhedrin<P class="in30">Legal and Historical Aspects<P class="in45">a) Before Annas and Caiaphas<61>the Unjust Judgment<P class="in45">b) The Threefold Denial<P class="in45">c) Remorse and Suicide of Judas<P class="in15">5. Trial before Pilate<P class="in45">a) The Attitude of the Accusers<P class="in45">b) The Attitude of Pilate<P class="in60">(1) Jesus Sent to Herod<P class="in60">(2) "Not This Man, but Barabbas"<P class="in60">(3) "Ecce Homo"<P class="in60">(4) A Last Appeal<61>Pilate Yields<P class="in45">c) The Attitude of Jesus<p><b>III. THE CRUCIFIXION AND BURIAL</b><P class="in15">1. The Crucifixion<P class="in45">a) On the Way<P class="in45">b) Between the Thieves<65>the Superscription<6F>the Seamless Robe<P class="in45">c) The Mocking<6E>the Penitent Thief<65>Jesus and His Mother<P class="in45">d) The Great Darkness<73>the Cry of Desertion<P class="in45">e) Last Words and Death of Jesus<P class="in45">f) The Spear-Thrust<73>Earthquake and Rending of the Veil<P class="in15">2. The Burial<P class="in45">a) The New Tomb<P class="in45">b) The Guard of Soldiers<p><b>F. THE RESURRECTION AND ASCENSION</b><P>The Resurrection a Fundamental Fact<P class="in15">1. The Resurrection<P class="in30">a) The Easter Morning<6E>the Open Tomb<P class="in45">(1) The Angel and the Keepers<P class="in45">(2) Visit of the Women<P class="in45">(3) The Angelic Message<P class="in30">b) Visit of Peter and John<68>Appearance to Mary<P class="in45">Report to the Disciples<65>Incredulity<P class="in30">c) Other Easter-Day Appearances (Emmaus, Jerusalem)<P class="in30">d) The Second Appearance to the Eleven<65>the Doubt of Thomas<P class="in30">e) The Galilean Appearances<P class="in45">(1) At the Sea of Tiberias<61>the Draught of Fish<73>Peter\'s Restoration<P class="in45">(2) On the Mountain<69>the Great Commission<6F>Baptism<P class="in30">f) Appearance to James<P class="in30">g) The Last Meeting<P class="in15">2. The Ascension<p><b>PART IV. EPILOGUE: THE APOSTOLIC TEACHING</b><P class="in15">1. After the Ascension<P class="in15">2. Revelation through the Spirit<P class="in15">3. Gospels and Epistles<P class="in15">4. Fact of Christ\'s Lordship<P class="in15">5. Significance of Christ\'s Person<P class="in15">6. Significance of the Cross and Resurrection<P class="in15">7. Hope of the Advent<p><b>LITERATURE</b><hr />``132';
isbe[5017]='Jesus Christ, 2`<P>Jesus Christ: The Founder of the Christian religion; the promised Messiah and Saviour of the world; the Lord and Head of the Christian church.<P>I. The Names.<P>1. Jesus:<P>(Iesous) is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew "Joshua" (yehoshua\'), meaning "Yahweh is salvation." It stands therefore in the Septuagint and Apocrypha for "Joshua," and in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',7,45);">Ac 7:45</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',4,8);">Heb 4:8</a> likewise represents the Old Testament Joshua; hence, in the Revised Version (British and American) is in these passages rendered "Joshua." In <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',1,21);">Mt 1:21</a> the name as commanded by the angel to be given to the son of Mary, "for it is he that shall save his people from their sins" (see below on "Nativity"). It is the personal name of the Lord in the Gospels and the Acts, but generally in the Epistles appears in combination with "Christ" or other appellative (alone in <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',3,26);">Ro 3:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',4,24);">4:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',12,3);">1Co 12:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',11,4);">2Co 11:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',2,10);">Php 2:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',4,14);">1Th 4:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,22);">Heb 7:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,19);">10:19</a>, etc.).<P>2. Christ:<P>(Christos) is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew "Messiah" (mashiach; compare in the New Testament, <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,41);">Joh 1:41</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,25);">4:25</a>, "Messiah"), meaning "anointed" (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=MESSIAH">MESSIAH</a>). It designates Jesus as the fulfiller of the Messianic hopes of the Old Testament and of the Jewish people. It will be seen below that Jesus Himself made this claim. After the resurrection it became the current title for Jesus in the apostolic church. Most frequently in the Epistles He is called "Jesus Christ," sometimes "Christ Jesus" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,1,2,39);">Ro 8:1,2,39</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',1,2,30);">1Co 1:2,30</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',4,15);">4:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',1,1);">Eph 1:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',1,1);">Php 1:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Col\',1,4,28);">Col 1:4,28</a> the King James Version; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',2,14);">1Th 2:14</a>, etc.), often "Christ" alone (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',1,16);">Ro 1:16</a> the King James Version; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',5,6,8);">Ro 5:6,8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',6,4,8,9);">6:4,8,9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,10);">8:10</a>, etc.). In this case "Christ" has acquired the force of a proper name. Very frequently the term is associated with "Lord" (kurios)<29>"the (or "our") Lord Jesus Christ" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',11,17);">Ac 11:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',15,11);">15:11</a> the King James Version; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',16,31);">Ac 16:31</a> the King James Version; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',20,21);">Ac 20:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',28,31);">28:31</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',1,7);">Ro 1:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',5,1,11);">5:1,11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',13,14);">13:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',16,23);">1Co 16:23</a>, etc.).<P>II. Order of Treatment.<P>In studying, as it is proposed to do in this article, the earthly history of Jesus and His place in the faith of the apostolic church, it will be convenient to pursue the following order:<P>First, as introductory to the whole study, certain questions relating to the sources of our knowledge of Jesus, and to the preparation for, and circumstances of, His historical appearance, invite careful attention (Part I).<P>Next, still as preliminary to the proper narrative of the life of Jesus, it is desirable to consider certain problems arising out of the presentation of that life in the Gospels with which modern thought is more specially concerned, as determining the attitude in which the narratives are approached. Such are the problems of the miracles, the Messiahship, the sinless character and supernatural claims of Jesus (Part II).<P>The way is then open for treatment in order of the actual events of Christ\'s life and ministry, so far as recorded. These fall into many stages, from His nativity and baptism till His death, resurrection and ascension (Part III).<P>A final division will deal with Jesus as the exalted Lord in the aspects in which He is presented in the teaching of the Epistles and remaining writings of the New Testament (Part IV).<P>PART I. INTRODUCTORY<P>I. The Sources.<P>1. In General:<P>The principal, and practically the only sources for our knowledge of Jesus Christ are the four Canonical Gospels<6C>distinction being made in these between the first three (Synoptic) Gospels, and the Gospel of John. Nothing, either in the few notices of Christ in non-Christian authors, or in the references in the other books of the New Testament, or in later Christian literature, adds to the information which the Gospels already supply. The so-called apocryphal Gospels are worthless as authorities (see under the word); the few additional sayings of Christ (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',20,35);">Ac 20:35</a>) found in outside writings are of doubtful genuineness (compare a collection of these in Westcott\'s Introduction to the Study of the Gospels, Appendix C; see also <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=LOGIA">LOGIA</a>).<P>2. Denial of Existence of Jesus:<P>It marks the excess to which skepticism has gone that writers are found in recent years who deny the very existence of Jesus Christ (Kalthoff, Das Christus-Problem, and Die Entstehung des Christenthums; Jensen, Das Gilgamesch-Epos, I; Drews, Die Christusmythe; compare on Kalthoff, Schweitzer, The Quest of the Historical Jesus, English translation, 313ff; Jensen is reviewed in the writer\'s The Resurrection of Jesus, chapter ix). The extravagance of such skepticism is its sufficient refutation.<P>3. Extra-Christian Notices:<P>Of notices outside the Christian circles the following may be referred to.<P>(1) Josephus.<P>There is the famous passage in Josephus, Ant, XVIII, iii, 3, commencing, "Now there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man," etc. It is not unlikely that Josephus had some reference to Jesus, but most agree that the passage in question, if not entirely spurious, has been the subject of Christian interpolation (on the lit. and different views, see Schurer, Jewish People in the Time of Christ, Div II, volume II, 143ff; in support of interpolation, Edersheim on "Josephus," in Dictionary of Christ. Biography).<P>(2) Tacitus.<P>The Roman historian, Tacitus, in a well-known passage relating to the persecution of Nero (Ann. xv.44), tells how the Christians, already "a great multitude" (ingens multitudo), derived their name "from one Christus, who was executed in the reign of Tiberius by the procurator of Judea, Pontius Pilate."<P>(3) Suetonius also, in his account of Claudius, speaks of the Jews as expelled from Rome for the raising of tumults at the instigation of one "Chrestus" (impulsore Chresto), plainly a mistake for "Christus." The incident is doubtless that referred to in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',18,2);">Ac 18:2</a>. 4. The Gospels:<P>The four Gospels, then, with their rich contents, remain as our primary sources for the knowledge of the earthly life of Jesus.<P>(1) The Synoptics.<P>It may be taken for granted as the result of the best criticism that the first three Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) all fall well within the apostolic age (compare Harnack, Altchr. Lit., Pref; see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=GOSPELS">GOSPELS</a>). The favorite theory at present of the relations of these Gospels is, that Mark is an independent Gospel, resting on the teaching of Peter; that Matthew and Luke have as sources the Gospel of Mark and a collection of discourses, probably attributable to the apostle Matthew (now commonly called Q); and that Luke has a third, well-authenticated source (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,\'1-4\');">Lu 1:1-4</a>) peculiar to himself. The present writer is disposed to allow more independence to the evangelists in the embodying of a tradition common to all; in any case, the sources named are of unexceptionable authority, and furnish a strong guaranty for the reliability of the narratives. The supreme guaranty of their trustworthiness, however, is found in the narratives themselves; for who in that (or any) age could imagine a figure so unique and perfect as that of Jesus, or invent the incomparable sayings and parables that proceeded from His lips? Much of Christ\'s teaching is high as heaven above the minds of men still.<P>(2) The Fourth Gospel.<P>The Fourth Gospel stands apart from the Synoptics in dealing mainly with another set of incidents (the Jerusalem ministry), and discourses of a more private and intimate kind than those belonging to the Galilean teaching. Its aim, too, is doctrinal<61>to show that Jesus is "the Son of God," and its style and mode of conception are very different from those of the Synoptic Gospels. Its contents touch their narratives in only a few points (as in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,\'4-21\');">Joh 6:4-21</a>). Where they do, the resemblance is manifest. It is obvious that the reminiscences which the Gospel contains have been long brooded over by the apostle, and that a certain interpretative element blends with his narration of incidents and discourses. This, however, does not warrant us in throwing doubt, with so many, on the genuineness of the Gospel, for which the external evidence is exceptionally strong (compare Sanday, The Criticism of the Fourth Gospel; Drummond, Character and Authorship of the Fourth Gospel; and see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JOHN,+GOSPEL+OF">JOHN, GOSPEL OF</a>). The Gospel is accepted here as a genuine record of the sayings and doings of Jesus which it narrates.<P>II. The Preparation.<P>1. Both Gentile and Jewish:<P>In the Gospels and throughout the New Testament Jesus appears as the goal of Old Testament revelation, and the point to which all providential developments tended. He came, Paul says, in "the fullness of the time" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',4,4);">Ga 4:4</a>). It has often been shown how, politically, intellectually, morally, everything in the Greco-Roman world was ready for such a universal religion as Jesus brought into it (compare Baur\'s Hist of the Church in the First Three Cents., English translation, chapter i). The preparation in Israel is seen alike in God\'s revelations to, and dealings with, the chosen people in the patriarchal, Mosaic, monarchical and prophetic periods, and in the developments of the Jewish mind in the centuries immediately before Christ.<P>2. Old Testament Preparation:<P>As special lines in the Old Testament preparation may be noted the ideas of the Messianic king, a ruler of David\'s house, whose reign would be righteous, perpetual, universal (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',7,13);">Isa 7:13-9:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',32,1,2);">32:1,2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',33,15,16);">Jer 33:15,16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',2,\'1-10\');">Ps 2:1-10</a>, etc.); of a Righteous Sufferer (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',22,\'1-\');">Ps 22</a>, etc.), whose sufferings are in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',53,\'1-\');">Isa 53</a> declared to have an expiatory and redeeming character; and of a Messianic kingdom, which, breaking the bounds of nationalism, would extend through the whole earth and embrace all peoples (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',60,\'1-\');">Isa 60</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',87,\'1-\');">Ps 87</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',2,44);">Da 2:44</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',7,27);">7:27</a>, etc.). The kingdom, at the same time, is now conceived of under a more spiritual aspect. Its chief blessings are forgiveness and righteousness.<P>3. Post-exilian Preparation:<P>The age succeeding the return from exile witnessed a manifold preparation for the advent of Christ. Here may be observed the decentralization of the Jewish religious ideals through the rise of synagogue worship and the widespread dispersion of the race; the contact with Hellenic culture (as in Philo); but especially the marked sharpening of Messianic expectations. Some of these were of a crude apocalyptic character (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=APOCALYPTIC+LITERATURE">APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ESCHATOLOGY+OF+THE+OLD+TESTAMENT">ESCHATOLOGY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT</a>); many were political and revolutionary; but some were of a purer and more spiritual kind (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,25,38);">Lu 2:25,38</a>). To these purer elements Jesus attached Himself in His preaching of the kingdom and of Himself as its Lord. Even in the Gentile world, it is told, there was an expectation of a great One who about this time would come from Judea (Tacitus, History v.13; Suet. Vespas. 4).<P>III. The Outward Situation.<P>1. The Land:<P>Of all lands Palestine was the most fitted to be the scene of the culminating revelation of God\'s grace in the person and work of Jesus Christ, as before it was fitted to be the abode of the people chosen to receive and preserve the revelations that prepared the way for that final manifestation. At once central and secluded<65>at the junction of the three great continents of the Old World, Asia, Africa and Europe<70>the highway of nations in war and commerce<63>touching mighty powers on every hand, Egypt, Syria, Assyria, kingdoms of Asia Minor, as formerly more ancient empires, Hittite and Babylonian, now in contact with Greece and Rome, yet singularly enclosed by mountain, desert, Jordan gorge, and Great Sea, from ready entrance of foreign influences, Palestine has a place of its own in the history of revelation, which only a Divine wisdom can have given it (compare Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, Part II, chapter ii; G.A. Smith, Hist. Geog. of the Holy Land, Book I, chapters i, ii; Lange, Life of Christ, I, 246ff).<P>Its Divisions.<P>Palestine, in the Roman period, was divided into four well-defined provinces or districts<74>Judaea, with Jerusalem as its center, in the south, the strong-hold of Jewish conservatism; Samaria, in the middle, peopled from Assyrian times by mixed settlers (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',17,\'24-34\');">2Ki 17:24-34</a>), preponderatingly heathen in origin, yet now professing the Jewish religion, claiming Jewish descent (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,12);">Joh 4:12</a>), possessing a copy of the law (Samaritan Pentateuch), and a temple of their own at Gerizim (the original temple, built by Manasseh, circa 409 BC, was destroyed by John Hyrcanus, 109 BC); Galilee<65>"Galilee of the Gentiles" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,15);">Mt 4:15</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',9,1);">Isa 9:1</a>)<29>in the north, the chief scene of Christ\'s ministry, freer and more cosmopolitan in spirit, through a large infusion of Gentile population, and contact with traders, etc., of varied nationalities: these in Western Palestine, while on the east, "beyond Jordan," was Peraea, divided up into Peraea proper, Batanea, Gaulonitis, Ituraea, Trachonitis, Decapolis, etc. (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,25);">Mt 4:25</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',19,1);">19:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,1);">Lu 3:1</a>). The feeling of bitterness between Jews and Samaritans was intense (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,9);">Joh 4:9</a>). The language of the people throughout was <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ARAMAIC">ARAMAIC</a> (which see), but a knowledge of the Greek tongue was widely diffused, especially in the north, where intercourse with Greek-speaking peoples was habitual (the New Testament writings are in Greek). Jesus doubtless used the native dialect in His ordinary teaching, but it is highly probable that He also knew Greek, and was acquainted with Old Testament Scriptures in that language (the Septuagint). In this case He may have sometimes used it in His preaching (compare Roberts, Discussions on the Gospels).<P>2. Political Situation:<P>The miserable story of the vicissitudes of the Jewish people in the century succeeding the great persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes and the Maccabean revolt<6C>a story made up of faction, intrigue, wars, murders, massacres, of growing degeneracy of rulers and nation, of repeated sackings of Jerusalem and terrible slaughters<72>till Herod, the Idumean, misnamed "the Great," ascended the throne by favor of the Romans (37 BC), must be read in the books relating to the period (Ewald, History of Israel, V; Milman, Hist of Jews; Schurer, History of the Jewish People in Time of Christ, Div I, Vol I; Stanley, Jewish Church, III, etc.). Rome\'s power, first invited by Judas Maccabeus (161 BC), was finally established by Pompey\'s capture of Jerusalem (63 BC). Herod\'s way to the throne was tracked by crime and bloodshed, and murder of those most nearly related to him marked every step in his advance. His taste for splendid buildings<67>palace, temple (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',24,1);">Mt 24:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,20);">Joh 2:20</a>), fortresses, cities (Sebaste, Caesarea, etc.)<29>and lavish magnificence of his royal estate and administration, could not conceal the hideousness of his crafty, unscrupulous selfishness, his cold-blooded cruelty, his tyrannous oppression of his subjects. "Better be Herod\'s hog (hus) than his son (huios)," was the comment of Augustus, when he heard of the dying king\'s unnatural doings.<P>Changes in Territory.<P>At the time of Christ\'s birth, the whole of Palestine was united under Herod\'s rule, but on Herod\'s death, after a long reign of 37 (or, counting from his actual accession, 34) years, his dominions were, in accordance with his will, confirmed by Rome, divided. Judea and Samaria (a few towns excepted) fell to his son Archelaus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',2,22);">Mt 2:22</a>), with the title of "ethnarch"; Galilee and Perea were given to Herod Antipas, another son, with the title of "tetrarch" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',14,1);">Mt 14:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,1,19);">Lu 3:1,19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,7);">23:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',13,1);">Ac 13:1</a>); Herod Philip, a third son, received Iturea, Trachonitis, and other parts of the Northern trans-Jordanic territory, likewise as "tetrarch" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,1);">Lu 3:1</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',14,3);">Mt 14:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,17);">Mr 6:17</a>). A few years later, the tyranny of Archelaus provoked an appeal of his subjects to Augustus, and Archelaus, summoned to Rome, was banished to Gaul (7 AD). Thereafter Judea, with Samaria, was governed by a Roman procurator, under the oversight of the prefect of Syria.<P>3. The Religious Sects:<P>In the religious situation the chief fact of interest is the place occupied and prominent part played by the religious sects<74>the <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=Pharisees">Pharisees</a>, the <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SADDUCEES">Sadducees</a>, and (though unmentioned in the Gospels, these had an important influence on the early history of the church) the <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ESSENES">Essenes</a>. The rise and characteristics of these sects can here only be alluded to (see special articles).<P>(1) The Scribes.<P>From the days of Ezra zealous attention had been given to the study of the law, and an order of men had arisen<65>the "scribes"<22>whose special business it was to guard, develop and expound the law. Through their labors, scrupulous observance of the law, and, with it, of the innumerable regulations intended to preserve the law, and apply it in detail to conduct (the so-called "tradition of the elders," <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',15,2);">Mt 15:2</a>ff), became the ideal of righteousness. The sects first appear in the Maccabean age. The Maccabean conflict reveals the existence of a party known as the "Assidaeans" (Hebrew chacidhim), or "pious" ones, opposed to the lax Hellenizing tendencies of the times, and staunch observers of the law. These in the beginning gave brave support to Judas Maccabeus, and doubtless then embraced the best elements of the nation.<P>(2) The Pharisees.<P>From them, by a process of deterioration too natural in such cases, developed the party of legalists known in the Gospels as the "Pharisees" ("separated"), on which Christ\'s sternest rebukes fell for their self-righteousness, ostentation, pride and lack of sympathy and charity (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',6,2,23);">Mt 6:2</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',23,\'23,\'1-\');">23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',18,\'9-14\');">Lu 18:9-14</a>). They gloried in an excessive scrupulosity in the observance of the externals of the law, even in trivialities. To them the multitude that knew not the law were "accursed" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,49);">Joh 7:49</a>). To this party the great body of the scribes and rabbis belonged, and its powerful influence was eagerly sought by contending factions in the state.<P>(3) The Sadducees.<P>Alongside of the Pharisees were the "Sadducees" (probably from "Zadok")<29>rather a political and aristocratic clique than a religious sect, into whose possession the honors of the high-priesthood and other influential offices hereditarily passed. They are first met with by name under John Hyrcanus (135-106 BC). The Sadducees received only the law of Moses, interpreted it in a literal, secularistic spirit, rejected the Pharisaic traditions and believed in neither resurrection, angel nor spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',23,8);">Ac 23:8</a>). Usually in rivalry with the Pharisees, they are found combining with these to destroy Jesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,3,4,5,57);">Mt 26:3-5,57</a>).<P>(4) The Essenes.<P>The third party, the "Essenes," differed from both (some derive also from the Assideans) in living in fraternities apart from the general community, chiefly in the desert of Engedi, on the northwest shore of the Dead Sea, though some were found also in villages and towns; in rejecting animal sacrifices, etc., sending only gifts of incense to the temple; in practicing celibacy and community of goods; in the wearing of white garments; in certain customs (as greeting the sunrise with prayers) suggestive of oriental influence. They forbade slavery, war, oaths, were given to occult studies, had secret doctrines and books, etc. As remarked, they do not appear in the Gospel, but on account of certain resemblances, some have sought to establish a connection between them and John the Baptist and Jesus. In reality, however, nothing could be more opposed than Essenism to the essential ideas and spirit of Christ\'s teaching (compare Schurer, as above, Div. II, Vol. II, 188ff; Kuenen, Hibbert Lects on National Religions and Universal Religions, 199-208; Lightfoot, Colossians, 114-79).<P>IV. The Chronology.<P>The leading chronological questions connected with the life of Jesus are discussed in detail elsewhere (<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CHRONOLOGY+OF+THE+NEW+TESTAMENT">CHRONOLOGY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=QUIRINIUS">QUIRINIUS</a>, etc.); here it is sufficient to indicate the general scheme of dating adopted in the present article, and some of the grounds on which it is preferred. The chief questions relate to the dates of the birth and baptism of Jesus, the duration of the ministry and the date of the crucifixion.<P>1. Date of the Birth of Jesus:<P>Though challenged by some (Caspari, Bosanquet, Conder, etc., put it as late as 1 BC) the usual date for the death of Herod the Great, March, 4 BC (year of Rome 750), may be assumed as correct (for grounds of this dating, see Schurer, op. cit., Div. I, Vol. I, 464-67). The birth of Jesus was before, and apparently not very long before, this event (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',2,\'1-\');">Mt 2</a>). It may therefore be placed with probability in the latter part of the previous year (5 BC), the ordinary dating of the commencement of the Christian era being thus, as is generally recognized, four years too late. There is no certainty as to the month or day of the birth. The Christmas date, December 25, is first met with in the West in the 4th century (the Eastern date was January 6), and was then possibly borrowed from a pagan festival. December, in the winter season, seems unlikely, as unsuitable for the pasturing of flocks (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,8);">Lu 2:8</a>), though this objection is perhaps not decisive (Andrews, Conder). A more probable date is a couple of months earlier. The synchronism with Quirinius (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,2);">Lu 2:2</a>) is considered in connection with the nativity. The earlier datings of 6, 7,or even 8 BC, suggested by Ramsay, Mackinlay and others, on grounds of the assumed Roman census, astronomical phenomena, etc., appear to leave too long an interval before the death of Herod, and conflict with other data, as <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,1);">Lu 3:1</a> (see below).<P>2. Date of Baptism:<P>John is said by Luke to have begun to preach and baptize "in the fifteenth year of Tiberius" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,1);">Lu 3:1</a>), and Jesus "was about thirty years of age" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,23);">Lu 3:23</a>) when He was baptized by John, and entered on His ministry. If the 15th year of Tiberius is dated, as seems most likely, from his association with Augustus as colleague in the government, 765 AUC, or 12 AD (Tacitus, Annals i.3; Suetonius on Augustus, 97), and if Jesus may be supposed to have been baptized about 6 months after John commenced his work, these data combine in bringing us to the year 780 AUC, or 27 AD, as the year of our Lord\'s baptism, in agreement with our former conclusion as to the date of His birth in 5 BC. To place the birth earlier is to make Jesus 32 or 33 years of age at His baptism<73>an unwarrantable extension of the "about." In accord with this is the statement in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,20);">Joh 2:20</a> that the temple had been 46 years in building (it began in 20-19 BC) at the time of Christ\'s first Passover; therefore in 780 AUC, or 27-AD (compare Schurer, op. cit., Div. I, Vol. I, 410).<P>3. Length of Ministry:<P>The determination of the precise duration of our Lord\'s ministry involves more doubtful elements. Setting aside, as too arbitrary, schemes which would, with some of the early Fathers, compress the whole ministry into little over a single year (Browne, Hort, etc.)<29>a view which involves without authority the rejection of the mention of the Passover in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,4);">Joh 6:4</a><3E>there remains the choice between a two years\' and a three years\' ministry. Both have able advocates (Turner in article "Chronology," and Sanday in article "Jesus Christ," in H D B, advocate the two years\' scheme; Farrar, Ramsay, D. Smith, etc., adhere to the three years\' scheme). An important point is the view taken of the unnamed "feast" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,1);">Joh 5:1</a>. John has already named a Passover<65>Christ\'s first<73>in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,13,23);">2:13,23</A>; another, which Jesus did not attend, is named in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,4);">6:4</a>; the final Passover, at which He was crucified, appears in all the evangelists. If the "feast" of <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,1);">Joh 5:1</a> (the article is probably to be omitted) is also, as some think, a Passover, then John has four Passovers, and a three years\' ministry becomes necessary. It is claimed, however, that in this case the "feast" would almost certainly have been named. It still does not follow, even if a minor feast<73>say Purim<69>is intended, that we are shut up to a two years\' ministry. Mr. Turner certainly goes beyond his evidence in affirming that "while two years must, not more than two years can, be allowed for the interval from <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,13,23);">Joh 2:13,23</a> to <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,55);">Joh 11:55</a>." The two years\' scheme involves, as will be seen on consideration of details, a serious overcrowding and arbitrary transposition of incidents, which speak to the need of longer time. We shall assume that the ministry lasted for three years, reserving reasons till the narrative is examined.<P>4. Date of Christ\'s Death:<P>On the hypothesis now accepted, the crucifixion of Jesus took place at the Passover of 30 AD. On the two years\' scheme it would fall a year earlier. On both sides it is agreed that it occurred on the Friday of the week of the Passover, but it is disputed whether this Friday was the 14th or the 15th day of the month. The Gospel of John is pleaded for the former date, the Synoptics for the latter. The question will be considered in connection with the time of the Last Supper. Meanwhile it is to be observed that, if the 15th is the correct date, there seems reason to believe that the 15th of Nisan fell on a Friday in the year just named, 783 AUG, or 30 AD. We accept this provisionally as the date of the crucifixion.``132';
isbe[5018]='Jesus Christ, 3`PART II. THE PROBLEMS OF THE LIFE OF JESUS<P>I. The Miracles.<P>1. The "Modern" Attitude:<P>Everyone is aware that the presence of miracle in the Gospels is a chief ground of the rejection of its history by the representatives of the "modern" school. It is not questioned that it is a super-natural person whose picture is presented in the Gospels. There is no real difference between the Synoptics and John in this respect. "Even the oldest Gospel," writes Bousset, "is written from the standpoint of faith; already for Mark, Jesus is not only the Messiah of the Jewish people, but the miraculous eternal Son of God, whose glory shone in the world" (Was wissen wir von Jesus? 54, 57). But the same writer, interpreting the "modern" spirit, declares that no account embracing supernatural events can be accepted as historical. "The main characteristic of this modern mode of thinking," he says, "rests upon the determination to try to explain everything that takes place in the world by natural causes, or<6F>to express it in another form<72>it rests on the determined assertion of universal laws to which all phenomena, natural and spiritual, are subject" (What Is Religion? English translation, 283).<P>2. Supernatural in the Gospels:<P>With such an assumption it is clear that the Gospels are condemned before they are read. Not only is Jesus there a supernatural person, but He is presented as super-natural in natural in character, in works, in claims (see below); He performs miracles; He has a supernatural birth, and a supernatural resurrection. All this is swept away. It may be allowed that He had remarkable gifts of healing, but these are in the class of "faithcures" (thus Harnack), and not truly supernatural. When one seeks the justification for this selfconfident dogmatism, it is difficult to discover it, except on the ground of a pantheistic or monistic theory of the universe which excludes the personal God of Christianity. If God is the Author and Sustainer of the natural system, which He rules for moral ends, it is impossible to see why, for high ends of revelation and redemption, a supernatural economy should not be engrafted on the natural, achieving ends which could not otherwise be attained. This does not of course touch the question of evidence for any particular miracle, which must be judged of from its connection with the person of the worker, and the character of the apostolic witnesses. The well-meant effort to explain all miracles through the action of unknown natural laws<77>which is what Dr. Sanday calls "making both ends meet" (Life of Christ in Recent Research, 302)<29>breaks down in the presence of such miracles as the instantaneous cleansing of the leper, restoration of sight to the blind, the raising of the dead, acts which plainly imply an exercise of creative power. In such a life as Christ\'s, transcendence of the ordinary powers of Nature is surely to be looked for.<P>II. The Messiahship.<P>1. Reserve of Jesus and Modern Criticism:<P>A difficulty has been found in the fact that in all the Gospels Jesus knew Himself to be the Messiah at least from the time of His baptism, yet did not, even to His disciples, unreservedly announce Himself as such till after Peter\'s great confession at Caesarea Philippi (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',16,13);">Mt 16:13</a>). On this seeming secrecy the bold hypothesis has been built that Jesus in reality never made the claim to Messiahship, and that the passages which imply the contrary in Mark (the original Gospel) are unhistorical (Wrede; compare on this and other theories, Schweitzer, The Quest of the Historical Jesus, English translation; Sanday, The Life of Christ in Recent Research). So extreme an opinion is rejected by most; but modern critics vie with each other in the freedom with which they treat the testimony of the evangelists on this subject. Baldensperger, e.g., supposes that Jesus did not attain full certainty on His Messiahship till near the time of Peter\'s confession, and arbitrarily transposes the earlier sections in which the title "Son of Man" occurs till after that event (Das Selbstbewusstsein Jesu, 2nd edition, 246). Bousset thinks that Jesus adopted the Messianic role as the only one open to Him, but bore it as a "burden" (compare his Jesus). Schweitzer connects it with apocalyptic ideas of a wildly fantastic character (op. cit., chapter xix).<P>2. A Growing Revelation:<P>There is, however, no need for supposing that Peter\'s confession marks the first dawn of this knowledge in the minds of the apostles. Rather was it the exalted expression of a faith already present, which had long been maturing. The baptism and temptation, with the use of the title "Son of Man," the tone of authority in His teaching, His miracles, and many special incidents, show, as clearly as do the discourses in John, that Jesus was from the beginning fully conscious of His vocation, and His reserve in the use of the title sprang, not from any doubt in His own mind as to His right to it, but from His desire to avoid false associations till the true nature of His Messiahship should be revealed. The Messiahship was in process of self-revelation throughout to those who had eyes to see it (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,\'66-71\');">Joh 6:66-71</a>). What it involved will be seen later.<P>III. Kingdom and Apocalypse.<P>1. The Kingdom<6F>Present or Future?:<P>Connected with the Messiahship is the idea of the "Kingdom of God" or "of heaven," which some in modern times would interpret in a purely eschatological sense, in the light of Jewish apocalyptic conceptions (Johannes Weiss, Schweitzer, etc.). The kingdom is not a thing of the present, but wholly a thing of the future, to be introduced by convulsions of Nature and the Parousia of the Son of Man. The language of the Lord\'s Prayer, "Thy kingdom come," is quoted in support of this contention, but the next petition should guard against so violent an inference. "Thy will be done," Jesus teaches His disciples to pray, "as in heaven, so on earth" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',6,10);">Mt 6:10</a>). The kingdom is the reign of God in human hearts and lives in this world as well as in the next. It would not be wrong to define it as consisting essentially in the supremacy of God\'s will in human hearts and human affairs, and in every department of these affairs. As Jesus describes the kingdom, it has, in the plain meaning of His words, a present being on earth, though its perfection is in eternity. The parables in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',13,\'1-\');">Mt 13</a> and elsewhere exhibit it as founded by the sowing of the word of truth (Sower), as a mingling of good and evil elements (Tares), as growing from small beginnings to large proportions (Mustard Seed), as gradually leavening humanity (Leaven), as of priceless value (Treasure; Pearl; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',6,33);">Mt 6:33</a>); as terminating in a judgment (Tares, Dragnet); as perfected in the world to come (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',13,43);">Mt 13:43</a>). It was a kingdom spiritual in nature (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',17,20,21);">Lu 17:20,21</a>), universal in range (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',8,11);">Mt 8:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',21,43);">21:43</a>, etc.), developing from a principle of life within (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',4,\'26-29\');">Mr 4:26-29</a>), and issuing in victory over all opposition (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',21,44);">Mt 21:44</a>).<P>2. Apocalyptic Beliefs:<P>It is difficult to pronounce on the extent to which Jesus was acquainted with current apocalyptic beliefs, or allowed these to color the imagery of parts of His teachings. These beliefs certainly did not furnish the substance of His teaching, and it may be doubted whether they more than superficially affected even its form. Jewish apocalyptic knew nothing of a death and resurrection of the Messiah and of His return in glory to bring in an everlasting kingdom. What Jesus taught on these subjects sprang from His own Messianic consciousness, with the certainty He had of His triumph over death and His exaltation to the right hand of God. It was in Old Testament prophecy, not in late Jewish apocalypse, that His thoughts of the future triumph of His kingdom were grounded, and from the vivid imagery of the prophets He borrowed most of the clothing of these thoughts. <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',53,\'1-\');">Isa 53</a> e.g., predicts not only the rejection and death of the Servant of Yahweh (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',53,3,7,8,9,12);">53:3,7-9,12</A>), but the prolongation of His days and His victorious reign (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',53,\'10-12\');">53:10-12</A>). Daniel, not the Book of Enoch, is the source of the title, "Son of Man," and of the imagery of coming on the clouds of heaven (<a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',7,13);">Da 7:13</a>). The ideas of resurrection, etc., have their ground in the Old Testament (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ESCHATOLOGY+OF+THE+OLD+TESTAMENT">ESCHATOLOGY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT</a>). With the extravagant, unspiritual forms into which these conceptions were thrown in the Jewish apocalyptic books His teaching had nothing in common. The new apocalyptic school represented by Schweitzer reduces the history of Jesus to folly, fanaticism and hopeless disillusionment.<P>IV. The Character and Claims.<P>1. Denial of Christ\'s Moral Perfection:<P>Where the Gospels present us in Jesus with the image of a flawless character<65>in the words of the writer to the Hebrews, "holy, guileless, undefiled, separated from sinners" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,26);">Heb 7:26</a>)<29>modern criticism is driven by an inexorable necessity to deprive Jesus of His sinless perfection, and to impute to Him the error, frailty, and moral infirmity that belong to ordinary mortals. In Schweitzer\'s portraiture (compare op. cit.), He is an apocalyptic enthusiastic, ruled by illusory ideals, deceiving Himself and others as to who He was, and as to the impending end of the world. Those who show a more adequate appreciation of Christ\'s spiritual greatness are still prevented by their humanitarian estimate of His person and their denial of the supernatural in history from recognizing the possibility of His sinlessness. It may confidently be said that there is hardly a single writer of the modern school who grants Christ\'s moral perfection. To do so would be to admit a miracle in humanity, and we have heard that miracle is by the highest rational necessity excluded. This, however, is precisely the point on which the modern so-called "historical-critical" mode of presentation most obviously breaks down. The ideal of perfect holiness in the Gospels which has fascinated the conscience of Christendom for 18 centuries, and attests itself anew to every candid reader, is not thus lightly to be got rid of, or explained away as the invention of a church gathered out (without the help of the ideal) promiscuously from Jews and Gentiles. It was not the church<63>least of all such a church<63>that created Christ, but Christ that created the church.<P>(1) The Sinlessness Assured.<P>The sinlessness of Jesus is a datum in the Gospels. Over against a sinful world He stands as a Saviour who is Himself without sin. His is the one life in humanity in which is presented a perfect knowledge and unbroken fellowship with the Father, undeviating obedience to His will, unswerving devotion under the severest strain of temptation and suffering to the highest ideal of goodness. The ethical ideal was never raised to so absolute a height as it is in the teaching of Jesus, and the miracle is that, high as it is in its unsullied purity, the character of Jesus corresponds with it, and realizes it. Word and life for once in history perfectly agree. Jesus, with the keenest sensitiveness to sin in thought and feeling as in deed, is conscious of no sin in Himself, confesses no sin, disclaims the presence of it, speaks and acts continually on the assumption that He is without it. Those who knew Him best declared Him to be without sin (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',2,22);">1Pe 2:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,5);">1Joh 3:5</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',5,21);">2Co 5:21</a>). The Gospels must be rent in pieces before this image of a perfect holiness can be effaced from them.<P>(2) What This Implies.<P>How is this phenomenon of a sinless personality in Jesus to be explained? It is itself a miracle, and can only be made credible by a creative miracle in Christ\'s origin. It may be argued that a Virgin Birth does not of itself secure sinlessness, but it will hardly be disputed that at least a sinless personality implies miracle in its production. It is precisely because of this that the modern spirit feels bound to reject it. In the Gospels it is not the Virgin Birth by itself which is invoked to explain Christ\'s sinlessness, but the supernatural conception by the Holy Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,35);">Lu 1:35</a>). It is because of this conception that the birth is a virgin one. No explanation of the supernatural element in Christ\'s Person is more rational or credible (see below on "Nativity").<P>2. Sinlessness and the Messianic Claim:<P>If Jesus from the first was conscious of Himself as without sin and if, as the converse of this, He knew Himself as standing in an unbroken filial fellowship with the Father, He must early have become conscious of His special vocation, and learnt to distinguish Himself from others as one called to bless and save them. Here is the true germ of His Messianic consciousness, from which everything subsequently is unfolded. He stood in a rapport with the Father which opened His spirit to a full, clear revelation of the Father\'s will regarding Himself, His mission, the kingdom He came to found, His sufferings as the means of salvation to the world, the glory that awaited Him when His earthly work was done. In the light of this revelation He read the Old Testament Scriptures and saw His course there made plain. When the hour had come He went to John for baptism, and His brief, eventful ministry, which should end in the cross, began. This is the reading of events which introduces consistency and purpose into the life of Jesus, and it is this we mean to follow in the sketch now to be given.``132';
isbe[5019]='Jesus Christ, 4A`PART III. COURSE OF THE EARTHLY LIFE OF JESUS<P>1. Divisions of the History:<P>The wonderful story of the life of the world\'s Redeemer which we are now to endeavor to trace falls naturally into several divisions:<P class="in15">A. From the Nativity to the Baptism and Temptation.<P class="in15">B. The Early Judean Ministry.<P class="in15">C. The Galilean Ministry and Visits to the Feasts.<P class="in15">D. The Last Journey to Jerusalem.<P class="in15">E. The Passion Week<65>Betrayal, Trial, and Crucifixion.<P class="in15">F. The Resurrection and Ascension.<P>2. Not a Complete "Life":<P>To avoid misconception, it is important to remember, that, rich as are the narratives of the Gospels, materials do not exist for a complete biography or "Life" of Jesus. There is a gap, broken only by a single incident, from His infancy till His 30th year; there are cycles of events out of myriads left unrecorded (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',21,25);">Joh 21:25</a>); there are sayings, parables, longer discourses, connected with particular occasions; there are general summaries of periods of activity comprised in a few verses. The evangelists, too, present their materials each from his own standpoint<6E>Matthew from theocratic, Mark from that of Christ\'s practical activity, Luke from the universalistic and human-sympathetic, John from the Divine. In reproducing the history respect must be had to this focusing from distinct points of view.<P>A. FROM THE NATIVITY TO THE BAPTISM AND TEMPTATION<P>I. The Nativity.<P>1. Hidden Piety in Judaism: Old Testament prophecy expired with the promise on its lips, "Behold, I send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, will suddenly come to his temple; and the messenger of the covenant, whom ye desire, behold, he cometh, saith Yahweh of hosts" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mal\',3,1);">Mal 3:1</a>). In the years immediately before Christ\'s birth the air was tremulous with the sense of impending great events. The fortunes of the Jewish people were at their lowest ebb. Pharisaic formalism, Sadducean unbelief, fanatical Zealotry, Herodian sycophantism, Roman oppression, seemed to have crushed out the last sparks of spiritual religion. Yet in numerous quiet circles in Judea, and even in remote Galilee, little godly bands still nourished their souls on the promises, looking for "the consolation of Israel" and "redemption of Jerusalem" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,25,38);">Lu 2:25,38</a>). Glimpses of these are vouchsafed in Zacharias and Elisabeth, in Simeon, in Anna, in Joseph and Mary (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,\'1-\');">Lu 1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,\'1-\');">2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',1,18);">Mt 1:18</a>). It was in hearts in these circles that the stirrings of the prophetic spirit began to make themselves felt anew, preparing for the Advent (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,27,36);">Lu 2:27,36</a>).<P>2. Birth of the Baptist:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,\'1-\');">Luke 1</a>)<P>In the last days of Herod<6F>perhaps in the year 748 of Rome, or 6 BC<42>the aged priest Zacharias, of the course of Abijah (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',24,10);">1Ch 24:10</a>; compare Schurer, Div. II, Vol. I, 219ff), was ministering in the temple at the altar of incense at the hour of evening prayer. Scholars have reckoned, if on somewhat precarious grounds, that the ministry of the order to which Zacharias belonged fell in this year in the month of April or in early October (compare Andrews, Life of our Lord). Now a wonderful thing happened. Zacharias and his wife Elisabeth, noted for their blameless piety, were up to this time childless. On this evening an angel, appearing at the side of the altar of incense, announced to Zacharias that a son should be born to them, in whom should be realized the prediction of Malachi of one coming in the spirit and power of Elijah to prepare the way of the Lord (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mal\',4,5,6);">Mal 4:5,6</a>). His name was to be called John. Zacharias hesitated to believe, and was stricken with dumbness till the promise should be fulfilled. It happened as the angel had foretold, and at the circumcision and naming of his son his tongue was again loosed. Zacharias, filled with the Spirit, poured forth his soul in a hymn of praise<73>the Benedictus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,\'5-25\');">Lu 1:5-25</a>,<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,\'57-80\');">57-80</a>; compare <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JOHN+THE+BAPTIST">JOHN THE BAPTIST</a>).<P>3. The Annunciation and Its Results:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,\'26-56\');">Lu 1:26-56</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',1,\'18-25\');">Mt 1:18-25</a>)<P>Meanwhile yet stranger things were happening in the little village of Nazareth, in Galilee (now enNacirah). There resided a young maiden of purest character, named Mary, betrothed to a carpenter of the village (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',13,55);">Mt 13:55</a>), called Joseph, who, although in so humble a station, was of the lineage of David (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',11,1);">Isa 11:1</a>). Mary, most probably, was likewise of Davidic descent (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,32);">Lu 1:32</a>; on the genealogies, see below). The fables relating to the parentage and youth of Mary in the Apocryphal Gospels may safely be discarded. To this maiden, three months before the birth of the Baptist, the same angelic visitant (Gabriel) appeared, hailing her as "highly favored" of God, and announcing to her that, through the power of the Holy Spirit, she should become the mother of the Saviour. The words "Blessed art thou among women," in the King James Version of <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,28);">Lu 1:28</a> are omitted by the Revised Version (British and American), though found below (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,42);">1:42</a>) in Elisabeth\'s salutation. They give, in any case, no support to Mariolatry, stating simply the fact that Mary was more honored than any other woman of the race in being chosen to be the mother of the Lord.<P>(1) The Amazing Message.<P>The announcement itself was of the most amazing import. Mary herself was staggered at the thought that, as a virgin, she should become a mother (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,34);">Lu 1:34</a>). Still more surprising were the statements made as to the Son she was to bear. Conceived of the Holy Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,35);">Lu 1:35</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',1,18);">Mt 1:18</a>), He would be great, and would be called "the Son of the Most High" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,32);">Lu 1:32</a>)<29>"the Son of God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,35);">Lu 1:35</a>); there would be given to Him the throne of His father David, and His reign would be eternal (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,32,33);">Lu 1:32,33</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',9,6,7);">Isa 9:6,7</a>); He would be "holy" from the womb (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,35);">Lu 1:35</a>). His name was to be called Jesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,31);">Lu 1:31</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',1,21);">Mt 1:21</a>), denoting Him as Saviour. The holiness of Jesus is here put in connection with His miraculous conception, and surely rightly. In no case in the history of mankind has natural generation issued in a being who is sinless, not to say superhuman. The fact that Jesus, even in His human nature, was supernaturally begotten<65>was "Son of God"<22>does not exclude the higher and eternal Sonship according to the Divine nature (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,18);">Joh 1:18</a>). The incarnation of such a Divine Being as Paul and John depict, itself implies miracle in human origin. On the whole message being declared to her, Mary accepted what was told her in meek humility (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,38);">Lu 1:38</a>).<P>(2) The Visit to Elisabeth.<P>With the announcement to herself there was given to Mary an indication of what had befallen her kinswoman Elisabeth, and Mary\'s first act, on recovering from her astonishment, was to go in haste to the home of Elisabeth in the hill country of Judea (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,39);">Lu 1:39</a>). Very naturally she did not rashly forestall God\'s action in speaking to Joseph of what had occurred, but waited in quietness and faith till God should reveal in His own way what He had done. The meeting of the two holy women was the occasion of a new outburst of prophetic inspiration. Elisabeth, moved by the Spirit, greeted Mary in exalted language as the mother of the Lord (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,\'42-45\');">Lu 1:42-45</a>)<29>a confirmation to Mary of the message she had received; Mary, on her part, broke forth in rhythmical utterance, "My soul doth magnify the Lord," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,\'46-56\');">Lu 1:46-56</a>). Her hymn<6D>the sublime Magnificat<61>is to be compared with Hannah\'s (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',2,\'1-11\');">1Sa 2:1-11</a>), which furnishes the model of it. Mary abode with Elisabeth about three months, then returned to her own house.<p>(3) Joseph\'s Perplexity.<P>Here a new trial awaited her. Mary\'s condition of motherhood could not long be concealed, and when Joseph first became aware of it, the shock to a man so just (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',1,19);">Mt 1:19</a>) would be terrible in its severity. The disappearance of Joseph from the later gospel history suggests that he was a good deal older than his betrothed, and it is possible that, while strict, upright and conscientious, his disposition was not as strong on the side of sympathy as so delicate a case required. It is going too far to say with Lange, "He encountered the modest, but unshakably firm Virgin with decided doubt; the first Ebionite"; but so long as he had no support beyond Mary\'s word, his mind was in a state of agonized perplexity. His first thought was to give Mary a private "bill of divorcement" to avoid scandal (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',1,19);">Mt 1:19</a>). Happily, his doubts were soon set at rest by a Divine intimation, and he hesitated no longer to take Mary to be his wife (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',1,24);">Mt 1:24</a>). Luke\'s Gospel, which confines itself to the story of Mary, says nothing of this episode; Matthew\'s narrative, which bears evidence of having come from Joseph himself, supplies the lack by showing how Joseph came to have the confidence in Mary which enabled him to take her to wife, and become sponsor for her child. The trial, doubtless, while it lasted, was not less severe for Mary than for Joseph<70>a prelude of that sword which was to "pierce through (her) own soul" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,35);">Lu 2:35</a>). There is no reason to believe that Joseph and Mary did not subsequently live in the usual relations of wedlock, and that children were not born to them (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',13,55,56);">Mt 13:55,56</a>, etc.).<P>4. The Birth at Bethlehem:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',2,1);">Matthew 2:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,\'1-7\');">Luke 2:1-7</a>)<P>Matthew gives no indication of where the events narrated in his first chapter took place, first mentioning Nazareth on the occasion of the return of the holy family from Egypt (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',2,23);">2:23</a>). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',2,1);">2:1</a> he transports us to Bethlehem as the city of Christ\'s birth. It is left to Luke to give an account of the circumstances which brought Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem<65>thus fulfilling prophecy (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mic\',5,2);">Mic 5:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',2,5,6);">Mt 2:5,6</a>)<29>at this critical hour, and to record the lowly manner of Christ\'s birth there.<P>(1) The Census of Quirinius.<P>The emperor Augustus had given orders for a general enrollment throughout the empire (the fact of periodical enrollments in the empire is well established by Professor W.M. Ramsay in his Was Christ Born at Bethlehem?), and this is stated to have been given effect to in Judea when Quirinius was governor of Syria (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,1,2);">Lu 2:1,2</a>). The difficulties connected with the enrollment or census here mentioned are discussed in the article <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=QUIRINIUS">QUIRINIUS</a>. It is known that Quirinius did conduct a census in Judea in 6 AD (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',5,37);">Ac 5:37</a>), but the census at Christ\'s birth is distinguished from this by Luke as "the first enrollment." The difficulty was largely removed when it was ascertained, as it has been to the satisfaction of most scholars, that Quirinius was twice governor of Syria<69>first, after Herod\'s death, 4-1 BC, and again in 6-11 AD. The probability is that the census was begun under Varus, the immediate predecessor of Quirinius<75>or even earlier under Saturninus<75>but was delayed in its application to Judea, then under Herod\'s jurisdiction, and was completed by Quirinius, with whose name it is officially connected. That the enrollment was made by each one going to his own city (verse <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,3);">3</a>) is explained by the fact that the census was not made according to the Roman method, but, as befitted a dependent kingdom, in accordance with Jewish usages (compare Ramsay).<P>(2) Jesus Born.<P>It must be left undecided whether the journey of Mary to Bethlehem with Joseph was required for any purpose of registration, or sprang simply from her unwillingness to be separated from Joseph in so trying a situation. To Bethlehem, in any case, possibly by Divine monition, she came, and there, in the ancestral city of David, in circumstances the lowliest conceivable, brought forth her marvelous child. In unadorned language<67>very different from the embellishments of apocryphal story<72>Luke narrates how, when the travelers arrived, no room was found for them in the "inn"<22>the ordinary eastern khan or caravanserai, a square enclosure, with an open court for cattle, and a raised recess round the walls for shelter of visitors<72>and how, when her babe was born, Mary wrapped Him in swaddling clothes, and laid Him in a manger. The wearied pair having, according to Luke, been crowded out of, and not merely within, the inn, there is every probability that the birth took place, not, as some suppose, in the courtyard of the inn, but, as the oldest tradition asserts (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, 78), in a cave in the neighborhood, used for similar purposes of lodgment and housing of cattle. High authorities look favorably on the "cave of the nativity" still shown, with its inscription, Hic de virgine Maria Jesus Christus natus est, as marking the sacred spot. In such incredibly mean surroundings was "the only begotten of the Father" ushered into the world He came to redeem. How true the apostle\'s word that He "emptied" Himself (<a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',2,7);">Php 2:7</a>)! A problem lies in the very circumstances of the entrance into time of such a One, which only the thought of a voluntary humiliation for saving ends can solve.<P>5. The Incidents of the Infancy:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,\'8-39\');">Luke 2:8-39</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',2,\'1-12\');">Matthew 2:1-12</a>)<P>Born, however, though Jesus was, in a low condition, the Father did not leave Him totally without witness to His Sonship. There were rifts in the clouds through which cidents of the hidden glory streamed. The scenes in the narratives of the Infancy exhibit a strange commingling of the glorious and the lowly.<P>(1) The Visit of the Shepherds.<P>To shepherds watching their flocks by night in the fields near Bethlehem the first disclosure was made. The season, one would infer, could hardly have been winter, though it is stated that there is frequently an interval of dry weather in Judea between the middle of December and the middle of February, when such a keeping of flocks would be possible (Andrews). The angel world is not far removed from us, and as angels preannounced the birth of Christ, so, when He actually came into the world (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',1,6);">Heb 1:6</a>), angels of God made the night vocal with their songs. First, an angel appearing in the midst of the Divine glory<72>the "Shekinah"<22>announced to the sorely alarmed shepherds the birth of a "Saviour who was Christ the Lord" at Bethlehem; then a whole chorus of the heavenly host broke in with the refrain, "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men in whom He is well pleased" (literally, "men of good pleasure")<29>since, the Christmas hymn of the generations (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,\'1-14\');">Lu 2:1-14</a>). The shepherds, guided as to how to recognize the babe (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,12);">Lu 2:12</a>), went at once, and found it to be ever, as they had been told. Thence they hastened to spread abroad the tidings<67>the first believers, the first worshippers, the first preachers (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,\'15-20\');">Lu 2:15-20</a>). Mary cherished the sayings in the stillness of her heart.<P>(2) The Circumcision and Presentation in the Temple.<P>Jewish law required that on the 8th day the male child should be circumcised, and on the same day He received His name (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,\'59-63\');">Lu 1:59-63</a>). Jesus, though entirely pure, underwent the rite which denoted the putting off of fleshly sin (<a onClick="return mV(\'Col\',2,11);">Col 2:11</a>), and became bound, as a true Israelite, to render obedience to every Divine commandment. The name "Jesus" was then given Him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,21);">Lu 2:21</a>). On the 40th day came the ceremony of presentation in the temple at Jerusalem, when Mary had to offer for her purifying (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',12,\'1-\');">Le 12</a>; Mary\'s was the humbler offering of the poor, "a pair of turtle-doves, or two young pigeons" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',12,8);">Le 12:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,24);">Lu 2:24</a>)), and when the first-born son had to be redeemed with 5 shekels of the sanctuary (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',18,15,16);">Nu 18:15,16</a>; about $3.60 (in 1915)). The observance was an additional token that Christ<73>personally sinless<73>did not shrink from full identification with our race in the responsibilities of its sinful condition. Ere it was completed, however, the ceremony was lifted to a Diviner level, and a new attestation was given of the dignity of the child of Mary, by the action and inspired utterances of the holy Simeon and the aged prophetess Anna. To Simeon, a righteous and devout man, "looking for the consolation of Israel," it had been revealed that he should not die till he had seen the Lord\'s Christ, and, led by the Spirit into the temple at the very time when Jesus was being presented, he recognized in Him the One for whom he had waited, and, taking Him in his arms, gave utterance to the beautiful words of the Nunc Dimittis<69>"Now lettest thou thy servant depart, Lord," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,\'25-32\');">Lu 2:25-32</a>). He told also how this child was set for the falling and rising of many in Israel, and how, through Him, a sword should pierce through Mary\'s own soul (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,34,35);">Lu 2:34,35</a>). Entering at the same hour, the prophetess Anna<6E>now in extreme old age (over 100; a constant frequenter of the temple, <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,37);">Lu 2:37</a><3E>confirmed his words, and spoke of Him to all who, like herself, looked "for the redemption of Jerusalem."<P>(3) Visit of the Magi.<P>It seems to have been after the presentation in the temple that the incident took place recorded by Matthew of the visit of the Magi. The Magi, a learned class belonging originally to Chaldea or Persia (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=MAGI">MAGI</a>), had, in course of time, greatly degenerated (compare Simon Magus, <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',8,9);">Ac 8:9</a>), but those who now came to seek Christ from the distant East were of a nobler order. They appeared in Jerusalem inquiring, "Where is He that is born King of the Jews?" and declaring that they had seen His star in the East, and had come to worship Him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',2,2);">Mt 2:2</a>). Observers of the nightly sky, any significant appearance in the heavens would at once attract their attention. Many (Kepler, Ideler, etc.; compare Ramsay, op. cit., 215ff) are disposed to connect this "star" with a remarkable conjunction<6F>or series of conjunctions<6E>of planets in 7-6 BC, in which case it is possible that two years may have elapsed (compare the inquiry of Herod and his subsequent action, <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',2,7,16);">Mt 2:7,16</a>) from their observation of the sign. On the other hand, the fact of the star reappearing and seeming to stand over a house in Bethlehem (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',2,9);">Mt 2:9</a>) rather points to a distinct phenomenon (compare <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=BETHLEHEM,+STAR+OF">BETHLEHEM, STAR OF</a>). The inquiry of the Magi at once awakened Herod\'s alarm; accordingly, having ascertained from the scribes that the Christ should be born at Bethlehem (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mic\',5,2);">Mic 5:2</a>), he summoned the Magi, questioned them as to when exactly the star appeared, then sent them to Bethlehem to search out the young child, hypocritically pretending that he also wished to worship Him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',2,7,8);">Mt 2:7,8</a>). Herod had faith enough to believe the Scriptures, yet was foolish enough to think that he could thwart God\'s purpose. Guided by the star, which anew appeared, the wise men came to Bethlehem, offered their gifts, and afterward, warned by God, returned by another road, without reporting to Herod. It is a striking picture<72>Herod the king, and Christ the King; Christ a power even in His cradle, inspiring terror, attracting homage! The faith of these sages, unrepelled by the lowly surroundings of the child they had discovered, worshipping, and laying at His feet their gold, frankincense and myrrh, is a splendid anticipation of the victories Christ was yet to win among the wisest as well as the humblest of our race. Herod, finding himself, as he thought, befooled by the Magi, avenged himself by ordering a massacre of all the male children of two years old, and under, in Bethlehem and its neighborhood (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',2,\'16-19\');">Mt 2:16-19</a>). This slaughter, if not recorded elsewhere (compare however, Macrobius, quoted by Ramsay, op. cit., 219), is entirely in keeping with the cruelty of Herod\'s disposition. Meanwhile, Joseph and Mary had been withdrawn from the scene of danger (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',2,17);">Mt 2:17</a> connects the mourning of the Bethlehem mothers with Rachel\'s weeping, <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',31,15);">Jer 31:15</a>).<P>6. Flight to Egypt and Return to Nazareth:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',2,\'13-15\');">Matthew 2:13-15</a>,<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',2,\'19-23\');">19-23</a>)<P>The safety of Mary and her threatened child was provided for by a Divine warning to retire for a time to Egypt (mark the recurring expression, "the young child and his mother"<22>the young child taking the lead, <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',2,11,13,14,20,21);">Mt 2:11,13,14,20,21</a>), whither, accordingly, they were conducted by Joseph (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',2,14);">Mt 2:14</a>). The sojourn was not a long one. Herod\'s death brought permission to return, but as Archelaus, Herod\'s son (the worst of them), reigned in Judea in his father\'s stead (not king, but "ethnarch"), Joseph was directed to withdraw to Galilee; hence it came about that he and Mary, with the babe, found themselves again in Nazareth, where Luke anew takes up the story (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,39);">Lu 2:39</a>), the thread of which had been broken by the incidents in Matthew. Matthew sees in the return from Egypt a refulfilling of the experiences of Israel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',11,1);">Ho 11:1</a>), and in the settling in Nazareth a connection with the Old Testament prophecies of Christ\'s lowly estate (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',11,1);">Isa 11:1</a>, netser, "branch"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',3,8);">Zec 3:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',6,12);">6:12</a>, etc.).<P>7. Questions and Objections:<P>The objections to the credibility of the narratives of the Virgin Birth have already partly been adverted to. (See further the articles on <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=MARY">MARY</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=VIRGIN+BIRTH">VIRGIN BIRTH</a>; and the writer\'s volume, The Virgin Birth of Christ.)<P>(1) The Virgin Birth.<P>The narratives in Matthew and Luke are attested by all manuscripts and versions genuine parts of their respective Gospels, and as coming to us in their integrity. The narrative of Luke is generally recognized as resting on an Aramaic basis, which, from its diction and the primitive character of its conceptions, belongs to the earliest age. While in Luke\'s narrative everything is presented from the standpoint of Mary, in Matthew it is Joseph who is in the forefront, suggesting that the virgin mother is the source of information in the one case, and Joseph himself in the other. The narratives are complementary, not contradictory. That Mark and John do not contain narratives of the Virgin Birth cannot be wondered at, when it is remembered that Mark\'s Gospel begins of purpose with the Baptism of John, and that the Fourth Gospel aims at setting forth the Divine descent, not the circumstances of the earthly nativity. "The Word became flesh" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,14);">Joh 1:14</a>)<29>everything is already implied in that. Neither can it be objected to that Paul does not in his letters or public preaching base upon so essentially private a fact as the miraculous conception<6F>at a time, too, when Mary probably still lived. With the exception of the narrowest sect of the Jewish Ebionites and some of the Gnostic sects, the Virgin Birth was universally accepted in the early church.<P>(2) The Genealogies<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',1,\'1-17\');">Matthew 1:1-17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,\'23-28\');">Luke 3:23-28</a>)<P>Difficulty is felt with the genealogies in Matthew and Luke (one descending, the other ascending), which, while both professing to trace the descent of Jesus from David and Abraham (Luke from Adam), yet go entirely apart in the pedigree after David. See on this the article <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=GENEALOGY+OF+JESUS+CHRIST">GENEALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST</a>. A favorite view is that Matthew exhibits the legal, Luke the natural descent of Jesus. There is plausibility in the supposition that though, in form, a genealogy of Joseph, Luke\'s is really the genealogy of Mary. It was not customary, it is true, to make out pedigrees of females, but the case here was clearly exceptional, and the passing of Joseph into the family of his father-in-law Heli would enable the list to be made out in his name. Celsus, in the 2nd century, appears thus to have understood it when he derides the notion that through so lowly a woman as the carpenter\'s wife, Jesus should trace His lineage up to the first man (Origen, Contra Celsus, ii. 32; Origen\'s reply proceeds on the same assumption. Compare article on "Genealogies" in Kitto, II).<P>II. The Years of Silence<63>the Twelfth Year.<P>1. The Human Development:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,40,52);">Luke 2:40,52</a>)<P>With the exception of one fragment of incident<6E>that of the visit to Jerusalem and the Temple in His 12th year<61>the Canonical Gospels are silent as to the history of Jesus from the return to Nazareth till His baptism by John. This long period, which the Apocryphal Gospels crowd with silly fables (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=APOCRYPHAL+GOSPELS">APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS</a>), the inspired records leave to be regarded as being what it was<61>a period of quiet development of mind and body, of outward uneventfulness, of silent garnering of experience in the midst of the Nazareth surroundings. Jesus "grew, and waxed strong, filled with wisdom; and the grace of God was upon him...advanced in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,40,52);">Lu 2:40,52</a>). The incarnation was a true acceptance of humanity, with all its sinless limitations of growth and development. Not a hint is offered of that omniscience or omnipotence which theology has not infrequently imputed to Jesus even as child and boy. His schooling was probably that of the ordinary village child (He could read, <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,17);">Lu 4:17</a>ff, and write, <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',8,\'6-8\');">Joh 8:6-8</a>); He wrought at the carpenter\'s bench (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,3);">Mr 6:3</a>; Justin Martyr, following tradition, speaks of Him as making "plows and yokes," Dial., 88). His gentleness and grace of character endeared Him to all who knew Him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,52);">Lu 2:52</a>). No stain of sin clouded His vision of Divine things. His after-history shows that His mind was nourished on the Scriptures; nor, as He pondered psalms and prophets, could His soul remain unvisited by presentiments, growing to convictions, that He was the One in whom their predictions were destined to be realized.<P>2. Jesus in the Temple:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,\'41-50\');">Luke 2:41-50</a>)<P>Every year, as was the custom of the Jews, Joseph and Mary went, with their friends and neighbors, in companies, to Jerusalem to the Passover. When Jesus was 12 years old, it would seem that, for the first time, He was permitted to accompany them. It would be to Him a strange and thrilling experience. Everything He saw<61>the hallowed sites, the motley crowd, the service of the temple, the very shocks His moral consciousness would receive from contact with abounding scandals<6C>would intensify His feeling of His own unique relation to the Father. Every relationship was for the time suspended and merged to His thought in this higher one. It was His Father\'s city whose streets He trod; His Father\'s house He visited for prayer; His Father\'s ordinance the crowds were assembled to observe; His Father\'s name, too, they were dishonoring by their formalism and hypocrisy. It is this exalted mood of the boy Jesus which explains the scene that follows<77>the only one rescued from oblivion in this interval of growth and preparation. When the time came for the busy caravan to return to Nazareth, Jesus, acting, doubtless, from highest impulse, "tarried behind" (verse <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,43);">43</a>). In the large company His absence was not at first missed, but when, at the evening halting-place, it became known that He was not with them, His mother and Joseph returned in deep distress to Jerusalem. Three days elapsed before they found Him in the place where naturally they should have looked first<73>His Father\'s house. There, in one of the halls or chambers where the rabbis were wont to teach, they discovered Him seated "in the midst," at the feet of the men of learning, hearing them discourse, asking questions, as pupils were permitted to do, and giving answers which awakened astonishment by their penetration and wisdom (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,46,47);">Lu 2:46,47</a>). Those who heard Him may well have thought that before them was one of the great rabbis of the future! Mary, much surprised, asked in remonstrance, "Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us?" evoking from Jesus the memorable reply, "How is it that ye sought me? knew ye not that I must be in my Father\'s house?" or "about my Father\'s business?" the King James Version (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,48,49);">Lu 2:48,49</a>). Here was the revelation of a selfconsciousness that Mary might have been prepared for in Jesus, but perhaps, in the common intercourse of life, was tending to lose sight of. The lesson was not unneeded. Yet, once it had been given, Jesus went back with Joseph and Mary to Nazareth, and "was subject unto them"; and Mary did not forget the teaching of the incident (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,51);">Lu 2:51</a>).<P>III. The Forerunner and the Baptism.<P>1. The Preaching of John:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',3,\'1-12\');">Matthew 3:1-12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,\'1-8\');">Mark 1:1-8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,\'1-18\');">Luke 3:1-18</a>)<P>Time passed, and when Jesus was nearing His 30th year, Judea was agitated by the message of a stern preacher of righteousness who had appeared in the wilderness by the Jordan, proclaiming the imminent approach of the kingdom of heaven, summoning to repentance, and baptizing those who confessed their sins. Tiberius had succeeded Augustus on the imperial throne; Judea, with Samaria, was now a Roman province, under the procurator Pontius Pilate; the rest of Palestine was divided between the tetrarchs Herod (Galilee) and Philip (the eastern parts). The Baptist thus appeared at the time when the land had lost the last vestige of self-government, was politically divided, and was in great ecclesiastical confusion. Nurtured in the deserts (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,80);">Lu 1:80</a>), John\'s very appearance was a protest against the luxury and self-seeking of the age. He had been a Nazarite from his birth; he fed on the simplest products of nature<72>locusts and wild honey; his coarse garb of camel\'s hair and leathern girdle was a return to the dress of Elijah (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',1,8);">2Ki 1:8</a>), in whose spirit and power he appeared (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,17);">Lu 1:17</a>) (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JOHN+THE+BAPTIST">JOHN THE BAPTIST</a>).<P>The Coming Christ.<P>John\'s preaching of the kingdom was unlike that of any of the revolutionaries of his age. It was a kingdom which could be entered only through moral preparation. It availed nothing for the Jew simply that he was a son of Abraham. The Messiah was at hand. He (John) was but a voice in the wilderness sent to prepare the way for that Greater than himself. The work of the Christ would be one of judgment and of mercy. He would lay the axe at the root of the tree<65>would winnow the chaff from the wheat<61>yet would baptize with the Holy Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',3,\'10-12\');">Mt 3:10-12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,\'15-17\');">Lu 3:15-17</a>). Those who professed acceptance of his message, with its condition of repentance, John baptized with water at the Jordan or in its neighborhood (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',3,6);">Mt 3:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,28);">Joh 1:28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,23);">3:23</a>).<P>2. Jesus Is Baptized:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',3,\'13-17\');">Matthew 3:13-17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,\'9-11\');">Mark 1:9-11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,21,22);">Luke 3:21,22</a>)<P>John\'s startling words made a profound impression. All classes from every part of the land, including Pharisees and Sadducees (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',3,7);">Mt 3:7</a>), came to his baptism. John was not deceived. He saw how little change of heart underlay it all. The Regenerator had not yet come. But one day there appeared before him One whom he intuitively recognized as different from all the rest<73>as, indeed, the Christ whose coming it was his to herald. John, up to this time, does not seem to have personally known Jesus (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,31);">Joh 1:31</a>). He must, however, have heard of Him; he had, besides, received a sign by which the Messiah should be recognized (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,33);">Joh 1:33</a>); and now, when Jesus presented Himself, Divinely pure in aspect, asking baptism at his hands, the conviction was instantaneously flashed on his mind, that this was He. But how should he, a sinful man, baptize this Holy One? "I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',3,14);">Mt 3:14</a>). The question is one which forces itself upon ourselves<65>How should Jesus seek or receive a "baptism of repentance"? Jesus Himself puts it on the ground of meetness. "Suffer it now: for thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',3,15);">Mt 3:15</a>). The Head was content to enter by the same gateway as the members to His specific vocation in the service of the kingdom. In submitting to the baptism, He formally identified Himself with the expectation of the kingdom and with its ethical demands; separated Himself from the evil of His nation, doubtless with confession of its sins; and devoted Himself to His life-task in bringing in the Messianic salvation. The significance of the rite as marking His consecration to, and entrance upon, His Messianic career, is seen in what follows. As He ascended from the water, while still "praying" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,21);">Lu 3:21</a>), the heavens were opened, the Spirit of God descended like a dove upon Him, and a voice from heaven declared: "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',3,16,17);">Mt 3:16,17</a>). It is needless to inquire whether anyone besides John (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,33);">Joh 1:33</a>) and Jesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',3,16);">Mt 3:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,10);">Mr 1:10</a>) received this vision or heard these words; it was for them, not for others, the vision was primarily intended. To Christ\'s consecration of Himself to His calling, there was now added the spiritual equipment necessary for the doing of His work. He went forward with the seal of the Father\'s acknowledgment upon Him.<P>IV. The Temptation.<P>1. Temptation Follows Baptism:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,\'1-11\');">Matthew 4:1-11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,13,14);">Mark 1:13,14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,\'1-13\');">Luke 4:1-13</a>)<P>On the narrative of the baptism in the first three Gospels there follows at once the account of the temptation of Jesus in the wilderness. The psychological naturalness of the incident is generally acknowledged. The baptism of Jesus was a crisis in His experience. He had been plenished by the Spirit for His work; the heavens had been opened to Him, and His mind was agitated by new thoughts and emotions; He was conscious of the possession of new powers. There was need for a period of retirement, of still reflection, of coming to a complete understanding with Himself as to the meaning of the task to which He stood committed, the methods He should employ, the attitude He should take up toward popular hopes and expectations. He would wish to be alone. The Spirit of God led Him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,1);">Mt 4:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,12);">Mr 1:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,1);">Lu 4:1</a>) whither His own spirit also impelled. It is with a touch of similar motive that Buddhist legend makes Buddha to be tempted by the evil spirit Mara after he has attained enlightenment.<P>2. Nature of the Temptation:<P>The scene of the temptation was the wilderness of Judea. Jesus was there 40 days, during which, it is told, He neither ate nor drank (compare the fasts of Moses and Elijah, <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',24,18);">Ex 24:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',34,28);">34:28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',9,18);">De 9:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',19,8);">1Ki 19:8</a>). Mark adds, "He was with the wild beasts" (verse <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,13);">13</a>). The period was probably one of intense self-concentration. During the whole of it He endured temptations of Satan (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,13);">Mr 1:13</a>); but the special assaults came at the end (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,2);">Mt 4:2</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,2);">Lu 4:2</a>). We assume here a real tempter and real temptations<6E>the question of diabolic agency being considered after. This, however, does not settle the form of the temptations. The struggle was probably an inward one. It can hardly be supposed that Jesus was literally transported by the devil to a pinnacle of the temple, then to a high mountain, then, presumably, back again to the wilderness. The narrative must have come from Jesus Himself, and embodies an ideal or parabolic element. "The history of the temptation," Lange says, "Jesus afterwards communicated to His disciples in the form of a real narrative, clothed in symbolical language" (Commentary on Matthew, 83, English translation).<P>3. Stages of the Temptation:<P>The stages of the temptation were three<65>each in its own way a trial of the spirit of obedience.<P>(1) The first temptation was to distrust. Jesus, after His long fast, was hungry. He had become conscious also of supernatural powers. The point on which the temptation laid hold was His sense of hunger<65>the most over-mastering of appetites. "If thou art the Son of God, command that these stones become bread." The design was to excite distrustful and rebellious thoughts, and lead Jesus to use the powers entrusted to Him in an unlawful way, for private and selfish ends. The temptation was promptly met by a quotation from Scripture: "Man shall not live by bread alone," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,4);">Mt 4:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,4);">Lu 4:4</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',8,3);">De 8:3</a>). If Jesus was in this position, it was His Father who had brought Him there for purposes of trial. Man has a higher life than can be sustained on bread; a life, found in depending on God\'s word, and obeying it at whatever cost.<P>(2) The second temptation (in Luke the third) was to presumption. Jesus is borne in spirit (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',40,1,2);">Eze 40:1,2</a>) to a pinnacle of the temple. From this dizzy elevation He is invited to cast Himself down, relying on the Divine promise: "He shall give His angels charge over thee," etc. (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',91,11,12);">Ps 91:11,12</a>). In this way an easy demonstration of His Messiahship would be given to the crowds below. The temptation was to overstep those bounds of humility and dependence which were imposed on Him as Son; to play with signs and wonders in His work as Messiah. But again the tempter is foiled by the word: "Thou shalt not make trial of (try experiments with, propose tests, put to the proof) the Lord thy God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,7);">Mt 4:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,12);">Lu 4:12</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',6,16);">De 6:16</a>).<P>(3) The third temptation (Luke\'s second) was to worldly sovereignty, gained by some small concession to Satan. From some lofty elevation<6F>no place on a geographical map<61>the kingdoms of the world and the glory of them are flashed before Christ\'s mind, and all are offered to Him on condition of one little act of homage to the tempter. It was the temptation to choose the easier path by some slight pandering to falsehood, and Jesus definitely repelled it by the saying: "Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,10);">Mt 4:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,8);">Lu 4:8</a>). Jesus had chosen His path. The Father\'s way of the cross would be adhered to.<P>Its Typical Character.<P>The stages of the temptation typify the whole round of Satanic assault on man through body, mind, and spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,13);">Lu 4:13</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,16);">1Joh 2:16</a>), and the whole round of Messianic temptation. Jesus was constantly being tempted<P class="in15">(a) to spare Himself;<P class="in15">(b) to gratify the Jewish signseekers;<P class="in15">(c) to gain power by sacrifice of the right.<P>In principle the victory was gained over all at the commencement. His way was henceforth clear.``132';
