Sermon and Worship Resources (2024)

The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesus followers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christ embodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in human history.

Birth and childhood. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem during the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesus was probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’s death (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of a virginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18; Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governor Quirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place in Bethlehem (2:15). Both the census and the governorship at the time of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars. Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to either confirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must be determined on the basis of one’s view regarding the general reliability of the Gospel tradition.

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

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

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

Galilean ministry. The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and around Galilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that the kingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment of prophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ first teaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30); the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for his calling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection and suffering.

All the Gospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in his Galilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke 5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioning of the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers is recorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministry is the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke 6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, in particular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synoptics focus on healings and exorcisms.

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

The Synoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful. No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority or ability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized many demons (5:1–13), raised the dead (5:35–42), fed five thousand (6:30–44), and walked on water (6:48–49).

In the later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew and traveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are not written with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns to Galilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fear resolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee, where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ disciples with lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed the Pharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents (7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demanding a sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, who confessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus did provide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).

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

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

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

Passion week, death, and resurrection. Each of the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with the crowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark 11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Luke describes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during which Jesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).

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

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

The nature of the church is too broad to be exhausted in the meaning of one word. To capture its significance, the NT authors utilize a rich array of metaphorical descriptions. Nevertheless, there are those metaphors that seem to dominate the biblical pictures of the church, five of which call for comment: the people of God, the kingdom of God, the eschatological temple of God, the bride of Christ, and the body of Christ.

The people of God. Essentially, the concept of the people of God can be summed up in the covenantal phrase: “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Exod. 6:67; 19:5; Lev. 26:9–14; Jer. 7:23; 30:22; 32:37–40; Ezek. 11:19–20; 36:22–28; Acts 15:14; 2Cor. 6:16; Heb. 8:10–12; Rev. 21:3). Thus, the people of God are those in both the OT and the NT eras who responded to God by faith and whose spiritual origin rests exclusively in God’s grace.

The kingdom of God. Many scholars have maintained that the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus inaugurated the kingdom of God, producing the overlapping of the two ages. The kingdom has already dawned but is not yet complete. The first aspect pertains to Jesus’ first coming, and the second aspect relates to his second coming. In other words, the age to come has broken into this age, and now the two exist simultaneously. This background is crucial in ascertaining the relationship between the church and the kingdom of God, because the church also exists in the tension that results from the overlapping of the two ages. Accordingly, one may define the church as the foreshadowing of the kingdom. Two ideas flow from this definition: first, the church is related to the kingdom of God; second, the church is not equal to the kingdom of God.

The church and the kingdom of God are related. Not until after the resurrection of Jesus does the NT speak with regularity about the church. However, there are early signs of the church in the teaching and ministry of Jesus, in both general and specific ways. In general, Jesus anticipated the later official formation of the church in that he gathered to himself the twelve disciples, who constituted the beginnings of eschatological Israel—in effect, the remnant. More specifically, Jesus explicitly referred to the church in two passages: Matt. 16:18–19; 18:17. In the first passage Jesus promised that he would build his church despite satanic opposition, thus assuring the ultimate success of his mission. The notion of the church overcoming the forces of evil coincides with the idea that the kingdom of God will prevail over its enemies and bespeaks the intimate association between the church and the kingdom. The second passage relates to the future organization of the church, not unlike the Jewish synagogue practices of Jesus’ day.

The church and the kingdom of God are not identical. As intimately related as the church and the kingdom of God are, the NT does not equate the two, as is evident in the fact that the early Christians preached the kingdom, not the church (Acts 8:12; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). The NT identifies the church as the people of the kingdom (e.g., Rev. 5:10), not the kingdom itself. Moreover, the church is the instrument of the kingdom. This is especially clear from Matt. 16:18–19, where the preaching of Peter and the church become the keys to opening up the kingdom of God to all who would enter.

The eschatological temple of God. Both the OT and Judaism anticipated the rebuilding of the temple in the future kingdom of God (e.g., Ezek. 40–48; Hag. 2:1–9). Jesus hinted that he was going to build such a structure (Matt. 16:18; Mark 14:58; John 2:19–22). Pentecost witnessed to the beginning of the fulfillment of that dream in that when the Spirit inhabited the church, the eschatological temple was formed (Acts 2:16–36). Other NT writers also perceived that the presence of the Spirit in the Christian community constituted the new temple of God (1Cor. 3:16–17; 2Cor. 6:14–7:1; Eph. 2:19–22; see also Gal. 4:21–31; 1Pet. 2:4–10). However, that the eschatological temple is not yet complete is evident in the preceding passages, especially in their emphasis on the need for the church to grow toward maturity in Christ, which will be fully accomplished only at the parousia (second coming of Christ). In the meantime, Christians, as priests of God, are to perform their sacrificial service to the glory of God (Rom. 12:1–2; Heb. 13:15; 1Pet. 2:4–10).

The bride of Christ. The image of marriage is applied to God and Israel in the OT (see Isa. 54:5–6; 62:5; Hos. 2:7). Similar imagery is applied to Christ and the church in the NT. Christ, the bridegroom, has sacrificially and lovingly chosen the church to be his bride (Eph. 5:25–27). Her responsibility during the betrothal period is to be faithful to him (2Cor. 11:2; Eph. 5:24). At the parousia the official wedding ceremony will take place, and with it the eternal union of Christ and his wife will be actualized (Rev. 19:7–9; 21:1–2).

The body of Christ. The body of Christ as a metaphor for the church is unique to the Pauline literature and constitutes one of the most significant concepts therein (Rom. 12:4–5; 1Cor. 12:12–27; Eph. 4:7–16; Col. 1:18). The primary purpose of the metaphor is to demonstrate the interrelatedness of diversity and unity within the church, especially with reference to spiritual gifts. The body of Christ is the last Adam (1Cor. 15:45), the new humanity of the end time that has appeared in history. However, Paul’s usage of the image, like the metaphor of the new temple, indicates that the church, as the body of Christ, still has a long way to go spiritually. It is not yet complete.

These church offices are God-given positions of leadership within the early church designed to give it structure and direction. Some of these positions have ongoing application for today; others are important primarily for understanding the historical development of the church. The more significant offices in the NT church include the following:

Apostle. Apostles formed the earliest and most important leadership structure. Jesus, early in his ministry, “called his disciples to him and chose twelve of them, whom he also designated apostles” (Luke 6:13). The word “disciple” (mathētēs) means “student” or “learner” and indicates the role of these original twelve during Jesus’ earthly ministry. Following Jesus’ death and resurrection, these same individuals (now minus Judas Iscariot) were typically called “apostles” (apostolos [lit., “sent-out one”]), who were then entrusted with Christ’s power and authority as his official representatives. Paul describes the foundational role of this office in Eph. 2:20. Their power and authority were without parallel in the historical development of the church.

Prophet. The office of prophet (prophētēs) is another foundational one at the time of the establishment of the church (Eph. 2:20). Agabus is described as a prophet (Acts 21:10), and Paul assumes that there were prophets in the church in Corinth (1Cor. 12:29). Although this is a controversial topic, many believe that this office no longer continues today.

Elder/presbyter. The office of elder or presbyter (presbyteros) is one of the most common in the church. This office is based on the model of elders in the Jewish synagogue. Paul and Barnabas appointed elders in every church as early as their first missionary journey (Acts 14:23). James instructs the sick to call on the elders of the church to pray over them (James 5:14). The best job description for elders is 1Tim. 5:17, where there are two major emphases: first, directing the affairs of the church, and second, preaching and teaching. Elders apparently always functioned in a plurality in Scripture, never as solo leaders.

Overseer/bishop. The office of overseer or bishop (episkopos) is mentioned in Phil. 1:1 as well as in 1Tim. 3:2; Titus 1:7 in the lists of qualifications. Although by the second or third century the office of overseer/bishop had evolved into a singular office of one overseer presiding over a number of elders, this was not true in the NT, where these two titles apparently were different names for the same office.

Deacon. Deacons provide practical, hands-on ministry in the local church. Interestingly, the classic passage on this office, Acts 6:1 6, never uses the actual noun “deacon” (diakonos). Instead, other forms of this word are used: “to wait on tables” (diakoneō [v.2]) and “the ministry [lit., ‘service’] of the word” (diakonia [v.4]). This word group is used frequently to refer to nonreligious service, such as Martha’s meal preparation (Luke 10:40) or in reference to a servant or attendant in one of Jesus’ parables (e.g., Matt. 22:13). Originally, the term “deacon” simply meant “servant.” In the development of the NT church, it gradually became a technical term used to refer to a specific office, such as in Paul’s greeting in Phil. 1:1 and in the list of qualifications in 1Tim. 3:8–13. The standard understanding of the deacons in the NT church structure is that they assisted the elders/overseers in practical ways (probably on the model of the seven men in Acts 6).

Pastor. Pastors, surprisingly, show up only a single time in most English translations, in Eph. 4:11, where Paul describes how Christ “gave ... pastors and teachers.” “Pastor” (poimēn) means “shepherd,” and although the noun appears in this sense of a church leader only here, the verb “to shepherd” (poimainō) occurs also in Acts 20:28; 1Pet. 5:2. This shepherding role is associated with the elders/overseers. We see this in Paul’s address to the Ephesian elders in Acts 20, where he calls them “elders” (v.17) and “overseers” (v.28) and tells them how they are to “be shepherds of the church of God” (v.28). Peter does the same thing in 1Pet. 5:1–2, where he calls them “elders” (v.1) and then calls them “overseers” and tells them to “be shepherds of God’s flock” (v.2).

Teacher. Teachers are mentioned among those with various spiritual gifts in 1Cor. 12:28–29 and are connected with pastors in Eph. 4:11, apparently as a single combined office.

Evangelist. Evangelists are mentioned in the list of specially gifted individuals in Eph. 4:11, in relationship to Philip the evangelist in Acts 21:8, and as part of the job description for Timothy in 2Tim. 4:5 (“do the work of an evangelist”).

Faith in the context of the OT rests on a foundation that the person or object of trust, belief, or confidence is reliable. Trust in Yahweh is expressed through loyalty and obedience. The theme of responsive obedience is emphasized in the Torah (Exod. 19:5). In the later history of Israel, faithfulness to the law became the predominant expression of faith (Dan. 1:8; 6:10). OT faith, then, is a moral response rather than abstract intellect or emotion.

Faith is a central theological concept in the NT. In relational terms, faith is foremost personalized as the locus of trust and belief in the person of Jesus Christ.

In the Gospels, Jesus is spoken of not as the subject of faith (as believing in God), but as the object of faith. In the Synoptic Gospels, faith is seen most often in connection with the ministry of Jesus. Miracles, in particular healings, are presented as taking place in response to the faith of the one in need of healing or the requester. In the Gospel of John, faith (belief) is presented as something that God requires of his people (6:2829).

In the book of Acts, “faith/belief” is used to refer to Jews and Gentiles converting to following the life and teachings of Jesus Christ and becoming part of the Christian community. The book correlates faith in Christ closely with repentance (Acts 11:21; 19:18; 20:21; 26:18).

Paul relates faith to righteousness and justification (Rom. 3:22; 5:11; Gal. 3:6). In Ephesians faith is shown as instrumental in salvation: “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God” (2:8).

In Hebrews, faith is described as “being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see” (11:1). Faith thus is viewed as something that can be accomplished in the life of the believer—a calling of God not yet tangible or seen. To possess faith is to be loyal to God and to the gospel of Jesus Christ despite all obstacles. In the Letter of James, genuine works naturally accompany genuine faith. Works, however, are expressed in doing the will of God. The will of God means, for example, caring for the poor (James 2:15–16).

In 1Peter, Christ is depicted as the broker of faith in God (1:21), whereas in 2Peter and Jude faith is presented as received from God (2Pet. 1:1). In the Letters of John “to believe” is used as a litmus test for those who possess eternal life: “You who believe in the name of the Son of God, ... you have eternal life” (1John 5:13).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The earliest ripening produce of the harvest (Exod. 23:16; Neh. 10:35) or, more generally, the highest-quality portion of any produce or manufactured commodity (Num. 15:20).

The firstfruit of the harvest is a symbol and harbinger of God’s blessing. Thus, God commands that sacrifices take place in which the “best of the firstfruits” are offered to him in thanksgiving and praise (Exod. 34:26; cf. Lev. 23:17; Deut. 26:2). The same principle applies to manufactured goods (Deut. 18:4), and all these events are accompanied by feasts and festivals (Exod. 23:16). Such ceremonial worship takes on renewed importance in the return from the exile, where they are connected to God’s worldwide rule and his claim upon the firstborn (Neh. 10:3537; cf. Exod. 13:2–16).

Paul uses this OT background to metaphorically describe the resurrection, God’s final “harvest” of the earth. Jesus Christ, by virtue of his resurrection from the dead, is “the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep” (1Cor. 15:20; cf. Rom. 8:29). The resurrection of Christ is the guarantee of an abundant harvest to come, in which those united to Jesus will be similarly raised into abundant life. There is therefore a two-part order to a single resurrection harvest: “Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him” (1Cor. 15:23).

Furthermore, since Jesus’ own resurrection has already taken place, believers, who are sealed with Christ through “the firstfruits of the Spirit,” enjoy now a foretaste of the abundant life to come (Rom. 8:23; cf. 2Cor. 1:22; 5:5). Believers are therefore encouraged to live as those who have been born again by faith, “that we might be a kind of firstfruits of all he created” (James 1:18). Similarly, Paul sometimes uses the term “firstfruits” to describe the first converts in a region (Rom. 16:5; 1Cor. 16:15 KJV), symbolizing the expectation of fruitful ministry and the intimation of worldwide salvation.

The word “Gentiles” is often used to translate words meaning “nations” or “peoples.”

In general, within the OT, Gentiles are not God’s people. God chose Israel to be his people, not other nations (Deut. 7:68; 10:15; 26:18–19). Israelite ancestry determines membership in the covenant people. Some writings thus forbid Gentiles from becoming part of God’s people (Ezra 9–10; Neh. 13).

The OT more commonly envisions Gentiles experiencing covenant blessing through Israel if they functionally become Israelites by keeping the law, including the parts we understand as ceremonial-ritual law. The law is that special life-giving and regulating aspect of the covenant that God revealed to Israel, which defines Israel (Lev. 18:1–5; 20:22–26; Deut. 4:1–8, 32–40; 6:24–25; 8:1–6; 10:12–11:32; 30:11–20; Josh. 1:7–9; Neh. 9:29; Pss. 119; 147:19–20; Ezek. 20:9–13, 21).

Such law/Israel-centered conditions for Gentiles relate to a broader OT understanding: God will reach and restore the world through Israel, the locus of his saving activity. God will bless the nations in and through Abraham’s descendants, Israel (Gen. 12:1–3; 17:4–6; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14). This covenant specifically involves keeping the law (e.g., circumcision [Gen. 17:9–14]). Some passages depict this happening through the nations being subject to Israel (Gen. 49:8–12; Num. 24:9, 17–19; Isa. 11:10–16; 14:2; 54:3). In other passages the nations will be blessed by Israel’s God as they come to Israel, bring back exiled Israel, serve Israel, present Israel with their own wealth, and/or fear Israel’s God (Isa. 45:23; 49:22–23; 51:4–5; 55:5; 60:3–16; 61:5–6; 66:12–13, 18–21; Mic. 7:12–17; Zech. 2:11; 8:22–23). Other passages further elucidate the law-defined nature of such Gentile participation in the God of Israel’s salvation (Exod. 12:48; Isa. 56:1–8; Jer. 12:14–17; Zech. 14:16–21). The portrait of the nations “flowing” up the mountain of God associates Gentile participation in God’s salvation explicitly with the law (Isa. 2:2–5; Mic. 4:1–5).

Situating Jesus and early Christianity within this matrix of Gentile sensitivities is illuminating. As the Jesus movement spread across the Mediterranean, proclaiming the ultimate salvation of the God of Israel in and through Jesus the Messiah, questions about how Gentiles experience this salvation of the Jewish God had paramount importance.

Some Christians, in line with traditional readings of the OT, thought that Gentiles must keep the law, becoming Jews to experience the God of Israel’s salvation in Jesus (Acts 11:1–3; 15:1, 5; Paul’s opponents in Galatia). Gentiles, after all, were separated from God and his salvation promises to Israel (Rom. 9:4–5; Eph. 2:11–13; 1Pet. 2:10). They stood under God’s condemnation, especially because they were controlled by their passions and sin, lacking self-mastery and the ability to live rightly (Rom. 1:18–32; Eph. 4:17–19; 1Thess. 4:5; 1Pet. 1:14, 18).

However, various NT authors, such as Paul, contend that Gentiles need not keep the law, functionally becoming Jews, in order to participate in God’s ultimate salvation in Jesus. Christ, the climax of Israel itself, has replaced the law’s centrality and ultimacy with himself and his death and resurrection (Rom. 10:4). Through being united to Christ by the Spirit, Gentiles are, apart from the law, grafted into true, redefined Israel and become Abraham’s descendants, inheriting God’s promised salvation for Israel (Rom. 3:21–4:25; 8:1–17; 9:30–10:17; 11:13–32; Gal. 2:11–4:7; Eph. 2:11–22; 3:4–6). In Christ, by the Spirit, Gentiles attain self-mastery over their passions and sin and thus live rightly before God, inheriting the kingdom of God in Christ (Rom. 6:1–8:30; 1Cor. 6:9–11; Gal. 5:16–26; 1Thess. 4:3–8). Various NT writings thus reconfigure the situation of Gentiles with respect to Israel’s God because of what God did in Christ.

Debates about Gentiles, the law, salvation, and what Christ means for these issues persisted after Paul. Early Christians lacked an unequivocal saying from Jesus on the matter, and not all accepted Paul and some other NT writings.

The tangible presence of God, experienced as overwhelming power and splendor. The main Hebrew word referring to glory, kabod, has the root meaning “heavy” (1Sam. 4:18), which in other contexts can mean “intense” (Exod. 9:3; NIV: “terrible”), “wealthy” (i.e., “heavy in possessions” [Gen. 13:2]), and “high reputation” (Gen. 34:19; NIV: “most honored”). When used of God, it refers to his person and his works. God reveals his glory to Israel and to Egypt at the crossing of the sea (Exod. 14:4, 1719). He carefully reveals his glory to Moses after Israel’s sin with the golden calf in order to assure him that he will not abandon them (33:12–23).

In the NT the glory of God is made real in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14; Heb. 1:3). He is, after all, the very presence of God. When he returns on the clouds, he will fully reveal God’s glory (Matt. 24:30; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27).

Grace is the nucleus, the critical core element, of the redemptive and sanctifying work of the triune God detailed throughout the entire canon of Scripture. The variegated expressions of grace are rooted in the person and work of God, so that his graciousness and favor effectively demonstrated in every aspect of the created realm glorify him as they are shared and enjoyed with one another.

The biblical terminology informing an understanding of grace defines it as a gift or a favorable reaction or disposition toward someone. Grace is generosity, thanks, and good will between humans and from God to humans. Divine expressions of grace are loving, merciful, and effective. The biblical texts provide a context for a more robust understanding of divine gift. The overall redemptive-historical context of grace is the desire of the eternal God to bring glory to himself through a grace-based relationship with his creation. The Creator-Redeemer gives grace, and the recipients of grace give him glory.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The practice of receiving strangers in order to offer provision and protection was an important concept in many of the cultures throughout the time period of both Testaments.

Hospitality first appears in Abraham’s care of the strangers who visit him in Gen. 18. The strangers in turn reveal God’s imminent fulfillment of his promise to provide a child to Abraham and Sarah. Thus, they return the good favor and kindness that they have received, which is the expected pattern of mutual goodwill that characterizes hospitality.

The unusual hospitality of Rebekah in offering water for Abraham’s servant’s camels distinguishes her as the wife whom God had appointed for Isaac (Gen. 24:149).

Part of the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah is that the men violate hospitality norms by demanding that the visiting angels have sex with them, which is in deep contrast to Lot’s attempt to welcome and protect the visitors (Gen. 19:1–9; see also Ezek. 16:49–50).

A conviction of the people of Israel is that God is their host in the promised land (Lev. 25:23). Jesus frequently is the beneficiary of the hospitality of others in the Gospels, and he sends out his disciples relying on it (Luke 9:1–4; 10:1–9). The messianic banquet is a theme of Jesus’ teaching on the kingdom of God (Matt. 8:11; 22:1–14; Luke 14:16–24). Hospitality is also commanded to be an aspect of early Christian communities, and it is a spiritual gift (Rom. 12:8, 13; Heb. 13:2; 1Pet. 4:9).

In the OT, a relative within an association of families that together compose a clan (e.g., Lev. 25:4849). Sometimes translated as “fellow Israelite” or “relative” (Lev. 25:25, 35, 47–48, but not 25:14–15), a kinsman is more literally a “brother” who has certain responsibilities for aiding another of his kin in times of hardship, especially when a portion of the clan’s land is involved (see Josh. 13:24–31). The greatest responsibility falls to the closest of kin, the go’el, the “kinsman-redeemer” (Ruth 4:1–8 [NIV 1984]; cf. Job 19:25; NIV: “guardian-redeemer”).

When hard economic times force a kinsman to sell some property (or rather lease it [cf. Lev. 25:15–16]), the kinsman-redeemer is to redeem what has been sold, thus keeping the land with the clan (25:25). The poorer kinsman may then work for the kinsman-redeemer in order to pay off the debt, though the relationship of both individuals is to remain that of brothers and not become that of a master and a slave (25:39–46). If a poor man sells himself to an alien’s clan, a kinsman should purchase him so that he can work within his own clan (25:47–49). The kinsman-redeemer also has the duty of avenging the blood of a murdered kinsman (Num. 35:21).

The role of a kinsman-redeemer in Israelite society is displayed in the book of Ruth. Boaz, a kinsman of Naomi and her widowed daughter-in-law Ruth, meets with the kinsman-redeemer to discuss the acquisition of the land of Ruth’s deceased husband, Naomi’s son Mahlon. Although the kinsman-redeemer at first agrees to redeem the land (Ruth 4:1–4), he changes his mind when Boaz points out that along with the land would come Ruth and the responsibility to maintain the name of Mahlon (Ruth 4:5–6; cf. Deut. 25:5–10). As next in line, Boaz acquires the land, Ruth, and the responsibility to maintain Mahlon’s name on the property (Ruth 4:7–10).

God, who owns all the land (Lev. 25:23–24) and who views all of Israel as his clan (Ps. 74:2), accepts the role of redeemer (go’el) (e.g., Ps. 19:14; Isa. 41:14; 43:14).

Mark’s Gospel is a fast-paced, action-packed narrative that portrays Jesus as the mighty Messiah and Son of God, who suffers and dies as the servant of the Lord—a ransom price for sins. Mark’s purpose is to provide an authoritative account of the “good news” about Jesus Christ and to encourage believers to follow Jesus’ example by remaining faithful to their calling through persecution and even martyrdom. A theme verse is Mark 10:45: “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

Mark’s narrative may be divided into two main parts. The first half of the story demonstrates that Jesus is the mighty Messiah and Son of God (1:18:26); the second half reveals that the Messiah’s role is to suffer and die as a sacrifice for sins (8:27–16:8).

Unlike Matthew and Luke, Mark does not begin with stories of Jesus’ birth but instead moves directly to his public ministry. As in the other Gospels, John the Baptist is the “messenger” who prepares the way for the Messiah (cf. Isa. 40:3; Mal. 3:1). John preaches a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins and announces the “more powerful” one, the Messiah, who will come after him (1:7). When Jesus is baptized by John, the Spirit descends on him, empowering him for ministry. After his temptation (or testing) by Satan in the desert, Jesus returns to Galilee and launches his ministry, proclaiming the “good news” (gospel) that “the time has come.... The kingdom of God has come near” (1:15).

During his Galilean ministry, Jesus demonstrates extraordinary authority in teaching, healing, and exorcism. He calls fishermen from their occupation, and they drop everything and follow him (1:16–20). He claims authority to forgive sins (2:10) and authority over the Sabbath command (2:28). He reveals power over natural forces, calming the sea (4:35–41), walking on water (6:45–52), and feeding huge crowds with a few loaves and fishes (6:30–44; 8:1–13). The people stand “amazed” and “astonished” (a major theme in Mark) at Jesus’ teaching and miracles, and his popularity soars.

Jesus’ authority and acclaim provoke opposition from the religious leaders of Israel, who are jealous of his influence. The scribes and Pharisees accuse him of claiming the prerogative of God (2:7), associating with undesirable sinners (2:16), breaking the Sabbath (2:24), and casting out demons by Satan’s powers (3:22). They conspire to kill him (3:6).

A sense of mystery and awe surrounds Jesus’ identity. When he calms the sea, the disciples wonder, “Who is this?” (4:41), and King Herod wonders if this might be John the Baptist risen from the dead (6:16). Adding to this sense of mystery is what has come to be called the “messianic secret.” Jesus silences demons who identify him as the Messiah and orders those he heals not to tell anyone what has happened. This secrecy is not, as some have claimed, a literary device invented by Mark to explain Jesus’ unmessianic life; rather, it is Jesus’ attempt to calm inappropriate messianic expectations and to define his messianic mission on his own terms.

The critical turning point in the narrative comes in 8:27–33, when Peter, as representative of the disciples, declares that Jesus is the Messiah. The authority that Jesus has demonstrated up to this point confirms that he is God’s agent of salvation. Yet Jesus startles the disciples by announcing that his messianic task is to go to Jerusalem to suffer and die. Peter rebukes him, but Jesus responds, “Get behind me, Satan! ... You do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns” (8:33). Jesus will accomplish salvation not by crushing the Roman occupiers, but by offering his life as a sacrifice for sins.

In the second half of the Gospel, Jesus journeys to Jerusalem, three times predicting that he will be arrested and killed (8:31–32; 9:31; 10:33–34). The disciples repeatedly demonstrate pride, ignorance, and spiritual dullness (8:33; 9:32–34; 10:35–41), and Jesus teaches them that whoever wants to be first must become last (9:35); that to lead, one must serve (10:45); and that to be Jesus’ disciple requires taking up one’s cross and following him (8:34).

When he comes to Jerusalem, Jesus symbolically judges the nation by clearing the temple of merchants (11:15–17) and by cursing a fig tree (representing Israel), which subsequently withers (11:12–14, 20–21). He engages in controversies with the religious leaders (chaps. 11–12) and teaches the disciples that Jerusalem and the temple will be destroyed (chap. 13). Judas Iscariot, one of Jesus’ own disciples, betrays him. Jesus is arrested and brought to trial before the Jewish Sanhedrin, which finds him guilty of blasphemy. That council turns Jesus over to the Roman governor Pilate, who accedes to his crucifixion (chaps. 14–15).

The crucifixion scene in Mark is a dark and lonely one. Jesus is deserted by his followers, unjustly condemned, beaten by the soldiers, and mocked by all. Apparently deserted even by God, Jesus cries out from the cross, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (15:34). Yet the reader knows by this point in the story that Jesus’ death is not the tragedy that it seems. This is God’s means of accomplishing salvation. Upon Jesus’ death, the curtain of the temple is torn, opening a new way into God’s presence. The Roman centurion at the cross cries out, “Surely this man was the Son of God!” (15:39). The death of the Messiah is not a defeat; it is an atoning sacrifice for sins. Three days later Jesus rises from the dead, just as he has predicted. When Jesus’ women followers come to the tomb, the angel announces, “He has risen! He is not here” (16:6). Jesus the Messiah has turned tragedy into victory and has defeated sin, Satan, and death.

(1)The most important Mary of the NT is the mother of Jesus, who becomes pregnant through the Holy Spirit while still a virgin. In contrast with Matthew’s birth narrative, where the emphasis falls on Joseph, Luke’s focuses on Mary. Luke’s Gospel introduces Mary as the one to whom God sends the angel Gabriel (1:2627). Gabriel announces that Mary will be the mother of the Messiah from David’s line, who will reign over the house of Jacob and have a unique father-son relationship with God. Mary responds in humble obedience as “the Lord’s servant” (1:29–38). When she visits her relative Elizabeth, Mary breaks forth in the Magnificat, a song praising God for caring for the humble, humbling the mighty, and remembering his covenant with Abraham (1:46–55).

After the birth of Jesus and the visit from the shepherds, Mary “treasured up all these things and pondered them in her heart” (2:19). An old man, Simeon, announces that although Jesus will be a light of revelation for the Gentiles and Israel’s glory, Mary will be deeply grieved, and her soul will be pierced by a sword (2:35). This is the first hint in Luke’s Gospel that Mary’s child, the Messiah, will suffer. In the only episode from Jesus’ childhood in the Gospel, Mary scolds her son for remaining in the temple while his family traveled back to Galilee (2:48). In Luke’s Gospel, Mary is a humble and obedient woman who reflects deeply about her experiences surrounding the birth of Jesus and cares greatly for him as well. Beyond the birth narratives, Mary does not figure as a prominent character in the Gospels. In John’s Gospel, Jesus speaks sternly to his mother when she wants him to perform a miracle before his “hour has ... come” (2:4); however, at the crucifixion, Mary is present, and Jesus places her into the care of the Beloved Disciple (19:25–27). Later traditions about Mary’s immaculate conception, perpetual virginity, sinlessness, and roles as co-mediator of salvation and answerer of prayer are not taught in the Bible.

(2)Another Mary mentioned in the Gospels is the sister of Martha, who is praised by Jesus for not busying herself with domestic duties as Martha does, but rather sits at the feet of Jesus, “listening to what he said” (Luke 10:39–40). This same Mary is mentioned on another occasion as the one “who poured perfume on the Lord and wiped his feet with her hair” (John 11:1–2; cf. 12:1–8). The Synoptic Gospels record a similar event in which a woman, left unnamed, anoints either the feet of Jesus (Luke 7:36–50) or his head (Matt. 26:6–13; Mark 14:3–9). With the exception of Luke, it seems as though John, Matthew, and Mark are recording the same event. In each of these three, Jesus associates the anointing with the preparation of his body for burial.

(3)Mary Magdalene makes a brief appearance during the ministry of Jesus, and Luke describes her as one who had been cured of seven demons (Luke 8:2). It is quite unlikely that she is the “sinful” woman of the preceding narrative (7:37–50), an association that has given rise to the erroneous belief that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute. She is the first to witness the empty tomb (John 20:1). Likewise, she is the first to see the resurrected Lord and is commanded to go and tell the disciples about his resurrection (John 20:11–18; cf. Matt. 28:1; Mark 16:1–6; Luke 24:1–10). She is even present for the crucifixion (Matt. 27:56) and the burial of Jesus’ body (Matt. 27:61).

(4)Mary the mother of James and Joses (Matt. 27:56; Mark 15:40) is one of two other Marys who, like Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Jesus, appear at the crucifixion. She may be the same person as #5.

(5)Mary the wife of Clopas (John 19:25) is the second of the two other Marys who, like Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Jesus, appear at the crucifixion. She may be the same person as #4.

A mystery entails knowledge that is disclosed to some but withheld from others. Nothing is mysterious to God (Heb. 4:13), and he alone understands the full purpose of his will (Job 38:140:24; Isa. 46:10), but he also condescends to reveal portions of his will to those whom he chooses (John 16:15).

Jesus’ parables make known the character and future of God’s coming kingdom to his chosen servants, while also concealing it from those outside the circle (Matt. 13:18–23). Paul, by contrast, used “mystery” to refer to the disclosure of God’s plan for the redemption of humanity—namely, the inclusion of Gentiles within “Israel” (Rom. 11:25). This plan, foreshadowed in the OT but nevertheless hidden in essentials, had only recently been fully revealed in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (Rom. 16:25; Eph. 1:9; 1Tim. 3:16; cf. 1Pet. 1:10–12). The gospel message is therefore the revelation of this mystery, the proclamation of the truth about Jesus Christ, now made public to the world (Eph. 3:3–9).

A central concept in both Testaments for understanding the way in which God’s people are to respond to him. God desires obedience from his people, in contrast to mere lip service (Isa. 29:13; Matt. 15:8; Mark 7:6) or conformity to religious ritual (Hos. 6:6; Mic. 6:68). When Saul disobeyed God by sacrificing some of the spoil from his victory over the Amalekites, Samuel the prophet responded, “To obey is better than sacrifice, and to heed is better than the fat of rams” (1Sam. 15:22).

In the NT, focus shifts from obedience to the Mosaic law to obedience to Jesus Christ. The Great Commission contains Jesus’ instructions for his own disciples to make disciples, teaching them to “obey” (Gk. tēreō) that which Christ had commanded (Matt. 28:19–20). Jesus’ disciples’ love for him would lead them to obey his commands (John 14:15, 21–24; 1John 5:3; 2John 6), and the disciples’ obedience, in turn, would cause them to remain in Jesus’ love (John 15:10). Paul instructs children to obey their parents and slaves to “obey” (Gk. hypakouō) their masters in obedience to Christ (Eph. 6:1, 5–6; Col. 3:20, 22).

The NT also discusses Christ’s perfect obedience to God the Father as a quality to imitate (Phil. 2:5–13) and as the basis for salvation (Rom. 5:19). Since it is only “those who obey the law who will be declared righteous” (Rom. 2:13), and all have sinned (Rom. 3:23), “God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Cor. 5:21).

In comparing modern society to that of biblical times, it is important to acknowledge what is distinctive about prisons in many modern societies. Prisons serve multiple functions, including imposing incarceration as punishment for crimes committed, segregating dangerous criminals from the larger population, deterring crime by imposing a negative incentive, and rehabilitating offenders so that they can eventually return to society. In many cases where modern law imposes incarceration as the penalty for crime, ancient and biblical law imposed economic penalties (such as fines), corporal punishment (beatings), and capital punishment (death). In addition, many of the biblical references to prisons and prisoners involve what in modern society would be considered political rather than criminal incarceration.

The story of Joseph prominently features an Egyptian prison. Joseph was falsely put in prison for the crime of molesting his master’s wife (Gen. 39:1920), while his companions were imprisoned for the otherwise unspecified crime of causing offense to the king (40:1). As this story illustrates, the sentences were not of a predetermined duration, and release depended on the goodwill of the king (Gen. 40:13), a situation in which Paul also found himself hundreds of years later during Roman times (Acts 24:27). When Joseph imprisoned his brothers, it was on a presumption of guilt for the crime of espionage (Gen. 42:16). In Roman times, in contrast, certain prisoners had a right to be put on trial eventually, if not quickly (Acts 25:27; see also 16:37). Imprisonment could also be imposed for failure to pay a debt (Matt. 18:30). Joseph kept Simeon in prison as a guarantee that his brothers would fulfill a prior agreement (Gen. 42:19, 24). In addition to specialized dungeons, prisoners could also be confined in houses (Jer. 37:15; Acts 28:16) and pits (Zech. 9:11).

In both Testaments, release from prison is a symbol of God’s salvation. The theme is prominent in the psalms, as in Ps. 146:7: “The Lord sets prisoners free” (see also Pss. 68:6; 107:10; 142:7). In Acts 12:7 Peter is freed from prison by a divinely sent messenger. Paul wrote a number of letters from prison and identified himself as a prisoner of Christ (Eph. 3:1; Col. 4:10; 2Tim. 1:8; Philem. 1). Some texts refer in mythological terms to a prison that confines spirits or Satan (1Pet. 3:19; Rev. 20:7).

A prophet is a messenger of God, a person to whom God entrusts his message to an individual or to a nation. Indeed, the last book in the OT is named “Malachi,” which means “my messenger.” Isaiah heard God ask, “Whom shall I send?” and he cried out, “Send me!” (Isa. 6:8). A good template for understanding the phenomenon is Moses and Aaron. Moses was to tell Aaron what to say, and Aaron would say it. “Then the Lord said to Moses, ‘See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron will be your prophet’” (Exod. 7:1).

In the NT period there were a number of prophets. John the Baptist could point to Jesus and proclaim him to be the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29). Agabus the prophet predicted a famine and, later, Paul’s arrest (Acts 11:28; 21:1011).

Paul lists “gifts of the Spirit” (1Cor. 12:4–11), including prophecy and various phenomena reminiscent of the OT prophets’ ecstatic state. Paul warns the Corinthians not to overdo this sort of thing and so to be mature (1Cor. 14:19–20). Near the end of his life, in one of his last letters, he speaks of prophecy as normative in the church, particularly in establishing an authoritative body of elders to rule and especially to preach the gospel (1Tim. 1:18; 4:14). Peter draws a connection between the ministry of the OT prophets and the proclamation of the gospel of Jesus Christ (1Pet. 1:10–12). Evangelism seems to be the normative mode for prophecy today: forthtelling by calling people to turn from their sins to Jesus, and foretelling by speaking of his return and the final judgment.

Thus, all Christians hold the office of prophet, even if they never participate in the ecstatic state experienced by the Corinthians. The greatness of a prophet is in how clearly the prophet points to Jesus. John the Baptist was the greatest of the OT prophets by that measure, but any Christian on this side of the cross and resurrection can proclaim the gospel even more clearly. Thus, the prophetic ministry of any Christian is greater than John’s (Matt. 11:11).

Five prophetesses are mentioned in the OT: Miriam (Exod. 15:20), Deborah (Judg. 4–5), Huldah (2Kings 22:14–20; 2Chron. 34:22–28), Isaiah’s wife (Isa. 8:3), and Noadiah (Neh. 6:14).

Similarly in the NT, Peter recognizes God’s promise through Joel being fulfilled in the gift of prophetic speech to women as well as men at Pentecost (Acts 2:18); and Paul, acknowledging that women prophesy publicly in the congregation, is concerned only with the manner of their doing so (1Cor. 11:5). The prophetess Anna proclaims the baby Jesus as the Messiah (Luke 2:36–38), Luke reports that the four unmarried daughters of Philip the evangelist also prophesy (Acts 21:8–9). The only false prophetess in the NT is the apocalyptic figure of Jezebel in Rev. 2:20.

The final book of the Bible is known by its opening line: “The revelation of Jesus Christ” (1:1 ESV, NRSV, KJV).

In powerful language and vivid imagery, Revelation presents the conclusion to God’s grand story of salvation, in which he defeats evil, reverses the curse of sin, restores creation, and lives forever among his people. Although the details are often difficult to understand, the main idea of Revelation is clear: God is in control and will successfully accomplish his purposes. In the end, God wins. As a transformative vision, Revelation empowers its readers/listeners to persevere faithfully in a fallen world until their Lord returns.

The overall purpose of Revelation is to comfort those who are facing persecution and to warn those who are compromising with the world system. During times of oppression, the righteous suffer and the wicked seem to prosper. This raises the question “Who is Lord?” Revelation says that Jesus is Lord in spite of how things appear, and he will return soon to establish his eternal kingdom. Those facing persecution find hope through a renewed perspective, and those who are compromising are warned to repent. Revelation’s goal is to transform the audience to follow Jesus faithfully.

Introduction (1:120). Chapter 1 includes both a prologue (1:1–8) and John’s commission to write what he sees (1:9–20). John’s vision focuses on the risen, glorified Christ and his continued presence among the seven churches.

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

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

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

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

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

Pouring out of the seven bowls (15:1–16:21). The seven golden bowls follow the trumpets and seals as the final series of seven judgments. As the bowls of God’s wrath are poured out on an unrepentant world, the plagues are devastating indicators of God’s anger toward sin and evil. The only response from the “earth dwellers” (MSG; NIV: “inhabitants of the earth” [17:2, 8]; this is a common term in Revelation for unbelievers) is to curse God rather than repent (16:9, 11, 21).

Judgment and fall of Babylon (17:1–19:5). This section depicts the death of Babylon, a pagan power said to be “drunk with the blood of God’s holy people, the blood of those who bore testimony to Jesus” (17:6). The funeral laments for the deceased Babylon of chapter 18 give way to a celebration as God’s people rejoice over Babylon’s downfall (19:1–5).

God’s ultimate victory (19:6–22:5). This climactic section describes God’s ultimate victory over evil and the final reward for the people of God. This scene includes the return of Christ for his bride (19:6–16), Christ’s defeat of the two beasts and their allies (19:17–21), the binding of Satan and the millennial reign (20:1–6), the final defeat of Satan (20:7–10), and the final judgment and the death of death itself (20:11–15). Chapter 21 features a description of the new heaven and new earth, where God’s long-standing promise to live among his people is fully realized.

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

In Gen. 3 the serpent entices humankind to sin. Not until Rev. 12:9 are we told explicitly that the serpent is Satan.

In the OT, “evil spirit” may be a heavenly being sent by God (1Sam. 16:1423; 18:10; 19:9; cf. 1Kings 22:22–23). The OT engages in extensive rebuke of the superstitions of the surrounding nations that included belief in demons (Deut. 32:17; Ps. 106:37; perhaps Isa. 13:21; cf. Rev. 18:2).