isbe[5020]='Jesus Christ, 4B`B. THE EARLY JUDAEAN MINISTRY<P>I. The Testimonies of the Baptist.<P>1. The Synoptics and John:<P>While the Synoptics pass immediately from the temptation of Jesus to the ministry in Galilee the imprisonment of the Baptist (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,12);">Mt 4:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,14,15);">Mr 1:14,15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,14);">Lu 4:14</a>), the Fourth Gospel furnishes the account, full of interest, of the earlier ministry of Jesus in Judea while the Baptist was still at liberty.<P>2. Threefold Witness of the Baptist:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,\'19-37\');">John 1:19-37</a>)<P>The Baptist had announced Christ\'s coming; had baptized Him when He appeared; it was now his privilege to testify to Him as having come, and to introduce to Jesus His first disciples.<P>a) First Testimony<6E>Jesus and Popular Messianic Expectation:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,\'19-28\');">John 1:19-28</a>)<P>John\'s work had assumed proportions which made it impossible for the ecclesiastical authorities any longer to ignore it (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,15);">Lu 3:15</a>). A deputation consisting of priests and Levites was accordingly sent to John, where he was baptizing at Bethany beyond Jordan, to put to him categorical questions about his mission. Who was he? And by what authority did<69>he baptize? Was he the Christ? or Elijah? or the expected prophet? (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,14);">Joh 6:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,4);">7:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',16,14);">Mt 16:14</a>). To these questions John gave distinct and straightforward replies. He was not the Christ, not Elijah, not the prophet. His answers grow briefer every time, "I am not the Christ"; "I am not"; "No." Who was he then? The answer was emphatic. He was but a "voice" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',40,3);">Isa 40:3</a>)<29>a preparer of the way of the Lord. In their midst already stood One<6E>not necessarily in the crowd at that moment<6E>with whose greatness his was not to be compared (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,26,27);">Joh 1:26,27</a>). John utterly effaces himself before Christ.<P>b) Second Testimony<6E>Christ and the Sin of the World:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,\'29-34\');">John 1:29-34</a>)<P>The day after the interview with the Jerusalem deputies, John saw Jesus coming to him<69>probably fresh from the temptation<6F>and bore a second and wonderful testimony to His Messiahship. Identifying Jesus with the subject of his former testimonies, and stating the ground of his knowledge in the sign God had given him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,\'30-34\');">1:30-34</a>), he said, "Behold, the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,29);">1:29</a>). The words are rich in suggestion regarding the character of Jesus, and the nature, universality and efficacy of His work (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,5);">1Joh 3:5</a>). The "Lamb" may point specifically to the description of the vicariously Suffering Servant of Yahweh in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',53,11);">Isa 53:11</a>.<P>c) Third Testimony<6E>Christ and the Duty of the Disciple:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,\'35-37\');">John 1:35-37</a>)<P>The third testimony was borne "again on the morrow," when John was standing with two of his disciples (one Andrew, <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,40);">1:40</a>, the other doubtless the evangelist himself). Pointing to Jesus, the Baptist repeated his former words, "Behold, the Lamb of God." While the words are the same, the design was different. In the first "behold" the idea is the recognition of Christ; in the second there is a call to duty<74>a hint to follow Jesus. On this hint the disciples immediately acted (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,37);">1:37</a>). It is next to be seen how this earliest "following" of Jesus grew.<P>II. The First Disciples.<P>1. Spiritual Accretion:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,\'37-51\');">John 1:37-51</a>)<P>John\'s narrative shows that Jesus gathered His disciples, less by a series of distinct calls, than by a process of spiritual accretion. Men were led to Him, then accepted by Him. This process of selection left Jesus at the close of the second day with five real and true followers. The history confutes the idea that it was first toward the close of His ministry that Jesus became known to His disciples as the Messiah. In all the Gospels it was as the Christ that the Baptist introduced Jesus; it was as the Christ that the first disciples accepted and confessed Him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,41,45,49);">Joh 1:41,45,49</a>).<P>a) Andrew and John<68>Discipleship as the Fruit of Spiritual Converse:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,\'37-40\');">John 1:37-40</a>)<P>The first of the group were Andrew and John<68>the unnamed disciple of <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,40);">Joh 1:40</a>. These followed Jesus in consequence of their Master\'s testimony. It was, however, the few hours\' converse they had with Jesus in His own abode that actually decided them. To Christ\'s question, "What seek ye?" their answer was practically "Thyself." "The mention of the time<6D>the 10th hour, i.e. 10 AM<41>is one of the small traits that mark John. He is here looking back on the date of his own spiritual birth" (Westcott).<P>b) Simon Peter<65>Discipleship a Result of Personal Testimony:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,41,42);">John 1:41,42</a>)<P>John and Andrew had no sooner found Christ for themselves ("We have found the Messiah," <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,41);">Joh 1:41</a>) than they hastened to tell others of their discovery. Andrew at once sought out Simon, his brother, and brought him to Jesus; so, later, Philip sought Nathanael (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,45);">Joh 1:45</a>). Christ\'s unerring eye read at once the quality of the man whom Andrew introduced to Him. "Thou art Simon the son of John: thou shalt be called Cephas"<22>"Rock" or "Stone" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,42);">1:42</a>). <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',16,18);">Mt 16:18</a>, therefore, is not the original bestowal of this name, but the confirmation of it. The name is the equivalent of "Peter" (Petros), and was given to Simon, not with any official connotation, but because of the strength and clearness of his convictions. His general steadfastness is not disproved by His one unhappy failure. (Was it thus the apostle acquired the name "Peter"?)<P>c) Philip<69>the Result of Scriptural Evidence:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,43,44);">John 1:43,44</a>)<P>The fourth disciple, Philip, was called by Jesus Himself, when about to depart for Galilee (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,43);">Joh 1:43</a>). Friendship may have had its influence on Philip (like the foregoing, he also was from Bethsaida of Galilee, <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,44);">Joh 1:44</a>), but that which chiefly decided him was the correspondence of what he found in Jesus with the prophetic testimonies (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,45);">Joh 1:45</a>).<P>d) Nathanael<65>Discipleship an Effect of Heart-Searching Power:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,\'45-51\');">John 1:45-51</a>)<P>Philip sought Nathanael (of Cana of Galilee, <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',21,2);">Joh 21:2</a>)<29>the same probably as Bartholomew the Apostle<6C>and told him he had found Him of whom Moses in the law and the prophets had written (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,45);">Joh 1:45</a>). Nathanael doubted, on the ground that the Messiah was not likely to have His origin in an obscure place like Nazareth (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,46);">Joh 1:46</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,52);">Joh 7:52</a>). Philip\'s wise answer was, "Come and see"; and when Nathanael came, the Lord met him with a word which speedily rid him of his hesitations. First, Jesus attested His seeker\'s sincerity ("Behold, an Israelite indeed," etc., <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,47);">Joh 1:47</a>); then, on Nathanael expressing surprise, revealed to him His knowledge of a recent secret act of meditation or devotion ("when thou wast under the fig tree," etc., <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,48);">Joh 1:48</a>). The sign was sufficient to convince Nathanael that he was in the presence of a superhuman, nay a Divine, Being, therefore, the Christ<73>"Son of God...King of Israel" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,49);">Joh 1:49</a>). Jesus met his faith with further self-disclosure. Nathanael had believed on comparatively slight evidence; he would see greater things: heavens opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,51);">Joh 1:51</a>). The allusion is to Jacob\'s vision (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',28,\'10-22\');">Ge 28:10-22</a>)<29>a Scripture which had possibly been theme of Philip\'s meditation in his privacy. Jesus puts Himself in place of that mystic ladder as the medium of reopened communication between heaven and earth.<P>2. "Son of Man" and "Son of God":<P>The name "Son of Man"<22>a favorite designation of Jesus for Himself<6C>appears here for the first time in the Gospels. It is disputed whether it was a current Messianic title (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SON+OF+MAN">SON OF MAN</a>), but at least it had this force on the lips of Jesus Himself, denoting Him as the possessor of a true humanity, and as standing in a representative relation to mankind universally. It is probably borrowed from <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',7,13);">Da 7:13</a> and appears in the Book of Enoch (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=APOCALYPTIC+LITERATURE">APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE</a>). The higher title, "Son of God," given to Jesus by Nathanael, could not, of course, as yet carry with it the transcendental associations of John\'s Prologue (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,1,14,18);">Joh 1:1,14,18</a>), but it evidently conveyed an idea of superhuman dignity and unique relation to God, such as the better class of minds would seem to have attributed to the Messiah (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,18);">Joh 5:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',10,33);">10:33</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,63);">Mt 26:63</a>).<P>III. The First Events.<P>An interval of a few weeks is occupied by a visit of Jesus to Cana of Galilee (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,1);">Joh 2:1</a>) and a brief sojourn in Capernaum (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,12);">Joh 2:12</a>); after which Jesus returned to Jerusalem to the Passover as the most appropriate place for His public manifestation of Himself as Messiah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,13);">Joh 2:13</a>). The notes of time in John suggest that the Passover (beginning of April, 27 AD) took place about three months after the baptism by John (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,43);">1:43</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,1,12);">2:1,12</A>).<P>1. The First Miracle:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,\'1-11\');">Joh 2:1-11</a>)<P>Prior to His public manifestation, a more private unfolding of Christ\'s glory was granted to the disciples at the marriage feast of Cana of Galilee (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,11);">Joh 2:11</a>). The marriage was doubtless that of some relative of the family, and the presence of Jesus at the feast, with His mother, brethren and disciples (as Joseph no more appears, it may be concluded that he was dead), is significant as showing that His religion is not one of antagonism to natural relations. The marriage festivities lasted seven days, and toward the close the wine provided for the guests gave out. Mary interposed with an indirect suggestion that Jesus might supply the want. Christ\'s reply, literally, "Woman, what is that to thee and to me?" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,4);">Joh 2:4</a>), is not intended to convey the least tinge of reproof (compare Westcott, in the place cited.), but intimates to Mary that His actions were henceforth to be guided by a rule other than hers (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,51);">Lu 2:51</a>). This, however, as Mary saw (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,5);">Joh 2:5</a>), did not preclude an answer to her desire. Six waterpots of stone stood near, and Jesus ordered these to be filled with water (the quantity was large; about 50 gallons); then when the water was drawn off it was found changed into a nobler element<6E>a wine purer and better than could have been obtained from any natural vintage. The ruler of the feast, in ignorance of its origin, expressed surprise at its quality (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,10);">Joh 2:10</a>). The miracle was symbolical<61>a "sign" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,11);">Joh 2:11</a>)<29>and may be contrasted with the first miracle of Moses<65>turning the water into blood (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',7,20);">Ex 7:20</a>). It points to the contrast between the old dispensation and the new, and to the work of Christ as a transforming, enriching and glorifying of the natural, through Divine grace and power.<P>After a brief stay at Capernaum (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,12);">Joh 2:12</a>), Jesus went up to Jerusalem to keep the Passover. There it was His design formally to manifest Himself. Other "signs" He wrought at the feast, leading many to believe on Him<69>not, however, with a deep or enduring faith (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,\'23-25\');">Joh 2:23-25</a>)<29>but the special act by which He signalized His appearance was His public cleansing of the temple from the irreligious trafficking with which it had come to be associated.<P>2. The First Passover, and Cleansing of the Temple:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,\'13-25\');">John 2:13-25</a>)<P>A like incident is related by the Synoptics at the close of Christ\'s ministry (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',21,12,13);">Mt 21:12,13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',11,\'15-18\');">Mr 11:15-18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',19,45,46);">Lu 19:45,46</a>), and it is a question whether the act was actually repeated, or whether the other evangelists, who do not narrate the events of the early ministry, simply record it out of its chronological order. In any case, the act was a fitting inauguration of the Lord\'s work. A regular market was held in the outer court of the temple. Here the animals needed for sacrifice could be purchased, foreign money exchanged, and the doves, which were the offerings of the poor, be obtained. It was a busy, tumultuous, noisy and unholy scene, and the "zeal" of Jesus burned within Him<69>had doubtless often done so before<72>as He witnessed it. Arming Himself with a scourge of cords, less as a weapon of offense, than as a symbol of authority, He descended with resistless energy upon the wrangling throng, drove out the dealers and the cattle, overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and commanded the doves to be taken away. Let them not profane His Father\'s house (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,\'14-16\');">Joh 2:14-16</a>). No one seems to have opposed. All felt that a prophet was among them, and could not resist the overpowering authority with which He spake and acted. By and by, when their courage revived, they asked Him for a "sign" in evidence of His right to do such things. Jesus gave them no sign such as they demanded, but uttered an enigmatic word, and left them to reflect on it, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,19);">Joh 2:19</a>). The authenticity of the saying is sufficiently vouched for by the perverted use made of it at Christ\'s trial (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,61);">Mt 26:61</a> parallel). It is a word based on the foresight which Christ had that the conflict now commencing was to end in His rejection and death. "The true way to destroy the Temple, in the eyes of Jesus, was to slay the Messiah....If it is in the person of the Messiah that the Temple is laid in ruins, it is in His person it shall be raised again" (Godet). The disciples, after the resurrection, saw the meaning of the word (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,22);">Joh 2:22</a>).<P>3. The Visit of Nicodemus:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,\'1-12\');">John 3:1-12</a>)<P>As a sequel to these stirring events Jesus had a nocturnal visitor in the person of Nicodemus<75>a Pharisee, a ruler of the Jews, a "teacher of Israel" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,10);">Joh 3:10</a>), apparently no longer young (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,4);">Joh 3:4</a>). His coming by night argues, besides some fear of man, a constitutional timidity of disposition (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,39);">Joh 19:39</a>); but the interesting thing is that he did come, showing that he had been really impressed by Christ\'s words and works. One recognizes in him a man of candor and uprightness of spirit, yet without adequate apprehensions of Christ Himself, and of the nature of Christ\'s kingdom. Jesus he was prepared to acknowledge as a Divinely-commissioned teacher<65>one whose mission was accredited by miracle (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,2);">Joh 3:2</a>). He was interested in the kingdom, but, as a morally living man, had no doubt of his fitness to enter into it. Jesus had but to teach and he would understand.<P>(1) The New Birth.<P>Jesus in His reply laid His finger at once on the defective point in His visitor\'s relation to Himself and to His kingdom: "Except one be born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,3);">Joh 3:3</a>); "Except one be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,5);">Joh 3:5</a>). Nicodemus was staggered at this demand for a spiritual new birth. There is reason to believe that proselytes were baptized on being received into the Jewish church, and their baptism was called a "new birth." Nicodemus would therefore be familiar with the expression, but could not see that it had any applicability to him. Jesus teaches him, on the other hand, that he also needs a new birth, and this, not through water only, but through the Spirit. The change was mysterious, yet plainly manifest in its effects (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,7,8);">Joh 3:7,8</a>). If Nicodemus did not understand these "earthly things"<22>the evidence of which lay all around him<69>how should he understand "heavenly things," the things pertaining to salvation?<P>(2) "Heavenly Things."<P>These "heavenly things" Jesus now proceeds to unfold to Nicodemus: "As Moses lifted up the serpent," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,14);">Joh 3:14</a>). The "lifting up" is a prophecy of the cross (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,32,33,34);">12:32-34</A>). The brazen serpent is the symbol of sin conquered and destroyed by the death of Christ. What follows in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,\'16-21\');">Joh 3:16-21</a> is probably the evangelist\'s expansion of this theme<6D>God\'s love the source of salvation (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,16);">Joh 3:16</a>), God\'s purpose not the world\'s condemnation, but its salvation (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,17,18);">Joh 3:17,18</a>) the self-judgment of sin (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,19);">Joh 3:19</a>).<P>4. Jesus and John:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,\'22-36\');">John 3:22-36</a>)<P>Retiring from Jerusalem, Jesus commenced a ministry in Judea (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,22);">Joh 3:22</a>). It lasted apparently about 6 months. The earlier Gospels pass over it. This is accounted for by the fact that the ministry in Judea was still preparatory. Jesus had publicly asserted His Messianic authority. A little space is now allowed to test the result. Meanwhile Jesus descends again to the work of prophetic preparation. His ministry at this stage is hardly distinguishable from John\'s. He summons to the baptism of repentance. His disciples, not Himself, administer the rite (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,23);">Joh 3:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,2);">4:2</a>); hence the sort of rivalry that sprang up between His baptism and that of the forerunner (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,\'22-26\');">Joh 3:22-26</a>). John was baptizing at the time at Aenon, on the western side of the Jordan; Jesus somewhere in the neighborhood. Soon the greater teacher began to eclipse the less. "All men came to Him" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,26);">3:26</A>). John\'s reply showed how pure his mind was from the narrow, grudging spirit which characterized his followers. To him it was no grievance, but the fulfillment of his joy, that men should be flocking to Jesus. He was not the Bridegroom, but the friend of the Bridegroom. They themselves had heard him testify, "I am not the Christ." It lay in the nature of things that Jesus must increase; he must decrease (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,\'27-30\');">3:27-30</a>). Explanatory words follow (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,\'31-36\');">3:31-36</a>).<P>IV. Journey to Galilee<65>the Woman of Samaria.<P>1. Withdrawal to Galilee:<P>Toward the close of this Judean ministry the Baptist appears to have been cast into prison for his faithfulness in reproving Herod Antipas for taking his brother Philip\'s wife (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,24);">Joh 3:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',14,\'3-5\');">Mt 14:3-5</a> parallel). It seems most natural to connect the departure to Galilee in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,3);">Joh 4:3</a> with that narrated in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',3,13);">Mt 3:13</a> parallel, though some think the imprisonment of the Baptist did not take place till later. The motive which John gives was the hostility of the Pharisees, but it was the imprisonment of the Baptist which led Jesus to commence, at the time He did, an independent ministry. The direct road to Galilee lay through Samaria; hence the memorable encounter with the woman at that place.<P>2. The Living Water:<P>Jesus, being wearied, paused to rest Himself at Jacob\'s well, near a town called Sychar, now \'Askar. It was about the sixth hour<75>or 6 o\'clock in the evening. The time of year is determined by <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,35);">Joh 4:35</a> to be "four months" before harvest, i.e. December (there is no reason for not taking this literally). It suits the evening hour that the woman of Samaria came out to draw water. (Some, on a different reckoning, take the hour to be noon.) Jesus opened the conversation by asking from the woman a draught from her pitcher. The proverbial hatred between Jews and Samaritans filled the woman with surprise that Jesus should thus address Himself to her. Still greater was her surprise when, as the conversation proceeded, Jesus announced Himself as the giver of a water of which, if a man drank, he should never thirst again (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,13,14);">Joh 4:13,14</a>). Only gradually did His meaning penetrate her mind, "Sir, give me this water," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,15);">Joh 4:15</a>). The request of Jesus that she would call her husband led to the discovery that Jesus knew all the secrets of her life. She was before a prophet (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,19);">Joh 4:19</a>). As in the case iof Nathanael, the heart-searching power of Christ\'s word convinced her of His Divine claim.<P>3. The True Worship:<P>The conversation next turned upon the right place of worship. The Samaritans had a temple of their own on Mount Gerizim; the Jews, on the other hand, held to the exclusive validity of the temple at Jerusalem. Which was right? Jesus in His reply, while pronouncing for the Jews as the custodians of God\'s salvation (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,22);">Joh 4:22</a>), makes it plain that distinction of places is no longer a matter of any practical importance. A change was imminent which would substitute a universal religion for one of special times and places (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,20);">Joh 4:20</a>). He enunciates the great principle of the new dispensation that God is a Spirit, and they who worship Him must do so in spirit and in truth. Finally, when she spoke of the Messiah, Jesus made Himself definitely known to her as the Christ. To this poor Samaritan woman, with her receptive heart, He unveils Himself more plainly than He had done to priests and rulers (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,26);">Joh 4:26</a>).<P>4. Work at Its Reward:<P>The woman went home and became an evangelist to her people, with notable results (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,28,39);">Joh 4:28,39</a>). Jesus abode with them two days and confirmed the impression made by her testimony (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,\'40-42\');">Joh 4:40-42</a>). Meanwhile, He impressed on His disciples the need of earnest sowing and reaping in the service of the Kingdom, assuring them of unfailing reward for both sower and reaper (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,\'35-38\');">Joh 4:35-38</a>). He Himself was their Great Example (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,34);">Joh 4:34</a>).``132';
isbe[5021]='Jesus Christ, 4C1`C. THE GALILEAN MINISTRY AND VISITS TO THE FEASTS<P>1. The Scene:<P>Galilee was divided into upper Galilee and lower Galilee. It has already been remarked that upper Galilee was inhabited by a mixed population<6F>hence called "Galilee of the Gentiles" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,15);">Mt 4:15</a>). The highroads of commerce ran through it. It was "the way of the sea" (the King James Version)<29>a scene of constant traffic. The people were rude, ignorant, and superstitious, and were densely crowded together in towns and villages. About 160 BC there were only a few Jews in the midst of a large heathen population; but by the time of Christ the Jewish element had greatly increased. The busiest portion of this busy district was round the Sea of Galilee, at the northeast corner of which stood Capernaum<75>wealthy and cosmopolitan. In Nazareth, indeed, Jesus met with a disappointing reception (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,\'16-30\');">Lu 4:16-30</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',13,\'54-57\');">Mt 13:54-57</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,\'43-45\');">Joh 4:43-45</a>); yet in Galilee generally He found a freer spirit and greater receptiveness than among the stricter traditionalists of Judea.<P>2. The Time:<P>It is assumed here that Jesus returned to Galilee in December, 27 AD, and that His ministry there lasted till late in 29 AD (see "Chronology" above). On the two years\' scheme of the public ministry, the Passover of <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,4);">Joh 6:4</a> has to be taken as the second in Christ\'s ministry<72>therefore as occurring at an interval of only 3 or 4 months after the return. This seems impossible in view of the crowding of events it involves in so short a time<6D>opening incidents, stay in Capernaum (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,13);">Mt 4:13</a>), three circuits in "all Galilee" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,\'23-25\');">Mt 4:23-25</a> parallel; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',8,\'1-4\');">Lu 8:1-4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',9,\'35-38\');">Mt 9:35-38</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,6);">Mr 6:6</a>), lesser journeys and excursions (Sermon on Mount: Gadara); and the dislocations it necessitates, e.g. the plucking of ears of corn (about Passover time) must be placed after the feeding of the 5,000, etc. It is simpler to adhere to the three years\' scheme.<P>A division of the Galilean ministry may then fitly be made into two periods<64>one preceding, the other succeeding the Mission of the Twelve in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',10,\'1-\');">Mt 10</a> parallel. One reason for this division is that after the Mission of the Twelve the order of events is the same in the first three evangelists till the final departure from Galilee.<P>First Period<6F>From the Beginning of the Ministry in Galilee till the Mission of the Twelve<P>I. Opening Incidents.<P>1. Healing of Nobleman\'s Son:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,\'43-54\');">Joh 4:43-54</a>)<P>From sympathetic Samaria (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,39);">Joh 4:39</a>), Jesus had journeyed to unsympathetic Galilee, and first to Cana, where His first miracle had been wrought. The reports of His miracles in Judea had come before Him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,45);">Joh 4:45</a>), and it was mainly His reputation as a miracle-worker which led a nobleman<61>a courtier or officer at Herod\'s court<72>to seek Him at Cana on behalf of his son, who was near to death. Jesus rebuked the sign-seeking spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,48);">Joh 4:48</a>), but, on the fervent appeal being repeated, He bade the nobleman go his way: his son lived. The man\'s prayer had been, "Come down"; but he had faith to receive the word of Jesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,50);">Joh 4:50</a>), and on his way home received tidings of his son\'s recovery. The nobleman, with his whole household, was won for Jesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,53);">Joh 4:53</a>). This is noted as the second of Christ\'s Galilean miracles (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,54);">Joh 4:54</a>).<P>2. The Visit to Nazareth:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,13);">Matthew 4:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,\'16-30\');">Luke 4:16-30</a>)<P>A very different reception awaited Him at Nazareth,"his own country," to which He next came. We can scarcely take the incident recorded in <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,\'16-30\');">Lu 4:16-30</a> to be the same as that in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',13,\'54-58\');">Mt 13:54-58</a>, though Matthew\'s habit of grouping makes this not impossible. The Sabbath had come, and on His entering the synagogue, as was His wont, the repute He had won led to His being asked to read. The Scripture He selected (or which came in the order of the day) was <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',61,1);">Isa 61:1</a>ff (the fact that Jesus was able to read from the synagogue-roll is interesting as bearing on His knowledge of Hebrew), and from this He proceeded to amaze His hearers by declaring that this Scripture was now fulfilled in their ears (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,21);">Lu 4:21</a>). The "words of grace" he uttered are not given, but it can be understood that, following the prophet\'s guidance, He would hold Himself forth as the predicted "Servant of Yahweh," sent to bring salvation to the poor, the bound, the broken-hearted, and for this purpose endowed with the fullness of the Spirit. The idea of the passage in Isaiah is that of the year of jubilee, when debts were canceled, inheritances restored, and slaves set free, and Jesus told them He had come to inaugurate that "acceptable year of the Lord." At first He was listened to with admiration, then, as the magnitude of the claims He was making became apparent to His audience, a very different spirit took possession of them. \'Who was this that spoke thus?\' \'Was it not Joseph\'s son?\' (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,22);">Lu 4:22</a>). They were disappointed, too, that Jesus showed no disposition to gratify them by working before them any of the miracles of which they had heard so much (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,23);">Lu 4:23</a>). Jesus saw the gathering storm, but met it resolutely. He told His hearers He had not expected any better reception, and in reply to their reproach that He had wrought miracles elsewhere, but had wrought none among them, quoted examples of prophets who had done the same thing (Elijah, Elisha, <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,\'24-28\');">Lu 4:24-28</a>). This completed the exasperation of the Nazarenes, who, springing forward, dragged Him to the brow of the hill on which their city was built, and would have thrown Him down, had something in the aspect of Jesus not restrained them. With one of those looks we read of occasionally in the Gospels, He seems to have overawed His townsmen, and, passing in safety through their midst, left the place (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,\'28-30\');">Lu 4:28-30</a>).<P>3. Call of the Four Disciples:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,\'17-22\');">Matthew 4:17-22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,\'16-22\');">Mark 1:16-22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',5,\'1-11\');">Luke 5:1-11</a>)<P>After leaving Nazareth Jesus made His way to Capernaum (probably Tell Hum), which thereafter seems to have been His headquarters. He "dwelt" there (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,13);">Mt 4:13</a>). It is called in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',9,1);">Mt 9:1</a>, "his own city." Before teaching in Capernaum self, however, He appears to have opened His ministry by evangelizing along the shores of the Sea of Galilee (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,18);">Mt 4:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,16);">Mr 1:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',5,1);">Lu 5:1</a>), and there, at Bethsaida (on topographical questions, see special articles), He took His first step in gathering His chosen disciples more closely around Him. Hitherto, though attached to His person and cause, the pairs of fisher brothers, Simon and Andrew, James and John<68>these last the "sons of Zebedee"<22>had not been in constant attendance upon Him. Since the return from Jerusalem, they had gone back to their ordinary avocations. The four were "partners" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',5,10);">Lu 5:10</a>). They had "hired servants" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,20);">Mr 1:20</a>); therefore were moderately well off. The time had now come when they were to leave "all," and follow Jesus entirely.<P>a) The Draught of Fishes:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',5,\'1-9\');">Luke 5:1-9</a>)<P>Luke alone records the striking miracle which led to the call. Jesus had been teaching the multitude from a boat borrowed from Simon, and now at the close He bade Simon put out into the deep, and let down his nets. Peter told Jesus they had toiled all night in vain, but he would obey His word. The result was an immense draught of fishes, so that the nets were breaking, and the other company had to be called upon for help. Both boats were filled and in danger of sinking. Peter\'s cry in so wonderful a presence was, "Depart from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord."<P>b) "Fishers of Men":<P>The miracle gave Jesus opportunity for the word He wished to speak. It is here that Mat and Mar take up the story. The boats had been brought to shore when, first to Simon and Andrew, afterward to James and John (engaged in "mending their nets," <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,21);">Mt 4:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,19);">Mr 1:19</a>), the call was given:"Come ye after me, and I will make you fishers of men." At once all was left<66>boats, nets, friends<64>and they followed Him. Their experience taught them to have large expectations from Christ.<P>4. At Capernaum:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,13);">Matthew 4:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,31);">Luke 4:31</a>)<P>Jesus is now found in Capernaum. An early Sabbath<74>perhaps the first of His stated residence in the city<74>was marked by notable events. The Sabbath found Jesus as usual in the synagogue<75>now as teacher. The manner of His teaching is specially noticed: "He taught them as having authority, and not as the scribes" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,22);">Mr 1:22</a>). The scribes gave forth nothing of their own.<P>a) Christ\'s Teaching:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,22,27);">Mark 1:22,27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,32);">Luke 4:32</a>)<P>They but repeated the dicta of the great authorities of the past. It was a surprise to the people to find in Jesus One whose wisdom, like waters from a clear fountain, came fresh and sparkling from His own lips. The authority also with which Jesus spoke commanded attention. He sought support in the opinion of no others, but gave forth His statements with firmness, decision, dignity and emphasis.<P>b) The Demoniac in the Synagogue:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,\'23-27\');">Mark 1:23-27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,\'33-37\');">Luke 4:33-37</a>)<P>While Jesus was teaching an extraordinary incident occurred. A man in the assembly, described as possessed by "an unclean spirit" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,23);">Mr 1:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,33);">Lu 4:33</a>) broke forth in cries, addressing Jesus by name ("Jesus, thou Nazarene"), speaking of Him as "the Holy One of God," and asking "What have we to do with thee? Art thou come to destroy us?" The diseased consciousness of the sufferer bore a truer testimony to Christ\'s dignity, holiness and power than most of those present could have given, and instinctively, but truly, construed His coming as meaning destruction to the empire of the demons. At Christ\'s word, after a terrible paroxysm, from which, however, the man escaped unhurt (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,35);">Lu 4:35</a>), the demon was cast out. More than ever the people were "amazed" at the word which had such power (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,27);">Mr 1:27</a>).<P>Demon-Possession: Its Reality.<P>This is the place to say a word on this terrible form of malady<64>demon-possession<6F>met with so often in the Gospels. Was it a reality? Or a hallucination? Did Jesus believe in it? It is difficult to read the Gospels, and not answer the last question in the affirmative. Was Jesus, then, mistaken? This also it is hard to believe. If there is one subject on which Jesus might be expected to have clear vision<6F>on which we might trust His insight<68>it was His relation to the spiritual world with which He stood in so close rapport. Was He likely then to be mistaken when He spoke so earnestly, so profoundly, so frequently, of its hidden forces of evil? There is in itself no improbability<74>rather analogy suggests the highest probability<74>of realms of spiritual existence outside our sensible ken. That evil should enter this spiritual world, and that human life should be deeply implicated with that evil<69>that its forces should have a mind and will organizing and directing them<65>are not beliefs to be dismissed with scorn. The presence of such beliefs in the time of Christ is commonly attributed to Babylonian, Persian or other foreign influences. It may be questioned, however, whether the main cause was not something far more real<61>an actual and permitted "hour and the power of darkness" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,53);">Lu 22:53</a>) in the kingdom of evil, discovering itself in manifestations in the bodies and souls of men, that could be traced only to a supernatural cause (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=DEMONIAC">DEMONIAC</A>). (The present writer discusses the subject in an article in the Sunday School Times for June 4, 1910. It would be presumptuous even to say that the instance in the Gospels have no modern parallels. See a striking paper in Good, Words, edited by Dr. Norman MacLeod, for 1867, on "The English Demoniac.") It should be noted that all diseases are not, as is sometimes affirmed, traced to demonic influence. The distinction between other diseases and demonic possession is clearly maintained (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,24);">Mt 4:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',10,1);">10:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',11,5);">11:5</a>, etc.). Insanity, epilepsy, blindness, dumbness, etc., were frequent accompaniments of possession, but they are not identified with it.<P>c) Peter\'s Wife\'s Mother:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',8,14,15);">Matthew 8:14,15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,\'29-31\');">Mark 1:29-31</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,38,39);">Luke 4:38,39</a>)<P>Jesus, on leaving the synagogue, entered the house of Peter. In Mark it is called "the house of Simon and Andrew" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,29);">1:29</a>). Peter was married (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',9,5);">1Co 9:5</a>), and apparently his mother-in-law and brother lived with him in Capernaum. It was an anxious time in the household, for the mother-in-law lay "sick of a fever"<22>"a great fever," as Luke the physician calls it. Taking her by the hand, Jesus rebuked the fever, which instantaneously left her. The miracle, indeed, was a double one, for not only was the fever stayed, but strength was at once restored. "She rose up and ministered unto them" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,39);">Lu 4:39</a>).<P>d) The Eventful Evening:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',8,16);">Matthew 8:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,\'32-34\');">Mark 1:32-34</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,40,41);">Luke 4:40,41</a>)<P>The day\'s labors were not yet done; were, indeed, scarce begun. The news of what had taken place quickly spread, and soon the extraordinary spectacle was presented of \'the whole city\' gathered at the door of the dwelling, bringing their sick of every kind to be healed. Demoniacs were there, crying and being rebuked, but multitudes of others as well. The Lord\'s compassion was unbounded. He rejected none. He labored unweariedly till every one was healed. His sympathy was individual: "He laid his hands on every one of them" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,40);">Lu 4:40</a>).<P>II. From First Galilean Circuit till the Choice of the Apostles.<P>1. The First Circuit:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,\'35-45\');">Mark 1:35-45</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,\'42-44\');">Luke 4:42-44</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,\'23-25\');">Matthew 4:23-25</a>)<P>The chronological order in this section is to be sought in Mark and Luke; Matthew groups for didactic purposes. The morning after that eventful Sabbath evening in Capernaum, Jesus took steps for a systematic visitation of the towns and villages of Galilee.<P>The task He set before Himself was prepared for by early, prolonged, solitary prayer (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,35);">Mr 1:35</a>; many instances show that Christ\'s life was steeped in prayer). His disciples followed Him, and reported that the multitudes sought Him. Jesus intimated to them His intention of passing to the next towns, and forthwith commenced a tour of preaching and healing "throughout all Galilee."<P>a) Its Scope:<P>Even if the expression "all Galilee" is used with some latitude, it indicates a work of very extensive compass. It was a work likewise methodically conducted (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,6);">Mr 6:6</a>: "went round about the villages," literally, "in a circle"). Galilee at this time was extraordinarily populous (compare Josephus, Wars of the Jews, III, iii, 2), and the time occupied by the circuit must have been considerable. Matthew\'s condensed picture (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,\'23-25\');">Mt 4:23-25</a>) shows that Christ\'s activity during this period was incredibly great. He stirred the province to its depths. His preaching and miracles drew enormous crowds after Him. This tide of popularity afterward turned, but much of the seed sown may have produced fruit at a later day.<P>b) Cure of the Leper:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',8,\'2-4\');">Matthew 8:2-4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,\'40-45\');">Mark 1:40-45</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',5,\'12-16\');">Luke 5:12-16</a>)<P>The one incident recorded which seems to have belonged to this tour was a sufficiently typical one. While Jesus was in a certain city a man "full of leprosy" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',5,12);">Lu 5:12</a>) came and threw himself down before Him, seeking to be healed. The man did not even ask Jesus to heal him, but expressed his faith, "If thou wilt, thou canst make me clean." The man\'s apparent want of importunity was the very essence of his importunity. Jesus, moved by his earnestness, touched him, and the man was made whole on the spot. The leper was enjoined to keep silence<63>Jesus did not wish to pass for a mere miracle-worker<65>and bade the man show himself to the priests and offer the appointed sacrifices (note Christ\'s respect for the legal institutions). The leper failed to keep Christ\'s charge, and published his cure abroad, no doubt much to his own spiritual detriment, and also to the hindrance of Christ\'s work (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,45);">Mr 1:45</a>).<P>2. Capernaum Incidents:<P>His circuit ended, Jesus returned to Capernaum (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',2,1);">Mr 2:1</a>; literally, "after days"). Here again His fame at once drew multitudes to see and hear Him. Among them were now persons of more unfriendly spirit. Pharisees and doctors, learning of the new rabbi, had come out of "every village of Galilee and Judea and Jerusalem" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',5,17);">Lu 5:17</a>), to hear and judge of Him for themselves. The chief incidents of this visit are the two now to be noted.<P>a) Cure of the Paralytic:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',9,\'2-8\');">Matthew 9:2-8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',2,\'1-12\');">Mark 2:1-12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',5,\'17-26\');">Luke 5:17-26</a>).<P>In a chamber crowded till there was no standing room, even round the door, Jesus wrought the cure upon the paralytic man. The scene was a dramatic one. From Christ\'s words "son," literally, "child" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',2,5);">Mr 2:5</a>), we infer that the paralytic was young, but his disablement seems to have been complete. It was no easy matter, with the doorways blocked, to get the man brought to Jesus, but his four bearers (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',2,3);">Mr 2:3</a>) were not easily daunted. They climbed the fiat roof, and, removing part of the covering above where Jesus was, let down the man into the midst. Jesus, pleased with the inventiveness and perseverance of their faith, responded to their wish. But, first, that the spiritual and temporal might be set in their right relations, and the attitude of His hearers be tested, He spoke the higher words: "Son, thy sins are forgiven" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',2,5);">Mr 2:5</a>). At once the temper of the scribes was revealed. Here was manifest evasion. Anyone could say, "Thy sins are forgiven." Worse, it was blasphemy, for "who can forgive sins but one, even God?" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',2,7);">Mr 2:7</a>). Unconsciously they were conceding to Christ the Divine dignity He claimed. Jesus perceives at once the thoughts of the cavilers, and proceeds to expose their malice. Accepting their own test, He proves His right to say, "Thy sins are forgiven," by now saying to the palsied man, "Take up thy bed and walk" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',2,9,11);">Mr 2:9,11</a>). At once the man arose, took his bed, and went forth whole. The multitude were "amazed" and "glorified God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',2,12);">Mr 2:12</a>).<P>b) Call and Feast of Matthew:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',9,\'9-13\');">Matthew 9:9-13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',2,\'13-17\');">Mark 2:13-17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',5,\'27-32\');">Luke 5:27-32</a>)<P>The call of Matthew apparently took place shortly after the cure of the paralytic man. The feast was possibly later (compare the connection with the appeal of Jairus, <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',9,18);">Mt 9:18</a>), but the call and the feast are best taken together, as they are in all the three narratives.<P>(1) The Call.<P>Matthew is called "Levi" by Luke, and "Levi, the son of Alpheus" by Mark. By occupation he was a "publican" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',5,27);">Lu 5:27</a>), collector of custom-dues in Capernaum, an important center of traffic. There is no reason to suppose that Matthew was not a man of thorough uprightness, though naturally the class to which he belonged was held in great odium by the Jews. Passing the place of toll on His way to or from the lake-side, Jesus called Matthew to follow Him. The publican must by this time have seen and heard much of Jesus, and could not but keenly feel His grace in calling one whom men despised. Without an instant\'s delay, he left all, and followed Jesus. From publican, Matthew became apostle, then evangelist.<P>(2) The Feast.<P>Then, or after, in the joy of his heart, Matthew made a feast for Jesus. To this feast he invited many of his own class<73>"publicans and sinners" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',9,10);">Mt 9:10</a>). Scribes and Pharisees were loud in their remonstrances to the disciples at what seemed to them an outrage on all propriety. Narrow hearts cannot understand the breadth of grace. Christ\'s reply was conclusive: "They that are whole have no need of a physician, but they that are sick," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',2,17);">Mr 2:17</a>, etc.).<P>(3) Fasting and Joy.<P>Another line of objection was encountered from disciples of the Baptist. They, like the Pharisees, "fasted oft" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',9,14);">Mt 9:14</a>), and they took exception to the unconstrained way in which Jesus and His disciples entered into social life. Jesus defends His disciples by adopting a metaphor of John\'s own (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,29);">Joh 3:29</a>), and speaking of Himself as the heavenly bridegroom (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',2,19);">Mr 2:19</a>). Joy was natural while the bridegroom was with them; then, with a sad forecast of the end, He alludes to days of mourning when the bridegroom should be taken away (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',2,20);">Mr 2:20</a>). A deeper answer follows. The spirit of His gospel is a free, spontaneous, joyful spirit, and cannot be confined within the old forms. To attempt to confine His religion within the outworn forms of Judaism would be like putting a patch of undressed cloth on an old garment, or pouring new wine into old wineskins. The garment would be rent; the wineskins would burst (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',2,21,22);">Mr 2:21,22</a> parallel). The new spirit must make forms of its own.<P>3. The Unnamed Jerusalem Feast:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,1);">John 5</a>)<P>At this point is probably to, be introduced the visit to Jerusalem to attend "a feast," or, according to another reading, "the feast\' of the Jews, recorded in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,\'1-\');">Joh 5</a>. The feast may, if the article is admitted, have been the Passover (April), though in that case one would expect it to be named; it may have been Purim (March), only this is not a feast Jesus might be thought eager to attend; it may even have been Pentecost (June). In this last case it would succeed the Sabbath controversies to be mentioned later. Fortunately, the determination of the actual feast has little bearing on the teaching of the chapter.<P>a) The Healing at Bethesda:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,\'1-16\');">John 5:1-16</a>).<P>Bethesda ("house of mercy") was the name given to a pool, fed by an intermittent spring, possessing healing properties, which was situated by the sheep-gate (not "market," the King James Version), i.e. near the temple, on the East Porches were erected to accommodate the invalids who desired to make trial of the waters (the mention of the angel, <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,4);">Joh 5:4</a>, with part of <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,3);">5:3</a>, is a later gloss, and is justly omitted in the Revised Version (British and American)). On one of these porches lay an impotent man. His infirmity was of long standing<6E>38 years. Hope deferred was making his heart sick, for he had no friend, when the waters were troubled, to put him into the pool. Others invariably got down before him. Jesus took pity on this man. He asked him if he would be made whole; then by a word of power healed him. The cure was instantaneous (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,8,9);">John 5:8,9</a>). It was the Sabbath day, and as the man, at Christ\'s command, took up his bed to go, he was challenged as doing that which was unlawful. The healed man, however, rightly perceived that He who was able to work so great a cure had authority to say what should and should not be done on the Sabbath. Meeting the man after in the temple, Jesus bade him "sin no more"<22>a hint, perhaps, that his previous infirmity was a result of sinful conduct (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,14);">John 5:14</a>).<P>b) Son and Father:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,\'17-29\');">John 5:17-29</a>)<P>Jesus Himself was now challenged by the authorities for breaking the Sabbath. Their strait, artificial rules would not permit even of acts of mercy on the Sabbath. This led, on the part of Jesus, to a momentous assertion of His Divine dignity. He first justified Himself by the example of His Father, who works continually in the upholding and government of the universe (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,17);">Joh 5:17</a>)<29>the Sabbath is a rest from earthly labors, for Divine, heavenly labor (Westcott)<29>then, when this increased the offense by its suggestion of "equality" with the Father, so that His life was threatened (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,18);">Joh 5:18</a>), He spoke yet more explicitly of His unique relationship to the Father, and of the Divine prerogatives it conferred upon Him. The Jews were right: if Jesus were not a Divine Person, the claims He made would be blasphemous. Not only was He admitted to intimacy with the Divine counsel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,20,21);">Joh 5:20,21</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',11,27);">Mt 11:27</a>), but to Him, He averred, was committed the Divine power of giving life (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,21,26);">Joh 5:21,26</a>), of judgment (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,22,27);">Joh 5:22,27</a>), of resurrection<6F>spiritual resurrection now (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,24,25);">Joh 5:24,25</a>), resurrection at the last day (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,28,29);">Joh 5:28,29</a>). It was the Father\'s will that the Son should be honored even as Himself (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,23);">Joh 5:23</a>).<P>c) The Threefold Witness:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,\'30-47\');">John 5:30-47</a>)<P>These stupendous claims are not made without adequate attestation. Jesus cites a threefold witness:<P>(1) the witness of the Baptist, whose testimony they had been willing for a time to receive (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,33,35);">Joh 5:33,35</a>);<P>(2) the witness of the Father, who by Christ\'s works supported His witness to Himself (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,\'36-38\');">Joh 5:36-38</a>);<P>(3) the witness of the Scriptures, for these, if read with spiritual discernment, would have led to Him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,39);">Joh 5:39</a>,<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,\'45-47\');">45-47</a>). Moses, whom they trusted, would condemn them. Their rejection of Jesus was due, not to want of light, but to the state of the heart: "I know you, that ye have not the love of God in yourselves" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,42);">Joh 5:42</a>); "How can ye believe," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,44);">Joh 5:44</a>).<P>4. Sabbath Controversies:<P>Shortly after His return to Galilee, if the order of events has been rightly apprehended, Jesus became involved in new disputes with the Pharisees about Sabbath-keeping. Possibly we hear in these the echoes of the charges brought against Him at the feast in Judea. Christ\'s conduct, and the principles involved in His replies, throw valuable light on the Sabbath institution.<P>a) Plucking of the Ears of Grain: (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',12,\'1-8\');">Matthew 12:1-8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',2,\'23-28\');">Mark 2:23-28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',6,\'1-5\');">Luke 6:1-5</a>)<P>The first dispute was occasioned by the action of the disciples in plucking ears of grain and rubbing them in their hands as they passed through the grainfields on a Sabbath (the note of time "second-first," in <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',6,1);">Lu 6:1</a> the King James Version, is omitted in the Revised Version (British and American). In any case the ripened grain points to a time shortly after the Passover). The law permitted this liberty (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',23,25);">De 23:25</a>), but Pharisaic rigor construed it into an offense to do the act on the Sabbath (for specimens of the minute, trivial and vexatious rules by which the Pharisees converted the Sabbath into a day of wretched constraint, see Farrar\'s Life of Christ, Edersheim\'s Jesus the Messiah, and similar works). Jesus, in defending His disciples, first quotes Old Testament precedents (David and the showbread, an act done apparently on the Sabbath, <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',21,6);">1Sa 21:6</a>; the priests\' service on the Sabbath<74>"One greater than the temple" was there, <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',12,6);">Mt 12:6</a>), in illustration of the truth that necessity overrides positive enactment; next, falls back on the broad principle of the design of the Sabbath as made for man<61>for his highest physical, mental, moral and spiritual well-being: "The sabbath was made for man," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',2,27);">Mr 2:27</a>). The claims of mercy are paramount. The end is not to be sacrificed to the means. The Son of Man, therefore, asserts lordship over the Sabbath (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',2,28);">Mr 2:28</a> parallel).<P>b) The Man with the Withered Hand:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',12,\'10-14\');">Matthew 12:10-14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',3,\'1-6\');">Mark 3:1-6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',6,\'6-11\');">Luke 6:6-11</a>)<P>The second collision took place on "another sabbath" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',6,6);">Lu 6:6</a>) in the synagogue. There was present a man with a withered hand. The Pharisees themselves, on this occasion, eager to entrap Jesus, seem to have provoked the conflict by a question, "Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath day?" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',12,10);">Mt 12:10</a>). Jesus met them by an appeal to their own practice in permitting the rescue of a sheep that had fallen into a pit on the Sabbath day (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',12,11,12);">Mt 12:11,12</a>), then, bidding the man stand forth, retorted the question on themselves, "Is it lawful on the sabbath day to do good, or to do harm? to save a life, or to kill?" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',3,4);">Mr 3:4</a>)<29>an allusion to their murderous intents. On no reply being made, looking on them with holy indignation, Jesus ordered the man to stretch forth his hand, and it was at once perfectly restored. The effect was only to inflame to "madness" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',6,11);">Lu 6:11</a>) the minds of His adversaries, and Pharisees and Herodians (the court-party of Herod) took counsel to destroy Him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',3,6);">Mr 3:6</a> parallel).<P>c) Withdrawal to the Sea:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',12,\'15-21\');">Matthew 12:15-21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',3,\'7-9\');">Mark 3:7-9</a>)<P>Jesus, leaving this scene of unprofitable conflict, quietly withdrew with His disciples to the shore, and there continued His work of teaching and healing. People from all the neighboring districts flocked to His ministry. He taught them from a little boat (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',3,9);">Mr 3:9</a>), and healed their sick. Matthew sees in this a fulfillment of the oracle which is to be found in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',42,\'1-4\');">Isa 42:1-4</a>.<P>5. The Choosing of the Twelve:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',10,\'1-4\');">Matthew 10:1-4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',3,\'13-19\');">Mark 3:13-19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',6,\'12-16\');">Luke 6:12-16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,13);">Ac 1:13</a>)<P>The work of Jesus was growing on His hands, and friends and enemies were rapidly taking sides. The time accordingly had come for selecting and attaching to His person a definite number of followers<72>not simply disciples<65>who might be prepared to carry on His work after His departure. This He did in the choice of twelve apostles. The choice was made in early morning, on the Mount of Beatitudes, after a night spent wholly in prayer (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',6,12);">Lu 6:12</a>).<P>a) The Apostolic Function:<P>"Apostle" means "one sent." On the special function of the apostle it is sufficient to say here that those thus set apart were chosen for the special end of being Christ\'s witnesses and accredited ambassadors to the world, able from personal knowledge to bear testimony to what Christ had been, said and done<6E>to the facts of His life, death and resurrection (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,22,23);">Ac 1:22,23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,\'22-32\');">2:22-32</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',3,15);">3:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',10,39);">10:39</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,\'3-15\');">1Co 15:3-15</a>, etc.); but, further, as instructed by Him, and endowed with His Spirit (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',12,12);">Lu 12:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,16,17,26);">Joh 14:16,17,26</a>, etc.), of being the depositories of His truth, sharers of His authority (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',10,1);">Mt 10:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',3,15);">Mr 3:15</a>), messengers of His gospel (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',5,\'18-21\');">2Co 5:18-21</a>), and His instruments in laying broad and strong the foundations of His church (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',2,20);">Eph 2:20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',3,5);">3:5</a>). So responsible a calling was never, before or after, given to mortal men.<P>b) The Lists:<P>Four lists of the apostles are given<65>in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and Acts (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,13);">1:13</A>, omitting Judas). The names are given alike in all, except that "Judas, the son (or brother) of James" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',6,16);">Lu 6:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,13);">Ac 1:13</a>) is called by Matt Lebbaeus, "and by Mark Thaddaeus." The latter names are cognate in meaning and all denote the same person. "Bartholomew" (son of Tolmai) is probably the Nathanael of <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,47);">Joh 1:47</a> (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',21,2);">21:2</a>). The epithet "Cananaean" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',10,4);">Mt 10:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',3,18);">Mr 3:18</a>) marks "Simon" as then or previously a member of the party of the Zealots (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',6,15);">Lu 6:15</a>). In all the lists Peter, through his gifts of leadership, stands first; Judas Iscariot, the betrayer, stands last. There is a tendency to arrangement in pairs: Peter and Andrew; James and John; Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew; lastly, James, the son of Alpheus, Judas, son or brother of James, Simonthe Zealot and Judas Iscariot. The list contains two pairs of brothers (three, if "brother" be read with Judas), and at least one pair of friends (Philip and Nathanael).<P>c) The Men:<P>All the apostles were men from the humbler ranks, yet not illiterate, and mostly comfortably circumstanced. All were Galileans, except the betrayer, whose name "Iscariot" i.e. "man of Kerioth," marks him as a Judean. Of some of the apostles we know a good deal; of others very little; yet we are warranted in speaking of them all, Judas excepted, as men of honest minds, and sincere piety. The band held within it a number of men of strongly contrasted types of character. Allusion need only be made to the impetuous Peter, the contemplative John, the matter-of-fact Philip, the cautious Thomas, the zealous Simon, the conservative Matthew, the administrative Judas. The last-named<65>Iscariot<6F>is the dark problem of the apostolate. We have express testimony that Jesus knew him from the beginning (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,64);">Joh 6:64</a>). Yet He chose him. The character of Judas, when Jesus received him, was doubtless undeveloped. He could not himself suspect the dark possibilities that slept in it. His association with the apostles, in itself considered, was for his good. His peculiar gift was, for the time, of service. In choosing him, Jesus must be viewed as acting for, and under the direction of, the Father (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,19);">Joh 5:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',17,12);">17:12</a>). See special articles on the several apostles [<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PETER,+SIMON">Peter</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ANDREW">Andrew</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JAMES">James</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JOHN,+THE APOSTLE">John, The Apostle</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PHILIP+(2)">Philip (2)</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=BARTHOLOMEW">Bartholomew</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=MATTHEW">Matthew</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=THOMAS">Thomas</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JAMES">James son of Alphaeus</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SIMON+THE+CANAANITE;+SIMON+THE+CANANAEAN;+SIMON+THE+ZEALOT">Simon the Zealot</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JUDAS+OF+JAMES">Judas son of James</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JUDAS+ISCARIOT">Judas Iscariot</a>]. <P>III. From the Sermon on the Mount till the Parables of the Kingdom<6F>a Second Circuit.<P>1. The Sermon on the Mount:<P>The choice of the apostles inaugurates a new period of Christ\'s activity. Its first most precious fruit was the delivery to the apostles and the multitudes who thronged Him as He came down from the mountain (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',6,17);">Lu 6:17</a>) of that great manifesto of His kingdom popularly known as the Sermon on the Mount. The hill is identified by Stanley (Sinai and Palestine, 368) and others with that known as "the Horns of Hattin," where "the level place" at the top, from which Christ would come down from one of the higher horns, exactly suits the conditions of the narrative. The sick being healed, Jesus seated Himself a little higher up, His disciples near Him, and addressed the assembly (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',7,28,29);">Mt 7:28,29</a>). The season of the year is shown by the mention of the "lilies" to be the summer.<P>Its Scope.<P>His words were weighty. His aim was at the outset to set forth in terms that were unmistakable the principles, aims and dispositions of His kingdom; to expound its laws; to exhibit its righteousness, both positively, and in contrast with Pharisaic formalism and hypocrisy. Only the leading ideas can be indicated here (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=BEATITUDES">BEATITUDES</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SERMON+ON+THE+MOUNT">SERMON ON THE MOUNT</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ETHICS+OF+JESUS">ETHICS OF JESUS</a>). Matthew, as is his wont, groups material part of which is found in other connections in Luke, but it is well to study the whole in the well-ordered form in which it appears in the First Gospel.<P>a) The Blessings:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',5,\'1-6\');">Matthew 5:1-6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',6,\'20-26\');">Luke 6:20-26</a>)<P>In marked contrast with the lawgiving of Sinai, Christ\'s first words are those of blessing. Passing at once to the dispositions of the heart, He shows on what inner conditions the blessings of the kingdom depend. His beatitudes (poverty of spirit, mourning, meekness, hunger and thirst after righteousness, etc.) reverse all the world\'s standards of judgment on such matters. In the possession of these graces consists true godliness of character; through them the heirs of the kingdom become the salt of the earth, the light of the world. The obligation rests on them to let their light shine (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',4,\'21-23\');">Mr 4:21-23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',8,16);">Lu 8:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,33);">11:33</a>).<P>b) True Righteousness<73>the Old and the New Law:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',5,\'17-48\');">Matthew 5:17-48</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',6,\'27-36\');">Luke 6:27-36</a>)<P>Jesus defines His relation to the old law<61>not a Destroyer, but a Fulfiller<65>and proceeds to exhibit the nature of the true righteousness in contrast to Pharisaic literality and formalism. Through adherence to the latter they killed the spirit of the law. With an absolute authority<74>"But I say unto you"<22>Jesus leads everything back from the outward letter to the state of the heart. Illustrations are taken from murder, adultery, swearing, retaliation, hatred of enemies, and a spiritual expansion is given to every precept. The sinful thought or desire holds in it the essence of transgression. The world\'s standards are again reversed in the demands for nonresistance to injuries, love of enemies and requital of good for evil.<P>c) Religion and Hypocrisy<73>True and False Motive:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',6,\'1-18\');">Matthew 6:1-18</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,\'1-8\');">Luke 11:1-8</a>)<P>Pursuing the contrast between the true righteousness and that of the scribes and Pharisees, Jesus next draws attention to motive in religion. The Pharisees erred not simply in having regard only to the letter of the Law, but in acting in morals and religion from a false motive. He had furnished the antidote to their literalism; He now assails their ostentation and hypocrisy. Illustrations are taken from almsgiving, prayer and fasting, and in connection with prayer the Lord\'s Prayer is given as a model (Luke introduces this in another context, <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,\'1-4\');">Lu 11:1-4</a>).<P>d) The True Good and Cure for Care:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',6,\'19-34\');">Matthew 6:19-34</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,\'34-36\');">Luke 11:34-36</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',12,\'22-34\');">12:22-34</a>)<P>The true motive in religious acts is to please God; the same motive should guide us in the choice of what is to be our supreme good. Earthly treasure is not to be put above heavenly. The kingdom of God and His righteousness are to be first in our desires. The eye is to be single. The true cure for worldly anxiety is then found in trust of the heavenly Father. His children are more to God than fowls and flowers, for whom His care in Nature is so conspicuously manifest. Seeking first the kingdom they have a pledge<67>no higher conceivable<6C>that all else they need will be granted along with it (this section on trust, again, Luke places differently, <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',12,\'22-34\');">12:22-34</a>).<P>e) Relation to the World\'s Evil<69>the Conclusion:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',7,\'1-29\');">Matthew 7:1-29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',6,\'37-49\');">Luke 6:37-49</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,\'9-13\');">11:9-13</a>):<P>Jesus finally proceeds to speak of the relation of the disciple to the evil of the world. That evil has been considered in its hostile attitude to the disciple (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',5,38);">Mt 5:38</a>); the question is now as to the disciple s free relations toward it. Jesus inculcates the duties of the disciple\'s bearing himself wisely toward evil<69>with charity, with caution, with prayer, in the spirit of ever doing as one would be done by<62>and of being on his guard against it. The temptation is great to follow the worldly crowd, to be misled by false teachers, to put profession for practice. Against these perils the disciple is energetically warned. True religion will ever be known by its fruits. The discourse closes with the powerful similitude of the wise and foolish builders. Again, as on an earlier occasion, Christ\'s auditors were astonished at His teaching, and at the authority with which He spoke (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',7,28,29);">Mt 7:28,29</a>).<P>2. Intervening Incidents: A series of remarkable incidents are next to be noticed.<P>a) Healing of the Centurion\'s Servant:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',8,1,\'5-13\');">Matthew 8:1,5-13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',7,\'1-10\');">Luke 7:1-10</a>)<P>(1) The healing of the centurion\'s servant apparently took place on the same day as the delivery of the Sermon on the Mount (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',7,1,2);">Lu 7:1,2</a>). It had been a day of manifold and exhausting labors for Jesus. A walk of perhaps 7 miles brought Him back to Capernaum, the crowds accompanying. Yet no sooner, on His return, does He hear a new appeal for help than His love Replies,"i will come and heal him." The suppliant was a Roman centurion<6F>one who had endeared himself to the Jews (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',7,5);">Lu 7:5</a>)<29>and the request was for the healing of a favorite servant, paralyzed and tortured with pain. First, a deputation sought Christ\'s good offices, then, when Jesus was on the way, a second message came, awakening even Christ\'s astonishment by the magnitude of its faith. The centurion felt he was not worthy that Jesus should come under his roof, but let Jesus speak the word only, and his servant would be healed. "I have not found so great faith," Jesus said, "no, not in Israel." The word was spoken, and, on the return of the messengers, the servant was found healed.<P>b) The Widow of Nain\'s Son Raised:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',7,\'11-17\');">Luke 7:11-17</a>)<P>The exciting events of this day gathered so great a crowd round the house where Jesus was as left Him no leisure even to eat, and His friends, made anxious for His health, sought to restrain Him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',3,20,21);">Mr 3:20,21</a>). It was probably to escape from this local excitement that Jesus, "soon afterwards," is found at the little town of Nain, a few miles southeast of Nazareth. A great multitude still followed Him. Here, as He entered the city, occurred the most wonderful of the works He had yet wrought. A young man<61>the only son of a widowed mother<65>was being carried out for burial. Jesus, in compassion, stopped the mournful procession, and, in the calm certainty of His word being obeyed, bade the young man arise. On the instant life returned, and Jesus gave the son back to his mother. The amazement of the people was tenfold intensified. They felt that the old days had come back: that God had visited His people.<P>It was apparently during the journey or circuit which embraced this visit to Nain, and as the result of the fame it brought to Jesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',7,17,18);">Lu 7:17,18</a>; note the allusion to the dead being raised in Christ\'s reply to John), that the embassy was sent from the Baptist in prison to ask of Jesus whether He was indeed He who should come, or would they look for another.<P>c) Embassy of John\'s Disciples<65>Christ and His Generation:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',11,\'2-30\');">Matthew 11:2-30</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',7,\'18-35\');">Luke 7:18-35</a>)<P>It was a strange question on the lips of the forerunner, but is probably to be interpreted as the expression of perplexity rather than of actual doubt. There seems no question but that John\'s mind had been thrown into serious difficulty by the reports which had reached him of the work of Jesus. Things were not turning out as he expected. It was the peaceful, merciful character of Christ\'s work which stumbled John. The gloom of his prison wrought with his disappointment, and led him to send this message for the satisfaction of himself and his disciples.<P>(1) Christ\'s Answer to John.<P>If doubt there was, Jesus treated it tenderly. He did not answer directly, but bade the two disciples who had been sent go back and tell John the things they had seen and heard<72>the blind receiving their sight, the lame walking, the deaf cured, the dead raised, the Gospel preached. Little doubt the Messiah had come when works like these<73>the very works predicted by the prophets (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',35,5,6);">Isa 35:5,6</a>)<29>were being done. Blessed were those who did not find occasion of stumbling in Him. Jesus, however, did more. By his embassy John had put himself in a somewhat false position before the multitude. But Jesus would not have His faithful follower misjudged. His was no fickle spirit. Jesus nobly vindicated him as a prophet and more than a prophet; yea, a man than whom a greater had not lived. Yet, even as the new dispensation was higher than the old, one "but little" in the kingdom of heaven<65>one sharing Christ\'s humble, loving, self-denying disposition<6F>was greater even than John (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',11,11);">Mt 11:11</a>).<P>(2) A Perverse People<6C>Christ\'s Grace.<P>The implied contrast between Himself and John led Jesus further to denounce the perverse spirit of His own generation. The Pharisees and lawyers (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',7,30);">Lu 7:30</a>) had rejected John; they were as little pleased with Him. Their behavior was like children objecting to one game because it was merry, and to another because it was sad. The flood of outward popularity did not deceive Jesus. The cities in which His greatest works were wrought<68>Chorazin, Bethsaida, Capernaum<75>remained impenitent at heart. The heavier would be their judgment; worse even than that on Tyre and Sidon, or on Sodom itself. Over against their unbelief Jesus reasserts His dignity and declares His grace (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',11,\'25-30\');">Mt 11:25-30</a>). All authority was His; He alone knew and could reveal the Father (no claims in John are higher). Let the heavy laden come to Him, and He would give them rest (parts of these passages appear in another connection in <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',10,\'12-21\');">Lu 10:12-21</a>).<P>d) The First Anointing<6E>the Woman Who Was a Sinner:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',7,\'36-50\');">Luke 7:36-50</a>)<P>Yet another beautiful incident connected with this journey is preserved by Lk<4C>the anointing of Jesus in Simon\'s house by a woman who was a sinner. In Nain or some other city visited by Him, Jesus was invited to dine with a Pharisee named Simon. His reception was a cold one (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',7,\'44-46\');">Lu 7:44-46</a>). During the meal, a woman of the city, an outcast from respectable society<74>one, however, as the story implies, whose heart Jesus had reached, and who, filled with sorrow, love, shame, penitence, had turned from her life of sin, entered the chamber. There, bathing Christ\'s feet with her tears, wiping them with her tresses, and imprinting on them fervent kisses, she anointed them with a precious ointment she had brought with her. Simon was scandalized. Jesus could not be a right-thinking man, much less a prophet, or He would have rebuked this misbehavior from such a person. Jesus met the thought of Simon\'s heart by speaking to him the parable of the Two Debtors (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',7,41,42);">Lu 7:41,42</a>). Of two men who had been freely forgiven, one 500, the other 50 shillings, which would love his creditor most? Simon gave the obvious answer, and the contrast between his own reception of Jesus and the woman\'s passionate love was immediately pointed out. Her greater love was due to the greater forgiveness; though, had Simon only seen it, he perhaps needed forgiveness even more than she.<P>3. Second Galilean Circuit<69>Events at Capernaum:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',8,\'1-4\',\'19-21\');">Luke 8:1-4,19-21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',12,\'22-50\');">Matthew 12:22-50</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',3,\'22-35\');">Mark 3:22-35</a> compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,\'14-36\');">Luke 11:14-36</a>)<P>Her faith saved her and she was dismissed in peace. But again the question arose, "Who is this that even forgiveth sins?" Luke introduces here (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',8,\'1-4\');">Lu 8:1-4</a>) a second Galilean circuit of Jesus, after the return from which a new series of exciting incidents took place at Capernaum.<P>a) Galilee Revisited:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',8,\'1-4\');">Luke 8:1-4</a>)<P>The circuit was an extensive one<6E>"went about through cities and villages (literally, "according to city and village"), preaching." During this journey Jesus was attended by the Twelve, and by devoted women (Mary Magdalene, Joanna, wife of Herod\'s steward, Susanna, and others), who ministered to Him of their substance (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',8,2,3);">Lu 8:2,3</a>). At the close of this circuit Jesus returned to Capernaum.<P>b) Cure of Demoniac<61>Discourse on Blasphemy:<P>Jesus, no doubt, wrought numerous miracles on demoniacs (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',8,1,2);">Lu 8:1,2</a>; out of Mary Magdalene He is said to have cast 7 demons<6E>perhaps a form of speech to indicate the severity of the possession). The demoniac now brought to Jesus was blind and dumb. Jesus cured him, with the double result that the people were filled with amazement: "Can this be the son of David?" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',12,23);">Mt 12:23</a>), while the Pharisees blasphemed, alleging that Jesus cast out demons by the help of Beelzebub (Greek, Beelzeboul), the prince of the demons (see under the word). A quite similar incident is narrated in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',9,\'32-34\');">Mt 9:32-34</a>; and Luke gives the discourse that follows in a later connection (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,11);">11:14</a>ff). The accusation may well have been repeated more than once. Jesus, in reply, points out, first, the absurdity of supposing Satan to be engaged in warring against his own kingdom (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',18,25);">Mt 18:25</a> parallel; here was plainly a stronger than Satan); then utters the momentous word about blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. All other blasphemies<65>even that against the Son of Man (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',12,32);">Mt 12:32</a>)<29>may be forgiven, for they may proceed from ignorance and misconception; but deliberate, perverse rejection of the light, and attributing to Satan what was manifestly of God, was a sin which, when matured<65>and the Pharisees came perilously near committing it<69>admitted of no forgiveness, either in this world or the next, for the very capacity for truth in the soul was by such sin destroyed. Mark has the strong phrase, "is guilty of an eternal sin" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',3,29);">3:29</a>). Pertinent words follow as to the root of good and evil in character (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',12,\'33-37\');">Mt 12:33-37</a>).<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=BLASPHEMY">BLASPHEMY</a>.<P>The Sign of Jonah.<P>Out of this discourse arose the usual Jewish demand for a "sign" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',12,38);">Mt 12:38</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,\'29-32\');">Lu 11:29-32</a>), which Jesus met by declaring that no sign would be given but the sign of the prophet Jonah<61>an allusion to His future resurrection. He reiterates His warning to the people of His generation for their rejection of greater light than had been enjoyed by the Ninevites and the Queen of Sheba.<P>Two incidents, not dissimilar in character, interrupted this discourse<73>one the cry of a woman in the audience (if the time be the same, <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,27,28);">Lu 11:27,28</a>), "Blessed is the womb that bare thee," etc., to which Jesus replied, "Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it"; the other, a message that His mother and brethren (doubtless anxious for His safety) desired to speak with Him.<P>c) Christ\'s Mother and Brethen:<P>To this, stretching out His hand toward His disciples, Jesus answered, "Behold, my mother and my brethren" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',3,34);">Mr 3:34</a>), etc. Kinship in the spiritual kingdom consists in fidelity to the will of God, not in ties of earthly relationship.<P>4. Teaching in Parables:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',13,\'1-52\');">Matthew 13:1-52</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',4,\'1-34\');">Mark 4:1-34</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',8,\'4-15\');">Luke 8:4-15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',13,\'18-21\');">13:18-21</a>)<P>On the same day on which the preceding discourses were delivered, Jesus, seeing the multitudes, passed to the shore, and entering a boat, inaugurated a new method in His public. teaching. This was the speaking in parables. Similitude, metaphor, always entered into the teaching of Jesus (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',7,\'24-27\');">Mt 7:24-27</a>), and parable has once been met with (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',7,41,42);">Lu 7:41,42</a>); now parable is systematically employed as a means of imparting and illustrating important truths, while yet veiling them from those whose minds were hostile and unreceptive (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',4,\'10-12\');">Mr 4:10-12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',8,9,10);">Lu 8:9,10</a>). The parable thus at once reveals and conceals. The motive of this partially veiled teaching was the growing hostility of the Pharisees. In its nature the parable (from a verb signifying "to place side by side") is a representation in some form of earthly analogy of truths relating to Divine and eternal things (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PARABLE">PARABLE</a>). The parables of the kingdom brought together in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',13,1);">Mt 13</a> form an invaluable series, though not all were spoken in public (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',13,\'36-52\');">Mt 13:36-52</a>), and some may belong to a later occasion (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',13,\'18-21\');">Lu 13:18-21</a>). Mark adds the parable of the Seed Growing Secretly (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',4,\'26-29\');">4:26-29</a>). Of three of the parables (the Sower, the Tares, the Dragnet), Jesus Himself gives the interpretation.<P>Parables of the Kingdom.<P>In series the parables at once mirror the origin, mixed character and development of the kingdom in its present imperfect earthly condition, and the perfection which awaits it after the crisis at the end. In the parable of the Sower is represented the origin of the kingdom in the good seed of the word, and the varied soils on which that seed falls; in the Seed Growing Secretly, the law of orderly growth in the kingdom; in the parable of the Tares, the mixed character of the subjects of the kingdom; in those of the Mustard Seed and Leaven, the progress of the kingdom<6F>external growth, internal tramsformative effect; in those of the Treasure and Pearl the finding and worth of the kingdom; in that of the Dragnet the consummation of the kingdom. Jesus compares His disciples, if they understand these things, to householders bringing out of their treasure "things new and old" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',13,52);">Mt 13:52</a>).<P>IV. From the Crossing to Gadara to the Mission of the Twelve<76>a Third Circuit.<P>1. Crossing of the Lake<6B>Stilling of the Storm:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',8,\'18-27\');">Matthew 8:18-27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',4,\'35-41\');">Mark 4:35-41</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',8,\'22-25\');">Luke 8:22-25</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,\'57-62\');">9:57-62</a>)<P>It was on the evening of the day on which He spoke the parables<65>though the chronology of the incident seems unknown to Luke (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',8,22);">8:22</a>)<29>that Jesus bade His disciples cross over to the other side of the lake. At this juncture He was accosted by an aspirant for discipleship. Matthew gives two cases of aspirants; Luke (but in a different connection, <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,\'57-62\');">9:57-62</a>), three. Luke\'s connection (departure from Galilee) is perhaps preferable for the second and third; but the three may be considered together.<P>The three aspirants may be distinguished as,<P>(a) The forward disciple: he who in an atmosphere of enthusiasm offered himself under impulse, without counting the cost. The zeal of this would-be follower Jesus cheeks with the pathetic words, "The foxes have holes," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',8,20);">Mt 8:20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,58);">Lu 9:58</a>).<P>(b) The procrastinating disciple. The first candidate needed repression; the second needs impulsion.<P>a) Aspirants for Disciplineship:<P>He would follow Jesus, but first let him bury his father. There had come a crisis, however, when the Lord\'s claim was paramount: "Leave the dead to bury their own dead" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',8,22);">Mt 8:22</a>). There are at times higher claims than mere natural relationships, to which, in themselves, Jesus was the last to be indifferent.<p>(c) The wavering disciple. The third disciple is again one who offers himself, but his heart was too evidently still with the things at home. Jesus, again, lays His finger on the weak spot, "No man, having put his hand to the plow, and looking back," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,62);">Lu 9:62</a>). As mentioned, the latter two cases tally better with a final departure from Galilee than with a temporary crossing of the lake.<P>b) The Storm Calmed:<P>The inland lake was exposed to violent and sudden tempests. One of these broke on the disciples\' boat as they sailed across. Everyone\'s life seemed in jeopardy. Jesus, meanwhile, in calmest repose, was asleep on a cushion in the stern (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',4,38);">Mr 4:38</a>). The disciples woke Him almost rudely: "Teacher, carest thou not that we perish?" Jesus at once arose, and, reproving their want of faith, rebuked wind and waves ("Peace, be still"). Immediately there was a great calm. It was a new revelation to the disciples of the majesty of their Master. "Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey him?"<P>2. The Gadarene (Gerasene) Demoniac:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',8,\'28-34\');">Matthew 8:28-34</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',5,\'1-20\');">Mark 5:1-20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',8,\'26-39\');">Luke 8:26-39</a>)<P>The lake being crossed, Jesus and His disciples came into the country of the Gadarenes (Matthew), or Gerasenes (Mark, Luke)<29>Gadara being the capital of the district (on the topography, compare Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, 380-81). From the lake shore rises a mountain in which are ancient tombs. Here Jesus was met by a demoniac (Matthew mentions two demoniacs: M. Henry\'s quaint comment is, "If there were two, there was one." Possibly one was the fiercer of the two, the other figuring only as his companion). The man, as described, was a raving maniac of the worst type (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',5,\'3-5\');">Mr 5:3-5</a>), dwelling in the tombs, wearing no clothes (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',8,27);">Lu 8:27</a>), of supernatural strength, wounding himself, shrieking, etc. Really possessed by "an unclean spirit," his consciousness was as if he were indwelt by a "legion" of demons, and from that consciousness he addressed Jesus as the Son of God come for their tormenting. In what follows it is difficult to distinguish what belongs to the broken, incoherent consciousness of the man, and the spirit or spirits who spake through him. In the question, "What is thy name?" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',5,9);">Mr 5:9</a>) Jesus evidently seeks to arouse the victim\'s shattered soul to some sense of its own individuality. On Jesus commanding the unclean spirit to leave the man, the request was made that the demons might be permitted to enter a herd of swine feeding near. The reason of Christ\'s permission, with its result in the destruction of the herd ("rushed down the steep into the sea") need not be too closely scrutinized. It may have had an aspect of judgment on the (possibly) Jewish holders of the swine; or it may have had reference to the victim of the possession, as enabling him to realize his deliverance. Whatever the difficulties of the narrative, none of the rationalistic explanations afford any sensible relief from them. The object of the miracle may be to exclude rationalistic explanations, by giving a manifest attestation of the reality of the demon influence. When the people of the city came they found the man fully restored<65>"clothed and in his right mind." Yet, with fatal shortsightedness, they besought Jesus to depart from their borders. The man was sent home to declare to his friends the great things the Lord had done to him.<P>3. Jairus\' Daughter Raised<65>Woman with Issue of Blood:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',9,\'18-26\');">Matthew 9:18-26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',5,\'21-43\');">Mark 5:21-43</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',8,\'40-56\');">Luke 8:40-56</a>)<P>Repelled by the Gerasenes, Jesus received a warm welcome on His return to Capernaum on the western shore (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',5,21);">Mr 5:21</a>). It was probably at this point that Matthew gave the feast formerly referred to.<P>It was in connection with this feast, Matthew himself informs us (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',9,18);">9:18</a>), that Jairus, one of the rulers of the synagogue, made his appeal for help. His little daughter, about 12 years old (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',8,42);">Lu 8:42</a>), was at the point of death; indeed, while Jesus was coming, she died. The ruler\'s faith, though real, was not equal to the centurion\'s, who believed that Jesus could heal without being present.<P>a) Jairus\' Appeal and Its Result:<P>Jesus came, and having expelled the professional mourners, in sacred privacy, only the father and mother, with Peter, James and John being permitted to enter the death-chamber, raised the girl to life. It is the second miracle on record of the raising from the dead.<P>b) The Afflicted Woman Cured:<P>On the way to the ruler\'s house occurred another wonder<65>a miracle within a miracle. A poor woman, whose case was a specially distressing one, alike as regards the nature of her malady, the length of its continuance, and the fruitlessness of her application to the physicians, crept up to Jesus, confident that if she could but touch the border of His garment, she would be healed. The woman was ignorant; her faith was blended with superstition; but Jesus, reading the heart, gave her the benefit she desired. It was His will, however, that, for her own good, the woman thus cured should not obtain the blessing by stealth. He therefore brought her to open confession, and cheered her by His commendatory word.<P>4. Incidents of Third Circuit:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',9,\'27-38\');">Matthew 9:27-38</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',13,\'53-58\');">13:53-58</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,\'1-6\');">Mark 6:1-6</a>)<P>At this point begins apparently a new evangelistic tour (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',9,35);">Mt 9:35</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,6);">Mr 6:6</a>), extending methodically to "all the cities and villages." To it belong in the narratives the healing of two blind men (compare the case of Bartimeus, recorded later); the cure of a demoniac who was dumb<6D>a similar case to that in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',12,22);">Mt 12:22</a>; and a second rejection at Nazareth (Matthew, Mark). The incident is similar to that in <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,\'16-30\');">Lu 4:16-30</a>, and shows, if the events are different, that the people\'s hearts were unchanged. Of this circuit Matthew gives an affecting summary (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',9,\'35-38\');">9:35-38</A>), emphasizing the Lord\'s compassion, and His yearning for more laborers to reap the abundant harvest.<P>5. The Twelve Sent Forth<74>Discourse of Jesus:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',10,\'1-\');">Matthew 10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,\'7-13\');">Mark 6:7-13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,\'1-6\');">Luke 9:1-6</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',10,\'2-24\');">Luke 10:2-24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',12,\'2-12\');">12:2-12</a>, etc.)<P>Partly with a view to the needs of the rapidly growing work and the training of the apostles, and partly as a witness to Israel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',10,6,23);">Mt 10:6,23</a>), Jesus deemed it expedient to send the Twelve on an independent mission. The discourse in Matthew attached to this event seems, as frequently, to be a compilation. Parts of it are given by Luke in connection with the mission of the Seventy (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',10,1);">Lu 10:1</a>; the directions were doubtless similar in both cases); parts on other occasions (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',12,\'2-12\');">Lu 12:2-12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',21,\'12-17\');">21:12-17</a>, etc.; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',13,\'9-13\');">Mr 13:9-13</a>).<P>The Twelve were sent out two by two. Their work was to be a copy of the Master\'s<>to preach the gospel and to heal the sick. To this end they were endowed with authority over unclean spirits, and over all manner of sickness. They were to go forth free from all encumbrances<65>no money, no scrip, no changes of raiment, no staff (save that in their hand, <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,8);">Mr 6:8</a>), sandals only on their feet, etc.<P>a) The Commission:<P>They were to rely for support on those to whom they preached. They were for the present to confine their ministry to Israel. The saying in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',10,23);">Mt 10:23</a>, "Ye shall not have gone through the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come," apparently has reference to the judgment on the nation, not to the final coming (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',16,28);">16:28</a>).<P>b) Counsels and Warnings:<P>The mission of the Twelve was the first step of Christianity as an aggressive force in society. Jesus speaks of it, accordingly, in the light of the whole future that was to come out of it. He warns His apostles faithfully of the dangers that awaited them; exhorts them to prudence and circumspection ("wise as serpents," etc.); holds out to them Divine promises for consolation; directs them when persecuted in one place to flee to another; points out to them from His own case that such persecutions were only to be expected. He assures them of a coming day of revelation; bids them at once fear and trust God; impresses on them the duty of courage in confession; inculcates in them supreme love to Himself. That love would be tested in the dearest relations, In itself peace, the gospel would be the innocent occasion of strife, enmity and division among men. Those who receive Christ\'s disciples will not fail of their reward.<P>When Christ had ended His discourse He proceeded with His own evangelistic work, leaving the disciples to inaugurate theirs (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',11,1);">Mt 11:1</a>).``132';