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

Whereas the OT provides sparse information about Satan and his angels/demons, the NT opens with an intensity of activity. Demons are also called “evil spirits,” and they are associated with physical illness, madness, and fortune-telling. In Acts 17:22 Paul describes his pagan Athenian listeners as “demon-fearers” (NIV: “religious”). Jesus’ miracles demonstrate his lordship over Satan’s regime as the demons flee in terror before him (Mark 1:23–26; 5:1–15). According to Paul, Christians are temples of the Holy Spirit (1Cor. 6:19), and John urges believers to “test the spirits to see whether they are from God” (1John 4:1), assuring them that they need not fear Satan or his forces, “because the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world.” (1John 4:4). On judgment day Satan will be cast into the lake of fire (Rev. 20:14–15) along with all of God’s enemies.

There are numerous relationships in the OT that could be characterized as following a servant-master model. These included service to the monarchy (2Sam. 9:2), within households (Gen. 16:8), in the temple (1Sam. 2:15), or to God himself (Judg. 2:8). We also see extensive slavery laws in passages such as Exod. 21:111; Lev. 25:39–55; Deut. 15:12–18. The slavery laws were concerned with the proper treatment of Hebrew slaves and included guidelines for their eventual release and freedom. For example, Hebrew slaves who had sold themselves to others were to serve for a period of six years. On the seventh year, known also as the Sabbath Year, they were to be released. Once released, they were not to be sent away empty-handed, but rather were to be supported from the owner’s “threshing floor” and “winepress.” Slaves also had certain rights that gave them special privileges and protection from their masters. Captured slaves, for example, were allowed rest on the Sabbath (Exod. 20:10) and during special holidays (Deut. 16:11, 14). They could also be freed if their master permanently hurt or crippled them (Exod. 21:26–27). Also, severe punishment was imposed on a person who beat a slave to death (Exod. 21:20–21).

Slavery was very common in the first century AD, and there were many different kinds of slaves. For example, slaves might live in an extended household (oikos) in which they were born, or they might choose to sell themselves into this situation (1Pet. 2:18–25). Although slavery was a significant part of society in the first century AD, we never see Jesus or the apostles encourage slavery. Instead, both Paul and Peter encouraged godly character and obedience for slaves within this system (Eph. 6:5–8; Col. 3:22–25; 1Tim. 6:1–2; Philemon; 1Pet. 2:18–21). Likewise, masters were encouraged to be kind and fair to their slaves (Eph. 6:9; Col. 4:1). Later in the NT, slave trading was condemned by the apostle Paul as contrary to “sound doctrine” and “the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God” (1Tim. 1:10–11).

Jesus embodied the idea of a servant in word and deed. He fulfilled the role of the “Servant of the Lord,” the Suffering Servant predicted by the prophet Isaiah (Isa. 42:1–4; 50:4–9; 52:13–53:12). He also took on the role of a servant in the Gospels, identifying himself as the Son of Man who came to serve (Mark 10:45) and washing the disciples’ feet (John 13:4–5). Paul says that in the incarnation Jesus took on “the very nature of a servant” (Phil. 2:7).

The special relationship between Jesus and his followers is captured in the servant-master language of the NT Epistles, especially in Paul’s letters (Rom. 1:1; Phil. 1:1; Titus 1:1). This language focuses not so much on the societal status of these servants as on the allegiance and honor owed to Christ Jesus.

In the OT, wisdom is a characteristic of someone who attains a high degree of knowledge, technical skill, and experience in a particular domain. It refers to the ability that certain individuals have to use good judgment in running the affairs of state (Joseph in Gen. 41:33; David in 2Sam. 14:20; Solomon in 1Kings 3:9, 12, 28). It can also refer to the navigational skills that sailors use in maneuvering a ship through difficult waters (Ps. 107:27). Furthermore, wisdom includes the particular skills of an artisan (Exod. 31:6; 35:35; 1Chron. 22:15 16). In all these cases, wisdom involves the expertise that a person acquires to accomplish a particular task. In these instances “wisdom” is an ethically neutral term, or at least that dimension is not emphasized. The wise are those who have mastered a certain skill set in their field of expertise.

The uniqueness of the OT wisdom literature (Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, etc.) is that it highlights the moral dimension of wisdom. Here “wisdom” refers to developing expertise in negotiating the complexities of life and managing those complexities in a morally responsible way that honors God and benefits both the community and the individual. Although it is difficult to pin down a concise definition, one can gain a better understanding of wisdom by investigating two important dimensions: wisdom as a worldview, and the traits of a person who is considered to be wise.

Who is wise? First, the wise are those involved in a lifelong process of character development. They manifest the virtues of righteousness, justice, and equity (Prov. 1:3; 2:9). The embodiment of these virtues culminates in the description of the woman of noble character at the conclusion of Proverbs (31:10–31). She exhibits self-control, patience, care, diligence, discipline, humility, generosity, honesty, and fear of the Lord (cf. James 3:13–18). She is the epitome of wisdom in its maturity and the model that all should emulate.

Second, the wise know the value of words and how to use them. They know when to speak, what to say, and how to say it (Job 29:21–22; Prov. 15:23; 25:11; Eccles. 3:7; 12:9–10). Wisdom and the wise place a premium on the power of words.

Third, the wise place great importance on relationships and on interaction with others. The wise person is the one who is open to the give-and-take of relationships (Prov. 27:5–6, 17, 19). Such a person develops the humility necessary to receive correction and criticism from others. Hearing criticism and changing wrong behavior are integral to wisdom (3:1–11). The wise appreciate insightful criticism because it helps them live life more productively (15:12). Wisdom is, ultimately, relational.

Fourth, the wise person develops the art of discernment (Prov. 1:2, 4–6). The sage is equipped with the ability to think critically. The very quality of wisdom itself invites the re-forming and rethinking of ideas. Sages are not interested in pat answers (26:4–5). Proverbs 16:1–9 throws a wrench in the conventional cogs of wisdom, claiming that although humans make their plans, God has the final say. Both Job and Ecclesiastes go head to head with conventional beliefs, probing more deeply into the complexities of life and the relationship between human and divine. No easy answers exist here. In contrast, fools do not use their mental faculties. They view wisdom as a commodity, a matter of learning some techniques, accepting certain beliefs, and memorizing a few proverbs (17:16). The wise, however, know that wisdom involves the art of critical thinking and interacting with others.

Fifth, and most fundamental, the wise person takes a God-centered focus toward life. Wisdom literature affirms, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (Prov. 9:10; cf. Prov. 1:7; Job 28:28; Eccles. 12:13). That this is the beginning step in the process of gaining wisdom means that one who misses this step can proceed no further along the path to wisdom. The fear of the Lord is to wisdom as the letters of the alphabet are to forming words. The wise gain wisdom by being in relationship with the Lord (Prov. 3:5–8). The fear of the Lord is the beginning as well as the culmination of wisdom.

Wisdom is a highly prized quality, superior to might and power (Prov. 25:15; Eccles. 9:13–16), and one must diligently seek it (Prov. 2:1–5). Yet in the end, wisdom is a gift that only God can give (Prov. 2:6–8; 1Kings 3:9).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Bible has much to say about works, and an understanding of the topic is important because works play a role in most religions. In the most generic sense, “works” refers to the products or activities of human moral agents in the context of religious discussion. God’s works are frequently mentioned in Scripture, and they are always good. His works include creation (Gen. 2:23; Isa. 40:28; 42:5), sustenance of the earth (Ps. 104; Heb. 1:3), and redemption (Exod. 6:6; Ps. 111:9; Rom. 8:23). Human works, therefore, should be in alignment with God’s works, though obviously of a different sort. Works in the Bible usually reflect a moral polarity: good or evil, righteous or unrighteous, just or unjust. The context of the passage often determines the moral character of the works (e.g., Isa. 3:10–11; 2Cor. 11:15).

Important questions follow from the existence of works and their moral quality. Do good works merit God’s favor or please him? Can good works save at the time of God’s judgment? When people asked Jesus, “What must we do to do the works God requires?” he answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent” (John 6:28–29). Without faith it is impossible to please God (Heb. 11:6). The people from the OT commended in Heb. 11 did their works in the precondition of faith. Explicitly in the NT and often implicitly in the OT, faith is the condition for truly good works. God elects out of his mercy, not out of human works (Rom. 9:12, 16; Titus 3:5; cf. Rom. 11:2). Works not done in faith, even if considered “good” by human standards, are not commendable to God, since all humankind is under sin (Rom. 3:9) and no person is righteous or does good (Rom. 3:10–18; cf. Isa. 64:6). Works cannot save; salvation is a gift to be received by faith (Eph. 2:8–9; 2Tim. 1:9; cf. Rom. 4:2–6). Even works of the Mosaic law are not salvific (Rom. 3:20, 27–28; Gal. 2:16; 3:2; 5:4). Good works follow from faith (2Cor. 9:8; Eph. 2:10; 1Thess. 1:3; James 2:18, 22; cf. Acts 26:20). The works of those who have faith will be judged, but this judgment appears to be related to rewards, not salvation (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6; 2Cor. 5:10; cf. Rom. 14:10; 1Cor. 3:13–15).

Aquila and Priscilla were important coworkers with theapostle Paul in his missionary effort. They joined Paul incooperative efforts and also worked in relative independence. Theywere Christian workers in what came to be important centers of earlyChristianity: Corinth, Ephesus, and Rome.

Aquilawas a Jew from Pontus, the husband of Priscilla (the diminutive form,“Prisca,” is used by Paul in his letters). Mentioned insix verses in the NT as a pair, four of these list Priscilla first,probably indicating her wealth, social status, or prominence inthe Christian community. They probably heard and trusted in thegospel in Rome and left that city after the expulsion edict ofClaudius (Acts 18:2). Paul met them in Corinth, where they housed andprobably worked their trade with him (18:3) before traveling withPaul to Ephesus (18:18–19). They provided hospitality toApollos while in Ephesus, also demonstrating knowledge of the faithand teaching skill when they explained the way of God more adequatelyto him (18:26). People of some financial means, they were able totravel and to house churches in Ephesus (1 Cor. 16:19) and Rome(Rom. 16:3–5). In Rom. 16:4 Paul mentions that they “riskedtheir lives” for him, and that the churches of the Gentileswere grateful to them, probably indicating sponsorship of housechurches, teaching ministry, and other missionary work. Since theyare first in the list of greetings in Rom. 16:3, it is likely thatthey were prominent Christians in Rome. They later traveled back toEphesus (2 Tim. 4:19).

Aquila and Priscilla were important coworkers with theapostle Paul in his missionary effort. They joined Paul incooperative efforts and also worked in relative independence. Theywere Christian workers in what came to be important centers of earlyChristianity: Corinth, Ephesus, and Rome.

Aquilawas a Jew from Pontus, the husband of Priscilla (the diminutive form,“Prisca,” is used by Paul in his letters). Mentioned insix verses in the NT as a pair, four of these list Priscilla first,probably indicating her wealth, social status, or prominence inthe Christian community. They probably heard and trusted in thegospel in Rome and left that city after the expulsion edict ofClaudius (Acts 18:2). Paul met them in Corinth, where they housed andprobably worked their trade with him (18:3) before traveling withPaul to Ephesus (18:18–19). They provided hospitality toApollos while in Ephesus, also demonstrating knowledge of the faithand teaching skill when they explained the way of God more adequatelyto him (18:26). People of some financial means, they were able totravel and to house churches in Ephesus (1 Cor. 16:19) and Rome(Rom. 16:3–5). In Rom. 16:4 Paul mentions that they “riskedtheir lives” for him, and that the churches of the Gentileswere grateful to them, probably indicating sponsorship of housechurches, teaching ministry, and other missionary work. Since theyare first in the list of greetings in Rom. 16:3, it is likely thatthey were prominent Christians in Rome. They later traveled back toEphesus (2 Tim. 4:19).

Terminology

TheNT word for “church” is ekklēsia, which means“gathering, assembly, congregation.” In classical Greekthe term was used almost exclusively for political gatherings. Inparticular, in Athens the word signified the assembling of thecitizens for the purpose of conducting the affairs of the city.Moreover, ekklēsia referred only to the actual meeting, not tothe citizens themselves. When the people were not assembled, theywere not considered to be the ekklēsia. The NT records threeinstances of this secular usage of the term (Acts 19:32, 39, 41).

Themost important background for the Christian use of the term is theLXX (Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, dated c. 250BC), which uses the word in a religious sense about one hundredtimes, almost always as a translation of the Hebrew word qahal. Whileqahal does not indicate a secular gathering (in contrast to ’edah,the typical Hebrew word for Israel’s religious gathering,translated by Greek synagōgē), it does denote Israel’ssacred meetings. This is especially the case in Deuteronomy, whereqahal is linked with the covenant.

Inthe NT, ekklēsia is used to refer to the community of God’speople 109 times (out of 114 occurrences of the term). Although theword occurs in only two Gospel passages (Matt. 16:18; 18:17), it isof special importance in Acts (23 times) and the Pauline writings (46times). It is found 20 times in Revelation and in isolated instancesin James and Hebrews. Three general conclusions can be drawn fromthis usage. First, ekklēsia (in both the singular and theplural) applies predominantly to a local assembly of those whoprofess faith in and allegiance to Christ. Second, ekklēsiadesignates the universal church (Acts 8:3; 9:31; 1 Cor. 12:28;15:9; especially in the later Pauline letters: Eph. 1:22–23;Col. 1:18). Third, the ekklēsia is God’s congregation(1 Cor. 1:2; 2 Cor. 1:1).

TheNature of the Church

Thenature of the church is too broad to be exhausted in the meaning ofone word. To capture its significance, the NT authors utilize a richarray of metaphorical descriptions. Nevertheless, there are thosemetaphors that seem to dominate the biblical pictures of the church,five of which call for comment: the people of God, the kingdom ofGod, the eschatological temple of God, the bride of Christ, and thebody of Christ.

Thepeople of God.Essentially, the concept of the people of God can be summed up in thecovenantal phrase: “I will be their God, and they will be mypeople” (see Exod. 6:6–7; 19:5; Lev. 26:9–14; Jer.7:23; 30:22; 32:37–40; Ezek. 11:19–20; 36:22–28;Acts 15:14; 2 Cor. 6:16; Heb. 8:10–12; Rev. 21:3). Thus,the people of God are those in both the OT and the NT eras whor*sponded to God by faith and whose spiritual origin restsexclusively in God’s grace.

Tospeak of the one people of God transcending the eras of the OT andthe NT necessarily raises the question of the relationship betweenthe church and Israel. Modern interpreters prefer not to polarize thematter into an either/or issue. Rather, they talk about the churchand Israel in terms of there being both continuity and discontinuitybetween them.

Continuitybetween the church and Israel. Two ideas establish the fact that thechurch and Israel are portrayed in the Bible as being in a continuousrelationship. First, in the OT the church was present in Israel insome sense. Acts 7:38 suggests this connection when, alluding toDeut. 9:10, it speaks of the church (ekklēsia) in thewilderness. The same idea is probably to be inferred from theintimate association noted earlier existing between the wordsekklēsia and qahal, especially when the latter is qualified bythe phrase “of God.” Furthermore, if the church is viewedin some NT passages as preexistent, then one finds therein theprototype of the creation of Israel (see Exod. 25:40; Acts 7:44; Gal.4:26; Heb. 12:22; Rev. 21:11; cf. Eph. 1:3–14).

Second,Israel in some sense is present in the church in the NT. The many OTnames for Israel applied to the church in the NT establish that fact.Some of those are “Israel” (Gal. 6:15–16; Eph.2:12; Heb. 8:8–10; Rev. 2:14), “a chosen people”(1 Pet. 2:9), “the circumcision” (Rom. 2:28–29;Phil. 3:3; Col. 2:11), “Abraham’s seed” (Rom. 4:16;Gal. 3:29), “the remnant” (Rom. 9:27; 11:5–7), “theelect” (Rom. 11:28; Eph. 1:4), “the flock” (Acts20:28; Heb. 13:20; 1 Pet. 5:2), and “priesthood”(1 Pet. 2:9; Rev. 1:6; 5:10).

Discontinuitybetween the church and Israel. The church, however, is not totallyidentical with Israel; discontinuity also characterizes therelationship. The church, according to the NT, is the eschatological(end-time) Israel incorporated in Jesus Christ and, as such, is aprogression beyond historical Israel (1 Cor. 10:11; 2 Cor.5:14–21). Indeed, significant discontinuity is introduced bythe fact that the church includes Gentiles as members of Israel,without requiring them to convert to Judaism first. Gentiles enter asGentiles. However, a caveat must be issued at this point. Althoughthe church is a progression beyond Israel, it does not seem to be thepermanent replacement of Israel (see Rom. 9–11, esp. 11:25–27).

Thekingdom of God.Many scholars have maintained that the life, death, and resurrectionof Jesus inaugurated the kingdom of God, producing the overlapping ofthe two ages. The kingdom has already dawned but is not yet complete.The first aspect pertains to Jesus’ first coming, and thesecond aspect relates to his second coming. In other words, the ageto come has broken into this age, and now the two existsimultaneously. This background is crucial in ascertaining therelationship between the church and the kingdom of God, because thechurch also exists in the tension that results from the overlappingof the two ages. Accordingly, one may define the church as theforeshadowing of the kingdom. Two ideas flow from this definition:first, the church is related to the kingdom of God; second, thechurch is not equal to the kingdom of God.

Thechurch and the kingdom of God are related. Not until after theresurrection of Jesus does the NT speak with regularity about thechurch. However, there are early signs of the church in the teachingand ministry of Jesus, in both general and specific ways. In general,Jesus anticipated the later official formation of the church in thathe gathered to himself the twelve disciples, who constituted thebeginnings of eschatological Israel—in effect, the remnant.More specifically, Jesus explicitly referred to the church in twopassages: Matt. 16:18–19; 18:17. In the first passage Jesuspromised that he would build his church despite satanic opposition,thus assuring the ultimate success of his mission. The notion of thechurch overcoming the forces of evil coincides with the idea that thekingdom of God will prevail over its enemies and bespeaks theintimate association between the church and the kingdom. The secondpassage relates to the future organization of the church, not unlikethe Jewish synagogue practices of Jesus’ day.

Thechurch and the kingdom of God are not identical. As intimatelyrelated as the church and the kingdom of God are, the NT does notequate the two, as is evident in the fact that the early Christianspreached the kingdom, not the church (Acts 8:12; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23,31). The NT identifies the church as the people of the kingdom (e.g.,Rev. 5:10), not the kingdom itself. Moreover, the church is theinstrument of the kingdom. This is especially clear from Matt.16:18–19, where the preaching of Peter and the church becomethe keys to opening up the kingdom of God to all who would enter.

Theeschatological temple of God.Both the OT and Judaism anticipated the rebuilding of the temple inthe future kingdom of God (e.g., Ezek. 40–48; Hag. 2:1–9;1 En. 90:29; 91:3; Jub. 1:17, 29). Jesus hinted that he wasgoing to build such a structure (Matt. 16:18; Mark 14:58; John2:19–22). Pentecost witnessed to the beginning of thefulfillment of that dream in that when the Spirit inhabited thechurch, the eschatological temple was formed (Acts 2:16–36).Other NT writers also perceived that the presence of the Spirit inthe Christian community constituted the new temple of God (1 Cor.3:16–17; 2 Cor. 6:14–7:1; Eph. 2:19–22; seealso Gal. 4:21–31; 1 Pet. 2:4–10). How­ever,that the eschatological temple is not yet complete is evident in thepreceding passages, especially in their emphasis on the need for thechurch to grow toward maturity in Christ, which will be fullyaccomplished only at the parousia (second coming of Christ). In themeantime, Christians, as priests of God, are to perform theirsacrificial service to the glory of God (Rom. 12:1–2; Heb.13:15; 1 Pet. 2:4–10).

Thebride of Christ.The image of marriage is applied to God and Israel in the OT (seeIsa. 54:5–6; 62:5; Hos. 2:7). Similar imagery is applied toChrist and the church in the NT. Christ, the bridegroom, hassacrificially and lovingly chosen the church to be his bride (Eph.5:25–27). Her responsibility during the betrothal period is tobe faithful to him (2 Cor. 11:2; Eph. 5:24). At the parousia theofficial wedding ceremony will take place, and with it the eternalunion of Christ and his wife will be actualized (Rev. 19:7–9;21:1–2).

Thebody of Christ.The body of Christ as a metaphor for the church is unique to thePauline literature and constitutes one of the most significantconcepts therein (Rom. 12:4–5; 1 Cor. 12:12–27; Eph.4:7–16; Col. 1:18). The primary purpose of the metaphor is todemonstrate the interrelatedness of diversity and unity within thechurch, especially with reference to spiritual gifts. The body ofChrist is the last Adam (1 Cor. 15:45), the new humanity of theend time that has appeared in history. However, Paul’s usage ofthe image, like the metaphor of the new temple, indicates that thechurch, as the body of Christ, still has a long way to gospiritually. It is not yet complete.