isbe[5022]='Jesus Christ, 4C2`Second Period<6F>After the Mission of the Twelve till the Departure from Galilee<P>I. From the Death of the Baptist till the Discourse on Bread of Life.<P>1. The Murder of the Baptist and Herod\'s Alarms:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',14,\'1-12\');">Matthew 14:1-12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,\'14-29\');">Mark 6:14-29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,\'7-9\');">Luke 9:7-9</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,\'18-20\');">3:18-20</a>)<P>Shortly before the events now to be narrated, John the Baptist had been foully murdered in his prison by Herod Antipas at the instigation of Herodias, whose unlawful marriage with Herod John had unsparingly condemned. Josephus gives as the place of the Baptist\'s imprisonment the fortress of Macherus, near the Dead Sea (Ant., XVIII, v, 2); or John may have been removed to Galilee. Herod would ere this have killed John, but was restrained by fear of the people (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',14,5);">Mt 14:5</a>). The hate of Herodias, however, did not slumber. Her relentless will contrasts with the vacillation of Herod, as Lady Macbeth in Shakspeare contrasts with Macbeth. A birthday feast gave her the opening she sought for. Her daughter Saleme, pleasing Herod by her dancing, obtained from him a promise on oath to give her whatever she asked. Prompted by Herodias, she boldly demanded John the Baptist\'s head. The weak king was shocked, but, for his oath\'s sake, granted her what she craved. The story tells how the Baptist\'s disciples reverently buried the remains of their master, and went and told Jesus. Herod\'s conscience did not let him rest. When rumors reached him of a wonderful teacher and miracle-worker in Galilee, he leaped at once to the conclusion that it was John risen from the dead. Herod cannot have heard much of Jesus before. An evil conscience makes men cowards.<P>Another Passover drew near (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,4);">Joh 6:4</a>), but Jesus did not on this occasion go up to the feast.<P>Returning from their mission, the apostles reported to Jesus what they had said and done (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,10);">Lu 9:10</a>); Jesus had also heard of the Baptist\'s fate, and of Herod\'s fears, and now proposed to His disciples a retirement to a desert place across the lake, near Bethsaida (on the topography, compare Stanley, op. cit.,375,381).<P>2. The Feeding of the Five Thousand:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',14,\'13-21\');">Matthew 14:13-21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,\'30-44\');">Mark 6:30-44</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,\'10-17\');">Luke 9:10-17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,\'1-14\');">John 6:1-14</a>)<P>As it proved, however, the multitudes had observed their departure, and, running round the shore, were at the place before them (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,33);">Mr 6:33</a>). The purpose of rest was frustrated, but Jesus did not complain. He pitied the shepherdless state of the people, and went out to teach and heal them. The day wore on, and the disciples suggested that the fasting multitude should disperse, and seek victuals in the nearest towns and villages. This Jesus, who had already proved Philip by asking how the people should be fed (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,5);">Joh 6:5</a>), would not permit. With the scanty provision at command<6E>5 loaves and 2 fishes<65>He fed the whole multitude. By His blessing the food was multiplied till all were satisfied, and 12 baskets of fragments, carefully collected, remained over. It was astupendous act of creative power, no rationalizing of which can reduce it to natural dimensions.<P>3. Walking on the Sea:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',14,\'22-33\');">Matthew 14:22-33</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,\'45-52\');">Mark 6:45-52</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,\'15-21\');">John 6:15-21</a>)<P>The enthusiasm created by this miracle was intense (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,14);">Joh 6:14</a>). Matthew and Mark relate (Luke here falls for a time out of the Synopsis) that Jesus hurriedly constrained His disciples to enter into their boat and recross the lake<6B>this though a storm was gathering<6E>while He Himself remained in the mountain alone in prayer. John gives the key to this action in the statement that the people were about to take Him by force and make Him a king (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,15);">6:15</a>). Three hours after midnight found the disciples still in the midst of the lake, "distressed in rowing" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,48);">Mr 6:48</a>), deeply anxious because Jesus was not, as on a former occasion, with them. At last, at the darkest hour of their extremity, Jesus was seen approaching in a way unlooked-for<6F>walking on the water. Every new experience of Jesus was a surprise to the disciples. They were at first terrified, thinking they saw a spirit, but straightway the well-known voice was heard, "Be of good cheer: it is I; be not afraid." In the rebound of his feelings the impulsive Peter asked Jesus to permit him to come to Him on the water (Matthew). Jesus said "Come," and for the first moment or two Peter did walk on the water; then, as he realized his unwonted situation, his faith failed, and he began to sink. Jesus, with gentle chiding, caught him, and assisted him back into the boat. Once again the sea was calmed, and the disciples watch found themselves safely at land. To their adoring minds the miracle of the loaves was eclipsed by this new marvel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,52);">Mr 6:52</a>).<P>4. Gennesaret<65>Discourse on the Bread of Life:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',14,\'34-36\');">Matthew 14:34-36</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,\'53-56\');">Mark 6:53-56</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,\'22-71\');">John 6:22-71</a>)<P>On the return to Gennesaret the sick from all quarters were brought to Jesus<75>the commencement apparently of a new, more general ministry of healing (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,56);">Mr 6:56</a>). Meanwhile<6C>here we depend on John<68>the people on the other side of the lake, when they found that Jesus was gone, took boats hastily, and came over to Capernaum. They found Jesus apparently in the synagogue (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,59);">6:59</a>). In reply to their query, "Rabbi, when camest thou hither?" Jesus first rebuked the motive which led them to follow Him<69>not because they had seen in His miracles "signs" of higher blessings, but because they had eaten of the loaves and were filled (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,26);">6:26</A>)<29>then spoke to them His great discourse on the bread from heaven. "Work," He said, "for the food which abideth unto eternal life, which the Son of man shall give unto you" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,27);">6:27</A>). When asked to authenticate His claims by a sign from heaven like the manna, He replied that the manna also (given not by Moses but by God) was but typical bread, and surprised them by declaring that He Himself was the true bread of life from heaven (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,35,51);">6:35,51</a>). The bread was Christ\'s flesh, given for the life of the world; His flesh and blood must be eaten and drunk (a spiritual appropriation through faith, <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,63);">6:63</a>), if men were to have eternal life. Jesus of set purpose had put His doctrine in a strong, testing manner. The time had come when His hearers must make their choice between a spiritual acceptance of Him and a break with Him altogether. What He had said strongly offended them, both on account of the claims implied (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,42);">6:42</a>), and on account of the doctrine taught, which, they were plainly told, they could not receive because of their carnality of heart (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,43,44,\'61-64\');">6:43,44,61-64</A>). Many, therefore, went back and walked no more with Him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,60,61,66);">6:60,61,66</a>); but their defection only evoked from the chosen Twelve a yet more confident confession of their faith. "Would ye also go away?"<P>Peter\'s First Confession.<P>Peter, as usual, spoke for the rest: "Lord, to whom shall we go?...We have believed and know that thou art the Holy One of God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,69);">Joh 6:69</a>). Here, and not first at Caesarea Philippi (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',16,16);">Mt 16:16</a>), is Peter\'s brave confession of his Master\'s Messiahship. Twelve thus confessed Him, but even of this select circle Jesus was compelled to say, "One of you (Judas) is a devil" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,70,71);">Joh 6:70,71</a>).<P>II. From Disputes with the Pharisees till the Transfiguration.<P>The discourse in Capernaum seems to mark a turning-point in the Lord\'s ministry in Galilee. Soon after we find Him ceasing from public teaching, and devoting Himself to the instruction of His apostles (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',15,21);">Mt 15:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',7,24);">Mr 7:24</a>, etc.).<P>1. Jesus and Tradition<6F>Outward and Inward Purity:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',15,\'1-20\');">Matthew 15:1-20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',7,\'1-23\');">Mark 7:1-23</a>)<P>Meanwhile, that Christ\'s work in Galilee was attracting the attention of the central authorities, is shown by the fact that scribes and Pharisees came up from Jerusalem to watch Him. They speedily found ground of complaint against Him in His unconventional ways and His total disregard of the traditions of the elders. They specially blamed Him for allowing His disciples to eat bread with "common," i.e. unwashen hands. Here was a point on which the Pharisees laid great stress (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',7,3,4);">Mr 7:3,4</a>). Ceremonial ablutions (washing "diligently," Greek "with the fist"; "baptizings" of person and things) formed a large part of their religion. These washings were part of the "oral tradition" said to have been delivered to Moses, and transmitted by a succession of elders. Jesus set all this ceremonialism aside. It was part of the "hypocrisy" of the Pharisees (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',7,6);">Mr 7:6</a>). When questioned regarding it, He drew a sharp distinction between God\'s commandment in the Scriptures and man\'s tradition, and accused the Pharisees (instancing "<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=Corban">Corban</a>" (which see), in support, <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',7,\'10-12\');">Mr 7:10-12</a>) of making "void" the former through the latter. This led to the wider question of wherein real defilement consisted. Christ\'s rational position here is that it did not consist in anything outward, as in meats, but consisted in what came from within the man: as Jesus explained afterward, in the outcome of his heart or moral life: "Out of the heart of men evil thoughts proceed," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',7,\'20-23\');">Mr 7:20-23</a>). Christ\'s saying was in effect the abrogation of the old ceremonial distinctions, as Mark notes: "making all meats clean" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',7,19);">Mr 7:19</a>). The Pharisees, naturally, were deeply offended at His sayings, but Jesus was unmoved. Every plant not of the Father\'s planting must be rooted up (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',7,13);">Mr 7:13</a>).<P>2. Retirement to Tyre and Sidon<6F>the Syrophoenician Woman:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',15,\'21-28\');">Matthew 15:21-28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',7,\'24-30\');">Mark 7:24-30</a>)<P>From this point Jesus appears, in order to escape notice, to have made journeys privately from place to place. His first retreat was to the borders, or neighborhood, of Tyre and Sidon. From <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',7,31);">Mr 7:31</a> it is to be inferred that He entered the heathen territory. He could not, however, be hid (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',7,24);">Mr 7:24</a>). It was not long ere, in the house into which He had entered, there reached Him the cry of human distress. A woman came to Him, a Greek (or Gentile, Greek-speaking), but Syrophoenician by race. Her "little daughter" was grievously afflicted with an evil spirit. Flinging herself at His feet, and addressing Him as "Son of David," she besought His mercy for her child. At first Jesus seemed<65>yet only seemed<65>to repel her, speaking of Himself as sent only to the lost sheep of Israel, and of the unmeetness of giving the children\'s loaf to the dogs (the Greek softens the expression, "the little dogs"). With a beautiful urgency which won for her the boon she sought, the woman seized on the word as an argument in her favor. "Even the dogs under the table eat of the children\'s crumbs." The child at Jesus\' word was restored.<P>3. At Decapolis<69>New Miracles:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',15,\'29-39\');">Matthew 15:29-39</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',7,\'31-37\');">Mark 7:31-37</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',8,\'1-10\');">8:1-10</a>)<P>Christ\'s second retreat was to Decapolis<69>the district of the ten cities<65>east of the Jordan. Here also He was soon discovered, and followed by the multitude. Sufferers were brought to Him, whom He cured (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',15,30);">Mt 15:30</a>). Later, He fed the crowds.<P>The miracle of the deaf man is attested only by Mk. The patient was doubly afflicted, being deaf, and having an impediment in his speech. The cure presents several peculiarities<65>its privacy (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',15,33);">Mt 15:33</a>); the actions of Jesus in putting his fingers into his ears, etc. (a mode of speech by signs to the deaf man); His "sign," accompanied with prayer, doubtless accasioned by something in the man\'s look; the word Ephphatha (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',15,34);">Mt 15:34</a>)<29>"Be opened."<P>a) The Deaf Man:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',7,\'32-37\');">Mark 7:32-37</a>)<P>The charge to those present not to blazon the deed abroad was disregarded. Jesus desired no cheap popularity.<P>b) Feeding of Four Thousand:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',15,\'32-39\');">Matthew 15:32-39</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',8,\'1-9\');">Mark 8:1-9</a>)<P>The next miracle closely resembles the feeding of the Five Thousand at Bethsaida, but the place and numbers are different; 4,000 instead of 5,000; 7 loaves and a few fishes, instead of 5 loaves and 2 fishes; 7 baskets of fragments instead of 12 (Mark\'s term denotes a larger basket). There is no reason for doubting the distinction of the incidents (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',16,9,10);">Mt 16:9,10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',8,19,20);">Mr 8:19,20</a>).<P>4. Leaven of the Pharisees, etc.<2E>Cure of Blind Man:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',16,\'1-12\');">Matthew 16:1-12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',8,\'11-26\');">Mark 8:11-26</a>)<P>Returning to the plain of Gennesaret (Magdala, <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',15,39);">Mt 15:39</a> the King James Version; parts of Dalmanutha, <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',8,10);">Mr 8:10</a>), Jesus soon found Himself assailed by His old adversaries. Pharisees and Sadducees were now united. They came "trying" Jesus, and asking from Him a "sign from heaven"<22>some signal Divine manifestation. "Sighing deeply" (Mark) at their caviling spirit, Jesus repeated His word about the sign of Jonah. The times in which they lived were full of signs, if they, so proficient in weather signs, could only see them. To be rid of such questioners, Jesus anew took boat to Bethsaida. On the way He warned His disciples against the leaven of the spirit they had just encountered. The disciples misunderstood, thinking that Jesus referred to their forgetfulness in not taking bread (Mark states in his graphic way that they had only one loaf). The leaven Christ referred to, in fact, represented three spirits:<P class="in15">(1) the Pharisaic leaven<65>formalism and hypocrisy;<P class="in15">(2) the Sadducean leaven<65>rationalistic skepticism;<P class="in15">(3) the Herodian leaven (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',8,15);">Mr 8:15</a>)<29>political expediency and temporizing.<P>Arrived at Bethsaida, a miracle was wrought on a blind man resembling in some of its features the cure of the deaf man at Decapolis. In both cases Jesus took the patients apart; in both physical means were used<65>the spittle ("spit on his eyes," <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',8,23);">Mr 8:23</a>); in both there was strict injunction not to noise the cure abroad. Another peculiarity was the gradualness of the cure. It is probable that the man had not been blind from his birth, else he could hardly have recognized men or trees at the first opening. It needed that Jesus should lay His hands on Him before he saw all things clearly.<P>5. At Caesarea Philippi<70>The Great Confession<6F>First Announcement of Passion:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',16,\'13-28\');">Matthew 16:13-28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',8,\'27-30\');">Mark 8:27-30</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,\'18-27\');">Luke 9:18-27</a>)<P>The next retirement of Jesus with His disciples was to the neighborhood of Caesarea Philippi, near the source of the Jordan. This was the northernmost point of His journeyings. Here, "on the geographical frontier between Judaism and heathenism" (Liddon), our Lord put the momentous question which called forth Peter\'s historical confession.<P>(1) The Voices of the Age and the External Truth.<P>The question put to the Twelve in this remote region was: "Who do men say that the Son of man is?" "Son of man," as already said, was the familiar name given by Jesus to Himself, to which a Messianic significance might or might not be attached, according to the prepossessions of His hearers. First the changeful voices of the age were recited to Jesus: "Some say John the Baptist; some, Elijah," etc. Next, in answer to the further question: "But who say ye that I am ?" there rang out from Peter, in the name of all, the unchanging truth about Jesus: "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." In clearness, boldness, decision, Peter\'s faith had attained a height not reached before. The confession embodies two truths:<P class="in15">(1) the Divinity,<P class="in15">(2) the Messiahship, of the Son of man.<P>Jesus did honor to the confession of His apostle. Not flesh and blood, but the Father, had revealed the truth to him. Here at length was "rock" on which He could build a church. Reverting to Peter\'s original name, Simon Bar-Jonah, Jesus declared, with a play on the name "Peter" (petros, "rock," "piece of rock") He had before given him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,42);">Joh 1:42</a>), that on this "rock" (petra), He would build His church, and the gates of Hades (hostile evil powers) would not prevail against it (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',16,18);">Mt 16:18</a>). The papacy has reared an unwarrantable structure of pretensions on this passage in supposing the "rock" to be Peter personally and his successors in the see of Rome (none such existed; Peter was not bishop of Rome). It is not Peter the individual, but Peter the confessing apostle<6C>Peter as representative of all<6C>that Christ names "rock"; that which constituted him a foundation was the truth he had confessed (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',2,20);">Eph 2:20</a>). This is the first New Testament mention of a "church" (ekklesia). The Christian church, therefore, is founded<P class="in15">(1) on the truth of Christ\'s Divine Sonship;<P class="in15">(2) on the truth of His Messiah-ship, or of His being the anointed prophet, priest and king of the new age.<P>A society of believers confessing these truths is a church; no society which denies these truths deserves the name. To this confessing community Jesus, still addressing Peter as representing the apostolate (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',18,18);">Mt 18:18</a>), gives authority to bind and loose<73>to admit and to exclude. Jesus, it is noted, bade His disciples tell no man of these things (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',16,20);">Mt 16:20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',8,30);">Mr 8:30</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,21);">Lu 9:21</a>).<P>(2) The Cross and the Disciple.<P>The confession of Peter prepared the way for an advance in Christ\'s teaching. From that time, Matthew notes, Jesus began to speak plainly of His approaching sufferings and death (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',16,21);">16:21</a>). There are in all three solemn announcements of the Passion (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',16,\'21-23\');">Mt 16:21-23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',17,22,23);">17:22,23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',20,\'17-19\');">20:17-19</a> parallel). Jesus foresaw, and clearly foretold, what would befall Him at Jerusalem. He would be killed by the authorities, but on the third day would rise again. On the first announcement, following His confession, Peter took it upon him to expostulate with Jesus: "Be it far from thee, Lord," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',16,22);">Mt 16:22</a>), an action which brought upon him the stern rebuke of Jesus: "Get thee behind me, Satan," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',16,23);">Mt 16:23</a>). The Rock-man, in his fall to the maxims of a worldly expediency, is now identified with Satan, the tempter. This principle, that duty is only to be done when personal risk is not entailed, Jesus not only repudiates for Himself, but bids His disciples repudiate it also. The disciple, Jesus says, must be prepared to deny himself, and take up his cross. The cross is the symbol of anything distressing or painful to bear. There is a saving of life which is a losing of it, and what shall a man be profited if he gain the whole world, and forfeit his (true, higher) life? As, however, Jesus had spoken, not only of dying, but of rising again, so now He encourages His disciples by announcing His future coming in glory to render to every man according to His deeds. That final coming might be distant (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',24,36);">Mt 24:36</a>); but (so it seems most natural to interpret the saying <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',16,28);">Mt 16:28</a> parallel) there were those living who would see the nearer pledge of that, in Christ\'s coming in the triumphs and successes of His kingdom (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',9,1);">Mr 9:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,27);">Lu 9:27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,64);">Mt 26:64</a>).<P>6. The Transfiguration<6F>the Epileptic Boy:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',17,\'1-20\');">Matthew 17:1-20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',9,\'2-29\');">Mark 9:2-29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,\'28-43\');">Luke 9:28-43</a>)<P>About eight days after the announcement of His passion by Jesus, took place the glorious event of the transfiguration. Jesus had spoken of His future glory, and here was pledge of it. In strange contrast with the scene of glory on the summit of the mountain was the painful sight which met Jesus and His three companions when they descended again to to the plain.<P>a) The Glory of the Only Begotten:<P>Tradition connects the scene of the transfiguration with Mount Tabor, but it more probably took place on one of the spurs of Mount Hermon. Jesus had ascended the mountain with Peter, James and John, for prayer. It was while He was praying the wonderful change happened. For once the veiled glory of the only begotten from the Father (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,14);">Joh 1:14</a>) was permitted to burst forth, suffusing His person and garments, and changing them into a dazzling brightness. His face did shine as the sun; His raiment became white as light ("as snow," the King James Version, Mark). Heavenly visitants, recognized from their converse as Moses and Elijah, appeared with Him and spoke of His decease (Luke). A voice from an enveloping cloud attested: "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." Little wonder the disciples were afraid, or that Peter in his confusion should stammer out: "It is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, I will make here three tabernacles (booths)." This, however, was not permitted. Earth is not heaven. Glimpses of heavenly glory are given, not to wean from duty on earth, but to prepare for the trials connected therewith.<P>b) Faith\'s Entreaty and Its Answer:<P>The spectacle that met the eyes of Jesus and the chosen three as they descended was distressing in the extreme. A man had brought his epileptic boy<6F>a sore sufferer and dumb<6D>to the disciples to see if they could cast out the evil spirit that possessed him, but they were not able. Their failure, as Jesus showed, was failure of faith; none the less did their discomfiture afford a handle to the gainsayers, who were not slow to take advantage of it (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',9,14);">Mr 9:14</a>). The man\'s appeal was now to Jesus, "If thou canst do anything," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',9,22);">Mr 9:22</a>). The reply of Jesus shifted the "canst" to the right quarter, "If thou canst (believe)" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',9,23);">Mr 9:23</a>). Such little faith as the man had revived under Christ\'s word: "I believe; help thou mine unbelief." The multitude pressing around, there was no call for further delay. With one energetic word Jesus expelled the unclean spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',9,25);">Mr 9:25</a>). The first effect of Christ\'s approach had been to induce a violent paroxysm (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',9,20);">Mr 9:20</a>); now the spirit terribly convulsed the frame it was compelled to relinquish. Jesus, taking the boy\'s hand, raised him up, and he was found well. The lesson drawn to the disciples was the omnipotence of faith (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',17,19,20);">Mt 17:19,20</a>) and power of prayer (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',9,28,29);">Mr 9:28,29</a>).<P>III. From Private Journey through Galilee till Return from the Feast of Tabernacles.<P>1. Galilee and Capernaum:<P>Soon after the last-mentioned events Jesus passed privately through Galilee (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',9,30);">Mr 9:30</a>), returning later to Capernaum. During the Galilean journey Jesus made to His disciples His 2nd announcement of His approaching sufferings and death, accompanied as before by the assurance of His resurrection. The disciples still could not take in the meaning of His words, though what He said made them "exceeding sorry" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',17,23);">Mt 17:23</a>).<P>a) Second Announcement of Passion:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',17,22,23);">Matthew 17:22,23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',9,\'30-33\');">Mark 9:30-33</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,44,45);">Luke 9:44,45</a>)<P>The return to Capernaum was marked by an incident which raised the question of Christ\'s relation to temple institutions. The collectors of tribute for the temple inquired of Peter: "Doth not your teacher pay the half-shekel?" (Greek didrachma, or double drachm, worth about 32 cents or is. 4d.).<P>b) The Temple Tax:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',17,\'24-27\');">Matthew 17:24-27</a>)<P>The origin of this tax was in the half-shekel of atonement-money of <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',30,\'11-16\');">Ex 30:11-16</a>, which, though a special contribution, was made the basis of later assessment (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',24,\'4-10\');">2Ch 24:4-10</a>; in Nehemiah\'s time the amount was one-third of a shekel, <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',10,32);">Ne 10:32</a>), and its object was the upkeep of the temple worship (Schurer). The usual time of payment was March, but Jesus had probably been absent and the inquiry was not made for some months later. Peter, hasty as usual, probably reasoning from Christ\'s ordinary respect for temple ordinances, answered at once that He did pay the tax. It had not occurred to him that Jesus might have something to say on it, if formally challenged. Occasion therefore was taken by Jesus gently to reprove Peter. Peter had but recently acknowledged Jesus to be the Son of God. Do kings of the earth take tribute of their own sons? The half-shekel was suitable to the subject-relation, but not to the relation of a son. Nevertheless, lest occasion of stumbling be given, Jesus could well waive this right, as, in His humbled condition, He had waived so many more. Peter was ordered to cast his hook into the sea, and Jesus foretold that the fish he would bring up would have in its mouth the necessary coin (Greek, stater, about 64 cents or 2s. 8d.). The tax was paid, yet in such a way as to show that the payment of it was an act of condescension of the king\'s Son.<P>c) Discourse on Greatness and Forgiveness:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',18,\'1-35\');">Matthew 18:1-35</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',9,\'33-50\');">Mark 9:33-50</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,\'46-50\');">Luke 9:46-50</a>)<P>On the way to Capernaum a dispute had arisen among the disciples as to who should be greatest in the Messianic kingdom about to be set up. The fact of such disputing showed how largely even their minds were yet dominated by worldly, sensuous ideas of the kingdom. Now, in the house (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',9,33);">Mr 9:33</a>), Jesus takes occasion to check their spirit of ambitious rivalry, and to inculcate much-needed lessons on greatness and kindred matters.<P>(1) Greatness in Humility.<P>First, by the example of a little child, Jesus teaches that humility is the root-disposition of His kingdom. It alone admits to the kingdom, and conducts to honor in it. He is greatest who humbles himself most (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',18,4);">Mt 18:4</a>), and is the servant of all (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',9,35);">Mr 9:35</a>). He warns against slighting the "little ones," or causing them to stumble, and uses language of terrible severity against those guilty of this sin.<P>(2) Tolerance.<P>The mention of receiving little ones in Christ\'s name led John to remark that he had seen one casting out demons in Christ\'s name, and had forbidden him, because he was not of their company. "Forbid him not," Jesus said, "for there is no man who shall do a mighty work in my name, and be able quickly to speak evil of me. For he that is not against us is for us" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',9,39,40);">Mr 9:39,40</a>).<P>(3) The Erring Brother.<P>The subject of offenses leads to the question of sins committed by one Christian brother against another. Here Christ inculcates kindness and forbearance; only if private representations and the good offices of brethren fail, is the matter to be brought before the church; if the brother repents he is to be unstintedly forgiven ("seventy times seven," <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',18,22);">Mt 18:22</a>). If the church is compelled to interpose, its decisions are valid (under condition, however, of prayer and Christ\'s presence, <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',18,\'18-20\');">Mt 18:18-20</a>).<P>(4) Parable of the Unmerciful Servant.<P>To enforce the lesson of forgiveness Jesus speaks the parable of the Unmerciful Servant (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',18,\'23-35\');">Mt 18:23-35</a>). Himself forgiven much, this servant refuses to forgive his fellow a much smaller debt. His lord visits him with severest punishment. Only as we forgive others can we look for forgiveness.<P>2. The Feast of Tabernacles<65>Discourses, etc.:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,\'1-\');">John 7-10:21</a>)<P>The Gospel of John leaves a blank of many months between chapters <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,\'1-\');">6</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,\'1-\');">7</a>, covered only by the statement, "After these things, Jesus walked in Galilee" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,1);">7:1</a>). In this year of His ministry Jesus had gone neither to the feast of the Passover nor to Pentecost. The Feast of Tabernacles was now at hand (October). To this Jesus went up, and John preserves for us a full record of His appearance, discourses and doings there.<P>a) The Private Journey<65>Divided Opinions:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,\'1-10\');">John 7:1-10</a>)<P>The brethren of Jesus, still unpersuaded of His claims (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,5);">Joh 7:5</a>), had urged Jesus to go up with them to the feast. "Go up," in their sense, included a public manifestation of Himself as the Messiah. Jesus replied that His time for this had not yet come. Afterward He went up quietly, and in the midst of the feast appeared in the temple as a teacher. The comments made about Jesus at the feast before His arrival vividly reflect the divided state of opinion regarding Him. "He is a good man," thought some. "Not so," said others, "but He leadeth the multitude astray." His teaching evoked yet keener division. While some said, "Thou hast a demon" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,20);">Joh 7:20</a>), others argued, "When the Christ shall come, will he do more signs?" etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,31);">Joh 7:31</a>). Some declared, "This is of a truth the prophet," or "This is the Christ"; others objected that the Christ was to come out of Bethlehem, not Galilee (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,\'40-42\');">Joh 7:40-42</a>). Yet no one dared to take the step of molesting Him.<P>b) Christ\'s Self-Witness:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,\'14-52\');">John 7:14-52</a>)<P>Christ\'s wisdom and use of the Scriptures excited surprise. Jesus met this surprise by stating that His knowledge was from the Father, and with reference to the division of opinion about Him laid down the principle that knowledge of the truth was the result of the obedient will: "If any man willeth to do his will, he shall know of the teaching, whether it is of God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,17);">Joh 7:17</a>). It was objected that they knew who Jesus was, and whence He came. In a sense, Jesus replied, this was true; in a deeper sense, it was not. He came from the Father, whom they knew not (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,28,29);">Joh 7:28,29</a>). The last and great day of the feast<73>the eighth (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',29,35);">Nu 29:35</a>)<29>brought with it a new self-attestation. Jesus stood and cried, "If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink. He that believeth on me...from within him shall flow rivers of living water" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,37,38);">Joh 7:37,38</a>). The words are understood to have reference to the ceremony of pouring out a libation of water at this feast<73>the libation, in turn, commemorating the gift of water at the striking of the rock. The evangelist interprets the saying of the Spirit which believers should receive. Meanwhile, the chief priests and Pharisees had sent officers to apprehend Jesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,32);">Joh 7:32</a>), but they returned without Him. "Why did ye not bring him?" The reply was confounding, "Never man so spake" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,45,46);">Joh 7:45,46</a>). The retort was the poor one, "Are ye also led astray?" In vain did Nicodemus, who was present, try to put in a moderating word (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,50,51);">Joh 7:50,51</a>). It was clear to what issue hate like this was tending.<P>c) The Woman Taken in Adultery:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',8,\'1-\');">John 8</a>)<P>The discourses at the feast are at this point interrupted by the episode of the woman taken in adultery (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',8,\'1-11\');">Joh 8:1-11</a>), which, by general consent, does not belong to the original text of the Gospel. It is probably, however, an authentic incident, and illustrates, on the one hand, the eagerness of the official classes to find an accusation against Jesus, and, on the other, the Saviour\'s dignity and wisdom in foiling such attempts, His spirit of mercy and the action of conscience in the accusers. In His continued teaching, Jesus put forth even higher claims than in the foregoing discourse. As He had applied to Himself the water from the rock, so now He applied to Himself the symbolic meaning of the two great candelabra, which were lighted in the temple court during the feast and bore reference to the pillar of cloud and fire. "I am the light of the world," said Jesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',8,12);">Joh 8:12</a>). Only a Divine being could put forth such a claim as that. The Jews objected that they had only His witness to Himself. Jesus replied that no other could bear adequate witness of Him, for He alone knew whence He came and whither He went (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',8,14);">Joh 8:14</a>). But the Father also had borne witness of Him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',8,18);">Joh 8:18</a>). This discourse, delivered in the "treasury" of the temple (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',8,20);">Joh 8:20</a>), was soon followed by another, no man yet daring to touch Him. This time Jesus warns the Jews of the fate their unbelief would entail upon them: "Ye shall die in your sins" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',8,24);">Joh 8:24</a>). Addressing Himself next specially to the Jews who believed in Him, He urged them to continuance in His word as the condition of true freedom. Resentment was again aroused at the suggestion that the Jews, Abraham\'s seed, were not free. Jesus made clear that the real bondage was that of sin; only the Son could make spiritually free (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',8,\'34-36\');">Joh 8:34-36</a>). Descent from Abraham meant nothing, if the spirit was of the devil (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',8,\'39-41\');">Joh 8:39-41</a>). A new conflict was provoked by the saying, "If a man keep my word, he shall never see death" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',8,51);">Joh 8:51</a>). Did Jesus make Himself greater than Abraham? The controversy that ensued resulted in the sublime utterance, "Before Abraham was born, I am" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',8,58);">Joh 8:58</a>). The Jews would have stoned Him, but Jesus eluded them, and departed.<P>d) The Cure of the Blind Man:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',9,\'1-\');">John 9</a>)<P>The Feast of Tabernacles was past, but Jesus was still in Jerusalem. Passing by on a Sabbath (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',9,14);">Joh 9:14</a>), He saw a blind man, a beggar (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',9,8);">John 9:8</a>), well known to have been blind from his birth. The narrative of the cure and examination of this blind man is adduced by Paley as bearing in its inimitable circumstantiality every mark of personal knowledge on the part of the historian. The man, cured in strange but symbolic fashion by the anointing of his eyes with clay (thereby apparently sealing them more firmly), then washing in the Pool of Siloam, became an object of immediate interest, and every effort was made by the Pharisees to shake his testimony as to the miracle that had been wrought. The man, however, held to his story, and his parents could only corroborate the fact that their son had been born blind, and now saw. The Pharisees themselves were divided, some reasoning that Jesus could not be of God because He had broken the Sabbath<74>the old charge; others, Nicodemus-like, standing on the fact that a man who was a sinner could not do such signs (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',9,15,16);">Joh 9:15,16</a>). The healed man applied the logic of common-sense: "If this man were not from God, he could do nothing" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',9,33);">Joh 9:33</a>). The Pharisees, impotent to deny the wonder, could only cast him out of the synagogue. Jesus found him, and brought him to full confession of faith in Himself (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',9,\'35-38\');">Joh 9:35-38</a>).<P>e) The Good Shepherd:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',10,\'1-21\');">John 10:1-21</a>)<P>Yet another address of Jesus is on record arising out of this incident. In continuation of His reply to the question of the Pharisees in John (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',9,40);">9:40</a>), "Are we also blind?" Jesus spoke to them His discourse on the Good Shepherd. Flocks in eastern countries are gathered at night into an enclosure surrounded by a wall or palisade. This is the "fold," which is under the care of a "porter," who opens the closely barred door to the shepherds in the morning. As contrasted with the legitimate shepherds, the false shepherds "enter not by the door," but climb over some other way. The allusion is to priests, scribes, Pharisees and generally to all, in any age, who claim an authority within the church unsanctioned by God (Godet). Jesus now gathers up the truth in its relation to Himself as the Supreme Shepherd. From His fundamental relation to the church, He is not only the Shepherd, but the Door (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',10,\'7-14\');">10:7-14</a>). To those who enter by Him there is given security, liberty, provision (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',10,9);">10:9</A>). In his capacity as Shepherd Christ is preeminently all that a faithful shepherd ought to be. The highest proof of His love is that, as the Good Shepherd, He lays down His life for the sheep (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',10,11,15,17);">10:11,15,17</a>). This laying down of His life is not an accident, but is His free, voluntary act (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',10,17,18);">10:17,18</a>). Again there was division among the Jews because of these remarkable sayings (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',10,19,20,21);">10:19-21</a>).<P>Chronological Note.<P>Though John does not mention the fact, there is little doubt that, after this visit to Jerusalem, Jesus returned to Galilee, and at no long interval from His return, took His final departure southward. The chronology of this closing period in Galilee is somewhat uncertain. Some would place the visit to the Feast of Tabernacles before the withdrawal to Caesarea Philippi, or even earlier (compare Andrews, Life of our Lord, etc.); but the order adopted above appears preferable.``132';
isbe[5023]='Jesus Christ, 4D`D. LAST JOURNEY TO JERUSALEM<45>JESUS IN PERAEA<P>Departure from Galilee:<P>An interval of two months elapses between <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',10,21);">John 10:21</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',10,22);">22</a><3E>from the Feast of Tabernacles (October) till the Feast of the Dedication (December). This period witnessed the final withdrawal of Jesus from Galilee. Probably while yet in Galilee He sent forth the seventy disciples to prepare His way in the cities to which He should come (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',10,1);">Lu 10:1</a>). Repulsed on the borders of Samaria (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,\'51-53\');">Lu 9:51-53</a>), He passed over into Peraea ("beyond Jordan"), where he exercised a considerable ministry. The record of this period, till the entry into Jerusalem, belongs in great part to Luke, who seems to have had a rich special source relating to it (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,51);">9:51-19:27</a>). The discourses in Luke embrace many passages and sections found in other connections in Matthew, and it is difficult, often, to determine their proper chronological place, if, as doubtless sometimes happened, portions were not repeated.<P>I. From Leaving Galilee till the Feast of the Dedication.<P>1. Rejected by Samaria:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,\'51-55\');">Luke 9:51-55</a>)<P>Conscious that He went to suffer and die, Jesus steadfastly set His face to go to Jerusalem. His route was first by Samaria<69>an opportunity of grace to that people<6C>but here, at a border village, the messengers He sent before Him, probably also He Himself on His arrival, were repulsed, because of His obvious intention to go to Jerusalem (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,53);">Lu 9:53</a>). James and John wished to imitate Elijah in calling down fire from heaven on the rejecters, but Jesus rebuked them for their thought (the Revised Version (British and American) omits the reference to Elijah, and subsequent clauses, <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,55,56);">Lu 9:55,56</a>).<P>2. Mission of the Seventy:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',10,\'1-20\');">Luke 10:1-20</a>)<P>In the present connection Luke inserts the incidents of the three aspirants formerly considered (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,\'57-62\');">9:57-62</a>; compare p. 1645). It was suggested that the second and third cases may belong to this period.<P>A new and significant step was now taken by Jesus in the sending out of 70 disciples, who should go before Him, two by two, to announce His coming in the cities and villages He was about to visit. The number sent indicates how large a following Jesus had now acquired. (Some see a symbolical meaning in the number 70, but it is difficult to show what it is.) The directions given to the messengers are similar to those formerly given to the Twelve (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,\'1-5\');">Lu 9:1-5</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',10,\'1-\');">Mt 10</a>); a passage also found in Matthew in a different connection (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',11,\'21-24\');">11:21-24</a>) is incorporated in this discourse, or had originally its place in it (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',11,\'13-15\');">11:13-15</a>). In this mission Jesus no longer made any secret of His Messianic character. The messengers were to proclaim that the kingdom of God was come nigh to them in connection with His impending visit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',10,9);">Lu 10:9</a>). The mission implies that a definite route was marked out by Jesus for Himself (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',13,22);">Lu 13:22</a>), but this would be subject to modification according to the reception of His emissaries (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',10,10,11,16);">Lu 10:10,11,16</a>). The circuit need not have occupied a long time with so many engaged in it. The results show that it aroused strong interest. Later the disciples returned elated with their success, emphasizing their victory over the demons (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',10,17);">Lu 10:17</a>). Jesus bade them rejoice rather that their names were written in heaven (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',10,20);">Lu 10:20</a>). Again a passage is inserted (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',10,21,22);">Lu 10:21,22</a>) found earlier in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',11,\'25-27\');">Mt 11:25-27</a>; compare also <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',10,23,24);">Lu 10:23,24</a>, with <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',13,16,17);">Mt 13:16,17</a>.<P>3. The Lawyer\'s Question<6F>Parable of Good Samaritan:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',10,\'25-37\');">Luke 10:25-37</a>)<P>Jesus had now passed "beyond the Jordan," i.e. into Peraea, and vast crowds waited on His teaching (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',19,1);">Mt 19:1</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',10,1);">Mr 10:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',12,\'1-\');">Lu 12:1</a>). At one place a lawyer put what he meant to be a testing question, "What shall I do to inherit eternal life?" Jesus referred him to the great commandments of love to God and one\'s neighbor, eliciting the further query, "And who is my neighbor?" In reply Jesus spoke to him the immortal parable of the Good Samaritan, and asked who proved neighbor to him who fell among the robbers. The lawyer could give but one answer, "He that showed mercy on him." "Go," said Jesus, "and do thou likewise."<P>The incident of Martha and Mary, which Luke inserts here (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',10,\'38-42\');">Lu 10:38-42</a>), comes in better later, when Jesus was nearer Bethany.<P>4. Discourses, Parables, and Miracles:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,1);">Luke 11-14</a>)<P>At this place Luke brings together a variety of discourses, warnings and exhortations, great parts of which have already been noticed in earlier contexts. It does not follow that Luke has not, in many cases, preserved the original connection. This is probably the case with the Lord\'s Prayer (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,\'1-4\');">Lu 11:1-4</a>), and with portions of what Matthew includes in the Sermon on the Mount (e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',11,\'9-13\',\'13-36\');">11:9-13,13-36</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',12,\'22-34\');">12:22-34</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',13,\'24-27\');">Lu 13:24-27</a> with <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',7,13,14,22,23);">Mt 7:13,14,22,23</a>), and in other discourses (e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,\'42-52\');">Lu 11:42-52</a> = <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',23,\'23-36\');">Mt 23:23-36</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',12,\'2-12\');">Lu 12:2-12</a> = <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',10,\'26-33\');">Mt 10:26-33</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',12,\'42-48\');">Lu 12:42-48</a> = <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',24,\'45-51\');">Mt 24:45-51</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',13,\'18-21\');">Lu 13:18-21</a>, parables of Mustard Seed and Leaven = <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',13,31,32);">Mt 13:31,32</a>, etc.).<P>a) Original to Luke:<P>Of matter original to Luke in these chapters may be noted such passages as that on the Friend at Midnight (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,\'5-8\');">11:5-8</a>), the incident of the man who wished Jesus to bid his brother divide his inheritance with him, to whom Jesus spoke the parable of the Rich Fool (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',12,\'13-21\');">12:13-21</a>), the parable of the Barren Fig Tree, called forth by the disposition to regard certain Galileans whom Pilate had slain in a tumult at the temple, and eighteen on whom the tower of Siloam had fallen, as sinners above others (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',13,\'1-9\');">13:1-9</a>: "Nay," said Jesus, "but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish"), and most of the teaching in <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',14,\'1-\');">Luke 14</a>, referred to below. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,37,38);">11:37,38</a>, we have the mention of a Pharisee inviting Jesus to dine, and of his astonishment at the Lord\'s neglect of the customary ablutions before eating. <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,53);">Luke 11:53</a> gives a glimpse of the fury to which the scribes and Pharisees were aroused by the severity of Christ\'s denunciations. They "began to press upon him vehemently...laying wait for him, to catch something out of his mouth." In <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',13,31);">13:31</a>ff it is told how the Pharisees sought to frighten Jesus from the district by telling Him that Herod would fain kill Him. Jesus bade them tell that "fox" that His work would go on uninterruptedly in the brief space that remained ("day" used enigmatically) till He was "perfected" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',13,32);">13:32</a>). The woe on Jerusalem (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',13,34,35);">13:34,35</a>) is given by Matthew in the discourse in chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',23,\'1-\');">23</a>.<P>b) The Infirm Woman<61>the Dropsied Man:<P>Of the miracles in this section, the casting out of the demon that was mute (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,14);">Lu 11:14</a>) is evidently the same incident as that already noted in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',12,22);">Mt 12:22</a>ff. Two other miracles are connected with the old accusation of Sabbath breaking. One was the healing in a synagogue on the Sabbath day of a woman bowed down for 18 years with "a spirit of infirmity" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',13,\'10-17\');">Lu 13:10-17</a>); the other was the cure on the Sabbath of a man afflicted with dropsy at a feast in the house of a ruler of the Pharisees to which Jesus had been invited (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',14,\'1-6\');">Lu 14:1-6</a>). The motive of the Pharisee\'s invitation, as in most such cases, was hostile (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',14,1);">Lu 14:1</a>). In both instances Jesus met the objection in the same way, by appealing to their own acts of humanity to their animals on the Sabbath (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',13,15,16);">Lu 13:15,16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',14,5);">14:5</a>).<P>c) Parable of the Great Supper:<P>This feast at the Pharisee\'s house had an interesting sequel in the discourse it led Jesus to utter against vainglory in feasting, and on the spirit of love which would prompt to the table being spread for the helpless and destitute rather than for the selfish enjoyment of the select few, closing, in answer to a pious ejaculation of one of the guests, with the parable of the Great Supper (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',14,\'7-24\');">Lu 14:7-24</a>). The parable, with its climax in the invitation to bring in the poor, and maimed, and blind, and those from the highways and hedges, was a commentary on the counsels He had just been giving, but it had its deeper lesson in picturing the rejection by the Jews of the invitation to the feast God had made for them in His kingdom, and the call that would be given to the Gentiles to take their place.<P>d) Counting the Cost:<P>The injunctions to the multitudes as to the sacrifice and cross-bearing involved in discipleship are pointed by the examples of a man building a tower, and a king going to war, who count the cost before entering on their enterprises (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',14,\'25-35\');">Lu 14:25-35</a>).<P>5. Martha and Mary:<P>At or about this time<6D>perhaps before the incidents in <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',14,\'1-\');">Lu 14</a><3E>Jesus paid the visit to Jerusalem at the Feast of the Dedication described in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',10,\'22-39\');">Joh 10:22-39</a>. This seems the fitting place for the introduction of the episode of Martha and Mary which Luke narrates a little earlier (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',10,\'38-42\');">10:38-42</a>). The "village" into which Jesus entered was no doubt Bethany (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,1);">Joh 11:1</a>). The picture given by Luke of the contrasted dispositions of the two sisters<72>Martha active and "serving" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,2);">Joh 12:2</a>), Mary retiring and contemplative<76>entirely corresponds with that in John. Martha busied herself with preparations for the meal; Mary sat at Jesus\' feet, and heard His word. To Martha\'s complaint, as if her sister were idling, Jesus gave the memorable answer, "One thing is needful: for Mary hath chosen the good part," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',10,42);">Lu 10:42</a>).<P>6. Feast of the Dedication:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',10,\'22-39\');">John 10:22-39</a>)<P>The Feast of the Dedication, held in December, was in commemoration of the cleansing of the temple and restoration of its worship after its profanation by Antiochus Epiphanes (164 BC). Great excitement was occasioned by the appearance of Jesus at this feast, and some asked, "How long dost thou hold us in suspense? If thou art the Christ, tell us plainly." Jesus said He had told them, and His works attested His claim, but they were not of His true flock, and would not believe. To His own sheep He gave eternal life. The Jews anew wished to stone Him for claiming to be God. Jesus replied that even the law called the judges of Israel "gods" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',82,6);">Ps 82:6</a>, "I said, Ye are gods, and all of you sons of the Most High") how could it then be blasphemy for Him whom the Father had sanctified and sent into the world to say of Himself, "I am the Son of God"? The Jews sought to take Him, but He passed from their midst.<P>II. From the Abode at Bethabara till the Raising of Lazarus.<P>After leaving Jerusalem Jesus went beyond Jordan again to the place where John at first baptized (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',10,40);">Joh 10:40</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,28);">Joh 1:28</a>, called in the King James Version "Bethabara," in the Revised Version (British and American) "Bethany," distinct from the Bethany of <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,\'1-\');">John 11</a>). There He "abode," implying a prolonged stay, and many resorted to Him. This spot, sacred to Jesus by His own baptism, may be regarded now as His headquarters from which excursions would be made to places in the neighborhood. Several of the incidents recorded by Luke are probably connected with this sojourn. <p>1. Parables of Lost Sheep, Lost Piece of Silver, Prodigal Son:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',15,\'1-\');">Luke 15</a>)<P>The stronger the opposition of scribes and Pharisees to Jesus became, the more by natural affinity did the classes regarded as outcast feel drawn to Him. He did not repel them, as the Pharisees did, but ate and drank with them. Publicans and sinners gathered to His teaching, and He associated with them. The complaining was great: "This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them." The defense of Jesus was in parables, and the Pharisees\' reproach may be thanked for three of the most beautiful parables Jesus ever spoke<6B>the Lost Sheep (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',18,\'12-14\');">Mt 18:12-14</a>), the Lost Piece of Silver, and the Prodigal Son (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',15,\'1-\');">Luke 15</a>). Why does the shepherd rejoice more over the one lost sheep brought back than over the ninety-nine that have not gone astray? Why does the woman rejoice more over the recovery of her lost drachma than over all the coins safe in her keeping? Why does the father rejoice more over the prodigal son come back in rags and penitence from the far country than over the obedient but austere brother that had never left the home? The stories were gateways into the inmost heart of God. There is joy in heaven over one sinner that repenteth more than over ninetynine just persons that need no repentance (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',15,7);">Lu 15:7</a>).<P>2. Parables of the Unjust Steward and the Rich Man and Lazarus:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',16,\'1-\');">Luke 16</a>)<P>Two other parables, interspersed by discourses (in part again met with in other connections, compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',16,13);">Lu 16:13</a> with <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',6,24);">Mt 6:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',16,16);">Lu 16:16</a> with <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',11,12);">Mt 11:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',16,18);">Lu 16:18</a> with <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',5,32);">Mt 5:32</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',19,9);">19:9</a>, etc.), were spoken at this time<6D>that of the Unjust Steward (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',16,\'1-9\');">Lu 16:1-9</a>) and that of the Rich Man and Lazarus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',16,\'19-31\');">Lu 16:19-31</a>). The dishonest steward, about to be dismissed, utilized his opportunities, still dishonestly, to make friends of his master\'s creditors; let the "children of light" better his example by righteously using mammon to make friends for themselves, who shall receive them into everlasting habitations. The rich man, pampered in luxury, let the afflicted Lazarus starve at his gate. At death<74>in Hades<65>the positions are reversed: the rich man is in torment, stripped of all he had enjoyed; the poor man is at rest in Abraham\'s bosom, compensated for all he suffered. It is character, not outward estate, that determines destiny. The unmerciful are doomed. Even a messenger from the unseen world will not save men, if they hear not Moses and the prophets (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',16,31);">Lu 16:31</a>).<P>In this connection Luke (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',17,\'1-10\');">17:1-10</a>) places exhortations to the disciples on occasions of stumbling, forgiveness, the power of faith, renunciation of merit ("We are unprofitable servants"), some of which are found elsewhere (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',18,6,7,15,21);">Mt 18:6,7,15,21</a>, etc.).<P>3. The Summons to Bethany<6E>Raising of Lazarus:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,1);">John 11</a>)<P>While Jesus was in the trans-Jordanic Bethabara, or Bethany, or in its neighborhood, a message came to Him from the house of Martha and Mary in the Judean Bethany (on the Mount of Olives, about 2 miles east from Jerusalem), that His friend Lazarus ("he whom thou lovest") was sick. The conduct of Jesus seemed strange, for He abode still two days where He was (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,6);">Joh 11:6</a>). As the sequel showed, this was only for the end of a yet more wonderful manifestation of His power and love, to the glory of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,4);">Joh 11:4</a>). Meanwhile Lazarus died, and was buried. When Jesus announced His intention of going into Judea, the disciples sought hard to dissuade Him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,8);">Joh 11:8</a>); but Jesus was not moved by the fears they suggested. He reached Bethany (a distance of between 20 and 30 miles) on the fourth day after the burial of Lazarus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,17);">Joh 11:17</a>), and was met on the outskirts by Martha, and afterward by Mary, both plunged in deepest sorrow. Both breathed the same plaint: "Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,21,32);">Joh 11:21,32</a>). To Martha Jesus gave the pledge, "Thy brother shall rise again," strengthening the faith she already had expressed in Him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,22);">Joh 11:22</a>) by announcing Himself as "the resurrection, and the life" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,25,26);">Joh 11:25,26</a>); at Mary\'s words He was deeply moved, and asked to be taken to the tomb. Here, it is recorded, "Jesus wept" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,35);">Joh 11:35</a>), the only other instance of His weeping in the Gospels being as He looked on lost Jerusalem (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',19,41);">Lu 19:41</a>). The proof of love was manifest, but some, as usual, suggested blame that this miracle-worker had not prevented His friend\'s death (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,37);">Joh 11:37</a>). Arrived at the rock-tomb, Jesus, still groaning in Himself, caused the stone at its mouth to be removed, and, after prayer, spoke with a loud voice, "Lazarus, come forth" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,43);">Joh 11:43</a>). The spirit returned, and the man who had been dead came forth bound with his grave-clothes. He was released and restored to his sisters.<P>Even this mighty deed did not alter the mind of the Pharisees, who held a council, and decided, on the advice of Caiaphas (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,50);">Joh 11:50</a>), that for the safety of the nation it was "expedient" that this man should die.<P>The circumstantiality of this beautiful narrative speaks irresistibly for its historical truth, and the objections raised by critical writers center really in their aversion to the miraculous as such.<P>III. From the Retirement to Ephraim till the Arrival at Bethany.<P>1. Retreat to Ephraim:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,\'54-57\');">John 11:54-57</a>)<P>The hostility of the ruling classes was now so pronounced that, in the few weeks that remained till Jesus should go up to the Passover, He deemed it advisable to abide in privacy at a city called Ephraim (situation uncertain). That He was in secrecy during this period is implied in the statement (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,57);">Joh 11:57</a>) that if anyone knew where He was, he was to inform the chief priests and Pharisees. The retirement would be for Jesus a period of preparation for the ordeal before Him, as the wilderness had been for the commencement of His ministry.<P>2. The Journey Resumed:<P>On His leaving this retreat to resume His advance to Jerusalem the narratives again become rich in incident and teaching.<P>3. Cure of the Lepers:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',17,\'11-19\');">Luke 17:11-19</a>)<P>It is not easy to define the route which brought Jesus again to the border line between Samaria and Galilee (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',17,11);">Lu 17:11</a>), but, in traversing this region, He was met by ten lepers, who besought Him for a cure. Jesus bade them go and show themselves to the priests, and on the way they were cleansed. Only one of the ten, and he a Samaritan, returned to give thanks and glorify God. Gratitude appeared in the unlikely quarter.<P>4. Pharisaic Questionings:<P>At some point in this journey the Pharisees sought to entrap Jesus on the question of divorce.<P>a) Divorce:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',19,\'3-12\');">Matthew 19:3-12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',10,\'1-12\');">Mark 10:1-12</a>) Was it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',19,3);">Mt 19:3</a>). Jesus in reply admitted the permission to divorce given by Moses (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',10,\'3-5\');">Mr 10:3-5</a>), but declared that this was for the hardness of their hearts, and went back to the original institution of marriage in which the two so joined were declared to be "one flesh." Only one cause is admissible as a ground of separation and remarriage (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',19,9);">Mt 19:9</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',5,31,32);">Mt 5:31,32</a>; Mark has not even the exception, which is probably, however, implied). Comments follow to the disciples in Matthew on the subject of continence (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',19,\'10-12\');">Mt 19:10-12</a>).<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=DIVORCE">DIVORCE</a>.<P>b) Coming of the Kingdom:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',17,\'20-37\');">Luke 17:20-37</a>)<P>Another question asked by the Pharisees of Jesus was as to when the kingdom of God should come. The expectation excited by His own ministry and claims was that it was near; when should it appear? Rebuking their worldly ideas, Jesus warned them that the kingdom did not come "with observation"<22>was not a "Lo, there! Lo, here!"; it was "within" them, or "in their midst," though they did not perceive it. In the last decisive coming of the Son of Man there would be no dubiety as to His presence (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',17,24,25);">Lu 17:24,25</a>). He adds exhortations as to the suddenness of His coming, and the separations that would ensue (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',17,\'26-37\');">Lu 17:26-37</a>), which Matthew gives as part of the great discourse on the Last Things in chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',24,\'1-\');">24</a>.<P>c) Parable of the Unjust Judge:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',18,\'1-8\');">Luke 18:1-8</a>)<P>In close connection with the foregoing, as furnishing the ground for the certainty that this day of the Son of Man would come, Jesus spoke the parable of the Unjust Judge. This judge, though heedless of the claims of right, yet yielded to the widow\'s importunity, and granted her justice against her adversary. How much more surely will the righteous, long-suffering God avenge His own elect, who cry unto Him day and night (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',18,7,8);">Lu 18:7,8</a>)! Yet men, in that supreme hour, will almost have lost faith in His coming (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',18,8);">Lu 18:8</a>).<P>A series of sayings and incidents at this time throw light upon the spirit of the kingdom.<P>5. The Spirit of the Kingdom:<P>The spirit of self-righteousness is rebuked and humble penitence as the condition of acceptance is enforced in the parable of the Pharisee and Publican.<P>a) Parable of Pharisee and Publican:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',18,\'9-14\');">Luke 18:9-14</a>)<P>The Pharisee posing in his self-complacency at his fastings and tithes, and thanking God for his superiority to others, is set in vivid contrast to the abased publican, standing afar off, and able only to say, "God, be thou merciful to me a sinner" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',18,13);">Lu 18:13</a>). Yet it was he who went down to his house "justified" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',18,14);">Lu 18:14</a>).<P>b) Blessing of the Babies:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',19,\'13-15\');">Matthew 19:13-15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',10,\'13-16\');">Mark 10:13-16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',18,\'15-17\');">Luke 18:15-17</a>)<P>A similar lesson is inculcated in the beautiful incident of the blessing of the babes. The disciples rebuked the mothers for bringing their little ones, but Jesus, "moved with indignation" (Mark), received and blessed the babes, declaring that to such (to them and those of like spirit) belonged the kingdom of heaven. "Suffer the little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me," etc.<P>c) The Rich Young Ruler:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',19,\'16-30\');">Matthew 19:16-30</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',10,\'17-31\');">Mark 10:17-31</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',18,\'18-30\');">Luke 18:18-30</a>)<P>A third illustration<6F>this time of the peril of covetousness<73>is afforded by the incident of the rich young ruler. This amiable, blameless, and evidently sincere young man ("Jesus looking upon him loved him," <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',10,21);">Mr 10:21</a>) knelt, and addressing Jesus as "Good Teacher," asked what he must do to inherit eternal life. Jesus first declined the term "good," in the easy, conventional sense in which it was applied, then referred the ruler to the commandments as the standard of doing. All these, however, the young man averred he had observed from his youth up. He did not know himself. Jesus saw the secret hold his riches had upon his soul, and revealed it by the searching word, "If thou wouldest be perfect, go, sell that which thou hast," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',19,21);">Mt 19:21</a>; compare Mark, "One thing thou lackest," etc.). This was enough. The young man could not yield up his "great possessions," and went away sorrowing. Jesus bases on his refusal earnest warnings against the love of riches, and points out, in answer to a question of Peter, that loss for His sake in this life is met with overwhelmingly great compensations in the life to come.<P>6. Third Announcement of the Passion:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',20,\'17-19\');">Matthew 20:17-19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',10,\'32-34\');">Mark 10:32-34</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',18,\'31-33\');">18:31-33</a>)<P>Not unconnected with the foregoing teachings is the third solemn announcement to the disciples, so hard to be persuaded that the kingdom was not immediately to be set up in glory, of His approaching sufferings and death, followed by resurrection. The disciples had been "amazed" and "afraid" (Mark) at something strange in the aspect and walk of Jesus as they Luke were on the way, going to Jerusalem (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,51);">Lu 9:51</a>). His words gave the explanation. With them should be taken what is said in a succeeding incident of His baptism of suffering (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',10,38,39);">Mr 10:38,39</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',12,50);">Lu 12:50</a>).<P>7. The Rewards of the Kingdom:<P>The spirit of the kingdom and sacrifice for the kingdom have already been associated with the idea of reward, but the principles underlying this reward are now made the subject of special teaching.<P>First by the parable of the Laborers in the Vineyard the lesson is inculcated that reward in the kingdom is not according to any legal rule, but is governed by a Divine equity, in accordance with which the last may often be equal to, or take precedence of, the first.<P>a) Parable of the Laborers in the Vineyard:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',20,\'1-17\');">Matthew 20:1-17</a>)<P>The laborers were hired at different hours, yet all at the end received the same wage. The murmuring at the generosity of the householder of those who had worked longest betrayed a defectiveness of spirit which may explain why they were not more highly rewarded. In strictness, the kingdom is a gift of grace, in the sum total of its blessings one and the same to all.<P>b) The Sons of Zebedee:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',20,\'20-28\');">Matthew 20:20-28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',10,\'35-45\');">Mark 10:35-45</a>)<P>Still there are distinctions of honor in God\'s kingdom, but these are not arbitrarily made. This is the lesson of the reply of Jesus to the plea of the mother of the sons of Zebedee, James and John, with, apparently, the concurrence of the apostles themselves, that they might sit one on the right hand and the other on the left hand in His kingdom. It was a bold and ambitious request, and naturally moved the indignation of the other apostles. Still it had its ground in a certain nobility of spirit. For when Jesus asked if they were able to drink of His cup and be baptized with His baptism, they answered, "We are able." Jesus told them they should share that lot of suffering, but to sit on His right hand and on His left were not favors that could be arbitrarily bestowed, but would be given to those for whom it had been prepared of His Father<65>the preparation having regard to character and fitness, of which the Father alone was judge. Jesus went on to rebuke the spirit which led one to seek prominence over another, and laid down the essential law, "Whosoever would become great among you shall be your minister," enforcing it by His own never-to-be-forgotten example, "Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom, for many" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',20,28);">Mt 20:28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',10,45);">Mr 10:45</a>).<P>8. Jesus at Jericho:<P>Accompanied by a great throng, possibly of pilgrims to the feast, Jesus drew near to the influential city of Jericho, in the Jordan valley, about 17 miles distant from Jerusalem. Here two notable incidents marked His progress.<P>a) The Cure of Bartimeus:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',20,\'29-34\');">Matthew 20:29-34</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',10,\'46-52\');">Mark 10:46-52</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',18,\'35-43\');">Luke 18:35-43</a>)<P>As they approached the city (Luke) (Matthew and Mark place the incident as they "went out") a blind beggar, Bartimeus, hearing that "Jesus the Nazarene" (Mark) passed by, loudly called on Him as the "Son of David" to have mercy on him. The multitude would have restrained the man, but their rebukes only made him the more urgent in his cries. Jesus stopped in His way, called the blind man to Him, then, when he came, renewing his appeal, healed him. The cry of the beggar shows that the Davidic descent, if not the Messiahship, of Jesus was now known. Matthew varies from the other evangelists in speaking of "two blind men," while Matthew and Mark, as noted, make the cure take place on leaving, not on entering the city. Not improbably there are two healings, one on entering Jericho, the other on going from the city, and Matthew, after his fashion, groups them together (Luke\'s language is really indefinite; literally, "as they were near to Jericho").<P>b) Zaccheus the Publican:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',19,\'1-10\');">Luke 19:1-10</a>)<P>The entrance of Jesus into Jericho was signalized by a yet more striking incident. The chief collector of revenue in the city was Zaccheus, rich, but held in opprobrium ("a sinner") because of his occupation. Being little of stature, Zaccheus had climbed into the branches of a sycomore tree to see Jesus as He passed. To his amazement, and that of the crowd, Jesus stopped on His way, and called Zaccheus by name to hasten to come down, for that day He must abide at his house. Zaccheus joyfully received Him, and, moved to a complete change in his views of duty, declared his purpose of giving half his goods to the poor, and of restoring fourfold anything he might have taken by false accusation. It was a revolution in the man\'s soul, wrought by love. "Today," Jesus testified, "is salvation come to this house ..... For the Son of man came to seek and to save that which was lost."<P>c) Parable of the Pounds:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',19,\'11-27\');">Luke 19:11-27</a>)<P>The expectations of the multitude that the kingdom of God should immediately appear led Jesus to speak the parable of the Pounds, forewarning them that the consummation they looked for might be longer delayed than they thought, and impressing on them the need of loyalty, faithfulness and diligence, if that day, when it came, was not to prove disastrous to them. The nobleman went into a "far country" to receive a kingdom, and his ten servants were to trade with as many pounds (each = 100 drachmas) in his absence. On his return the faithful servants were rewarded in proportion to their diligence; the faithless one lost what he had; the rebellious citizens were destroyed. Thus Jesus fore-shadowed the doom that would overtake those. who were plotting against Him, and checked hopes that disregarded the moral conditions of honor in His kingdom.<P>Arrival at Bethany.<P>From Jericho Jesus moved on to Bethany, the abode of Lazarus and his sisters. To His halt here before His public entrance into Jerusalem the next events belong.``132';
isbe[5024]='Jesus Christ, 4E1`E. THE PASSION WEEK<45>BETRAYAL, TRIAL AND CRUCIFIXION<P>Importance of the Last Events:<P>We reach now the closing week and last solemn events of the earthly life of Jesus. The importance attached to this part of their narratives is seen by the space the evangelists devote to it. Of the Gospels of Matthew and Mark fully one-third is devoted to the events of the Passion Week and their sequel in the resurrection; Luke has several chapters; John gives half his Gospel to the same period. It is obvious that in the minds of the evangelists the crucifixion of Jesus is the pivot of their whole narrative<76>the denouement to which everything tends from the first.<P>I. The Events Preceding the Last Super.<P>1. The Chronology:<P>The arrival in Bethany is placed by John "six days before the Passover" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,1);">12:1</A>). Assuming that the public entry into Jerusalem took place on the Sunday, and that the 14th of Nisan fell on the following Thursday, this would lead to the arrival being placed on the Friday or Saturday preceding, according to the mode of reckoning. It is in the highest degree unlikely that Jesus would journey from Jericho on the Jewish Sabbath; hence He may be supposed to have arrived on the Friday evening. The supper at which the anointing by Mary took place would be on the Saturday (Sabbath) evening. Matthew and Mark connect it with events two days before the Passover (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,2);">Mt 26:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,1);">Mr 14:1</a>), but parenthetically, in a way which leaves the other order open.<P>2. The Anointing at Bethany:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,\'6-13\');">Matthew 26:6-13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,\'3-9\');">Mark 14:3-9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,\'1-9\');">John 12:1-9</a>)<P>This beautiful deed occurred at a supper given in honor of Jesus at the house of one Simon, a leper (Matthew and Mark)<29>probably cured by Jesus<75>at which Martha, Mary and Lazarus were guests. Martha aided in serving (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,2);">Joh 12:2</a>). In the course of the meal, or at its close, Mary brought a costly box of nard (valued by Judas at "300 shillings," about $50, or 10 pounds; compare the American Revised Version margin on <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,7);">Joh 6:7</a>), and with the perfume anointed the head (Matthew, Mark) and feet (John) of Jesus, wiping His feet with her hair (Matthew and Mark, though not mentioning the "feet," speak of the "body" of Jesus). Indignation, instigated by Judas (John), was at once awakened at what was deemed wanton waste. How much better had the money been given to the poor! Jesus vindicated Mary in her loving act<63>a prophetic anointing for His burial<61>and declared that wherever His gospel went, it would be spoken of for a memorial of her. It is the hearts from which such acts come that are the true friends of the poor. The chief priests were only the further exasperated at what was happening, and at the interest shown in Lazarus, and plotted to put Lazarus also to death (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,10);">Joh 12:10</a>).<P>3. The Entry into Jerusalem:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',21,\'1-11\');">Matthew 21:1-11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',11,\'1-11\');">Mark 11:1-11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',19,\'29-44\');">Luke 19:29-44</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,\'12-19\');">John 12:12-19</a>)<P>On the day following<6E>Palm Sunday<61>Jesus made His public entry as Messiah into Jerusalem. All the evangelists narrate this event. The Mount of Olives had to be crossed from Bethany, and Jesus sent two disciples to an adjacent village<67>probably Bethphage (this seems to have been also the name of a district)<29>where an ass and its colt would be found tied. These they were to bring to Him, Jesus assuring them of the permission of the owners. Garments were thrown over the colt, and Jesus seated Himself on it. In this humble fashion (as Matthew and John note, in fulfillment of prophecy, <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',9,9);">Zec 9:9</a>), He proceeded to Jerusalem, from which a multitude, bearing palm branches, had already come out to meet Him (John). Throngs accompanied Him, going before and after; these, spreading their garments, and strewing branches in the way, hailed Him with hosannas as the Son of David, the King of Israel, who came in the name of the Lord. Very different were the feelings in the breasts of the Pharisees. "Behold," they said, "how ye prevail nothing; lo, the world is gone after him" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,19);">Joh 12:19</a>). They bade Jesus rebuke His disciples, but Jesus replied that if they were silent, the very stones would cry out (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',19,40);">Lu 19:40</a>).<P>Jesus Weeping over Jerusalem<65>Return to Bethany.<P>One incident in this progress to Jerusalem is related only by <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',19,\'41-44\');">Lu 19:41-44</a>. As at a bend in the road Jerusalem became suddenly visible, Jesus paused and wept over the city, so blind to its day of visitation, and so near to its awful doom. Not His own sufferings, but the thought of Jerusalem\'s guilt and woes, filled Him with anguish. On reaching the city, Mark\'s testimony is explicit that He did no more than enter the temple, and \'look round on all things\' (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',11,11);">Mr 11:11</a>). Then eventide having come, He returned to Bethany with the Twelve.<P>4. Cursing of the Fig Tree<65>Second Cleansing of Temple:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',21,\'12-22\');">Matthew 21:12-22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',11,\'12-26\');">Mark 11:12-26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',19,\'45-48\');">Luke 19:45-48</a>)<P>The morning of Monday found Jesus and His disciples again on their way to the city. Possibly the early hours had been spent by Jesus in solitary prayer, and, as they went, it is recorded that "he hungered." A fig tree from which, from its foliage, fruit might have been expected, stood invitingly by the wayside, but when Jesus approached it, it was found to have nothing but leaves<65>a striking symbol of the outwardly religious, but spiritually barren Jewish community. And in this sense Jesus used it in pronouncing on it the word of doom, "No man eat fruit from thee henceforward for ever" (Mark). Next morning (Tuesday), as the disciples passed, the tree was found withered from the roots. Matthew combines the events of the cursing and the withering, placing both on the second day, but Mark more accurately distinguishes them. Jesus used the surprise of the disciples as the occasion of a lesson on the omnipotence of faith, with added counsels on prayer.<P>Were There Two Cleansings?<P>Pursuing His journey on the first morning, Jesus reached the temple, and there, as His first act, is stated by Matthew and Mark to have cleansed the temple of the traders. It is a diffcult question whether this is a second cleansing, or the same act as that recorded by John at the beginning of the ministry (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,\'13-22\');">Joh 2:13-22</a>; see above), and here narrated out of its chronological order. The acts are at least quite similar in character and significance. In favor of a second cleansing is the anger of the priests and scribes (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',11,18);">Mr 11:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',19,47);">Lu 19:47</a>), and their demand next day for His authority. No other incidents are recorded of this visit to the temple, except the healing of certain blind and lame, and the praises of the children, "Hosanna to the son of David"<22>an echo of the previous day\'s proceedings (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',21,\'14-16\');">Mt 21:14-16</a>). In the evening He went back to Bethany.<P>5. The Eventful Tuesday:<P>Far different is it with the third day of these visits of Jesus to the temple<6C>the Tuesday of the Passion Week. This is crowded with parables, discourses, incidents, so numerous, impressive, tragical, as to oppress the mind in seeking to grasp how one short day could embrace them all. It was the last day of the appearance of Jesus in the temple (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,36);">Joh 12:36</a>), and marks His final break with the authorities of the nation, on whom His words of denunciation (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',23,\'1-\');">Mt 23</a>) fell with overwhelming force. The thread of the day\'s proceedings may thus be briefly traced.<P>a) The Demand for Authority<74>Parables:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',21,\'23-\');">Matthew 21:23</A>-<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',22,\'1-14\');">22:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',11,\'27-\');">Mark 11:27</A>-<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',12,\'1-12\');">12:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',20,\'1-18\');">Luke 20:1-18</a>)<P>On His first appearance in the temple on the Tuesday morning, Jesus was met by a demand from the chief priests, scribes and elders (representatives of the Sanhedrin), for the authority by which He acted as He did. Jesus met them by a counterquestion, "The baptism of John, was it from heaven, or from men?" The dilemma was obvious. If John was Divinely accredited, why did they not accept his testimony to Jesus? Yet they feared to say his mission was of men, for John was universally esteemed a prophet. They could therefore only lamely reply: "We cannot tell" (the King James Version). Matters had now come to an issue, and Jesus, reverting to the method of parable, set forth plainly their sin and its results to themselves and others.<P>The Two Sons<6E>the Wicked Husbandmen<65>the Marriage of the King\'s Son.<P>The parables spoken on this occasion were: that of the Two Sons, one who said "I go not," but afterward repented and went, the other who said, "I go, sir," but went not<6F>pointing the moral that the publicans and harlots went into the kingdom of God before the self-righteous leaders who rejected the preaching of John (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',21,\'28-32\');">Mt 21:28-32</a>); that of the Wicked Husbandmen, who slew the servants, and finally the son, sent to them, and were at length themselves destroyed, the vineyard being given to others<72>a prophecy of the transferring of the kingdom to the Gentiles (Matthew, Mark, Luke); and that of the Marriage of the King\'s Son (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',22,\'2-14\');">Mt 22:2-14</a>), akin to that of the Great Supper in <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',14,\'16-24\');">Lu 14:16-24</a> in its gathering in of the outcasts to take the place of those who had been bidden, but distinguished from it by the feature of the wedding garment, the lack of which meant being thrust into the outer darkness. The Pharisees easily perceived that these parables were spoken of them (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',21,45);">Mt 21:45</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',12,12);">Mr 12:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',20,19);">Lu 20:19</a>), and were correspondingly enraged, yet dared not touch Jesus for fear of the people.<P>b) Ensnaring Questions, etc.:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',22,\'1-46\');">Matthew 22:1-46</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',12,\'13-37\');">Mark 12:13-37</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',20,\'19-44\');">Luke 20:19-44</a>)<P>The attempt was next made on the part of the Pharisees, Herodians and Sadducees<65>now joined in a common cause<73>to ensnare Jesus by captious and compromising questions. These attempts He met with a wisdom and dignity which foiled His adversaries, while He showed a ready appreciation of a candid spirit when it presented itself, and turned the point against His opponents by putting a question on the Davidic sonship of the Messiah.<P>(1) Tribute to Caesar<61>the Resurrection<6F>the Great Commandment.<P>First the Pharisees with the Herodians sought to entrap Him by raising the question of the lawfulness of tribute to Caesar. By causing them to produce a denarius bearing Caesar\'s image and superscription, Jesus obtained from them a recognition of their acceptance of Caesar\'s authority, and bade them render Caesar\'s things to Caesar, and God\'s to God. The Sadducees next tried Him with the puzzle of the wife who had seven husbands, leading up to denial of the resurrection; but Jesus met them by showing that marriage relations have no place in the resurrection life, and by pointing to the implication of a future life in God\'s word to Moses, "I am the God of Abraham," etc. God "is not the God of the dead, but of the living," a fact which carried with it all the weight of resurrection, as needed for the completion of the personal life. The candid scribe, who came last with His question as to which commandment was first of all, had a different reception. Jesus met Him kindly, satisfied him with His answer, and pronounced him "not far from the kingdom of God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',12,34);">Mr 12:34</a>).<P>(2) David\'s Son and Lord.<P>The adversaries were silenced, but Jesus now put to them His own question. If David in <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',110,\'1-\');">Ps 110</a> could say "Yahweh saith unto my lord, Sit thou on my right hand," etc., how was this reconcilable with the Christ being David\'s son? The question was based on the acceptance of the oracle as spoken by David, or one of his house, of the Messiah, and was intended to suggest the higher nature of Christ as one with God in a Divine sovereignty. David\'s son was also David\'s Lord.<P>c) The Great Denunciation:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',23,\'1-\');">Matthew 23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',12,\'38-40\');">Mark 12:38-40</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',20,\'45-47\');">Luke 20:45-47</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,\'39-52\');">Luke 11:39-52</a>)<P>At this point, in audience of the multitudes and of His disciples in the temple, Jesus delivered that tremendous indictment of the scribes and Pharisees, with denunciations of woes upon them for their hypocrisy and iniquity of conduct, recorded most fully in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',23,\'1-\');">Mt 23</a>. A more tremendous denunciation of a class was never uttered. While conceding to the scribes and Pharisees any authority they lawfully possessed (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',23,2,3);">23:2,3</a>), Jesus specially dwelt on their divorce of practice from precept. They said and did not (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',23,2);">23:3</a>). He denounced their perversion of the right, their tyranny, their ostentation, their keeping back others from the kingdom, their zeal in securing proselytes, only to make them, when gained, worse than themselves, their immoral casuistry, their scruples about trifles, while neglecting essentials, their exaltation of the outward at the expense of the inward, their building the tombs of the prophets, while harboring the spirit of those that killed the prophets. He declared them to be foul and corrupt to the last degree: \'sons of Gehenna\' (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',23,15,33);">23:15,33</a>). So awful a condition meant ripeness for doom. On them, through that law of retribution which binds generation with generation in guilt and penalty, would come all the righteous blood shed since the days of Abel (the allusion to "Zachariah son of Barachiah," <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',23,35);">23:35</a>, is unmistakably to <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',24,21);">2Ch 24:21</a><3E>this being the last book in the Hebrew Canon<6F>but "Barachiah" seems a confusion with <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',1,1);">Zec 1:1</a>, perhaps through a copyist\'s gloss or error). At the close indignation melts into tenderness in the affecting plaint over Jerusalem<65>"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem,...how often would I have gathered thy children together," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',23,\'37-39\');">Mt 23:37-39</a>)<29>words found in Luke in an earlier context (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',13,34,35);">13:34,35</a>), but assuredly also appropriate here. For other parts of the discourse found earlier, compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,\'39-52\');">Lu 11:39-52</a>. All seems to have been gathered up afresh in this final accusation. It can be imagined that the anger of the Pharisees was fierce at such words, yet they did not venture openly to touch Him.<P>d) The Widow\'s Offering:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',12,\'41-44\');">Mark 12:41-44</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',21,\'1-4\');">Luke 21:1-4</a>)<P>Before finally leaving the temple, Jesus seems to have passed from the outer court into the women\'s court, and there to have sat down near the receptacles provided for the gifts of the worshippers. Many who were wealthy cast of their gold and silver into the treasury, but the eye of Jesus singled out one poor widow who, creeping up, cast in two mites (Greek lepta, the smallest of coins), which made up but a farthing. It was little, but it was her all, and Jesus immortalized her poor offering by declaring that, out of her want, she had given more than the wealthlest there. Gifts were measured in His sight by the willingness that prompted them, and by the sacrifice they entailed.<P>e) The Visit of the Greeks:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,\'20-36\');">John 12:20-36</a>)<P>It is perhaps to this crowded day, though some place it earlier in the week (on Sunday or Monday), that the incident should be referred of the request of certain Greeks to see Jesus, as related in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,20);">Joh 12:20</a>ff. Who these Greeks were, or whence they came, is unknown, but they were evidently proselytes to the Jewish faith, and men of a sincere spirit. Their request was made through Philip of Bethsaida, and Philip and Andrew conveyed it to Jesus. It is not said whether their wish was granted, but we can hardly doubt that it was. Jesus evidently saw in the incident a prelude of that glory that should accrue to Himself through all men being drawn to Him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,23,32);">Joh 12:23,32</a>). But He saw as clearly that this "glorifying" could only be through His death (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,24,33);">Joh 12:24,33</a>), and He universalized it into a law of His Kingdom that, as a grain of wheat must fall into the earth and die if it is to be multiplied, so only through sacrifice can any life be made truly fruitful (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,24,25);">Joh 12:24,25</a>). The thought of death, however, always brought trouble to the soul of Jesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,27);">Joh 12:27</a>), and a voice from the Father was given to comfort Him. The multitude thought it thundered, and failed to apprehend the meaning of the voice, or His own words about being "lifted up" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,29,34);">Joh 12:29,34</a>).<P>f) Discourse on the Last Things:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',24,\'1-\');">Matthew 24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',13,\'1-\');">Mark 13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',21,\'5-36\');">Luke 21:5-36</a>)<P>Jesus had now bidden farewell to the temple. As He was going out, His disciples<65>or one of them (Mark)<29>called His attention to the magnificence of the buildings of the temple, eliciting from Him the startling reply that not one stone should be left upon another that should not be thrown down. Later in the evening, when seated on the Mount of Olives on their return journey, in view of the temple, Andrew, James and John (Mark) asked Him privately when these things should be, and what would be the signs of their fulfillment. In Matthew the question is put more precisely, "When shall these things be? And what shall be the sign of thy coming (parousia), and of the end of the world?" (or "consummation of the age"). It is in answer to these complex questions that Jesus spoke His great discourse on the destruction of Jerusalem and His final coming, some of the strands in which it is difficult now to disentangle. In the extended report in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',24,\'1-\');">Mt 24</a> certain passages appear which are given elsewhere by Luke (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',17,\'20-37\');">Lu 17:20-37</a>). It may tend to clearness if a distinction be observed between the nearer event of the destruction of Jerusalem<65>also in its way a coming of the Son of Man<61>and the more remote event of the final parousia. The former, to which <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',24,\'15-28\');">Mt 24:15-28</a> more specially belong, seems referred to by the "these things" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',24,34);">24:34</a>, which, it is declared, shall be fulfilled in that generation. Of the final parousia, on the other hand, it is declared in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',24,36);">24:36</a> that "of that day and hour knoweth no one, not even the angels of heaven, neither the Son, but the Father only" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',13,32);">Mr 13:32</a>). The difficulty occasioned by the immediately of <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',24,29);">Mt 24:29</a> is relieved by recalling the absence of perspective and grouping of future events in all apocalyptic prophecy<63>the consummation ever rising as the background of the immediate experience which is its prelude. The discourse then divides itself into a general part (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',24,\'4-14\');">Mt 24:4-14</a>), delineating the character of the entire period till the consummation (false Christs and prophets, wars, tribulations, apostasies, preaching of the gospel to all nations, etc.); a special part relating to the impending destruction of the city, with appropriate warnings (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',24,\'15-28\');">Mt 24:15-28</a>); and a closing part (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',24,\'32-51\');">Mt 24:32-51</a>) relating mainly to the final parousia, but not without reference to preceding events in the extension of Christ\'s kingdom, and ingathering of His elect (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',24,30,31);">Mt 24:30,31</a>). Warning is given of the suddenness of the coming of the Son of Man, and the need of being prepared for it (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',24,\'37-51\');">Mt 24:37-51</a>). The whole is a massive prophecy, resting on Christ\'s consciousness that His death would be, not the defeat of His mission, but the opening up of the way to His final glorification and triumph.<P>g) Parables of Ten Virgins, Talents and Last Judgment:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',25,\'1-\');">Matthew 25</a>)<P>To this great discourse on the solemnities of the end, Jesus, still addressing His disciples, added three memorable parables of instruction and warning (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',25,\'1-\');">Mt 25</a>)<29>the first, that of the Ten Virgins, picturing, under the figure of virgins who went to meet the bridegroom with insufficient provision of oil for their lamps, the danger of being taken unawares in waiting for the Son of Man; the second, that of the Talents, akin to the parable in Luke of the Pounds (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',19,\'11-27\');">19:11-27</a>), emphasizing the need of diligence in the Lord\'s absence; the third, that of the Sheep and Goats, or Last Judgment, showing how the last division will be made according as discipleship is evinced by loving deeds done to those in need on earth<74>such deeds being owned by Christ the King as done to Himself. Love is thus declared to be the ultimate law in Christ\'s kingdom (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',13,\'1-\');">1Co 13</a>); the loveless spirit is reprobated. "These shall go away into eternal punishment: but the righteous into eternal life" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',25,46);">Mt 25:46</a>).<P>6. A Day of Retirement:<P>(compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,36);">John 12:36</a>)<P><a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',21,37,38);">Lu 21:37,38</a> might suggest that Jesus taught in the temple every day till the Thursday of the Passover; if, however, the denunciation took place, as nearly all agree, on Tuesday, an exception must be made of the Wednesday, which Jesus probably spent in retirement in Bethany in preparation of spirit for His last great conflict (others arrange differently, and put some of the preceding events in this day). The summary in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,\'36-43\');">Joh 12:36-43</a> connects the blindness of mind of the Pharisees with Isaiah\'s vision (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',6,10);">Isa 6:10</a>), and with the prophecy of the rejected Servant (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',53,1);">Isa 53:1</a>).<P>7. An Atmosphere of Plotting<6E>Judas and the Priests:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,\'1-5\',\'14-16\');">Matthew 26:1-5,14-16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,1,2,10,11);">Mark 14:1,2,10,11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,\'1-6\');">Luke 22:1-6</a>)<P>The plot for the destruction of Jesus was meanwhile maturing. Two days before the Passover (Tuesday evening), Jesus forewarned the disciples of His approaching betrayal and crucifixion (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,2);">Mt 26:2</a>); and probably at that very hour a secret meeting of the chief priests and elders was being held in the court of the house of the high priest, Caiaphas (Matthew), to consult as to the means of putting Him to death. Their resolve was that it should not be done on the feast day, lest there should be a tumult; but the appearance of Judas, who since the anointing had seemingly meditated this step, speedily changed their plans. For the paltry sum of 30 pieces of silver (shekels of the sanctuary, less than $20 or 4 pounds (1915); the price of a slave, <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',21,32);">Ex 21:32</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',11,12);">Zec 11:12</a>), the recreant disciple, perhaps persuading himself that he was really forcing Jesus to an exercise of His Messianic power, agreed to betray his Lord. The covenant of infamy was made, and the traitor now only waited his opportunity to carry out his project.``132';
isbe[5025]='Jesus Christ, 4E2`II. From the Last Supper till the Cross.<P>1. The Chronology:<P>A question of admitted difficulty arises in the comparison of the Synoptics and John as to the dates of the Last Supper and of the crucifixion. The Synoptics seem clearly to place the Last Supper on the evening of the 14th of Nisan (in Jewish reckoning, the beginning of the 15th), and to identify it with the ordinary paschal meal (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,\'17-19\');">Mt 26:17-19</a>). The crucifixion then took place on the 15th. John, on the contrary, seems to place the supper on the day before the Passover (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',13,1);">13:1</a>), and the crucifixion on the 14th, when the Passover had not yet been eaten (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,28);">18:28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,14);">19:14</a>). Many, on this ground, affirm an irreconcilable discrepancy between John and the Synoptics, some (e.g. Meyer, Farrar, less decisively Sanday) preferring John; others (Strauss, Baur, Schmiedel, etc.) using the fact to discredit John. By those who accept both accounts, various modes of reconciliation are proposed. A favorite opinion (early church writers; many moderns, as Godet, Westcott, Farrar) is that Jesus, in view of His death, anticipated the Passover, and ate His parting meal with His disciples on the evening of the 13th; others (e.g. Tholuck, Luthardt, Edersheim, Andrews, D. Smith), adhering to the Synoptics, take the view, here shared, that the apparent discrepancy is accounted for by a somewhat freer usage of terms in John. Details of the discussion must be sought in the works on the subject. The case for the anticipatory view is well given in Westcott, Introduction to the Study of the Gospels, 339ff; and in Farrar, Life of Christ, Excur. X; a good statement of that for the Synoptics may be seen in Andrews, Life of our Lord; compare Tholuck, Commentary on John, on <span class="noTag">13:1</span>; Luthardt, Commentary on John, on <span class="noTag">13:1; 18:28</span>; D. Smith, Days of His Flesh, App. II. The language of the Synoptists ("the first day of unleavened bread, when they sacrificed the passover," <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,12);">Mr 14:12</a>) leaves no doubt that they intended to identify the Last Supper with the regular Passover, and it is hardly conceivable that they could be mistaken on so vital a point of the apostolic tradition. This also was the view of the churches of Asia Minor, where John himself latterly resided. On the other hand, the phrase to "eat the passover" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,28);">Joh 18:28</a> may very well, in John\'s usage, refer to participation in the special sacrifices which formed a chief feature of the proceedings on the 15th. The allusion in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',13,1);">Joh 13:1</a> need mean no more than that, the Passover now impending, Jesus, loving His disciples to the end, gave them a special token of that love during the meal that ensued. The "preparation of the passover" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,14,31);">Joh 19:14,31</a> most naturally refers to the preparation for the Sabbath of the Passover week, alluded to also by the Synoptics (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',27,62);">Mt 27:62</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',15,42);">Mr 15:42</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,54);">Lu 23:54</a>). The objections based on rabbinical regulations about the Sabbath are convincingly met by Tholuck (see also Andrews). We assume, therefore, that our Lord ate the Passover with His disciples at the usual time<6D>the evening of the 14th of Nisan (i.e. the beginning of the 15th).<P>2. The Last Supper:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,\'17-35\');">Matthew 26:17-35</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,\'12-31\');">Mark 14:12-31</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,\'7-38\');">Luke 22:7-38</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',13,\'1-\');">John 13</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',11,\'23-25\');">1Co 11:23-25</a>)<P>In the scene in the upper chamber, at the observance of the Last Supper, we enter the holy of holies of this part of the Lord\'s history. It is difficult, in combining the narratives, to be sure of the order of all the particulars, but the main events are clear. They may be exhibited as follows:<P>a) The Preparation:<P>On "the first day of unleavened bread"<22>Thursday, 14th of Nisan<61>Jesus bade two of His disciples (Luke names Peter and John) make the needful preparations for the observance of the Passover. This included the sacrificing of the lamb at the temple, and the securing of a guest-chamber. Jesus bade the disciples follow a man whom they would meet bearing a pitcher, and at the house where he stopped they would find one willing to receive them. The master of the house, doubtless a disciple, at once gave them "a large upper room furnished and ready" (Mark); there they made ready.<P>b) Dispute about Precedence<63>Washing of the Disciples\' Feet<65>Departure of Judas:<P>Evening being come, Jesus and the Twelve assembled, and took their places for the meal. We gather from <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',13,23);">Joh 13:23</a> that John reclined next to Jesus (on the right), and the sequel shows that Judas and Peter were near on the other side. It was probably this arrangement that gave rise to the unseemly strife for precedence among the disciples narratedin <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,\'24-30\');">Lu 22:24-30</a>. The spirit thus displayed Jesus rebuked, as He had more than once had occasion to do (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',9,\'33-37\');">Mr 9:33-37</a>); then (for here may be inserted the beautiful incident in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',13,1);">Joh 13:1</a>ff), rising from the table, He gave them an amazing illustration of His own precept, "He that is chief (let him become) as he that doth serve...I am in the midst of you as he that serveth" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,26,27);">Lu 22:26,27</a>), in divesting Himself of His garments, girding Himself with a towel, and performing the act of a servant in washing His disciples\' feet. Peter\'s exclamation must have expressed the feelings of all: "Lord, dost thou wash my feet?" The act of the Divine Master was a wonderful lesson in humility, but Jesus used it also as a parable of something higher. "If I wash thee not (i.e. if thou art not cleansed by the receiving of my word and spirit, which this washing symbolizes), thou hast no part with me"; then on Peter\'s further impulsive protest, "Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and my head," the word: "He that is bathed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit" (i.e. sanctification of the inner man is once for all, but there is need for cleansing from the sins of the daily walk). Resuming His place at the table, He bade them imitate the example He had just given them.<P>Is it I?<P>An ominous word had accompanied the reply to Peter, "Ye are not all clean" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',13,10,11);">Joh 13:10,11</a>). As the supper proceeded, the meaning of this was made plain. Judas, who had already sold his Master, was at the table with the rest. He had permitted Jesus to wash his feet, and remained unmoved by that surpassing act of condescending love. Jesus was "troubled in spirit" and now openly declared, "One of you shall betray me" (the Greek word means literally, "deliver up": compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,4,6);">Lu 22:4,6</a>, and the Revised Version margin throughout). It was an astounding announcement to the disciples, and from one and another came the trembling question, "Lord, is it I?" Jesus answered that it was one of those dipping his hand with Him in the dish (Mark), and spoke of the woe that would overtake the betrayer ("Good were it for that man if he had not been born"). John, at a sign from Peter, asked more definitely, "Who is it?" (John). Jesus said, but to John only, it was he to whom He would give a sop, and the sop was given to Judas. The traitor even yet sought to mask his treachery by the words, "Is it I, Rabbi?" and Jesus replied, though still not aloud, "Thou hast said" (Matthew); then, as Satanic passion stirred the breast of Judas, He added, "What thou doest, do quickly" (John). Judas at once rose and went out<75>into the night (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',13,30);">Joh 13:30</a>). The disciples, not comprehending his abrupt departure, thought some errand had been given him for the feast or for the poor. Jesus was relieved by his departure and spoke of the glory coming to Himself and to His Father, and of love as the mark of true discipleship (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',13,\'31-35\');">Joh 13:31-35</a>).<P>c) The Lord\'s Supper:<P>The forms of the observance of the Passover by the Jews are given elsewhere (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PASSOVER">PASSOVER</a>). Luke alone of the New Testament writers speaks of 2 cups (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',22,17,20);">22:17,20</a>); in Jewish practice 4 cups were used. The "Western" text, Codex Bezae (D), omits Luke\'s 2nd cup, from which some (compare Sanday, Hastings, Dictionary of the Bible (five volumes)) infer duplication, but this is not necessary. Luke\'s 1st cup (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,17);">Lu 22:17</a>) may be that with which the paschal supper opened; the 2nd cup<75>that mentioned by all the writers<72>was probably the 3rd Jewish cup, known as "the cup of blessing" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',10,16);">1Co 10:16</a>). Some, however, as Meyer, make it the 4th cup. It is implied in Matthew, Mark, John, that by this time Judas had gone. Left thus with His own, the essentials of the paschal meal being complete, Jesus proceeded, by taking and distributing bread and wine, associating them with His body and blood, soon to be offered in death upon the cross, to institute that sacred rite in which, through all ages since (though its simplicity has often been sadly obscured) His love and sacrifice have been commemorated by His church. There are variations of phrase in the different accounts, but in the essentials of the sacramental institution there is entire agreement. Taking bread, after thanks to God, Jesus broke it, and gave it to the disciples with the words, "This is my body"; the cup, in like manner, after thanksgiving, He gave them with the words, "This is my blood of the covenant (in Luke and Paul, "the new covenant in my blood") which is poured out for many" (Matthew adds, "unto remission of sins"). Luke and Paul add what is implied in the others: "This do in remembrance of me" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,19);">Lu 22:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',11,24);">1Co 11:24</a>). Nothing could more plainly designate the bread and wine as holy symbols of the Lord\'s body and blood, offered in death for man\'s redemption, and sealing in His blood a new covenant with God; nor, so long as the rite is observed in its Divine simplicity, as Jesus instituted it, will it be possible to expunge from His death the character of a redeeming sacrifice. In touching words Jesus intimated that He would no more drink of the fruit of the vine till He drank it new with them in their Father\'s Kingdom (on the doctrinal aspects, see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=EUCHARIST">EUCHARIST</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SACRAMENTS">SACRAMENTS</A>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=LORD\'S+SUPPER">LORD\'S SUPPER</a>).<P>d) The Last Discourses<65>Intercessory Prayer:<P>The Supper was over, and parting was imminent, but Jesus did not leave the holy chamber till He had poured out His inmost heart in those tender, consolatory, profoundly spiritual addresses which the beloved disciple has preserved for us in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,\'1-\');">John 14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,\'1-\');">15</a>; and <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,\'1-\');">16</a>, followed by the wonderful closing intercessory prayer of <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',17,\'1-\');">John 17</a>. He was leaving them, but their hearts were not to be disquieted, for they would see Him again (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,18);">14:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,16);">16:16</a>ff), and if, ere long, He would part with them again in visible form, it was only outwardly He would be separated from them, for He would send them the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, who would take His place, to guide them into all truth, and bring all things to their remembrance that He had said to them (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,16,17);">14:16,17</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,26);">15:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,\'7-14\');">16:7-14</a>). If He went away, it was to prepare a place for them, and He would come again to receive them to Himself in His Father\'s house (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,1,2,3);">14:1-3</a>); let them meanwhile show their love to Him by keeping His commandments (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,15,23,24);">14:15,23,24</a>). In the Spirit He Himself and the Father would dwell in the souls that loved Him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,\'21-23\');">14:21-23</a>). The intimacy of their union with Him would be like that of branches in the vine; only by abiding in Him could they bring forth fruit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,1);">15:1</A>ff). They would have tribulations (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,18);">15:18</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,1,2);">16:1,2</a>), but as His dying bequest He left them His own peace (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,27);">14:27</A>); that would sustain their hearts in all trial (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,33);">16:33</a>). With many such promises did He comfort them in view of the terrible ordeal through which they were soon to pass; then, addressing His Father, He prayed for their holy keeping, and their final admission to His glory (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',17,\'9-18\',24\');">17:9-18,24</a>).<P>These solemn discourses finished, Jesus and His disciples sang a hymn (the "Hallel") and departed to go to the Mount of Olives. Comparing the evangelists, one would infer that the conversation in which Jesus foretold the denial of Peter at least commenced before they left the chamber (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,31);">Lu 22:31</a>; John connects it, probably through relation of subject, with the exposure of Judas, <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',13,\'36-38\');">Joh 13:36-38</a>); but it seems to have continued on the way (Matthew, Mark).<P>e) The Departure and Warning:<P>Jesus had spoken of their being "offended" in Him that night. In his exaltation of spirit, Peter declared that though all should be offended in Him, he would never be offended. Jesus, who had already warned Peter that Satan sought to have him, that he might sift him as wheat (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,31);">Lu 22:31</a>; but "I made supplication for thee," etc.), now told him that before the cock should crow, he would thrice deny Him. Peter stoutly maintained that he would die rather than be guilty of so base an act<63>so little did he or the others (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,35);">Mt 26:35</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,31);">Mr 14:31</a>) know themselves! The enigmatic words in <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,36);">Lu 22:36</a> about taking scrip and sword point metaphorically to the need, in the times that were coming upon them, of every lawful means of provision and self-defence; the succeeding words show that "sword" is not intended to be taken literally (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,38);">22:38</a>).<P>3. Gethsemane<6E>the Betrayal and Arrest:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,\'36-56\');">Matthew 26:36-56</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,\'32-53\');">Mark 14:32-53</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,\'39-53\');">Luke 22:39-53</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,\'1-12\');">John 18:1-12</a>)<P>Descending to the valley, Jesus and His disciples, crossing the brook Kidron ("of the cedars"), entered the "garden" (John) known as Gethsemane ("oil-press"), at the foot of the Mount of Olives. Here took place the agony, which is the proper commencement of the Passion, the betrayal by Judas and the arrest of Jesus.<P>During the evening the thoughts of Jesus had been occupied mainly with His disciples; now that the hour had come when the things predicted concerning Him should have fulfillment (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,37);">Lu 22:37</a> "your hour, and the power of darkness," <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,53);">Lu 22:53</a>), it was inevitable that mind and spirit should concentrate on the awful bodily and mental sufferings that lay before Him.<P>a) Agony in the Garden:<P>It was not the thought of physical suffering alone<6E>from that also the pure and sensitive humanity of Jesus shrank with natural horror<6F>but death to Him, the Holy One and Prince of Life, had an indescribably hateful character as a hostile power in humanity, due to the judgment of God on sin, and now descending upon Him through the workings of the vilest of human passions in the religious heads of His nation. What anguish to such an One, filled with love and the desire to save, to feel Himself rejected, betrayed, deserted, doomed to a malefactor\'s cross<73>alone, yet not alone, for the Father was with Him! (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,32);">Joh 16:32</a>). The burden on His spirit when He reached Gethsemane was already, as the language used shows, all but unendurable<6C>"amazed," "sore troubled," "My soul is exceeding sorrowful even unto death" (Mark). There, bidding the other disciples wait, He took with Him Peter, and James, and John, and withdrew into the recesses of the garden. Leaving these also a little behind, He sank on the ground in solitary "agony" (Luke), and "with strong crying and tears" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,7);">Heb 5:7</a>), poured out His soul in earnest supplication to His Father. "Let this cup pass away from me"<22>it could not be, but thus the revulsion of His nature was expressed<65>"howbeit not what I will, but what thou wilt." The passage in Luke (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,44);">22:44</a>), "His sweat became as it were great drops of blood," etc., though omitted in certain manuscripts, doubtless preserves a genuine trait. Returning to the three, He found them overpowered with sleep: even the support of their wakeful sympathy was denied Him! "Watch and pray," He gently admonished them, "that ye enter not into temptation." A second and third time the same thing happened<65>wrestling with God on His part, sleep on theirs, till, with Divine strengthening (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,41);">Lu 22:41</a>), victory was attained, and calm restored. "Sleep on now," He said to His disciples (the crisis is past; your help can avail no more): "Arise, let us be going" (the future has to be faced; the betrayer is at hand. See the remarkable sermon of F.W. Robertson, II, sermon 22).<P>b) Betrayal by Judas<61>Jesus Arrested:<P>The crisis had indeed arrived. Through the darkness, even as Jesus spoke, was seen flashing the light of torches and lanterns, revealing a mingled company of armed men<65>Roman soldiers, temple officers (John), others<72>sent by the chief priests, scribes and elders, to apprehend Jesus. Their guide was Judas. It had been found impracticable to lay hands on Jesus in public, but Judas knew this retreat (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,2);">Joh 18:2</a>), and had arranged, by an act of dastardly treachery, to enable them to effect the capture in privacy. The sign was to be a kiss. With an affectation of friendship, only possible to one into whose heart the devil had truly entered (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,3);">Lu 22:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',13,27);">Joh 13:27</a>), Judas advanced, and hailing Jesus as "\'Master," effusively kissed Him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,49);">Mt 26:49</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,45);">Mr 14:45</a> margin). Jesus had asked, "Betrayest thou the Son of man with a kiss?" (Luke); now He said, "Friend, do that for which thou art come" (Matthew). The soldiers essayed to take Jesus, but on their first approach, driven back as by a supernatural power, they fell to the ground (John). A proof thus given of the voluntariness of His surrender (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,53);">Mt 26:53</a>: "Thinkest thou that I cannot beseech my Father," etc.), Jesus, remarking only on the iniquity of secret violence when every day they had opportunity to take Him in the temple, submitted to be seized and bound. At this point Peter, with characteristic impetuosity, remembering, perhaps, his pledge to die, if need be, with Jesus, drew a sword, and cut off the right ear of the high priest\'s servant, Malchus (John gives the names). If he thought his deed justified by what Jesus had earlier said about "swords" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,36,38);">Lu 22:36,38</a>), he was speedily undeceived by Jesus\' rebuke (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,11);">Joh 18:11</a>), and by His healing of the ear (Luke; the last miracle of Jesus before His death). How little this flicker of impulsive boldness meant is shown by the general panic that immediately followed. "All the disciples," it is related, "left him, and fled" (Matthew, Mark). Mark tells of a young man who had come upon the scene with only a linen cloth cast about his naked body, and who fled, leaving the cloth behind (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,51,52);">14:51,52</A>). Not improbably the young man was Mark himself.<P>4. Trial before the Sanhedrin:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,\'57-75\');">Matthew 26:57-75</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',27,\'1-10\');">27:1-10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,\'53-72\');">Mark 14:53-72</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',15,1);">15:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,\'54-71\');">Luke 22:54-71</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,\'12-27\');">John 18:12-27</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,18,19);">Ac 1:18,19</a>):<P>It would be about midnight when Jesus was arrested, and He was at once hurried to the house of Caiaphas, the high priest, where in expectation of the capture, a company of chief priests, scribes and elders<72>members of the Sanhedrin<69>were already assembled. Here the first stage in the trial of Jesus took place.<P>The legal and constitutional questions connected with the trial of Jesus are considered in the article on <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JESUS+CHRIST,+THE+ARREST+AND+TRIAL+OF">JESUS CHRIST, THE ARREST AND TRIAL OF</a>; see also Dr. Taylor Innes, The Trial of Jesus Christ; on the powers of the Sanhedrin, see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SANHEDRIN">SANHEDRIN</a>, and compare Schurer, Jewish People, etc., II,1,pp. 163ff. There seems little doubt that, while certain judicial forms were observed, the trial was illegal in nearly every particular. The arrest itself was arbitrary, as not rounded on any formal accusation (the Sanhedrin, however, seems to have arrogated to itself powers of this kind; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',4,1);">Ac 4:1</a>ff); but the night session, lack of definite charge, search for testimony, interrogation of accused, haste in condemnation, were unquestionably in flagrant violation of the established rules of Jewish judicial procedure in such cases. It is to be remembered that the death of Jesus had already been decided on by the heads of the Sanhedrin, so that the trial was wholly a means to a foregone conclusion. On the historical side, certain difficulties arise. John seems to make the first interrogation of Jesus take place before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas (on Annas, see below; though deposed 15 years before, he retained, in reality, all the dignity and influence of the high-priesthood; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,2);">Lu 3:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',4,6);">Ac 4:6</a>); after which He is sent to Caiaphas (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,13);">Joh 18:13,14</a>,<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,\'19-24\');">19-24</a>). The narrative is simplified if either<P class="in15">(1) <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,\'19-23\');">Joh 18:19-23</a> are regarded as a preliminary interrogatory by Annas till matters were prepared for the arraignment before Caiaphas; or<P class="in15">(2) <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,24);">18:24</a> is taken as retrospective (in the sense of "had sent," as in the King James Version), and the interrogation is included in the trial by Caiaphas compare (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,19);">18:19</A>: "the high priest").<P>Annas and Caiaphas may be presumed from the account of Peter\'s denials to have occupied the same official residence; else Annas was present on this night to be in readiness for the trial. The frequently occurring term "chief priests" denotes the high priests, with those who had formerly held this rank, and members of their families (compare Schurer, op. cit., 203ff). They formed, with the scribes, the most important element in the Sanhedrin.<P>a) Before Annas and Caiaphas<61>the Unjust Judgment:<P>First Jesus was led before Annas, then by him, after a brief interview, was transferred, still bound, to Caiaphas. Annas had been deposed, as above noticed, much earlier (15 AD), but still retained the name and through his sons and relations, as long as he lived, exercised much of the authority of high priest. Like all those holding this high office, he and Caiaphas were Sadducees. Annas<61>if he is the questioner in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,\'19-23\');">Joh 18:19-23</a><3E>asked Jesus concerning His disciples and His teaching. Such interrogation was unlawful, the duty of the accuser, in Jewish law, being to produce witnesses; properly, therefore, Jesus referred him to His public teaching in the temple, and bade him ask those who heard Him there. An officer standing by struck Jesus with his hand for so speaking: an indignity which Jesus endured with meek remonstrance (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,22,23);">18:22,23</a>).<P>(1) An Illegal Session.<P>Meanwhile a company of the Sanhedrin had assembled (23 sufficed for a quorum), and Jesus was brought before this tribunal, which was presided over by Caiaphas. A hurried search had been made for witnesses (this, like the night session, was illegal), but even the suborned testimony thus obtained ("false witnesses") was found useless for the purpose of establishing, constructively or directly, a charge of blasphemy against Jesus. At length two witnesses were produced who gave a garbled version of the early saying of Jesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,19);">Joh 2:19</a>) about destroying the temple and rebuilding it in three days. To speak against the temple might be construed as speaking against God (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',23,16,21);">Mt 23:16,21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',6,13,14);">Ac 6:13,14</a>), but here too the witnesses broke down through lack of agreement. At all costs, however, must Jesus be condemned: the unprecedented course therefore was taken of seeking a conviction from the mouth of the accused Himself. Rising from his seat, the high priest adjured Jesus by the living God to tell them whether He was the Christ, the Son of God (in Mark, "Son of the Blessed"). In using this title, Caiaphas had evidently in view, as in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,18);">Joh 5:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',10,33);">10:33</a>, a claim to equality with God. The supreme moment had come, and Jesus did not falter in His reply: "Thou hast said." Then, identifying Himself with the Son of Man in Daniel\'s vision (<a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',7,13,14);">Da 7:13,14</a>), He solemnly added, "Henceforth (from His resurrection on) ye shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven." It was enough. Without even the pretense of inquiry into the truth or falsehood of the claim, the high priest rent his garments, exclaiming, "He hath spoken blasphemy," and by assent of all Jesus was adjudged worthy of death. Abuse and insult followed. The minions of the Sanhedrin were permitted to spit on the condemned One, smite Him, blindfold and mock Him, saying, "Prophesy unto us, thou Christ: who is he that struck thee?" Then, with further blows, He was led away (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,68);">Mt 26:68</a>).<P>(2) A Morning Confirmation.<P>To give color of judicial sanction to these tumultuous and wholly irregular night proceedings, a more formal meeting of the Sanhedrin was convened as soon as day had dawned (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',27,1);">Mt 27:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',15,1);">Mr 15:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,\'66-71\');">Lu 22:66-71</a>). Probably the irregularities were held to be excused by the urgency of the occasion and the solemnities of the feast. Jesus was again brought forward; new questions were put which He declined to answer. Possibly a new avowal of His Messiahship was made (more probably Luke includes in this scene, the only one he records, some of the particulars of the earlier proceedings). The judgment of the past night was confirmed.<P>b) The Threefold Denial:<P>While this greatest moral tragedy of the trial and condemnation of Jesus was in process, a lesser, but still awful, tragedy in the history of a soul was being enacted in the court of the same building (from this the chamber in which the Sanhedrin sat was visible), in the threefold denial of his Master by the apostle Peter. Peter, who had followed "afar off" (Luke), had gained access to the court through an unnamed disciple, whom it is easy to identify with John (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,15);">Joh 18:15</a>). As he stood warming himself at a fire which had been kindled, the maid who had admitted them (John), gazing attentively at Peter, said boldly, "Thou also wast with Jesus the Galilean" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,69);">Mt 26:69</a>). Unnerved, and affrighted by his surroundings, Peter took the readiest mode of escape in denial. "I know him not." His heart must have sunk within him as he framed the words, and the crowing of a cock at the moment (Mark<72>perhaps an hour after midnight), reminding him of his Master\'s warning, completed his discomfiture. Guiltily he withdrew to the porch, only a little after to be accosted by another (the maid had spoken to her neighbors, Mark), with the same charge. More afraid than ever, he declared again, "I know not this man," and, seeing he was not believed, strengthened the denial with an oath. Yet a third time, an hour later, a bystander (or several, Mark), this time founding on his Galilean speech, pronounced, "Of a truth thou art one of them." Peter, to clear himself, cursed and swore, anew disclaiming knowledge of his Lord. To this depth had the boastful apostle fallen<65>as low, it might seem, as Judas! But there was a difference. As Peter spoke the cock again crew<65>the cockcrow which gives its form to three of the narratives (Mark alone mentions the double cockcrowing). At the same instant, either from within, or as He was being led forth, Jesus turned and looked on His erring disciple. That look<6F>so full of pity, sorrow, reproach<63>could never be forgotten! Its effect was instantaneous: "Peter went out, and wept bitterly."<P>c) Remorse and Suicide of Judas:<P>Peter\'s heartfelt repentance has its counterfoil in the remorse of Judas, which, bitter as it also was, cannot receive the nobler name. First, Judas sought to return the 30 shekels paid him as the price of blood ("I betrayed innocent blood"); then, when callously rebuffed by the priests and elders, he flung down the accursed money in the sanctuary, and went and hanged himself. Matthew and Acts seem to follow slightly divergent traditions as to his end and the purchase of the potter\'s field. The underlying facts probably are that the priests applied the money, which they could not put into the treasury (Matthew), to the purchase of the field, where, either before or after the purchase, Judas destroyed himself (Acts: falling and bursting asunder), assigning it as a place to bury strangers in. Its connection with Judas is attested by its name, "Akeldama," "the field of blood."<P>The Jews might condemn, but they had no power to execute sentence of death (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,31);">Joh 18:31</a>). This power had been taken from them by the Romans, and was now vested in the Roman governor. The procurator of Judea was Pontius Pilate, a man hated by the Jews for his ruthless tyranny (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PILATE">PILATE</a>), yet, as the Gospels show him, not without a sense of right, but vacillating and weak-willed in face of mob clamor, and risk to his own interests.<P>5. Trial before Pilate:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',27,2);">Matthew 27:2</a>,<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',27,\'11-31\');">11-31</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',15,\'1-20\');">Mark 15:1-20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,\'1-25\');">Luke 23:1-25</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,\'28-40\');">John 18:28-40</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,\'1-16\');">19:1-16</a>)<P>His residence in Jerusalem ("Praetorium," the English Revised Version "palace") was probably Herod\'s former palace (thus Schurer, G.A. Smith, etc.), on the tesselated pavement (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,13);">Joh 19:13</a>) in the semicircular front of which was placed the tribunal (bema) from which judgments were delivered. It was to this place Jesus was now brought. The events took place when it was "early" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,28);">Joh 18:28</a>), probably between 6 a.m. and 7 a.m. (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,14);">Joh 19:14</a>, Roman camputation).<P>a) The Attitude of the Accusers:<P>Jesus was taken within the Praetorium, but His accusers were too scrupulous about defilement at the Passover festival (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,28);">Joh 18:28</a>) to enter the building. Pilate therefore came out to hear their accusation. They would fain have had him endorse their condemnation without further inquiry, but this he would not do. They would not have it that it was a simple question of their law, yet had to justify their demand for a death sentence (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,31);">Joh 18:31</a>). They based, therefore, on the alleged revolutionary character of Christ\'s teaching, His forbidding to pay tribute to Caesar (a false charge), His claim to be a king (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,2,5);">Lu 23:2,5</a>), to all which charges Jesus answered not a word (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',15,3,5);">Mr 15:3,5</a>). At a later stage, after Pilate, who knew very well that no mere sedition against the Roman power had called forth all this passion (witness the choice of Barabbas), had repeatedly declared that he found no crime in Jesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',15,14);">Mr 15:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,4,14,22);">Lu 23:4,14,22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,38);">Joh 18:38</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,4,6);">19:4,6</a>), the real spring of their action was laid bare: "We have a law, and by that law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,7);">Joh 19:7</a>). When it was seen how this declaration made Pilate only the more unwilling to yield to their rage, return was made to the political motive, now in the form of personal threat: "If thou release this man, thou art not Caesar\'s friend" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,12);">Joh 19:12</a>). This was Pilate\'s weak point, and the Jews knew it. The clamor grew ever louder, "Crucify him, crucify him." Hate of Jesus and national degradation could go no farther than in the cry, "We have no king but Caesar" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,15);">Joh 19:15</a>).<P>b) The Attitude of Pilate:<P>Pilate was from the first impressed with the innocence of Jesus, and was sincerely anxious, as his actions showed, to save Him from the terrible and ignominious death His implacable enemies were bent on inflicting upon Him. His crime was that, as Roman judge, he finally, against his own convictions, through fear of a charge of disloyalty to Caesar, yielded up to torture and death One whom he had pronounced guiltless, to gratify the brutal passions of a mob. By Pilate\'s own admissions, Christ\'s death was, not a punishment for any crime, but a judicial murder. First, through private examination, Pilate satisfied himself that the kingship Jesus claimed ("Thou sayest") carried with it no danger to the throne of Caesar. Jesus was a king indeed, but His kingdom was not of this world; was not, like earthly kingdoms, supported by violence; was founded on the truth, and gathered its subjects from those that received the truth (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,36,37);">Joh 18:36,37</a>). The indifference to the name of truth which the jaded mind of Pilate confessed ("What is truth?") could not hide from him the nobility of soul of the Holy One who stood before him. He declared publicly, "I find no fault in this man," and thereafter sought means of saving Him, at least of shifting the responsibility of His condemnation from himself to others.<P>(1) Jesus Sent to Herod.<P>Hearing in the clamor round the judgment seat that Jesus was a Galilean, and remembering that Herod Antipas, who had jurisdiction in that region, was in the city, Pilate\'s first expedient was to send Jesus to Herod, to be examined by him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,\'6-11\');">Lu 23:6-11</a>). This act of courtesy had the effect of making Herod and Pilate, who had been at enmity, again friends (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,12);">Lu 23:12</a>); otherwise it failed of its object. Herod was pleased enough to see One he had so often heard about<75>even thought in his flippancy that a miracle might be done by Him<69>but when Jesus, in presence of "that fox" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',13,32);">Lu 13:32</a>), refused to open His mouth in answer to the accusations heaped upon Him, Herod, with his soldiers, turned the matter into jest, by clothing Jesus in gorgeous apparel, and sending Him back as a mock-king to Pilate.<P>(2) "Not This Man, but Barabbas."<P>Pilate\'s next thought was to release Jesus in pursuance of a Jewish custom of setting free a prisoner at the feast, and to this end, having again protested that no fault had been found in Him, offered the people the choice between Jesus and a notorious robber and murderer called Barabbas, then in prison. Just then, as he sat on the judgment seat, a message from his wife regarding a dream she had ("Have thou nothing to do with that righteous man," <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',27,19);">Mt 27:19</a>) must strongly have influenced his superstitious mind. Pilate could hardly have conceived that the multitude would prefer a murderer to One so good and pure; but, instigated by the priests, they perpetrated even this infamy, shouting for the release of Barabbas and the crucifixion of Jesus.<P>(3) "Ecce Homo."<P>Pilate\'s weakness now began to reveal itself. He proposed to "chastise" (scourge) Jesus<75>why "chastise," if He was innocent?<3F>then release Him. But this compromise, as was to be anticipated, only whetted the eagerness for blood, and the cries grew ever louder, "Crucify him." Pilate, however, as if yielding to the storm, did deliver Jesus to be scourged (scourging<6E>a fearful infliction<6F>preceded crucifixion), the cruelty being aggravated by the maltreatment of the soldiers, who, outstripping former mockeries, put on His head a crown of thorns, arrayed Him in a purple robe, and rained blows upon His bleeding face and form. It seems to have been a design of Pilate to awake pity, for once again he brought Jesus forth, and in this affecting guise, with new attestation of His innocence, presented Him to the people in the words, "Behold, the man!" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,5);">Joh 19:5</a>). How hideous the mockery, at once to declare of such an one, "I find no crime in him," and to exhibit Him to the crowd thus shamefully abused! No pity dwelt in these hearts, however, and the shouts became still angrier, "Crucify him."<P>(4) A Last Appeal<61>Pilate Yields.<P>The words of the leaders, "He made himself the Son of God," spoken as a reason for putting Jesus to death (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,7);">Joh 19:7</a>), struck a new fear into the heart of Pilate. It led him again to enter the Praetorium, and inquire of this strange prisoner, unlike any he had ever seen, "Whence art thou?" Jesus was silent. "Knowest thou not," asked Pilate, "that I have power to release thee, and have power to crucify thee?" Jesus answered only that he, Pilate, had no power over Him at all save what was given him of God; the greater therefore was the crime of those who had subjected Him to this abuse of Divinely given power. Again Pilate went out and sought to release Him, but was met by the fierce cries that foreboded complaint to Caesar (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,12);">Joh 19:12</a>). A tumult seemed imminent, and Pilate succumbed. Here probably (though possibly after the choice of Barabbas) is to be placed the washing of his hands by Pilate<74>a vain disclaiming of his responsibility<74>recorded in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',27,24);">Mt 27:24</a>, and the awful answer of the people, "His blood be on us, and on our children" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',27,25);">27:25</a>). Pilate now ascends the judgment seat, and, fully conscious of the iniquity of his procedure, pronounces the formal sentence which dooms Jesus to the cross. The trial over, Jesus is led again into the Pretorium, where the cruel mockery of the soldiers is resumed in intensified form. The Holy One, thorn-crowned, clad in purple, a reed thrust into His hand, is placed at the mercy of the whole band, who bow the knee in ridicule before Him ("Hail, King of the Jews"), spit upon Him in contempt, smite Him on the head with the reed (Matthew, Mark). Then, stripped of the robe, His own garments are put on Him, in preparation for the end.<P>c) The Attitude of Jesus:<P>In all this hideous scene of cruelty, injustice, and undeserved suffering, the conspicuous feature in the bearing of Jesus is the absolute calmness, dignity and meekness with which He endures the heaviest wrongs and insults put upon Him. The picture in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',53,7,8);">Isa 53:7,8</a> is startling in its fidelity: "When he was afflicted he opened not his mouth; as a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and as a sheep that before its shearers is mute, so he opened not his mouth. By oppression and judgment he was taken away," etc. There is no return of the perturbation of Gethsemane. As if the strength won there had raised Him into a peace that nothing could shake, He passed through the frightful physical exhaustion, mental strain, agony of scourging, suffering from wounds and blows, of that terrible night and morning, with unbroken fortitude and unembittered spirit. Not a word of complaint passes His lips; He makes no reply to accusations; when reviled, He reviles not again; He takes all with submission, as part of the cup the Father has given Him to drink. It is a spectacle to move the stoniest heart. Well to remember that it is the world\'s sin, in which all share, that mingled the bitter draught!<P>III. The Crucifixion and Burial.<P>1. The Crucifixion:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',27,\'31-56\');">Matthew 27:31-56</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',15,\'20-41\');">Mark 15:20-41</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,\'26-49\');">Luke 23:26-49</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,\'16-37\');">John 19:16-37</a>)<P>Crucifixion was the form of punishment reserved by the Romans for slaves, foreigners and the vilest criminals, and could not be inflicted on a Roman citizen. With its prolonged and excruciating torture, it was the most agonizing and ignominious death which the cruelty of a cruel age could devise. Jewish law knew nothing of it (the \'hanging on a tree\' of <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',21,22,23);">De 21:22,23</a>, was after death; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',3,13);">Ga 3:13</a>), yet to it the Jewish leaders hounded Pilate on to doom their Messiah. The cross was no doubt of the usual Roman shape (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CROSS">CROSS</a>). The site of Golgotha, "the place of a skull" (in Luke "Calvary," the Latinized form), is quite uncertain. It may have been a slight mound resembling a skull (thus Meyer, Luthardt, Godet, etc.), but this is not known. It is only plain that it was outside the wall, in the immediate vicinity of the city (see note below on sepulcher). The time of the crucifixion was about 9 a.m. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',15,25);">Mr 15:25</a>). The day (Friday) was the "preparation" for the Sabbath of the Passover week (Matthew, Mark, Luke; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,14,31);">Joh 19:14,31</a>).<P>a) On the Way:<P>It was part of the torment of the victim of this horrible sentence that he had to bear his own cross (according to some only the patibulum, or transverse beam) to the place of execution. As Jesus, staggering, possibly fainting, under this burden, passed out of the gate, a stranger coming from the country, Simon, a man of Cyrene, was laid hold of, and compelled to carry the cross (such an one would not be punctilious about rabbinical rules of travel, especially as it was not the regular Sabbath). Jesus, however, was not wholly unpitied. In the crowd following Him were some women of Jerusalem, who bewailed and lamented Him. The Lord, turning, bade these weep, not for Him, but for themselves and for their children. "If they do these things in the green tree, what shall be done in the dry?" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,\'27-31\');">Lu 23:27-31</a>).<P>b) Between the Thieves<65>the Superscription<6F>the Seamless Robe:<P>Golgotha being reached, the crucifixion at once took place under the care of a centurion and a quaternion of soldiers. With ruthless blows, hands and feet were nailed to the wood, then the cross was reared (the perpendicular part may, as some think, have first been placed in position). As if to emphasize, from Pilate\'s point of view, the irony of the proceedings, two robbers were crucified with Jesus, on right and left, an undesigned fulfillment of prophecy (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',53,12);">Isa 53:12</a>). It was doubtless when being raised upon the cross that Jesus uttered the touching prayer<65>His 1st word on the cross (its genuineness need not be questioned, though some ancient manuscripts omit)<29>"Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do" (Luke). Above His head, according to custom, was placed a tablet with His accusation, written in three languages, Hebrew, Greek and Latin. The chief priests took offense at the form, "This is the King of the Jews," and wished the words changed to, "He said, I am King," etc., but Pilate curtly dismissed their complaint: "What I have written I have written" (John). Whether Jesus still wore the crown of thorns is doubtful. The garments of the Crucified were divided among the soldiers, but for His inner garment, woven without seam, they cast lots (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',22,18);">Ps 22:18</a>). A draught of wine mingled with an opiate (gall or myrrh), intended to dull the senses, was offered, but refused.<P>c) The Mocking<6E>the Penitent Thief<65>Jesus and His Mother:<P>The triumph of Christ\'s enemies now seemed complete, and their glee was correspondingly unrestrained. Their victim\'s helplessness was to them a disproof of His claims. Railing, and wagging their heads, they taunted Him, "If thou art the Son of God, come down from the cross"; "He saved others; himself he cannot save." At first the robbers who were crucified with Him (possibly only one) joined in this reproach, but ere long there was a change. The breast of one of the malefactors opened to the impression of the holiness and meekness of Jesus, and faith took the place of scorn. He rebuked his neighbor for reviling One who had "done nothing amiss"; then, addressing Jesus, he prayed: "Jesus, remember me when thou comest in thy kingdom." The reply of Jesus<75>His 2nd word on the cross<73>surpassed what even the penitent in these strange circumstances could have anticipated "Today shalt thou be with me in Paradise" (Luke). A not less touching incident followed<65>perhaps preceded<65>this rescue of a soul in its last extremity. Standing near the cross was a group of holy women, one of them the mother of Jesus Himself (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,25);">Joh 19:25</a> Mary the mother of Jesus, Mary\'s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas<61>some identify the two latter<65>Mary Magdalene). Mary, whose anguish of spirit may be imagined, was supported by the disciple John. Beholding them<65>His 3rd word from the cross<73>Jesus tenderly commended His mother to the care of John; to Mary, "Woman, behold, thy son"; to John, "Beho1d, thy mother." From that time Mary dwelt with John.<P>Three hours passed, and at noon mocking was hushed in presence of a startling natural change. The sun\'s light failed (Luke), and a deep darkness, lasting for 3 hours, settled over the land. The darkness was preternatural in its time and occasion, whatever natural agencies may have been concerned in it. The earthquake a little later (Matthew) would be due to the same causes. It was as if Nature veiled itself, and shuddered at the enormity of the crime which was being perpetrated.<P>d) The Great Darkness<73>the Cry of Desertion:<P>But the outer gloom was only the symbol of a yet more awful darkness that, toward the close of this period, overspread the soul of Jesus Himself. Who shall fathom the depths of agony that lay in that awful cry<72>the 4th from the cross<73>that burst loudly from the lips of Jesus, "Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani"<22>"My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me" (or, "Why didst thou forsake me?")<29>words borrowed from <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',22,1);">Ps 22:1</a>! It was before remarked that death was not a natural event to Jesus, but ever had in it to His mind its significance as a judgment of God on sin. Here it was not simply death that He experienced in its most cruel form, but death bereft of the sensible comforts of the Father\'s presence. What explanation of that mystery can be found which does not take into account with <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',53,1);">Isa 53</a> (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,29);">Joh 1:29</a>) His character as Sin-Bearer, even as the unbroken trust with which in His loneliness He clings to God ("My God") may be felt to have in it the element of atonement? On this, however, the present is not the place to dwell.<P>e) Last Words and Death of Jesus:<P>The end was now very near. The victim of crucifixion sometimes lingered on in his agony for days; but the unexampled strain of body and mind which Jesus had undergone since the preceding day brought an earlier termination to His sufferings. Light was returning, and with it peace; and in the consciousness that all things were now finished (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,28);">Joh 19:28</a>), Jesus spoke again<69>the 5th word<72>"I thirst" (John). A sponge filled with vinegar was raised on a reed to His lips, while some who had heard His earlier words ("Eli, Eli," etc.), and thought He called for Elijah, said, "Let us see whether Elijah cometh to save him" (Matthew). With a last effort, Jesus cried aloud<75>6th and memorable word<72>"It is finished," then, in a final utterance<63>the 7th<74>commended His spirit to God: "Father into thy hands I commend my spirit" (Luke). Following on this word, bowing His head, He surrendered Himself to death. It will be seen that of the 7 words spoken from the cross, 3 are preserved by Luke alone (1st, 2nd, 7th), 3 by John alone (3rd, 5th, 6th), while the 4th cry ("Eli, Eli," etc.) occurs only in the first 2 evangelists (Matthew and Mark, however, speak of Jesus "crying with a loud voice" at the close).<P>f) The Spear Thrust<73>Earthquake and Rending of the Veil:<P>Jesus had died; the malefactors still lived. It was now 3 o\'clock in the afternoon, and it was desired that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the approaching Sabbath. Permission was therefore obtained from Pilate for the soldiers to break the legs of the crucified (crurifragium), and so hasten death. When it was discovered that Jesus was already dead, a soldier, possibly to make sure, pierced His side with a spear, and John, who was present, notices as a special fact that "there came out blood and water" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,34);">19:34</a>). Whether this means, as Stroud and others have contended, that Jesus literally died of rupture of the heart, or what other physiological explanation may be given of the phenomenon, to which the apostle elsewhere attaches a symbolical significance (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',5,6);">1Joh 5:6</a>), need not be here discussed (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=BLOOD+AND+WATER">BLOOD AND WATER</a>). This, however, was not the only startling and symbolically significant fact attending the death of Jesus. A great darkness had preluded the death; now, at the hour of His termination, the veil of the temple (i.e. of the inner shrine) was rent from top to bottom<6F>surely a sign that the way into the holiest of all was now opened for mankind (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,8,12);">Heb 9:8,12</a>)<29>and a great earthquake shook the city and rent the rocks. Matthew connects with this the statement that from the tombs thus opened "many bodies of the saints...were raised; and coming forth out of the tombs after his resurrection they entered into the holy city and appeared unto many" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',27,52,53);">27:52,53</A>). There is nothing in itself improbable, though none of the other evangelists mention it, in such an early demonstration being given of what the Lord\'s death and resurrection meant for believers. In other ways the power of the cross was revealed. A dying robber had been won to penitence; now the centurion who commanded the soldiers was brought to the avowal, "Truly this was the Son of God" (Matthew, Mark; in Luke, "a righteous man"). The mood of the crowd, too, was changed since the morning; they "returned, smiting their breasts" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,48);">Lu 23:48</a>). "Afar off," speechless with sorrow, stood the women who had followed Jesus from Galilee, with other friends and disciples. The evangelists name Mary Magdalene, Mary, the mother of James and Joses, Salome (Mark), and Joanna, the wife of Chuza, Herod\'s steward (Luke).<P>2. The Burial:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',27,\'57-66\');">Matthew 27:57-66</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',28,\'11-15\');">28:11-15</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',15,\'42-47\');">Mark 15:42-47</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,\'50-56\');">Luke 23:50-56</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,\'38-42\');">John 19:38-42</a>)<P>Jesus had conquered hearts on His cross; now His death reveals friends from the wealthier classes, hitherto kept back by fear (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,38,39);">Joh 19:38,39</a>), who charge themselves with His honorable burial. One was Joseph of Arimathea, a just man, "looking for the kingdom of God," of whom the interesting fact is recorded that, though a member of the Sanhedrin, "he had not consented to their counsel and deed" (Luke); the other was Nicodemus, he who came to Jesus by night (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,1,2);">Joh 3:1,2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,39);">19:39</a>), mentioned again only in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,\'50-52\');">Joh 7:50-52</a>, where, also as a member of the Sanhedrin, he puts in a word for Jesus.<P>a) The New Tomb:<P>Joseph of Arimathea takes the lead. "Having dared," as Mark says (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',15,43);">15:43</A>, Gr), he begged the body of Jesus from Pilate, and having obtained it, bought linen cloth wherein to wrap it, and reverently buried it in a new rock-tomb of his own (Matthew, Mark), "where never man had yet lain" (Luke). John furnishes the further particulars that the tomb was in a "garden," near where Jesus was crucified (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,41,42);">19:41,42</A>). He tells also of the munificence of Nicodemus, who brought as much as 100 pounds (about 75 lbs. avoir.) of spices<65>"a mixture of myrrh and aloes" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,39);">19:39</a>), with which to enwrap the body of Jesus. This is not to be thought of as an "anointing": rather, the spices formed a powder strewn between the folds of the linen bandages (compare Luthardt, Commentary on <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,40);">Joh 19:40</a>). The body, thus prepared, was then placed in the tomb, and a great stone rolled to tile entrance. The burial was of necessity a very hurried one, which the holy women who witnessed it<69>Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses are specially mentioned (Matthew, Mark)<29>purposed to supplement by an anointing when the Sabbath was past (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,56);">Lu 23:56</a>).<P>b) The Guard of Soldiers:<P>Though Jesus was dead, the chief priests and Pharisees were far from easy in their minds about Him. Mysterious words of His had been quoted about His building of the temple in three days; possibly Judas had told something. about His sayings regarding His death and rising again on the 3rd day; in any case, His body was in the hands of His disciples, and they might remove it, and create the persuasion that He had risen. With this plea they went to Pilate, and asked from him a watch of soldiers to guard the tomb. To make assurance doubly sure, they sealed the tomb with the official seal. The result of their efforts was only, under Providence, to provide new evidence of the reality of the resurrection!<P>The uncertainty attaching to the site of Golgotha attaches also to the site of Joseph\'s rock-tomb. Opinion is about equally divided in favor of, and against, the traditional site, where the Church of the Holy Sepulchre now stands. A principal ground of uncertainty is whether that site originally lay within or without the second wall of the city (compare Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, 457ff; G.A. Smith, Jerusalem, II, 576; a good conspectus of the different opinions, with the authorities, is given in Andrews, Part VII).``132';
isbe[5026]='Jesus Christ, 4F`F. THE RESURRECTION AND ASCENSION<P>The Resurrection a Fundamental Fact:<P>The resurrection of Jesus, with its completion in the ascension, setting the seal of the Father\'s acceptance on His finished work on earth, and marking the decisive change from His state of humiliation to that of exaltation, may be called in a true sense the corner stone of Christianity (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,14,17);">1Co 15:14,17</a>). It was on the preaching of Christ crucified and risen that the Christian church was founded (e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,\'32-36\');">Ac 2:32-36</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,3,4);">1Co 15:3,4</a>). Professor Harnack would distinguish between "the Easter faith" (that Jesus lives with God) and "the Easter message," but the church never had any Easter faith apart from the Easter message. The subversion of the fact of the resurrection is therefore a first task to which unbelief addresses itself. The modern spirit rules it out a priori as miraculous. The historical fact is denied, and innumerable theories (imposture, theories of swoon, of hallucination, mythical theories, spiritualistic theories, etc.) are invented to explain the belief. None of these theories can stand calm examination (see the writer\'s work, The Resurrection of Jesus). The objections are but small dust of the balance compared with the strength of the evidence for the fact. From the standpoint of faith, the resurrection of Jesus is the most credible of events. If Jesus was indeed such an One as the gospel history declares Him to be, it was impossible that death should hold Him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,24);">Ac 2:24</a>). The resurrection, in turn, confirms His claim to be the Son of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',1,4);">Ro 1:4</a>).<P>1. The Resurrection:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',28,1);">Matthew 28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',16,1);">Mark 16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,1);">Luke 24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',20,1);">John 20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',21,1);">21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,\'3-8\');">1 Corinthians 15:3-8</a>)<P>With the narratives of the resurrection are here included as inseparably connected, those of the appearances of Jesus in Jerusalem and Galilee. The accounts will show that, while the body of Jesus was a true body, identical with that which suffered on the cross (it could be seen, touched, handled), it exhibited attributes which showed that Jesus had entered, even bodily, on a new phase of existence, in which some at least of the ordinary limitations of body were transcended. Its condition in the interval between the resurrection and the ascension was an intermediate one<6E>no longer simply natural, yet not fully entered into the state of glorification. "I am not yet ascended...I ascend" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',20,17);">Joh 20:17</a>); in these two parts of the one saying the mystery of the resurrection body is comprised.<P>a) The Easter Morning<6E>the Open Tomb:<P>The main facts in the resurrection narratives stand out clearly. "According to all the Gospels," the arch-skeptic Strauss concedes, "Jesus, after having been buried on the Friday evening, and lain during the Sabbath in the grave, came out of it restored to life at daybreak on Sunday" (New Life of Jesus, I, 397, English translations). Discrepancies are alleged in detail as to the time, number, and names of the women, number of angels, etc.; but most of these vanish on careful examination. The Synoptics group their material, while John gives a more detailed account of particular events.<P>(1) The Angel and the Keepers.<P>No eye beheld the actual resurrection, which took place in the early morning, while it was still dark. Matthew records that there was "a great earthquake," and tells of the descent of an angel of the Lord, who rolled away the stone, and sat upon it. Before his dazzling aspect the keepers became as dead men, and afterward fled. The chief priests bribed them to conceal the facts, and say the body had been stolen (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',28,\'2-4\');">Mt 28:2-4</a>,<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',28,\'11-15\');">11-15</a>).<P>(2) Visit of the Women.<P>The first intimation of the resurrection to the disciples was the discovery of the empty tomb by the women who had come at early dawn (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',28,1);">Mt 28:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',16,2);">Mr 16:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,1);">Lu 24:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',20,1);">Joh 20:1</a>) with spices, prepared to anoint the body of Jesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',16,1);">Mr 16:1</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,56);">Lu 23:56</a>). Apparently ignorant of the guard, the women were concerned on their way as to who should roll away the stone from the door of the tomb (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',16,3);">Mr 16:3</a>), and were much surprised to find the stone rolled away, and the tomb open. There is no need for supposing that the women mentioned all came together. It is much more probable that they came in different groups or companies<65>perhaps Mary Magdalene and the other Mary, or these with Salome, first (Matthew, Mark; compare the "we" of <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',20,2);">Joh 20:2</a>); then Joanna and other members of the Galilean band (Luke). (On the appearance of Jesus to Mary, see below.)<P>(3) The Angelic Message.<P>As the women stood, perplexed and affrighted, at the tomb, they received a vision of angels (Matthew and Mark speak only of one angel; Luke and John mention two; all allude to the dazzling brightness), who announced to them that Jesus had risen ("He is not here; for he is risen;...come, see the place where the Lord lay"), and bade them tell His disciples that He went before them to Galilee, where they should see Him (Matthew, Mark; Luke, who does not record the Galilean appearances, omits this part, and recalls the words spoken by Jesus in Galilee, concerning His death and resurrection; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',16,21);">Mt 16:21</a>). The women departed with "trembling and astonishment" (Mark), yet "with great joy" (Matthew). Here the original Mark breaks off (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',16,8);">Mr 16:8</a>), the remaining verses being an appendix. But it is granted that Mark must originally have contained an account of the report to the disciples, and of an appearance of Jesus in Galilee.<P>b) Visit of Peter and John<68>Appearance to Mary:<P>(John; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',16,9,10);">Mark 16:9,10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,12,24);">Luke 24:12,24</a>)<P>The narrative in John enlarges in important respects those of the Synoptics. From it we learn that Mary Magdalene (no companion is named, but one at least is implied in the "we" of <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',20,2);">20:2</a>), concluding from the empty tomb that the body of Jesus had been removed, at once ran to carry the news to Peter and John ("They have taken away the Lord out of the tomb, and we know not where they have laid him"). These apostles lost no time in hastening to the spot. John, who arrived first, stooping down, saw the linen cloths lying, while Peter, entering, beheld also the napkin for the head rolled up in a place by itself. After John likewise had entered ("He saw, and believed"), they returned to their home. Meanwhile Mary had come back disconsolate to the tomb, where, looking in, she, like the other women, had a vision of two angels. It was then that Jesus addressed her, "Why weepest thou?" At first she thought it was the gardener, but on Jesus tenderly naming her, "Mary," she recognized who it was, and, with the exclamation, "Rabboni" ("Teacher"), would have clasped Him, but He forbade: "Touch me not," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',20,17);">Joh 20:17</a>, margin "Take not hold on me"), i.e. "Do not wait, but hasten to tell my disciples that I am risen, and ascend to my Father" (the ascension-life had already begun, altering earlier relations).<P>Report to the Disciples<65>Incredulity.<P>The appearance of Jesus to the other women (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',28,9,10);">Mt 28:9,10</a>) is referred to below. It is probable that, on the way back, Mary Magdalene rejoined her sisters, and that the errand to the disciples<65>or such of them as could be found<6E>was undertaken together. Their report was received with incredulity (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,11);">Lu 24:11</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',16,11);">Mr 16:11</a>). The visit of Peter referred to in <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,12);">Lu 24:12</a> is doubtless that recorded more precisely in John.<P>c) Other Easter-Day Appearances (Emmaus, Jerusalem):<P>Ten appearances of Jesus altogether after His resurrection are recorded, or are referred to; of these five were on the day of resurrection. They are the following:<P>(1) The first is the appearance to Mary Magdalene above described.<P>(2) The second is an appearance to the women as they returned from the tomb, recorded in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',28,9,10);">Mt 28:9,10</a>. Jesus met them, saying, "All hail," and as they took hold of His feet and worshipped Him, He renewed the commission they had received for the disciples. Some regard this as only a generalization of the appearance to Mary Magdalene, but it seems distinct.<P>(3) An appearance to Peter, attested by both <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,34);">Lu 24:34</a> and Paul (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,5);">1Co 15:5</a>). This must have been early in the day, probably soon after Peter\'s visit to the tomb. No particulars are given of this interview, so marked an act of grace of the risen Lord to His repentant apostle. The news of it occasioned much excitement among the disciples (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,34);">Lu 24:34</a>).<P>(4) The fourth was an appearance to two disciples on their way from Jerusalem to Emmaus<75>a village about two hours distant (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,\'12-35\');">Lu 24:12-35</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',16,12,13);">Mr 16:12,13</a>). They were conversing on the sad events of the last few days, and on the strange tidings of the women\'s vision of angels, when Jesus overtook them, and entered into conversation with them. At first they did not recognize Him<69>a token, as in Mary\'s case, of change in His appearance<63>though their hearts burned within them as He opened to them the Scriptures about Christ\'s sufferings and glory. As the day was closing, Jesus abode with them to the evening meal; then, as He blessed and brake the bread, "Their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,30,31);">Lu 24:30,31</a>). They hastily rose, and returned to the company of disciples at Jerusalem. According to <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',16,13);">Mr 16:13</a>, their testimony, like that of the women, was not at first believed.<P>(5) The fifth appearance was that to "the eleven," with others, in the evening<6E>an appearance recorded by Luke (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,36);">24:36</a>ff), and John (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',20,\'19-23\');">20:19-23</a>), and alluded to by Paul (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,5);">1Co 15:5</a>). The disciples from Emmaus had just come in, and found the company thrilling with excitement at the news that the Lord had appeared to Simon (Luke). The doors were closed for fear of the Jews, when suddenly Jesus appeared in their midst with the salutation, "Peace be unto you" (Luke, John; doubt is unnecessarily cast on <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,36,40);">Lu 24:36,40</a>, by their absence from some Western texts). The disciples were affrighted; they thought they had seen a spirit (Luke); "disbelieved for joy" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,41);">Lu 24:41</a>). To remove their fears, Jesus showed them His hands and His feet (in John, His side), and ate before them (Luke). He then breathed on them, saying, "Receive ye the Holy Spirit," and renewed the commission formerly given to remit and retain sins (John; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',18,17,18);">Mt 18:17,18</a>). The breathing was anticipative of the later affusion of the Spirit at Pentecost (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,39);">Joh 7:39</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,\'1-\');">Ac 2</a>); the authority delegated depends for its validity on the possession of that Spirit, and its exercise according to the mind of Christ (compare e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',5,3);">1Co 5:3</a>). The incident strikingly illustrates at once the reality of Christ\'s risen body, and the changed conditions under which that body now existed.<P>d) The Second Appearance to the Eleven<65>the Doubt of Thomas:<P>Eight days after this first appearance<63>i.e. the next Sunday evening<6E>a second appearance of Jesus to the apostles took place in the same chamber and under like conditions ("the doors being shut"). The peculiar feature of this second meeting was the removal of the doubt of Thomas who, it is related, had not been present on the former occasion. Thomas, devoted (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,16);">Joh 11:16</a>), but of naturally questioning temperament (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,5);">Joh 14:5</a>), refused to believe on the mere report of others that the Lord had risen, and demanded indubitable sensible evidence for himself. Jesus, at the second appearance, after salutation as before, graciously gave the doubting apostle the evidence he asked: "Reach hither thy finger, and see my hands," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',20,27);">Joh 20:27</a>), though, as the event proved, the sign was not needed. The faith and love of the erst-while doubter leaped forth at once in adoring confession: "My Lord and my God." It was well; but Jesus reminded him that the highest faith is not that which waits on the evidence of sense ("Blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed," <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',20,29);">Joh 20:29</a>).<P>e) The Galilean Appearances:<P>The scene now shifts for the time to Galilee. Jesus had appointed to meet with His disciples in Galilee (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,32);">Mt 26:32</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',16,7);">Mr 16:7</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,28);">Mr 14:28</a>). Prior, however, to this meeting<6E>that recorded in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',28,\'16-20\');">Mt 28:16-20</a>, probably to be identified with the appearance "to above five hundred brethren at once" mentioned by Paul (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,6);">1Co 15:6</a>)<29>there is another appearance of Jesus to seven disciples at the Lake of Galilee, of which the story is preserved in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',21,\'1-23\');">Joh 21:1-23</a>.<P>(1) At the Sea of Tiberias<61>the Draught of Fishes<65>Peter\'s Restoration.<P>The chapter which narrates this appearance of Jesus at the Lake of Galilee ("Sea of Tiberias") is a supplement to the Gospel, but is so evidently Johannine in character that it may safely be accepted as from the pen of the beloved disciple (thus Lightfoot, Meyer, Godet, Alford, etc.). The appearance itself is described as the third to the disciples (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',21,14);">Joh 21:14</a>), i.e. the third to the apostles collectively, and in Jn\'s record seven disciples are stated to have been present, of whom five are named<65>Peter, Thomas, Nathaniel (probably to be identified with Bartholomew), and the sons of Zebedee, James and John. The disciples had spent the night in fishing without result. In the morning Jesus<75>yet unrecognized<65>appeared on the beach, and bade them cast down their net on the right side of the boat. The draught of fishes which they took revealed to John the presence of the Master. "It is the Lord," he said to Peter, who at once flung himself into the lake to go to Jesus. On landing, the disciples found a fire of coals, with fish placed on it, and bread; and Jesus Himself, after more fish had been brought, distributed the food, and, it seems implied, Himself shared in the meal. Still a certain awe<77>another indication of a mysterious change in Christ\'s appearance<63>restrained the disciples from asking openly, "Who art thou?" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',21,12);">Joh 21:12</a>). It was not long, however ("when they had broken their fast"), before Jesus sufficiently disclosed Himself in the touching episode of the restoration of Peter (the three-fold question, "Lovest thou me?" answering to the three-fold denial, met by Peter\'s heartfelt, "Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee," with the words of reinstatement, "Feed my lambs," "Feed my sheep"). In another way, Jesus foretold that Peter would have the opportunity of taking back his denial in the death by which he should glorify God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',21,18,19);">Joh 21:18,19</a>; tradition says he was crucified head-downward). Curious inquiries were set aside, and attention recalled to duty, "Follow thou me" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',21,22);">Joh 21:22</a>).<P>(2) On the Mountain<69>the Great Commission<6F>Baptism.<P>Though only the eleven apostles are named in Matthew\'s account (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',28,16);">Mt 28:16</a>), the fact of an \'appointment\' for a definite time and place ("the mountain"), and the terms in which the message was given to the "disciples," suggests a collective gathering such as is implied in Paul\'s "above five hundred brethren at once" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,6);">1Co 15:6</a>). The company being assembled, Jesus appeared; still, at first, with that element of mystery in His appearance, which led some to doubt (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',28,17);">Mt 28:17</a>). Such doubt would speedily vanish when the Lord, announcing Himself as clothed with all authority in heaven and earth, gave to the apostles the supreme commission to "make disciples of all the nations" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',28,\'18-20\');">Mt 28:18-20</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',16,15);">Mr 16:15</a>, "Go ye into all tho world" etc.). Discipleship was to be shown by baptism "into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (one name, yet threefold), and was to be followed by instruction in Christ\'s commands. Behind the commission, world-wide in its scope, and binding on every age, stands the word of never-failing encouragement, "Lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world." Doubts of the genuineness of these august utterances go as a rule with doubt of the resurrection itself.<P>It will be noticed that the Lord\'s Supper and Baptism are the only sacraments instituted by Jesus in His church.<P>f) Appearance to James:<P>Paul records, as subsequent to the above, an appearance of Jesus to James, known as "the Lord\'s brother" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,7);">1Co 15:7</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',1,19);">Ga 1:19</a>). No particulars are given of this appearance, which may have occurred either in Galilee or Jerusalem. James, so far as known, was not a believer in Jesus before the crucifixion (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,3);">Joh 7:3</a>); after the ascension he and the other brethren of Jesus are found in the company of the disciples (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,14);">Ac 1:14</a>), and he became afterward a chief "pillar" of the church at Jerusalem (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',1,19);">Ga 1:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',2,9);">2:9</a>). This appearance may have marked the turning-point.<P>g) The Last Meeting:<P>The final appearance of Jesus to the apostles (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,7);">1Co 15:7</a>) is that which Luke in the closing verses of his Gospel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,\'44-53\');">Lu 24:44-53</a>), and in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,\'3-12\');">Ac 1:3-12</a>, brings into direct relation with the ascension. In the Gospel Luke proceeds without a break from the first appearance of Jesus to "the eleven" to His last words about "the promise of my Father"; but <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,1);">Acts 1</a> shows that a period of 40 days really elapsed during which Jesus repeatedly "appeared" to those whom He had chosen. This last meeting of Jesus with His apostles was mainly occupied with the Lord\'s exposition of the prophetic Scriptures (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,\'44-46\');">Lu 24:44-46</a>), with renewed commands to preach repentance and forgiveness of sins in His name, "beginning from Jerusalem" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,47,48);">Lu 24:47,48</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,8);">Ac 1:8</a>), and with the injunction to tarry in Jerusalem till the Spirit should be given (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,49);">Lu 24:49</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,4,5);">Ac 1:4,5</a>). Then He led them forth to Olivet, "over against Bethany," and, while blessing them, "was carried up into heaven" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,50,51);">Lu 24:50,51</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,10,12);">Ac 1:10,12</a>).<P>2. The Ascension:<P>(<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,\'50-53\');">Luke 24:50-53</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,\'6-14\');">Ac 1:6-14</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',16,19);">Mark 16:19</a>)<P>Jesus had declared, "I ascend unto my Father" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',20,17);">Joh 20:17</a>), and Luke in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,\'1-\');">Acts 1</a> narrates the circumstances of that departure. Jesus might simply have "vanished" from the sight of His disciples, as on previous occasions, but it was His will to leave them in a way which would visibly mark the final close of His association with them. They are found, as in the Gospel, "assembled" with Him at Jerusalem, where His final instructions are given. Then the scene insensibly changes to Olivet, where the ascension is located (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,12);">Ac 1:12</a>). The disciples inquire regarding the restoration of the kingdom to Israel (even yet their minds are held in these temporal conceptions), but Jesus tells them that it is not for them to know times and seasons, which the Father had set within His own authority (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,7);">Ac 1:7</a>). Far more important was it for them to know that within the next days they should receive power from the Holy Spirit to be witnesses for Him to the uttermost part of the earth (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,8);">Ac 1:8</a>). Even as He spake, He was taken up, and a cloud received Him out of their sight (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,9);">Ac 1:9</a>). Then, as the apostles stood gazing upward, two heavenly messengers appeared, who comforted them with the assurance that in like manner as they had seen Jesus ascend into heaven, so also would He come again. For that return the church still prays and waits (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',22,20);">Re 22:20</a>).<P>See, further, <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ASCENSION">ASCENSION</a>.<P>Retracing their steps to Jerusalem, the apostles joined the larger company of disciples in the "upper room" where their meetings seem to have been habitually held, and there, with one accord, to the number of about 120 (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,15);">Ac 1:15</a>), they all continued steadfastly in prayer till "the promise of the Father" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,49);">Lu 24:49</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,4);">Ac 1:4</a>) was, at Pentecost, bestowed upon them.``132';