Sacraments

Atthe heart of the expression of the church’s faith are thesacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper. The formersymbolizes entrance into the church, while the latter providesspiritual sustenance for the church.

Baptism.Baptism symbolizes the sinner’s entrance into the church. Threeobservations emerge from the biblical treatment of this sacrament.First, the OT intimated baptism, especially in its association ofrepentance of sin with ablutions (Num.19:18–22; Ps. 51:7; Ezek.36:25; cf. John 3:5). Second, the baptism of John anticipatedChristian baptism. John administered a baptism of repentance inexpectation of the baptism of the Spirit and fire that the Messiahwould exercise (Matt. 3:11 // Luke 3:16). Those who accept Jesusas Messiah experience the baptism of fire and judgment (which may bean allusion to undergoing the great tribulation/messianic woes thatlead into the messianic kingdom). Third, the early church practicedbaptism in imitation of the Lord Jesus (Matt. 3:13–17 //Mark 1:9–11 // Luke 3:21–22; see also John 1:32–34;cf. Matt. 28:19; Acts 2:38; 8:16; Rom. 6:3–6; 1 Cor.1:13–15; Gal. 3:27; Titus 3:5; 1 Pet. 3:21). Thesepassages demonstrate some further truths about baptism: baptism isintimately related to faith in God; baptism identifies the personwith the death and resurrection of Jesus; baptism incorporates theperson into the community of believers.

Lord’sSupper.The other biblical sacrament is the Lord’s Supper. This ritesymbolizes Christ’s spiritual nourishment of his church as itcelebrates the sacred meal. Two basic points emerge from the biblicaldata concerning the Lord’s Supper. First, it was instituted byChrist (Matt. 26:26–29; Mark 14:22–25; Luke 22:15–20;1 Cor. 11:23–25), probably as an adaptation of thePassover meal. If that is the case, then, Jesus will have introducedtwo changes into the Passover seder: he replaced the unleavened breadwith a reference to his body being given for us on the cross; hereplaced the cup of redemption with a reference to his shed blood onthe cross, the basis of the new covenant. Second, the early churchpracticed the Lord’s Supper probably weekly, in conjunctionwith the love feast (see 1 Cor. 11:18–22; cf. Jude 12). Atwofold meaning is attached to the Lord’s Supper by the NTauthors. First, it involves participation in Christ’s salvation(Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:24–25), and in two ways:participating in the Lord’s Supper looks back to the death ofJesus, in which the believer now shares; participating in the Lord’sSupper looks forward to Christ’s return, the culmination pointof the believer’s salvation. Second, the Lord’s Supperinvolves identification with the body of Christ, the community offaith (1 Cor. 10:16–17; 11:27–33).

Worship

Theultimate purpose of the church is to worship God through Christ andin the power of the Holy Spirit (see, e.g., Rev. 4–5). Theearly church first worshiped in the Jerusalem temple (Acts 2:46; 3:1;5:42) as well as in the synagogue (Acts 22:19; cf. John 9:22; James2:2). At the same time, and into the near future, believers met inhomes for worship (Acts 1:13; 2:46; 5:42; cf. Rom. 16:15; Col. 4:15;Philem. 2; 2 John 10; 3 John 1, 6). Although many JewishChristians no doubt continued to worship God on the Sabbath, theestablished time for the church’s worship came to be Sunday,the day of Jesus’ resurrection (Acts 20:7; Rev. 1:10). Theearly church most probably patterned its order of worship after thesynagogue service: praise in prayer (Acts 2:42, 47; 3:1; 1 Thess.1:2; 5:17) and in song (1 Cor. 14:26; Phil. 2:6–11; Col.1:15–20), the expounding of Scripture (Acts 2:42; 6:4; Col.4:16; 1 Thess. 2:13; 1 Tim. 4:13), and almsgiving to theneedy (Acts 2:44–45; 1 Cor. 16:1–2; 2 Cor. 8–9;James 2:15–17).

Serviceand Organization

Fiveobservations emerge from the NT regarding the service andorganization of the early church. First, the ministry of the churchcenters on its usage of spiritual gifts, which are given to believersby God’s grace and for his glory as well as for the good ofothers (Rom. 12:3; Eph. 4:7–16). Second, every believerpossesses a gift of the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:7; Eph. 4:7). Third,it is through the diversity of the gifts that the body of Christmatures and is unified (Rom. 12:4; 1 Cor. 12:12–31; Eph.4:17–18). Fourth, although there was organized leadership inthe NT church, including elders (1 Tim. 3:1–7 [also called“pastors” and “bishops”; see Acts 20:17, 28;1 Pet. 5:1–4]) and deacons (1 Tim. 3:8–13),there does not seem to have been a gap between the “clergy”and the “laity” in the church of the first century;rather, those with the gift of leadership are called to equip all thesaints for the work of the ministry (Eph. 4:7–16). Fifth,spiritual gifts are to be exercised in love (1 Cor. 13).

Cities, towns, and villages were essential parts of a commoncivilization pattern shared by the ancient Near East and the Bible.Towns and cities were designed to provide the basic needs ofsecurity, shelter, and sustenance to enable their populations toengage in a variety of social, economic, religious, and politicalactivities.

Theurban picture of the biblical world is complicated by severalfactors. The first is the large span of time covered in the Bible.The urban chronology of Scripture begins at the moment of the firstattempt at city building (Gen. 4:17) and ends with the revelation ofthe new Jerusalem, the city of God (Rev. 3:12; 21:2).

Moreover,the Bible is not concerned with providing a detailed commentary onthe expansion of city and urban life. It is true that several of thegreat cities of the ancient Near East and the Greco-Roman world arementioned in the pages of the Bible; however, many of the religious,social, economic, and political factors involved in the developmentof urban life are not identified or discussed. The archaeologicalrecord often suggests a more complex picture.

Inaddition, a wide variety of terms are used broadly andinterchangeably in the Scriptures to describe settlement patterns andsocio-urban structures. For example, the specific differences betweena city, a town, and a village are not clearly identified in thebiblical text. Normally, a city had a fortified wall or other type ofdefensive enclosure, while a town or village did not.

Furthermore,city status was not necessarily determined by size. Ancient citieswere much smaller. During the reign of Solomon, Jerusalem coveredabout thirty-three acres. But by the time of Jesus it measured nearlytwo hundred acres. Jericho, the oldest city in Palestine, was nolarger than ten acres. The archaeological record suggests thatJericho was occupied by at least 7000 BC. Hazor, one of the largestcities in the upper Galilee, covered 175 acres. The dimensions ofPalestinian cities were minuscule compared to the great pagan citiessuch as Nineveh, Babylon, and Rome.

ArchaeologicalEvidence

Archaeologicalevidence suggests that some of the chief concerns of city buildingremained constant over time. Cities were planted along main highwaysor trade routes. Often a city sat at important crossroads orintersections. An adequate water supply was necessary, as were rawmaterials for shelter and industry. The site had to be easy to defendand surrounded by adjacent agricultural land sufficient to sustainthe population. All cities in the ancient Near East built walls andcity gates. Most featured an acropolis or citadel and a workingsystem of city streets. Many cities contained a sanctuary or highplace where individuals could worship.

Atleast four major phases of urbanization in Palestine occurred duringthe biblical period.

EarlyBronze Age II (3000–2700 BC).Although Jericho and other cities had their origin in theChalcolithic period, the Early Bronze Age produced a significantexpansion of urban life. Cities in this period included Megiddo, Ai,Gezer, Arad, Jericho, and others. Larger sites protected byfortifications with gates are characteristic of this period. Temples,fortified citadels, and residential houses were found arranged alongstreets and thoroughfares inside the city. The water supply became acommunity concern, and steps were taken to conserve runoff water intolarge reservoirs or cisterns. Such urban planning presupposes asocial hierarchy in the differentiation of labor and need. Farmers,craftsmen, and traders, as well as priests and rulers, worked andlived side by side in the city.

MiddleBronze Age IIB (1750–1650 BC).In the second wave of urbanization, the Canaanites refortified andrebuilt older settlements such as Dan, Hazor, Megiddo, and Shechem.Other sites, such as Bethel and Beth Shemesh, were established as newsettlements. Distinctive walls, fortifications, gates, and culticarchitecture characterized this period. Mud-brick was a commonconstruction material. Larger city-states controlled agriculturalresources and ruled numerous villages and settlements within theirimmediate vicinity. These city-states often joined together inpolitical alliances. Cuneiform documents from Mari and Hazor providea glimpse into the social, cultural, and political life in the citiesof this period. This wave of urbanization began to decline by theLate Bronze Age.

IronAge II (1000–586 BC).Early Iron Age settlements developed alongside the declining LateBronze cities as rough camps, simple enclosures, and villages in thehighlands of Palestine. Later, during the monarchial period, some ofthe villages and cities expanded into full urban centers, followingroyal hierarchical and administrative blueprints. Cities containedadministrative buildings, enhanced fortifications and gates, newwater systems, and planned street systems offering systematicdrainage. Housing generally followed a typical pattern. Stone becamethe construction material of choice. Both the united monarchy and thedivided kingdoms of Israel and Judah established royal cities,administrative centers, fortified border cities, and fortresses.Urban life gravitated toward the upkeep of a central religious andeconomic royal administration.

Romanperiod.As a champion of all things Hellenic, Alexander the Great introducedthe Greek city, or polis, into the oriental culture of the Levant.This new type of city, with its theaters, gymnasia, statues, andcolonnades, served as a beacon of Greek civilization. Such citiesattracted Greek settlers, traders, and local natives (Acts 18:1–3,18–28; Rom. 16:3–5; 1 Cor. 16:19). The Greek agora(marketplace) replaced the Palestinian city gate as the center oftrade and commerce. Sepphoris and the towns of the Decapolis wereexamples of this type of city in Palestine. The Romans imitated theHellenistic city plan but emphasized one main north-souththoroughfare (cardo) and east-west streets. Building activity inPalestine flourished under Herod the Great (37–4 BC). Herebuilt, expanded, and renamed many Palestinian sites, such asCaesarea, Sebaste, and the Tower of Antonia in Jerusalem. Herodradically changed the landscape of Jerusalem, rebuilding there on amassive scale not only the palace but also the temple.

OldTestament

Thecommon Hebrew word for “city,” ’ir, occurs 1,093times in the OT. English versions normally translate the word as“city,” but sometimes “town” is used. Thesame term is found outside the Bible in one of the Lachish lettersand as a cognate in several Semitic languages. The etymology of ’iris not clear, but it may be related to the Sumerian word for “city,”uru. The word may have originally designated a fortified or protectedplace.

Inthe OT, ’ir can be applied to a wide range of settlements,including villages, towns, and capital cities regardless of size orlocation. For example, Deut. 3:5 speaks of cities fortified with highwalls, gates, and bars in the same sentence with “rural towns”or “country settlements” [NIV: “unwalledvillages”]. On the other hand, a distinction is made between a“walled city” and a “village” in Lev. 25:29,31. In Num. 13:19 Moses specifically charges the spies with the taskof determining whether the Canaanite cities are fortified or morelike camps. Cities given to the Levites in Num. 35:1–8 alsoincluded the surrounding pasturelands connected with them. A numberof times the OT speaks of the fields associated with a city orvillage (Lev. 25:34; Josh. 21:12; Neh. 11:25, 30).

Citieswere also given special designations or names. Cities of refuge areso designated to provide protection for individuals who havecommitted accidental manslaughter (Num. 35:11; Josh. 20:2; 1 Chron.6:57). Jericho was called “the City of Palms” (Deut.34:3; 2 Chron. 28:15). Jerusalem was known as “the City ofDavid” (1 Kings 3:1; 2 Chron. 5:2), “Zion”(Isa. 33:20; Zech. 8:3; Heb. 12:22), and “the holy city”(Isa. 52:1; Rev. 21:1).

Twoother Hebrew terms are often translated “city.” The nounqeret occurs only five times in biblical poetry (Job 29:7; Prov. 8:3;9:3, 14; 11:11). The noun qiryah is found twenty-nine times. It issometimes translated “town” in the NIV (Deut. 2:36; Job39:7; Isa. 25:2; Jer. 49:25; Hos. 7:12). The etymology of either wordis uncertain, but both may be derived from qir (“wall”).In many cases qiryah functions as a synonym of ’ir.

InDeut. 2:36 and 3:4 qiryah is used to designate the towns taken by theIsraelites in Transjordan. Heshbon is identified in Num. 21:28 as the“town” (qiryah; NIV: “city”) of Sihon. Theword qiryah is also found in the names of several towns, such asKiriath Jearim (Josh. 15:9) and Kiriath Sepher (Josh. 15:15). Hebronwas originally Kiriath Arba (Gen. 23:2; 35:27), and Balaam rode toKiriath Huzoth (Num. 22:39). Shaveh Kiriathaim (Gen. 14:5) andKiriathaim (Num. 32:37) contain a form of qiryah.

Smallercommunities were called “villages” or “settlements”(Gen. 25:16; Lev. 25:31; Deut. 2:23). Some of these were connected toa larger city or provincial center. The book of Joshua commonlyspeaks of a city or town and “its villages” (Josh. 13–19;cf. 1 Chron. 6:26). In addition, the Hebrew phrase “daughtersof” (i.e., settlements) is frequently used to identify smallervillages under the jurisdiction of a larger city and dependent uponit (Num. 21:25, 32; 32:42; Josh. 15:45, 47; Neh. 11:25–31).

NewTestament

TheGreek word polis occurs 163 times in the NT and is translated as“town” or “city.” Several sites are calledpolis: Nazareth (Matt. 2:23), Capernaum (Luke 4:31), Arimathea (Luke23:51), Bethlehem (John 7:42), and others. Jerusalem is called “theholy city” (Matt. 4:5; cf. Rev. 3:12), “the city of theGreat King” (Matt. 5:35), and “the city of the livingGod” (Heb. 12:22). During his ministry, Jesus preached in thetowns of Galilee (Matt. 11:1) and Samaria (Matt. 10:5). In the bookof Acts, Paul served as an evangelist to the Greek and Roman citiesin the Mediterranean world.

Terminology

“Deacon”is an English translation of the Greek word diakonos. Generically,this term refers to one who serves, and the word is used with thissense repeatedly throughout the NT (e.g., Matt. 20:26; 23:11; Mark9:35; 10:43). Matthew 22:13 speaks specifically of those who serve bydoing the bidding of a king. John 2:9 refers to the servants who drawthe water at the wedding in Cana. Various other passages use diakonosin a religious context with reference to ministers or those who serveGod or Christ in some way (Rom. 13:4; 2Cor. 6:4; Eph. 6:21;Col. 1:7; 1Tim. 4:6). This broad usage of the term to indicategeneral service, including table service, is also quite common in thesecular Greek literature of the first century.

Asthe early church grew and developed, the word diakonos came todesignate the specific church office of deacon. Although often cited,Acts 6 is inconclusive regarding the office of deacon. The noundiakonos does not appear in this text, but the related verb formdiakoneō (“to wait on” [Acts 6:2]) is used inreference to the ministry of distributing food. Some interpretersfind in this the precursor or establishment of the diaconate, butothers argue that the use of diakoneō to speak of table serviceneed not imply that the role of deacon had developed at this earlystage of the church. Only two passages in the NT, Phil. 1:1 and1Tim. 3:8–12, clearly use diakonos in the sense of anestablished church office, and here the NIV rightly translates it as“deacon.”

TheOffice of Deacon

Paul’saddress to the believers in Philippi is unique within the Paulinecorpus in its singling out of two church offices. While directing hiswords to the saints at Philippi, Paul specifically makes mention ofthe “overseers” (Gk. episkopos) and deacons in theirmidst (Phil. 1:1). This greeting provides evidence of the existenceof such ecclesiastical structure from the early AD 60s at the latest.

Themost detailed information in the NT related to the office of deaconoccurs in 1Tim. 3:8–12. Immediately following adiscussion of “overseers” (Gk. episkopos) in 1Tim.3:1–7, this text shifts its focus to the office of deacon andprovides a description of the requirements for the one occupying therole. The one fit to serve as a deacon should have a character worthyof respect, and the passage calls for the demonstration of thischaracter in the areas of drink, money (v.8), and family(v.12). A deacon should display a commitment to Christian truth(v.9), and a candidate should be tested before officially beingallowed to serve in this office (v.10).

Deaconessesin the Early Church

Significantdiscussion surrounds the issue of whether the NT limits the role ofdeacon to men or whether it provides evidence of women serving asdeacons, frequently designated with the feminized term “deaconess.”At issue is the translation of gynaikes in 1Tim. 3:11. The NIVrenders it as “women”; also within its range of meaningare the translations “wives” (ESV) and “womendeacons.” The context of the passage must dictate whether thequalifications listed in 1Tim. 3:11 apply to the wives of thosem*n who wish to be deacons or whether they are the standard for thosewomen who themselves desire to serve in the office of deacon. On theone hand, the subsequent clear address of a male deacon as needing tobe “faithful to his wife” (1Tim. 3:12) makes areference to female deacons in 1Tim. 3:11 an illogicalinterruption. However, those who see in 1Tim. 3:11 a referenceto female deacons cite the use of diakonos to describe Phoebe in Rom.16:1 as evidence that she served as a deaconess of the church inCenchrea. Alternatively, Rom. 16:1 may be speaking only of Phoebe’sgreat service to the church in that locale without implying that sheoccupied an official church office.

Whetheror not 1Tim. 3:11 and Rom. 16:1 have in mind the role ofdeaconess, it is clear that an order of deaconesses existed in thechurch after the first century. The most significant early evidenceincludes the Didaskalia Apostolorum (Syria, early third century AD),which describes the female deacon in the Eastern church as one whoministered by assisting women with their baptism, providedinstruction to the recently baptized women, visited women who wereill, and provided service for women in need. The fourth-centurySyrian Apostolic Constitutions affirms their function in similaractivities and identifies additional duties, including maintainingthe separation of the sexes during worship. It also describes theirordination by means of the laying on of hands and prayer.

In Christian theology, doctrine is the synthesis of Christianteaching, especially as set forth in its various related themes. Theearly disciples frequently referred to the teachings of Christ and tothe teachings of the apostles and the church. These were memorized,compiled, and passed through the generations in the church (2Tim.2). As early as Acts 2 reference is made to the teaching of theapostles and the devotion of the church to it. By the second century,a body of teaching had crystallized into a doctrinal treatise calledthe Didache. Doctrinal teaching as a set structure is especiallyemphasized in the Pastoral Epistles, such that it has caused some toconjecture a later date and early catholic outlook for those letters.Regardless of the validity of this postulation, these lettersevidence an early doctrinal and confessional outlook within thechurch.

Thiswas, of course, nothing new, since the Israelites had a body ofteaching that they had passed on through the generations: the law,both written and oral. For the Israelites, the law, both written andoral, was memorized, taught, interpreted, and heeded through all ofsociety. The church simply followed suit in forming its teachings.

Inthe NT two words, didachē and didaskalia, are commonlytranslated “teaching” and in some cases are rendered bysome translations as “doctrine.” The term didachēappears more widely throughout the NT, whereas didaskalia is usedlargely in the Pastoral Epistles (referring to both the content andthe act of teaching). The term didaskalia is sometimes used with theterm logos when the latter indicates sound speech (Titus 2:7–8)and words of the faith (1Tim. 4:6). In fact, in one verse inthe Pastoral Epistles all three terms are used together as “thefaithful word,” “in accordance with the teaching,”and “in sound doctrine” (Titus 1:9 NASB).

Thefirst body of teaching for the church is the teaching of Jesus (Matt.7:28), such as that found in the Sermon on the Mount, where Jesusnotes the ethic of his messiahship and his followers. The teaching ofJesus, which is authoritative (Mark 1:22, 27), and confrontational(Mark 12:38), is an astonishing answer to the religious leaders(Matt. 22:33; cf. Luke 4:32). Jesus notes the vanity of teaching thehuman commandments as if they were the doctrine from God (Mark 7:7).When questioned, Jesus sets forth his teaching as from the Father(John 7:16–17). The chief priests seek to destroy both Jesusand his followers because of the teaching (Mark 11:18; John 18:19;Acts 5:28). On Cyprus the proconsul is astonished at the doctrine ofChrist taught by Paul (Acts 13:12), and in Athens Paul’steaching about Christ is new and unusual to those of the Areopagus(Acts 17:18–20).