isbe[5027]='Jesus Christ, 5`PART IV. EPILOGUE: THE APOSTOLIC TEACHING<P>1. After the Ascension:<P>The earthly life of Jesus is finished. With His resurrection and ascension a new age begins. Yet the work of Christ continues. As Luke expressively phrases it in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,1,2);">Ac 1:1,2</a>, the Gospels are but the records of "all that Jesus began both to do and to teach, until the day in which he was received up." It is beyond the scope of this article to trace the succeeding developments of Christ\'s activity through His church and by His Spirit; in order, however, to bring the subject to a proper close, it is necessary to glance, even if briefly, at the light thrown back by the Spirit\'s teachings, after the ascension, on the significance of the earthly life itself, and at the enlargement of the apostles\' conceptions about Christ, consequent on this, as seen in the Epistles and the Apocalypse.<P>2. Revelation through the Spirit:<P>It was the promise of Jesus that, after His departure, the Spirit would be given to His disciples, to teach them all things, and bring to their remembrance all that He had said to them (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,26);">Joh 14:26</a>). It was not a new revelation they were to receive, but illumination and guidance of their minds into the meaning of what they had received already (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,\'13-15\');">Joh 16:13-15</a>). This promise of the Spirit was fulfilled at Pentecost (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,1);">Ac 2</a>). Only a few personal manifestations of Jesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',7,55,56);">Ac 7:55,56</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',22,17,18);">22:17,18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',23,11);">23:11</a>) are recorded after that event<6E>the two chief being the appearance to Paul on the way to Damascus (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,8);">1Co 15:8</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',9,3);">Ac 9:3</a>, etc.), and the appearance in vision to John in Patmos (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',1,10);">Re 1:10</a>). The rest was internal revelation (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',1,12,16);">Ga 1:12,16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',1,17);">Eph 1:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',3,\'3-5\');">3:3-5</a>). The immense advance in enlargement and clearness of view<65>aided, no doubt, by Christ\'s parting instructions (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,\'44-48\');">Lu 24:44-48</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,2);">Ac 1:2</a>)<29>is already apparent in Peter\'s discourses at Pentecost; but it is not to be supposed that much room was not left for after-growth in knowledge, and deepened insight into the connection of truths. Peter, e.g., had to be instructed as to the admission of the Gentiles (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',10,11);">Ac 10:11</a>); the apostles had much gradually to learn as to the relations of the law (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',15,\'1-\');">Ac 15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',21,20);">21:20</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',2,\'1-\');">Ga 2</a>, etc.); Paul received revelations vastly widening the doctrinal horizon; both John and Paul show progressive apprehension in the truth about Christ.<P>3. Gospels and Epistles:<P>It is therefore a question of much interest how the apostolic conceptions thus gained stand related to the picture of Jesus we have been studying in the Gospels. It is the contention of the so-called "historical" (anti-supernaturalistic) school of the day that the two pictures do not correspond. The transcendental Christ of Paul and John has little in common, it is affirmed, with the Man of Nazareth of the Synoptic Gospels. Theories of the "origins of Christianity" are concocted proceeding on this assumption (compare Pfieiderer, Weizsacker, Bousset, Wernle, etc.). Such speculations ignore the first conditions of the problem in not accepting the self-testimony of Jesus as to who He was, and the ends of His mission into the world. When Jesus is taken at His own valuation, and the great fact of His resurrection is admitted, the alleged contradictions between the "Jesus of history" and the "Christ of faith" largely disappear.<P>4. Fact of Christ\'s Lordship:<P>It is forgotten how great a change in the center of gravity in the conception of Christ\'s person and work was necessarily involved in the facts of Christ\'s death, resurrection and exaltation to the right hand of power. The life is not ignored<65>far from it. Its influence breathes in every page, e.g. of Paul\'s epistles. But the weakness, the limitations, the self-suppression<6F>what Paul in <a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',2,7);">Php 2:7</a> calls the "emptying"<22>of that earthly life have now been left behind; the rejected and crucified One has now been vindicated, exalted, has entered into His glory. This is the burden of Peter\'s first address at Pentecost: "God hath made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom ye crucified" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,36);">Ac 2:36</a>). Could anything look quite the same after that? The change is seen in the growing substitution of the name "Christ" for "Jesus" (see at beginning of article), and in the habitual speaking of Jesus as "Lord."<P>5. Significance of Christ\'s Person:<P>With belief in the lordship of Jesus went necessarily an enlarged conception of the significance of His person. The elements were all there in what the disciples had seen and known of Jesus while on earth (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,14);">Joh 1:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,\'1-3\');">1Joh 1:1-3</a>), but His exaltation not only threw back light upon His claims while on earth<74>confirmed, interpreted, completed them<65>but likewise showed the ultimate ground of these claims in the full Divine dignity of His person. He who was raised to the throne of Divine dominion; who was worshipped with honors due to God only; who was joined, with Father and with Holy Spirit as, coordinately, the source of grace and blessing, must in the fullest sense be Divine. There is not such a thing as honorary Godhead. In this is already contained in substance everything taught about Jesus in the epistles: His preexistence (the Lord\'s own words had suggested this, <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',8,58);">Joh 8:58</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',17,5);">17:5</a>, etc.), His share in Divine attributes (eternity, etc.), in Divine works (creation, etc., <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',8,6);">1Co 8:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Col\',1,16,17);">Col 1:16,17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',1,2);">Heb 1:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',1,8);">Re 1:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',3,14);">3:14</a>, etc.), in Divine worship (<a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',2,\'9-11\');">Php 2:9-11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',5,11,12);">Re 5:11,12</a>, etc.), in Divine names and titles (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',1,8);">Heb 1:8</a>, etc.). It is an extension of the same conception when Jesus is represented as the end of creation<6F>the "Head" in whom all things are finally to be summed up (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',1,10);">Eph 1:10</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,\'6-9\');">Heb 2:6-9</a>). These high views of the person of Christ in the Epistles are everywhere assumed to be the possession of the readers.<P>Jesus had furnished His disciples with the means of understanding His death as a necessity of His Messianic vocation, endured for the salvation of the world; but it was the resurrection and exaltation which shed light on the utmost meaning of this also. Jesus died, but it was for sins. He was a propitiation for the sin of the world (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',3,25);">Ro 3:25</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,2);">1Joh 2:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,10);">4:10</a>). He was \'made sin\' for us (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',5,21);">2Co 5:21</a>).<P>6. Significance of the Cross and Resurrection:<P>The strain of <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',53,\'1-\');">Isa 53</a> runs through the New Testament teaching on this theme (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',1,19);">1Pe 1:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',2,\'22-25\');">2:22-25</a>, etc.). Jesus\' own word "ransom" is reproduced by Paul (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',2,6);">1Ti 2:6</a>). The song of the redeemed is, "Thou didst purchase unto God with thy blood men of every tribe," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',5,9);">Re 5:9</a>). Is it wonderful, in view of this, that in the apostolic writings<67>not in Paul only, but in Peter, in John, in Hebrews, and Revelation, equally<6C>the cross should assume the decisive importance it does? Paul only works out more fully in relation to the law and the sinner\'s justification a truth shared by all. He himself declares it to be the common doctrine of the churches (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,3,4);">1Co 15:3,4</a>).<P>7. Hope of the Advent:<P>The newer tendency is to read an apocalyptic character into nearly all the teaching of Jesus (compare Schweitzer, Quest of the Historical Jesus). This is an exaggeration, but that Jesus taught His disciples to look for His coming again, and connected with that coming the perfection of His kingdom, is plain to every reader of the Gospels. It will not be denied that the apostolic church retained this feature of the teaching of Jesus. In accordance with the promise in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,11);">Ac 1:11</a>, it looked for the glorious reappearing of its Lord. The Epistles are full of this hope. Even John gives it prominence (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,28);">1Joh 2:28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,2);">3:2</a>). In looking for the parousia as something immediately at hand, the early believers went even beyond what had been revealed, and Paul had to rebuke harmful tendencies in this direction (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Th\',2,\'1-\');">2Th 2</a>). The hope might be cherished that the coming would not long be delayed, but in face of the express declarations of Jesus that no one, not the angels, not even the Son, knew of that day and hour (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',24,36);">Mt 24:36</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',13,32);">Mr 13:32</a>), and that the Father had set these things in His own authority (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,7);">Ac 1:7</a>; compare also such intimations as in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',13,30);">Mt 13:30</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',24,14);">24:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',25,19);">25:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',28,19);">28:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',19,11);">Lu 19:11</a>, etc.), none could affirm this with certainty. Time has proved<65>proved it even in the apostolic age (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Pe\',3,3,4);">2Pe 3:3,4</a>)<29>that the Advent was not so near as many thought. In part, perhaps, the church itself may be to blame for the delay. Still to faith the Advent remains the great fixed event of the future, the event which overshadows all others<72>in that sense is ever near<61>the polestar of the church\'s confidence that righteousness shall triumph, the dead shall be raised, sin shall be judged and the kingdom of God shall come.<P>LITERATURE.<P>The literature on the life and teaching of Jesus is so voluminous, and represents such diverse standpoints, that it would be unprofitable to furnish an extended catalogue of it. It may be seen prefixed to any of the larger books. On the skeptical and rationalistic side the best account of the literature will be found in Schweitzer\'s book, From Reimarus to Wrede (English translation, Quest of the Historical Jesus). Of modern believing works may be specially named those of Lange, Weiss, Ellicott Edersheim, Farrar, D. Smith. Dr. Sanday\'s book, The Life of Christ in Recent Research, surveys a large part of the field, and is preparatory to an extended Life from Dr. Sanday\'s own pen. His article in HDB has justly attracted much attention. Schurer\'s Hist of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ (ET, 5 volumes; a new German edition has been published) is the best authority on the external conditions. The works on New Testament Biblical theology (Reuss, Weiss, Schmid, Stevens, etc.) deal with the teaching of Jesus; see also Wendt, The Teaching of Jesus (ET). Works and articles on the Chronology, on Harmony of the Gospels, on geography and topography (compare especially Stanley, G.A. Smith) are legion. A good, comprehensive book on these topics is Andrews, Life of our Lord (revised edition). The present writer has published works on The Virgin Birth of Christ and The Resurrection of Jesus. On the relations of gospel and epistle, see J. Denney, Jesus and the Gospel.<P>See also the various articles in this Encyclopedia, on <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=GOSPELS">GOSPELS</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PERSON+OF+CHRIST">PERSON OF CHRIST</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ETHICS+OF+JESUS">ETHICS OF JESUS</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=VIRGIN+BIRTH">VIRGIN BIRTH</A>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JESUS+CHRIST,+THE+ARREST+AND+TRIAL+OF">JESUS CHRIST, THE ARREST AND TRIAL OF</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=RESURRECTION">RESURRECTION</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ASCENSION">ASCENSION</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PHARISEES">PHARISEES</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SADDUCEES">SADDUCEES</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HEROD">HEROD</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JERUSALEM">JERUSALEM</a>, etc.``132';
isbe[5028]='Jesus Christ, the Arrest and Trial of`<p>1. Jewish and Roman Law<P>2. Difficulties of the Subject<P>3. Illustrations of Difficulties<P><b>I. THE ARREST</b><P class="in15">1. Preparatory Steps<P class="in15">2. The Arrest in the Garden<P class="in15">3. Taken to the City<P><b>II. THE JEWISH TRIAL</b><P class="in15">1. The Jewish Law<P class="in15">2. The Mishna<P class="in15">3. Criminal Trials<P class="in15">4. The Trial of Jesus<P class="in15">5. The Preliminary Examination<P class="in15">6. The Night Trial<P class="in15">7. False Witnesses<P class="in15">8. A Browbeating Judge<P class="in15">9. The Morning Session<P class="in15">10. Powers of the Sanhedrin<P class="in15">11. Condemnation for Blasphemy<P class="in15">12. Summary<P><b>III. THE ROMAN TRIAL</b><P class="in15">1. Taken before Pilate<P class="in15">2. Roman Law and Procedure<P class="in15">3. Full Trial Not Desired<P class="in15">4. Final Accusation<P class="in15">5. Examination, Defence and Acquittal<P class="in15">6. Fresh Accusations<P class="in15">7. Reference to Herod<P class="in15">8. Jesus or Barabbas<P class="in15">9. Behold the Man!<P class="in15">10. Pilate Succumbs to Threats<P class="in15">11. Pilate Washes His Hands<P class="in15">12. The Sentence<P class="in15">13. Review<hr /><P>This subject is of special interest, not only on account of its inherent importance, but more particularly on account of its immediately preceding, and leading directly up to what is the greatest tragedy in human history, the crucifixion of our Lord. It has also the added interest of being the only proceeding on record in which the two great legal systems of antiquity, the Jewish and the Roman, which have most largely influenced modern legislation and jurisprudence, each played a most important part.<P>1. Jewish and Roman Law:<P>The coexistence of these two systems in Judea, and their joint action in bringing about the tremendous results in question, were made possible by the generous policy pursued by Rome in allowing conquered nations to retain their ancient laws, institutions and usages, in so far as they were compatible with Roman sovereignty and supremacy. Not only so, but, in a large degree, they permitted these laws to be administered by the officials of the subject peoples. This privilege was not granted absolutely, but was permitted only so long as it was not abused. It might be withdrawn at any time, and the instances in which this was, done were by no means rare.<P>Of the matters considered in this article, the arrest of Jesus and the proceedings before Annas, Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin took place professedly under Jewish law; the proceedings before Pilate and the reference to Herod, under Roman law.<P>2. Difficulties of the Subject:<P>It is very difficult to construct from the materials in the four Gospels a satisfactory continuous record of the arrest, and of what may be called the twofold trial of Jesus. The Gospels were written from different viewpoints, and for different purposes, each of the writers selecting such particulars as seemed to him to be of special importance for the particular object he had in view. Their reports are all very brief, and the proper chronological order of the various events recorded in different Gospels must, in many eases, be largely a matter of conjecture. The difficulty is increased by the great irregularities and the tumultuous character of the proceedings; by our imperfect knowledge of the topography of Jerusalem at this time (29 AD); also by the fact that the reports are given mainly in popular and not in technical language; and when the latter form is used, the technical terms have had to be translated into Greek, either from the Hebrew or from the Latin.<P>3. Illustrations of Difficulties:<P>For instance, opinions are divided as to where Pilate resided when in Jerusalem, whether in the magnificent palace built by Herod the Great, or in the castle of Antonia; as to where was the palace occupied by Herod Antipas during the Passover; whether Annas and Caiaphas occupied different portions of the same palace, or whether they lived in adjoining or different residences; whether the preliminary examination of Jesus, recorded by John, was before Annas or Caiaphas, and as to other similar matters. It is very satisfactory, however, to know that, although it is sometimes difficult to decide exactly as to the best way of harmonizing the different accounts, yet there is nothing irreconcilable or contradictory in them, and that there is no material point in the history of the very important proceedings falling within the scope of this article which is seriously affected by any of these debatable matters.<P>For a clear historical statement of the events of the concluding day in the life of our Lord before His crucifixion, see the article on <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JESUS+CHRIST">JESUS CHRIST</a>. The present article will endeavor to consider the matters relating to His arrest and trial from a legal and constitutional point of view.<P>I. The Arrest.<P>During the last year of the ministry of Jesus, the hostility of the Jews to Him had greatly increased, and some six months before they finally succeeded in accomplishing their purpose, they had definitely resolved to make away with Him. At the Feast of Tabernacles they sent officers (the temple-guards) to take Him while He was teaching in the temple (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,32);">Joh 7:32</a>); but these, after listening to His words, returned without having made the attempt, giving as a reason that "never man so spake" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,46);">Joh 7:46</a>).<P>After His raising of Lazarus, their determination to kill Him was greatly intensified. A special meeting of the council was held to consider the matter. There Caiaphas, the high priest, strongly advocated such a step on national grounds, and on the ground of expediency, quoting in support of his advice, in a cold-blooded and cynical manner, the Jewish adage that it was expedient that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not. Their plans to this end were frustrated, for the time being, by Jesus withdrawing Himself to the border of the wilderness, where He remained with His disciples (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,\'47-54\');">Joh 11:47-54</a>).<P>On His return to Bethany and Jerusalem, six days before the Passover, they were deterred from carrying out their design on account of His manifest popularity with the people, as evidenced by His triumphal entry into Jerusalem on the first day of the Passover week (Palm Sunday), and by the crowds who thronged around Him, and listened to His teachings in the temple, and who enjoyed the discomfiture of the Pharisees, Sadducees and Herodians, as they successively sought to entangle Him in His talk.<P>Two days before the Passover, at a council meeting held in the palace of Caiaphas, they planned to accomplish their purpose by subtlety, but "not during the feast, lest a tumult arise among the people" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,\'3-5\');">Mt 26:3-5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,1,2);">Mr 14:1,2</a>). While they were in this state of perplexity, to their great relief Judas came to them and agreed to betray his Master for money (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,\'14-16\');">Mt 26:14-16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,10,11);">Mr 14:10,11</a>).<P>1. Preparatory Steps:<P>This time they determined not to rely solely upon their own temple-guards or officers to execute their warrant or order of arrest, fearing that these officials, being Jews, might again be fascinated by the strange influence which Jesus exercised over His countrymen, or that His followers might offer resistance. They therefore applied to Pilate, the Roman procurator (governor), for the assistance of a band of Roman soldiers. He granted them a cohort (Greek: speira, 400 to 600 men) from the legion then quartered in the castle of Antonia, which adjoined and overlooked the temple-area. The final arrangements as to these would probably be completed while Judas was at the supper room. It has been suggested that the whole cohort would not go, but only a selection from them. However, it is said that Judas "received the band (cohort) of soldiers" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,3);">Joh 18:3</a>), and that they were under the command of a chief captain (Greek: chiliarch, Latin tribune, <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,12);">Joh 18:12</a>). If there had not been more than 100 soldiers, they would not have been under the command of a captain, but the chief officer would have been a centurion. The amazing popularity of Jesus, as shown by His triumphal entry into the city, may have led the authorities to make such ample provision against any possible attempt at rescue.<P>The Garden of Gethsemane, in which Judas knew that Jesus would be found that night, was well known to him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,2);">Joh 18:2</a>); and he also knew the time he would be likely to find his Master there. Thither at the proper hour he led the band of soldiers, the temple officers and others, and also some of the chief priests and elders themselves; the whole being described as "a great multitude with swords and staves" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,47);">Mt 26:47</a>). Although the Easter full moon would be shining brightly, they also carried "lanterns and torches" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,3);">Joh 18:3</a>), in order to make certain that Jesus should not escape or fail to be recognized in the deep shade of the olive trees in the garden.<P>2. The Arrest in the Garden:<P>On their arrival at the garden, Jesus came forward to meet them, and the traitor Judas gave them the appointed signal by kissing Him. As the order or warrant was a Jewish one, the temple officers would probably be in front, the soldiers supporting them as reserves. On Jesus announcing to the leaders that He was the one they sought, what the chief priests had feared actually occurred. There was something in the words or bearing of Jesus which awed the temple officers; they were panic-stricken, went backward, and fell to the ground. On their rallying, the impetuous Peter drew his sword, and cut off the ear of one of them, Malchus, the servant of the high priest (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,\'6-10\');">Joh 18:6-10</a>).<P>On this evidence of resistance the Roman captain and soldiers came forward, and with the assistance of the Jewish officers bound Jesus. Under the Jewish law this was not lawful before condemnation, save in exceptional cases where resistance was either offered or apprehended.<P>Even in this trying hour the concern of Jesus was more for others than for Himself, as witness His miracle in healing the ear of Malchus, and His request that His disciples might be allowed their liberty (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,8);">Joh 18:8</a>). Notwithstanding His efforts, His followers were panic-stricken, probably on account of the vigorous action of the officers and soldiers after the assault by Peter, "and they all left him and fled" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,50);">Mr 14:50</a>).<P>It is worthy of note that Jesus had no word of blame or censure for the Roman officers or soldiers who were only doing their sworn duty in supporting the civil authorities; but His pungent words of reproach for not having attempted His arrest while He was teaching openly in the temple were reserved for "the chief priests, and captains of the temple, and elders" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,52);">Lu 22:52</a>), who had shown their inordinate zeal and hostility by taking the unusual, and for those who were to sit as judges on the case, the improper and illegal course of accompanying the officers, and themselves taking part in the arrest.<P>3. Taken to the City:<P>The whole body departed with their prisoner for the city. From the first three Gospels one might infer that they went directly to the palace of Caiaphas, the high priest. In the Fourth Gospel, however, we are told that they took him first to Annas (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,13);">Joh 18:13</a>).<P>Why they did so we are not informed, the only statement made being that he was the father-in-law of Caiaphas (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,13);">Joh 18:13</a>). He had been the high priest from 7 AD to 15 AD, when he was deposed by Valerius Gratus, the Roman procurator. He was still the most influential member of the Sanhedrin, and, being of an aggressive disposition, it may be that it was he who had given instructions as to the arrest, and that they thought it their duty to report first to him.<P>Annas, however, sent Jesus bound to Caiaphas (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,24);">Joh 18:24</a>). Having delivered over their prisoner, the Roman soldiers would proceed to their quarters in the castle, the temple officials retaining Jesus in their charge.<P>Meanwhile, the members of the Sanhedrin were assembling at the palace of the high priest, and the preliminary steps toward the first or Jewish trial were being taken.<P>II. The Jewish Trial.<P>1. The Jewish Law:<P>It is the just boast of those countries whose jurisprudence had its origin in the common law of England, that their system of criminal law is rounded upon the humane maxims that everyone is presumed to be innocent until he is proved to be guilty, and that no one is bound to criminate himself. But the Jewish law went even farther in the safeguards which it placed around an accused person. In the Pentateuch it is provided that one witness shall not be sufficient to convict any man of even a minor offense. "One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall a matter be established" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',19,15);">De 19:15</a>).<P>2. The Mishna:<P>These principles of the Mosaic law were elaborated and extended in the system which grew up after the return from Babylon. It was begun by the men of the Great Synagogue, and was afterward completed by the Sanhedrin which succeeded them. Up to the time of our Lord, and for the first two centuries of the Christian era, their rules remained largely in an oral or unwritten form, until they were compiled or codified in the Mishna by Rabbi Judah and his associates and successors in the early part of the 3rd century. It is generally conceded by both Jewish and Christian writers that the main provisions, therein found for the protection of accused persons, had been long incorporated in the oral law and were recognized as a part of it in the time of Annas and Caiaphas.<P>3. Criminal Trials:<P>The provisions relating to criminal trials, and especially to those in which the offense was punishable by death, were very stringent and were all framed in the interest of the accused. Among them were the following: The trial must be begun by day, and if not completed before night it must be adjourned and resumed by day; the quorum of judges in capital cases was 23, that being the quorum of the Grand Council; a verdict of acquittal, which required only a majority of one, might be rendered on the same day as the trial was completed; any other verdict could only be rendered on a subsequent day and required a majority of at least two; no prisoner could be convicted on his own evidence; it was the duty of a judge to see that the interests of the accused were fully protected.<P>The modern practice of an information or complaint and a preliminary investigation before a magistrate was wholly unknown to the Jewish law and foreign to its genius. The examination of the witnesses in open court was in reality the beginning of a Jewish trial, and the crime for which the accused was tried, and the sole charge he had to meet, was that which was disclosed by the evidence of the witnesses.<P>4. The Trial of Jesus:<P>Let us see how far the foregoing principles and rules were followed and observed in the proceedings before the high priest in the present instance. The first step taken in the trial was the private examination of Jesus by the high priest, which is recorded only in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,\'19-23\');">Joh 18:19-23</a>. Opinions differ as to whether this examination was conducted by Annas at his residence before he sent Jesus to Caiaphas (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,24);">Joh 18:24</a>), or by the latter after Jesus had been delivered up to him.<P>Caiaphas was actually the high priest at the time, and had been for some years. Annas had been deposed from the office about 14 years previously by the Roman procurator; but he was still accorded the title (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',4,6);">Ac 4:6</a>). Many of the Jews did not concede the right of the procurator to depose him, and looked upon him as still the rightful high priest. He is also said to have been at this time the vice-president of the Sanhedrin. The arguments as to which of them is called the high priest by John in this passage are based largely upon two different renderings of <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,24);">Joh 18:24</a>. In the King James Version the verse reads "Now Annas had sent him bound unto Caiaphas the high priest," a reading based upon the Textus Receptus of the New Testament which implies that Jesus had been sent to Caiaphas before the examination. On the other hand, the Revised Version (British and American), following the Greek text adopted by Nestle and others, reads, "Annas therefore sent him bound unto Caiaphas the high priest," implying that Annas sent him to Caiaphas on account of what had taken place in the examination.<P>However, it is not material which of these two leading members of the Sanhedrin conducted the examination. The same may also be said as to the controversy regarding the residence of Annas at the time, whether it was in some part of the official palace of the high priest or elsewhere. The important matters are the fact, the time, and the manner of the examination by one or other of these leading members of the council, not the precise place where, or the particular person by whom, it was conducted.<P>5. The Preliminary Examination:<P>The high priest (whether Annas or Caiaphas) proceeded to interrogate Jesus concerning His disciples and His doctrine (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,19);">Joh 18:19</a>). Such a proceeding formed no part of a regular Jewish trial, and was, moreover, not taken in good faith; but with a view to entrapping Jesus into admissions that might be used against Him at the approaching trial before the council. It appears to have been in the nature of a private examination, conducted probably while the members of the council were assembling. The dignified and appropriate answer of Jesus pointedly brought before the judge the irregularity he was committing, and was a reminder that His trial should begin with the examination of the witnesses: "\'I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing. Why askest thou me? Ask them which heard me, what I have said unto them: behold, they know what I said" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,20,21);">Joh 18:20,21</a> the King James Version). The reply to this was a blow from one of the officers, an outrageous proceeding which appears to have passed unrebuked by the judge, and it was left to Jesus Himself to make the appropriate protest.<P>6. The Night Trial:<P>The next proceeding was the trial before the council in the palace of Caiaphas, attended at least by the quorum of 23. This was an illegal meeting, since a capital trial, as we have seen, could not either be begun or proceeded with at night. Some of the chief priests and elders, as previously stated, had been guilty of the highly improper act for judges, of taking part in and directing the arrest of Jesus. Now, "the chief priests and the whole council" spent the time intervening between the arrest and the commencement of the trial in something even worse: they "sought false witness against Jesus, that they might put him to death" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,59);">Mt 26:59</a>). This, no doubt, only means that they then collected their false witnesses and instructed them as to the testimony they should give. For weeks, ever since the raising of Lazarus, they had been preparing for such a trial, as we read: "So from that day forth they took counsel that they might put him to death" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,53);">Joh 11:53</a>).<P>Caiaphas, as high priest and president of the Sanhedrin, presided at the meeting of the council. The oath administered to witnesses in a Jewish court was an extremely solemn invocation, and it makes one shudder to think of the high priest pronouncing these words to perjured witnesses, known by him to have been procured by the judges before him in the manner stated.<P>7. False Witnesses:<P>But even this did not avail. Although "many bare false witness against him," yet on account of their having been imperfectly tutored by their instructors, or for other cause, "their witness agreed not together" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,56);">Mr 14:56</a>), and even these prejudiced and partial judges could not find the concurring testimony of two witnesses required by their law (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',19,15);">De 19:15</a>).<P>The nearest approach to the necessary concurrence came at last from two witnesses, who gave a distorted report of a figurative and enigmatic statement made by Jesus in the temple during His early ministry: "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,19);">Joh 2:19</a>). The explanation is given: "He spake of the temple of his body" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,21);">Joh 2:21</a>). The testimony of the two witnesses is reported with but slight variations in the two first Gospels as follows: "This man said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,61);">Mt 26:61</a>); and "We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and in three days I will build another made without hands" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,58);">Mr 14:58</a>). Whether these slightly different statements represent the discrepancies in their testimony, or on account of some other variations or contradictions, the judges reluctantly decided that "not even so did their witness agree together" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,59);">Mr 14:59</a>).<P>8. A Browbeating Judge:<P>Caiaphas, having exhausted his list of witnesses, and seeing the prosecution on which he had set his heart in danger of breaking down for the lack of legal evidence, adopted a blustering tone, and said to Jesus, "Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these witness against thee? But Jesus held his peace" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,62,63);">Mt 26:62,63</a>), relying on the fact that the prosecution had utterly failed on account of the lack of agreement of two witnesses on any of the charges. As a final and desperate resort, Caiaphas had recourse to a bold strategic move to draw from Jesus an admission or confession on which he might base a condemnation, similar to the attempt which failed at the preliminary examination; but this time fortifying his appeal by a solemn adjuration in the name of the Deity. He said to Jesus: "I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou art the Christ, the Son of God. Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Henceforth ye shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,63,64);">Mt 26:63,64</a>). Caiaphas, although knowing that under the law Jesus could not be convicted on His own answers or admissions, thereupon in a tragic manner "rent his garments, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy: what further need have we of witnesses? behold, now ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? They answered and said, He is worthy of death (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,65,66);">Mt 26:65,66</a>).<P>The night session then broke up to meet again after daybreak in order to ratify the decision just come to, and to give a semblance of legality to the trial and verdict. The closing scene was one of disorder, in which they spat in their prisoner\'s face and buffeted him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,67,68);">Mt 26:67,68</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,\'63-65\');">Lu 22:63-65</a>).<P>9. The Morning Session:<P>The following morning, "as soon as it was day," the council reassembled in the same place, and Jesus was led into their presence (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,66);">Lu 22:66</a>). There were probably a number of the council present who had not attended the night session. For the benefit of these, and perhaps to give an appearance of legality to the proceeding, the high priest began the trial anew, but not with the examination of witnesses which had proved such a failure at the night session. He proceeded at once to ask substantially the same questions as had finally brought out from Jesus the night before the answer which he had declared to be blasphemy, and upon which the council had "condemned him to be worthy of death" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,64);">Mr 14:64</a>). The meeting is mentioned in all the Gospels, the details of the examination are related by Luke alone. When asked whether He was the Christ, He replied, "If I tell you, ye will not believe: and if I ask you, ye will not answer. But from henceforth shall the Son of man be seated at the right hand of the power of God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,\'67-69\');">Lu 22:67-69</a>). This answer not being sufficient to found a verdict of blasphemy upon, they all cried out, "Art thou then the Son of God?" To this He gave an affirmative answer, "Ye say that I am. And they said, What further need have we of witness? for we ourselves have heard from his own mouth" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,70,71);">Lu 22:70,71</a>).<P>10. Powers of the Sanhedrin:<P>It will be observed that neither at the night nor at the morning session was there any sentence pronounced upon Jesus by the high priest. There was on each occasion only what would be equivalent to a verdict of guilty found by a jury under our modern criminal practice, but no sentence passed upon the prisoner by the presiding judge. When Judea lost the last vestige of its independence and became a Roman province (6 AD), the Sanhedrin ceased to have the right to inflict Capital punishment or to administer the law of life and death. This jurisdiction was thenceforth transferred to the Roman procurator. The Sanhedrin submitted very reluctantly to this curtailment of its powers. A few years later it exercised it illegally and in a very riotous manner in the case of Stephen (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',7,58);">Ac 7:58</a>). Annas, however, of all men, had good reason not to violate this law, as his having done so during the absence of the procurator was the cause of his being deposed from the office of high priest by Valerius Gratus (15 AD).<P>The proceedings may have been taken before the high priest in the hope that Pilate might be induced to accept the verdict of the Sanhedrin as conclusive that Jesus had been guilty of an offense punishable by death under the Jewish law.<P>11. Condemnation for Blasphemy:<P>Now what was the precise crime or crimes for which Jesus was tried at these two sittings of the council? The first impression would probably be that there was no connection between the charge of destroying the temple and building another in three days, and His claiming to be the Son of God. And yet they were closely allied in the Jewish mind. The Jewish nation being a pure theocracy, the overthrow of the temple, the abode of the Divine Sovereign, would mean the overthrow of Divine institutions, and be an act of treason against the Deity. The profession of ability to build another temple in three days would be construed as a claim to the possession of supernatural power and, consequently, blasphemy. As to the other claim which He Himself made and confessed to the council, namely, that He was the Christ, the Son of God, none of them would have any hesitation in concurring in the verdict of the high priest that it was rank blasphemy, when made by one whom they regarded simply as a Galilean peasant.<P>12. Summary:<P>To sum up: The Jewish trial of our Lord was absolutely illegal, the court which condemned Him being without jurisdiction to try a capital offense, which blasphemy was under the Jewish law. Even if there had been jurisdiction, it would have been irregular, as the judges had rendered themselves incompetent to try the case, having been guilty of the violation of the spirit of the law that required judges to be unprejudiced and impartial, and carefully to guard the interests of the accused. Even the letter of the law had been violated in a number of important respects. Among these may be mentioned:<P class="in15">(1) some of the judges taking part in and directing the arrest;<P class="in15">(2) the examination before the trial and the attempt to obtain admissions;<P class="in15">(3) endeavors of the judges to procure the testimony of false witnesses;<P class="in15">(4) commencing and continuing the trial at night;<P class="in15">(5) examining and adjuring the accused in order to extort admissions from Him;<P class="in15">(6) rendering a verdict of guilty at the close of the night session, without allowing a day to intervene;<P class="in15">(7) holding the morning session on a feast day, and rendering a verdict at its close; and<P class="in15">(8) rendering both verdicts without any legal evidence.<P>III. The Roman Trial.<P>Early on the morning of Friday of the Passover week, as we have already seen, "the chief priests with the elders and scribes, and the whole council" held a consultation (Mark), in the palace of the high priest; and after the examination of Jesus and their verdict that He was guilty of blasphemy, they took counsel against Him "to put him to death" (Matthew), this being, in their judgment, the proper punishment for the offense of which they had pronounced Him guilty.<P>1. Taken before Pilate:<P>For the reasons already mentioned, they came to the conclusion that it would be necessary to invoke the aid of the Roman power in carrying out this sentence. They thereupon bound Jesus, and led Him away and delivered Him up to Pilate, who at this time probably occupied, while in Jerusalem, the magnificent palace built by Herod the Great. Jesus was taken into the judgment hall of the palace or Praetorium; His accusers, unwilling to defile themselves by entering into a heathen house and thereby rendering themselves unfit to eat the Passover, remained outside upon the marble pavement.<P>2. Roman Law and Procedure:<P>The proceedings thus begun were conducted under a system entirely different from that which we have thus far been considering, both in its nature and its administration. The Jewish law was apart of the religion, and in its growth and development was administered in important cases by a large body of trained men, who were obliged to follow strictly a well-defined procedure. The Roman law, on the other hand, had its origin and growth under the stern and manly virtues and the love of justice which characterized republican Rome, and it still jealously guarded the rights and privileges of Roman citizens, even in a conquered province. Striking illustrations of this truth are found in the life of Paul (see <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',16,\'35-39\');">Ac 16:35-39</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',22,\'24-29\');">22:24-29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',25,\'10-12\');">25:10-12</a>). The lives and fortunes of the natives in an imperial province like Judea may be said to have been almost completely at the mercy of the Roman procurator or governor, who was responsible to his imperial master alone, and not even to the Roman senate. Pilate therefore was well within the mark when, at a later stage of the trial, being irritated at Jesus remaining silent when questioned by him, he petulantly exclaimed: "Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to release thee, and have power to crucify thee?" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,10);">Joh 19:10</a>). While, however, the procurator was not compelled in such cases to adhere strictly to the prescribed procedure, and had a wide discretion, he was not allowed to violate or depart from the established principles of the law.<P>On this occasion, Pilate, respecting the scruples of the chief priests about entering the palace, went outside at their request, apparently leaving Jesus in the Pretorium. He asked them the usual formal question, put at the opening of a Roman trial: "What accusation bring ye against this man?<P>3. Full Trial Not Desired:<P>They answered and said unto him, If he were not an evil-doer, we should not have delivered him up unto thee" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,29);">Joh 18:29</a>f the King James Version). Pilate could see at once that this was a mere attempt to evade the direct question he had asked, and was not such an accusation as disclosed any offense known to the Roman law. Affecting to treat it with disdain, and as something known only to their own law, he said, "Take him yourselves, and judge him according to your law. The Jews said unto him, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,31);">Joh 18:31</a>).<P>4. Final Accusation:<P>Perceiving that Pilate would not gratify their desire to have Jesus condemned on the verdict which they had rendered, or for an offense against their own law only, "they began to accuse him, saying, We found this man perverting our nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, and saying that he himself is Christ a king" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,2);">Lu 23:2</a>). This was an accusation containing three charges, much like a modern indictment containing three counts. Pilate appears to have been satisfied that there was nothing in the first two of these charges; but the third was too serious to be ignored, especially as it was a direct charge of majestas or treason, the greatest crime known to the Roman law, and as to which the reigning emperor, Tiberius, and his then favorite, Sejanus, were particularly sensitive and jealous. The charges in this case were merely oral, but it would appear to have been in the discretion of the procurator to receive them in this form in the case of one who was not a Roman citizen.<P>5. Examination, Defence and Acquittal:<P>The accusers having been heard, Pilate returned to the Pretorium to examine Jesus regarding the last and serious accusation. The Four Gospels give in the same words the question put to him by Pilate, "Art thou the King of the Jews?" The first three record only the final affirmative answer, "Thou sayest," which if it stood alone might have been taken as a plea of guilty; but John gives the intervening discussion which explains the matter fully. He tells us that Jesus did not answer the question directly, but asked Pilate, "Sayest thou this of thyself, or did others tell it thee concerning me?" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,34);">Joh 18:34</a>) (apparently not having been outside when the charges were made). On being told that it came from the chief priests, He went on to explain that His kingdom was not of this world, but was a spiritual kingdom. Being again asked if He was a king, He replied in effect, that He was a king in that sense, and that His subjects were those who were of the truth and heard His voice (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,\'35-37\');">Joh 18:35-37</a>). Pilate, being satisfied with His explanation, "went out again unto the Jews," and apparently having taken Jesus with him, he mounted his judgment seat or movable tribunal, which had been placed upon the tesselated pavement, and pronounced his verdict, "I find in him no fault at all" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,38);">Joh 18:38</a> the King James Version, the Revised Version (British and American) "I find no crime in him").<P>6. Fresh Accusations:<P>According to the Roman law, this verdict of acquittal should have ended the trial and at once secured the discharge of Jesus; but instead it brought a volley of fresh accusations to which Jesus made no reply. Pilate hesitated, and hearing a charge that Jesus had begun His treasonable teaching in Galilee, the thought occurred to him that he might escape from his dilemma by sending Jesus for trial to Herod Antipas, the tetrarch of Galilee, who was then in Jerusalem for the feast, which he accordingly did (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,7);">Lu 23:7</a>).<P>7. Reference to Herod:<P>Herod had long been desirous to see Jesus<75>"hoped to see some miracle done by him," and "questioned him in many words; but he answered him nothing." The chief priests and scribes, who had followed him from the Pretorium to the Maccabean palace, which Herod was then occupying, "stood, vehemently accusing" Jesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,\'8-10\');">Lu 23:8-10</a>). "That fox," however, as Jesus had called him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',13,32);">Lu 13:32</a>), was too astute to intermeddle in a trial for treason, which was a dangerous proceeding, and possibly he was aware that Pilate had already acquitted Him; in which case a retrial by him would be illegal. He and his soldiers, probably irritated at the refusal of Jesus to give him any answer, mocked Him, and arraying Him in a gorgeous robe, no doubt in ridicule of His claim to be a king, sent Him back to Pilate. This reference to Herod in reality formed no effective part of the trial of Jesus, as Herod declined the jurisdiction, although Pilate sought to make use of it in his subsequent discussion with the chief priests. The only result was that Herod was flattered by the courtesy of Pilate, the enmity between them ceased, and they were made friends (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,11,12,15);">Lu 23:11,12,15</a>).<P>8. Jesus or Barabbas:<P>On their return, Pilate resumed his place on the judgment seat outside. What followed, however, properly formed no part of the legal trial, as it was a mere travesty upon law as well as upon justice. Pilate resolved to make another attempt to secure the consent of the Jews to the release of Jesus. To this end he summoned not only the chief priests and the rulers, but "the people" as well (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,13);">Lu 23:13</a>), and after mentioning the failure to prove any of the charges made against Jesus, he reminded them of the custom of releasing at the feast a prisoner selected by them, and offering as a compromise to chastise or scourge Jesus before releasing Him. At this point Pilate\'s anxiety to release Jesus was still further increased by the message he received from his wife concerning her disturbing dream about Jesus and warning him to "have...nothing to do with that righteous man" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',27,19);">Mt 27:19</a>). Meanwhile, the chief priests and elders were busily engaged in canvassing the multitude to ask for the release of Barabbas, the notable robber, and destroy Jesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',27,20);">Mt 27:20</a>). When Pilate urged them to release Jesus, they cried out all together, "Away with this man, and release unto us Barabbas"; and upon a further appeal on behalf of Jesus they cried, "Crucify, crucify him." A third attempt on his part met with no better result (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,\'18-23\');">Lu 23:18-23</a>).<P>9. Behold the Man!:<P>The Fourth Gospel alone records a final attempt on the part of Pilate to save Jesus. He scourged Him, it has been suggested, with a view to satisfying their desire for His punishment, and afterward appealing to their pity. He allowed his soldiers to repeat what they had seen done at Herod\'s palace, and place a crown of thorns upon His head, array Him in a purple robe, and render mock homage to Him as king of the Jews. Pilate went out to the Jews with Jesus thus arrayed and bleeding. Again declaring that he found no fault in Him, he presented Him, saying, "Behold, the man!" This was met by the former cry, "Crucify him, crucify him." Pilate replied, "Take him yourselves...for I find no crime in him." The Jews referred him to their law by which He deserved death because He made Himself the Son of God. This alarmed Pilate\'s superstitious fears, who by this time appears to have wholly lost control of himself. He took Jesus into the palace and said to Him, "Whence art thou? But Jesus gave him no answer." Irritated at His silence, Pilate reminded Him of his absolute power over Him. The mysterious answer of Jesus as to the source of power still further alarmed him, and he made new efforts to secure His discharge (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,\'1-9\');">Joh 19:1-9</a>).<P>10. Pilate Succumbs to Threats:<P>The Jews were well aware that Pilate was arbitrary and cruel, but they had also found that he was very sensitive as to anything that might injuriously affect his official position or his standing with his master, the emperor. As a last resort they shouted to him, "If thou release this man, thou art not Caesar\'s friend: every one that maketh himself a king speaketh against Caesar" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,12);">Joh 19:12</a>). The prospect of a charge of his aiding and abetting such a crime as treason, in addition to the other charges that a guilty conscience told him might be brought against him, proved too much for the vacillating procurator. He brought Jesus out, and sat down again upon the judgment seat placed upon the pavement. He made one more appeal, "Shall I crucify your King?" The chief priests gave the hypocritical answer, "We have no king but Caesar" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,15);">Joh 19:15</a>). Pilate finally succumbed to their threats and clamor; but took his revenge by placing upon the cross the superscription that was so galling to them, "THE KING OF THE JEWS."<P>11. Pilate Washes His Hands:<P>Then occurred the closing scene of the tragedy, recorded only in the First Gospel, when Pilate washed his hands before the multitude (a Jewish custom), saying to them, "I am innocent of the blood of this righteous man; see ye to it." The reply was that dreadful imprecation, "His blood be on us, and on our children" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',27,24,25);">Mt 27:24,25</a>).<P>12. The Sentence:<P>Pilate resumes his place upon the judgment seat, the fatal sentence at last falls from his lips, and Jesus is delivered up to be crucified.<P>Now, how far were these proceedings in accordance with the Roman law under which they purported to have been taken and conducted? In the first place, Pilate, as procurator, was the proper officer to try the charges brought against Jesus.<P>13. Review:<P>In the next place he acted quite properly in declining to entertain a charge which disclosed no offense known to the Roman law, or to pass a sentence based on the verdict of the Sanhedrin for an alleged violation of the Jewish law. He appears to have acted in accordance with the law, and indeed in a judicial and praiseworthy manner in the trial and disposition of the threefold indictment for treason (unless it be a fact that Jesus was not present when these accusations were brought against Him outside the Pretorium, which would be merely an irregularity, as they were made known to him later inside). Pilate\'s initial mistake, which led to all the others, was in not discharging Jesus at once, when he had pronounced the verdict of acquittal.<P>All the subsequent proceedings were contrary to both the letter and the spirit of the law. Although Pilate took his place upon the judgment seat, his acts, properly speaking, were not those of a judge, and had no legal force or value; but were rather the futile attempts of a weak and vacillating politician to appease an angry mob thirsting for the blood of an innocent countryman. The carrying out of a sentence imposed in such circumstances, and under such conditions, may not inaptly be described as a judicial murder.``111';
isbe[5029]='Jesus Justus`je\'-zus jus\'-tus Iesous ho legomenos Ioustos, "Jesus that is called Justus," <a onClick="return mV(\'Col\',4,11);">Col 4:11</a>):<P>1. A Jew by Birth:<P>One of three friends of Paul<75>the others being Aristarchus and Mark<72>whom he associates with himself in sending salutations from Rome to the church at Colosse. Jesus Justus is not mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament, and there is nothing more known about him than is given in this passage in Colossians, namely, that he was by birth a Jew<65>"of the circumcision"<22>that he had been converted to Christ, and that he was one of the inner circle of intimate friends and associates of the apostle during his first Roman captivity.<P>2. He Remains True to Paul:<P>The words also contain the information that at a stage in Paul\'s imprisonment, when the welcome extended to him by the Christians in Rome on his arrival there had lost its first warmth, and when in consequence, probably, of their fear of persecution, most of them had proved untrue and were holding aloof from him, J. J. and his two friends remained faithful. It would be pressing this passage unduly to make it mean that out of the large number<65>hundreds, or perhaps even one or two thousands<64>who composed the membership of the church in Rome at this time, and who within the next few years proved their loyalty to Christ by their stedfastness unto death in the Neronic persecution, all fell away from their affectionate allegiance to Paul at this difficult time. The words cannot be made to signify more than that it was the Jewish section of the church in Rome which acted in this unworthy manner<65>only temporarily, it is to be hoped. But among these Jewish Christians, to such dimensions had this defection grown that Aristarchus, Mark and J. J. alone were the apostle\'s fellow-workers unto the kingdom of God. These three alone, at that particular time<6D>from among the Jewish Christians<6E>were helping him in the work of the gospel in Rome. That this defection refers to the Jewish section of the church and not to the converts from among the Gentiles, is evident from many considerations. It seems to be proved, for example by verse 14 of the same chapter (i.e. <a onClick="return mV(\'Col\',4,14);">Col 4:14</a>), as well as by <a onClick="return mV(\'Phm\',1,24);">Phm 1:24</a>, in both of which passages Paul names Demas and Luke as his fellow-laborers; and Luke was not a Jew by birth. But in the general failure of the Christians in Rome in their conduct toward Paul, it is with much affection and pathos that he writes concerning Aristarchus, Mark, and J. J., "These only are my fellow-workers unto the kingdom of God, men that have been a comfort unto me."``155';
isbe[5030]='Jesus, Genealogy of``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=GENEALOGY+OF+JESUS+CHRIST">GENEALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST</a>`1';
isbe[5031]='Jether`je\'-ther (yether, "abundance"):<P>(1) <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',4,18);">Ex 4:18</a> the Revised Version margin, King James Version, margin.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JETHRO">JETHRO</a>.<P>(2) Gideon\'s eldest son (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',8,20);">Jud 8:20</a>), who was called upon by his father to slay Zebah and Zalmunnah, but "feared, because he was yet a youth." The narrative there (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',8,4);">Jud 8:4</a>) should be connected with that of <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',6,34);">Jud 6:34</a>, where Gideon is followed by his clan, and not with that of <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',7,\'1-\');">Jud 7</a>, where he has 300 picked men. The captives would be taken to Orpah, Gideon\'s home, and slain there.<P>(3) Father of Amasa (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',2,5,32);">1Ki 2:5,32</a>); he was an Ishmaelite according to <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',2,17);">1Ch 2:17</a> = "Ithra, the Israelite" of <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',17,25);">2Sa 17:25</a>, where "the Ishmaelite" should be read for "the Israelite."<P>(4) A Jerahmeelite (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',2,32);">1Ch 2:32</a> twice).<P>(5) A Judahite (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',4,17);">1Ch 4:17</a>).<P>(6) A man of Asher (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',7,38);">1Ch 7:38</a>) = "Ithran" of <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',7,37);">1Ch 7:37</a>.``149';
isbe[5032]='Jetheth`je\'-theth (yetheth, meaning unknown): a chief (or clan) of Edom (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',36,40);">Ge 36:40</a> parallel <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',1,51);">1Ch 1:51</a>), but probably a mistake for "Jether" = "Ithran" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',36,26);">Ge 36:26</a>).``1';
isbe[5033]='Jethlah`jeth\'-la (yithlah).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ITHLAH">ITHLAH</a>`1';
isbe[5034]='Jethro`jeth\'-ro, je\'-thro (yithro, "excellence," <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',3,1);">Ex 3:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',4,18);">4:18b</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',18,\'1-12\');">18:1-12</a> (in <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',4,18);">4:18a</a>, probably a textual error, yether, "Iether," the King James Version margin, the Revised Version margin); Septuagint always Iothor): The priest of Midian and father-in-law (chothen) of Moses.<P>1. His Relation to Reuel and Hobab:<P>It is not easy to determine the relation of Jethro to Reuel and Hobab. If we identify Jethro with Reuel as in <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',2,18);">Ex 2:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',3,1);">3:1</a> (and in Ant, III, iii; V, ii, 3), we must connect "Moses\' father-in-law" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',10,29);">Nu 10:29</a> immediately with "Reuel" (the King James Version "Raguel"), and make Hobab the brother-in-law of Moses. But while it is possible that chothen may be used in the wider sense of a wife\'s relative, it is nowhere translated "brother-in-law" except in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',1,16);">Jud 1:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',4,11);">4:11</a> ("father-in-law," the King James Version, the Revised Version margin). If we insert, as Ewald suggests (HI, II, 25), "Jethro son of" before "Reuel" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',2,18);">Ex 2:18</a> (compare the Septuagint, verse 16, where the name "Jethro" is given), we would then identify Jethro with Hobab, the son of Reuel, in <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',10,29);">Nu 10:29</a>, taking "Moses\' father-in-law" to refer back to Hobab. Against this identification, however, it is stated that Jethro went away into his own country without any effort on the part of Moses to detain him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',18,27);">Ex 18:27</a>), whereas Hobab, though at first he refused to remain with the Israelites, seems to have yielded to the pleadings of Moses to become their guide to Canaan (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',10,\'29-32\');">Nu 10:29-32</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',1,16);">Jud 1:16</a>, where Kittel reads "Hobab the Kenite"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',4,11);">Jud 4:11</a>). It may be noted that while the father-in-law of Moses is spoken of as a "Midianite" in Exodus, he is called A "kenite" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',1,16);">Jud 1:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',4,11);">4:11</a>. From this Ewald infers that the Midianites were at that time intimately blended with the Amalekites, to which tribe the Kenites belonged (HI, II, 44).<P>2. His Hearty Reception of Moses:<P>When Moses fled from Egypt he found refuge in Midian, where he received a hearty welcome into the household of Jethro on account of the courtesy and kindness he had shown to the priest\'s 7 daughters in helping them to water their flock. This friendship resulted in Jethro giving Moses his daughter, Zipporah, to wife (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',2,\'15-21\');">Ex 2:15-21</a>). After Moses had been for about 40 years in the service of his father-in-law, the angel of the Lord appeared to him in the burning bush as he was keeping the flock at Horeb, commanding him to return to Egypt and deliver his enslaved brethren out of the hands of Pharaoh (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',3,1);">Ex 3:1</a>). With Jethro\'s consent Moses left Midian to carry out the Divine commission (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',4,18);">Ex 4:18</a>).<P>3. His Visit to Moses in the Wilderness:<P>When tidings reached Midian of "all that God had done for Moses, and for Israel" in delivering them from Egyptian bondage, Jethro, with a natural pride in the achievements of his relative, set out on a visit to Moses, taking Zipporah and her two sons with him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',18,\'1-12\');">Ex 18:1-12</a>). On learning of his father-in-law\'s arrival at the "mount of God," Moses went out to meet him, and after a cordial exchange of courtesies they retired to Moses\' tent, where a pleasant interview took place between them. We are told of the interest Jethro felt in all the particulars of the great deliverance, how he "rejoiced for all the goodness which Yahweh had done to Israel," and how the conviction was wrought within him that Yahweh was "greater than all gods; yea, in the thing wherein they dealt proudly against them" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',18,11);">Ex 18:11</a>). In this condition so expressed there is evidently a reference to the element by which the Egyptians thought in their high-handed pursuit they would be able to bring back Israel into bondage, but by which they were themselves overthrown.<P>It is worth noting that in the religious service in which Jethro and Moses afterward engaged, when Jethro, as priest, offered a burnt offering, and Aaron with all the elders of Israel partook of the sacrificial feast, prominence was given to Jethro over Aaron, and thus a priesthood was recognized beyond the limits of Israel.<P>4. His Wise Counsel:<P>This visit of Jethro to Moses had important consequences for the future government of Israel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',18,\'13-27\');">Ex 18:13-27</a>). The priest of Midian became concerned about his son-in-law when he saw him occupied from morning to night in deciding the disputes that had arisen among the people. The labor this entailed, Jethro said, was far too heavy a burden for one man to bear. Moses himself would soon be worn out, and the people, too, would become weary and dissatisfied, owing to the inability of one judge to overtake all the eases that were brought before him. Jethro, therefore, urged Moses to make use of the talents of others and adopt a plan of gradation of judges who would dispose of all eases of minor importance, leaving only the most difficult for him to settle by a direct appeal to the will of God. Moses, recognizing the wisdom of his father-in-law\'s advice, readily acted upon his suggestion and appointed "able men out of all Israel, and made them heads over the people, rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens." Thereafter, Jethro returned to his own country.<P>5. His Character and Influence:<P>The story of Jethro reveals him as a man of singular attractiveness and strength, in whom a kind, considerate disposition, a deeply religious spirit, and a wise judgment all met in happy combination. And this ancient priest of Midian made Israel and all nations his debtors when he taught the distinction between the legislative and the judicial function, and the importance of securing that all law be the expression of the Divine will, and that its application be entrusted only to men of ability, piety, integrity and truth (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',18,21);">Ex 18:21</a>).``32';
isbe[5035]='Jetur`je\'-tur (yetur, meaning uncertain): a "son" of Ishmael (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',25,15);">Ge 25:15</a> parallel <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',1,31);">1Ch 1:31</a>); against this clan the two and a half tribes warred (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',5,18);">1Ch 5:18</a>f); they are the Itureans of New Testament times.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ITURAEA">ITURAEA</a>`1';
isbe[5036]='Jeuel`je-u\'-el ju\'-el (ye\'-u\'-el, meaning unknown):<P>(1) A man of Judah (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',9,6);">1Ch 9:6</a>); the name is not found in the parallel of <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',11,24);">Ne 11:24</a>. <p>(2) A Levite, the King James Version "Jeiel" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',29,13);">2Ch 29:13</a>).<P>(3) A companion of Ezra, the King James Version "Jeiel" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',8,13);">Ezr 8:13</a>).<P>(4) The name occurs also as Kethibh in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',9,35);">1Ch 9:35</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',26,11);">2Ch 26:11</a>.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JEIEL">JEIEL</a>`1';
isbe[5037]='Jeush`je\'-ush (ye\'ush, probably "he protects," "he comes to help"; see HPN, 109; Kethibh is ye\'ish, in <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',36,5,14);">Ge 36:5,14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',7,10);">1Ch 7:10</a>):<P>(1) A "son" of Esau (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',36,5,14,18);">Ge 36:5,14,18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',1,35);">1Ch 1:35</a>). "The name is thought by some to be identical with that, of an Arabian lion-god Yagut ...., meaning \'helper,\' whose antiquity is vouched for by inscriptions of Thamud" (Skinner, Genesis, 432).<P>(2) A Benjamite (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',7,10);">1Ch 7:10</a>), but probably a Zebulunite. See Curtis, Chronicles, 145ff.<P>(3) A descendant of King Saul, the King James Version "Jehush" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',8,39);">1Ch 8:39</a>).<P>(4) A Gershonite Levite (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',23,10,11);">1Ch 23:10,11</a>).<P>(5) A son of King Rehoboam (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',11,19);">2Ch 11:19</a>).``149';
isbe[5038]='Jeuz`je\'-uz ye\'-uts "he counsels"): The eponym of a Benjamite family (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',8,10);">1Ch 8:10</a>).``1';
isbe[5039]='Jew, Jewess, Jewish`ju, joo, ju\'-ish, joo\'-ish (yehudhi plural yehudhim; Ioudaioi; feminine adjective yehudhith; Ioudaikos): "Jew" denotes originally an inhabitant of Judah (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',16,6);">2Ki 16:6</a> applies to the two tribes of the Southern Kingdom), but later the meaning was extended to embrace all descendants of Abraham. In the Old Testament the word occurs a few times in the singular. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Est\',2,5);">Es 2:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Est\',3,4);">3:4</a>, etc.; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',34,9);">Jer 34:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',8,23);">Zec 8:23</a>); very frequently in the plural in Ezra and Nehemiah, Esther, and in Jeremiah and Daniel. The adjective in the Old Testament applies only to the "Jews\' language" or speech (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',18,26,28);">2Ki 18:26,28</a> parallel <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',13,24);">Ne 13:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',36,11,13);">Isa 36:11,13</a>). "Jews" (always plural) is the familiar term for Israelites in the Gospels (especially in John), Acts, Epistles, etc. "Jewess" occurs in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',4,18);">1Ch 4:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',16,1);">Ac 16:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',24,24);">24:24</a>. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Tts\',1,14);">Tit 1:14</a> a warning is given against "Jewish fables" (in Greek the adjective is found also in <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',2,14);">Ga 2:14</a>). The "Jews\' religion" (Ioudaismos) is referred to in <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',1,13,14);">Ga 1:13,14</a>. On the "Jews\' language,<2C> see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=LANGUAGES+OF+THE+OLD+TESTAMENT">LANGUAGES OF THE OLD TESTAMENT</a>; on the "Jews\' religion," see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ISRAEL,+RELIGION+OF">ISRAEL, RELIGION OF</a>``132';
isbe[5040]='Jewel`ju\'-el, joo\'-el: An ornament of gold, silver or of precious stones in the form of armlet, bracelet, anklet, nose-ring, etc. Oriental dress yields itself freely to such adornment, to which there are many allusions in Scripture. a frequent term in Hebrew is keli ("utensil," "vessel"), coupled with mention of "gold" or "silver" or both (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',24,53);">Ge 24:53</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',3,22);">Ex 3:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',11,2);">11:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',12,35);">12:35</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',35,22);">35:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',6,8,15);">1Sa 6:8,15</a>, etc.; the Revised Version (British and American) in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',32,27);">2Ch 32:27</a> translations "vessels"). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Sgs\',1,10);">So 1:10</a>, where the King James Version has "rows (of jewels)," the Revised Version (British and American) has "plaits (of hair)"; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Sgs\',7,1);">So 7:1</a>, the word is from a root chalah, meaning "to adorn." In 3 instances in the King James Version "jewel" represents the Hebrew nezem (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',11,22);">Pr 11:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',3,21);">Isa 3:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',16,12);">Eze 16:12</a>); the American Standard Revised Version changes <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',11,22);">Pr 11:22</a> to "ring" Septuagint here = "earring"), and both the English Revised Version and the American Standard Revised Version have "ring" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',16,12);">Eze 16:12</a>. The familiar phrase in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mal\',3,17);">Mal 3:17</a>, "in that day when I make up my jewels," becomes in the English Revised Version, "in the day that I do make, even a peculiar treasure" (margin "or, wherein I do make a peculiar treasure"), and in the American Standard Revised Version, "even mine own possession, in the day that I make" (margin "or, do this").`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ORNAMENT">ORNAMENT</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=DRESS">DRESS</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=STONES,+PRECIOUS">STONES, PRECIOUS</a>`132';
isbe[5041]='Jewry`ju\'-ri, joo\'-ri: In <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',5,13);">Da 5:13</a> the King James Version, where the Revised Version (British and American) has "Judah"; in the New Testament, in two places in the King James Version, <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,5);">Lu 23:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,1);">Joh 7:1</a>, where the Revised Version (British and American) has correctly "<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JUDAEA">Judaea</a>" (Ioudaia) (which see).``1';
isbe[5042]='Jews`juz, jooz.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JEW">JEW</a>`1';
isbe[5043]='Jezaniah`jez-a-ni\'-a (yezanyahu, probably "Yahweh hears"; compare <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JAAZANIAH">JAAZANIAH</a>): In <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',40,8);">Jer 40:8</a>, and also <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',42,1);">42:1</a> where Septuagint has "Azariah," as in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',43,2);">43:2</a> (see Driver, Jeremiah) = <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JAAZANIAH">JAAZANIAH, (1)</a> (which see).``1';
isbe[5044]='Jezebel`jez\'-e-bel \'izebhel, "unexalted," "unhusbanded" (?); Iezabel; see BDB; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',16,31);">1Ki 16:31</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',18,4,13119);">18:4,13,19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',19,1,2);">19:1,2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',21,5);">21:5</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',9,7,30);">2Ki 9:7ff, 30ff</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',2,20);">Re 2:20</a>): Daughter of Ethbaal, king of the Zidonians, i.e. Phoenicians, and queen of Ahab, king of Northern Israel. Ahab (circa 874-853 BC) carried out a policy, which his father had perhaps started, of making alliances with other states. The alliance with the Phoenicians was cemented by his marriage with Jezebel, and he subsequently gave his daughter Athaliah in marriage to Jehoram, son of Jehoshaphat, king of Judah. His own union with Jezebel is regarded as a sin in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',16,31);">1Ki 16:31</a>, where the Massoretic Text is difficult, being generally understood as a question. The Septuagint translations: "and it was not enough that he should walk in the sins of Jeroboam ben Nebat, he also took to wife Jezebel," etc. The Hebrew can be pointed to mean, "And it was the lightest thing for him to walk in the sins of Jeroboam ben Nebat, he also took to wife Jezebel, and went and served Baal and worshipped him," i.e. all the other sins were light as compared with the marriage with Jezebel and the serving of Baal (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mic\',6,16);">Mic 6:16</a>). Is this a justifiable view to take of the marriage? One answer would be that Ahab made a wise alliance; that Baal-worship was not non-Hebrew, that Ahab named his children not alter Baal but after Yahweh (compare Ahaziah, Jehoram, Athaliah), and that he consulted the prophets of Yahweh (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',22,6);">1Ki 22:6</a>); further, that he only did what Solomon had done on a much larger scale; it may be added too that Ahab was in favor of religious toleration, and that Elijah and not the king is the persecutor. What then can be said for the unfavorable Verdict of the Hebrew historians? That verdict is based on the results and effects of the marriage, on the life and character of Jezebel, and in that life two main incidents demand attention.<P>1. Persecution of Yahweh\'s Prophets:<P>This is not described; it is only referred to in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',18,4);">1Ki 18:4</a>, "when Jezebel cut off the prophets of Yahweh"; and this shows the history of the time to be incompletely related. In <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',18,19);">1Ki 18:19</a> we are further told that "450 prophets of Baal ate at her table" (commentators regard the reference to "400 prophets of the Asherah" as an addition). In <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',19,1);">1Ki 19:1</a> Ahab tells Jezebel of the slaughter of the prophets of Baal by Elijah, and then Jezebel (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',19,2);">19:2</a>) sends a messenger to Elijah to threaten his life. This leads to the prophet\'s flight, an object which Jezebel had in view, perhaps, for she would hardly dare to murder Elijah himself. <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',9,7);">2Ki 9:7</a> regards the massacre of Ahab\'s family as a punishment for the persecution of the prophets by Jezebel<P>2. Jezebel\'s Plot Against Naboth (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',21,\'1-\');">1Ki 21</a>):<P>Ahab expresses a desire to possess the vineyard neighboring upon his palace in Jezreel, owned by Naboth, who refuses to part with the family inheritance though offered either its money value or a better vineyard in exchange. Ahab is depressed at this, and Jezebel, upon finding the cause of his melancholy feelings, asks him sarcastically if he is not king, suggesting that as king his wishes should be immediately granted by his subjects. She thereupon plots to secure him Naboth\'s vineyard. Jezebel sends letters sealed in Ahab\'s name to the elders of Naboth\'s township, and bids them arrange a public fast and make Naboth "sit at the head of the people" (Revised Version margin), a phrase taken by some to mean that he is to be arraigned, while it is explained by others as meaning that Naboth is to be given the chief place. Two witnesses<65>a sufficient number for that purpose<73>are to be brought to accuse Naboth of blasphemy and treason. This is done, and Naboth is found guilty, and stoned to death. The property is confiscated, and falls to the king (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',21,\'1-16\');">1Ki 21:1-16</a>). Elijah hears of this, and is sent to threaten Ahab with Divine vengeance; dogs shall lick his dead body (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',21,19);">1Ki 21:19</a>). But in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',21,\'20-23\');">1Ki 21:20-23</a> this prophecy is made, not concerning Ahab but against Jezebel, and <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',21,25);">21:25</a> attributes the sins of Ahab to her influence over him.<P>The prophecy is fulfilled in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',9,\'30-37\');">2Ki 9:30-37</a>. Ahaziah and Jehoram had succeeded their father Ahab; the one reigned for 2 years (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',22,51);">1Ki 22:51</a>), the other 12 years (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',3,1);">2Ki 3:1</a>). Jehu heads a revolt against the house of Ahab, and one day comes to Jezreel. Jezebel had "painted her eyes, and attired her head," and sees Jehu coming. She greets him sarcastically as his master\'s murderer. According to Massoretic Text, Jehu asks, "Who is on my side? who?" but the text is emended by Klostermann, following Septuagint in the main, "Who art thou that thou shouldest find fault with me?" i.e. thou art but a murderess thyself. She is then thrown down and the horses tread upon her (reading "they trod" for "he trod" in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',9,33);">2Ki 9:33</a>). When search is afterward made for her remains, they are found terribly mutilated. Thus was the prophecy fulfilled. (Some commentaries hold that Naboth\'s vineyard and Ahab\'s garden were in Samaria, and Naboth a Jezreelite. The words, "which was in Jezreel," of <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',21,1);">1Ki 21:1</a> are wanting in Septuagint, which has "And Naboth had a vineyard by the threshing-floor of Ahab king of Samaria." But compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',18,45);">1Ki 18:45</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',21,23);">21:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',8,29);">2Ki 8:29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',9,10,15,30);">9:10,15ff, 30ff</a>.)<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=AHAB">AHAB</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JEHU">JEHU</a>.<P>3. Jezebel\'s Character:<P>The character of Jezebel is seen revived in that of her daughter, Athaliah of Judah (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',11,\'1-\');">2Ki 11</a>); there is no doubt that Jezebel was a powerful personality. She brought the worship of the Phoenician Baal and Astarte with her into Hebrew life, and indirectly introduced it into Judah as well as into the Northern Kingdom. In judging her connection with this propagation, we should bear in mind that she is not a queen of the 20th century; she must be judged in company with other queens famous in history. Her religious attitude and zeal might profitably be compared with that of Mary, queen of Scots. It must also be remembered that the introduction of any religious change is often resented when it comes from a foreign queen, and is apt to be misunderstood, e.g. the attitude of Greece to the proposal of Queen Olga have an authorized edition of the Bible in modern Greek.<P>On the other hand, although much may be said that would be favorable to Jezebel from the religious standpoint, the balance is heavy against her when we remember her successful plot against Naboth. It is not perhaps blameworthy in her that she upheld the religion of her native land, although the natural thing would have been to follow that of her adopted land (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Rth\',1,16);">Ru 1:16</a>f). The superiority of Yahweh-worship was not as clear then as it is to us today. It may also be held that Baal-worship was not unknown in Hebrew life (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',6,25);">Jud 6:25</a>f), that Baal of Canaan had become incorporated with Yahweh of Sinai, and that there were pagan elements in the worship of the latter. But against all this it must be clear that the Baal whom Jezebel attempted to introduce was the Phoenician Baal, pure and simple; he was another god, or rather in him was presented an idea of God very different from Yahweh. And further, "in Phoenicia, where wealth and luxury had been enjoyed on a scale unknown to either Israel or the Canaanites of the interior, there was a refinement, if one may so speak, and at the same time a prodigality of vicious indulgences, connected with the worship of Baal and Astarte to which Israel had hitherto been a stranger ..... It was like a cancer eating into the vitals or a head and heart sickness resulting in total decay (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',1,6);">Isa 1:6</a>). In Israel, moral deterioration meant political as well as spiritual death. The weal of the nation lay in fidelity to Yahweh alone, and in His pure worship" (HPM, section symbol 213).<P>The verdict of the Hebrew historian is thus substantiated. Jezebel is an example<6C>an extreme one no doubt<62>of the bad influence of a highly developed civilization forcing itself with all its sins upon a community less highly civilized, but possessed of nobler moral and religious conceptions. She has parallels both in family and in national life. For a parallel to Elijah\'s attitude toward Jezebel compare the words of Carlyle about Knox in On Heroes and Hero-Worship, IV, especially the section, "We blame Knox for his intolerance," etc.<P>In <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',2,20);">Re 2:20</a>, we read of Iezabel, "the woman Jezebel, who calleth herself a prophetess"; not "thy wife" (i.e. the wife of the bishop) the Revised Version margin, but as Moffat (Expositor\'s Greek Testament) aptly renders, "that Jezebel of a woman alleging herself a prophetess." Some members of the church at Thyatira "under the sway of an influential woman refused to separate from the local guilds where moral interests, though not ostensibly defied, were often seriously compromised ..... Her lax principles or tendencies made for a connection with foreign and compromising associations which evidently exerted a dangerous influence upon some weaker Christians in the city." Her followers "prided themselves upon their enlightened liberalism (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',2,24);">Re 2:24</a>)." Moffat rejects both the view of Schurer (Theol. Abhandlungen, 39f), that she is to be identified with the Chaldean Sibyl at Thyatira, and also that of Selwyn making her the wife of the local asiarch. "It was not the cults but the trade guilds that formed the problem at Thyatira." See also Zahn, Introduction to the New Testament, section symbol 73, note 7. `<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=AHAB">AHAB</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=BAAL">BAAL</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ELIJAH">ELIJAH</a>.`149';
isbe[5045]='Jezelus`je-ze\'-lus, jez\'-e-lus (Iezelos):<P>(1) In 1Esdras 8:32; called "Jahaziel" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',8,5);">Ezr 8:5</a>.<P>(2) In 1Esdras 8:35; called "Jehiel" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',8,9);">Ezr 8:9</a>.``1';
isbe[5046]='Jezer`je\'-zer (yecher, "form" or "purpose"): A "son" of Naphtali (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',46,24);">Ge 46:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',26,49);">Nu 26:49</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',7,13);">1Ch 7:13</a>).``1';
isbe[5047]='Jezerites, the`je\'-zer-its, (ha-yitsri (collective with article)): Descendants of "Jezer" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',26,49);">Nu 26:49</a>).``1';
isbe[5048]='Jeziah`je-zi\'-a.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=IZZIAH">IZZIAH</a>`1';
isbe[5049]='Jeziel`je\'-zi-el, je-zi\'-el (Kethibh is yezu\'el, or yezo\'el; Qere yezi\'el = "God gathers," perhaps): One of David\'s Benjamite recruits at Ziklag (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',12,3);">1Ch 12:3</a>).``1';
isbe[5050]='Jezliah`jez-lia.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=IZLIAH">IZLIAH</a>`1';
isbe[5051]='Jezoar`je-zo\'-ar.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=IZHAR">IZHAR</a>`1';
isbe[5052]='Jezrahiah`jez-ra-hi\'-a.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=IZRAHIAH">IZRAHIAH</a>`1';
isbe[5053]='Jezreel`jez\'-re-el, jez\'-rel (yizre\'e\'l, "God soweth"):<P>(1) A city on the border of the territory of Issachar (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',19,18);">Jos 19:18</a>).<P>1. Territory:<P>It is named with Chesulloth and Shunem (modern Iksal and Solam). It remained loyal to the house of Saul, and is mentioned as part of the kingdom over which Abner set Ishbosheth (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',2,9);">2Sa 2:9</a>). From Jezreel came the tidings of Saul and Jonathan\'s death on Gilboa, which brought disaster to Mephibosheth (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',4,4);">2Sa 4:4</a>). The city plays no important part in the history till the time of Ahab. Attracted, doubtless, by the fine position and natural charms of the place, he made it one of his royal residences, building here a palace (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',21,1);">1Ki 21:1</a>). This was evidently on the eastern wall; and the gate by which Jehu entered was over-looked by the quarters of Queen Jezebel (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',9,30);">2Ki 9:30</a>f). The royal favor naturally enhanced the dignity of the city, and "elders" and "nobles" of Jezreel are mentioned (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',21,8);">1Ki 21:8</a>, etc.). Under the influence of Jezebel, an institution for the worship of Baal was founded here, from which, probably, the men were drawn who figured in the memorable contest with Elijah on Carmel (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',10,11);">2Ki 10:11</a>). "The tower in Jezreel" was part of the defenses of the city. It commanded a view of the approach up the valley from Beth-shean<61>the way followed by the hordes of the East, who, from time immemorial, came westward for the rich pasture of the plain (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',9,17);">2Ki 9:17</a>). It was necessary also to keep constant watch, as the district east of the Jordan was always more unsettled than that on the west; and danger thence might appear at any moment. The garden of Naboth seems to have lain to the East of the city (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',9,21);">2Ki 9:21</a>), near the royal domain, to which Ahab desired to add it as a garden of herbs (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',21,1);">1Ki 21:1</a>). See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=NABOTH">NABOTH</a>. This was the scene of the tragic meetings between Elijah and Ahab (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',21,17);">1Ki 21:17</a>), and between Jehu and Joram and Ahaziah (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',9,21);">2Ki 9:21</a>). Joram had returned to Jezreel from Ramoth-gilead to be healed of his wounds (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',9,15);">2Ki 9:15</a>). By the gateway the dogs devoured Jezebel\'s body (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',9,31);">2Ki 9:31</a>). Naboth had been stoned to death outside the city (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',21,13);">1Ki 21:13</a>). Josephus lays the scene by the fountain of Jezreel, and here, he says, the dogs licked the blood washed from the chariot of Ahab (Ant., VIII, xv, 6). This accords with <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',21,19);">1Ki 21:19</a>; but <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',22,38);">22:38</a> points to the pool at Samaria.<P>2. Identification:<P>The site of Jezreel must be sought in a position where a tower would command a view of the road coming up the valley from Beth-shean. It has long been the custom to identify it with the modern village, Zer\'in, on the northwestern spur of Gilboa. This meets the above condition; and it also agrees with the indications in Eusebius, Onomasticon as lying between Legio (Lejjun) and Scythopolis (Beisan). Recently, however, Professor A.R.S. Macalister made a series of excavations here, and failed to find any evidence of ancient Israelite occupation. This casts doubt upon the identification, and further excavation is necessary before any certain conclusion can be reached. For the "fountain which is in Jezreel," see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HAROD,+WELL+OF">HAROD, WELL OF</a>.<P>(2) An unidentified town in the uplands of Judah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',15,56);">Jos 15:56</a>), the home of Ahinoam (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',27,3);">1Sa 27:3</a>, etc.).``54';
isbe[5054]='Jezreel, Vale of``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ESDRAELON,+PLAIN+OF">ESDRAELON, PLAIN OF</a>`1';
isbe[5055]='Jezreelite`jez\'-re-el-it, jez\'-rel-it ha-yizre\'e\'li): applied to Naboth, a native of <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JEZREEL">Jezreel (1)</a> (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',21,1);">1Ki 21:1</a>, etc.).``1';
isbe[5056]='Jezreelitess`jez\'-re-el-it-es, jez\'-rel-it-es (yizre\'e\'lith, "of Jezreel," feminine): Applied to Ahinoam, one of David\'s first two wives, a native of Jezreel in Judah (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',27,3);">1Sa 27:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',30,5);">30:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',2,2);">2Sa 2:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',3,2);">3:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',3,1);">1Ch 3:1</a>).``1';
isbe[5057]='Jezrielus`jez-ri-e\'-lus (Iezrielos; the King James Version Hierielus; 1Esdras 9:27): Corresponding to "Jehiel" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',10,26);">Ezr 10:26</a>.``1';
isbe[5058]='Jibsam`jib\'-sam.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=IBSAM">IBSAM</a>`1';
isbe[5059]='Jidlaph`jid\'-laf (yidhlaph perhaps "he weeps"): A "son" of Nahor (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',22,22);">Ge 22:22</a>).``1';
isbe[5060]='Jimna, Jimnah`jim\'-na (yimnah, perhaps equals "good fortune"): A "son" of Asher (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',46,17);">Ge 46:17</a>, the King James Version "Jimnah"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',26,44);">Nu 26:44</a>, the King James Version "Jimna"), whereas the Revised Version (British and American) has <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=IMNAH">IMNAH</a> (which see).``1';
isbe[5061]='Jimnites, the`jim\'-nits, (same as "Jimna," only collective with the definite article; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',26,44);">Nu 26:44</a> the King James Version, where the Revised Version (British and American) has "Imnites"): Descendants of Jimna or Imna.``1';
isbe[5062]='Jiphtah`jif\'-ta (yiphtach).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=IPHTAH">IPHTAH</a>`1';
isbe[5063]='Jiphthahel`jif\'-tha-el.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=IPHTAH+EL">IPHTAH-EL</a>`1';
isbe[5064]='Joab`jo\'-ab (yo\'-abh, "Yahweh is father"; Ioab):<P>(1) Son of Zeruiah, David\'s sister. He was "captain of the host" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',19,13);">2Sa 19:13</a>) under David.<P>1. Joab and Abner:<P>(a) Joab is first introduced in the narrative of the war with Abner, who supported the claims of Ishbosheth to the throne against those of David (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',2,8);">2Sa 2:8-3:1</a>). The two armies met, and on Abner\'s suggestion a tournament took place between 12 men from each side; a general engagement follows, and in this Joab\'s army is victorious. Asahel, Joab\'s brother, is killed in his pursuit of Abner, but the latter\'s army is sorely pressed, and he appeals to Joab for a cessation of hostilities. Joab calls a halt, but declares that he would not cease had Abner not made his plea.<P>(b) <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',3,\'12-29\');">2Sa 3:12-29</a>. Abner visits David at Hebron, and makes an alliance with David. He then leaves the town, apparently under royal protection. Joab is absent at the time, but returns immediately after Abner\'s departure, and expostulates with David for not avenging Asahel\'s death, and at the same time attributes a bad motive to Abner\'s visit. He sends a message, no doubt in the form of a royal command, for Abner to return; the chief does so, is taken aside "into the midst of the gate" (or as Septuagint and commentators read, "into the side of the gate," <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',3,27);">2Sa 3:27</a>), and slain there by Joab. David proclaims his own innocence in the matter, commands Joab as well as the people to mourn publicly for the dead hero (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',3,31);">2Sa 3:31</a>), composes a lament for Abner, and pronounces a curse upon Joab and his descendants (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',3,30);">2Sa 3:30</a> is regarded as an editorial note, and commentators change <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',3,39);">2Sa 3:39</a>).<P>2. The Ammonite War: Death of Uriah:<P>(a) <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',10,\'1-14\');">2Sa 10:1-14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',19,\'1-15\');">1Ch 19:1-15</a>. David sends ambassadors with his good wishes to Hanun on his ascending the throne of the Ammonites; these are ill-treated, and war follows, David\'s troops being commanded by Joab. On finding himself placed between the Ammonites on the one hand, and their Syrian allies on the other, he divides his army, and himself leads one division against the Syrians, leaving Abishai, his brother, to fight the Ammonites; the defeat of the Syrians is followed by the rout of the ammonites.<P>(b) <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',10,\'15-19\');">2Sa 10:15-19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',19,\'16-19\');">1Ch 19:16-19</a> describes a second war between Hadarezer and David. Joab is not mentioned here.<P>(c) <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',11,1);">2Sa 11:1</a> narrates the resumption of the war against the Ammonites; Joab is in command, and the town of Rabbah is besieged. Here occurs the account of David\'s sin with Bathsheba, omitted by Chronicles. David gets Joab to send Uriah, her husband, to Jerusalem, and when he refuses to break the soldier\'s vow (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',11,\'6-13\');">11:6-13</a>), Joab is used to procure Uriah\'s death in the siege, and the general then sends news of it to David (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',11,\'14-27\');">11:14-27</a>). After capturing the \'water-city\' of Rabbah, Joab sends for David to complete the capture and lead the triumph himself (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',12,\'26-29\');">12:26-29</a>).<P>3. Joab and Absalom:<P>(a) The next scene depicts Joab attempting and succeeding in his attempt to get Absalom restored to royal favor. He has noticed that "the king\'s heart is toward Absalom" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',14,1);">2Sa 14:1</a>), and so arranges for "a wise woman" of Tekoa to bring a supposed complaint of her own before the king, and then rebuke him for his treatment of Absalom. The plan succeeds. David sees Joab\'s hand in it, and gives him permission to bring Absalom to Jerusalem. But the rebel has to remain in his own house, and is not allowed to see his father (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',14,\'1-24\');">2Sa 14:1-24</a>).<P>(b) Absalom attempts to secure Joab\'s intercession for a complete restoration to his father\'s confidence. Joab turns a deaf ear to the request until his field is put on fire by Absalom\'s command. He then sees Absalom, and gets David to receive his prodigal son back into the royal home (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',14,\'28-33\');">2Sa 14:28-33</a>).<P>(c) Absalom revolts, and makes Amasa, another nephew of David, general instead of Joab (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',17,24);">2Sa 17:24</a>f). David flees to Mahanaim, followed by Absalom. Joab is given a third of the army, the other divisions being led by Abishai and Ittai. He is informed that Absalom has been caught in a tree (or thicket), and expostulates with the informer for not having killed him. Although he is reminded of David\'s tender plea that Absalom be kindly dealt with, he dispatches the rebel himself, and afterward calls for a general halt of the army. When David gives vent to his feelings of grief, he is sternly rebuked by Joab, and the rebuke has its effect (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',17,1);">2Sa 17-19:8</a>).<P>4. Joab and Amasa:<P><a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',19,\'8-15\');">2Sa 19:8b-15</a>. On David\'s return to Jerusalem, Amasa is made "captain of the host" instead of Joab (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',19,13);">19:13</a>). Then Sheba revolts, Amasa loses time in making preparation for quelling it, and Abishai is bidden by David to take the field (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',20,6);">20:6</a>). The Syriac version reads "Joab" for "Abishai" in this verse, and some commentators follow it, but Septuagint supports Massoretic Text. Joab seems to have accompanied Abishai; and when Amasa meets them at Gibeon, Joab, on pretense of kissing his rival, kills him. He then assumes command, is followed by Amasa\'s men, and arranges with a woman of Abel beth-maacah to deliver to him Sheba\'s head. The revolt is then at an end.<P>5. Joab\'s Death:<P>Joab subsequently opposed David\'s suggestion of a census, but eventually carried it out (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',24,\'1-9\');">2Sa 24:1-9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',21,\'1-6\');">1Ch 21:1-6</a>), yet <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',21,6);">1Ch 21:6</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',27,24);">27:24</a> relate that he did not carry it out fully. He was one of Adonijah\'s supporters in his claim to the throne (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',1,7,19,41);">1Ki 1:7,19,41</a>). For this he had to pay the penalty with his life, being slain at the altar in the "Tent of Yahweh" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',2,\'28-34\');">1Ki 2:28-34</a>) by Benaiah, who acted upon Solomon\'s orders. His murderer became his successor as head of the army. <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',2,5);">1Ki 2:5</a> makes David advise Solomon not to forget that Joab slew Abner and Amasa, and <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',11,\'14-22\');">1Ki 11:14-22</a> contains a reference to the dread of his name in Edom. <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',11,6);">1Ch 11:6</a> makes him win his spurs first at the capture of Jerusalem, but <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',2,\'1-\');">2Sa 2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',3,\'1-\');">3</a> are previous in time to this event (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',5,\'6-10\');">2Sa 5:6-10</a>), and <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',11,8);">1Ch 11:8</a> makes him repair the city, while <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',26,28);">1Ch 26:28</a> refers to a dedication of armor by him.<P>6. Joab\'s Character:<P>In summing up Joab\'s character, we must remember the stirring times in which he lived. That he was a most able general, there is no doubt. He was, however, very jealous of his position, and this accounts for Amasa\'s murder, if not partially for that of Abner too: if he was afraid that Abner would supplant him, that fear may be held to be justified, for Amasa, who had not been too loyal to David did take Joab\'s place for a time. But blood revenge for Asahel\'s death was perhaps the chief cause. Yet even when judged in the light of those rough times, and in the light of eastern life, the murder of Abner was a foul, treacherous deed (see Trumbull, Studies in Oriental Social Life, 129-31).<P>Joab opposed the census probably because it was an innovation. His rebuke of David\'s great grief over Absalom\'s death can only be characterized as just; he is the stern warrior who, after being once merciful and forgiving, will not again spare a deceitful rebel; and yet David shows how a father\'s conduct toward a prodigal, rebellious son is not regulated by stern justice. Joab\'s unswerving loyalty to David leads one to believe that no disloyalty was meant by his support of Adonijah, who was really the rightful heir to the throne. But their plans were defeated by those of the harem, and Joab had to pay the price with his life.<P>Taken as a whole, his life, as depicted in the very reliable narrative of 2 Samuel and 1 Kings, may be said to be as characteristic of the times as that of David himself, with a truly Homeric ring about it. He was a great man, great in military prowess and also in personal revenge, in his loyalty to the king as well as in his stern rebuke of his royal master. He was the greatest of David\'s generals, and the latter\'s success and glory owed much to this noblest of that noble trio whom Zeruiah bore.<P>(2) A Judahite, father or founder of Ge-harashim (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',4,14);">1Ch 4:14</a>, "valley of craftsmen" the Revised Version margin).<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=GE-HARASHIM">GE-HARASHIM</a>.<P>(3) A family of returned exiles (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',2,6);">Ezr 2:6</a> parallel <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',7,11);">Ne 7:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',8,9);">Ezr 8:9</a>; 1Es 8:35).<P>(4) See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ATROTH-BETH-JOAB">ATROTH-BETH-JOAB</a>.``149';
isbe[5065]='Joachaz`jo\'-a-kaz (Iochaz, Iechonias): Son of Josiah (1Esdras 1:34). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',1,11);">Mt 1:11</a> "Jechoniah" is the reading.``1';
isbe[5066]='Joacim`jo\'-a-sim.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JOAKIM">JOAKIM</a>`1';
isbe[5067]='Joadanus`jo-a-da\'-nus (Ioadanos: In 1Esdras 9:19, apparently, through some corruption; the same as Gedaliah, a son of Jeshua, the son of Jozadak, in <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',10,18);">Ezr 10:18</a>.``1';
isbe[5068]='Joah`jo\'-a (yo\'ach, "Yahweh is brother"):<P>(1) Son of Asaph and recorder under King Hezekiah (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',18,18,26);">2Ki 18:18,26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',36,3,11,22);">Isa 36:3,11,22</a>); he was one of the 3 officers sent by the king to speak to the Assyrian envoys at the siege of Jerusalem (circa 701 BC).<P>(2) In <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',6,21);">1Ch 6:21 (Hebrew 6)</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',29,12);">2Ch 29:12</a>, a Levite (son of Zimmah) = "Ethan" of <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',6,42);">1Ch 6:42 (Hebrew 27)</a>.<P>(3) a son of Obed-edom (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',26,4);">1Ch 26:4</a>).<P>(4) Son of Joahaz and recorder under King Josiah (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',34,8);">2Ch 34:8</a>).``1';
isbe[5069]='Joahaz`jo\'-a-haz (yo\'-achaz, "Yahweh has grasped" = "Jehoahaz"):<P>(1) Father of <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JOAH">JOAH (4)</a> (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',34,8);">2Ch 34:8</a>).<P>(2) the Revised Version (British and American) and Hebrew in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',14,1);">2Ki 14:1</a> for Jehoahaz, king of Israel.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JEHOAHAZ">JEHOAHAZ</a>.<P>(3) the Revised Version (British and American) and Hebrew in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',36,2,4);">2Ch 36:2,4</a> for <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JEHOAHAZ">JEHOAHAZ</a>, king of Judah (which see).``1';
isbe[5070]='Joakim`jo\'-a-kim (Ioakeim; the King James Version Joacim):<P>(1) Jehoiakim, king of Judah and Jerusalem (1Esdras 1:37-39; Baruch 1:3).<P>(2) Jehoiachin, son of (1) (1Esdras 1:43).<P>(3) Son of Jeshua (1Esdras 5:5), called by mistake son of Zerubbabel; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',12,10,26);">Ne 12:10,26</a> his name occurs as in 1Esdras, among the priests and Levites who returned to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel.<P>(4) High priest of Jerusalem in the time of Baruch (Baruch 1:7).<P>(5) High priest in Jerusalem in the days of Judith who, along with "the ancients of the children of Israel," welcomed the heroine back to the city after the death of Holofernes (Judith 4). He cannot be identified with any of the high priests in the lists given in 1 Chronicles or in Josephus, Ant, X, viii, 6. The word means "the Lord hath set up." It is probably symbolical, and tends with other names occurring in the narrative to establish the supposition that the book was a work of imagination composed to support the faith of the Jews in times of stress and difficulty.<P>(6) The husband of Susanna (Susanna verses 1ff), perhaps here also a symbolical name.``79';
isbe[5071]='Joanan`jo-a\'-nan (Westcott-Hort, Greek New Testament, Ioanan; Textus Receptus of the New Testament, Ioanna; the King James Version, Joanna):<P>(1) A grandson of Zerubbabel in the genealogy of Jesus according to Luke (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,27);">3:27</a>).<P>(2) The son of Eliasib (1Esdras 9:1 the King James Version, the Revised Version (British and American) "Jonas").``1';
isbe[5072]='Joanna`jo-an\'-a (Ioana, or Ioanna): The wife of Chuzas, Herod\'s steward. She was one of the "women who had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities" which "ministered unto him (King James Version, i.e. Jesus, or "them" the Revised Version (British and American), i.e. Jesus and His disciples) of their substance," on the occasion of Jesus\' tour through Galilee (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',8,2,3);">Lu 8:2,3</a>). Along with other women she accompanied Jesus on His last journey from Galilee to Jerusalem, and was present when His body was laid in the sepulcher (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,55);">Lu 23:55</a>). She was thus among those who prepared spices and ointments, who found the grave empty, and who "told these things unto the apostles" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,\'56-\');">Lu 23:56</a>-<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,\'1-10\');">24:10</a>).``88';
isbe[5073]='Joannes`jo-an\'-es, jo-an\'-ez (Ioannes; the King James Version, Johannes):<P>(1) Son of Acatan (1Esdras 8:38), called also "Johanan" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',8,12);">Ezr 8:12</a>.<P>(2) Son of Bebai (1Esdras 9:29), called "Jehohanan" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',10,28);">Ezr 10:28</a>.``1';
isbe[5074]='Joarib`jo\'-a-rib (Ioarib; the King James Version Jarib): Ancestor of Mattathias (1Macc 14:29), given as "Joarib" in the King James Version of 1Macc 2:1; he was chief of the first of the 24 courses of priests in the reign of David. Varieties of the name are Jarib, Joarib, and Jehoiarib (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',24,7);">1Ch 24:7</a>).``1';
isbe[5075]='Joash (1)`jo\'-ash (yo\'ash, "Yahweh is strong" or "Yahweh has bestowed"; Ioas):<P>(1) Father of Gideon, of the clan of Abiezer and the tribe Manasseh (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',6,11,29,30,31);">Jud 6:11,29,30,31</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',7,14);">7:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',8,13,19,62);">8:13,19,32</a>). Gideon declares (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',6,15);">Jud 6:15</a>) that the family is the poorest in Manasseh, words similar to those of Saul (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',9,21);">1Sa 9:21</a>), and not to be taken too literally. Joash would be a man of standing and wealth, for Gideon was able to command 10 servants to destroy the altar and the Asherah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',6,27,34);">Jud 6:27,34</a>), and also to summon the whole clan to follow him. Further, the altar that Joash had was that used by the community (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',6,28);">Jud 6:28</a>), so that he would be the priest, not only of his own family qua paterfamilias, but also of the community in virtue of his position as chief. When Gideon destroyed the altar and the Asherah or sacred pillar by it, Joash refused to deliver his son to death, declaring that Baal, if he was a god, should avenge himself (compare Elijah in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',18,\'1-\');">1Ki 18</a>).<P>(2) Called "the king\'s son" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',22,26);">1Ki 22:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',18,25);">2Ch 18:25</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',36,26);">Jer 36:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',38,6);">38:6</a>), or, less probably, "the son of Hammelech," the Revised Version margin; perhaps a son of Ahab. Micaiah the prophet was handed over to his custody and that of Amon by Ahab.<P>(3) A Judahite, descendant of Shelah (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',4,22);">1Ch 4:22</a>).<P>(4) A Benjamite recruit of David at Ziklag. Commentators read here, "Joash the son of Shemaiah (or Jehoshamai), the Gibeathite" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',12,3);">1Ch 12:3</a>).<P>(5) In <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',11,2);">2Ki 11:2</a>, etc. = Jehoash, king of Judah.<P>(6) In <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',13,9);">2Ki 13:9</a>, etc. = Jehoash, king of Northern Israel.``149';
isbe[5076]='Joash (2)`(yo\'ash, "Yahweh has aided"):<P>(1) A Benjamite, or, more probably, a Zebulunite (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',7,8);">1Ch 7:8</a>).<P>(2) One of David\'s officers; Joash was "over the cellars of oil" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',27,28);">1Ch 27:28</a>).``1';
isbe[5077]='Joatham`jo\'-a-tham (Ioatham): the King James Version for the Revised Version (British and American) "Jotham" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',1,9);">Mt 1:9</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JOTHAM">JOTHAM</a>`1';
isbe[5078]='Job`job (\'iyobh, meaning of name doubtful; some conjecturing "object of enmity," others "he who turns," etc., to God; both uncertain guesses; Iob): The titular hero of the Book of Job, represented as a wealthy and pious land-holder who lived in patriarchal times, or at least conditions, in the land of Uz, on the borders of Idumea. Outside of the Book of Job he is mentioned by Ezekiel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',14,14,20);">Eze 14:14,20</a>) as one of 3 great personages whose representative righteousness would presumably avail, if that of any individuals could, to redeem the nation; the other two being Noah, an ancient patriarch, and Daniel, a contemporary of the prophet. It is difficult to determine whether Job was an actual personage or not. If known through legend, it must have been on account of some such experience as is narrated in the book, an experience unique enough to have become a potent household word; still, the power and influence of it is due to the masterly vigor and exposition of the story. It was the Job of literature, rather than the Job of legend, who lived in the hearts of men; a character so commanding that, albeit fictitious, it could be referred to as real, just as we refer to Hamlet or Othello. It is not the way of Hebrew writers, however, to evolve literary heroes from pure imagination; they crave an authentic basis of fact. It is probable that such a basis, in its essential outlines, existed under the story of Job. It is not necessary to suppose, however, that the legend or the name was known to Israel from ancient times. Job is introduced (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',1,1);">Job 1:1</a>) as if he had not been known before. The writer, who throughout the book shows a wide acquaintance with the world, doubtless found the legend somewhere, and drew its meanings together for an undying message to his and all times.``66';
isbe[5079]='Job, Book of`<b>I. INTRODUCTORY</b><P class="in30">1. Place in the Canon<P class="in30">2. Rank and Readers<P><b>II. THE LITERARY FRAMEWORK</b><P class="in30">1. Setting of Time, Place and Scene<P class="in30">2. Characters and Personality<P class="in30">3. Form and Style<P><b>III. THE COURSE OF THE STORY</b><P class="in15">A) To Job\'s Blessing and Curse<P class="in30">1. His "Autumn Days"<P class="in30">2. The Wager in Heaven<P class="in30">3. The Silent Friends<P class="in30">4. Whose Way Is Hid<P class="in15">B) To Job\'s Ultimatum of Protest<P class="in30">1. The Veiled Impeachment<P class="in30">2. Wisdom Insipid, Friends Doubtful<P class="in30">3. Crookedness of the Order of Things<P class="in30">4. No Mediation in Sight<P class="in15">C) To Job\'s Ultimatum of Faith<P class="in30">1. Detecting the Friends\' False Note<P class="in30">2. Staking Everything on Integrity<P class="in30">3. "If a Man Die"<P class="in30">4. The Surviving Next of Kin<P class="in15">D) To Job\'s Verdict on Things as They Are<P class="in30">1. Climax and Subsidence of the Friends\' Charge<P class="in30">2. The Real Cause of Job\'s Dismay<P class="in30">3. Manhood in the Ore<P class="in30">4. Job Reads His Indictment<P class="in15">E) The Denouement<P class="in30">1. The Self-constituted Interpreter<P class="in30">2. The Whirlwind and the Voice<P class="in30">3. The Thing That Is Right<P class="in30">4. The Restored Situation<P><b>IV. THE PROBLEM AND THE PURPOSE</b><P class="in30">1. Beyond the Didactic Tether<P class="in30">2. What Comes of Limiting the Purpose<P class="in30">3. The Book\'s Own Import of Purpose<P class="in30">4. Problem of the Intrinsic Man<P><b>V. CONSIDERATIONS OF AGE AND SETTING</b><P class="in30">1. Shadowy Contacts with History<P class="in30">2. Place in Biblical Literature<P class="in30">3. Parallels and Echoes<P>LITERATURE<hr /><P>I. Introductory.<P>1. Place in the Canon:<P>The greatest production of the Hebrew Wisdom literature, and one of the supreme literary creations of the world. Its place in the Hebrew Canon corresponds to the high estimation in which it was held; it stands in the 3rd section, the "writings" (kethubhim) or Hagiographa, next after the two great anthologies Psalms and Proverbs; apparently put thus near the head of the list for weighty reading and meditation. In the Greek Canon (which ours follows), it is put with the poetical books, standing at their head. It is one of 3 Scripture books, the others being Psalms and Proverbs, for which the later Hebrew scholars (the Massoretes) employed a special system of punctuation to mark its poetic character.<P>2. Rank and Readers:<P>The Book of Job was not one of the books designated for public reading in the synagogues, as were the Pentateuch and the Prophets, or for occasional reading at feast seasons, as were the 5 megilloth or rolls. It was rather a book for private reading, and one whose subject-matter would appeal especially to the more cultivated and thoughtful classes. Doubtless it was all the more intimately valued for this detachment from sanctuary associations; it was, like Proverbs, a people\'s book; and especially among the cultivators of Wisdom it must have been from its first publication a cherished classic. At any rate, the patriarch Job (though whether from the legend or from the finished book is not clear; see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JOB">JOB</a>) is mentioned as a well-known national type by <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',14,14,20);">Eze 14:14,20</a>; and James, writing to Jewish Christians (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',5,11);">5:11</a>), refers to the character of patriarch as familiar to his readers. It was as one of the great classic stories of their literature, rather than as embodying a ritual or prophetic standard, that it was so universally known and cherished.<P>II. The Literary Framework.<P>In view of the numerous critical questions by which the interpretation of the book has been beclouded<65>questions of later alterations, additions, corruptions, dislocations<6E>it may be well to say at the outset that what is here proposed is to consider the Book of Job as we have it before us today, in its latest and presumably definitive edition. It will be time enough to remove excrescences when a fair view of the book as it is, with its literary values and relations, makes us sure that there are such; see III, below. Meanwhile, as a book that has reached a stage so fixed and finished that at any rate modern tinkering cannot materially change it, we may consider what its literary framework does to justify itself. And first of all, we may note that preeminently among Scripture books it bears the matured literary stamp; both in style and structure it is a work, not only of spiritual edification, but of finished literary art. This may best be realized, perhaps, by taking it, as from the beginning it purports to be, as a continuously maintained story, with the consistent elements of plot, character scheme, and narrative movement which we naturally associate with a work of the narrator\'s article<P>1. Setting of Time, Place and Scene:<P>The story of the Book of Job is laid in the far-off patriarchal age, such a time as we find elsewhere represented only in the Book of Genesis; a time long before the Israelite state, with its religious, social and political organization, existed. Its place is "the land of Uz," a little-known region southeast of Palestine, on the borders of Edom; a place remote from the ways of thinking peculiar to Israelite lawgivers, priests and prophets. Its scene is in the free open country, among mountains, wadies, pasture-lands, and rural towns, where the relations of man and man are more elemental and primitive, and where the things of God are more intimately apprehended than in the complex affairs of city and state. It is easy to see what the writer gains by such a choice of setting. The patriarchal conditions, wherein the family is the social and communal unit, enable him to portray worship and conduct in their primal elements: religious rites of the simplest nature, with the family head the unchallenged priest and intercessor (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',1,4,5);">Job 1:4,5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',42,8);">42:8</a>), and without the austere exactions of sanctuary or temple; to represent God, as in the old folk-stories, as communicating with men in audible voice and in tempest; and to give to the patriarch or sheikh a function of counsel and succor in the community analogous to that of the later wise man or sage (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',29,\'1-\');">Job 29</a>). The place outside the bounds of Palestine enables him to give an international or rather intercommunal tissue to his thought, as befits the character of the wisdom with which he is dealing, a strain of truth which Israel could and did share with neighbor nations. This is made further evident by the fact that in the discourses of the book, the designation of God is not Yahweh (with one exception, <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',12,9);">Job 12:9</a>), but \'Elohim or \'Eloah or Shaddai, appellatives rather than names, common to the Semitic peoples. The whole archaic scene serves to detach the story from complex conditions of civilization, and enables the writer to deal with the inherent and intrinsic elements of manhood.<P>2. Characters and Personality:<P>All the characters of the story, Job included, are from non-Palestinian regions. The chief spokes-man of the friends, Eliphaz, who is from Teman, is perhaps intended to represent a type of the standard and orthodox wisdom of the day; Teman, and Edom in general being famed for wisdom (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',49,7);">Jer 49:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Oba\',1,8,9);">Obadiah 1:8,9</a>). The characters of the friends, while representing in general a remarkable uniformity of tenet, are quite aptly individualized: Eliphaz as a venerable and devout sage who, with his eminent penetrativeness of insight, combines a yearning compassion; Bildad more as a scholar versed in the derived lore of tradition; and Zophar more impetuous and dogmatic, with the dogmatist\'s vein of intolerance. In Elihu, the young Aramean who speaks after the others, the writer seems endeavoring to portray a young man\'s positiveness and absoluteness of conviction, and with it a self-conceit that quite outruns his ability. The Satan of the Prologue, who makes the wager with Yahweh, is masterfully individualized, not as the malignant tempter and enemy of mankind, but as a spirit compact of impudent skepticism, who can appreciate no motive beyond self-advantage. Even the wife of Job, with her peremptory disposition to make his affliction a personal issue with God, is not without an authentic touch of the elemental feminine. But high above them all is the character of Job himself, which, with all its stormy alternations of mood, range of assertion and remonstrance and growth of new conviction, remains absolutely consistent with itself. Nor can we leave unmentioned what is perhaps the hardest achievement of all, the sublime venture of giving the very words of God, in such a way that He speaks no word out of character nor measures His thought according to the standards of men.<P>3. Form and Style:<P>The Prologue, <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',1,\'1-\');">Job 1</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',2,\'1-\');">2</a>, a few verses at the beginning of chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',32,\'1-6\');">32 (verses 1-6a)</a>, and the Epilogue (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',42,\'7-17\');">42:7-17</a>) are written in narrative prose. The rest of the book (except the short sentences introducing the speakers) is in poetry; a poetic tissue conforming to the type of the later mashal (see under <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PROVERB">PROVERB</a>), which, in continuous series of couplets, is admirably adapted alike to imaginative sublimity and impassioned address. Beginning with Job\'s curse of his day (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',3,\'1-\');">Job 3</a>), Job and his three friends answer each other back and forth in three rounds of speeches, complete except that, for reasons which the subject makes apparent, Zophar, the third friend, fails to speak the third time. After the friends are thus put to silence, Job speaks three times in succession (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',26,\'1-\');">Job 26:1-31:40</a>), and then "the words of Job are ended." At this point (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',32,\'1-\');">Job 32</a>) a fourth speaker, Elihu, hitherto unmentioned, is introduced and speaks four times, when he abruptly ceases in terror at an approaching whirlwind (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',37,24);">37:24</a>). Yahweh speaks from the whirlwind, two speeches, each of which Job answers briefly (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',40,\'3-5\');">40:3-5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',42,\'1-6\');">42:1-6</a>), or rather declines to answer. Such, which we may summarize in Prologue (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',1,\'1-\');">Job 1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',2,\'1-\');">2</a>), Body of Discussion (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',3,\'1-\');">3-42:6</a>), and Epilogue (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',42,\'7-17\');">42:7-17</a>), is the literary framework of the book. The substance of the book is in a way dramatic; it cannot, however, be called so truly a drama as a kind of forum of debate; its movement is too rigid for dramatic action, and it lacks besides the give-and-take of dialogue. In a book of mine published some years ago I ventured to call it "the Epic of the Inner Life," epic not so much in the technical sense, as in recognition of an underlying epos which for fundamental significance may be compared to the story underlying the Prometheus Bound of Aeschylus. It will not do, however, to make too much of either of these forms as designating the Book of Job; either term has to be accommodated almost out of recognition, because the Hebrew literary forms were not conceived according to the Greek categories from which our terms "epic" and "dramatic" are derived. A greater limitation on our appreciation of its form, I think, is imposed by those who regard it as a mixture of forms. It is too generally divided between narrative and didactic debate. To the Hebrew mind it was all a continuous narrative, in which the poetic discussion, though overweighting the current of visualized action, had nevertheless the movement and value of real events. It is in this light, rather than in the didactic, that we may most profitably regard it.<P>III. The Course of the Story.<P>To divide the story of Job into 42 parts, according to the 42 numbered chapters, is in the last degree arbitrary. Nothing comes of it except convenience in reading for those who wish to take their Job in little detached bits. The chapter division was no part of the original, and a very insignificant step in the later apprehension of the original. To divide according to the speeches of the interlocutors is better; it helps us realize how the conflict of views brought the various phases of the thought to expression; but this too, with its tempting, three-times-three, turns out to be merely a framework; it corresponds only imperfectly with the true inwardness of the story\'s movement; it is rather a scheme than a continuity. We are to bear in mind that this Book of Job is fundamentally the inner experience of one man, as he rises from the depths of spiritual gloom and doubt to a majestic table-land of new insight and faith; the other characters are but ancillary, helps and foils, whose function is subordinate and relative. Hence, mindful of this inwardness of Job\'s experience, I have ventured to trace the story in 5 main stages, naming them according to the landing-stage attained in each.<P>A) To Job\'s Blessing and Curse:<P>1. His "Autumn Days":<P>The story begins (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',1,\'1-5\');">Job 1:1-5</a>) with a brief description of Job as he was before his trial began; the elements of his life, outer and inner, on which is to be raised the question of motive. A prosperous landholder of the land of Uz, distinguished far and wide as the greatest (i.e. richest) of the sons of the East, his inner character corresponds: to all appearance nothing lacking, a man "perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and turned away from evil." The typical Hebrew blessings of life were his to the full: wealth, honor, health, family. He is evidently set before us as the perfect example of the validity of the established Wisdom-tenet, that righteousness and Wisdom are identical (see under <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PROVERBS,+THE+BOOK+OF">PROVERBS, THE BOOK OF</a>), and that this is manifest in its visible rewards. This period of his life Job describes afterward by retrospect as his "autumn days," when the friendship or intimacy (coah) of God was over his tent (see <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',29,4);">29:4</a>, and the whole <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',29,\'1-\');">chapter</a>). Nor are we left without a glimpse into his heart: his constant attitude of worship, and his tender solicitude lest, in their enjoyment of the pleasures of life, his sons may have been disloyal to God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',1,4,5);">Job 1:4,5</a>). It is easy to see that not Job alone, but Wisdom as embodied in Job, is postulated here for its supreme test.<P>2. The Wager in Heaven:<P>Nor is the test delayed, or its ground ambiguous when it comes. Satan proposes it. Two scenes are given (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',1,\'6-12\');">Job 1:6-12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',2,\'1-6\');">2:1-6</a>) from the court of God, wherever that is; for they are overheard by the reader, not seen, and of course neither Job nor any inhabitant of earth is aware of them. In these scenes the sons of God, the spirits who rejoiced over creation (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',38,7);">38:7</a>), are come together to render report, and Satan, uninvited, enters among them. He is a wandering spirit, unanchored to any allegiance, who roams through the earth, prying and criticizing. There is nothing, it would seem, in which he cannot find some flaw or discount. To Yahweh\'s question if he has considered Job, the man perfect and upright, he makes no denial of the fact, but raises the issue of motive: "Doth Job fear God for nought?" and urges that Job\'s integrity is after all only a transparent bargain, a paying investment with only reward in view. It is virtually an arraignment both of God\'s order and of the essential human character: of God\'s order in connecting righteousness so intimately with gain; and of the essential human character, virtually denying that there is such a thing as disinterested, intrinsic human virtue. The sneer strikes deep, and Job, the perfect embodiment of human virtue, is its designated victim. Satan proposes a wager, to the issue of which Yahweh commits Himself. The trial of Job is carried out in two stages: first against his property and family, with the stipulation that it is not to touch him; and then, this failing to detach him from his allegiance, against his person in sore disease, with the stipulation that his life is to be spared. Yahweh acknowledges that for once He is consenting to an injustice (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',2,3);">2:3</a>), and Satan, liar that he is, uses instrumentalities that men have ascribed to God alone: the first time, tempest and lightning (as well as murderous foray), the second time, the black leprosy, a fell disease, loathsome and deadly, which, in men\'s minds meant the immediate punitive stroke of God. The evil is as absolute as was the reward; a complete reversal of the order in which men\'s wisdom had come to trust. But in the immediate result, Yahweh\'s faith in His noblest creature is vindicated. Urged by his wife in his extremity to "curse God and die," Job remains true to his allegiance; and in his staunch utterance, "Yahweh gave, and Yahweh hath taken away; blessed be the name of Yahweh," Job, as the writer puts it, \'sinned not, nor attributed aught unbeseeming (tiphalah, literally, "tasteless") to God.\' Such is the first onset of Job\'s affliction and its result. It remains to be seen what the long issue, days and months of wretchedness, will bring forth.<P>3. The Silent Friends:<P>We are now to imagine the lapse of some time, perhaps several months (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',7,3);">Job 7:3</a>), during which Job suffers alone, an outcast from house and society, on a leper\'s ash-heap. Meanwhile three friends of his who have heard of his affliction make an appointment together and come from distant regions to give him sympathy and comfort (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',2,\'11-13\');">2:11-13</a>). On arriving, however, they find things different from what they had expected; perhaps the ominous nature of his disease has developed since they started. What they find is a man wretched and outcast, with a disease (elephantiasis) which to them can mean nothing but the immediate vengeance of God. The awful sight gives them pause. Instead of condoling with him, they sit silent and dismayed, and for seven days and nights no word is spoken (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',53,3);">Isa 53:3</a>). What they were debating with themselves during that time is betrayed by the after-course of the story. How can they bless one whom God has stamped with His curse? To do so would be taking sides with the wicked. Is it not rather their duty to side with God, and be safe, and let sympathy go? By this introduction of the friends and their averted attitude, the writer with consummate skill brings a new element into the story, the element of the Wisdom-philosophy; and time will show whether as a theoretical thing, cold and intellectual, it will retain or repress the natural outwelling of human friendship. And this silence is ominous.<P>4. Whose Way Is Hid:<P>The man who, in the first onset of trial, blessed Yahweh and set himself to bear in silence now opens his mouth to curse. His curse is directed, not against Yahweh nor against the order of things, but against the day of his birth. It is a day that has ceased to have meaning or worth for him. The day stands for life, for his individual life, a life that in the order of things should carry out the personal promise and fruitage for which it had been bestowed. And his quarrel with it is that he has lost its clue. Satan unknown to him has sneered because Yahweh had hedged him round with protection and favor (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',1,10);">Job 1:10</a>); but his complaint is that all this is removed without cause, and God has hedged him round with darkness. His way is hid (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',3,23);">Job 3:23</a>). Why then was life given at all? In all this, it will be noted, he raises no train of introspection to account for his condition; he assumes no sinfulness, nor even natural human depravity; the opposite rather, for a baffling element of his case is his shrinking sensitiveness against evil and disloyalty (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',3,25,26);">Job 3:25,26</a>, in which the tenses should be past, with <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',1,5);">1:5</a>; see also <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',6,30);">6:30</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',16,17);">16:17</a>). His plight has become sharply, poignantly objective; his inner self has no part in it. Thus in this opening speech he strikes the keynote of the real, against which the friends\' theories rage and in the end wreck themselves.<P>B) To Job\'s Ultimatum of Protest:<P>1. The Veiled Impeachment:<P>With all the gentle regret of having to urge a disagreeable truth the friends, beginning with Eliphaz the wisest and most venerable, enter upon their theory of the case. Eliphaz covers virtually the whole ground; the others come in mainly to echo or emphasize. He veils his reproof in general and implicatory terms, the seasoned terms of wisdom in which Job himself is expert (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',4,3,4,5);">4:3-5</a>); reminds him that no righteous man perishes, but that men reap what they sow (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',4,7,8);">4:7,8</a>); adduces a vision that he had had which revealed to him that man, by the very fact of being mortal, is impure and iniquitous (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',4,17,18,19);">4:17-19</a>); implies that Job\'s turbulence of mind precludes him from similar revelations, and jeopardizes his soul (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',5,1,2);">5:1,2</a>); advises him to commit his case to God, with the implication, however, that it is a case needing correction rather than justification, and that the result in view is restored comfort and prosperity. As Job answers with a more passionate and detailed portrayal of his wrong, Bildad, following, abandons the indirect impeachment and attributes the children\'s death to their sin (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',8,4);">8:4</a>), saying also that if Job were pure and upright he might supplicate and regain God\'s favor (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',8,5,6);">8:5,6</a>). He then goes on to draw a lesson from the traditional Wisdom lore, to the effect that sure destruction awaits the wicked and sure felicity the righteous (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',8,\'11-22\');">Job 8:11-22</a>). On Job\'s following this with his most positive arraignment of God\'s order and claim for light, Zophar replies with impetuous heat, averring that Job\'s punishment is less than he deserves (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',11,6);">Job 11:6</a>), and reproving him for his presumption in trying to find the secret of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',11,\'7-12\');">Job 11:7-12</a>). All three of the friends, with increasing emphasis, end their admonitions in much the same way; promising Job reinstatement in God\'s favor, but always with the veiled implication that he must own to iniquity and entreat as a sinner.<P>2. Wisdom Insipid, Friends Doubtful:<P>To the general maxims of Wisdom urged against him, with which he is already familiar (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',13,2);">Job 13:2</a>), Job\'s objection is not that they are untrue, but that they are insipid (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',6,6,7);">Job 6:6,7</a>); they have lost their application to the case. Yet it is pain to him to think that the words of the Holy One should fail; he longs to die rather than deny them (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',6,9,10);">Job 6:9,10</a>). One poignant element of his sorrow is that the intuitive sense (tushiyah; see under <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PROVERBS,+THE+BOOK+OF">PROVERBS, THE BOOK OF</A>) is driven away from him; see <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',6,13);">Job 6:13</a>. He is irritated by the insinuating way in which the friends beg the question of his guilt; longs for forthright and sincere words (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',6,25);">6:25</a>). It is this quality of their speech, in fact, which adds the bitterest drop to his cup; his friends, on whom he had counted for support, are deceitful like a dried-up brook (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',6,\'15-20\');">6:15-20</a>); he feels, in his sick sensitiveness, that they are not sympathizing with him but using him for their cold, calculating purposes (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',6,27);">6:27</a>). Thus is introduced one of the most potent motives of the story, the motive of friendship; much will come of it when from the fallible friendships of earth he conquers his way by faith to a friendship in the unseen (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',16,19);">16:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',19,27);">19:27</a>).<P>3. Crookedness of the Order of things:<P>With the sense that the old theories have become stale and pointless, though his discernment of the evil of things is undulled by sin (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',6,30);">Job 6:30</a>), Job arrives at an extremely poignant realization of the hardness and crookedness of the world-order, the result both of what the friends are saying and of what he has always held in common with them. It is the view that is forced upon him by the sense that he is unjustly dealt with by a God who renders no reasons, who on the score of justice vouchsafes to man neither insight nor recourse, and whose severity is out of all proportion to man\'s sense of worth (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',7,17);">7:17</a>) or right (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',9,17);">9:17</a>) or claim as a creature of His hand (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',10,\'8-14\');">10:8-14</a>). <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',9,\'1-\');">Job 9</a>, which contains Job\'s direct address to this arbitrary Being, is one of the most tremendous, not to say audacious conceptions in literature; in which a mortal on the threshold of death takes upon himself to read God a lesson in godlikeness. In this part of the story Job reaches his ultimatum of protest; a protest amazingly sincere, but not blasphemous when we realize that it is made in the interest of the Godlike.<P>4. No Mediation in Sight:<P>The great lack which Job feels in his arraignment of God is the lack of mediation between Creator and creature, the Oppressor and His victim. There is no umpire between them, who might lay his hand upon both, so that the wronged one might have voice in the matter (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',9,\'32-35\');">9:32-35</a>). The two things that an umpire might do: to remove God\'s afflicting hand, and to prevent God\'s terror from unmanning His victim (see <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',13,\'20-22\');">13:20-22</a>, as compared with the passage just cited), are the great need to restore normal and reciprocal relations with Him whose demand of righteousness is so inexorable. This umpire or advocate idea, thus propounded negatively, will grow to a sublime positive conviction in the next stage of Job\'s spiritual progress (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',16,19);">16:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',19,\'25-27\');">19:25-27</a>).<P>C) To Job\'s Ultimatum of Faith:<p>1. Detecting the Friends\' False Note:<P>As the friends finish their first round of speeches, in which a remote and arbitrary God is urged upon him as everything, and man so corrupt and blind that he cannot but be a worm and culprit (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',25,\'4-6\');">Job 25:4-6</a>), Job\'s eyes, which hitherto have seen with theirs, are suddenly opened. His first complaint of their professed friendship was that it was fallible; instead of sticking to him when he needed them most (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',6,14);">Job 6:14</a>), and in spite of his bewilderment (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',6,26);">Job 6:26</a>), they were making it virtually an article of traffic (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',6,27);">Job 6:27</a>), as if it were a thing for their gain. It was not sincere, not intrinsic to their nature, but an expedient. And now all at once he penetrates to its motive. They are deserting him in order to curry favor with God. That motive has prevented them from seeing true; they see only their theoretical God, and are respecting His person instead of responding to the inner dictate of truth and integrity. To his honest heart this is monstrous; they ought to be afraid of taking falseness for God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',13,\'3-12\');">Job 13:3-12</a>). Nor does his inference stop with thus detecting their false note. If they are "forgers of lies" in this respect, what of all their words of wisdom? they have been giving him "proverbs of ashes" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',13,12);">Job 13:12</a>); the note of false implication is in them all. From this point therefore he pays little attention to what they say; lets them go on to grossly exaggerated statement of their tenet, while he opens a new way of faith for himself, developing the germs of insight that have come to him.<P>2. Staking All on Integrity:<P>Having cut loose from all countenancing of the friends\' self-interested motives, Job now, with the desperate sense of taking his life in his hand and abandoning hope, resolves that come what will he will maintain his ways to God\'s face. This, as he believes, is not only the one course for his integrity, but his one plea of salvation, for no false one shall appear before him. How tremendous the meaning of this resolve, we can think when we reflect how he has just taken God in hand to amend His supposed iniquitous order of things; and that he is now, without mediator, pleading the privilege that a mediator would secure (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',13,30,21);">13:20,21</a>; see 8, above) and urging a hearing on his own charges. The whole reach of his sublime faith is involved in this.<P>3. "If a Man Die":<P>In two directions his faith is reaching out; in both negatively at first. One, the belief in an Advocate, has already been broached, and is germinating from negative to positive. The other, the question of life after death, rises here in the same tentative way: using first the analogy of the tree which sprouts again after it is cut down (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',14,\'7-9\');">Job 14:7-9</a>), and from it inquiring, \'If a man die<69>might he live again?\' and dwelling in fervid imagination on the ideal solution which a survival of death would bring (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',14,\'13-17\');">Job 14:13-17</a>), but returning to his reluctant negative, from the analogy of drying waters (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',14,11);">Job 14:11</a>) and the slow wearing down of mountains (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',14,18,19);">Job 14:18,19</a>). As yet he can treat the idea only as a fancy; not yet a hope or a grounded conviction.<P>4. The Surviving Next of Kin:<P>The conviction comes by a nobler way than fancy, by the way of his personal sense of the just and God-like order. The friends in their second round of speeches have begun their lurid portrayals of the wicked man\'s awful fate; but until all have spoken again he is concerned with a far more momentous matter. Dismissing these for the present as an academic exercise composed in cold blood (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',16,4,5);">Job 16:4,5</a>), and evincing a heart hid from understanding (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',17,4);">Job 17:4</a>), Job goes on to recount in the most bitter terms he has yet used the flagrancy of his wrong as something that calls out for expiation like the blood of Cain (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',16,18);">16:18</a>), and breaks out with the conviction that his witness and voucher who will hear his prayer for mediation is on high (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',16,\'19-21\');">16:19-21</a>). Then after Bildad in a spiteful retort has matched his complaint with a description of the calamities of the wicked (an augmented echo of Eliphaz), and he has pathetically bewailed the treachery of earthly friends (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',19,13,14,21,22);">19:13,14,21,22</a>), he mounts, as it were, at a bound to the sublime ultimatum of his faith in an utterance which he would fain see engraved on the rock forever (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',19,\'23-29\');">19:23-29</a>). "I know that my Redeemer liveth," he exclaims; literally, my Go\'el (go\'ali), or next of kin, the person whose business in the old Hebrew idea was to maintain the rights of an innocent wronged one and avenge his blood. He does not recede from the idea that his wrong is from God (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',19,6,21);">19:6,21</a>); but over his dust stands his next of kin, and as the result of this one\'s intercession Job, in his own integral person, shall see God no more a stranger. So confident is he that he solemnly warns the friends who have falsely impeached him that it is they, not he, who are in peril (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',19,28,29);">19:28,29</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',13,10,11);">13:10,11</a>).<P>D) To Job\'s Verdict on Things as They Are:<P>1. Climax and Subsidence of the Friends\' Charge:<P>That in this conviction of a living Redeemer Job\'s faith has reached firm and final ground is evident from the fact that he does not recur to his old doubts at all. They are settled, and settled right. But now, leaving them, he can attend to what the friends have been saying. Zophar, the third speaker, following, presses to vehement, extreme their iterated portrayal of the wicked man\'s terrific woes; it seems the design of the writer to make them outdo themselves in frantic overstatement of their thesis. As Zophar ceases, and Job has thus, as it were, drawn all their fire, Job refutes them squarely, as we shall presently see. Meanwhile, in the course of his extended refutation, the friends begin a third round of speeches. Eliphaz, who has already taken alarm at the tendency of Job\'s words, as those of a depraved skeptic and ruinous to devotion (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',15,4,5,6);">15:4-6</a>), now in the interests of his orthodoxy brings in his bill of particulars. It is the kind of theoretical cant that has had large prevalence in dogmatic religion, but in Job\'s case atrociously false. He accuses Job of the most heartless cruelties and frauds (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',22,\'5-11\');">22:5-11</a>), and of taking occasion to indulge in secret wickedness when God was not looking (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',22,\'12-14\');">22:12-14</a>); to this it is that he attributes the spiritual darkness with which Job is encompassed. Then in a beautiful exhortation<6F>beautiful when we forget its unreal condition (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',22,23);">22:23</a>)<29>he ends by holding open to Job The way of reinstatement and peace. This is the last word of the friends that has any weight. Bildad follows Job\'s next speech indeed very briefly (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',25,\'1-\');">Job 25</a>), giving a last feeble echo of their doctrine of total depravity; a reply which Job ridicules and carries on in a kind of parody (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',26,\'1-\');">Job 26</a>). Zophar does not speak a third time at all. He has nothing to say. And this silence of his is the writer\'s way of making the friends\' theory subside ingloriously.<P>2. The Real Cause of Job\'s Dismay:<P>The idea that Job has a defensible cause or sees farther than they is wholly lost on the friends; to them he is simply a wicked man tormented by the consciousness of guilt, and they attribute the tumult of his thoughts to a wrath, or vexation, which blinds and imperils his soul (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',5,2);">5:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',18,4);">18:4</a>). That is not the cause of his dismay at all, nor is it merely that his personal fate is inscrutable (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',23,17);">23:17</a> margin). He is confounded rather, even to horror, because the probable facts of the world-order prove the utter falsity of all that they allege. Leaving his case, the righteous man\'s, out of the account, he sees the wicked just as prosperous, just as secure, just as honored in life and death, as the righteous (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',21,\'5-15\',\'29-33\');">21:5-15,29-33</a>). The friends ought to see so plain a fact as well as he (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',21,29);">21:29</a>). To all outward appearance there is absolutely no diversity of fate between righteous and wicked (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',21,\'23-26\');">21:23-26</a>). The friends\' cut-and-dried Wisdom-doctrine and their thrifty haste to justify God (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',13,7,8);">13:7,8</a>) have landed them in a lie; the truth is that God has left His times mysterious to men (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',24,1);">24:1</a>). They may as well own to the full the baffling fact of the impunity of wickedness; the whole of <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',24,\'1-\');">Job 24</a> is taken up with details of it. Wisdom, with its rigid law of reward and punishment, has failed to penetrate the secret. A hard regime of justice, work and wage, conduct and desert, does not sound the deep truth of God\'s dealings, either with righteous or wicked. What then? Shall Wisdom go, or shall it rise to a higher level of outlook and insight?<P>3. Manhood in the Ore:<P>In some such dim inquiry as this, it would seem, Job goes on from where his friends sit silenced to figure some positive solution of things as they are. He begins with himself and his steadfastly held integrity, sealing his utterance by the solemn Hebrew oath (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',27,\'2-6\');">27:2-6</a>), and as solemnly disavowing all part or sympathy with the wicked (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',27,7);">27:7</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',21,16);">21:16</a>). He has already found a meaning in his own searching experience; he is being tried for a sublime assay, in which all that is permanent and precious in him shall come out as gold (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',23,10);">23:10</a>). But this thought of manhood in the ore is no monopoly of his; it may hold for all. What then of the wicked? In a passage which some have deemed the lost third speech of Zophar (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',27,\'8-23\');">27:8-23</a>), and which, indeed, recounts what all the friends have seen (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',27,12);">27:12</a>), he sets forth the case of the wicked in its true light. The gist of it is that the wicked have not the joy of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',27,10);">27:10</a>), or the peace of a permanent hope. It is in much the same tone as the friends\' diatribes, but with a distinct advance from outward disaster toward tendency and futility. The ore is not being purged for a noble assay; and this will work their woe. Then finally, in the celebrated <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',28,\'1-\');">Job 28</a>, comes up the summary of wisdom itself. That remains, after all this testing of motive, a thing intact and elemental; and man\'s part in it is just what Job\'s life has been, to fear God and shun evil (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',28,28);">28:28</a>).<P>4. Job Reads His Indictment:<P>As the crowning pronouncement on things as they are, Job in his final and longest speech, describes in a beautiful retrospect his past life, from his "autumn days" when the friendship of God was over his tent and he was a counselor and benefactor among men (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',29,\'1-\');">Job 29</a>), through this contrasted time of his wretchedness and curse-betraying disease, when the most degraded despise him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',30,\'1-\');">Job 30</a>), until now as he draws consciously near the grave, he recounts in solemn review the principles and virtues that have guided his conduct<63>a noble summary of the highest Hebrew ideals of character (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',31,\'1-\');">Job 31</a>). This he calls, in sublime irony, the indictment which his Adversary has written; and like a prince, bearing it upon his shoulder and binding it to him like a crown, he is ready to take it with him beyond the bourn to the presence of his Judge. With this tremendous proposal, sanctioned Hebrew-fashion by a final curse if it prove false, the words of Job are ended.<P>E) The Denoucement:<P>The friends are silenced, not enlightened. They have clung to their hard thesis to the stubborn end; postulating enough overt crime on Job\'s part to kill him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',22,\'5-9\');">Job 22:5-9</a>), and clinching their hypothesis with their theory of innate depravity (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',4,18,19);">Job 4:18,19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',15,14,15);">15:14,15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',25,\'4-6\');">25:4-6</a>) and spiritual hebetude (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',5,2);">Job 5:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',15,26,27);">15:26,27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',22,10,11);">22:10,11</a>); but toward Job\'s higher level of honest integrity and exploring faith they have not advanced one inch; and here they lie, fossilized dogmatists, fixed and inveterate in their odium theologicum<75>a far cry from the friendship that came from afar to condole and console. Job, on the other hand, staking all on the issue of his integrity, has held on his way in sturdy consistency (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',17,9);">17:9</a>), and stood his ground before the enigma of things as they are. Both parties have said their say; the story is evidently ready for its denouement. Job, too, is ready for the determining word, though it would seem he expects it to be spoken only in some unseen tribunal; the friends rather savagely wish that God would speak and reprove Job for his presumption (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',11,5,11);">11:5,11</a>). But how shall the solution be brought about in this land of Uz where all may see? And above all, how shall it affect the parties concerned? A skillfully told story should not leave this out.<P>1. The Self-constituted Interpreter:<P>For this determining pronouncement the writer has chosen to have both parties definitely represented, apparently at their best. So, instead of proceeding at once to the summons from the whirlwind, he introduces here a new character, Elihu, a young man, who has listened with growing impatience to the fruitless discussion, and now must set both parties right or burst (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',32,19);">Job 32:19</a>). It is like the infusion of young blood into a theodicy too arrogant in its antiquity (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',8,\'8-10\');">Job 8:8-10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',15,10,19);">15:10,18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',12,12);">12:12</a> margin, or better as question). This character of Elihu is conceived in a spirit of satire, not without a dash of grim humor. His self-confidence, not to say conceit, is strongly accentuated (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',32,\'11-22\');">Job 32:11-22</a>); he assumes the umpire function for which Job has pleaded (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',33,6,7);">33:6,7</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',9,33,34,35);">9:33-35</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',13,20,21,22);">13:20-22</a>); and is sure he represents the perfect in knowledge (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',36,2,3,4);">36:2-4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',37,16);">37:16</a>). He speaks four times, addressing himself alternately to Job and the friends. His words, though designedly diffuse, are not without wisdom and beauty; he makes less of Job\'s deep-seated iniquity than do the friends, but blames him for speaking in the wicked man\'s idiom (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',34,7,8,9,36,37);">34:7-9,36,37</a>), and warns him against inclining more to iniquity than submission (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',36,21);">36:21</a>); but his positive contribution to the discussion is the view he holds of the chastening influence of dreams and visions (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',33,\'14-18\');">33:14-18</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',7,13,14,15);">7:13-15</a>), and of the pains of disease (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',33,\'-28\');">33:19-28</a>), especially if the sufferer has an "angel (messenger) interpreter" to reveal its meaning, such a one perhaps as Elihu feels himself to be. As he proceeds in his speech, his words indicate that a storm is rising; and so long as it is distant he employs it to descant on the wonders of God in Nature, wonders which to him mean little more than arbitrary marvels of power; but as it approaches nearer and shows exceptional phenomena as of a theophany, his words become incoherent, and he breaks off with an abject attempt to disclaim his pretensions. Such is the effect, with him, of the near presence of God. It overwhelms, paralyzes, stops the presumptuous currents of life.<P>2. The Whirlwind and the Voice:<P>The writer of the book has not committed the literary fatuity of describing the whirlwind, except as Elihu has seen its oncoming, first with conceit of knowledge, then with wild access of terror<6F>a description in which his essentially vapid personality is reflected. For the readers the significance of the whirlwind is in the Voice it encloses, the thing it says. And here the writer has undertaken the most tremendous task ever attempted by the human imagination: to make the Almighty speak, and speak in character. And one fatuity at least he has escaped; he has not made God bandy arguments with men, or piece together the shifting premises of logic. The whole of the two discourses from the whirlwind is descriptive; a recounting of observable phenomena of created nature, from the great elemental things, earth and sea and light and star and storm, to the varied wonders of animal nature<72>all things in which the questing mind of man may share, laying hold in his degree on its meaning or mystery. Thus, as a sheer literary personation, it fails at no point of the Godlike. It begins with a peremptory dismissal of Elihu: "Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',38,2);">Job 38:2</a>). Then Job is bidden gird up his loins like a strong man, and listen and answer. The fact that Job alone, of all the company, can stand, as it were, on common terms with God is premonitory of the outcome. Of the two Divine discourses, the first (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',38,\'1-\');">Job 38</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',39,\'1-\');">39</a>) emphasizes more especially the unsearchable wisdom of creation; and the lesson it brings home to Job is that a being who is great enough<67>or presumptuous enough<67>to criticize and censure is great enough to resolve his own criticism (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',40,2);">40:2</a>). To this, of course, Job has no answer; he has presented his plea, which he neither adds to nor takes back (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',40,3,4,5);">40:3-5</a>). Resuming, then, the Voice in the second discourse (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',40,\'6-\');">40:6</a>-<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',41,\'1-34\');">41:34</a>) goes on to describe two great beasts, as it were, elemental monsters of Nature: Behemoth<74>probably the hippopotamus<75>vast in resisting and overcoming power, yet unaware of it, and easily subduable by man; and Leviathan<61>probably the crocodile<6C>a wonder of beautiful adaptedness to its function in Nature, yet utterly malignant, unsubduable, untamable. And the lesson brought home to Job by this strange distribution of creative power is that he, who has called in question God\'s right to work as He does, had better undertake to lower human pride and "tread down the wicked where they stand" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',40,12);">40:12</a>), thus demonstrating his ability to save himself and manage mankind (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',40,14);">40:14</a>). By this illuminating thought Job\'s trenchancy of demand is utterly melted away into contrition and penitence (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',42,\'1-6\');">42:1-6</a>); but one inspiring effect is his, the thing indeed which he has persistently sought (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',23,3);">23:3</a>): God is no more a hearsay, such as the friends have defended and his Wisdom has speculated about; his eye sees Him here on earth, and in his still unremoved affliction, no stranger, but a wise and communable Friend, just as his confident faith had pictured he would, in some embodied sphere beyond suffering (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',19,27);">19:27</a>).<P>3. The Thing That Is Right:<P>Two of the parties in the story have met the august theophany, and it has wrought its effect on them according to the spirit of the man. The self-constituted interpreter, Elihu, has collapsed as suddenly as he swelled up and exhibited himself. The man of integrity, Job, has reached the beatific goal of his quest. What now of the friends who came from far to confirm their Wisdom, and who were so sure they were defending the mind of God? they are not left without a sufficing word, addressed straight to their spokesman Eliphaz (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',42,7);">Job 42:7</a>); but their way to light is through the man whose honesty they outraged. Eliphaz\' closing words had promised mediatorial power to Job if he would return from iniquity and acquaint himself with God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',22,30);">22:30</a>); Job is now the mediator, though he has held consistently to the terms they reprobated. And the Divine verdict on them is: "Ye have not spoken of me the thing that is right, as my servant Job hath" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',42,7);">42:7</a>). These are the words of the Being who acknowledged that in permitting this whole trial He was \'swallowing Job up causelessly\' (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',2,3);">2:3</a>). Job\'s honest and immensely revelatory words, anger, remonstrance, bold arraignment of God\'s way and all, were "the thing that is right." There is no more tremendous Divine pronouncement in all Scripture than this.<P>4. The Restored Situation:<P>Here certain myopic students of the Book of Job think the story should end. It offends them, apparently, to see Satan\'s work undone; if they had had the making of the story they would have left Job still suffering, as if disinterested virtue could not be its own reward without it. The author, at least the final author, evidently did not think so; in the ideals and sanctions that prevailed in his age he knew better what he was about. It is not my business to cut the book to modern pattern, but to note what is there. Job is restored to health, to double his former wealth, to family and honor and a ripe old age. These were what the friends predicted for him on condition of his owning to guilt and calling injustice desert; but in no word of his has he intimated that worldly reinstatement was his wish or his object, the contrary rather. And what he sought he obtained, in richer measure than he sought; obtained it still in suffering, and on earth, "in the place where may see" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',34,26);">34:26</a> margin). It is no discount to the value of this, nor on the other hand is it an essential addition, to express it not only in spiritual terms, but in terms current among men. And one fundamental thing this restored situation shows, or at least takes for granted, namely, that the quarrel has not been with Wisdom itself, its essence or its sanctions, but only with its encroaching false motive. Deepened, not invaded, its Newtonian law that it is well with the righteous, ill with the wicked, remains intact, an external sanction to live by, in spite of temporal exceptions. A spiritual principle of great significance, too, seems to be indicated, as it were, furtively, in the words, "And Yahweh turned the captivity of Job, when he prayed for his friends." He had stood on his integrity demanding his right, and became a self-loathing penitent; out of dust and ashes he prayed for his friends, and became again such a power in health and wealth as he had been in his "autumn days."<P>IV. The Problem and the Purpose.<P>1. Beyond the Didactic Tether:<P>If the foregoing section has rightly shown that the main thrust and interest of the Book of Job lies not in its debate but in its narrative, we have therein the best clue to its problem and its purpose. The sublime self-portrayal of a man who held fast his integrity against God and man and death and darkness tells its own story and teaches its own lesson, beyond the power of didactic propositions or deductions to compass. The book is not a sermon but a vital, throbbing uprising of the human spirit. It is warm with the life of sound manhood; the inner life with its hopes, its doubts, its convictions, its supreme affiance; to impose on this any tether of didacticism is to chili its spirit and make it dogmatic and academic. The reading of its problem which mainly holds the field today is expressed in the question, "Why does God afflict the righteous?" and so the book is resolved into a theodicy, a justification of God\'s ways with man. Well the friends of Job do their best to make their interpretation a theodicy, even outraging palpable fact to do it; they monopolize the didactic element of the poem; but their chief contention is that God does not afflict the righteous but the wicked, and that Job is a flagrant case in point who adds rebellion to his sin (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',34,37);">34:37</a>). Job does not know why God afflicts the righteous; he only knows that it is a grievous fact, which to him seems utterly un-Godlike. God knows, undoubtedly, but He does not tell. Yet all the while an answer to the question is shaping itself in personality, in intrinsic manhood, in the sturdy truth and loyalty of Job\'s spirit. So, going beyond the didactic tether, we may say that in a deeper sense God is justified after all; if such a result of desperate trial is possible in man, it is worth all the rigor of the experiment. But it is as truly an anthropodicy (excuse the word!) as a theodicy; it puts the essential man on a plane above all that Satan can prove by his lying sneers of self-interest, or the friends\' poisoning of the wells by their theory of natural depravity. It comes back after all to the story of Job; he lives the answer to the problem, his personality is the teaching.<P>2. What Comes of Limiting the Purpose:<P>It is from this point of view that we can best judge of the critical attacks that have been made on the structure and coherence of the Book of Job. The book has suffered its full share of negative disintegration at the hands of the critics; mostly subjective it seems to me, coming from a too restricted view of its problem and purpose, or from lack of that long patient induction which will not be content until it sees all the elements of its creative idea in fitting order and proportion. To limit the purpose to the issue of a debated theodicy, is to put some parts in precarious tenure; accordingly, there are those to whom the Epilogue seems a superfluity, the Prologue an afterthought, <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',28,\'1-\');">Job 28</a> a fugitive poem put in to fill up<75>not to go on to still more radical excisions. On the score of regularity of structure, too, this limitation of design has had equally grave results. Elihu has perhaps fared the worst. He must go, the critics almost universally say, because forsooth he was not formally introduced in the Prologue; and naturally enough, as soon as he has received notice to quit, the language which in one view fits him so dramatically to his part begins to bristle with Aramaisms (\'of the kindred of Ram,\' <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',32,2);">32:2</a>) and strange locutions, the alleged marks of a later bungling hand. Then, further, Zophar must needs round out the mechanical three-times-three of structure by coming up the third time; accordingly, Job is levied upon to contribute some of his words (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',27,\'13-23\');">27:13-23</a>) to help him out. I need not go into further detail. The foregoing section has done something, I hope, to justify my conviction that the book has a homogeneous design and structure just as it is. Whatever its vicissitudes since the first draft was made, it may turn out after all that the last edition is the best.<P>3. The Book\'s Own Import of Purpose:<P>We are not left in the dark as to the large purpose of the Book of Job, if we will follow its own indications consistently. Satan\'s question at the beginning, "Doth Job fear God for nought?" sets us on the track of it. To give that question a Godlike and not a Satanic answer, to prove in the person of Job That man has it in him to make his life an unbought loyalty to the Divine, is a purpose large enough to include many subsidiary purposes. But behind this appears, on the part of the author, a purpose which relates his story intimately to the intellectual tendencies of his day. The book embodies, especially in theories of the friends, a searching epitome of the status to which the wisdom philosophy of his time had arrived. That philosophy was a nobly founded theory of life; Job himself had been and continued (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',28,28);">28:28</a>) thoroughly at one with it. Soundly identified with righteousness and piety, Wisdom had in religious idiom defined the elements of right and wrong living, and had in no uncertain terms fixed its sanctions of reward and penalty. But from a warm, pulsating life it had become an orthodoxy. Its rigid world had room for only two classes of men: the righteous, bound for the sure rewards of life; the wicked, bound for sure failure and destruction. It brooked no real exception to this austere law of being. But two grave evils were invading its system. One was its hard blindness to facts, or, what is as bad, its determination at all hazards to explain them away. From the psalms of the period (compare e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',37,\'1-\');">Psalms 37</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',49,\'1-\');">49</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',73,\'1-\');">73</a>) we can see how the evident happiness and prosperity of the wicked was troubling devout minds. The other was that under this prevailing philosophy life was becoming too cold-blooded and calculable a thing, a virtual feeder of self-interest. The doubt lay very near whether conduct so sanctioned was a thing intrinsic and sincere or a thing bought and sold. This equivocal state of things could not long endure. Sooner or later Satan\'s question of motive must stab it to the heart; and we may be sure that to the author of the book the impulse to ask the question was not all Satanic. The interests of true wisdom, no less than of skepticism, demanded that the question of inner motive be raised and solved. Nay, Yahweh Himself, whom Satan mocked as abettor of the situation, was on trial. Have we not material here, then, for a sublime purpose, a mighty epic of test and trial and victory? Out of it, not Job alone, but Wisdom must emerge purified, enlightened, spiritualized.<P>4. Problem of the Intrinsic Man:<P>So much for the purpose of the book. The problem corresponds to it. If we take it as the baffling problem of suffering, or more specifically why God afflicts the righteous, the sufficing answer is, Job is why. To give such essential integrity as his its ultimate proof and occasion is worth the injustice and the unmerited pain. In other words, the problem is more deeply concerned with man\'s intrinsic nature than with God\'s mysterious dealings. When God created man in His own image, did He endow him most fundamentally with the spirit of commercialism, or with the spirit of unbought loyalty to the Godlike? And when created man was made fallible and mortal, did that mean an inescapable inherent depravity, or was the potency of noblest manhood still left at the center of his being? Here again Job is the embodied answer. The friends, veritable Calvinists before Calvin, urge depravity; they would exalt God by making man His utter contrast. But Job\'s stedfast integrity proves that man, one man at least, is at heart sound and true. And if one man, then the potency of soundness exists in manhood. The book is indeed a theodicy; but still more truly it is a boldly maintained anthropodicy, a vindication of the intrinsic worth of man.<P>V. Considerations of Age and Setting.<P>1. Shadowy Contacts with History:<P>The questions who was the personal author of the Book of Job, and what was its age, are at best only a matter of conjecture; and my revised conjecture, arrived at since I wrote my Epic of the Inner Life, must go for what it is worth. It seems to me much better to regard a story so homogeneous and interrelated as in the main the composition of one mind than to distribute it, as some critics do, among various authors, supplementers, and editors. As to its age, there is so little identifiable contact with political or ecclesiastical history that its composition has been ascribed to many periods, from the time of Abraham to late in post-exilic times. The fact that its scene is laid in the patriarchal past and in a land outside of Palestine indicates the author\'s design to dissociate it from contemporary events and conditions; such contact with these as exist, therefore, must be read between the lines. The book does not hold with full consistency to patriarchal conditions. Job\'s friends appeal with the complacency of wisdom-prospered men to the ancient tenure of the land (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',15,19);">15:19</a>); and yet, as Job complains, the heartless greed of the landholding class in removing landmarks and oppressing the poor (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',24,\'2-12\');">24:2-12</a>) connotes the prevalence of such outrages as were denounced by Isaiah and Micah before the Assyrian crisis. Such evils would not decrease under Manasseh and Jehoiakim, and might well be portrayed in reminiscence by an exilic writer. On the top of this consideration may be cited the most definite reference to a historical event that the book contains: the passage <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',12,\'17-25\');">Job 12:17-25</a>, which vividly describes, by an eyewitness ("Lo, mine eye hath seen all this," <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',13,1);">13:1</a>), a wholesale deportation and humiliation of eminent persons, just like that told of Jehoiachin and his court in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',24,\'13-15\');">2Ki 24:13-15</a>. To my mind this is illuminative for the age of the book. It seems to have been written by one who saw the Chaldean deportation of 587 BC. May I be suffered to carry the suggestion a step farther? It will be remembered that the chief personage of that deportation was for 37 years a state prisoner in Babylon, at the end of which time he was "taken from durance and judgment" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',53,8);">Isa 53:8</a> the King James Version) and lived thenceforth honored with kings (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',25,\'27-30\');">2Ki 25:27-30</a> = <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',52,\'31-34\');">Jer 52:31-34</a>). I take him to have been the original of the individualized Servant of Yahweh described and describing himself in Second Isaiah. In one of his self-descriptions he says that Yahweh has given him "the tongue of them that are taught" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',50,4);">Isa 50:4</a>); in another that Yahweh has made his "mouth like a sharp sword" and himself "a polished shaft" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',49,2);">Isa 49:2</a>). What he said or wrote is of course unidentifiable; but it is certain that in some cultural way he was a hidden power for good to his people. What if this Book of Job were a prison-made book, like Pilgrim\'s Progress and Don Quixote, but as much greater as the experience that underlay it was more momentous? I do not see but this suggestion is as probable as any that have been made; and some expressions of the book become thereby very striking, as for instance, the reference to prisoners (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',3,118,19);">3:18,19</a>), to the servant longing for release (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',7,2);">7:2</a>), the general sense of being despised, the several references to Job as "my servant Job" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',1,8);">1:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',2,3);">2:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',42,7,8);">42:7,8</a>), the description of his restoration as a turned captivity, and his successful intercession for the friends (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',42,10);">42:10</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',53,12);">Isa 53:12</a>). I would merely suggest the idea, however, not press it.<P>2. Place in Biblical Literature:<P>If the Book of Job is a product of the time of Jehoiachin\'s imprisonment, it is in worthy and congenial literary company. Isaiah, fostering the faith of a new-born spiritual "remnant," had gathered the elements of that sublime vision (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',1,1);">Isa 1:1</a>) of Israel\'s mission among the nations which a later hand was even now, four generations after, working to supplement and finish, in a prophecy (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',40,\'1-\';">Isa 40:1-66:24</a>) which, as all recognize, constitutes the closest parallel in spirited idea to our book. Seers, priests and singers had long busied themselves with the literary treasures of the past; drawing out of dusty archives and putting into popular idiom the ancient laws and counsels of Moses (Deuteronomy; see under <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JOSIAH">JOSIAH</a>); Collecting and adapting the old Davidic psalms and composing new ones, as Hezekiah\'s reorganization of the worship required. Ezekiel was at Tel Abib planning for the reconstruction of the temple, and perhaps by his use of the name "Job" veiling a cryptic reference (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',14,14,20);">Eze 14:14,20</a>). The affiliations of the Book of Job, however, were more specifically, with the wisdom literature; and long before this the "men of Hezekiah" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',25,1);">Pr 25:1</a>) had gathered their aftermath of the Solomonic proverbs, to supplement the maxims which had been the educative pabulum of the people (see under <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PROVERBS,+THE+BOOK+OF">PROVERBS, THE BOOK OF</a>). It was with the care and principle of this diffused instruction, now the most popular vein of literature, that the Book of Job concerned itself. That had become apparent as soon as the maxims were coordinated in an anthology, and an introduction to the collection had been composed, extolling Wisdom as the guide and savior of life. To a spiritually-minded thinker with the Hebrew genius for religion the motivation of Wisdom must sooner or later come. With its values should be apprehended also its unguarded points and tendencies. It was exposed to the one-sided drift of all popular things. In an age when revision and deeper insight were the literary order of the day, Wisdom would come in with the other strains of literature for purification and maturing; and there was not wanting an experience, the basis of an almost unbelievable report (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',53,1);">Isa 53:1</a>) to give depth and poignancy to Job\'s personal story of suffering and integrity.<P>3. Parallels and Echoes:<P>In the amazing sureness and vigor. of its message the Book of Job stands out unique and alone; but it is by no means without its lesser parallels in faith and doubt, above which it rises like a mountain above its retinue of foothills. Mention has been made above of a number of Psalms (e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',37,\'1-\');">37</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',49,\'1-\');">49</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',73,\'1-\');">73</a>) which with different degrees of assurance witness to the struggle of faith with the problem of the rampant and successful wicked. <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',49,\'1-\');">Ps 49</a>, one of the psalms of the sons of Korah, is especially noteworthy, because it expressly employs the popular mashal, that is, the Wisdom vehicle, to convey a corrective lesson about unblest riches, drawing a conclusion not unlike that of <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',27,\'8-23\');">Job 27:8-23</a>, though in milder tone. Not less noteworthy also is the note of suffering and its mysteriousness which pervades many of the psalms, especially of Asaph and Heman; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',88,\'1-\');">Psalms 88</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',102,\'1-\');">102</a> might both have been composed with special reference to Hezekiah\'s sickness and set beside his psalm in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',38,\'1-\');">Isa 38</a>, but also they are so fully in the tone of Job\'s complaint, especially <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',88,\'1-\');">Ps 88</a>, that Professor Godet, not unplausibly, conjectures that the Book of Job was written by its author Heman. Hezekiah\'s deadly sickness itself (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',38,\'1-\');">Isa 38</a>), which was of a leprous nature, banishing him from the house of God, and which was miraculously healed<65>an experience regarding which Hezekiah\'s own writing (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',38,\'10-20\');">Isa 38:10-20</a>) is strikingly in the key of Job\'s complaint<6E>furnishes the nearest parallel to, or adumbration of, Job\'s affliction; but also in the accounts of the Servant of Yahweh there are hints of a similar stroke of God\'s judgment (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',52,14);">Isa 52:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',53,3);">53:3</a>). The passage <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',7,17,18);">Job 7:17,18</a> has been called "a bitter parody" of <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',8,4);">Ps 8:4</a>; it may be so, but the conditions are in utter contrast, and nothing can be concluded as to which is original and which echo. As to expression, the most remarkable parallel to Job, perhaps, is the passage <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',20,\'14-18\');">Jer 20:14-18</a>, in which, like Job, the prophet Jeremiah curses the day of his birth. This curse in Job would naturally be remembered by all readers as one of the most characteristic features of the book; and in like manner the curse in Jeremiah may have stood out in the memory of his disciples, of whom the writer of Job may have been one, and figure in a similar literary situation. Ezekiel\'s naming of Job along with Noah and Daniel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',14,14,20);">Eze 14:14,20</a>), as a type of atoning righteousness, is doubly remarkable if the writer of Job was a contemporary; he may have taken the name from a well-known legend, and there may have underlain it a double meaning, known to an inner circle, referring cryptically to one whose real name it might be impolitic to pronounce. Whenever written, the outline and meaning of Job\'s momentous experience must have won speedily to a permanent place in the universal Hebrew memory; so that centuries afterward James could write to the twelve tribes scattered abroad (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',5,11);">5:11</a>), "Ye have heard of the patience of Job, and have seen the end of the Lord."<P>LITERATURE.<P>A.B. Davidson, "The Book or Job" (Cambridge Bible for Schools), 1884; A.S. Peake, "Job" (New Century Bible), 1905; S.R. Driver, The Book of Job in the Revised Version, 1906; J. T. Marshall, The Book of Job, 1904; J.F. Genung, Epic of the Inner Life, 1891; G.G. Bradley, Lectures on Job in Westminster Abbey, 1887; F.C. Cook in The Speaker\'s Commentary, 1882. Among German writers, A. Dillmann, Hiob erklart, 1891; K. Budde, Das Buch Hiob ubersetzt und erklart, 1896 (see The Expositor T, VIII, iii); B. Duhm, Das Buch Hiob erklart, 1897; G. Beer, Der text des Buches Hiob untersucht, 1897; Gibson, "The Book of Job" (Oxford Commentaries), 1899.``66';
isbe[5080]='Job, Testament of``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=APOCALYPTIC+LITERATURE">APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE</a>`1';
isbe[5081]='Jobab`jo\'-bab (yobhabh, perhaps "howling"; Iobab):<P>(1) "Son" of Joktan (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',10,29);">Ge 10:29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',1,23);">1Ch 1:23</a>).<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=TABLE+OF+NATIONS">TABLE OF NATIONS</a>.<P>(2) An Edomite king (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',36,33,34);">Ge 36:33,34</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',1,44,45);">1Ch 1:44,45</a>).<P>(3) King of Madon (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',11,1);">Jos 11:1</a>).<P>(4) <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',8,9);">1Ch 8:9</a>; and (5) <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',8,18);">1Ch 8:18</a>, Benjamites.<P>The name is confused with that of Job in Septuagint of <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',42,17);">Job 42:17</a>.``1';
isbe[5082]='Jochebed`jok\'-e-bed (yokhebhedh, "Yahweh is glory"): Daughter of Levi, wife of Amram and mother of Moses (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',6,20);">Ex 6:20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',26,59);">Nu 26:59</a>). According to <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',6,20);">Ex 6:20</a>, she was a sister of Kohath, Amram\'s father.``1';
isbe[5083]='Jod`jod "y": Yodh, the tenth letter of the Hebrew alphabet.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ALPHABET">ALPHABET</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JOT">JOT</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=YODH">YODH</a>`1';
isbe[5084]='Joda`jo\'-da (Westcott-Hort, Greek New Testament, Ioda; Textus Receptus of the New Testament, Iouda):<P>(1) A Levite, whose sons were "over the works of the Lord," corresponding to Sudias (1Esdras 5:26), Hodaviah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',2,40);">Ezr 2:40</a>), Judah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',3,9);">Ezr 3:9</a>), Hodevah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',7,43);">Ne 7:43</a>).<P>(2) An ancestor of Jesus in Luke\'s genealogy (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,26);">Lu 3:26</a>, the King James Version "Juda").``1';
isbe[5085]='Joed`jo\'-ed (yo\'edh, "Yahweh is witness"): A "son" of Benjamin (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',11,7);">Ne 11:7</a>), wanting in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',9,7);">1Ch 9:7</a>.``1';