ForPaul, doctrine is fundamental for believers. He notes the commitmentto the teaching of Christ after conversion as normative for the Romanbelievers (Rom. 6:17), and he instructs further that they keep an eyeout for those who cause division and hinder adherence to sounddoctrine (Rom. 16:17). In fact, God has given gifted people to thebody for building up the saints to avoid such doctrinal problems(Eph. 4:12–14). Further, a straightforward expression ofteaching has priority over gifts such as tongues (1Cor. 14:6,26). Paul also points out that the Colossian heresy is the doctrineof human beings rather than that of God (Col. 2:22).

Inthe Pastoral Epistles the injunction from Paul to Timothy is that hebe nourished on and persevere in sound doctrine (1Tim. 4:6, 16)and set forth doctrine in preaching (1Tim. 4:13 [along withpublic reading of Scripture]; 2Tim. 4:2). All this is certainlyfitting for Timothy, as he has followed the teaching of Paul (2Tim.3:10). The injunction to Titus is to hold to the word and to thesound doctrine and teaching as he corrects the church (Titus 1:9).Those who are servants are encouraged to show honesty and good faith,so that the teaching of the Savior will be respected (Titus 2:10). Itis clear for Paul that Scripture is the basis of doctrine (2Tim.3:16). This doctrine (teaching) will be tolerated by few; as a whole,sound doctrine will be rejected in favor of a message more palatableto human interest (2Tim. 4:3). The task of the servant of Godis to stand against heterodox teaching (1Tim. 1:3; 6:3).Heterodoxy leads to heteropraxy (1Tim. 1:10). Paul notes thedoctrine of demons, false teaching that is ultimately based insatanic teaching (1Tim. 4:1).

Theinjunction of the writer to the Hebrews is that they are not tosubmit to strange teachings, which deny grace (13:9). This accordswith the book’s argument as a whole. For John, staying in thedoctrine of Christ is salvific, but going outside it is not (2John9). John’s readers are not to receive those who pervert thedoctrine of Christ (2John 10).

Inthe book of Revelation, Jesus warns the church at Pergamum about thefalse teaching of Balaam (2:14) and that of the Nicolaitans (2:15).The church at Thyatira is likewise warned to shun the teachings ofthe false prophetess known as “Jezebel” (2:20,24).

First Timothy, along with 2Timothy and Titus, is knownas one of the apostle Paul’s Pastoral Epistles. These lettershave earned this designation because they were addressed to pastorsand deal with particular problems that they were facing in theirrespective churches. This letter was addressed to Timothy, whom Paulaffectionately called “my son,” most likely because theapostle had led him to faith in Christ (1:18; cf. 1:2). At Paul’surging, Timothy took on the role of providing leadership to thechurch in Ephesus (1:3), which had been infiltrated by false teachers(1:3–4). Paul wrote this letter to Timothy, instructing him torebuke the false teachers in the church and to fight the good fightof faith (1:18). The apostle concisely summarized the major theme ofthis letter by saying, “I am writing you these instructions sothat ... you will know how people ought to conductthemselves in God’s household, which is the church of theliving God, the pillar and foundation of the truth” (3:14–15).

Authorshipand Date

Theauthenticity of the Pastoral Epistles has been questioned more thanthat of any of Paul’s other letters. This is due to differencesin style and theology as well as the difficulty in establishing theirplace in the travels of Paul in Acts. The letters, it is presumed,were written by a disciple of Paul after his death and were meant tobe a “testament” honoring the memory of Paul.

Despitethese claims, there is not enough evidence to overturn Paulineauthorship. Differences in theology can be accounted for by thedifferent circ*mstances addressed. Stylistic differences may havearisen from Paul’s use of an amanuensis (scribe) to write theletter, a common practice in the ancient world (see Rom. 16:22). Interms of their time of writing, the Pastorals were likely writtenafter Paul’s first Roman imprisonment and so after thenarrative of Acts. Paul expected to be released (Phil. 1:25; 2:24),and it is likely that his Jewish accusers never made the long andarduous trip from Jerusalem to Rome.

Evidencein support of Pauline authorship can also be found: (1)The manypersonal comments to Timothy (cf. 2Tim. 4:13) show that theletters are either authentic, or blatant forgeries, not “testaments”honoring the memory of Paul. (2)All of Paul’s keytheological themes appear in the Pastorals. (3)Paul makesnegative statements about himself that a disciple writing to honorPaul is unlikely to have made, for example, referring to himself asthe “worst” of sinners (1Tim. 1:15).

FirstTimothywas likely written between AD 63 and 66, after Paul’s releasefrom his first imprisonment in Rome (AD 62–63; cf. 3:14; Acts28:30–31).

Recipient

Timothycame from the city of Lystra in Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey). Hisfather was Greek and his mother Jewish (Acts 16:1). Eunice, hismother, and Lois, his grandmother, brought him up under the influenceof the Jewish religion (2Tim. 1:5; 3:14–15). Timothygained a good reputation among the local believers, so Paul added himto his missionary team (Acts 16:2–3). He accompanied Paulduring his second and third missionary journeys (Acts 16:3; 17:14;18:5; 19:22; 20:4). Paul listed Timothy as the coauthor or cosenderin several of his letters (2Cor. 1:1; Phil. 1:1; Col. 1:1;1Thess. 1:1; 2Thess. 1:1; Philem. 1) and included him inthe greetings that he sent to the church in Rome (Rom. 16:21). Inaddition, the apostle sent his protégé as a messengerto Thessalonica (1Thess. 3:1–6), Corinth (1Cor.4:17; 16:10), and Philippi (Phil. 2:19, 23). Because Timothy was bynature shy and timid, Paul had to exhort him to use his gifts and toboldly carry out his ministry (1Cor. 16:10; 1Tim. 4:12;5:23; 2Tim. 1:6–7).

Backgroundand Occasion

Duringhis third missionary journey, Paul warned the Ephesian church thatfalse teachers would arise from their midst (Acts 20:30). After hisfirst imprisonment in Rome (cf. Acts 28:16, 20, 30), the apostleaccompanied Timothy to Ephesus (1Tim. 1:3). They discoveredthat certain teachers were spreading “false doctrines” inthe church. According to 1Timothy, these false teachingsincluded a morbid interest in myths, old wives’ tales, andgenealogies. Some were promoting controversies, meaningless talk,incorrect teaching of the law, abstinence from marriage and certainfoods, and ungodly gossip (1:3–7; 4:3, 7; 5:13; 6:4–5).These false teachers also attempted to secure financial gain bypromoting their doctrines (6:3–5). Paul hoped to visit Ephesusagain (3:14), but in the meantime he wrote this letter instructingTimothy and the church leadership to correct these problems (1:3–4;3:15).

Paul’sinstructions to Timothy were not only to defend the church from falseteachers but also to give guidelines on the proper behavior for menand women in the church (2:1–15). He gave Timothy standards forselecting godly leaders (3:1–16) and practical advice ondealing with various age groups in the church (5:1–20).Throughout the book Paul exhorts his young protégé andthe church to lead a holy life (1:18; 2:8–15; 4:12–16;6:6–8, 11–14, 20).

Outline

I.Introduction (1:1–2)

II.Warning about False Teachers and Exhortation to Keep the Faith(1:3–20)

A.False teaching and false teachers of the law (1:3–11)

B.Paul, an example of God’s grace (1:12–17)

C.Exhortation to keep the faith in the midst of apostasy (1:18–20)

III.Prayer and Proper Behavior in the Church (2:1–15)

A.Prayer in the church (2:1–7)

B.Men and women in the worship service (2:8–15)

IV.Qualifications for Church Leaders (3:1–16)

A.Qualifications for elders (3:1–7)

B.Qualifications for deacons (3:8–13)

C.The purpose behind Paul’s instructions (3:14–16)

V.Correction of False Teaching (4:1–16)

A.Apostasy and false teaching (4:1–5)

B.Exhortation to confront apostasy (4:6–16)

VI.Responsibility toward Various Groups in the Church (5:1–6:19)

A.Relating to men and women in the church (5:1–2)

B.Responsibility toward widows (5:3–16)

C.Responsibilities toward elders (5:17–25)

D.Responsibility of slaves toward their masters (6:1–2)

E.Contrasting corrupt teachers with true godliness (6:3–10)

F.Pursuing the life of faith (6:11–16)

G.Instructing the wealthy (6:17–19)

VII.Closing Admonition and Benediction (6:20–21)

The earliest ripening produce of the harvest (Exod. 23:16;Neh. 10:35) or, more generally, the highest-quality portion of anyproduce or manufactured commodity (Num. 15:20).

Thefirstfruit of the harvest is a symbol and harbinger of God’sblessing. Thus, God commands that sacrifices take place in which the“best of the firstfruits” are offered to him inthanksgiving and praise (Exod. 34:26; cf. Lev. 23:17; Deut. 26:2).The same principle applies to manufactured goods (Deut. 18:4), andall these events are accompanied by feasts and festivals (Exod.23:16). Such ceremonial worship takes on renewed importance in thereturn from the exile, where they are connected to God’sworldwide rule and his claim upon the firstborn (Neh. 10:35–37;cf. Exod. 13:2–16).

Pauluses this OT background to metaphorically describe the resurrection,God’s final “harvest” of the earth. Jesus Christ,by virtue of his resurrection from the dead, is “thefirstfruits of those who have fallen asleep” (1Cor.15:20; cf. Rom. 8:29). The resurrection of Christ is the guarantee ofan abundant harvest to come, in which those united to Jesus will besimilarly raised into abundant life. There is therefore a two-partorder to a single resurrection harvest: “Christ, thefirstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him”(1Cor. 15:23).

Furthermore,since Jesus’ own resurrection has already taken place,believers, who are sealed with Christ through “the firstfruitsof the Spirit,” enjoy now a foretaste of the abundant life tocome (Rom. 8:23; cf. 2Cor. 1:22; 5:5). Believers are thereforeencouraged to live as those who have been born again by faith, “thatwe might be a kind of firstfruits of all he created” (James1:18). Similarly, Paul sometimes uses the term “firstfruits”to describe the first converts in a region (Rom. 16:5; 1Cor.16:15 KJV), symbolizing the expectation of fruitful ministry and theintimation of worldwide salvation.

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

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

Grace is the nucleus, the critical core element, of theredemptive and sanctifying work of the triune God detailed throughoutthe entire canon of Scripture. The variegated expressions of graceare rooted in the person and work of God, so that his graciousnessand favor effectively demonstrated in every aspect of the createdrealm glorify him as they are shared and enjoyed with one another.

Thebiblical terminology informing an understanding of grace defines itas a gift or a favorable reaction or disposition toward someone.Grace is generosity, thanks, and goodwill between humans and from Godto humans. Divine expressions of grace are loving, merciful, andeffective. The biblical texts provide a context for a more robustunderstanding of divine gift. The overall redemptive-historicalcontext of grace is the desire of the eternal God to bring glory tohimself through a grace-based relationship with his creation. TheCreator-Redeemer gives grace, and the recipients of grace give himglory.

OldTestament

Genesis.The grace of the creation narratives is summarized with the repeateduse of the term “good” (Gen. 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25,31). God is good, and he made a good creation with abundant gifts forAdam and Eve to enjoy. When Adam and Eve rebelled against God, herighteously judged and graciously provided for an ongoingrelationship. God clothed the naked Adam and Eve (3:21) and announcedthat the seed of the woman would yield a redeemer (3:15).

Gracein the postcreation narratives (Gen. 4–6) is focused onindividuals. God looked with favor on Abel and his offering (4:4),and Noah found grace in God’s eyes (6:8). God looked at and hadregard for the offering of Abel (Gen. 4). Jacob confessed to Esauthat God graced him with descendants and with possessions (33:5).

Graceand graciousness also characterize interaction between individuals.The Jacob and Esau exchange uses grace vocabulary for the gift andthe disposition of grace. Jacob invited Esau to accept his gift if hehad a favorable disposition toward him (Gen. 33:11). The covenant sonJoseph received favorable treatment from the prison warden because ofhis disposition toward him (39:21).

Exodus.The exodus narrative recounts how the seed of Abraham multiplies, isredeemed, and then is given the law, which defines the relationshipof God to Israel. All these events are tied to the gracious promisesthat God made to Abraham and his descendants (Gen. 12; 15; 17; seealso Gen. 21; 27).

Thegrace associated with the redemption of Israel from Egypt iscelebrated in the song of Exod. 15. God’s victory over theEgyptian army and his covenant fidelity to the patriarchs are thesong’s themes. Moses and the Israelites sing because God heardIsrael’s groaning; he remembered his covenant with Abraham andlooked on Israel with concern (2:24). God made Egypt favorablydisposed toward Israel (3:21) and parted the sea for Israel to escape(11:3; 12:36). The confession “He is my God ... myfather’s God” ties together major sections of redemptivehistory and affirms the constancy of God’s grace throughout theperiods (15:2). God’s tenacious covenant loyalty (khesed) tothe nation and his covenant grace (15:13) to Israel cannot bemerited.

Thegiving of the law in Exod. 20 is prefaced by a gracious and powerfulpresentation of God to the nation in Exod. 19. In the organizationand development of Exod. 19–20, grace themes emerge. The graceassociated with redemption and covenant life is marked in Exod. 19.God took Israel from Egyptian bondage, redeemed it, and brought thenation to himself (19:4). Through this action, the nation will becomea special treasure, a holy nation, a kingdom of priests (19:5–6).In sum, Israel exists because God created, loved, and redeemed it.

Second,the Decalogue of Exod. 20 follows upon the redemption effected byGod, defining how Israel will relate to its God. In this sense, lawis viewed as a gift that expresses the divine will. When compared andcontrasted with ancient Near Eastern laws, Torah reflects the graceof God’s character and his genuine concern for the poor,slaves, aliens, and widows. In addition, there is a grace ethic thatmotivates obedience to the law. The motivational statements in theDecalogue in Exod. 20 relate to the grace of redemption (v.2),the righteousness of God (vv. 4–7), the creation work of God(vv. 8–11), and long life (v.12).

Exodus32–34 is a key passage that links the covenant with graceterminology. This section begins with the story of the golden calf(chap. 32) and ends with the account of Moses’ radiant face(34:29–35). The grace terminology is observed in 33:19; 34:6–7.The context of 33:19 involves Moses meeting with God face-to-face.According to 33:12–17, Moses wanted to know who would be leftafter the purge of 33:5. He acknowledged God’s favor in hislife and wondered who else might enjoy it. Moses reminded God thatthe nation was his people (33:13). The grace of this account is God’sassurance of his presence with Israel and the unmerited purposefulexpression of his grace.

Exodus34:6–7 employs a series of adjectives in a grace confessionalstatement. This statement arises out of God’s instructions toMoses to cut two new tablets of stone like the first ones (34:1; seealso 24:12), which were broken after the incident of the golden calf(32:19). God descended in a cloud, stood with Moses, and proclaimedhis name to him (34:5). The rhetoric of the passage emphasizes thespeech of God, who defines himself in connection with covenantmaking. God is merciful and gracious, long-suffering, anddistinguished by steadfast love.

Graceand covenant loyalty.These key passages are foundational for understanding the grace andsteadfast loyalty of God expressed in the subsequent events ofcovenant history. Grace and khesed are expressed in connection withcovenant curse implementation (Num. 14:18; Hos. 4:1; 6:4, 6), in theoverall structure of Deuteronomy (5:10; 7:9, 12), in the Davidiccovenant (2Sam. 7:15; 1Chron. 17:13), in the future hopeof Israel (Isa. 54:8), in restoration (Jer. 32:18), in the newcovenant (Jer. 31:31), and in exile (Dan. 9:4).

Toround out the OT discussion, we may note that covenant siblings wereto be gracious and loyal in their ongoing relationships with oneanother. The book of Ruth illustrates covenant grace in action (2:2,10, 13). In addition, grace is to be expressed toward the poor (Prov.28:8), the young and the old (Deut. 28:50), and those who suffer (Job19:21).

NewTestament

TheNT focus of grace is developed in keeping with the foundation laid inthe OT. The triune God is the center and source of grace: it is thegrace of God (Rom. 1:7), the Spirit of grace (Heb. 10:29), and thegrace of Christ (John 1:17). The grace of God revealed in the OT isunveiled uniquely in the person and work of Christ.

TheGospel of John.The canonical development of the grace theme between the Testamentsis explained in the opening chapter of John’s Gospel. JesusChrist is the Word, who was with God, who is God, and who created theworld (John 1:1–3). Christ then became flesh and dwelled amongus (1:14). In doing so, he made known the glory of God to us. At thispoint in the development of chapter 1, John connects Christ (theWord) with the adjectives describing God in Exod. 34:6 to affirm thatChrist has the very same virtues that God has. The assertion in John1:17 that Jesus is full of grace and truth parallels the statement inExod. 34:6 of God’s steadfast love and faithfulness. In Christwe are able to see the glory that Moses hoped to see in God (John1:18). Christ is both the message and the messenger of grace andtruth.

TheEpistles and Acts.The NT Epistles develop the “full of grace and truth”statement about Christ (John 1:14) in several ways. The grace andtruth found in Christ are given to his servants (1Cor. 1:4) andare a reason for praise (2Cor. 8:9; Gal. 1:6, 15; Eph. 4:7;1Tim. 1:2; 2Tim. 2:1). This grace from Christ iseffective in bringing about redemption and sustaining a life ofgodliness. Ephesians 2:8–9 is the classic statement affirmingthat God’s favor is the source of salvation. Paul makes thispoint by repeating “it is by grace” in 2:5, 8 andclarifying the grace of salvation with the “it is the gift ofGod” statement in 2:8. This design of salvation celebrates theincomparable riches of Christ’s grace and the expression of hiskindness to us (cf. Eph. 1:7). Salvation is devoid of human merit,gifts, or favor (2:8). Keeping the law as a means of entrance into arelationship with God and as a means of gaining favor with God isantithetical to the nature of grace. God’s favor expressed topeople in salvation is an expression of his sovereign will.

Romans5 declares many of the same themes found in Eph. 2. In Rom. 5 Paulcontrasts the action and result of Adam’s transgression withthe obedience of Christ. Salvation is God’s grace and giftbrought by the grace of one man, Jesus Christ (v.15). The giftand grace of Christ brought about justification.

Theeffective operation of God’s grace in salvation is illustratedin the historical narratives of Acts. The men involved in the heateddebate of the Jerusalem council (Acts 15:2) affirmed the salvation ofthe Gentiles by grace after hearing the report of Barnabas and Paul(15:12). Those in Achaia (18:27) are another illustration of aneffective operation of grace.

Thegrace of God that saves is also the grace that sanctifies. Titus 2:11declares that redemptive grace instructs the redeemed to say no to alife of ungodliness. The instructional nature of grace is highlightedin the development of the Titus 2 context. The teacher in 2:1–10,15 is Titus, who is to nurture godly people. There is a change ofinstructors in 2:11, with grace now teaching. Redemptive grace worksin harmony with sanctifying grace to provide for godly living.

Accordingto Titus 3:8, those who trust in the generosity of God’s graceshould devote themselves to doing what is good. By God’s grace,justified sinners will find their delight and satisfaction in thepromises of God for a life of persevering godliness.

Gracealso functions as an enablement for life and ministry. Paul oftenrehearses this feature of grace in his letters. In Rom. 1:5 Paultestifies about the grace associated with a commission to be anapostle. When reflecting on his role in the church, he affirms thatby God’s grace he has been able to lay a foundation (1Cor.3:10). Paul’s testimony in 1Cor. 15:10 demonstrates theessential role of grace in making him who he is and effectivelyenabling what he does. Giving is also viewed as an exercise of grace(2Cor. 8:7) reflecting the grace received by individualbelievers. This gift of grace for life and ministry is somehowrecognizable. Peter, James, and John recognized it in Paul (Gal.2:9). It was upon the apostles (Acts 4:33), and it was seen in thechurch of Antioch (11:23).

Giventhe source and the effective nature of grace, one can understand theappropriateness of appealing to grace in greetings and salutations(Rom. 1:7; 16:20; Gal. 1:3; 6:18).

Commongrace.Finally, grace does operate beyond the context of the elect and thework of salvation and sanctification. Theologians define this as“common grace.” God’s sending rain and givingcreatures intellectual and artistic abilities are expressions ofcommon grace.

GreetingCustoms in Biblical Times

Weknow of greeting customs in biblical times from narrations ofgreetings and from instructions on greeting.