isbe[5086]='Joel (1)`jo\'-el (yo\'el, popularly interpreted as "Yahweh is God"; but see HPN, 153; BDB, 222a):<P>(1) The firstborn of Samuel (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',8,2);">1Sa 8:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',6,33);">1Ch 6:33</a>), and supplied in the Revised Version (British and American) of <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',6,28);">1Ch 6:28</a>, correctly).<P>(2) A Simeonite prince (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',4,35);">1Ch 4:35</a>).<p>(3) A Reubenite chief (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',5,4,8);">1Ch 5:4,8</a>).<P>(4) A Gadite chief, perhaps the same as (3) (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',5,12);">1Ch 5:12</a>). He might be the chief of "a family or clan whose members might be reckoned as belonging to either or both of the tribes" (Curtis, Chronicles, 122).<P>(5) A Levite ancestor of Samuel (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',6,36);">1Ch 6:36</a>), called "Shaul" in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',6,24);">6:24 (Hebrew 9)</a>).<P>(6) A chief of Issachar (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',7,3);">1Ch 7:3</a>).<P>(7) One of David\'s mighty men (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',11,38);">1Ch 11:38</a>), brother of Nathan. <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',23,36);">2Sa 23:36</a> has "Igal son of Nathan," and the Septuagint\'s Codex Vaticanus has "son" in 1 Chronicles, a reading which Curtis adopts.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=IGAL">IGAL</a>.<P>(8) A Levite (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',15,7,11,17);">1Ch 15:7,11,17</a>), probably the Joel of <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',23,8);">1Ch 23:8</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',26,22);">26:22</a>.<P>(9) David\'s tribal chief over half of Manasseh (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',27,20);">1Ch 27:20</a>).<P>(10) A Levite of Hezekiah\'s time (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',29,12);">2Ch 29:12</a>).<P>(11) One of those who had married foreign wives (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',10,43);">Ezr 10:43</a>) = "Juel" of 1Esdras 9:35.<P>(12) A Benjamite "overseer" in Jerusalem (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',11,9);">Ne 11:9</a>).<P>(13) Ioel, the prophet (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,1);">Joe 1:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,16);">Ac 2:16</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JOEL+2">JOEL 2</a>`149';
isbe[5087]='Joel (2)`(yo\'el; Ioel):<P><b>I. THE PROPHET</b><P><b>II. THE BOOK</b><P class="in15">1. Literary Form<P class="in15">2. Outline of Contents<P class="in15">3. Interpretation<P class="in30">(1) Literal<P class="in30">(2) Allegorical<P class="in15">4. Indications of Date<P class="in30">(1) Place in the Canon<P class="in30">(2) Language and Style<P class="in30">(3) Quotations<P class="in30">(4) The Situation<P class="in45">(a) Political<P class="in45">(b) Religious<P class="in45">(c) Ritualistic<P class="in30">(5) Foreign Nations Mentioned or Omitted<P class="in30">(6) Some Notable Expressions<P class="in15">5. View of Professor Merx<P class="in15">6. Connections with the New Testament<p><b>LITERATURE</b><hr /><P>I. The Prophet.<P>The Book of Joel stands second in the collection of the twelve Prophets in the Hebrew Canon. The name (yo\'el), meaning "Yahweh is God," seems to have been common, as we find a dozen other persons bearing it at various periods of the Biblical history. Beyond the fact that he was the son of Pethuel, there is no intimation in the book as to his native place, date, or personal history; nor is he mentioned in any other part of the Old Testament; so that any information on these points must be matter of inference, and the consideration of them must follow some examination of the book itself.<P>II. The Book.<P>1. Literary Form:<P>This takes largely the form of addresses, the occasion and scope of which have to be gathered from the contents. There is no narrative, properly so called, except at one place (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,18);">Joe 2:18</a>), "Then was Yahweh jealous for his land," etc., and even there the narrative form is not continued. Yet, though the earlier portions at least may be the transcript of actual addresses in which the speaker had his audience before him, this would not apply to the later portions, in which also the direct address is still maintained (e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,11);">Joe 3:11</a>, "Haste ye, and come, all ye nations round about"). This form of direct address is, indeed, characteristic of the style throughout (e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,21);">Joe 2:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,4,9,13);">3:4,9,13</a>). There is this also to be said of its literary character, that "the style of Joel is bright and flowing," his "imagery and language are fine" (Driver, LOT); "his book is a description, clear, well arranged, and carried out with taste and vivacity, of the present distress and of the ideal future. Joel may be reckoned among the classics of Hebrew literature. The need of a commentary for details, as is the case with Amos and Hosea, is here hardly felt" (Reuss, Das Altes Testament).<P>2. Outline of Contents:<P>The book in the original consists of 4 chapters, which, however, are in our version reduced to 3, by making the portion which constitutes chapter 3 in the Hebrew the concluding portion (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,\'28-32\');">2:28-32</a>) of chapter 2. The book begins in gloom, and its close is bright. Up to <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,18);">Joe 2:18</a> there is some great trouble or a succession of troubles culminating at <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,\'28-32\');">2:28-32</A> (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,\'1-\');">Joe 3</a> in Hebrew). And the concluding portion, <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,\'1-\');">Joe 3 (Joe 4 in Hebrew)</a>, in which the prophet projects his view into futurity, begins with judgment but ends with final blessedness. There is a progression in the thought, rising from the solid, sorely smitten earth to a region ethereal, and the stages of advance are marked by sudden, sharp calls (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,2,14);">1:2,14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,9);">3:9</a>), or by the blasts of the trumpet which prelude the shifting scenes (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,1,15);">2:1,15</a>).<P><a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,\'1-\');">Joe 1</a> begins with an address, sharp and peremptory, in which the oldest inhabitant is appealed to whether such a calamity as the present has ever been experienced, and all are called to take note so that the record of it may be handed down to remotest posterity. The land has suffered from a succession of disasters, the greatest that could befall an agricultural country, drought and locusts. The two are in fact inextricably connected, and the features of both are mixed up in the description of their effects. The extent of the disaster is vividly depicted by the singling out of the classes on whom the calamity has fallen, the drinkers of wine, the priests,<P>the vine-dressers, the husbandmen; and, toward the close of the chapter, the lower animals are pathetically introduced as making their mute appeal to heaven for succor (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,18,19,20);">1:18-20</a>). Specially to be noted is the manner in which the priests are introduced (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,9);">1:9</a>), and how with them is associated the climax of the affliction. The prophet had just said "my land" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,6);">1:6</a>), "my vine" and "my fig-tree" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,7);">1:7</a>); and, though many modern expositors take the pronoun as referring to the nation or people, it would appear more appropriate, since the people is objectively addressed, to regard the prophet as identifying himself with the God in whose name he is speaking. And then the transition to <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,8);">Joe 1:8</a> becomes intelligible, in which certainly the land is personified as a female: "Lament like a virgin girded with sackcloth for the husband of her youth." The underlying idea seems to be the conception of the land as Yahweh\'s and of Yahweh as the ba\'al "lord," or husband of people and land. This is the idea so much in evidence in the Book of Hosea, and so much perverted by the people whom he addressed, who ascribed their corn (grain) and wine and oil to the Canaanite Baals. The idea in its purer form is found in the "land Beulah," "married land" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',62,4,5);">Isa 62:4,5</a>). If it was this that was in Joel\'s mind, the mention of the priests comes naturally. The products of the land were Yahweh\'s gifts, and the acknowledgment of His lordship was made by offerings of the produce laid on His altar. But if nothing was given, nothing could be offered; the "cutting off" of the meal and drink offerings was the mark of the widowhood and destitution of the land. Hence, the pathetic longing (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,14);">Joe 2:14</a>) that at least so much may be left as to assure the famished land that the supreme calamity, the loss of God, has not fallen. Thus the visitation is set in a religious light: the graphic description is more than a poetic picture. It is the Lord\'s land that is wasted; hence, the summons (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,14);">Joe 1:14</a>) to "cry unto Yahweh," and in the verses that follow the supplication by man and beast for deliverance.<P><a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,\'1-17\');">Joe 2 up to verse 17</a> seems to go over the same ground as <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,\'1-\');">Joe 1</a>, and it has also two parts parallel respectively to two parts of that chapter: <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,\'1-11\');">2:1-11</A> is parallel to <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,\'2-12\');">1:2-12</A>, and <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,\'12-17\');">2:12-17</a> to <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,\'13-20\');">1:13-20</a>. The former part in both cases is chiefly descriptive of the calamity, while the latter part is more hortatory. Yet there is an advance; for, whereas in <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,\'2-12\');">1:2-12</a> the attention is fixed on the devastation, in <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,\'1-11\');">2:1-11</A> it is the devastator, the locust, that is particularly described; also, in <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,\'12-17\');">2:12-17</a> the tone is more intensely religious: "Rend your heart, and not your garments" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,13);">2:13</A>). Finally it is to be noted that it is at the close of this portion that we get the first reference to external nations: "Give not thy heritage to reproach, that the nations should use a byword against them: wherefore should they say among the peoples, Where is their God?" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,17);">2:17</a> margin). If the view given above of <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,6,7,8);">1:6-8</a> be correct, this is merely an expansion of the germinal idea there involved. And so it becomes a pivot on which the succeeding portion turns: "Then was Yahweh jealous for his land, and had pity on his people" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,18);">2:18</a>).<P>There is a sharp turn at <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,18);">Joe 2:18</a>, marked by the sudden variation of the verbal forms. Just as in <a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',7,10);">Am 7:10</a>, in the midst of the prophet\'s discourse, we come upon the narration, "Then Amaziah the priest of Beth-el sent to Jeroboam," etc., so here we have obviously to take the narrative to be the sequence of the foregoing address, or, more properly speaking, we have to infer that what Joel had counseled had been done. The fast had been sanctified, the solemn assembly had been called, all classes or their representatives had been gathered to the house of the Lord, the supplication had been made, and "then was Yahweh jealous for his land, and had pity on his people." In point of fact, as the Hebrew student will perceive, all the verbs from <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,15);">2:15</a> may be read, with a change of the points, as simple perfects, with the exception of the verbs for "weep" and "say" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,17);">2:17</a>, which might be descriptive imperfects. But no doubt the imperative forms are to be read, expressing as they do more graphically the doing of the thing prescribed. And, this sharp turn having been made, it will be noticed how the discourse proceeds on a higher gradient, forming a counterpart to the preceding context. Step by step, in inverse order, we pass the former points, beginning opposite what was last the "reproach among the nations" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,19);">2:19</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,7);">2:7</a>), passing the destruction of the great army (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,20);">2:20</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,\'2-11\');">2:1-11</a>), then touching upon the various kinds of vegetation affected (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,\'21-24\');">2:21-24</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,12);">1:12</a>, <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,10);">10</a>, etc.), and ending with the reversal of the fourfold devastation with which the prophet began (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,25);">2:25</A>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,4);">1:4</A>). So that what at the outset was announced as a calamity unprecedented and unparalleled, now becomes a deliverance as enduring as God\'s presence with His people is forever assured.<P>Up to this point there has been an observable sequence and connection, so that, while the prophet has steadily progressed upward, we can look down from the point reached and see the whole course that has been traversed. But now in <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,\'28-32\');">Joe 2:28-32 (Joe 3</a> in Hebrew)</a> he passes abruptly to what "shall come to pass afterward." And yet no doubt there was a connection of thought in his mind, of which we obtain suggestions in the new features of the description. There is "the sound of abundance of rain" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',18,41);">1Ki 18:41</a>) in this pouring out of the Spirit upon all flesh; in the sons and daughters, old men and young, servants and handmaidens, we seem to recognize the representative gathering of <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,15);">Joe 2:15</a>f; those engaged in the priestly function of, supplication here endued with prophetic gifts, "a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',19,6);">Ex 19:6</a>), all the Lord\'s people become prophets (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',11,29);">Nu 11:29</a>). Again we see the sky overcast and sun and moon darkened before the great and terrible day of the Lord, as if the prophet had said: There shall be greater things than these; a new era is coming in which God\'s hand will be laid more heavily upon the world, and His people will be quickened to a clearer vision of His working. The "day of Yahweh" has yet to come in a fuller sense than the locust plague suggested, and there will be a more effective deliverance than from drought and dearth; but then as now there will be found safety in Mt. Zion and Jerusalem. This, however, implies some danger with which Jerusalem has been threatened; a "remnant," an "escaped" portion involves a disaster or crisis out of which new life comes. And so the prophet goes on in <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,1);">Joe 3 (Joe 4 in Hebrew)</a>, still speaking of "those days" and "that time," to tell us of the greater deliverance from the greater trouble to which he has been alluding. There is nothing in the antecedent chapters to indicate what "that time" and "those days" are, or what the prophet means by bringing again the captivity of Judah and Jerusalem. These are questions of interpretation. In the meantime, we may note the general features of the scene now set before us. A great assize is to be held in the valley of Jehoshaphat, in which "all nations" there assembled by Divine summons will be judged for offenses against God\'s people and heritage (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,\'1-8\');">3:1-8</A>). And again, just as in <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,\'1-\');">Joe 1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,\'1-\');">2</a> the prophet exhibited the plague of locusts in two pictures, so here in <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,\'9-21\');">3:9-21</A> the picture of the great assize is transformed into a bloody picture in the same valley, not so much of battle as of slaughter, a treading of the wine-press. There is a confused multitude in "the valley of decision"; sun and moon are darkened, and the stars withdraw their shining; the "day of Yahweh" has finally come; and, when the din is silenced and clear light again falls upon the scene, all is peace and prosperity, the last of the enemies destroyed, and the Lord dwelleth in Zion.<P>3. Interpretation:<P>(1) Literal.<P>Thus the book forms a fairly intelligible and connected whole when we read in the literal sense of the language. That is to say: a time of continued drought combined with an unprecedented visitation of locusts gives occasion to the prophet to call his people to the recognition of the Divine hand and to earnest supplication that the threatened ruin of people and land may be averted. The removal of the calamity is interpreted as a mark of restored Divine favor and an assurance of prosperity based on God\'s unchangeable purpose of good to His people. But these great doings of Nature\'s God suggest yet greater deeds of Israel\'s God of a more spiritual kind, the outpouring, like copious showers, of Divine blessing, so that the whole community would be set on a higher level of spiritual apprehension. And thus the prophet is led on to speak of the "last things." Judah and Jerusalem, highly distinguished and signally protected, are bound up with a world-wide purpose; Israel, in a word, cannot be conceived apart from non-Israel. And as non-Israel had in the past been an opposing power, in the great "day of Yahweh," wrong should be at last righted, the nations judged, and Israel and Israel\'s God be glorified. No doubt the interpretation is not without difficulties. We may not be able to detect the motives of the sudden transitions, or to say how much of the purport of the latter part was in the prophet\'s mind when he was engaged on the former part. And the description of the locust is so highly poetical that there is a temptation to see in it a reference to a great invading army.<P>(2) Allegorical.<P>These considerations, combined with the undoubted eschatological strain of the closing part of the book, led early commentators (and they have had followers in modern times) to an allegorical interpretation of the locust, and to regard the whole book as pointing forward to future history. Thus, in Jerome\'s time, the 4 names of the locust in <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,4);">1:4</a> were supposed to designate<P class="in15">(1) the Assyrians and Babylonians,<P class="in15">(2) the Medes and Persians,<P class="in15">(3) the Macedonians and Antiochus Epiphanes, and<P class="in15">(4) the Romans.<P>But, apart from the consideration that the analogy of prophecy would lead us to look for some actual situation or occurrence of his time as the starting-point of Joel\'s discourse, a close observation and acquaintance with the habits of the locust confirm the prophet\'s description, albeit highly figurative and poetical, as minutely accurate in all its details. It is to be observed that, though spoken of as an army (and at the present day the Oriental calls the locust the "army of God"), there is no mention of bloodshed. The designation "the Northern one," which has been considered inappropriate because the locust comes from the parched plain of the eastern interior, need not cause perplexity; for the Hebrew, while it has names for the 4 cardinal points of the compass, has none for the intermediate points: Judea might be visited by locusts coming from the northeast, or, coming from the East, they might strike the country at a point to the north of Palestine and travel southward. So the wind which destroys the locust (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,20);">Joe 2:20</a>) would be a northwesterly wind, driving the forepart into the Dead Sea and the hinder part into the Mediterranean.<P>4. Indications of Date:<P>The Book of Joel has been assigned by different authorities to very various dates, ranging over 4 or 5 centuries; but, as will appear in the sequel, it comes to be a question whether the book is very early or very late, in fact, whether Joel is perhaps the very earliest or the very last or among the last of the writing prophets. This diversity of opinion is due to the fact that there are no direct indications of date in the book itself, and that such indirect indications as it affords are held to be capable of explanation on the one view or the other. It will be noticed also that, to add to the uncertainty, many of the arguments adduced are of a negative kind, i.e. consideration of what the prophet does not mention or refer to, and the argument from silence is notoriously precarious. It will, therefore, be convenient to specify the indications available, and to note the arguments drawn from them in support of the respective dates.<P>(1) Place in the Canon.<P>An argument for a very early date is based upon the place of the book in the, collection of the "twelve" minor prophets.<P>It stands, in the Hebrew Bible, between Hosea and Amos, who are usually spoken of as the earliest "writing prophets." It is true that, in the Septuagint collection, the order is different, namely, Hosea, Amos, Micah, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah; which may indicate that as early as the time of the formation of the Canon of the Prophets there was uncertainty as to the place of Joel, Obadiah, and Jon, which contain no direct indication of their dates. But, seeing that there has evidently been a regard to some chronological order, the books being arranged according to the Assyrian, Babylonian and Persian periods, it cannot be without significance that Joel has found a place so high up in the collection. The three indisputably post-exilian books stand together at the end. If Joel is late, it must be as late as the latest of these, possibly a great deal later. But if that is so, there was the greater likelihood of its date being known to the collectors. It would be a very hazardous assumption that prophetical books were not read or copied from the time of their first composition till the time they were gathered into a Canon. And, if they were so read and copied, surely the people who handled them took some interest in preserving the knowledge of their origin and authorship.<P>In this connection, attention is directed to the resemblances to the Book of Amos before which Joel stands. These are regarded by Reuss as favoring the early date. That large and beautiful passage with which the Book of Amos opens dwells upon the thought that the threatenings, which had formerly been uttered against the nations, are about to receive their fulfillment, and that Yahweh could not take back His word. Now it is just such a threatening that fills the last part of the Book of Joel. Indeed Amos begins his book with the very phrase in which Joel opens his closing address, "Yahweh will roar from Zion, and utter his voice from Jerus" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',1,2);">Am 1:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,16);">Joe 3:16</a>). At the end of Amos also the happy fertility of Canaan is described in similar terms to those in Joel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',9,13);">Am 9:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,18);">Joe 3:18</a>). Reuss, moreover, draws attention to the remarkable expression found in Joel, and also, though in modified terms, in two Prophets of the Assyrian period: "Beat your plowshares into swords, and your pruning-hooks into spears," says Joel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,10);">3:10</a>), whereas we have the oracle in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',2,4);">Isa 2:4</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Mic\',4,3);">Mic 4:3</a>, "They shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning-hooks"; and it is suggested that, if these were current phrases, they were more likely to have been coined in the form employed by Joel in earlier and less settled times, when sudden alarms of war called the peaceful husbandman to the defense of his fields and flocks. Further, it is pointed out that Amos reproaches the people of his day for impenitence, although Yahweh had given them "cleanness of teeth" and "want of bread" and had "withholden the rain...when there were yet three months to the harvest," and smitten them with blasting and mildew and the palmer worm (<a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',4,\'6-9\');">Am 4:6-9</a>); and all this is the more striking because Joel represents the distress of his day as unprecedented in magnitude.<P>To all this, advocates of the late date reply that we cannot determine the date of a book by its place in the Canon; for that the collectors were guided by other considerations. As to the resemblances to Amos, it may have been on the strength of these very resemblances that the Book of Joel, bearing no date in itself, was placed beside that of Amos. Moreover, it is maintained, as we shall see presently, that Joel has resemblances to other prophets, some of them confessedly of late date, proving that he was acquainted with writings of a very late time.<P>(2) Language and Style.<P>Another argument for an early date is based upon the purity of the language and character of the style. The book is written in what may be described as classical Hebrew, and shows no trace of decadence of language. It is no doubt true that "the style is the man," as is strikingly illustrated in the very different styles of Amos and Hosea, who were practically contemporaneous; so that arguments of this kind are precarious. Still, it is to be noted, that though there is nothing archaic in the style of Joel, neither is there anything archaic in the style of Amos, who would, by the exclusion of Joel, be our earliest example of written prophecy.<P>The advocates of the very late date reply that the style of Joel is too good to be archaic; and that his admittedly classic style is to be explained by the supposition that, living at a late time, he was a diligent student of earlier prophetic literature, and molded his style upon the classical.<P>(3) Quotations.<P>Here, therefore, must be mentioned an argument much relied on by the advocates of a very late date. It is said that there are so many resemblances in thought and expression to other Old Testament books that it is incredible that so many writers posterior to the early date claimed for Joel should have quoted from this little book or expanded thoughts contained in it. A very elaborate comparison of Joel with late writers has been made by Holzinger in ZATW, 1889, 89-131; his line of argument being that, while resemblances to undoubtedly early writers may be explained as the work of a writer in the Renaissance imitating older models, the resemblances to others known to be late, such as Jeremiah, Ezekiel, II Isaiah, Psalms, Nehemiah, Chronicles, etc., cannot be so explained if Joel is taken to be early. The principal passages in question are given in the Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges, "Book of Joel," by Professor Driver, who also takes the view that Joel is late.<P>The list is not, perhaps, so formidable as its length would imply. Both writers confess that from several of the passages no conclusion of any value can be drawn, and that there is always a difficulty in determining priority when similarities in diction are found. Many of the expressions quoted look as if they might have been commonplaces of the prophetical literature; and, if it was possible for a very late writer to quote from so many antecedent writings, it was as possible and much easier for a number of late writers to go back to the very earliest prophets, especially if their words were memorable and germinal. We have heard of the man who objected to Shakespeare because he was full of quotations; and there is perhaps not a line of Gray\'s "Elegy" that has not been quoted somewhere, while some of his lines have become household words. But the strongest objection to this argument is this: if Joel had the minute acquaintance with antecedent writers and followed them so closely as is implied, he not only varies from them in essential particulars, but falls below them, as we shall see, in his anticipations of the future.<P>(4) The Situation.<P>We have now to look at features of a more concrete and tangible character, which promise to give more positive results. It is maintained by the advocates of the late date that the situation and immediate outlook of the prophet are not only consistent with the late date but preclude any preexilian date altogether. The elements of the situation are these: Whereas all the prophets before the downfall of Samaria (722 BC), and even Jeremiah and Ezekiel, mention the Northern Kingdom, it is not once named or referred to in Joel; for the occurrence of the name "Israel" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,27);">2:27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,2,16);">3:2,16</a> cannot support this sense. Judah and Jerusalem fill our prophet\'s actual horizon (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,1,32);">2:1,32</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,6.16.20);">3:6,16f., 20</a>); no king is mentioned or implied, but the elders with the priests seem to be the prominent and ruling class. Further, the temple and its worship are central (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,14);">1:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,15);">2:15f</a>) and so important that the cutting off of the meal offering and drink offering is tantamount to national ruin (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,9,13,16);">1:9,13,16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,14);">2:14</a>). Again, there is no mention of the prevailing sins of preexilian times, the high places with their corrupt worship, or indeed of any specific sin for which the people were to humble themselves, while fasting and putting on sackcloth seem to have a special virtue. All the circumstances, it is held, conform exactly to the time of the post-exilian temple and to no other time. The Northern Kingdom was no more, there was no king in Jerusalem, the temple was the center and rallying-point of national life, its ritual the pledge and guarantee of God\'s presence and favor; the period of legalism had set in. It is confidently averred that at no period prior to the regime inaugurated by Ezra and Nehemiah was there such a conjunction of circumstances.<P>(a) Political:<P>In reply, it is urged in favor of the early date that there was a period in preexilian time when such a situation existed, namely, the early years of the reign of Joash, when that prince was still an infant; for Jehoiada the priest acted practically as regent after the death of Athaliah, 836 BC (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',11,\'1-17\');">2Ki 11:1-17</a>). This would sufficiently account for the absence of mention of a king in the book. At such a time the priesthood must have held a prominent position, and the temple would overshadow the palace in importance. The omission of the Northern Kingdom may be accounted for by the fact that at that time the two kingdoms were on friendly terms; for the two royal houses were connected by marriage, and the kingdoms were in alliance (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',3,6);">2Ki 3:6</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',8,28);">8:28</a>). Or the omission may have no more significance than the fact that Joel was concerned with an immediate and near present distress and had no occasion to mention the Northern Kingdom. To show how unsafe it is to draw conclusions from such silence, it may be observed that throughout the first 5 chapters of Isaiah, larger in bulk than the whole Book of Joel, only Judah and Jerusalem are mentioned; and, even if it should be maintained that a part or the whole of these chapters dates from after the deportation of the ten tribes, still it is noteworthy that, when the prophet could have made as good use of a reference to the event as Jeremiah and Ezekiel, he does not do so.<P>(b) Religious:<P>The fact that there is no mention of specific national sins, and particularly of the worship of the high places, of which preexilian prophets have so much to say, is made much of by advocates of the late date, Dr. A.B. Davidson, e.g., declaring it to be "doubtful whether such a state of things existed at any time prior to the restoration from exile" (Expos, March, 1888); but perhaps this argument proves too much. If we are to deduce the state of religion in Joel\'s day from, what he does not say on the subject, it may be doubted whether at any time, either before or after the exile, such a condition prevailed. The post-exilian prophets certainly knew of sins in their time, sins, too, which restrained the rain and blasted the wine and oil and corn (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hag\',1,11);">Hag 1:11</a>). For all that Joel says on the subject, the condition of things implied is as consistent with the time of Jehoiada as with that of Nehemiah. And what shall we say of Isaiah\'s positive description of the condition of Jerusalem before his time: "the faithful city...she that was full of justice! righteousness lodged in her" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',1,21);">Isa 1:21</a>)? When was that? So also his promise: "I will restore thy judges as at the first, and thy counselors as at the beginning: afterward thou shalt be called The city of righteousness, a faithful town" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',1,26);">Isa 1:26</a>). Higher praise could scarcely be bestowed, and there is nothing in the Book of Joel to imply that he assumed so much.<P>(c) Ritualistic:<P>Too much has been made of the references to ritual, as if they necessarily implied a post-exilian date. It is not legitimate here to assume that the idea of centralization of worship originated in Josiah\'s days, and that the priestly legislation is post-exilic. The mention of "old men" or "elders" is no such indication. Wellhausen himself maintains that the expression everywhere in Joel means nothing more than "old men"; and, even if it had an official connotation, the official elders are an old tribal institution in Israel. It may be noted here again that in the first 5 chapters of Isaiah elders also are mentioned, and more indubitably in an official sense, although the time was that of the monarchy (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',3,2,14);">Isa 3:2,14</a>). And as to the sanctity of the temple, it will hardly be denied that in the time of Jehoiada the Jerusalem temple was a place of far more importance than any supposed local shrine, and especially when there was a call to a united national supplication (see <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',11,\'1-\');">2Ki 11</a>). In point of fact the alleged references to ritual are very few and in most general terms. The "fast" is not denoted by the phrases in the legal codes, and was evidently on the footing of such observances as are common and instinctive at all times and among all persons (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',20,26);">Jud 20:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',7,6);">1Sa 7:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',1,12);">2Sa 1:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jon\',3,5);">Jon 3:5</a>). And where in any law-code are priests enjoined to lie all night in sackcloth (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,13);">Joe 1:13</a>)? Or what prescription in any code requires young and old, bridegroom and bride, to press together into the temple (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,16);">Joe 2:16</a>)? And why should not any or all of these things have been done in face of a sudden emergency threatening the ruin of an agricultural people? Moreover, Joel, so far from ascribing virtue to these outward marks of humiliation in a legalistic spirit, immediately after mentioning them says: "Rend your heart, and not your garments, and turn unto Yahweh your God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,13);">Joe 2:13</a>).<P>The only ritual references are to the meal offering and the drink offering (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,9,13);">Joe 1:9,13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,14);">2:14</a>), and these were not characteristically post-exilian. Indeed, they may be regarded as primitive forms of offering, the produce of the ground without which, among an agricultural people, we can hardly imagine a system of offerings to exist. They are both ancient. Amos regards the meal offering as well known (<a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',5,22,25);">Am 5:22,25</a>), and Isaiah uses the word "vain oblations" in speaking of its abuse (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',1,13);">Isa 1:13</a>). And though the noun for drink offering is not mentioned in the older prophets, Hosea knows the related verb and the act of pouring out wine to the Lord (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',9,4);">Ho 9:4</a>), and it may be asked whether it is likely that the people performed the act and had no name for the offering itself. Moreover, in an undisputed passage (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',16,13,15);">2Ki 16:13,15</a>), both offerings are mentioned in the time of Ahaz. As for the contention that our prophet regards these offerings of so much importance that the cessation of them would be fatal, if our interpretation of <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,8);">Joe 1:8</a>f above be correct, the earlier date would be much more appropriate. It was not because the offering threatened to cease, but because the thing offered threatened to be cut off, that Joel was so perturbed. The popular view as to the relation of Yahweh to His land was ancient, and had a foundation of truth; and in fact Hosea\'s teaching would fitly follow and complete that of Joel. Finally it is to be said that Joel\'s fine forecast of the outpouring of the Spirit, and of the universal extension of prophetic activity is as far removed as possible from the "legalistic" tendency that set in after the exile. And if the argument from silence is of any force at all, it is surely a very remarkable thing that in a book of post-exilian times, there should be no mention of prince or governor, or even of high priest.<P>(5) Foreign Nations Mentioned or Omitted.<P>Allusions to foreign nations, or the absence of allusion, would obviously promise to afford indications of the time of the prophet; and yet here also the allusions have been adduced in support of either of the divergent dates. The facts here are as follows: In the first two chapters, where the prophet, as is generally understood, is speaking of his own time and its pressing distress, there is no mention of any foreign nation, not even the kingdom of the ten tribes. The only expression which has been taken to be significant in this connection is the word translated "the northern" army (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,20);">Joe 2:20</a>), which some refer to the Assyrians, while others explain it of a northern army in late or apocalyptic time. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,\'1-\');">Joe 3</a>, however, when the prophet is speaking of "those days" and "that time" in the future, when the Lord "shall bring back the captivity of Judah and Jerusalem," there is to be a gathering of "all nations" in the valley of Jehoshaphat (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,1);">3:1</a>f); and later on "all the nations" are summoned to appear in the same valley for judgment (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,11);">3:11</a>f). "Tyre, and Sidon, and all the regions of Philistia" are specially reproached (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,4);">3:4</a>) because they have carried into their temples the sacred treasures, and have sold the children of Judah and Jerusalem unto the "sons of the Grecians" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,6);">3:6</a>); in recompense for which their sons and daughters are to be sold into the hand of the children of Judah, to be sold by them to "the men of Sheba, to a nation far off" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,8);">3:8</a>). Finally, at the close (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,19);">3:19</a>f), "Egypt shall be a desolation, and Edom shall be a desolate wilderness, for the violence done to the children of Judah, because they have shed innocent blood in their land."<P>It is acknowledged that, on either hypothesis, there are difficulties in accounting for the presence or absence of names of foreign nations in this presentation. Those who advocate the late date point with confidence to the silence as to the kingdom of the ten tribes, or to the kingdom of Damascus, which, on their hypothesis, had passed away, and the equally significant silence as to Assyria, which had long ago been superseded by the Babylonian and Persian empires of the East. As to the mention of Tyre and Sidon and the coasts of Philistia (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,\'4-6\');">Joe 3:4-6</a>), Driver says: "The particular occasion referred to by Joel must remain uncertain: but the Phoenicians continued to act as slave-dealers long after the age of Amos: and the notice of Javan (Greece) suits better a later time, when Syrian slaves were in request in Greece" (Cambridge Bible, "Joel," 17). The same writer says on <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,19);">Joel 3:19</a>: "There is so little that is specific in what is said in this verse with reference to either Egypt or Edom, that both countries are probably named (at a time when the Assyrians and Chaldeans had alike ceased to be formidable to Judah) as typical examples of countries hostile to the Jews." It is pointed out, moreover, that the enmity of Edom was particularly manifest at a late period when Jerusalem was destroyed by the Chaldeans, and that this was remembered and resented long afterward (<a onClick="return mV(\'Oba\',1,\'10-16\');">Ob 1:10-16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',25,12);">Eze 25:12</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',35,\'1-\');">35</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',137,7);">Ps 137:7</a>).<P>On the hypothesis of the early date, it is urged that there was no occasion to refer to the Northern Kingdom. If it was friendly, the inclusive name of Israel for the whole people was sufficient to denote this, and that it was not hostile in the early days of Joash has already been pointed out. As to Damascus, it was not till the last years of the reign of Joash that Hazael showed hostility to Jerusalem (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',12,17);">2Ki 12:17</a>f); and danger from Assyria had not yet emerged, and appears only faintly in Amos (<a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',3,11);">Am 3:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',6,14);">6:14</a>). Then it is pointed out that history records how, in the reign of Jehoram, the grandfather of Joash, "Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah, and made a king over themselves" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',8,20);">2Ki 8:20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',21,8);">2Ch 21:8</a>), and the historian adds that the revolt continued "unto this day." It may well have been that in such a revolt the resident Judeans in the land of Edom suffered the violence referred to in <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,19);">Joe 3:19</a>. Moreover, the Chronicler mentions that, in the same reign, "Yahweh stirred up against Jehoram the spirit of the Philistines, and of the Arabians that are beside the Ethiopians: and they came up against Judah, and brake into it, and carried away all the substance that was found in the king\'s house, and his sons also, and his wives," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',21,16);">2Ch 21:16</a>f). This might be what is referred to in <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,\'4-6\');">Joe 3:4-6</a>. If the royal family were carried away there would most probably be a deportation of other prisoners, who, taken by the seaboard Philistines, would, through the great maritime power of the day, be sold to the distant Greeks. And here it is pointed out that Amos singles out the very nations mentioned by Joel: Philistines, Tyre and Sidon and Edom, and reproaches them with offenses such as Joel specifies (<a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',1,\'6-12\');">Am 1:6-12</a>). And then, it is added, if the book is as late as Nehemiah, why is nothing said of Samaritans, Moabites, and Ammonites, who showed such marked hostility in his days (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',2,19);">Ne 2:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',4,7);">4:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',6,1);">6:1</a>)? For Ezekiel also, from whom it is supposed Joel derived his reference to the Edomites, mentions also Moabites and Ammonites as hostile to Israel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',25,\'1-11\');">Eze 25:1-11</a>). And so far were Tyre and Sidon from being hostile in the days of Nehemiah that we read of similar arrangements being made with them, as in the time of Solomon, for the supply of materials for the rebuilding of the temple (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',3,7);">Ezr 3:7</a>). And why is not a word said of the Babylonians, at whose hands Israel had suffered so much? So strongly, indeed, are these objections felt by Reuss, that he declares that, should the view of the late origin come to be finally accepted as the more probable, he would decide for a date after the Persian domination, i.e. subsequent to 332 BC. For, he says, the names of peoples introduced at the end of the book, Phoenicians, Egyptians, Philistines, Edomites, must surely in some way have had an actual significance for the author, who cannot out of caprice have passed over Syrians, Assyrians, Chaldeans, and Persians. Accordingly, if we are to have nothing to do with the pre-Assyrian period, we must come down to the late Seleucidan and Ptolemean dynasties, by whose hostile collisions Judea was certainly involved in severe trouble. But then, how are we to account for the position of Joel so high up in the collection of prophetical writers? For, on this supposition, we should expect his book to stand in the third division of the Canon.<P>(6) Some Notable Expressions.<P>There remain to be noticed some significant expressions which have a bearing on the question of date and, at first sight, seem to indicate a late origin. And yet there is a difficulty. For there is no doubt that our familiarity with the details of the great downfall of the Jewish state leads us to think of the destruction of Jerusalem when we read of the captivity or scattering of the people. There is, however, a saying in the Talmud that a greater distress makes a lesser one forgotten; and the question is whether there may not have been national experiences at an earlier time to which such expressions might be applicable: or, in other words, how early such phrases were coined and became current.<P>(a) "Bring Back the Captivity":<P>There is, first of all, uncertainty as to the origin of the phrase "bring back the captivity." Some connect the word "captivity" (shebhuth, shebhith) with the verb "to take captive" (shabhah), while others make it the cognate noun of the verb "to return" (shubh), with which it stands connected in the phrase "bring back the captivity of Judah and Jerus" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,1);">Joe 3:1</a>). In the former case the reference would be to the return of captives taken in war, or the return of exiles from captivity; and that view has led to the translation in our version. On the latter view, the expression would mean the restoration of prosperity, of which use we have an undoubted example in the words: "Yahweh turned the captivity of Job" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',42,10);">Job 42:10</a>). We can conceive either of the views to have been the original, and either to be quite early. A main feature of early warfare was the carrying away of prisoners, and the return of such captives was equivalent to a restoration of prosperity. Or again, the relief from any illness or trouble might be expressed by saying that there was a restoration, as e.g. in Scotland a sick person is said to have "got the turn." As to the significance of the phrase in Joel, it is pointed out by the advocates of the early date that, in Nehemiah\'s time, the exile was at an end, and the captivity "brought back" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',126,\'1-\');">Ps 126</a>). On the other side it is said that, though the new order was set up at Jerusalem, there still remained many Israelites in foreign lands, and Joel, not satisfied with the meager community in Palestine, looked forward to a fuller restoration; or otherwise, that the words are used in the wider and more general sense of restored prosperity. That the phrase was in early use, and in the sense of bringing back captives, is seen in <a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',9,14);">Am 9:14</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',6,11);">Ho 6:11</a>. And it may be observed that the phraseology used by Amos to denote going into captivity (<a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',1,5,15);">Am 1:5,15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',5,5,27);">5:5,27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',7,17);">7:17</a>) is employed by the Jews to denote the Babylonian captivity, and is even used by modern Jews to express the present dispersion. And yet Amos speaks of an "entire captivity" of people in his day (<a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',1,6,9);">Am 1:6,9</a> margin).<P>(b) "Parted My Land":<P>Then again, the expression "parted my land" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,2);">Joe 3:2</a>) does not seem very applicable to the breaking up of the state, for the land was not parted but absorbed in the great eastern empires; nor does Joel single out Assyrians, Babylonians, and Persians, by whom, if by any, a post-exilian parting of the land was effected. The expression would more fitly apply to such movements as the revolt of Edom and Libnah (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',8,22);">2Ki 8:22</a>), and the successive losses of territory by which the great dominion of David and Solomon was reduced. This process, described as "cutting Israel short" (literally, "cutting off the ends," <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',10,32);">2Ki 10:32</a> the King James Version) is recorded as having begun in the time of Jehu, before the reign of Joash, when outlying parts of territory were smitten by Hazael of Damascus; and Joel, speaking in God\'s name, may have used the expression "my land" as referring to the whole country.<P>(c) "Scattered among the Nations":<P>Whether the expression "scattered among the nations" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,2);">Joe 3:2</a>) would be applicable to the Israelite inhabitants of such conquered territories or to those sold into slavery (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,6);">Joe 3:6</a>) may be disputed. The expression certainly suggests rather the dispersion following the downfall of the state. And yet it is noteworthy that, if so, Joel is the only prophet who uses in that sense the verb here employed, a very strange thing if he followed and borrowed from them all; for, both in Jeremiah and Ezkekiel, as well as in Deuteronomy, other verbs are used. Jeremiah indeed uses the verb in comparing Israel to a scattered (or isolated) sheep which the lions have driven away (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',50,17);">50:17</a>); but the only other passage in which the word is plainly used of Israel being dispersed among the peoples in all the provinces of Persia is <a onClick="return mV(\'Est\',3,8);">Es 3:8</a>.<P>(d) "Reproach of the Nations":<P>Then there is the passage: "Give not thy heritage to reproach, that the nations should rule over them" (or "use a byword against them"): "wherefore should they say among the peoples, Where is their God?" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,17,19);">Joe 2:17,19</a>; compare margin). Here it is to be noted that the idea involved is certainly much older than the time of the exile. In the time of Hezekiah, the ambassadors of Sennacherib delivered their taunting message, which is described as reproaching the living God (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',19,4);">2Ki 19:4</a>). It was the method of ancient warfare, as is seen in the boasting of Goliath; for it is the same word that is used in that narrative, though rendered in our version "defy" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',17,10,25,36);">1Sa 17:10, 25f; 36</a>). And, if we read between the lines of the historical books, we shall see how common was this habit of "defying" or "reproaching," and how sensitive the people were to it (e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',20,2,5,13,18);">1Ki 20:2f; 5f; 13,18</a>). All this is anterior to the earliest possible date of Joel, and proves that, at an early time, there was a consciousness in Israel that the fortunes of the people were bound up with the honor of the national God. It is not to be overlooked that it is in the early part of the book, when he is concerned with the drought and locust, that Joel uses this expression.<P>(e) "Strangers Passing Through":<P>Toward the close of the book it is predicted that, in the time of final glory, strangers shall no longer pass through Jerusalem (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,17);">Joe 3:17</a>). This again would certainly be applicable to a late time, after the land had suffered many hostile invasions. Yet it can well be understood how a prophet at a very early period, thinking of the glorification of Zion, should imagine a state in which no "stranger" or foreigner should have a footing on the sacred soil, and Israel should dwell in solitary and preeminent exclusiveness. If so, the idea again is of a more primitive kind than the late date would suggest, especially if we postulate a prophet who had deeply studied earlier prophets, to whom Jerusalem of the future was the religious metropolis of the world, and Zion the place to which all nations would flow (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',2,3);">Isa 2:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',56,7);">56:7</a>).<P>(f) "Day of Yahweh":<P>A word must be said, in conclusion, in regard to the "day of Yahweh" which figures so prominently in the Book of Joel. In whatever sense it may originally have been employed, whether betokening weal or woe, the expression was an ancient one; for Amos refers to it as current in his day (5:18); and almost all the prophets refer to it in one way or another (<a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',5,\'18-20\');">Am 5:18-20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',2,12);">Isa 2:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',13,6,9);">13:6,9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',34,8);">34:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',46,10);">Jer 46:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lam\',2,22);">La 2:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',30,3);">Eze 30:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Oba\',1,15);">Ob 1:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zep\',1,8,18);">Ze 1:8,18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zep\',2,2,3);">2:2,3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',14,1);">Zec 14:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mal\',4,5);">Mal 4:5</a>). So far as it bears upon the date of Joel the question is: How does his usage compare with those of the other prophets? We find that he uses the expression twice in connection with the visitation of the locust (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,15);">1:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,1);">2:1</a>), once after speaking of the outpouring of the Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,31);">2:31</a>), and once again near the close of the book (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,14);">3:14</a>). Now, in regard to the earliest occurrences, it will be perceived that Joel is on a lower plane than succeeding prophets. He associates the approach of the day of the Lord with a heavy visitation upon material nature, precisely as the simple Oriental of the present day, on the occurrence of an eclipse, or at a visitation of locust or pestilence, begins to talk of the end of the world. And, though the point of view is shifted, and the horizon wider, at the close, it is to be remarked that the highest point attained is the conception of the day of the Lord as the deliverance and glorification of Israel: there is not a hint of that day being a time of testing and sifting of Israel itself, as in Amos and elsewhere (<a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',5,\'18-20\');">Am 5:18-20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',2,12);">Isa 2:12</a>). In fact, so far is he from going beyond the other prophets in his conception, that we may say Joel leaves the matter at the point where Amos takes it up.<P>5. View of Professor Merx:<P>In view of all these perplexing questions, Professor Ad. Merx had some reason for describing the Book of Joel as the "sorrow\'s child" (Schmerzenskind) of Old Testament exegesis; and he published in 1879 a work, Die Prophetic des Joel und ihre Ausleger von den aeltesten Zeiten bis zu den Reformatoren, in which, besides giving a history of the interpretation, he combated the method hitherto employed, and put forth a novel view of his own. Concluding, on the grounds usually maintained by the advocates of the late date, that Joel is post-exilian, he makes a comparison of the book with preceding prophetical literature, in order to show that Joel derived his ideas from a study of it, and especially that he followed step by step the prophecies of Ezekiel. Now in Ezekiel\'s outlook, the overflowing of Judea by the northern people, Gog, plays an important part (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',38,2,3,16,18);">Eze 38:2,3,16,18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',39,11);">39:11</a>), and this explains Joel\'s reference in <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,20);">2:20</a>.<P>As to the precise date: not only is the second temple standing but the city is surrounded by a wall (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,9);">Joe 2:9</a>); and this brings us down to the government of Nehemiah, after 445 BC; and the book of Nehemiah shows that other prophets besides Malachi lived and found acceptance in those days (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',6,7,14);">Ne 6:7,14</a>). The circumstances were these. Not only the exile, but the restoration, is a thing of the past. We are to think of Jerusalem and Judah in the narrowest sense: the elders and all the inhabitants of the land are addressed, a sort of senatus populusque Romanus, and with them are the priests presiding over an orderly ritual service at the temple. Judah is unaffected by political movements; the conflict with the Samaritans has died down; Judah is leading a quiet life, of which nothing is recorded because there is nothing to record; and the people of the ten tribes have practically disappeared, being swallowed up among the heathen: This undisturbed period is employed in literary labor, as may be inferred from the well-known notice regarding Nehemiah\'s collection of books (2Macc 2:13f), and from the production of such works as Esther, Jonah, Qoheleth, Malachi, Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah, etc. The making of books (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ecc\',12,12);">Ec 12:12</a>) had not come to an end.<P>But now, if the older prophets were seriously studied (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',9,2);">Da 9:2</a>), what impression would they make on the mind of a man like Joel? Was the daily life that followed the time of Nehemiah in any degree a fulfillment of the hopes of a Deutero-Isaiah, a Jeremiah, an Ezekiel, a Zechariah? Could a member of the restored community contemplate without painful feelings the lamentable condition of existence under the Persian government, the limitation of the people to a narrow territory, the separation from those still in the Dispersion, the irritation of the worship of the half-heathen Samaritans, the mixed marriages and general low condition, as contrasted with the glowing pictures of the prophets who had spoken of the last days? Such a contradiction between prophecy and event must have disturbed the minds of the more thoughtful; and so, while some said, "It is vain to serve God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mal\',3,14);">Mal 3:14</a>), "They that feared Yahweh spake one with another" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mal\',3,16);">Mal 3:16</a>), waiting in hope, believing that the present restoration could not be the true and final bringing back of the captivity.<P>To relieve his mind, Joel will write a book, the result of his study; and it must depict the full and final consummation. Living as he did, however, in quiet times, he had not, like earlier prophets, a historical situation to start from. Here, according to Merx, the genius of Joel comes into play. Seeking for a type of the end of the world, which was to be the antitype, he found one in the deliverance of Israel from Egypt in the distant past. Just as at that great crisis the people were rescued from bondage and brought into a wide and fertile land, so in the end Yahweh would subdue all Israel\'s enemies and place them in a noble land, uncontaminated by strangers, while He Himself would be enthroned in majesty on Zion. But just as that deliverance was ushered in by plagues, so also will be the "great day of Yahweh"; and as a signal type of the wholesale destruction of Israel\'s enemies, he seizes upon the plague of locusts and models his introduction upon <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',10,4);">Ex 10:4</a>ff. Joel had, no doubt, seen many a visitation of locusts; but what we have before us in <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,\'1-\');">Joe 1</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,\'1-\');">2</a> is not actual description but idealized picture, the groundwork of his eschatology.<P>Accordingly, in the view of Merx, the whole Book of Joel is one piece. There is no historical transition at <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,10);">2:10</a>; in fact, there is no historical element in it at all. The end of the book being apocalyptical, the beginning, which forms with it a unity, must also relate to no event in Joel\'s days, but moves likewise in the period at the close of time. The people addressed are not the men of Joel\'s day, but those who shall be alive when "that day" is imminent: in a word, the reader is at <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,2);">1:2</a> lifted into the air and placed at the beginning of the final judgment, at the moment when the apocalyptic locusts appear as heralds of the day.<P>Merx\'s view may be taken as an extreme and somewhat fanciful statement of the case for a late post-exilian date; and it does not seem to have found acceptance by the critics who start from a historical basis. Merx himself is fully aware that it is a revival of the allegorical and typical interpretation which had its vogue in earlier stages of exposition. But he defends himself on the ground that it was not the ancients who imposed the allegorical interpretation upon Scripture, but the original writers who were the first typologists and allegorists, as is notably seen in later books like Ezekiel and Daniel. Whatever opinion may be held on that subject, we must at least recognize the strongly marked eschatology of the book. But this does not of necessity imply a late date. It is no doubt true that the fully developed eschatology, as we see it in the apocalyptic literature of the extra-canonical books, came in after the cessation of prophecy proper. Yet prophecy, in its earliest phases, contemplated the distant future, and had its support in such an outlook. Professor A.B. Davidson has said: "Isaiah is the creator of the eschatology of the Old Testament and of Christianity, and it comes from his hand in a form so perfect that his successors can hardly add a single touch to it" (Expository Times, V, 297). The ancient oracle, found both in Isaiah and Micah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',2,\'2-4\');">Isa 2:2-4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mic\',4,\'1-5\');">Mic 4:1-5</a>), testifies to the triumphant and far-reaching hope of the older seers; and, before Isaiah\'s time, both Amos (<a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',9,\'11-15\');">9:11-15</a>) and Hosea (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',14,\'4-8\');">14:4-8</a>) have their outlook to the final future. The remarkable thing about Joel, which makes the determination of his date so difficult, is that he seems now to go beyond and now to fall short of other prophets. If he is later than Ezekiel and Jeremiah, he has nothing to say of the inclusion of Gentiles in the inheritance of Israel, but contemplates the final destruction of all Israel\'s enemies. If he is a contemporary of Malachi or later, he is less legalistic than that prophet; and whereas in Malachi we see the beginning of the fading away of prophecy, Joel looks for the time when the Spirit shall be poured out on all flesh, and the sons and daughters shall prophesy (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,28);">2:28</a>).<P>6. Connection with the New Testament:<P>It is this last element in the prophecy of Joel that links his book particularly with the New Testament, for Peter quoted Joel\'s words in this passage as fulfilled on the day of Pentecost, when the Spirit was poured forth on the assembled multitude (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,16);">Ac 2:16</a>). Yet, even as the Old Testament prophets one after another caught up the idea, unfolding and expanding it, so the New Testament writers see the approach of the day of the Lord in their own time (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',5,2);">1Th 5:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Pe\',3,10);">2Pe 3:10</a>); for that day is always coming, always near, though still in the future. Paul saw the whole creation groaning and travailing in pain, as Joel did, and the pouring out of the Spirit at Pentecost was part of, and also more than, the effusion seen by Joel. What Joel said he said truly, though he could not say all. For "that day" has grown in significance as the ages have rolled on; men have seen its approach in the various commotions and upheavals of the world, depicting its features in the colors of the changing times, now praying for it, now dreading its approach; and how far from precision are our thoughts in regard to it still! Yet, early or late, unerring is the sure word of prophecy in its essential burden. The concrete historical situations crumble away and leave the eternal truth as fresh as ever: "Yahweh reigneth; let the earth rejoice" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',97,1);">Ps 97:1</a>); it is the hopeful burden of Old Testament prophecy, for "righteousness and justice are the foundation of thy throne" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',89,14);">Ps 89:14</a>).<P>LITERATURE<P>(Besides that cited above).<2E>Credner, Der Proph. Joel ubersetzt u. erklart (1831); Wuensche, Die Weissagungen des Proph. Joel ubersetzt u. erklart (1872); the commentary on the Minor Prophets by Pusey, Orelli, Keil, Wellhausen, G.A. Smith; Meyrick in Speaker\'s Commentary; Nowack, in Handkommentar zum Altes Testament; Marti, in Kurzer Hand-Commentar zum Altes Testament.``151';
isbe[5088]='Joelah`jo-e\'-la (yo\'e\'lah, perhaps = yo\'elah, "may he avail!"): One of David\'s recruits at Ziklag (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',12,7);">1Ch 12:7 (Hebrew 8)</a>); a Benjamite or perhaps a Judean (see Curtis, Chronicles, 195f).``1';
isbe[5089]='Joezer`jo-e\'-zer (yo\'ezer, "Yahweh is help"): One of David\'s Benjamite recruits at Ziklag, though perhaps a Judean (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',12,6);">1Ch 12:6 (Hebrew 7)</a>).``1';
isbe[5090]='Jogbehah`jog\'-be-ha (yoghbechah): A city in Gilead assigned to Gad and fortified by that tribe (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',32,35);">Nu 32:35</a>). It lay on the line along which Gideon chased the Midianites (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',8,11);">Jud 8:11</a>), and the indication there leaves no doubt that it is represented today by Ajbeihat. The name attaches to 3 groups of ruins which date from Roman times. The position is about 7 miles northwest of \'Amman, and about midway between that city and the town of es-SalT. It stands 3,468 ft. above the level of the Mediterranean.<P>LITERATURE.<P>Oliphant, Land of Gilead, 232; Baedeker-Socin, Palestine.``1';
isbe[5091]='Jogli`jog\'-li (yoghli, perhaps = "led into exile"): Father of Bukki, a Danite chief (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',34,22);">Nu 34:22</a>).``1';
isbe[5092]='Joha`jo\'-ha (yocha, meaning unknown, but perhaps = yo\'ach "Joah"; see HPN, 283, note 4):<P>(1) A Benjamite (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',8,16);">1Ch 8:16</a>).<P>(2) One of David\'s mighty men (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',11,45);">1Ch 11:45</a>).``1';
isbe[5093]='Johanan`jo-ha\'-nan (yochanan, "Yahweh has been gracious"; Ioanan; compare <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JEHOHANAN">JEHOHANAN</a>):<P>(1) Son of Kareah, and one of "the captains of the forces who were in the fields" (i.e. probably guerrilla bands), who allied with Gedaliah, governor of Judah, after the fall of Jerusalem, 586 BC (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',25,23);">2Ki 25:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',40,7);">Jer 40:7-43:7</a>). He warned Gedaliah of the plot of Ishmael ben Nethaniah, who was instigated by the Ammonite king Baalis, to murder the governor; but the latter refused to believe him nor would he grant Johanan permission to slay Ishmael (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',40,\'8-16\');">Jer 40:8-16</a>). After Ishmael had murdered Gedaliah and also 70 northern pilgrims, Johanan went in pursuit. He was joined by the unwilling followers of Ishmael, but the murderer escaped. Thereupon Johanan settled at Geruth-Chimham near Bethlehem (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',41,\'1-\');">Jer 41</a>). As Ishmael\'s plan was to take the remnant to the land of Ammon, so that of Johanan and his fellow-chiefs was to go to Egypt. They consulted the Divine oracle through Jeremiah, and received the answer that they should remain in Judah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',42,\'1-\');">Jer 42</a>). But the prophet was accused of giving false counsel and of being influenced by Baruch. The chiefs then resolved to go to Egypt, and forced Jeremiah and Baruch to accompany them (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',43,\'1-\');">Jer 43</a>).<P>(2) The eldest son of King Josiah (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',3,15);">1Ch 3:15</a>), apparently = "Jehoahaz" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',23,\'30-33\');">2Ki 23:30-33</a>).<P>(3) Son of Elioenai, and a Davidic post-exilic prince (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',3,24);">1Ch 3:24</a>).<P>(4) Father of the Azariah who was priest in Solomon\'s time (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',6,9,10);">1Ch 6:9,10; (Hebrew 5:35,36)</a>).<P>(5) A Benjamite recruit of David at Ziklag, but perhaps a Judean (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',12,4);">1Ch 12:4 (Hebrew 5)</a>).<P>(6) A Gadite recruit of David at Ziklag (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',12,12);">1Ch 12:12 (Hebrew 13)</a>).<P>(7) Hebrew has "Jehohanan," an Ephraimite chief (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',28,12);">2Ch 28:12</a>).<P>(8) A returned exile (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',8,12);">Ezr 8:12</a>) = "Joannes" (1Esdras 8:38, the King James Version "Johannes").<P>(9) <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',12,22,23);">Ne 12:22,23</a> = <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JEHOHANAN">JEHOHANAN, (3)</a>.``149';
isbe[5094]='Johannes`jo-han\'-es, jo-han\'-ez.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JOANNES">JOANNES</a>`1';
isbe[5095]='Johannine Theology, 1`jo-han\'-in, -in:<P><b>I. THE ANTECEDENTS</b><P class="in15">1. Personality of Writer<P class="in15">2. Earlier New Testament Writings<P class="in15">3. Christian Experience and Teaching of History<P class="in15">4. Widening Contact with Gentile World<P class="in15">5. The Odes of Solomon<P class="in15">6. Antagonism to Gnostic Speculation<P><b>II. THE DIVINE NATURE</b><P class="in15">1. God Is Spirit<P class="in15">2. God Is Life<P class="in15">3. God Is Light<P class="in15">4. Ethical Attributes<P class="in30">God Is Righteous<P class="in15">5. God Is Love<P class="in30">(1) The Love of God<P class="in45">(a) Primarily a Disposition<P class="in45">(b) Embodied in Christ\'s Self-Sacrifice<P class="in45">(c) Love in Redemption<P class="in30">(2) Love Is God\'s Nature<P><b>III. THE INCARNATION</b><P class="in15">1. Historical Antecedents of the Logos-Doctrine<P class="in15">2. The Logos-Doctrine in John<P class="in15">3. The Incarnation as Delineated in the Fourth Gospel<P class="in15">4. The Incarnation in the First Epistle<P class="in15">5. Practical Implications of the Incarnation<P><b>IV. THE HOLY SPIRIT</b><P class="in15">1. The Work of the Spirit<69>in the Fourth Gospel<P class="in30">Perpetuates, but also Intensifies the Consciousness of Christ<P class="in15">2. In the First Epistle<P class="in30">(1) A Divine Teacher<P class="in30">(2) Other Aspects<P class="in15">3. The Person of the Spirit<P class="in30">His Deity Implied<P><b>V. DOCTRINE OF SIN AND PROPITIATION</b><P class="in15">1. Sin<P class="in15">2. Propitiation<P class="in30">(1) In the Gospel<P class="in30">(2) In the Epistle<P class="in30">(3) One with New Testament Teaching<P><b>VI. ETERNAL LIFE</b><P class="in15">1. Ethical Rather than Eschatological<P class="in15">2. Metaphysical Aspect<P class="in30">Reply to Criticism<P class="in15">3. Development of Doctrine<P class="in30">(1) Source in God<P class="in30">(2) Mediated by Christ<P class="in30">(3) Through the Spirit<P class="in30">(4) The Divine "Begetting"<P class="in30">(5) The "Children of God"<P class="in30">(6) The Divine Abiding<P><b>VII. HUMAN NATURE AND ITS REGENERATION</b><P class="in15">1. The World<P class="in15">2. Two Classes in the Human Race<P><b>VIII. THE CHURCH AND SACRAMENTS</b><P class="in15">1. The Church<P class="in15">2. The Sacraments<P class="in30">(1) Baptism<P class="in30">(2) The Lord\'s Supper<P>IX. ESCHATOLOGY<P class="in15">1. Type of Thought Idealistic<P class="in15">2. Yet History Not Ignored<P class="in15">3. Nor Eschatology<P class="in15">4. Eschatological Ideas<P class="in30">(1) Eternal Life<P class="in30">(2) Antichrist<P class="in30">(3) Resurrection<P class="in30">(4) Judgment<P class="in30">(5) The Parousia<P class="in45">(a) A "Manifestation"<P class="in45">(b) Relation to Believers<P><b>LITERATURE</b><hr ><P>The materials for the following sketch of the Johannine theology are necessarily drawn from the Fourth Gospel and the Epistles, chiefly the First Epistle, of John. The question of authorship is not here considered (see articles on the <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=GOSPEL">GOSPEL</a> and on the <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JOHN,+THE+EPISTLES+OF">JOHN, THE EPISTLES OF</a>). These writings, whether by the same or by different authors, are equally saturated with that spiritual and theological atmosphere, equally characterized by that type of thought which we call Johannine, and which presents an interpretation of Christianity scarcely less distinctive and original than Paulinism. Where there are differences in the point of view, these will be indicated.<P>I. The Antecedents.<P>1. Personality of Writer:<P>To attempt a full account of the historical sources and antecedents of the Johannine theology is beyond the scope of the present article; but they may be briefly indicated. Much must be attributed to the personality of the great anonymous writer to whom we directly owe this latest development of New Testament thought. Only a thinker of first rank among the idealists and mystics, a mind of the Platonic order, moving instinctively in the world of supersensuous realities, absorbed in the passion for the infinite, possessing in a superlative degree the gift of spiritual intuition, could under any conditions have evolved a system of thought having the special characteristics of this theology.<P>2. Earlier New Testament Writings:<P>Yet with all his originality the builder has raised his structure upon the foundation already laid in the teaching represented by the earlier New Testament writings. The synoptic tradition, though freshly interpreted, is presupposed. At certain points there is a strong affinity with the Epistle to the Hebrews. In the main, however, the Johannine doctrine may be said to be a natural and inevitable development of Paulinism<73>the conclusion to which the earlier writer\'s mind is visibly moving in e.g. the Epistle to the Colossians.<P>3. Christian Experience and Teaching of History:<P>Among the influences which have stimulated and guided this development, the first place belongs to the natural growth of Christian experience and the teaching of history. In the closing decades of the 1st century, Christianity was compelled by the force of events to liberate itself more completely from the husk of Jewish Messianism in which its Divine seed had first been deposited. The faith of the first Christian generation in the Messiahship of Jesus and the triumph of His cause had expressed itself (necessarily so, under the historical conditions) in vivid expectation of His Second Coming. He was only waiting behind the clouds, and would speedily return to the earth for the restitution of all things (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',3,21);">Ac 3:21</a>). But after the fall of Jerusalem this primitive apocalypticism became, with the passing years, more and more discredited; and the Christian faith had either to interpret itself afresh, both to its own consciousness and to the world, or confess itself "such stuff as dreams are made of." It would be difficult to overestimate the service which the Johannine theology must have rendered in this hazardous transition by transferring the emphasis of Christian faith from the apocalyptic to \'the spiritual, and leading the church to a profounder realization of its essential and inalienable resources in the new spiritual life it possessed through the ever-living Christ. Eternal life was not merely a future felicity, but a present possession; the most real coming of Christ, His coming in the Spirit. The Kingdom of God is here: the eternal is now. Such was the great message of John to his age, and to all ages.<P>4. Widening Contact with Gentile World:<P>In another direction, the widening contact of Christianity with the Gentile world had stimulated the development of doctrine. A disentanglement from Jewish nationalism, more complete than even Paul had accomplished, had become a necessity. If Christianity was to find a home and a sphere of conquest in the Greek-Roman world<6C>to recreate European thought and civilization<6F>the person of Christ must be interpreted as having a vastly larger significance than that of the Jewish Messiah. That this necessity hastened the process of thought which reached its goal in the Loges-doctrine of John cannot well be doubted. The way had so far been prepared by Philo and the Jewish-Alexandrian school. And while it is probably mere coincidence that Ephesus, with which the activity of John\'s later years is associated by universal tradition, was also the city of Heraclitus, who, 500 years earlier, had used the term Logos to express the idea of an eternal and universal Reason, immanent in the world, there is as little room as there can be motive for questioning that in the Johannine theology Christian thought has been influenced and fertilized at certain points by contact with Hellenism.<P>5. The Odes of Solomon:<P>On the other hand it is possible that this influence has been overrated. Fresh material for the investigation of the sources and connections of the Johannine theology is furnished by the recent discovery of the Odes of Solomon (J. Rendel Harris, M.A., Odes and Psalms of Solomon, Cambridge, 1909; AdoIf Harnack, Ein judisch-christliches Psalmbuch aus dem ersten Jahrhundert, Leipzig, 1910). This collection of religious poems is regarded by its discoverer, Rendel Harris, as the work of a writer who, while not a Jew, was a member of a community of Christians who were for the most part of Jewish extraction and beliefs. But though the Odes in their present form contain distinctly Christian elements (references, e.g. to the Son, the Incarnation, the Virgin Birth, the Passion, the Descensus ad inferos), Harnack\'s closer analysis tends to the conclusion that in their original form they were purely Jewish, and that they have been adapted to Christian use by a process of interpolation. For the original work Harnack gives as a possible date the beginning of the Christian era, the Christian redaction falling within the 1st century. Harnack recognizes a possibility that the redactor may have been acquainted with the Fourth Gospel. The religious feeling of the writer is throughout individual and mystical, rather than nationalistic and Messianic. The characteristic atmosphere is strongly Johannine (we may quote in, illustration only the noble sentence from the 12th ode: "The dwelling-place of the Word is man; and its truth is Love"). The Odes have, in common with the Johannine writings, such leading conceptions as "grace," "believing," "knowledge," "truth," "light," "living water," "life" (for a full exhibition of the parallelisms, see article by R.H. Strachan, The Expository Times, October, 1910). Harnack asserts deliberately (p. 99) that in the Odes we possess "the presuppositions of the Johannine theology, apart from the historical Jesus Christ, and without any Messianic doctrine." More recent criticism of the Odes, however, has resulted in great diversity of view regarding their origin. They have been assigned to Gnosticism, and on the contrary to Montanism; and again are described (Bernard) as Christian baptismal hymns. In view of this division of critical opinion, all that can be said in the meantime is that the Odes testify to a collateral mystical development, the recognition of which necessitates a revision of the estimates which have been made regarding the extent to which the Johannine theology is indebted to Hellenistic philosophy.<P>6. Antagonism to Gnostic Speculation:<P>One other factor in this theological development remains to be mentioned<65>antagonism to Gnostic speculation. In the Gospel this has left not a few traces, in the way both of statement and omission; in the 1st Epistle scarcely any other danger to the faith and life of the church is apprehended than the spreading influence of Gnostic tenets (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JOHN,+THE+EPISTLES+OF">JOHN, THE EPISTLES OF</a>). John himself has been charged with Gnostic tendencies; but the truth rather is that to him Gnosticism must have been the more hateful and have seemed the more dangerous because its conceptions were at some points the caricature of his own. In it he saw the real Antichrist, the "spirit of error," giving fatally misleading solutions of those problems which the human mind can never leave alone, but regarding which the one true light is the historic Christ. Gnosticism had lost all historical sense, all touch with reality. It moved in a world of sheer mythology and speculation; history became allegory; the incarnate Christ a phantasm. John took his stand only the more firmly upon historical fact, insisted the more strenuously upon the verified physical reality of the Incarnation. In many of its adherents Gnosticism had lost almost completely the moral sense; John the more vehemently asserts the inviolable moral purity of the Divine nature and of the regenerate life which is derived from it. Gnostic dualism had set God infinitely far from men as transcendent Being; John brings God infinitely near to men as Love; and sweeps away the whole complicated mythology of Gnostic emanations, eons and archons, by his doctrine of the Logos, coeternal and coequal with the Father, incarnate in Jesus, through whom humanity is made to participate in the very life of God<6F>the life of all love, purity and truth.<P>II. The Divine Nature.<P>1. God Is Spirit:<P>One of the glories of the Johannine theology is its doctrine of God, its delineation of the Divine nature. This is given in a series of intuitional affirmations which, though the manner of statement indicates no attempt at correlation, unite to form a complete organic conception. The first of these affirmations defines what is the Divine order of being: God is Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,24);">Joh 4:24</a>). The central significance of this inexhaustible saying is defined by the context. The old local worships, whether at Jerusalem or Samaria, had implied some special local mode of Divine presence; and this naturally suggested, if it did not necessitate, the idea of some kind of materiality in the Divine nature. But God is spirit; and true worship must be an intercourse of spirit with spirit, having relation to no local or material, but only to moral conditions. Thus the concept of the Divine spirituality is both moral and metaphysical. The religious relation to God, as it exists for Christian faith, rests upon the fact that the Supreme Being is essentially moral, but also omnipresent and omniscient<6E>the Divine Spirit whose will and percipiency act immediately and simultaneously at every point of existence. Such a Being we utterly lack the power to comprehend. But only such a Being can be God, can satisfy our religious need<65>a Being of whom we are assured that nothing that is in us, good or evil, true or false, and nothing that concerns us, past, present or future, is hid from His immediate vision or barred against the all-pervading operation of His will. To realize that God is such a Being is to be assured that He can be worshipped with no mechanical ritual or formal observance: they that worship Him must worship Him "in spirit and in truth."<P>2. God Is Life:<P>God, who is spirit, is further conceived as Life, Light, Righteousness and Love. Righteousness and Love are the primary ethical quailties of the Divine nature; Life the energy by which they act; Light the self-revelation in which they are manifested throughout the spiritual universe. God is Life. He is the ultimate eternal Reality. He was "in the beginning" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,1);">Joh 1:1</a>), or "from the beginning" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,1);">1Joh 1:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,13);">2:13</a>). These statements are made of the Logos, therefore a fortiori of God. But the Divine nature is not mere abstract being, infinite and eternal; it is being filled with that inscrutable elemental energy which we call Life. In God this energy of life is self-originating and self-sustaining ("The Father hath life in himself," <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,26);">Joh 5:26</a>), and is the source of all life (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,3,4);">Joh 1:3,4</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) margin). For every finite being life is union with God according to its capacity.<P>But the lower potencies of the creative Life do not come within the scope of the Johannine theology. The term is restricted in usage to its highest ethical significance, as denoting that life of perfect, holy love which is "the eternal life," the possession of which in fellowship with God is the chief end for which every spiritual nature exists. The elements present in the conception of the Divine life are these:<P>(1) The ethical: the life God lives is one of absolute righteousness (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,29);">1Joh 2:29</a>), and perfect love (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,9);">1Joh 4:9</a>).<P>(2) The metaphysical: the Divine life is nothing else than the Divine nature itself regarded dynamically, as the ground and source of all its own activities, the animating principle or energy which makes Divine righteousness and love to be not mere abstractions but active realities.<P>(3) In Johannine thought the Divine life is especially an energy of self-reproduction. It is this by inherent moral necessity. Love cannot but seek to beget love, and righteousness to beget righteousness, in all beings capable of them. With John this generative activity of the Divine nature holds a place of unique prominence. It is this that constitutes the Fatherhood of God. Eternally the Father imparts Himself to the Son (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,26);">Joh 5:26</a>), the Word whose life from the beginning consisted in His relation to the Father (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,2);">1Joh 1:2</a>). To men eternal life is communicated as the result of a Divine begetting (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,13);">Joh 1:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,5);">3:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,29);">1Joh 2:29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,9);">3:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,7);">4:7</a>, etc.) by which they become "children of God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,12);">Joh 1:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,1);">1Joh 3:1</a>, etc.).<P>(4) But God is not only the transcendent final source, He is also the immanent source of life. This is clearly implied in all those passages, too numerous to be quoted, which speak of God\'s abiding in us and our abiding in Him. Life is maintained only through a continuous vitalizing union with Him, as of the branches with the vine (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,\'1-6\');">Joh 5:1-6</a>). It must be observed, however, that John nowhere merges the idea of God in that of life. God is personal; life is impersonal. The eternal life is the element common to the personality of God, of the Loges, and of those who are the "children of God." Any pantheistic manner of thinking is as foreign to John as to every other Biblical writer.<P>3. God Is Light:<P>God is not life only; He is light also (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,5);">1Joh 1:5</a>). That God is life means that He is and is self-imparting; that He is light means that the Divine nature is by inward necessity self-revealing.<P>(1) As the essential property of light is to shine, so God by His very nature of righteousness and love is necessitated to reveal Himself as being what He is, so as to become the Truth (he aletheia), the object of spiritual perception (ginoskein), and the source of spiritual illumination to every being capable of receiving the revelation. "God is light, and in him is no darkness at all." In God there is nothing that hides, nothing that is hidden. The Divine character is utterly transparent<6E>goodness without a shadow of evil.<P>(2) This self-revelation of God is given in its perfect form in Jesus, the incarnate Word, who is the light of men (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,4);">Joh 1:4</a>), the light of the world (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',8,12);">Joh 8:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',9,5);">9:5</a>), the true light (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,9);">Joh 1:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,8);">1Joh 2:8</a>).<P>(3) It is in their illumination by this Divine light that there exists, even for the sinful, a medium of moral fellowship with God. We can "come to the light" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,\'19-21\');">Joh 3:19-21</a>) and "walk in the light" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,7);">1Joh 1:7</a>). In the translucent atmosphere of the true light, we, even while morally imperfect and impure, may come to have a common view of spiritual facts with God (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,\'8-10\');">1Joh 1:8-10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,9,10);">2:9,10</a>). This is the basis of a spiritual religion, and distinguishes Christianity from all irrational superstitions and unethical ritualisms.<P>4. Ethical Attributes:<P>In Gnostic speculation the Divine nature was conceived as the ultimate spiritual essence, in eternal separation from all that is material and mutable. But while John also, as we have seen, conceives it in this way, with him the conception is primarily and intensely ethical. The Divine nature, the communication of which is life and the revelation of which is light, has, as its two great attributes, Righteousness and Love; and with his whole soul John labors to stamp on the minds of men that only in righteousness and love can they walk in the light and have fellowship in the life of God. It is characteristic of John\'s intuitional fashion of thought that there is no effort to correlate these two aspects of the ethical perfection of God; but, broadly, it may be said that they are respectively the negative and the positive. Love is the sum of all that is positively right; righteousness the antithesis of all that is wrong, in character and conduct.<P>God Is Righteous.<P>(1) That such righteousness<73>antagonism to all sin<69>belongs to, or rather is, the moral nature of God, and that this lies at the basis of Christian ethics is categorically affirmed. "If ye know that he is righteous, ye know that every one also that doeth righteousness is begotten of him" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,29);">1Joh 2:29</a>).<p>(2) This righteousness which belongs to the inward character of God extends necessarily to all His actions: "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,9);">1Joh 1:9</a>). When on the ground of Christ\'s propitiation God forgives those who by confessing their sins make forgiveness possible, He acts righteously; and because He acts righteously, He acts also faithfully, that is, self-consistently. He does not "deny himself" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ti\',2,13);">2Ti 2:13</a>), but does what is in accordance with His own unchangeable character. (3) God\'s righteousness is related imperatively to the whole moral activity of His creatures, rendering sin inadmissible in them<65>inadmissible de jure in all, de facto in all who are "begotten of him." This John maintains with unexampled vigor (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,29);">1Joh 2:29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,6,8,9,10);">3:6,8-10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',5,18);">5:18</a>). It is true, however, that in its doctrine of Divine righteousness the Johannine theology makes no notable contribution to the sum of New Testament thought, but simply restates in peculiarly forceful fashion the conception of it which pervades the whole Biblical revelation.<P>5. God Is Love:<P>(1) The Love of God.<P>It is far otherwise with the next of the great affirmations which constitute its doctrine of God: God is Love. Here Gospel and Epistle rise to the summit of all revelation, and for the first time clearly and fully enunciate that truth which is the innermost secret of existence.<P>(a) Primarily a Disposition:<P>Love is primarily a disposition, a moral quality of the will. What this quality is is indicated by the fact that the typical object of love in human relation is invariably our "brother." It is the disposition to act toward others as it is natural for those to do who have all interests in common and who realize that the full self-existence of each can be attained only in a larger corporate existence. It is the mysterious power by which egoism and altruism meet and coalesce, the power to live not only for another but in another, to realize one\'s own fullest life in the fulfillment of other lives. It is self-communication which is also self-assertion.<P>(b) Embodied in Christ\'s Self-Sacrifice:<P>In history love has its one perfect embodiment in the self-sacrifice of Christ. "Hereby know we love (i.e. perceive what love is), because he laid down his life for us" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,16);">1Joh 3:16</a>). The world had never been without love; but till Jesus Christ came and laid down His life for the men that hated and mocked and slew him, it had not known what love in its greatness and purity could be.