Inbiblical Hebrew, the phrase usually translated “to greet”is literally “to inquire of someone’s well-being[shalom]” (e.g., Exod. 18:7; 2Sam. 20:9 [cf. the Englishgreeting “How are you?”]). In some instances, we seepeople “blessing” one another as a form of greeting:“Just as he finished making the offering, Samuel arrived, andSaul went out to greet [lit., ‘bless’] him” (1Sam.13:10). Ruth 2:4 provides an example of the words that passed betweenindividuals in such a greeting: “Just then Boaz arrived fromBethlehem and greeted the harvesters, ‘The Lord be with you!’‘The Lord bless you!’ they answered.” The formulahad changed little by the first century AD, when Gabriel said toMary, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is withyou” (Luke 1:28). Luke reports that “Mary was greatlytroubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this mightbe” (1:29), though the source of her consternation is unclear,since the angel’s greeting closely approximates that of Boaz.Perhaps this is the very point: the angel was speaking in adistinctively “biblical-sounding” vernacular, whichraised the concerns of the young, first-century AD woman.

Pauloften instructs the recipients of his letters to greet one anotherwith a “holy kiss” (Rom. 16:16; 1Cor. 16:20; 2Cor.13:12; 1Thess. 5:26; see also 1Pet. 5:14). Tragically, akiss of greeting was the signal by which Judas Iscariot betrayedJesus (Matt. 26:48–49). Other examples of greeting with a kissinclude Gen. 29:11, 13; 33:4; 45:15; Exod. 4:27; 18:7; 2Sam.20:9; Prov. 7:13. In other cases, kisses were exchanged as a farewellgreeting (Gen. 31:28, 55; 48:10; 50:1; Ruth 1:9, 14; 1Sam.20:41; 2Sam. 19:39; 1Kings 19:20; Acts 20:37). Jesustaught his disciples to be generous with their greetings; after all,even pagans will greet their brothers and sisters, but a Christianmust extend greetings even beyond the narrow circle of kinship (Matt.5:47). When entering a home, Jesus taught, his disciples were togreet the inhabitants (Matt. 10:12). At other times, however, Jesustold his disciples to forgo greetings along the road in the interestof arriving quickly at their destination (Luke 10:4).

Greetingand Social Rank

Inthe examples of Ruth 2:4 and Luke 1:28 above, the greeting isinitiated by the person of higher status. Boaz was a wealthylandowner greeting fieldworkers, and Gabriel was an important angelgreeting a young, unmarried woman. An analogy may be drawn to anothersocial norm, the notion that it was appropriate for the greaterperson to bless the lesser: “Without doubt the lesser isblessed by the greater” (Heb. 7:7). Elsewhere in the Bible, theopposite practice is referred to, when Jesus criticizes the teachersof the law and the Pharisees because, among other honors, “theylove to be greeted with respect in the marketplace and to be called‘Rabbi’ by others” (Matt. 23:7). When Paul went toRome, believers from that city traveled about forty miles to meet andgreet him as he approached the city (Acts 28:15), thus according tohim the honors due a traveling dignitary in antiquity (cf. Mark 9:15;1Thess. 4:17).

EpistolaryGreetings

Likemodern letters, ancient correspondence began with a salutation (Acts15:23; 23:26; James 1:1) (see Salutation). In particular, Paul usedthe greeting at the beginning of his epistles as an occasion fortheological elaboration in addition to its use as the identificationof the writer and the recipients of the letter. To the end of hisletters, Paul often appended individually directed greetings, as wellas greetings in the name of friends with whom he sent the letter(Rom. 16:3–16; 1Cor. 16:19–21; 2Cor.13:12–13; Phil. 4:22–23; Col. 4:10–15; 2Tim.4:19–21; Titus 3:15; Philem. 1:23; see also Heb. 13:24; 1Pet.5:13; 2John 13; 3John 14).

Freedom from sin, guilt, impurity, blame, guile, or harm.This broad semantic range includes several Hebrew and Greek words. Inthe OT, one root, tsdq, which suggests “righteousness,”is used in a forensic sense (e.g., Gen. 44:16; Job 9:15), andanother, nqh, which means “free from, clean,” appears incultic contexts (e.g., Pss. 19:13; 26:6). However, because God is theultimate judge, these spheres often overlap (e.g., 1Kings 8:32;Jer. 2:35). Other words suggest a lack of guile (2Sam. 15:11)or of impurity (Prov. 16:2; 21:8). The common phrase “innocentblood” (e.g., Deut. 19:10; Ps. 106:38) indicates that a victimof murder is undeserving of this fate. God warns Israel not to shedinnocent blood (Deut. 27:25; Jer. 22:3). Innocence and guilt arecalculated in the ultimate sense before God, who is “the Judgeof all the earth” (Gen. 18:25). This is why the psalmistdesires to be forgiven or declared innocent of hidden faults and keptfrom committing willful sins (Ps. 19:12–13).

Inthe NT, references to innocence are relatively rare, yet the range ofmeanings spans the forensic (Matt. 27:19) to the cultic (Matt. 12:5,7), including the connotations of a lack of guile (Matt. 10:16; Rom.16:19) or of impurity (Acts 20:26). The phrase “innocent blood”reappears, now applied to Jesus (Matt. 27:4; cf. 27:24), and thejoining of the forensic and the cultic meanings of innocence in God’sjudgment is explicitly stated (1Cor. 4:4).

InJesus’ trial and death, his innocence is clearly shown eventhough he is condemned as guilty. Judas acknowledges that he hasbetrayed innocent blood (Matt. 27:4), Pilate announces that he findsno basis for a charge against Jesus (John 19:4), and a centuriondeclares that Jesus is “righteous” (NIV) or “innocent”(NASB) (Luke 23:47, translating dikaios). God now “justifiesthe wicked” by faith in Jesus (Rom. 4:5).

While kissing is sometimes a sign of an erotic relationship,especially in Song of Songs (1:2; 8:1), in the Bible kissinggenerally is a sign of respect or friendship. Paul viewed kissing asan important sign of love between believers, instructing them togreet each other with a “holy kiss” (Rom. 16:16; 1Cor.16:20). Peter also instructs readers to greet each other with “akiss of love” (1Pet.5:14). Kissing in thesecontexts was very similar to the contemporary practice of shakinghands.

Inthe OT kissing was often used as a sign of blessing, as when Labankissed his grandchildren (Gen. 31:28, 55), and Jacob on his deathbedkissed his sons (Gen. 48:10). Luke 7:36–50 records the act of asinful woman anointing Jesus’ feet with perfume and kissing hisfeet in a sign of humble devotion to him. Kissing could also be asign of homage to an idol (Hos. 13:2).

Probablythe most famous kiss in the Bible is Judas’s kiss of Jesus toidentify him to those who intended to arrest him (Matt. 26:49; Mark14:44; Luke 22:47–48). Thus, the phrase “Judas kiss”has become a term indicating betrayal.

(1)Themost important Mary of the NT is the mother of Jesus, who becomespregnant through the Holy Spirit while still a virgin. In contrastwith Matthew’s birth narrative, where the emphasis falls onJoseph, Luke’s focuses on Mary. Luke’s Gospel introducesMary as the one to whom God sends the angel Gabriel (1:26–27).Gabriel announces that Mary will be the mother of the Messiah fromDavid’s line, who will reign over the house of Jacob and have aunique father-son relationship with God. Mary responds in humbleobedience as “the Lord’s servant” (1:29–38).When she visits her relative Elizabeth, Mary breaks forth in theMagnificat, a song praising God for caring for the humble, humblingthe mighty, and remembering his covenant with Abraham (1:46–55).

Afterthe birth of Jesus and the visit from the shepherds, Mary “treasuredup all these things and pondered them in her heart” (2:19). Anold man, Simeon, announces that although Jesus will be a light ofrevelation for the Gentiles and Israel’s glory, Mary will bedeeply grieved, and her soul will be pierced by a sword (2:35). Thisis the first hint in Luke’s Gospel that Mary’s child, theMessiah, will suffer. In the only episode from Jesus’ childhoodin the Gospel, Mary scolds her son for remaining in the temple whilehis family traveled back to Galilee (2:48). In Luke’s Gospel,Mary is a humble and obedient woman who reflects deeply about herexperiences surrounding the birth of Jesus and cares greatly for himas well. Beyond the birth narratives, Mary does not figure as aprominent character in the Gospels. In John’s Gospel, Jesusspeaks sternly to his mother when she wants him to perform a miraclebefore his “hour has ... come” (2:4);however, at the crucifixion, Mary is present, and Jesus places herinto the care of the Beloved Disciple (19:25–27). Latertraditions about Mary’s immaculate conception, perpetualvirginity, sinlessness, and roles as co-mediator of salvation andanswerer of prayer are not taught in the Bible.

(2)AnotherMary mentioned in the Gospels is the sister of Martha, who is praisedby Jesus for not busying herself with domestic duties as Martha does,but rather sits at the feet of Jesus, “listening to what hesaid” (Luke 10:39–40). This same Mary is mentioned onanother occasion as the one “who poured perfume on the Lord andwiped his feet with her hair” (John 11:1–2; cf. 12:1–8).The Synoptic Gospels record a similar event in which a woman, leftunnamed, anoints either the feet of Jesus (Luke 7:36–50) or hishead (Matt. 26:6–13; Mark 14:3–9). With the exception ofLuke, it seems as though John, Matthew, and Mark are recording thesame event. In each of these three, Jesus associates the anointingwith the preparation of his body for burial.

(3)MaryMagdalene makes a brief appearance during the ministry of Jesus, andLuke describes her as one who had been cured of seven demons (Luke8:2). It is quite unlikely that she is the “sinful” womanof the preceding narrative (7:37–50), an association that hasgiven rise to the erroneous belief that Mary Magdalene was aprostitute. She is the first to witness the empty tomb (John 20:1).Likewise, she is the first to see the resurrected Lord and iscommanded to go and tell the disciples about his resurrection (John20:11–18; cf. Matt. 28:1; Mark 16:1–6; Luke 24:1–10).She is even present for the crucifixion (Matt. 27:56) and the burialof Jesus’ body (Matt. 27:61).

(4)Marythe mother of James and Joses (Matt. 27:56; Mark 15:40) is one of twoother Marys who, like Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Jesus,appear at the crucifixion. She may be the same person as #5.

(5)Marythe wife of Clopas (John 19:25) is the second of the two other Maryswho, like Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Jesus, appear at thecrucifixion. She may be the same person as #4.

(6)AnotherMary is the mother of John Mark, to whose house Peter comes after heescapes from prison (Acts 12:12).

(7)InRom. 16:6, Paul sends greetings to Mary, who “worked very hard”for the church in Rome.

A mystery entails knowledge that is disclosed to some butwithheld from others. Nothing is mysterious to God (Heb. 4:13), andhe alone understands the full purpose of his will (Job 38:1–40:24;Isa. 46:10), but he also condescends to reveal portions of his willto those whom he chooses (John 16:15).

Oneway that God reveals such mysteries in the OT is through dreams andtheir interpretation. This is the dynamic at work in Dan. 2, whereGod reveals secrets to King Nebuchadnezzar through cryptic imagery.The meaning of this imagery remains hidden, however, until the“mystery was revealed to Daniel in a vision” (v.19).Once revealed, the dreams detail God’s plans for the future ofhis kingdom.

Similarly,Jesus’ parables make known the character and future of God’scoming kingdom to his chosen servants, while also concealing it fromthose outside the circle (Matt. 13:18–23). Paul, by contrast,used “mystery” to refer to the disclosure of God’splan for the redemption of humanity, namely the inclusion of Gentileswithin “Israel” (Rom. 11:25). This plan, foreshadowed inthe OT but nevertheless hidden in essentials, had only recently beenfully revealed in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (Rom.16:25; Eph. 1:9; 1Tim. 3:16; cf. 1Pet. 1:10–12).The gospel message is therefore the revelation of this mystery, theproclamation of the truth about Jesus Christ, now made public to theworld (Eph. 3:3–9).

Aquila and Priscilla were important coworkers with theapostle Paul in his missionary effort. They joined Paul incooperative efforts and also worked in relative independence. Theywere Christian workers in what came to be important centers of earlyChristianity: Corinth, Ephesus, and Rome.

Aquilawas a Jew from Pontus, the husband of Priscilla (the diminutive form,“Prisca,” is used by Paul in his letters). Mentioned insix verses in the NT as a pair, four of these list Priscilla first,probably indicating her wealth, social status, or prominence inthe Christian community. They probably heard and trusted in thegospel in Rome and left that city after the expulsion edict ofClaudius (Acts 18:2). Paul met them in Corinth, where they housed andprobably worked their trade with him (18:3) before traveling withPaul to Ephesus (18:18–19). They provided hospitality toApollos while in Ephesus, also demonstrating knowledge of the faithand teaching skill when they explained the way of God more adequatelyto him (18:26). People of some financial means, they were able totravel and to house churches in Ephesus (1 Cor. 16:19) and Rome(Rom. 16:3–5). In Rom. 16:4 Paul mentions that they “riskedtheir lives” for him, and that the churches of the Gentileswere grateful to them, probably indicating sponsorship of housechurches, teaching ministry, and other missionary work. Since theyare first in the list of greetings in Rom. 16:3, it is likely thatthey were prominent Christians in Rome. They later traveled back toEphesus (2 Tim. 4:19).

Aquila and Priscilla were important coworkers with theapostle Paul in his missionary effort. They joined Paul incooperative efforts and also worked in relative independence. Theywere Christian workers in what came to be important centers of earlyChristianity: Corinth, Ephesus, and Rome.

Aquilawas a Jew from Pontus, the husband of Priscilla (the diminutive form,“Prisca,” is used by Paul in his letters). Mentioned insix verses in the NT as a pair, four of these list Priscilla first,probably indicating her wealth, social status, or prominence inthe Christian community. They probably heard and trusted in thegospel in Rome and left that city after the expulsion edict ofClaudius (Acts 18:2). Paul met them in Corinth, where they housed andprobably worked their trade with him (18:3) before traveling withPaul to Ephesus (18:18–19). They provided hospitality toApollos while in Ephesus, also demonstrating knowledge of the faithand teaching skill when they explained the way of God more adequatelyto him (18:26). People of some financial means, they were able totravel and to house churches in Ephesus (1 Cor. 16:19) and Rome(Rom. 16:3–5). In Rom. 16:4 Paul mentions that they “riskedtheir lives” for him, and that the churches of the Gentileswere grateful to them, probably indicating sponsorship of housechurches, teaching ministry, and other missionary work. Since theyare first in the list of greetings in Rom. 16:3, it is likely thatthey were prominent Christians in Rome. They later traveled back toEphesus (2 Tim. 4:19).

Used as a reference for God’s people in the OT and NT,the Hebrew word qadosh(e.g., Ps. 16:3) and the Greek word hagios(e.g., Acts 9:13; 2Cor. 1:1) emphasize being singled out orconsecrated. The Hebrew root was also used to designate cultprostitutes (qadeshah)as “consecrated,” though in Scripture this use isrelatively infrequent (e.g., Gen. 38:21; Deut. 23:17). Another Hebrewword sometimes translated “saint” is khasid(e.g., 1Sam. 2:9; Pss. 30:4; 31:23 KJV), which emphasizesfaithfulness and devotion to God. In biblical terms, then, the saintsof God are those whom he has designated as belonging to him and wholive in faithfulness to him. They are not necessarily noted forexceptional holiness or meritorious acts. Thus, Paul places “hissaints” in parallel with “all who have believed”(2Thess. 1:10 NRSV).

TheBible speaks of saints as sometimes being in need (Rom. 16:2; 2Cor.8:4; 9:1, 12) and persecuted (Rev. 13:7), but also as called toendure (Rev. 13:10) and offer help, especially to other saints (Rom.12:13; Gal. 6:10; 1Tim. 5:10). The saints are the recipients ofthe faith (Jude 1:3), of grace (Rev. 22:21), and of special equippingfor ministry in the church (Eph. 4:12) and prayer (Rev. 5:8; 8:3–4).As those who belong to the Lord, the saints will be raised to eternallife (John 6:39; 1Cor. 15:22–23).

“Saint,”however, has come to function as a title given to Christians ofexceptional merit, beatified or canonized by the Roman CatholicChurch. The need for canonization and beatification arose from theCatholic doctrine of the veneration, invocation, and intercession ofthe saints (see Augustine, Quaest. Hept. 2.94; Faust. 20.21) and isconnected to the Catholic doctrine of the “communion of thesaints” (a phrase drawn from the Apostles’ Creed), whichincludes believers in heaven, on earth, and in purgatory, recognizingthem as saints in the general sense by virtue of their being redeemedand set apart for fellowship with God. These doctrines suggest thatjust as Paul, for example, sought the prayers of the church on earth(Rom. 15:30; 2Cor. 1:11), so also prayer by members of thechurch in heaven might be sought. Canonization, then, publiclyestablishes which persons can be surely known to be in heaven and maybe properly asked to intercede on behalf of the church on earth.

Protestants,on the basis of the unique intercession of Christ Jesus (1Tim.2:5), exclude invocation of heavenly saints as unnecessary andunwarranted. They further find no basis in the Scriptures for adoctrine of purgatory. Thus, Protestant understandings of thecommunion of the saints focus on the believers on earth, who, “beingunited to one another in love, have communion in each other’sgifts and graces and are obliged to the performance of such duties,public and private, as to conduce to their mutual good, both in theinward and outward man” (Westminster Confession of Faith 28.1).

Many of the letters, or epistles, in the Bible includesalutations consisting of expressions of goodwill from the sender tothe recipient. Salutations can be found at the beginning and end ofthe NT Epistles. While the salutation itself was not the invention ofthe authors of the NT Epistles, the form has been adapted in thisliterature to express explicitly Christian theological content.

Thesimplest form of salutation found in the NT is simply “Greetings,”which appears in James 1:1, as well as in the letter sent fromJerusalem to Antioch (Acts 15:23) and the letter of Claudius Lysiasto Felix (Acts 23:26). See also the examples of secularcorrespondence in Ezra 4:17; 7:12; Dan. 4:1.

Mostof the letters bearing the name of Paul begin with the greeting“Grace and peace to you from God our Father and from the LordJesus Christ” (Rom. 1:7) or a slight variation thereof (1Cor.1:3; 2Cor. 1:2; Eph. 1:2; Phil. 1:2; Col. 1:2; 1Thess.1:1; 2Thess. 1:2; Titus 1:4; Philem. 3). The salutation in Gal.1:3–5 is a theological expansion of Paul’s standardsalutation. The salutations in 1Tim. 1:2 and 2Tim. 1:2include “Grace, mercy, and peace.”

Thesalutation of the Petrine letters is “Grace and peace be yoursin abundance” (1Pet. 1:2; 2Pet. 1:2). Salutationsare also found in 2John 3; Jude 2; Rev. 1:4–5. Hebrews,1John, and 3John do not begin with salutations.

Ina number of cases, salutatory remarks function to close the letternear its end, often in connection with individual greetings. See Rom.16:20; 1Cor. 16:21–24; 2Cor. 13:14; Gal. 6:18; Eph.6:23–24; Phil. 4:23; Col. 4:18; 1Thess. 5:28; 2Thess.3:16–18; 1Tim. 6:21; 2Tim. 4:22; Titus 3:15;Philem. 25; 1Pet. 5:14.

One of Paul’s faithful companions who proved himself asa valuable coworker (e.g., 1Cor. 4:17; 16:10; Phil. 2:19–24).Many think that Timothy responded to Paul’s preaching duringthe first missionary journey, explaining the frequent references toTimothy as Paul’s “son” (1Cor. 4:17; Phil.2:22; 1Tim. 1:2; 2Tim. 1:2). Paul circumcised Timothybecause he had a Greek father and Jewish mother. He ministered withPaul from the second missionary journey (Acts 16) to late in Paul’slife (2Timothy), probably about twenty years. Timothy is notmentioned in much of Acts 16, an expression of Luke’s deferenceto the most prominent members of the missionary team, Paul and Silas.In Acts 19:22 Luke refers to Timothy as Paul’s “helper,”one who serves. This designation and Luke’s silence in Acts 16,however, should not be taken to mean that Timothy, who clearly has asubordinate role to Paul, had menial roles and functions.

Titlesand ministry assignments demonstrate Timothy’s important rolein Pauline mission. Paul calls Timothy a “brother”(2Cor. 1:1; Col. 1:1; 1Thess. 3:2; Philem. 1), “myco-worker” (Rom. 16:21), a “co-worker in God’sservice” (1Thess. 3:2 [textual variant: “servant ofGod”]), and “servant of Christ Jesus” with Paul(Phil. 1:1) and refers to him metaphorically as a “soldier”and “hardworking farmer” (2Tim. 2:3, 6). Paulprobably includes Timothy among the “apostles of Christ”in 1Thess. 2:6, a reference to his role as a qualifiedambassador of the gospel, not as an apostle in the technical sense.Paul sent Timothy out on ministry assignments to difficult places(e.g., Thessalonica and Corinth [see 1–2Timothy]).

Apparently,Timothy worked alongside Paul a great deal of the time and was wellrespected in many locations, because Paul identifies Timothy ascosender of six letters: 2Corinthians, Philippians, Colossians,1Thessalonians, 2Thessalonians, and Philemon. He was alsowith Paul during the writing of Romans and 1Corinthians.Mentioned as released from prison in Heb. 13:23, he was anacquaintance of the author of Hebrews.

AncientNear East

Theancient Near East was a male-dominated culture in which, therefore,women were marginalized and treated more or less as property. Note,for example, Boaz’s question “Who does that young womanbelong to?” (Ruth 2:5). Women, of course, produce children, andthis power was prized. Women were also fit to engage in variousmundane tasks, but they were not trained for war or educated forservice in the royal court. Their role in society was subordinate andsecondary.

Inthe Epic of Gilgamesh, the wild and powerful Enkidu met a “wisewoman” who seduced him. Thereafter, Enkidu was tamed andweakened. She made a civilized man of him. In the Ugaritic legend ofDanil, Danil was unhappy because he had no sons. With the blessing ofthe gods, he married Hurriya, and had sons and daughters. Thus, sonsfulfilled Danil as much as they fulfilled the woman.

Butthe power to reproduce, which resides in the woman’s womb, alsowas mysterious and seemed to belong in the same category as otherforces of nature, such as the rebirth of life in the spring followingsterile winter. Thus, the ancient world was filled with goddesses ofgreat power. These goddesses at times also took on masculinecharacteristics, such as displaying great prowess in war; this isespecially true of Anat of Canaanite mythology.

ThroughoutIsrael’s sojourn in the Promised Land, there was anundercurrent of Canaanite-style goddess worship. In the period of thejudges, the Israelites worshiped the goddess Asherah (Judg. 6:25).Led astray by his wives, Solomon also worshiped the goddess (1Kings11:1–8). The “fertility cult” included ritual sexin places of worship. This eventually took place in the temple ofYahweh. Much of this seems to have been hom*osexual sex (2Kings23:7).

Creationof Woman

Inthe Bible, woman is first encountered along with man in Gen. 1:26–28.God created “man” in the plural, male and female, andcommanded them to reproduce and to fill the earth and subdue it.Being created male and female is set in parallel to being created inthe image of God. In the ancient Near East, perhaps the king would bethought of as the image of God. But in Genesis, not only is the firstman the image of God, but the first woman participates in the imageas well. This is all but unthinkable in the ancient world, and itsuggests an unparalleled dignity and worth in womankind.

Genesisrecords that the human race fell through the instrumentality of aman, a woman, and the serpent. The serpent approached the woman, notthe man. The woman was convinced by the serpent and ate the forbiddenfruit. She gave some to her husband, who also ate it without saying aword. Thus, the woman can be blamed in part for the fall of the race.Adam was condemned because he “listened to [his] wife”(Gen. 3:17). Her judgment, for heeding the serpent, was pain inchildbirth and a desire for her husband, who would rule over her(Gen. 3:16). The exact parameters of this judgment are unclear, butit appears that her desire will be for his position of leadership andwill be perpetually frustrated.

Throughoutthe remainder of Genesis, this judgment does not seem to unfold asexpected. Instead, men are shown to desire women. Jacob was willingto work seven years to get the beautiful Rachel as his wife, and whenhe was fooled into marrying her sister, Leah, he was willing to workanother seven years for her (Gen. 29:16–30). And women exploitmen and their desire in order to get what they want, in effectmastering them. Lot’s daughters contrived to get what theywanted from him (19:30–38), and Tamar manipulated Judah’sdesire (38:13–26).

Reproduction

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

InGenesis, the reproductive capability of slave girls is at thedisposal of their owners. Thus, Rachel and Leah’s maidservantsbecame surrogate mothers for a number of their sons (Gen. 30:3–10).Sarah also became frustrated at her inability to conceive, so shegave Hagar to Abraham. The result was great familial turmoil, finallyresulting in the banishment of both Hagar and Ishmael, whom she boreto Abraham.

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

Inthe Bible, women are described as having a number of different sexualrelationships with men. There were wives, who enjoyed the closestrelationship and had the greatest privileges. There were concubines,who were not wives but were bound to a single man. The greatestdeviation from the norm of creation was the institution of the harem,whereby a king took to himself any number of consorts. The law ofMoses restricted this practice (Deut. 17:17).

Legislation

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

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

Sexualintercourse was also regulated in the law of Moses, insofar as theact rendered both parties ritually impure (Lev. 15:18). Both mustbathe and were unclean until evening. A woman’s menstrualdischarge also made her unclean for a week. Everything she sat or layupon was unclean, as was anyone who touched these things. She mustwash and offer sacrifice to become clean again (15:18–31).

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

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

Numbers5:11–31 treats cases where a husband was suspicious that hiswife had been unfaithful—that is, a matter of covenantaljealousy. The unprovable was left to God to punish.

TheStatus of Women

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

Manybiblical stories feature heroines. Mighty Pharaoh was undermined bytwo midwives in his attempt to destroy Israel (Exod. 1:15–21).Ruth the Moabite woman gave her name to the book that recounts hertrek from Moab to Israel, including her famous oath of loyalty (Ruth1:16–17). Esther too was a courageous woman whose book bearsher name. Heroines are especially prominent in the Gospels, and thewomen there have the distinction of being the first to witness therisen Lord. Luke’s birth narrative is largely organized aroundMary. Priscilla (with her husband) taught and helped to shape theearly church (Acts 18:26). Paul lists many women in Rom. 16, callingthem “deaconess,” “fellow worker,” andpossibly even “apostle.”

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

Songof Songs

Songof Songs, while acknowledging the great power of sexuality to movepeople to act against their own best interests, nevertheless portrayslove in a very positive light. The love between a man and a woman isshown in Song of Songs to be not primarily about generating children.Offspring are not at issue in the Bible’s great love song.Rather, relations between man and wife rest on a deeper foundation,that of sexual enjoyment and desire. In the words of Hannah’shusband, Elkanah, “Don’t I mean more to you than tensons?” (1Sam. 1:8).

InGen. 3:16, God pronounces judgment on the woman that her “desire”will be for her husband, but that he will master her. The Hebrew wordfor “desire” occurs only once outside Genesis, in Song7:10, where the woman says that her lover’s “desire”is for her. This seems to be a direct reference to Gen. 3:16. Thus,in Song of Songs the judgment on the woman is rolled back andreversed in love. In Song of Songs it is the king who is enthralledin love and thus subdued (7:5). He would not have it any other way!

Thus,sexuality is celebrated in Song of Songs. What proves to be such agrave temptation to men elsewhere is shown to be an essential part ofGod’s good creation, albeit a potent and dangerous facet oflife. Women do not exist simply to produce children; they partner andrevel with their lovers, together enjoying that particular part ofGod’s creation that requires two sexes to explore.

Imagery

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

Thebook of Proverbs also separates humankind into two groups, symbolizedby two women. Along the path of life, the youth hears the voices ofWoman Folly (9:13–18) and of Woman Wisdom (1:20–33)calling out to him. Folly is incarnated in the flesh-and-bloodtemptation of the immoral woman (7:6–27), whereas Woman Wisdomhas her counterpart at the end of the book in the detaileddescription of the woman of virtue (31:10–31). There, the womanwho fears God is set as a prize far above earthly wealth—thehighest blessing of the wise.

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

ChurchGovernment

Throughoutmost of Christian history, women’s roles in the church havebeen comparable to their role in the general culture. Womenparticipated little in the institutional life of society, and thechurch was no different. A number of Bible texts can be used insupport of women’s marginalization as leaders. For example, inthe OT, the cult was managed by the priestly caste, and no woman wasever a priest of Yahweh. In the NT, the local churches were overseenby a company of elders. Elders are described by Paul as men, thehusband of one wife, who were apt to teach and who managed their ownfamilies well (1Tim. 3:1–7). Immediately before thisdescription, Paul notes that women were not to teach or haveauthority over men (1Tim. 2:9–15). Women were the “weakerpartner” (1Pet. 3:7). Thus, women’s subordinaterole throughout most of church history has some biblicaljustification.

However,as women participate more and more in the institutional life ofsociety, the normative value of the aforementioned texts has beenquestioned, and other texts have been put forward to provide analternative biblical conception of women’s roles in the church.Perhaps 1Tim. 2:12 is only against teaching a specific heresy,and the Greek verb translated “to assume authority over”(authenteō)may refer to a specific kind of authoritarian or domineeringbehavior. As noted above, in Rom. 16 Paul considers women to beleaders in the church. Since it is true that in Christ there is nomale or female (Gal. 3:28), how far does this extend? Today’schallenge for churches is to decide these matters in light of thewhole of Scripture rather than a few proof texts.

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

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

Agricultureand Farming

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

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

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

Herdingand Hunting

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

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

Buildersand Craftsmen

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

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

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

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

Musicians

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

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

Government,Politics, and Military

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

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

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

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

Tradeand Economics

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

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

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

Servantsand Slaves

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

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

ReligiousService

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

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

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

Archaeology is the scientific study of the material remainsof past human life and activities. It can also be described as theprocedure by which ancient artifacts are recovered, identified, andinterpreted. Archaeology deals with both the prehistorical andhistorical periods and encompasses both written (epigraphical) andunwritten (artifactual) discoveries. Even though literary remains(inscriptions, ostraca [potsherds], seals) are typically the subjectof other disciplines, archaeological investigation usually isresponsible for their discovery. Without archaeology much of theavailable written evidence would have remained buried forever in theground. Unwritten materials include everything made by humans, suchas fortifications, pottery, tools, jewelry, and weapons.

Biblicalarchaeology more narrowly focuses on the material remains of Israeland its neighboring countries that relate to the biblical period andnarrative. For example, ancient texts recovered from sites such asMari, Ugarit, Ebla, and Amarna shed valuable light on the biblicalrecord and on the history and religion of the ancient Near East.Biblical archaeology may be understood as the process of correlatingarchaeological evidence with the biblical record. Archaeology and theBible are closely related because they inform each other. Thus, eventhough archaeology and biblical studies are independent disciplines,they are certainly interrelated.

TheHistory of Biblical Archaeology

Tounderstand better the meaning of biblical archaeology, it isnecessary to briefly trace its history. Before the 1800s little wasknown about the Bible’s background, despite its central role inthe religion and culture of the world, because the Bible was theprimary source for access to the history of ancient Israel and itsneighbors. There were few sources to which the Scripture historianscould appeal besides the apocryphal writings and the works ofJosephus, because the early Greek historians (Herodotus andThucydides) were of limited value, given their interest in the “majorplayers” of history.

Thediscovery of the Rosetta Stone (dated 196 BC) in 1799 and itsdecipherment in 1822 by J. F. Champollion opened wide the doorsto ancient Egypt’s history. Within twenty-five years, by thedecipherment of Akkadian cuneiform by Henry Rawlinson (1846), theworld had the key to reading and interpreting thousands of tabletsand monumental texts from ancient Babylonia, Assyria, and even theland of the Hittites. These two major developments allowed the voicesfrom the ancient world of the Bible to speak once more and encouragedhistorians to look at the Bible as supported by the background datacoming from the rest of the ancient Near East. As a result of thesedevelopments, a new interest was kindled in ancient Near Easterncultures and the material remains (realia) that they left behind,coupled with a renewed interest in the setting of the biblical text.

Initialexcavations of biblical sites.Thebeginnings of scientific exploration of Palestine can be traced to1838 when American Edward Robinson (geographer and explorer) aided bythe Arabist Eli Smith undertook a historic trip to the Holy Land andsucceeded in identifying over one hundred biblical sites, effectivelylaying the foundations for biblical archaeology and geography. Thisled to the establishment of the British Palestine Exploration Fund in1865 for the purpose of exploring Palestine systematically andscientifically, and to several of the geographic surveys of westernPalestine and Transjordan.

Thebeginning of major excavations of biblical sites was not far behind,and in 1890 William M. F. Petrie (a renowned Egyptologist then)initiated what is widely regarded as the first modern archaeologicalexcavation in the Holy Land. He excavated Tell el-Hesi(identification still uncertain) in the northern Negev, and his workunderlies archaeological inquiry in the Holy Land to this day. Morespecifically, Petrie laid the foundations of modern archaeology byhis application of stratigraphy and ceramic typology.

Stratigraphyis the technique of digging a tell (a cone-shaped mound that containsthe remains of successive human occupation over a long period oftime) layer by layer while carefully separating and recording thecontents of each occupational layer. This technique tries to untanglethese layers in the reverse order (the older layers of occupation arealways below the newer layers) of their deposition and to reconstructthe history of a site period by period.

Typologyis the technique of classifying artifacts based on their externalcharacteristics (shape, ware, and decoration). Pottery is consideredan accurate tool for dating the occupational layers of a tell, andceramic typology is the art of charting changes in local potterystyles. By analyzing the pottery lying within successive layers atHesi, Petrie was able to construct a relative chronological frameworkfor Palestine. To arrive at a more absolute chronology, theresearchers from Palestine usually need (especially in the earlierperiods) to correlate their findings with similar styles fromneighboring areas, such as Egypt and Mesopotamia, where there areavailable written records and astronomically fixed dates.

BeforeWorld War I, the first and only American excavation in Palestinethat deserves mention is that of George A. Reisner and architectClarence S. Fisher between 1908 and 1910 at Sebastiyeh (biblicalSamaria). The rest are usually considered to have resembled “treasurehunts.” By the use of systematic digging and recording inPalestine, the Reisner-Fisher method, which was far morecomprehensive and meticulous than Petrie’s, greatly improvedPalestinian archaeology.

Thefirst golden age.The “golden age” of American excavation in Palestinefollowed a few decades later, after World War I in the 1920s and1930s. Numerous and well-financed archaeological digs started at thefollowing biblical sites: Ai, Bethel, Beth-shean, Beth-shemesh,Beth-zur, Debir, Gibeah, Jericho, Mizpah, Samaria, Shechem, andothers. All of these excavations, however, were overshadowed by thework of Orientalist W. F. Albright at Tell Beit Mirsim (identitystill disputed, but perhaps Debir).

Itwas Albright and those of the American school in Jerusalem (now theAlbright Institute of Archaeology) who dominated the scene in theseformative years. Albright refined Petrie’s methodology andintegrated very well archaeology, biblical research, and ancient NearEastern studies, thus establishing biblical (and Palestinian)archaeology as a discipline in its own right. He also envisioned an“archaeological revolution” that would open up the lands,peoples, and lost sites of the ancient Near East so that the Biblewould be better understood and also gain new credibility. Hecertainly was reacting against the spirit of his time, when steriledebates of textual and literary criticism (especially of theskeptical variety) were prevalent in both European and Americanliberalism, and this seems to have led some to believe thatarchaeology’s primary function was to “prove the Bibletrue.”

Thesecond golden age.A second “golden age” of biblical archaeology is usuallyconsidered to have arrived after World War II when variousforeign teams worked throughout the Middle East in cooperation withlocal archaeologists, a trend that continues today. The archaeologyof Palestine advanced rapidly, with significant improvements in thetechniques of digging and recording. The greatest influence onarchaeological method at this time belongs to Kathleen Kenyon(English excavator of Jericho [Tell es-Sultan]), whosestratigraphical method (known as the Wheeler-Kenyon method) is usedeven today by excavators, with modifications. Other importantarchaeologists who contributed significantly to the biblicalarchaeology movement are Yigael Yadin of Israel and G. E. Wrightof the United States.

Duringthe height of its prominence and promise, biblical archaeology becamean important component for the biblical theology movement and alsofor Christian apologetics (especially as represented by Joseph Freeof Wheaton College). In fact, one of the greatest theologians in thebiblical theology movement, G. E. Wright, was also Albright’sstudent. He conducted a major excavation at Tell Balath (biblicalShechem), following the Wheeler-Kenyon method and emphasizing potterychronology in the tradition of the Albright school. More important,Shechem was a training ground for many American archaeologists whereWright created a new school of field archaeology.

Thenew archaeology.In the 1960s, under the influence of the social and natural sciences,the “new archaeology” that developed tended to focus onthe comprehensive study of humans as species (and not on historicalissues). William G. Dever (a student and follower of G. E.Wright at the important Tel Gezer project) argued forcefully andsuccessfully for the “liberation” of Near Easternarchaeology from biblical studies and preferred the term (prevalenttoday in most American schools) “Syro-Palestinian archaeology.”Today, with very few exceptions (e.g., Harvard University), mostAmerican universities offer classes in the archaeology ofSyria-Palestine (this was apparently Albright’s old alternateterm for biblical archaeology), not in biblical archaeology. The nameof the popular magazine Biblical Archaeologist was also changed toAncient Near Eastern Archaeology, despite protests from many of itsreaders.

Thenew archaeology began with the realization in the 1960s that muchdata of potential significance has been overlooked, and perhaps evenvital evidence has been discarded. New questions and methodsdeveloped from the frustration that old questions have not beenanswered satisfactorily. The temporal and geographical horizons ofthe new archaeology broadened to include the Paleolithic period(c. 100,000 BC) through the Ottoman era (AD 1922), and attentionis now paid to the neglected periods of Judaism and earlyChristianity.

Moreimportant, the composition of the dig staff broadened considerably toinclude a much larger body of scientists to assist in answering thenew questions posed. Today, the field archaeologists (besideshistorians, linguists, and ceramic experts) are supported bygeologists, anthropologists, paleoethnobotanists, zoologists,climatologists, hydrologists, ethnographers, and, more recently,statisticians and computer experts. It is clear that the newarchaeology is done in a very interdisciplinary way. The Tell Hesbanand Khirbat en-Nahas excavations (both in Jordan) are good models ofthis type of interdisciplinary research. Bones, seeds, and otherorganic materials are now saved and carefully recorded to addressquestions related to economic strategies, social differentiation,diet, disease, and the like. Soil and pollen samples are taken,extensive regional and environmental surveys are carried out, andmaterial culture samples and artifacts are submitted forsophisticated analysis. It is ironic (according to Dever) that thisnew and “secular” archaeology, while demanding moreautonomy from the Bible, promises to contribute even more to biblicalstudies as it grows in precision and sophistication.

Thenew archaeology and Syro-Palestinian archaeology of today haveadvantages and disadvantages. They have the advantages of staff whoare better equipped and trained, as well as educated volunteers whousually have genuine interest in their work. More important, theirconclusions have the advantage of being based on data that is morescientifically obtained and analyzed. Many of the digs run fieldschools modeled on the ones from the Gezer project (1964–1973),which trained hundreds of student volunteers. These are all good anduseful for both participants and their projects, but they have led tosignificant rises in the costs of an excavation. Thus, a typicalsix-week season is estimated now to cost in excess of one hundredthousand dollars. Since the new archaeology has led to a“secularization” of biblical archaeology and churches andseminaries have gradually stopped sponsoring these projects, thefunds have had to come increasingly from federal and public sourcesof support. The National Endowment for the Humanities (and privatedonors later) became the major source of funds in the 1970s.

Approachesto the Bible in Modern Archaeology

Thereis no doubt that the new archaeology has introduced many usefulscientific improvements in the field. (Of course, these scientificimprovements were embraced by both biblical and Syro-Palestinianarchaeologists in the 1970s, and the distinction between these twogroups has become largely imaginary.) At the same time, however, ithas brought new biases against the biblical text. The Bible, inDever’s view, was never intended as a historical document andshould be viewed with “considerable suspicion” forreconstructing the history of the ancient Near East. Otherarchaeologists in the field (and also historians) have an even morenegative attitude toward the Bible. However, it must be emphasizedthat all (or at least most) agree that the Bible has its role in thearchaeology of Syria-Palestine. The question has to do with how theBible should be used.

Maximalistand minimalist approaches.The two schools of thought that seem the loudest in the debate amongbiblical and/or Syro-Palestinian archaeologists are usually labeled“maximalist” and “minimalist.” (To theseKenneth A. Kitchen adds the label “factualist.”According to Kitchen, the agenda of a “factualist” isneither to prove nor to disprove any theory concerning the earlyhistory of Israel, but simply to examine the facts and let the dataspeak for itself.)