<P>(c) Love in Redemption:<P>But here history is the invisible translated into the visible. The self-sacrifice of Christ in laying down His life for us is the manifestation (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,9);">1Joh 4:9</a>), under the conditions of time and sense, of the love of God, eternal and invisible. In the closely related parallel passages (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,16);">Joh 3:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,9,10);">1Joh 4:9,10</a>) this is declared with matchless simplicity of statement. The Divine love is manifested in the magnitude of its gift<66>"his Son, his only begotten" (elsewhere the title is only "the Son" or "his Son" or "the Son of God"). Other gifts are only tokens of God\'s love; in Christ its all is bestowed (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,32);">Ro 8:32</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',22,12);">Ge 22:12</a>). The love of God is manifested further in the purpose of its gift<66>"that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life." It is the self-determination of God, not only to rescue men from what is the sum and finality of all evils, but to impart the supreme and eternal good. But again, the love of God is manifested in the means by which this purpose is achieved. His son is sent as "the propitiation for our sins." God shrinks not from the uttermost cost of redemption; but in the person of His Son humbles Himself and suffers unto blood that He may take upon Himself the load of human guilt and shame. And the last element in the full conception of Divine love is its objects: "God so loved the world"; "Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us." Its ineffable mystery reveals itself in its absolute spontaneity, its self-origination. Its fires are self-kindled; it shines forth in its purest splendors upon the unattractive and unworthy. Such is the conception John sets before us. In this entirely spontaneous, self-determined devotion of God to sinful men; this Divine passion to rescue them from sin, the supreme evil, and to impart to them eternal life, the supreme good; in this, which is evoked not by their worthiness but by their need, and goes to the uttermost length of sacrifice in bearing the uttermost burden of their sin and its inevitable consequences; in this, which is forever revealed in the mission of Jesus Christ, God\'s only begotten Son, is love.<P>(2) Love Is God\'s Nature.<P>And God is love (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,8,16);">1Joh 4:8,16</a>).<P>(a) God is love essentially. Love is not one of God\'s moral attributes, but that from which they all proceed, and in which they all unite. The spring of all His actions is love.<P>(b) Therefore also His love is universal. In a special sense He loves those who are spiritually His children (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,23);">Joh 14:23</a>); but His undivided and essential love is given also to the whole world (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,16);">Joh 3:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,2);">1Joh 2:2</a>). That is John\'s great truth. He does not attempt to reconcile with it other apparently conflicting truths in his theological scheme; possibly he was not conscious of any need to do so. But of this he is sure<72>God is love. That fact must, in ways we cannot yet discern, include all other facts.<P>(c) The love of God is eternal and unchangeable; for it does not depend on any merit or reciprocation in its object, but overflows from its own infinite fullness. We may refuse to it the inlet into our life which it seeks (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,19);">Joh 3:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,40);">5:40</a>); we may so identify ourselves with evil as to turn it into an antagonistic force. But as our goodness did not call it forth, neither can our evil cause it to cease.<P>(d) If love is an essential, the essential attribute of God, it follows that we cannot ultimately conceive of God as a single simple personality. It is at this point that the fuller Johannine conception of multiple personality in the Godhead becomes most helpful, enabling us to think of the Divine life in itself not as an eternal solitude of self-contemplation and self-love, but as a life of fellowship (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,1);">Joh 1:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,2);">1Joh 1:2</a>). The Godhead is filled with love. "The Father loveth the Son" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,35);">Joh 3:35</a>); and the prayer of the Son for His followers is "that the love wherewith thou lovedst me may be in them" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',17,26);">Joh 17:26</a>). The eternal giving and receiving of Divine love between the Father and the Son is, in the Johannine theology, an essential element of the Divine nature.<P>III. The Incarnation.<P>The 2nd great contribution of the Johannine writings to the development of Christian theology is their doctrine of Christ<73>the latest and most deliberate effort within New Testament times to relate intellectually the church\'s faith in Jesus to its faith in God. In these writings the superhuman personality of Jesus is expressed by three titles which are used as practically synonymous<75>"the Christ," "the Son" ("Son of God," "only begotten Son of God"), the "Word" (Logos). The last alone is distinctively Johannine.<P>1. Historical Antecedents of the Logos-Doctrine:<P>Historically, the Logos-doctrine of John has undoubted links of connection with certain speculative developments both of Greek and Hebrew thought. The Heraclitean use of the term "Logos" (see above, I) to express the idea of an eternal and all-embracing Reason immanent in the world was continued, while the conception was further elaborated, by the Stoics. On the other hand, the later developments of Hebrew thought show an increasing tendency to personify the self-revealing activity of God under such conceptions as the Angel, Glory, or Name of Yahweh, to attach a peculiar significance to the "Word" (me\'mera\') by which He created the heaven and the earth, and to describe "Wisdom" (Job, Proverbs) in something more than a figurative sense as His agent and coworker. These approximations of Greek pantheism and Hebrew monotheism were more verbal than real; and, naturally, Philo\'s attempt in his doctrine of the Logos to combine philosophies so radically divergent was less successful than it was courageous. How far, and whether directly or indirectly, John is indebted to Philo and his school, are questions to which widely different answers have been given; but some obligation, probably indirect, cannot reasonably be denied. It is evident, indeed, that both the idea and the term "Logos" were current in the Christian circles for which his Gospel and First Epistle were immediately written; in both its familiarity is assumed. Yet the Johannine doctrine has little in common with Philo\'s except the name; and it is just in its most essential features that it is most original and distinct.<P>As the Old Testament begins with the affirmation, "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth," so the Fourth Gospel begins with the similar affirmation, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,1);">Joh 1:1</a>). The Word was the medium of Divine action in creation (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,3);">Joh 1:3</a>).<P>2. The Logos-Doctrine in John:<P>In the Word was life, not merely self-existing but self-imparting, so that it became the light of men (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,4);">Joh 1:4</a>)<29>the true light, which, coming into the world, lighteth every man (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,9);">Joh 1:9</a>). And finally it is declared that this Divine Word became flesh and tabernacled among us, so that "we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,14);">Joh 1:14</a>). Here faith in Jesus as Divine has been traced back to, and grounded in, a duality within the Godhead itself. In the twofold mode of the Divine existence, it is seen that there is God who is just God (so to say), God in Himself; and there is God-with-God, God who is God\'s other self, God going forth from Himself in thought and action. The first without the second would be essence without manifestation, mind without utterance, light without effulgence, life without life-giving, fatherhood without sonship. It is seen that within the Divine Being there is one through whom, as there is also one from whom, all Divine energy goes forth. Above all it is seen that there is a Divine mode of existence in which it is inherently possible and natural for God to be immediately related to created being and even to become incarnate in humanity, as there is also a mode of Divine existence which cannot be immediately communicated or revealed to created life. Thus the Johannine doctrine is: first, that the Logos is personal and Divine, having a ground of personal being within the Divine nature (pros ton Theon, "in relation to God"); and, second, that the Logos became flesh, was and is incarnate in the historical Jesus.<P>3. The Incarnation as Delineated in the Fourth Gospel:<P>In the Gospel the term "Logos" does not recur after the opening verses; yet thesis of the Prologue, so far from being irrelevant, dominates the entire biographical presentation. The creative and cosmic significance of the Logos-Christ is naturally in the background; but it may be said of the Gospel that "the Word became flesh" is its text, and all the rest<73>miracle, incident, discourse<73>is comment. On the one hand, the reality of the "becoming flesh" is emphasized (e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,6);">Joh 4:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,35);">11:35</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,1,2,3,17,28,34,\'38-40\');">19:1,2,3,17,28,34,38-40</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',20,20,27);">20:20,27</a>). On the other hand, the human vesture only reveals the Divine glory within. On earth, Jesus is still "the Son of man, who is in heaven" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,13);">Joh 3:13</a>); the perfect revelation of the Father (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,9);">Joh 14:9</a>); the light of the world (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',8,12);">Joh 8:12</a>); the way, the truth and the life (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,6);">Joh 14:6</a>); the resurrection (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,26);">Joh 11:26</a>); the final judge (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,22);">Joh 5:22</a>) and Saviour (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,42);">Joh 4:42</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,40);">6:40</a>) of men; the supreme moral authority (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',13,34);">Joh 13:34</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,15,21);">14:15,21</a>); the hearer of prayer (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,13,14);">Joh 14:13,14</a>); the giver of the Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,38,39);">Joh 7:38,39</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,7);">16:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',20,22);">20:22</a>); endowed with all the prerogatives of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,23);">Joh 5:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',10,30);">10:30</a>,<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',10,\'36-38\');">36-38</a>).<P>4. The Incarnation in the First Epistle:<P>In the 1John the central thesis is the complete, personal, and permanent identity of the historical Jesus with the Divine Being who is the Word of Life (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,1);">1:1</a>), the Christ (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,2);">4:2</a>), the Son of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,5);">5:5</a>). This is maintained in a vigorous polemic against certain heretical teachers whom the writer calls "antichrists," who in docetic fashion denied that Jesus is the Christ (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,22);">2:22</A>), or, more definitely, the "Christ come in the flesh" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,3);">4:3</a>), and who asserted that He "came" by water only and not by blood also (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,6);">5:6</A>; see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JOHN,+THE+EPISTLES+OF">JOHN, THE EPISTLES OF</a>). Against this doctrine of a merely apparent or temporary association of Jesus with the Christ John bears vehement testimony. "Who is the liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ?" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,22);">1Joh 2:22</a>). \'Every spirit that confesseth Jesus as Christ come in the flesh is of God: and every spirit that confesseth not Jesus is not of God\' (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,2,3);">1Joh 4:2,3</a>). "Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God? This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not with the water only, but with the water and with the blood" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',5,5,6);">1Joh 5:5,6</a>). These passages all promulgate the same truth in substantially the same way. Without ceasing to be what He is, the Christ, the Son of God, has become Jesus; and Jesus, without ceasing to be truly human, is the Son of God. As to the manner of the incarnation<6F>by what process of self-emptying or by what conjunction of Divine-human attributes the eternal Son became Jesus<75>the Johannine writings, like the New Testament everywhere, are silent. They proclaim Jesus Christ as human and Divine; but the distinguishing of what in Him was human and what Divine, or whether the one is distinct from the other, this they do not even consider. Gnosticism drew such a distinction; John does not. His one truth is that Jesus is the Son of God and the Son of God is Jesus, and that in Him the life of God was manifested (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,2);">1Joh 1:2</a>) and is given (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',5,11);">1Joh 5:11</a>) to men.<P>5. Practical Implications of the Incarnation:<P>In this truth, viewed in its practical consequences, John sees the core of the church\'s faith and the root and safeguard of its life.<p>(a) This alone secures and guarantees the Christian revelation of God; with its denial that revelation is canceled. "Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,23);">1Joh 2:23</a>).<p>(b) Above all, it is only in the life and death of Jesus, the incarnate Son, that we possess a valid revelation of God\'s self-sacrificing love. "Herein was the love of God manifested in us, that God hath sent his...Son into the world that we might live through him" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,9);">1Joh 4:9</a>). With the denial of this the Christian ethic is drained of its very life-blood. There was no merely external and accidental connection between Docetism and the moral indifferentism of the Gnostic. The natural result of making man\'s salvation easy, so to say, for God, was to make it easy for man also<73>salvation by creed without conduct (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,4,6);">1Joh 2:4,6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,7);">3:7</a>), knowledge without love (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,8);">1Joh 4:8</a>), or love that paid its debts with goodly phrases and empty words (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,17,18);">1Joh 3:17,18</a>). A docetic Christ meant docetic Christianity.<p>(c) Finally, John sees in the incarnation the only possibility of a Divine redemption. It was not for a word or a formula he was concerned, but for the raising of humanity to Divine life through the God-man. The ultimate significance of the incarnation of the Son is that in Him the eternal life of God has flowed into our humanity and become a fountain of regenerative power to as many as receive Him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,12);">Joh 1:12</a>). "He that hath the Son hath the life; he that hath not the Son of God hath not the life" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',5,12);">1Joh 5:12</a>). This is the center of the Johannine Gospel<65>a Divine-human Christ, who stands in a unique, vital relation to men, reproducing in them His own character and experiences as the vine reproduces itself in the branches, doing that, the mysterious reality of which is only expressed, not explained, when it is said that He is our "life" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,19,20);">Joh 14:19,20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,5);">15:5</a>).<P>IV. The Holy Spirit.<P>1. The Work of the Spirit<69>in the Fourth Gospel:<P>In one direction the doctrine of the Holy Spirit is uniquely developed in the Johannine writings. The conception of the Spirit as the agent of Work of the Christ\'s presence with and activity in the church is presented with a fullness and clearness unequaled in the New Testament. The departing Christ promises to His friends a new presence, different from His own in that it was to be not a bodily but a spiritual presence, and yet really His own<77>a presence in which all and more than all the effects of His bodily presence would be perpetuated (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,18);">Joh 14:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,22);">16:22</a>). In truth, it was expedient for them that He should go away, in order that this other Paraclete should come (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,7);">Joh 16:7</a>). In the body His presence with His followers had been local and intermittent; in the Spirit He would come to take up His abode with them forever (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,16);">Joh 14:16</a>). Formerly He had been still external to them, but now was not only to dwell with them, but to be in them (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,17);">Joh 14:17</a>). Instead of the external voice of their Teacher addressing to them the words of eternal life, they should possess the very Spirit of truth (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,17);">Joh 14:17</a>), a well-spring of illumination from within, giving them an "understanding" to know Him that is true (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',5,20);">1Joh 5:20</a>); and instead of His visible example before their eyes, an inward community of life with Him like that of the vine and the branches. The complete, vital, permanent union of Christ and His people, which had been prevented by the necessary limitations of a local, corporeal state of existence, would be attained, when for this there was substituted the direct action of spirit upon spirit.<P>Perpetuates, but also Intensifies the Consciousness of Christ.<P>Thus the function of the Spirit which is chiefly emphasized in the Johannine writings is that by which He perpetuates but also intensifies, enlightens, and educates the consciousness of Christ in the church and in the Christian life. In this respect His nature is the opposite of that of the Logos, the self-revealing God. The Holy Spirit never reveals Himself to human consciousness; He reveals the Son and the Father through the Son. His operations are wholly secret and inscrutable, known only by their result (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,8);">Joh 3:8</a>). He is the silent inward monitor and remembrancer of the disciples (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,20);">Joh 14:20</a>); the illuminator, the revealer of Christ (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,14);">Joh 16:14</a>); a spirit of witness who both Himself bears witness concerning Christ to His people and makes of them ready and joyful witness-bearers (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,26,27);">Joh 15:26,27</a>); a guide by whom a steady growth in knowledge is secured, leading gradually on to the full truth of Christ (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,12,13);">Joh 16:12,13</a>); a spirit of conviction working in men an immediate certainty of the truth regarding sin and righteousness, and the Divine judgment which marks their eternal antagonism (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,\'8-11\');">Joh 16:8-11</a>).<P>2. In the First Epistle:<P>In the Epistle we find the promise of the Gospel accomplished in actual experience. There is no reference to the manifold charismata of the first age, the prophetic afflatus excepted (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,1);">1Joh 4:1</a>). But whether through the prophetic "medium" or the normal Christian consciousness, the function of the Spirit is always to "teach" or to "witness" concerning Christ. This is finely brought out in the parallelism of <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',5,6);">1Joh 5:6</a>: "This (Jesus Christ) is he that came" (once for all fulfilling the Messiah\'s mission); "It is the Spirit that beareth witness" (ever authenticating its Divine origin, interpreting its purpose and applying its results). The specific testimony the Spirit bears to Christ is defined (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,2,3);">1Joh 4:2,3</a>). "Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: and every spirit that confesseth not Jesus is not of God."<P>(1) A Divine Teacher.<P>The gift of the Spirit is an "anointing from the Holy One" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,20);">1Joh 2:20</a>); and the result of this "anointing" is that "ye know all things" (or that "ye all have knowledge"; the reading is doubtful), and "need not that any one teach you" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,27);">1Joh 2:27</a>). The apostle\'s comfort concerning his readers, encompassed as they are by the snares of Antichrist, is that they have a Divine Teacher, who continually enlightens their understanding, strengthens their convictions and ministers to them an invincible assurance of the truth of the Gospel. "The anointing abideth in you...and teacheth you concerning all things." The spirit is not a source of independent revelation, but makes the revelation of Christ effectual. The truth is placed beyond all reach of controversy and passes into absolute knowledge: "Ye know all things." It may be added that the history of Christianity furnishes an always growing verification of this Johannine doctrine of a living power of witness and enlightenment present in the church, by which, notwithstanding the constant hindrance of human imperfection, the development of the Christian faith has been steadily advanced, its forgotten or neglected factors brought to remembrance. Old truths have been presented in new aspects and filled with fresh life, and all has been brought to pass with marvelous adaptation to the church\'s needs and in proportion to its receptivity.<P>(2) Other Aspects.<P>In other directions the doctrine of the Spirit is less developed. The agency of the Spirit in regeneration is repeatedly and emphatically declared in a single passage (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,\'5-8\');">Joh 3:5-8</a>), but is nowhere else referred to either in the Gospel or the First Epistle. More remarkable still, neither in Gospel nor Epistle is the Holy Spirit once spoken of as the Divine agent in sanctification. There is no passage resembling that in which Paul speaks of the ethical "fruit of the Spirit" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',5,22,23);">Ga 5:22,23</a>). The Spirit is the Spirit of truth, the revealer, the inspirer of faith, but is never spoken of as the Spirit of love or holiness. If those who are begotten of God cannot sin, it is not because God\'s Spirit, but because "his seed," abideth in them (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,9);">1Joh 3:9</a>). The explanation of this peculiarity (which has been little observed) in the Johannine theology may be that the Spirit\'s work of revealing Christ is regarded as all-inclusive. Thus enabling Christ\'s disciples to abide in Him as the branch in the vine, He secures also their bringing forth "much fruit" in all Christlikeness of character and conduct.<P>2. The Person of the Spirit:<P>Passing now from the work to the Person, we observe that in the Fourth Gospel the attribution of personality to the Spirit reaches the acme of distinctness. He is "another Paraclete" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,16);">Joh 14:16</a> margin), personal as Christ Himself is personal; and all the functions ascribed to Him<69>to remind, to teach, to testify, to guide, to convict<63>are such as are possible only to a personal agent. Nor is it otherwise in the First Epistle. The expressions in it which have been alleged (Pfleiderer and others) as inconsistent with personality (the "anointing," <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,20);">1Joh 2:20</a>; "He hath given us of his Spirit," <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,13);">4:13</a>) require no such interpretation. The "anointing" denotes the Spirit, not in His essence or agency, but as the gift of the Holy One with which He anoints believers (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,38,39);">Joh 7:38,39</a>); and the expression "He hath given us of his Spirit" (as if the Spirit were a divisible entity) is no more incompatible with personality than is the saying "to Him whom he hath sent..., God giveth not the Spirit by measure" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,34);">Joh 3:34</a>), or than our speaking of Christians as having more or less of the Spirit.<P>His Deity Implied.<P>The essential Deity of the Spirit is nowhere explicitly asserted, but is necessarily implied in His relation both to Christ and to the church as the "other Paraclete." There is not, however, the same theological development as is achieved regarding the Logos. The Divinity of Christ is grounded in an essential duality of being within the Godhead itself; but there is no similar effort to trace back the threefoldness in the revelation of God, as Father, Son and Spirit, to an essential threefoldness in the Divine nature. The fact is that both historically and logically the doctrine of the Spirit as the third person in the Godhead depends upon that of the Divine Son as the second. It was through its living experience of the Divine in Christ that the church first developed its thought of God beyond the simple monotheism of the Old Testament; but having advanced to the conception of a twofold Godhead, in which there is Fatherhood and Sonship, it was bound to enlarge it still further to that of a threefold Godhead<61>Father, Son and Spirit. The Son and the Spirit were equally manifestations of God in redemption, and must equally stand in essential relation to the Divine existence.<P>V. Doctrine of Sin and Propitiation.<P>This theme is not elaborated. It is characteristic of the Johannine writings that salvation is looked at from the terminus ad quem rather than from the terminus a quo. The infinite good, eternal life, is more in view than the infinite evil, sin. It seems safe to say that the author of these writings at no time had that intense experience of bondage to the law of sin and of death which so colors Paul\'s presentation of the gospel. It was, moreover, no part of his plan to expound the doctrine of propitiation; nor had he any original contribution to make on this head to the sum of New Testament thought. But it is a quite unwarrantable criticism which denies that the saving work of Christ, in the Johannine conception, consists in deliverance from sin.<P>1. Sin:<P>It is true that Christ not only takes away the sin of the world (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,29);">Joh 1:29</a>), but also draws it forth in its utmost intensity and guilt. All sin culminates in the rejection of Christ (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,22);">Joh 15:22</a>); the Spirit convicts men of sin because they "believe not" on Him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,9);">Joh 16:9</a>). "Every one that committeth sin is the bondservant of sin" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',8,34);">Joh 8:34</a>); but what reveals the true character of this bondage is that in the presence of the light, men "loved the darkness" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,19);">Joh 3:19</a>). That the malign quality and power of evil are fully revealed only in the presence of perfect goodness, that the brighter is the light, the darker is the shade of guilt created by its rejection<6F>all this John teaches; but such teaching is by no means peculiar to him, and to infer from it that "to his mind sin in itself involves no moral culpability" is nothing more than a way-ward paradox.<P>In the Epistle the guilt of sin as constituting an objective disability to fellowship with God is strongly emphasized. "If We say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,8);">1Joh 1:8</a>). The phrase "to have sin" is peculiar to John, and specifically denotes the culpability of the agent (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',9,41);">Joh 9:41</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,22,24);">15:22,24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,11);">19:11</a>). Sin is essentially that which needs God\'s forgiveness (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,9);">1Joh 1:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,1,2);">2:1,2</a>); and to this end an intercessor and a propitiation have been provided. Such culpability is universal: "If we say that we have not sinned, we"<22>not only deceive ourselves<65>"we make him a liar" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,10);">1Joh 1:10</a>).<P>A second passage (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,\'4-9\');">1Joh 3:4-9</a>) emphasizes the ethical quality of sin<69>its antagonism to the nature of God and of the children of God. The word which defines the constitutive principle of sin is "lawlessness" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,4);">1Joh 3:4</a>). Sin is fundamentally the denial of the absoluteness of moral obligation, the repudiation of the eternal law upon which all moral life is based. In other words, to sin is to assert one\'s own will as the rule of action against the absolutely good will of God. But again, the Epistle gives the warning that "all unrighteousness is sin" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',5,17);">1Joh 5:17</a>). Everything that is not right is wrong, Every morally inferior course of action, however venial it may appear, is sin and contains the elements of positive guilt. The perplexing topic of "sin unto death" demands too special treatment to be dealt with here.<P>2. Propitiation:<P>(1) In the Gospel.<P>The paucity of reference in the Fourth Gospel to the propitiating aspect of Christ\'s redemptive work has been seized upon as proof that, though the writer did not consciously reject the orthodox doctrine, it was really alien to his system. But such a criticism might be directed with almost equal force against the Synoptics. It was no part of John\'s plan, as has been said, to expound a doctrine of propitiation; yet his frontispiece to the ministry of Jesus is "the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world"; and, as Dr. Inge has pointed out, the same type of the Paschal Lamb underlies the whole narrative of the Passion. In the high-priestly prayer our Lord expressly represents Himself as the covenant-sacrifice which consecrates His disciples as the people of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',17,19);">Joh 17:19</a>); while the Synoptic "ransom for many" is paralleled by the interpretation of Christ\'s death as effectual "for the nation; and not for the nation only, but that he might also gather together into one the children of God that are scattered abroad" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,51,52);">Joh 11:51,52</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,2);">1Joh 2:2</a>).<P>(2) In the Epistle.<P>In the Epistle the doctrinal statement is much more explicit. The fact of propitiation is placed in the forefront. The passage which immediately follows the Prologue (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,6);">1Joh 1:6-2:2</a>) introduces a group of ideas<61>propitiation, blood, forgiveness, cleansing<6E>which are taken directly from the sacrificial system of the Old Testament, and are expressed, indeed, in technical Levitical terms. The mode of action by which Christ accomplished and still accomplishes His mission as the Saviour of the world is: "He is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the whole world" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,2);">1Joh 2:2</a>). Propitiation has its ultimate source in the moral nature of God. It is no device for inducing a reluctant Deity to forgive; it is the way by which the Father brings back His sinning children to Himself. In John\'s conception it is the supreme act of God\'s supreme attribute, love. "Herein is love" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,10);">1Joh 4:10</a>). Yet it is a real work of propitiation in which this love goes forth for man\'s salvation<6F>a work, that is, which expiates the guilt of sin, which restores sinful offenders to God by rendering their sin null and inoperative as a barrier to fellowship with Him. This propitiatory virtue is regarded as concentrated in the "blood of Jesus his Son" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,7);">1Joh 1:7</a>), that is to say, in the Divine-human life offered to God in the sacrifice of the cross. This, if we walk in the light as He is in the light, "cleanseth us from all sin"<22>removes from us the stain of our guilt, and makes us clean in God\'s sight. In virtue of this, Christ is the penitent sinner\'s advocate (paraclete-helper) with the Father (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,1);">1Joh 2:1</a>). The words "with the Father" are highly significant. Even the Father\'s love can urge nothing in apology for sin, nothing that avails to absolve from its guilt. But there is one who can urge on our behalf what is at once the strongest condemnation of our sin and plea for its remission<6F>Himself, "Jesus Christ the righteous" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,1);">1Joh 2:1</a>). "And he (Himself) is the propitiation for our sins." John does not speak of Christ as "making propitiation"; He, Himself, in virtue of all He is<69>Jesus Christ, in whom the Divine ideal of humanity is consummated, in whom the Father sees His own essential righteousness revealed, Jesus Christ the Righteous<75>is both propitiation and intercession. The two acts are not only united in one person, but constitute the one reconciling work by which there is abiding fellowship between God and His sinning people.<P>(3) One with New Testament Teaching.<P>In this statement of the doctrine of propitiation, memorable as it is, there is nothing notably original. It tacitly presupposes, as New Testament teaching everywhere does, that God, in bestowing the sovereign grace of pardon and sonship, must deal truthfully and adequately with sin as a violation of the moral order; and with John, as with other New Testament writers, the necessity and efficacy of sacrifice as the means by which this is accomplished are simply axiomatic. His great contribution to Christian thought is the vision of the cross in the heart of the eternal love. How suggestive are these two statements when placed side by side! "Herein is love...that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,10);">1Joh 4:10</a>); and "Hereby know we love (recognize what it is), because he laid down his life for us" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,16);">1Joh 3:16</a>). God\'s sending His Son and Christ\'s laying down His life are moral equivalents. The sacrifice of Christ is the sacrifice of God. John\'s doctrine of propitiation follows as a moral necessity from his doctrine of God. If God is love, nothing is more inevitably true than that He suffers on account of human sin; and to deny Him the power to help and save men by bearing their burden would be to deny to Him love\'s highest prerogative.``1';
isbe[5096]='Johannine Theology, 2`VI. Eternal Life.<P>The development of the conception of eternal life must be set along with the doctrine of the moral nature of God and the doctrine of the incarnation as one of the greatest contributions of the Johannine theology to New Testament thought. With this conception the Gospel begins (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,4);">Joh 1:4</a>) and ends (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',20,31);">Joh 20:31</a>); and, in like manner, the Epistle (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,2);">1Joh 1:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',5,20);">5:20</a>). The designation most frequently employed is simply "the life" (he zoe); 17 times in the Gospel and 6 times in the First Epistle it is described qualitatively as "eternal"; but the adjective brings out only what is implicit in the noun. In harmony with the universal Biblical conception, John regards life as the summum bonum, in which the reality of fellowship with God consists, which therefore fulfills the highest idea of being<6E>"perfect truth in perfect action" (Westcott). Christ Himself is "the life" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,6);">Joh 14:6</a>), its only bestower and unfailing source (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,19);">Joh 14:19</a>). He came that we might have it abundantly (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',10,10);">Joh 10:10</a>).<P>1. Ethical Rather than Eschatological:<P>But this conception is uniquely developed in two directions. While the eschatological element is not lost, it is absorbed in the ethical. The ideas of duration and futurity, which are properly and originally expressed by the adjective "eternal" (aionios = belonging to an eon<6F>specifically to "the coming eon"), become secondary to that of timeless moral quality. Always life is regarded as a present possession rather than as future felicity (e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,36);">Joh 3:36</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',20,31);">20:31</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,14,15);">1Joh 3:14,15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',5,12);">5:12</a>). For John the question whether it is possible to make the best of both worlds is meaningless. Eternal life is the best, the Divine, kind of life, whether in this world or another. It is the kind of life that has its perfect manifestation in Christ (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,2);">1Joh 1:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',5,11);">5:11</a>). To possess that nature which produces thoughts and motives and desires, words and deeds like His, is to have eternal life.<P>2. Metaphysical Aspect:<P>Metaphysically the conception undergoes a development which is equally remarkable, though in the judgment of many, of more questionable value. It has already been seen (see above, II) that life is conceived as the animating principle or essence of the Divine nature, the inward energy of which all its activities are the manifold outgoing. And this conception is carried through with strict consistency. The spiritual life in men, which is "begotten of God," is the vital essence, the mystic principle which is manifested in all the capacities and activities of Christian personality. It does not consist in, and still less is it a result following, repentance, faith, obedience or love; it is that of which they are the fruits and the evidences. Thus instead of "This do, and thou shalt live" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',10,28);">Lu 10:28</a>), John says, conversely, "Every one also, that doeth righteousness is (= has been) begotten of" God (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,29);">1Joh 2:29</a>); instead of "The just shall live by faith" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',1,17);">Ro 1:17</a>, the King James Version), "Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is (= has been) begotten of God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',5,1);">1Joh 5:1</a>). The human activity is the result and proof of Divine life already imparted, not the condition or means of its attainment. In the Johannine conception life is cause, not effect; not phenomenon, but essence; not the complex whole of the qualities, activities and experiences of the spiritual man, but that which makes them possible<6C>the inscrutable, Divinely communicated principle (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,8);">Joh 3:8</a>) in which the capacity for them is given and by which also it is realized.<P>Reply to Criticism.<P>This Johannine conception of life is vigorously criticized as importing into the interpretation of Christian experience principles and modes of thought borrowed from Greek philosophy. But the tendency to infer causes from effects and to reason from phenomena to essence is not peculiar to Greek philosophy; it is native to the human intellect. The Johannine conception of spiritual life is closely analogous to the common conception of physical life. We do not conceive that a man lives because he breathes and feels and acts; we think and we say that he does these things because he lives, because there is in him that mystic principle we call life. Only to the thinker trained in the logic of empiricism is it possible to define life solely by its phenomena, as e.g. "the continuous adjustment of internal to external relations" (Spencer). The ordinary mind instinctively passes behind the phenomena to entity of which they are the manifestation. The Johannine conception, moreover, lies in the natural line of development for New Testament thought. It is implicit in that whole strain of our Lord\'s synoptic teaching which regards doing as only the outcome of being, and which is emphasized in such utterances as "Either make the tree good, and its fruit good; or make the tree corrupt, and its fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by its fruit" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',12,33);">Mt 12:33</a>); as also in the whole Pauline doctrine of the new creation and the mystical indwelling of Christ in the members of His body. And while it is no doubt true that the Johannine conception of life was immediately influenced by contact with Hellenism, it is one which was sure, sooner or later, to emerge in Christian theology.<P>3. Development of Doctrine:<P>(1) Source in God.<P>In the development of the doctrine we note the following points. (a) The sole and absolute source of life is God, the Father, revealed in Christ. "The Father hath life in himself" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,26);">Joh 5:26</a>). He is the "living Father" by whom the Son lives (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,57);">Joh 6:57</a>); the "true God, and eternal life" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',5,20);">1Joh 5:20</a>). Eternal life is nothing else than the immanence of God in moral beings created after His likeness; the Divine nature reproducing itself in human nature; the energy of the Spirit of God in the spiritual nature of man. This is its ultimate definition.<P>(2) Mediated by Christ.<P>Of this life Christ is the sole mediator (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,33,57);">Joh 6:33,57</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,25);">11:25</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,6);">14:6</a>). The witness is that "God gave unto us eternal life, and this life is in his Son" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',5,11);">1Joh 5:11</a>). This mediation is grounded in the relation, eternally subsisting within the Godhead, of the Logos to the Father. The life manifested and seen in the historic Christ (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,1);">1Joh 1:1</a>) is "the life, the eternal life," which existed in relation to the Father (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,2);">1Joh 1:2</a>). By the incarnation of the Son the eternal life in its Divine fullness has become incorporate with humanity, a permanent source of regenerative power to "as many as received him" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,12);">Joh 1:12</a>). It is His own relation to the Father that He reproduces in men (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',17,23);">Joh 17:23</a>).<P>(3) Through the Spirit.<P>In the communication of this life the Spirit is the one direct agent (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,\'5-8\');">Joh 3:5-8</a>; see above, under IV).<P>(4) The Divine "Begetting."<P>The act of Divine self-communication is constantly and exclusively expressed by the word "beget" (gennao<61><a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,13);">Joh 1:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,3);">3:3</a>,<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,\'5-8\');">5-8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,29);">1Joh 2:29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,9);">3:9</a>, etc.). The word is of far-reaching significance. It implies not only that life has its ultimate origin in God, but that its communication is directly and solely His act. In how literal a sense the Divine begetting is to be understood appears very strikingly in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,9);">1Joh 3:9</a>: "Whosoever is begotten of God doeth no sin; because his seed abideth in him." The unique expression "his seed" signifies the new life-principle which is the formative element of the "children of God." This abides in him who has received it. It stamps its own character upon his life and determines its whole development.<P>(5) The "Children of God."<P>Those who are "begotten of God" are ipso facto "children of God" (tekna theou, <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,12);">Joh 1:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,52);">11:52</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,1,2,10);">1Joh 3:1,2,10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',5,2);">5:2</a>). The term connotes primarily the direct communication of the Father\'s own nature; and secondarily the fact that the nature thus communicated has not as yet reached its full stature, but contains the promise of a future glorious development. We are now children of God, but what it fully is to be children of God is not yet made manifest (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,2);">1Joh 3:2</a>). Participation in this life creates a family fellowship (koinonia) at once human and Divine. Those who are begotten of God and walk in the light have "fellowship one with another" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,7);">1Joh 1:7</a>). They are "brethren" and are knit together by the instincts (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',5,1);">1Joh 5:1</a>) and the duties of mutual love (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',13,34);">Joh 13:34</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,12);">15:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,16);">1Joh 3:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,11);">4:11</a>) and of mutual watchfulness and intercession (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',5,16);">1Joh 5:16</a>).<P>On the Divine side they have fellowship "with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,3);">1Joh 1:3</a>). In this Divine fellowship the life "begotten" is nourished and sustained; and no term is more characteristic of the Johannine vocabulary, alike in Gospel and Epistles, than the word "abide" (menein), by which this is expressed. There is, however, a noticeable difference in the modes of statement. In the Epistle, the formulas almost exclusively employed are these: "God abides in us," "We abide in God," "God abides in us and we in him." In the Gospel the reciprocal indwelling is that of Christ and His disciples (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,\'4-10\');">Joh 15:4-10</a>), which has its Divine counterpart in that of the Father and the Son (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,10);">Joh 14:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',17,23);">17:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,10);">15:10</a>). This diversity is consistent with the different points of view occupied in the two documents. The Gospel is christocentric; the Epistle, theocentric. In the one is given the concrete presentment of the incarnate Son; in the other the immediate intuition of the Divine nature revealed in Him. While the theme common to both is the "Word of life," the special theme of the Gospel is the Word who reveals and imparts the life; in the Epistle it is the life revealed and imparted by the Word, and the thought of the indwelling Christ is naturally carried up to the ultimate truth of the indwelling God.<P>(6) The Divine Abiding.<P>The vitalizing union by which the Divine life is sustained in those who are begotten of God consists in two reciprocal activities, not separable and not identical<61>God\'s (or Christ\'s) abiding in us and our abiding in Him. As in the similitude of the vine and the branches (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,\'1-10\');">Joh 15:1-10</a>), the life imparted is dependent for its sustenance and growth upon a continuous influx from the parent source: as it is the sap of the vine that vitalizes the branches, producing leaf and blossom and fruit, so does the life of God support and foster in His children its own energies of love and truth and purity. But to this end the abiding of God in us has as its necessary counterpart our abiding in Him. We can respond to the Divine influence or reject it; open or obstruct the channels through which the Divine life flows into ours (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,6,7,10);">Joh 15:6,7,10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',8,31);">8:31</a>). Hence, abiding in God is a subject of instruction and exhortation (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,4);">Joh 15:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,27);">1Joh 2:27</a>f); and here the idea of persistent and stedfast purpose which belongs to the word menein comes clearly into view. As the abiding of God in us is the persistent and purposeful action by which the Divine nature influences ours, so our abiding in God is the persistent and purposeful submission of ourselves to that influence. The means of doing this are stedfast loyalty to the truth as it is revealed in Christ and announced in the apostolic Gospel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',8,31);">Joh 8:31</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,7);">15:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,27);">1Joh 2:27</a>), keeping God\'s commandments (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,23);">Joh 14:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,10);">15:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,24);">1Joh 3:24</a>), and loving one another (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,12,16);">1Joh 4:12,16</a>). Thus only is the channel of communication kept clear between the source and the receptacle of life.<P>VII. Human Nature and Its Regeneration.<P>The necessity of regeneration is fundamental to the whole theological scheme (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,3,5,7);">Joh 3:3,5,7</a>). Life which consists in union with God does not belong to man as he is naturally constituted: those who know that they have eternal life know that it is theirs because they have "passed out of death into life" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,14);">1Joh 3:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,24);">Joh 5:24</a>).<P>1. The World:<P>The unregenerate state of human nature is specially connected with the Johannine conception of the "world" (kosmos). This term has a peculiar elasticity of application; and Westcott\'s definition<6F>"the order of finite being, regarded as apart from God"<22>may be taken as expressing the widest idea that underlies John\'s use of the word. When the kosmos is material, it signifies<P>(1) the existing terrestrial creation (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,10);">Joh 1:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',13,1);">13:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,28);">16:28</a>), especially as contrasted with the sphere of the heavenly and eternal. When it refers to humanity, it is either<P>(2) the totality of mankind as needing redemption and as the object of God\'s redeeming love (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,16);">Joh 3:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,2);">1Joh 2:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,14);">4:14</a>), or<P>(3) the mass of unbelieving men, hostile to Christ and resisting salvation (e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,18);">Joh 15:18</a>). Of the world in this sense it is said that it has no perception of the true nature of God and the Divine glory of Christ (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,10);">Joh 1:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',17,25);">17:25</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,1);">1Joh 3:1</a>); that it hates the children of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,18,19);">Joh 15:18,19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',17,14);">17:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,13);">1Joh 3:13</a>); that the spirit of Antichrist dwells in it (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,3,4);">1Joh 4:3,4</a>); that to it belong the false prophets and their adherents (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,1,5);">1Joh 4:1,5</a>); that it is under the dominion of the wicked one (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,31);">Joh 12:31</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,30);">14:30</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,11);">16:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',5,19);">1Joh 5:19</a>); that the constituents of its life are "the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the vainglory of life" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,16);">1Joh 2:16</a>); that it passeth away (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,17);">1Joh 2:17</a>); that Christ has conquered it (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,33);">Joh 16:33</a>), and that "whatsoever is begotten of God" conquers it (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',5,4);">1Joh 5:4</a>) by the power of faith in Him (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',5,5);">1Joh 5:5</a>).<P>Thus the "world" (in this darker significance) is composed of those who still love the darkness rather than the light (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,19);">Joh 3:19</a>), who, when Christ is presented to them, obstinately retain their blindness and enmity. Nevertheless, the "world" is not beyond the possibility of salvation. The Holy Spirit, acting in the Christian community, will convince the world with regard to sin and righteousness and judgment (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,8);">Joh 16:8</a>); and the evidence of the unity of Divine fellowship among Christ\'s disciples will lead it to believe in His Divine mission (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',17,23);">Joh 17:23</a>).<P>2. Two Classes in the Human Race:<P>Thus, it is true that John teaches "a distinction of two great classes in the human race<63>those who are from above and those who are from beneath<74>children of light and children of darkness." But that he teaches this in any Gnostic or semignostic fashion is an assertion for which there is no real basis. He distinguishes between those who love the light and those who love the darkness rather than the light, between those who "receive" Christ and those who "will not" come unto Him that they may have life. This distinction, however, he traces to nothing in the natural constitution of the two classes, but solely to the regenerating act of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,13);">Joh 1:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,44);">6:44</a>). His doctrine of regeneration is, in fact, his solution of the problem created by the actual existence of those two classes among men<65>a problem which is forced upon every thoughtful Christian mind by the diverse and opposite results of evangelism. It is this that lies behind such utterances as these: "Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,37);">Joh 18:37</a>); "Ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep. My sheep hear my voice...and they follow me" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',10,26,27);">Joh 10:26,27</a>); "Every one that hath heard from the Father, cometh unto me. No man can come unto me except it be given unto him of the Father" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,45,65);">Joh 6:45,65</a>). In these and all similar passages, belief or unbelief in Christ, when He is presented, depends upon antecedent spiritual predisposition (John\'s equivalent to the Pauline predestination). There exists in certain persons what is lacking in others, a power of spiritual vision by which Christ is recognized, a capacity and a predisposition to receive Him. But this predisposition is not (any more than Paul\'s predestination) theirs by gift of nature. John refuses to find its source in human personality (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,13);">Joh 1:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',5,1);">1Joh 5:1</a>). The children of God are not a superior species of the genus homo. They are men who have passed from death into life, and who have done so because they are begotten of God. John\'s doctrine is thus the antithesis of Gnosticism. The Gnostic distinction of two classes in the human race glorified men; its proper and inevitable fruit was spiritual pride. The effect of John\'s doctrine is to humble man and glorify God, to satisfy the innermost Christian consciousness that not even for their appropriation of God\'s gift in Christ can believers take credit to themselves; that in nothing can the human spirit do more than respond to the Divine, and that, in the last analysis, this power itself is of God. Regeneration in the Johannine sense is not to be identified with conversion. It is the communication of that vision of truth and that capacity for new moral activity which issue in conversion. The doctrine of regeneration contained in the Johannine writings is the fullest recognition in the New Testament that all the conscious experiences and activities of the Christian life are the result of God\'s own inscrutable work of begetting in the depths of human personality, and of renewing and replenishing there, the energies of the Divine.<P>VIII. The Church and Sacraments.<P>1. The Church:<P>While the word "church" is not found, the idea lies near the base of the Johannine theology. The Divine life communicated to men creates a Divine brotherhood, a "fellowship" which is with the Father and "with his Son Jesus Christ" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,3);">1Joh 1:3</a>) and also "one with another" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,7);">1Joh 1:7</a>)<29>a fellowship which is consecrated by the self-consecration of Jesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',17,19);">Joh 17:19</a>), in which men are cleansed from all sin by His blood (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,7);">1Joh 1:7</a>), and which is maintained by His intercessory action as the Paraclete with the Father (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,1);">1Joh 2:1</a>). This fellowship is realized in the actual Christian community and there only; but it is essentially inward and spiritual, not mechanically ecclesiastical, In the visible community spurious elements may intrude themselves, as is proved when schism unmasks those who, though they have belonged to the external organization, have never been partakers of its real life (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,19);">1Joh 2:19</a>). Only among those who walk in the light of God does true fellowship exist (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,7);">1Joh 1:7</a>).<P>2. The Sacraments:<P>From the doctrine of the Divine nature as life and light one might a priori infer the possibilities of a Johannine view of the sacraments. It is evident that there is room in the Johannine system of thought for a genuinely sacramental mode of Divine action<6F>the employment of definite external acts, not as symbols only, but as real media of Divine communication. On the other hand, the truth that God is not life only but light also<73>self-revealing as well as self-imparting<6E>would necessarily exclude any magical ex opere operato theory by which spiritual efficacy is attributed either to the physical elements in themselves or to the physical act of participation. And (though there is little or no explicit statement) such is the type of doctrine we actually find. With regard to all sacramental rites the universal principle applies: \'It is the spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing\' (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,63);">Joh 6:63</a>).<P>(1) Baptism.<P>Yet baptism is the physical counterpart of the Spirit\'s work in regeneration, and great importance is attached to it as the means of admission to the new life of the kingdom (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,5);">Joh 3:5</a>).<P>(2) The Lord\'s Supper.<P>The omission of all reference to the institution of the Lord\'s Supper (the incident of the feet-washing and the proclamation of the new commandment taking its place in the Gospel-narrative) is thought to indicate that John was conscious of a tendency to attach a superstitious value to the outward observance, and desired emphatically to subordinate this to what was spiritual and essential. The omission, to whatever motive it may have been due, is counter-balanced by the sacramental discourse (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,\'1-\');">Joh 6</a>). While the language of this discourse is not to be interpreted in a technically eucharistic sense, its purpose, or one of its purposes, undoubtedly, is to set forth the significance of the Lord\'s Supper in the largest light. Christ gives to men the bread of life, which is His own flesh and of which men must eat that they may live (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,\'50-55\');">Joh 6:50-55</a>). "He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood abideth in me and I in him." This eating and drinking is essentially of the Spirit. It signifies a derivation of life analogous to that of the Son Himself from the Father. "As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father; so he that eateth me, he also shall live because of me" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,57);">Joh 6:57</a>). To "eat the flesh" of the Son of Man is to receive spiritual nourishment from Him, to live by His life. Yet there is nothing in John\'s way of thinking to exclude a real sacramental efficiency. "The act which is nothing when it is performed ignorantly and mechanically is of sovereign value to those who have apprehended its true meaning. The material elements represent the flesh and blood of Christ<73>His Divine Person given for the life of the world. He is present in them, not merely by way of symbol, but actually; but there must be something in the recipient corresponding to the spiritual reality which is conveyed through the gift. The outward act of participation must be accompanied with belief in Christ and a true insight into the nature of His work and a will to know and serve Him. The sacrament becomes operative as the bread of life through this receptive spirit on the part of those who observe it" (Scott, The Fourth Gospel, 127-28).<P>IX. Eschatology.<P>1. Type of Thought Idealistic:<P>The type of mind revealed in the Johannine writings is one that instinctively leans to the ideal and the spiritual in its contemplation of life, grasping what is of universal significance and dwelling upon events only as they are the embodiment of eternal principles. Where this fashion of thought is so strongly developed, the eschatological, like the historical, becomes secondary.<P>2. Yet History Not Ignored:<P>In John there is but one life<66>the eternal; and there is but one world<6C>the world of the ideal, which is also the only real. Yet he is not an idealist, pure and simple. For him events are not merely symbols; history is not allegory. The incarnation is a historical fact, the Parousia a future event. His thought does not move in a world of mere abstractions, a world in which nothing ever happens. His true distinction as a thinker lies in the success with which he unites the two strains of thought, the historical and the ideal. The word which may be said to express his conception of history is "manifestation" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,11);">Joh 2:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',9,3);">9:3</a>; but especially <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,2);">1Joh 1:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,19,28);">2:19,28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,2,5,8);">3:2,5,8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,9);">4:9</a>). The incarnation is only the manifestation of \'what was from the beginning\' (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,1,2);">1Joh 1:1,2</a>); the mission of Christ, the manifestation of the love eternally latent in the depths of the Divine nature (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,9);">1Joh 4:9</a>). The successive events of history are the emergence into visibility of what already exists. In them the potential becomes actual.<P>3. Nor Eschatology:<P>Thus John has an eschatology, as well as a history. He profoundly spiritualizes. He reaches down through the pictorial representations of the traditional apocalyptic, and inquires what essential principle each of these embodies. Then he discovers that this principle is already universally and inevitably in operation; and this, the present spiritual reality, becomes for him the primary thought. Judgment means essentially the sifting and separation, the classification of men according to their spiritual affinities. But every day men are thus classifying themselves by their attitude toward Christ; this, the true judgment of the world, is already present fact. So also the coming and presence of Christ must always be essentially a spiritual fact, and as such it is already a present fact. There is, in the deepest significance of the word, a perpetual coming of Christ in Christian experience. This, however, does not prevent John from firmly holding the certainty of a fuller manifestation of these facts in the future, when tendencies shall have reached a final culmination, and principles which are now apprehended only by faith will be revealed in all the visible magnitude of their consequences.<P>4. Eschatological Ideas:<P>We shall now briefly survey the Johannine presentation of the chief eschatological ideas.<P>(1) Eternal life.<P>It has already been said that the most distinctive feature in the conception of eternal life is that it is not a future immortal felicity so much as a present spiritual state. The category of duration recedes before that of moral quality. Yet it has its own stupendous importance. In triumphant contrast with the poor ephemeralities of the worldly life, he that doeth the will of God "abideth for ever" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,17);">1Joh 2:17</a>); and the complete realization of the life eternal is still in the future (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,36);">Joh 4:36</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,27);">6:27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,25);">12:25</a>).<P>(2) Antichrist.<P>The view of Antichrist is strikingly characteristic. Tacitly setting aside the lurid figure of popular traditions, John grasps the essential fact that is expressed by the name and idea of Antichrist (= one who in the guise of Christ opposes Christ), and finds its fulfillment in the false teaching which substituted for the Christ of the gospel the fantastic product of Gnostic imagination (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,3);">1Joh 4:3</a>). But in this he reads the sign that the world\'s day has reached its last hour (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,18);">1Joh 2:18</a>).<P>(3) Resurrection.<P>While the Fourth Gospel so carefully records the proofs of Christ\'s resurrection, noticeably little (in the Epistle, nothing) is made of the thought of a future resurrection from the dead. For the Christian, the death of the body is a mere incident. "Whosoever liveth and believeth on me shall never die" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,26);">Joh 11:26</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',8,51);">Joh 8:51</a>). Regeneration<6F>union with Christ<73>is the true resurrection (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,50,51,58);">Joh 6:50,51,58</a>). And yet, again, the eschatological idea is not lost. Side by side with the essential truth the supplementary and interpretative truth is given its right place. "Whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,54);">Joh 6:54</a> the King James Version). If Christ says "I am the life: whosoever liveth and believeth on me shall never die," He also says "I am the resurrection: he that believeth on me, though he die, yet shall he live" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,25);">Joh 11:25</a>).<P>(4) Judgment.<P>As has already been said, John regards judgment as essentially a present fact of life. Christ does not pass judgment upon men<65>that is not the purpose of His coming (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,17);">Joh 3:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,47);">12:47</a>). Yet Christ is always of necessity judging men<65>compelling them to pass judgment upon themselves. For judgment He is come into the world (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',9,39);">Joh 9:39</a>). By their attitude toward Him men involuntarily but inevitably classify themselves, reveal what spirit they are of, and automatically register themselves as being or as not being "of the truth" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,37);">Joh 18:37</a>). Judgment is not the assigning of a character from without, but the revelation of a character from within. And this is not future, but present. "He that believeth not hath been judged...because he hath not believed on the name of the only begotten Son of of God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,18);">Joh 3:18</a>). Yet the apostle indubitably looks forward to a future Day of Judgment (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,48);">Joh 12:48</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,17);">1Joh 4:17</a>). Nor is this simply an "unconscious concession to orthodoxy." The judgment to come will be the full manifestation of the judgment that now is, that is to say, of the principles according to which men are in reality approved or condemned already. What this present judgment, the classification of men by their relation to Christ, ultimately signifies, is not at all realized by the "world," is not fully realized even in Christian faith. There must be a day when all self-deception shall cease and all reality shall be manifested.<P>(5) The Parousia.<P>In like manner the conception of the Parousia is primarily spiritual. The substitution in the Fourth Gospel of the Supper Discourse (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,1);">Joh 14-16</a>) for the apocalyptic chapters in the Synoptics is of the utmost significance. It is not a Christ coming on the clouds of heaven that is presented, but a Christ who has come and is ever coming to dwell in closest fellowship with His people (see above under IV). Yet John by no means discards belief in the Parousia as a historical event of the future. If Christ\'s abiding-place is in those that love Him and keep His word, there is also a Father\'s House in which there are many abiding-places, whither He goes to prepare a place for them and whence He will come again to receive them unto Himself (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,2,3);">Joh 14:2,3</a>). Still more is this emphasized in the Epistle. The command "Love not the world" is sharpened by the assurance that the world is on the verge, aye, in the process of dissolution (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,17);">1Joh 2:17</a>). The exhortation to "abide in him" is enforced by the dread of being put to shame at His impending advent (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,28);">1Joh 2:28</a>). The hope of being made partakers in His manifested glory is the consummation of all that is implied in our being now children of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,2,3);">1Joh 3:2,3</a>).<P>(a) A "Manifestation":<P>But this future crisis will be only the manifestation of the existing reality (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,2);">1Joh 3:2</a>). The Parousia will, no more than the incarnation, be the advent of a strange Presence in the world. It will be, as on the Mount of Transfiguration, the outshining of a latent glory; not the arrival of one who is absent, but the self-revealing of one who is present. As to the manner of Christ\'s appearing, the Epistle is silent. As to its significance, we are left in no doubt. It is a historical event; occurring once for all; the consummation of all Divine purpose that has governed human existence; the final crisis in the history of the church, of the world, and of every man.<P>(b) Relation to Believers:<P>Especially for the children of God, it will be a coming unto salvation. "Beloved, now are we children of God, and it is not yet made manifest what we shall be. We know that, if he shall be manifested, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,2);">1Joh 3:2</a>). Here the Johannine idea of "manifestation" is strikingly employed. "What we shall be" will be essentially what we are<72>children of God. No new element will be added to the regenerate nature. All is there that ever will be there. But the epoch of full development is not yet. Only when Christ<73>the Christ who is already in the world<6C>shall be manifested, then also the children of God who are in the world will be manifested as being what they are. They also will have come to their Mount of Transfiguration. As eternal life here is mediated through this first manifestation (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',1,2);">1Joh 1:2</a>), so eternal life hereafter will be mediated through this second and final manifestation. "We know that we shall be like him, because we shall see him as he is." It is true that here according to our capacity we behold Him as He is (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,14);">Joh 1:14</a>); but perception, now dim and wavering, will then be intense and vivid. The vision of the future is in some sense corporeal as well as spiritual. Sense and faith will coincide. It will then have ceased to be expedient that Christ should go away in order that the Spirit of truth may come. We shall possess in the same experience the privilege of the original eyewitnesses of the incarnate life and the inward ministry of the Spirit. And seeing Him as He is, we shall be like Him. Vision will beget likeness, and likeness again give clearness to vision. And as the vision is in some unconjecturable fashion corporeal as well as spiritual, so also is the assimilation (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',3,21);">Php 3:21</a>). The very idea of the spiritual body is that it perfectly corresponds to the character to which it belongs. The outward man will take the mold of the inward man, and will share with it its perfected likeness to the glorified manhood of Jesus Christ. Such is the farthest view opened to our hope by the Johannine eschatology; and it is that which, of all others, has been most entrancing to the imagination and stimulating to the aspiration of the children of God.<P>LITERATURE.<P>The following works may be mentioned as treating specially of the Theology: B. Weiss, Der Johannische Lehrbegriff, Berlin, 1862; O. Holtzmann, Das Johannes-Evangelium untersucht und erklart, Darmstadt, 1887; Beyschlag, Neutestamentliche Theologie, Halle, 1896; Pfleiderer, Das Urchristentum, Berlin,1902,English translation, Williams and Norgate, London; E. Haupt, Der erste Brief des Johannes, Colberg,1869,English translation, T. and T. Clark, Edinburgh; Grill, Untersuchungen uber die Entstehung des vierten Evangeliums, Tubingen, 1902; G.B. Stevens, The Johannine Theology, New York, 1894; id., The Theology of the New Testament,1899,also The Christian Doctrine of Salvation,1905,T. and T. Clark, Edinburgh; O. Cone, The Gospel and Its Earliest Interpretations, New York, 1893; Scott, The Fourth Gospel, Its Purpose and Theology, T. and T. Clark, 1906; Law, The Tests of Life: A Study of the First Epistle of John (dealing specially with the Theology), Edinburgh and New York, 1909; Denney, Jesus and the Gospel, New York, 1909; Judge, Cambridge Biblical Essays, Macmillan, 1910.``97';
isbe[5097]='John (1)`jon (Ioannes): The name of several persons mentioned in the Apocrypha:<P>(1) Father of Mattathias, grandfather of Judas Maccabeus and his brothers (1Macc 2:1).<P>(2) Eldest son of Mattathias, surnamed <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=GADDIS">GADDIS</a> (which see).<P>(3) Father of Eupolemus, one of the envoys sent to Rome by Judas Maccabeus (1Macc 8:17; 2Macc 4:11).<P>(4) John Hyrcanus, "a valiant man," son of Simon, and nephew of Judas Maccabeus (1Macc 13:53; 16:1).<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ASMONEANS">ASMONEANS</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=MACCABEES">MACCABEES</a>.<P>(5) One of the envoys sent to treat with Lysias (2Macc 11:17).``79';
isbe[5098]='John (2)`(Ioannes): The name of 4 persons:<P>(1) <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JOHN+THE+BAPTIST">JOHN THE BAPTIST</a> (which see).<P>(2) The apostle, the son of Zebedee, and brother of James (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JOHN,+THE+APOSTLE">JOHN, THE APOSTLE</a>).<P>(3) A relative of Annas the high priest, who sat in the Sanhedrin when Peter and John were tried (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',4,6);">Ac 4:6</a>). Lightfoot supposes him to be the Jochanan ben Zacchai of the Talmud, who, however, did not belong to the family of the high priest. Nothing is really known of him.<P>(4) <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JOHN+MARK">JOHN MARK</a> (which see).<P>(5) Father of Simon Peter (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,42);">Joh 1:42</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',21,15,17);">21:15,17</a>, margin "Greek Joanes: called in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',16,17);">Mt 16:17</a>, Jonah").``78';
isbe[5099]='John Mark``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=MARK,+JOHN">MARK, JOHN</a>`1';
isbe[5100]='John the Baptist`(Ioanes):<P><b>I. SOURCES</b><P><b>II. PARENTAGE</b><P><b>III. EARLY LIFE</b><P><b>IV. MINISTRY</b><P class="in15">1. The Scene<P class="in15">2. His First Appearance<P class="in15">3. His Dress and Manner<P class="in15">4. His Message<P class="in15">5. His Severity<P><b>V. BAPTISM</b><P class="in15">1. Significance<P class="in30">(1) Lustrations Required by the Levitical Law<P class="in30">(2) Anticipation of Messianic Lustrations Foretold by the Prophets<P class="in30">(3) Proselyte Baptism<P class="in15">2. Baptism of Jesus<P><b>VI. IMPRISONMENT AND DEATH</b><P class="in15">1. The Time<P class="in15">2. The Occasion<P><b>VII. JOHN AND HIS DISCIPLES</b><P class="in15">1. The Inner Circle<P class="in15">2. Their Training<P class="in15">3. Their Fidelity<P><b>VIII. JOHN AND JESUS</b><P class="in15">1. John\'s Relation to Jesus<P class="in15">2. Jesus\' Estimate of John<P><b>LITERATURE</b><hr /><P>I. Sources.<P>The sources of first-hand information concerning the life and work of John the Baptist are limited to the New Testament and Josephus Luke and Matthew give the fuller notices, and these are in substantial agreement. The Fourth Gospel deals chiefly with the witness after the baptism. In his single notice (Ant., XVIII, v, 2), Josephus makes an interesting reference to the cause of John\'s imprisonment. See VI, 2, below.<P>II. Parentage.<P>John was of priestly descent. His mother, Elisabeth, was of the daughters of Aaron, while his father, Zacharias, was a priest of the course of Abija, and did service in the temple at Jerusalem. It is said of them that "they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,6);">Lu 1:6</a>). This priestly ancestry is in interesting contrast with his prophetic mission.<P>III. Early Life.<P>We infer from Luke\'s account that John was born about six months before the birth of Jesus. Of the place we know only that it was a city of the hill country of Judah. Our definite information concerning his youth is summed up in the angelic prophecy, "Many shall rejoice at his birth. For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and he shall drink no wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother\'s womb" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,\'14-16\');">Lu 1:14-16</a>), and in Luke\'s brief statement, "And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, and was in the deserts till the day of his showing unto Israel" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,80);">Lu 1:80</a>). The character and spiritual insight of the parents shown in the incidents recorded are ample evidence that his training was a fitting preparation for his great mission.<P>IV. Ministry.<P>1. The Scene:<P>The scene of the Baptist\'s ministry was partly in the wilderness of Southern Judea and partly in the Jordan valley. Two locations are mentioned, Bethany or Bethabara (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,28);">Joh 1:28</a>), and Aenon near Salim (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,23);">Joh 3:23</a>). Neither of these places can be positively identified. We may infer from <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,2);">Joh 3:2</a> that he also spent some time in Peraea beyond the Jordan.<P>2. His First Appearance:<P>The unusual array of dates with which Luke marks the beginning of John\'s ministry (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,1,2);">Lu 3:1,2</a>) reveals his sense of the importance of the event as at once the beginning of his prophetic work and of the new dispensation. His first public appearance is assigned to the 15th year of Tiberius, probably 26 or 27 AD, for the first Passover attended by Jesus can hardly have been later than 27 AD (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,20);">Joh 2:20</a>).<P>3. His Dress and Manner:<P>John\'s dress and habits were strikingly suggestive of Elijah, the old prophet of national judgment. His desert habits have led some to connect him with that strange company of Jews known as the Essenes. There is, however, little foundation for such a connection other than his ascetic habits and the fact that the chief settlement of this sect was near the home of his youth. It was natural that he should continue the manner of his youthful life in the desert, and it is not improbable that he intentionally copied his great prophetic model. It was fitting that the one who called men to repentance and the beginning of a self-denying life should show renunciation and self-denial in his own life. But there is no evidence in his teaching that he required such asceticism of those who accepted his baptism.<P>4. His Message:<P>The fundamental note in the message of John was the announcement of the near approach of the Messianic age. But while he announced himself as the herald voice preparing the way of the Lord, and because of this the expectant multitudes crowded to hear his word, his view of the nature of the kingdom was probably quite at variance with that of his hearers. Instead of the expected day of deliverance from the foreign oppressor, it was to be a day of judgment for Israel. It meant good for the penitent, but destruction for the ungodly. "He will gather his wheat into the garner, but the chaff he will burn up with...fire" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',3,12);">Mt 3:12</a>). "The axe also lieth at the root of the trees: every tree therefore that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,9);">Lu 3:9</a>). Yet this idea was perhaps not entirely unfamiliar. That the delay in the Messiah\'s coming was due to the sinfulness of the people and their lack of repentance, was a commonplace in the message of their teachers (Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, I, 169).<P>The call to repentance was then a natural message of preparation for such a time of judgment. But to John repentance was a very real and radical thing. It meant a complete change of heart and life. "Bring forth...fruits worthy of repentance" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,8);">Lu 3:8</a>). What these fruits were he made clear in his answers to the inquiring multitudes and the publicans and soldiers (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,\'10-14\');">Lu 3:10-14</a>). It is noticeable that there is no reference to the usual ceremonies of the law or to a change of occupation. Do good; be honest; refrain from extortion; be content with wages.<P>5. His Severity:<P>John used such violence in addressing the Pharisees and Sadducees doubtless to startle them from their self-complacency. How hopelessly they were blinded by their sense of security as the children of Abraham, and by their confidence in the merits of the law, is attested by the fact that these parties resisted the teachings of both John and Jesus to the very end.<P>With what vigor and fearlessness the Baptist pressed his demand for righteousness is shown by his stern reproof of the sin of Herod and Herodias, which led to his imprisonment and finally to his death.<P>V. Baptism.<P>1. Significance:<P>The symbolic rite of baptism was such an essential part of the work of John that it not only gave him his distinctive title of "the Baptist" (ho baptistes), but also caused his message to be styled "preaching the baptism of repentance." That a special virtue was ascribed to this rite, and that it was regarded as a necessary part of the preparation for the coming of the Messiah, are shown by its important place in John\'s preaching, and by the eagerness with which it was sought by the multitudes. Its significance may best be understood by giving attention to its historical antecedents, for while John gave the rite new significance, it certainly appealed to ideas already familiar to the Jews.<P>(1) Lustrations Required by the Levitical Law.<P>The divers washings required by the law (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',11,\'1-\');">Le 11-15</a>) have, without doubt, a religious import. This is shown by the requirement of sacrifices in connection with the cleansing, especially the sin offering (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',14,8,9,19,20);">Le 14:8,9,19,20</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,44);">Mr 1:44</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,22);">Lu 2:22</a>). The designation of John\'s baptism by the word baptizein, which by New Testament times was used of ceremonial purification, also indicates some historical connection (compare Sirach 34:25).<P>(2) Anticipation of Messianic Lustrations Foretold by Prophets.<P>John understood that his baptism was a preparation for the Messianic baptism anticipated by the prophets, who saw that for a true cleansing the nation must wait until God should open in Israel a fountain for cleansing (<a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',13,1);">Zec 13:1</a>), and should sprinkle His people with clean water and give them a new heart and a new spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',36,25,26);">Eze 36:25,26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',33,8);">Jer 33:8</a>). His baptism was at once a preparation and a promise of the spiritual cleansing which the Messiah would bestow. "I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me...shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',3,11);">Mt 3:11</a> margin).<P>(3) Proselyte Baptism.<P>According to the teaching of later Judaism, a stranger who desired to be adopted into the family of Israel was required, along with circumcision, to receive the rite of baptism as a means of cleansing from the ceremonial uncleanness attributed to him as a Gentile. While it is not possible to prove the priority of this practice of proselyte baptism to the baptism of John, there can be no doubt of the fact, for it is inconceivable, in view of Jewish prejudice, that it would be borrowed from John or after this time.<P>While it seems clear that in the use of the rite of baptism John was influenced by the Jewish customs of ceremonial washings and proselyte baptism, his baptism differed very essentially from these. The Levitical washings restored an unclean person to his former condition, but baptism was a preparation for a new condition. On the other hand, proselyte baptism was administered only to Gentiles, while John required baptism of all Jews. At the same time his baptism was very different from Christian baptism, as he himself declared (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,16);">Lu 3:16</a>). His was a baptism of water only; a preparation for the baptism "in the Spirit" which was to follow. It is also to be observed that it was a rite complete in itself, and that it was offered to the nation as a preparation for a specific event, the advent of the Messiah.<P>We may say, then, that as a "baptism of repentance" it meant a renunciation of the past life; as a cleansing it symbolized the forgiveness of sins (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,4);">Mr 1:4</a>), and as preparation it implied a promise of loyalty to the kingdom of the Messiah. We have no reason to believe that Jesus experienced any sense of sin or felt any need of repentance or forgiveness; but as a Divinely appointed preparation for the Messianic kingdom His submission to it was appropriate.<P>2. Baptism of Jesus:<P>While the multitudes flocked to the Jordan, Jesus came also to be baptized with the rest. "John would have hindered him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me? But Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it now: for thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',3,\'13-15\');">Mt 3:13-15</a>). Wherein was this act a fulfillment of righteousness? We cannot believe that Jesus felt any need of repentance or change of life. May we not regard it rather as an identification of Himself with His people in the formal consecration of His life to the work of the kingdom?<P>VI. Imprisonment and Death.<P>1. The Time:<P>Neither the exact time of John\'s imprisonment nor the period of time between his imprisonment and his death can be determined. On the occasion of the unnamed feast of <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,1);">Joh 5:1</a>, Jesus refers to John\'s witness as already past. At least, then, his arrest, if not his death, must have taken place prior to that incident, i.e. before the second Passover of Jesus\' ministry.<P>2. The Occasion:<P>According to the Gospel accounts, John was imprisoned because of his reproof of Herod\'s marriage with Herodias, the wife of his brother Philip (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,19,20);">Lu 3:19,20</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',14,3,4);">Mt 14:3,4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,17,18);">Mr 6:17,18</a>). Josephus says (Ant., XVIII, v, 2) that Herod was influenced to put John to death by the "fear lest his great influence over the people might put it in his power or inclination to raise a rebellion. Accordingly, he was sent a prisoner, out of Herod\'s suspicious temper, to Macherus, and was there put to death." This account of Josephus does not necessarily conflict with the tragic story of the Gospels. If Herod desired to punish or destroy him for the reasons assigned by the evangelists, he would doubtless wish to offer as the public reason some political charge, and the one named by Josephus would be near at hand.<P>VII. John and His Disciples.<P>1. The Inner Circle:<P>Frequent reference is made in the Gospel narrative to the disciples of John. As the multitudes crowded to his baptism, it was natural that he should gather about him an inner circle of men who should receive special instruction in the meaning of his work, and should aid him in the work of baptism, which must have soon increased beyond his power to perform alone. It was in the formation of this inner circle of immediate followers that he prepared a sure foundation for the work of the Messiah; for it was from this inner group that the disciples of Jesus were mainly drawn, and that with his consent and through his witness to the superior worth of the latter, and the temporary character of his own mission (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,\'29-44\');">Joh 1:29-44</a>).<P>2. Their Training:<P>Concerning the substance of their training, we know from the disciples of Jesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,1);">Lu 11:1</a>) that it included forms of prayer, and from his own disciples (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',9,14);">Mt 9:14</a>) we learn that frequent fastings were observed. We may be sure also that he taught them much concerning the Messiah and His work.<P>3. Their Fidelity:<P>There is abundant evidence of the great fidelity of these disciples to their master. This may be observed in their concern at the over-shadowing popularity of Jesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,26);">Joh 3:26</a>); in their loyalty to him in his imprisonment and in their reverent treatment of his body after his death (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,29);">Mr 6:29</a>). That John\'s work was extensive and his influence lasting is shown by the fact that 20 years afterward Paul found in far-off Ephesus certain disciples, including Apollos, the learned Alexandrian Jew, who knew no other baptism than that of John (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',19,\'1-7\');">Ac 19:1-7</a>).<P>VIII. John and Jesus.<P>1. John\'s Relation to Jesus:<P>John assumed from the first the role of a herald preparing the way for the approaching Messianic age. He clearly regarded his work as Divinely appointed (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,33);">Joh 1:33</a>), but was well aware of his subordinate relation to the Messiah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,7);">Mr 1:7</a>) and of the temporary character of his mission (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,30);">Joh 3:30</a>). The Baptist\'s work was twofold. In his preaching he warned the nation of the true character of the new kingdom as a reign of righteousness, and by his call to repentance and baptism he prepared at least a few hearts for a sympathetic response to the call and teaching of Jesus. He also formally announced and bore frequent personal testimony to Jesus as the Messiah.<P>There is no necessary discrepancy between the synoptic account and that of the Fourth Gospel in reference to the progress of John\'s knowledge of the Messianic character of Jesus. According to <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',3,14);">Mt 3:14</a>, John is represented as declining at first to baptize Jesus because he was conscious of His superiority, while in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,\'29-34\');">Joh 1:29-34</a> he is represented as claiming not to have known Jesus until He was manifested by the heavenly sign. The latter may mean only that He was not known to him definitely as the Messiah until the promised sign was given.<P>The message which John sent to Jesus from prison seems strange to some in view of the signal testimonies which he had previously borne to His character. This need not indicate that he had lost faith in the Messiahship of Jesus, but rather a perplexity at the course of events. The inquiry may have been in the interest of the faith of his disciples or his own relief from misgivings due to Jesus\' delay in assuming the expected Messianic authority. John evidently held the prophetic view of a temporal Messianic kingdom, and some readjustment of view was necessary.<P>2. Jesus\' Estimate of John:<P>Jesus was no less frank in His appreciation of John. If praise may be measured by the worth of the one by whose lips it is spoken, then no man ever received such praise as he who was called by Jesus a shining light (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,35);">Joh 5:35</a>), more than a prophet (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',11,9);">Mt 11:9</a>), and of whom He said, "Among them that are born of women there hath not arisen a greater than John the Baptist" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',11,11);">Mt 11:11</a>). If, on the other hand, He rated him as less than the least in the kingdom of heaven, this was a limitation of circumstances, not of worth.<P>Jesus paid high tribute to the Divine character and worth of John\'s baptism; first, by submitting to it Himself as a step in the fulfillment of all righteousness; later, by repeated utterance, especially in associating it with the birth of the Spirit as a necessary condition of inheriting eternal life (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,5);">Joh 3:5</a>); and, finally, in adopting baptism as a symbol of Christian discipleship.<P>LITERATURE.<P>The relative sections in the Gospel Commentaries, in the Lives of Christ, and the articles on John the Baptist in the several Bible dictionaries. There are a number of monographs which treat more minutely of details: W.C. Duncan, The Life, Character and Acts of John the Baptist, New York, 1853; Erich Haupt, Johannes der Taufer, Gutersloh, 1874; H. Kohler, Johannes der Taufer, Halle, 1884; R.C. Houghton, John the Baptist: His Life and Work, New York, 1889; H.R. Reynolds, John the Baptist, London, 1890; J. Feather, John the Baptist, Edinburgh, 1894; George Matheson in Representative Men of the New Testament, 24-66, Edinburgh, 1905; T. Innitzer, Johannes der Taufer, Vienna, 1908; A.T. Robertson, John the Loyal, New York, 1911.``121';
</script>
<script src="./study/isbe/author.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
<script src="./study/isbe/isbeDisplay.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
<script src="./js/MainFooter.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
Reference in New Issue View Git Blame Copy Permalink