Themaximalist school has a strong view of the historical reliability ofScripture and emphasizes synergy between archaeology and biblicalstudies. Others consider this to be a naive approach to Scripture andan uncritical acceptance of the information that it tries tocommunicate. The maximalists follow the scholarship of W. F.Albright and his student John Bright, and they assume that the OTspeaks of historical realities. When seeking to reconstruct thehistory of ancient Israel, they readily and confidently refer to thebiblical record as a valid and significant source for their research.They are also confident that when all the data is in, a biblicalhistory of Israel (aided by archaeology) will exhibit a closecorrespondence with the real history of Israel.

Theminimalist school is generally skeptical concerning the historicalreliability of the biblical text. Many advocates of this approachargue that the OT was written primarily during the Hellenistic period(it certainly is postexilic), centuries after the events that itclaims to describe. A community around Jerusalem created thetraditions found in the Bible in order to give account for themselvesand their distinctive religious notions and practices. According tothis approach, any correlation between the Bible and thearchaeological record is suspect a priori. When there aretensions between biblical and extrabiblical records (includingarchaeology), the extrabiblical records are to be preferred asevidence, and the contradictions are usually emphasized to underminethe reliability of the Bible as a historical source.

Theminimalist movement has developed gradually. Although a century agothere were many who questioned the historicity of the first chaptersof Genesis, most accepted the essential historicity of thepatriarchs, the exodus from Egypt under Moses, the conquest of Canaanby Joshua, the historicity of David and Solomon, and the rest of theOT narrative. During the past forty years, however, serious doubt hasbeen cast on all of these events.

Thestance of the minimalists led to peculiar (and rarely settled)controversies over issues such as the legitimacy of reading “thehouse of David” in the Tel Dan inscription (discovered in1993), the Siloam Tunnel inscription (which overlaps with 2 Chron.32 and is traditionally ascribed to Hezekiah), the very existence ofJerusalem during the days of David and Solomon, and even theexistence of these two kings.

Afresh approach.Is there a way to move beyond the current state of the debate? Somebelieve that there is hope by using a fresh approach to biblicalarchaeology, one that follows in the footsteps of Lawrence Stager andPhilip King (see their book, Life in Biblical Israel  ).This approach does not try to reconstruct history or simplyilluminate the Bible; rather, it seeks to enter into the world of theancients to acquire a fuller understanding of Israelite society andits literary record through the combined use of artifacts, sociology,and ethnography. Textual and archaeological data are brought into ahistorical discourse by “selecting and interpreting themthrough the problematics of social history.” Thus, biblicalarchaeology in the older sense is making a comeback by hearkeningback to the integrative works of the nineteenth century, but withvast amounts of new data. This “new biblical archaeology”should not be driven by apologetic purposes and should not aim to“prove the truth of the Bible.” It should have moremodest and realistic goals, considering the limitations ofarchaeology (see below).

Evangelicalarchaeologists, confident in the truth of the Bible (which can standby itself despite its many attacks from within and without), shouldhave as their goal the understanding of the biblical world in itsgeographical, cultural, and historical setting. They should usearchaeology and linguistics to correlate biblical texts and ancientartifacts against the background of the historical and geographicalsetting. When historical questions are posed, the cumulative evidenceshould lead to probability and plausibility rather than a defensivequest for final proof. This attempt to follow historical probabilityvis-à-vis the Bible is different from setting out a prioriwith a defensive Bible-proving agenda.

Thisnew approach will not make the Scriptures say more than judiciousassessment of the evidence will allow (a problem that plagues someconservative interpreters), but neither will it cast undue skepticismon the Scriptures’ historical value (the problem of theminimalists). It endeavors to pay close attention both to theliterary nature and intentions of the biblical text and to thefragmentary nature of the archaeological record.

Thesenew biblical archaeologists do not set out again “to prove theBible.” Instead, they seek to situate the texts of the OT intheir historical and cultural contexts and to demonstrate howawareness of the extrabiblical world can open new doors into theBible. Their goals are more modest, not because of a lower view ofScripture, but rather because of a clearer understanding of thelimitations and fragmentary nature of archaeology despite itsconsiderable refinement in the recent decades.

TheLimitations of Archaeology

Archaeologyhas limitations because of the vast amount of time and area to becovered and because of the hazards of preservation. Objects of wood,leatherwork, basketry, papyrus, and cloth rarely survive, and metals(especially precious metals) were frequently recycled. It is alsoimportant to realize that no biblical site has ever been completelyexcavated, and most of the excavations tend to pay greater attentionto the major buildings (citadels, temples, palaces) rather than thehomes of the general population.

Onlyin recent years have accurate methods of stratification and recordingenabled comparisons to be made between sites, and the reliability ofsome foundational excavations in the Holy Land is rightly questionedby the finds from newer excavations (e.g., Megiddo, Gezer, and Hazorare being reexcavated in part to clarify and answer questions raisedby previous excavations and debates). This is understandable becausemost of the foundational excavations in the Holy Land did not haveaccess to the accurate methods of stratification, recording, andscientific analysis available today. Many useful artifacts andespecially organic objects were routinely discarded in the earlierexcavations.

Ingeneral, earlier levels of a site are more likely to have beendisturbed by the activities of later periods, and it was very commonfor older buildings (and sometimes even monumental inscriptions) tobe dismantled and the (stone) blocks reused for later buildings oreven roads. The objects that archaeologists discover survive and aremost often found by accident. Consequently, given the limitations andpitfalls of archaeology (especially the way it was done in theearliest part of the twentieth century), one must have realistic andmore modest expectations about what archaeology can recover, andrealize that the further one goes in time, the less archaeologicalinformation may be available for comparison and useful analysis. Addto this that some of the central characters of the Bible (e.g.,Abraham, Moses, most of the judges, Ezra) were not major players inthe world of their time, and that some important sites have neverbeen excavated (e.g., Damascus, Hebron), and it becomes clear thatthere are considerable reasons to have more realistic and modestexpectations about what archaeology can accomplish.

Therole and possibility of accurately interpreting archaeologicalremains should also be taken into consideration, especially sincethere are well-documented cases in which the interpretation of theexcavator has turned out to be false (e.g., the “DegeneratedAshtoreth Plaque” of R. A. S. Macalister from Gezer).Anyone who has ever participated in an archaeological excavation ledby a group of experts in the field can remember debates that tookplace among these experts, not only about the dating of variouspieces of pottery, but even about the role and dating of well-definedand visible monumental architecture. While this is understandable anddesirable, and many times leads to the refinement and corrections ofunwarranted early assumptions, the process shows the difficultyinherent in interpreting the fragmentary remains of a deadcivilization far removed from our times and settings.

MaterialRemains and Written Sources

Itis a sobering fact that archaeology cannot provide the basis forhistory. Material remains can reveal climate changes and theirimpact, sequences of human cultures and their products, traces ofdestruction and desertion, changes in building techniques and art.Nevertheless, the persons involved remain anonymous, their thoughts,motives and faith a mystery, and the specific events of their timeslargely unknown (e.g., the destruction by fire of Lachish IIcould not have been accurately dated and related without the biblicalreport in Jer. 34:7). It is the written documents (many timesrecovered through archaeology) that can reveal the names of kings andkingdoms, their dates and deeds, and the fruits of their thinking inliterature. It is the testimony of these texts, rightly evaluated,that can add the “flesh and features” to the “bones”archaeology discovers (Allan Millard).

Onthe other hand, the material remains of life (pottery, jewelry,tools, weapons, cultic objects, architecture, etc.) as recoveredthrough archaeology can bring color to the textual references.Nevertheless, the written sources are essential and provide the mostvaluable information for recovering the history and faith of anyancient nation. It is the duty of the biblical scholar andarchaeologist to interpret correctly the available data fromSyria-Palestine and to arrive at plausible explanations concerningthe biblical world. The combination of texts (biblical andextrabiblical), material culture (archaeology), geography, andhistory holds considerable promise to help scholars better define thecontext of Scripture.

Thereis no doubt that this approach to archaeology holds considerablepotential as it is generating more material than is possible for anyperson (or even school) to encompass. As one of the most quicklychanging social sciences today, both in theoretical advances and newdata, archaeology is and will be the source of new insights intobiblical life and times. It seems that the “archaeologicalrevolution” predicted by W. F. Albright is far from over;it probably has only begun.

Theevidence for this revolution from the evangelical field is visible invarious ways. The rest of this entry briefly presents some selectivearchaeological data that helps define the context and thatcomplements (since the writers of the Bible were selective in theirreporting), challenges, or confirms the narrative of the Bible. Thedata should help the interpreter of the Bible bridge thegeographical, temporal, and cultural gap that leads to the ancientwriter.

TheCannanite (Bronze) Age (3300–1200 BC)

EarlyBronze Age.Towns with mud-brick walls begin to appear in Canaan in the EarlyBronze Age I (before 3000 BC). Evidence of occupation in thethird millennium is found at Beth-yerah, Beth-shan, Gezer, Jerusalem,Jericho, Arad, Megiddo, and Ai, among others. There was a differencebetween the pottery of the north (Beth-yerah) and that of the south,while the most striking development was that of the fine “KhirbetKerak” ware.

MiddleBronze Age.About 2200 BC (Middle Bronze Age I) there arrived a distinctivenomadic people identified with the Amorites of the Bible (Num. 13:29;Josh. 5:1; 10:6). They had distinctive burial customs, pottery, andweapons that show connection with the city-states of Syria. It ismost likely that their kings included the Asiatic “ForeignRulers” (Hyksos) who conquered Egypt in the eighteenth centuryBC. This was a time of wealth and frequent warfare between cities. Itseems that the Middle Bronze Age was a time when seminomadic groups(including a group called “Habiru,” who are also found inthe Late Bronze Age) infiltrated the land between defended towns. Itis possible that the patriarchs were among these Habiru, whoinfiltrated mostly the hill country and the Negev. In fact, it isdemonstrable from a comparison with the eighteenth-century BC textsfrom Mari (on the Euphrates River) that the pastoral traditions ofGenesis fit the early second-millennium BC context much better thanlater periods.

Thetowns and houses of the Middle Bronze Age were violently destroyed inthe fifteenth century BC, most likely by the Egyptians, who expelledthe Hyksos. Despite the trade that seems to have continued with theeastern Mediterranean (Mycenaean pottery), the hill towns ofPalestine were now poorer and fewer than the coastal cities. Thissituation is clearly reflected in the Amarna letters between thekings of Canaan and Egypt. The major cities were reoccupied, but manyof them were destroyed later in the thirteenth century.

LateBronze Age.It is in the Late Bronze Age (c. 1550–1200 BC) that thebiblical account is usually challenged by the archaeologicaldiscoveries. Even if one accepts the reasonable interpretation thatJoshua burned only three cities (Jericho, Ai, Hazor) in his campaign(see Josh. 6:24; 8:28; 11:13), the evidence of destruction from bothJericho and Ai is highly questionable. Thus, while it is widelybelieved that Jericho was abandoned around 1325 BC, the fallen wallsonce thought to belong to this period were dated much earlier byKathleen Kenyon (Early Bronze). The evidence from Ai (et-Tell) iseven less promising, unless Bryan Wood is correct in hisidentification of Ai with Khirbet el-Maqatir.

Basedon the apparent lack of change in material culture during the LateBronze Age, mainstream archaeologists commonly classify theIsraelites as dissident Canaanites who moved into the hill country.

Althoughit cannot be conclusively demonstrated from archaeology that theIsraelites were not Canaanites but rather came to Canaan from theoutside, the mainstream interpretation has serious problems of itsown. There was clearly a new pattern of simple farming in the hills,characterized by four-room houses whose inhabitants used manycollared-rim jars, and there is an almost complete absence of pigbones (which usually are found in the Canaanite cities) in thehill-country sites. More important, there is strong evidence that theIsraelites were worshiping their own national God (YHWH) by the ninthcentury BC, in sharp contrast to the polytheistic religion of Canaan(as illuminated by the culture in neighboring Ugarit). The personalnames of individuals in the eighth and seventh centuries BC arealmost exclusively Yahwistic.

Anothervery significant change is the abandonment of the shrines in towns ofthe Late Bronze Age. Not a single site can be identified in whichworship continued from the Late Bronze Age well into the Iron Age (itseems that by 1000 BC the Canaanites disappeared as an entity in thearea occupied by Israel). It is highly unlikely that the Canaaniteswho moved from towns into the hill-country sites would have abandonedtheir divinities (whose need they must have felt greatly while facingthe uncertainties of the wilderness), and it is even more unlikelythat people who had come from different towns with different deitieswould have accepted almost universally a new patron deity of obscureprovenance. The continuity in material culture of a nation that wasto take over the homes and all the equipment of the Canaanites shouldnot be surprising in light of the commands of the Bible (Deut.6:10–11). The almost universal rise of the worship of the Godof Israel, and the mention of Israel as a group of people in theStela of Merneptah (c. 1208 BC), argue forcefully that theIsraelites were not really Canaanites.

TheIsraelite (Iron) Age (1200–586 BC)

Bythe twelfth century, the Philistine settlement of southwest Canaan isattested by a new type of pottery with Late Mycenaean affinities.This new type of pottery was found throughout Philistia, theShephelah, and as far north as Joppa. Wealthy and well-constructedCanaanite cities held out for at least another century (Beth-Shean,Gezer, and Megiddo?). The evidence for Israelites comes from thesmall villages throughout the hill country and Galilee.Traditionally, as mentioned above, they are recognized by theirfour-room houses, large number of storage pits for grain, largestorage jars with thick-collared rims, and preference for terracinghillsides for farming.

Archaeologically,it is very difficult to at­trib­ute the construction ofcities to any king of the united monarchy (but see the recentdiscovery below). Saul had a citadel at Gibeah (Tell el-Fûl),and the first fortification there has been attributed to him. Itshows the adoption of a new fortification system of casemate wall,characteristic of this period. Similar casemate walls have been foundat Shechem, Beth-shemesh, and Beit Mirsim (and later even in Moab). Asmall town at Megiddo, whose houses form a defensive ring around theperimeter of the mound, has been attributed to David.

Though1 Kings 9:15 reports how Solomon built up Hazor, Megiddo, andGezer, the dating of the six-chambered gates found in all of thesesites and the related walls is still being debated. A much morerecent excavation from Khirbat en-Nahas in Jordan has foundindustrial-scale production of copper in a region and at a time thatcorrelates well with the narrative about Solomon (see 1 Kings7:46).

Anothervery recent and impressive find comes from Khirbet Qeiyafa (mostlikely Shaaraim [Josh. 15:36; 1 Sam. 17:52; 1 Chron.4:31–32]). This site, located in the western part of the highShephelah (near Azekah), was recently excavated by Yosef Garfinkeland Saar Ganor of Hebrew University, Jerusalem. On the basis of fourburnt olive pits tested at Oxford University, the excavators datedthis fortified city to the time of David. They concluded that themassive construction of the city wall (which required two hundredthousand tons of stone) supports the existence of a centralizedpolitical organization, a state—a conclusion that hasfar-reaching implications for the disputed chronology of Iron Age IIA(1000–900 BC). They also found a five-line inscription,indicating that writing was practiced in the region. This inscriptionis important because it seems to be the longest proto-Canaaniteinscription ever found, and the earliest Hebrew inscription known todate.

TheHellenistic-Roman Period (332 BC and Following)

Herodthe Great (37–4 BC) was the ambitious ruler who carried throughmost of the grand building projects that still dot the Holy Landtoday. At Jerusalem, which is still being excavated, the massivewalls that he built for the platform of the temple are still visibletoday both above and below the ground. Other ruins associated withHerod have been found at Caesarea, Jericho, Herodium (nearBethlehem), Masada, and also in Jordan.

Oneof the most important inscriptions for NT studies (especially theGospels) was found by the Italian excavators of Caesarea. Theseexcavators found that the inscription refers to Pontius Pilate,prefect of Judea. Other inscriptions from Greece and Turkey areconnected with the events described in Acts and Paul’s letters.Thus, in Corinth a door inscription (“Synagogue of theHebrews”) may indicate the place where Paul preached (Acts18:4). Excavations there revealed a text naming Erastus as abenefactor. This may be the city treasurer of Rom. 16:23. Near Lystrainscriptions record the dedication to Zeus of a statue of Hermes bysome Lycaonians, and nearby was a stone altar for Zeus and Hermes.This explains the identification of Barnabas with Zeus (Jupiter) andPaul with Hermes (Mercury) in Acts 14:11–12.

Itis clear from the selective sample of data presented here that thefield of archaeology has contributed considerably to the context andunderstanding of the biblical world. All the signs and recentexcavations suggest that there are continuing and exciting prospectsto be found in the newer (biblical) archaeology.

Archaeology is the scientific study of the material remainsof past human life and activities. It can also be described as theprocedure by which ancient artifacts are recovered, identified, andinterpreted. Archaeology deals with both the prehistorical andhistorical periods and encompasses both written (epigraphical) andunwritten (artifactual) discoveries. Even though literary remains(inscriptions, ostraca [potsherds], seals) are typically the subjectof other disciplines, archaeological investigation usually isresponsible for their discovery. Without archaeology much of theavailable written evidence would have remained buried forever in theground. Unwritten materials include everything made by humans, suchas fortifications, pottery, tools, jewelry, and weapons.

Biblicalarchaeology more narrowly focuses on the material remains of Israeland its neighboring countries that relate to the biblical period andnarrative. For example, ancient texts recovered from sites such asMari, Ugarit, Ebla, and Amarna shed valuable light on the biblicalrecord and on the history and religion of the ancient Near East.Biblical archaeology may be understood as the process of correlatingarchaeological evidence with the biblical record. Archaeology and theBible are closely related because they inform each other. Thus, eventhough archaeology and biblical studies are independent disciplines,they are certainly interrelated.

TheHistory of Biblical Archaeology

Tounderstand better the meaning of biblical archaeology, it isnecessary to briefly trace its history. Before the 1800s little wasknown about the Bible’s background, despite its central role inthe religion and culture of the world, because the Bible was theprimary source for access to the history of ancient Israel and itsneighbors. There were few sources to which the Scripture historianscould appeal besides the apocryphal writings and the works ofJosephus, because the early Greek historians (Herodotus andThucydides) were of limited value, given their interest in the “majorplayers” of history.

Thediscovery of the Rosetta Stone (dated 196 BC) in 1799 and itsdecipherment in 1822 by J. F. Champollion opened wide the doorsto ancient Egypt’s history. Within twenty-five years, by thedecipherment of Akkadian cuneiform by Henry Rawlinson (1846), theworld had the key to reading and interpreting thousands of tabletsand monumental texts from ancient Babylonia, Assyria, and even theland of the Hittites. These two major developments allowed the voicesfrom the ancient world of the Bible to speak once more and encouragedhistorians to look at the Bible as supported by the background datacoming from the rest of the ancient Near East. As a result of thesedevelopments, a new interest was kindled in ancient Near Easterncultures and the material remains (realia) that they left behind,coupled with a renewed interest in the setting of the biblical text.

Initialexcavations of biblical sites.Thebeginnings of scientific exploration of Palestine can be traced to1838 when American Edward Robinson (geographer and explorer) aided bythe Arabist Eli Smith undertook a historic trip to the Holy Land andsucceeded in identifying over one hundred biblical sites, effectivelylaying the foundations for biblical archaeology and geography. Thisled to the establishment of the British Palestine Exploration Fund in1865 for the purpose of exploring Palestine systematically andscientifically, and to several of the geographic surveys of westernPalestine and Transjordan.

Thebeginning of major excavations of biblical sites was not far behind,and in 1890 William M. F. Petrie (a renowned Egyptologist then)initiated what is widely regarded as the first modern archaeologicalexcavation in the Holy Land. He excavated Tell el-Hesi(identification still uncertain) in the northern Negev, and his workunderlies archaeological inquiry in the Holy Land to this day. Morespecifically, Petrie laid the foundations of modern archaeology byhis application of stratigraphy and ceramic typology.

Stratigraphyis the technique of digging a tell (a cone-shaped mound that containsthe remains of successive human occupation over a long period oftime) layer by layer while carefully separating and recording thecontents of each occupational layer. This technique tries to untanglethese layers in the reverse order (the older layers of occupation arealways below the newer layers) of their deposition and to reconstructthe history of a site period by period.

Typologyis the technique of classifying artifacts based on their externalcharacteristics (shape, ware, and decoration). Pottery is consideredan accurate tool for dating the occupational layers of a tell, andceramic typology is the art of charting changes in local potterystyles. By analyzing the pottery lying within successive layers atHesi, Petrie was able to construct a relative chronological frameworkfor Palestine. To arrive at a more absolute chronology, theresearchers from Palestine usually need (especially in the earlierperiods) to correlate their findings with similar styles fromneighboring areas, such as Egypt and Mesopotamia, where there areavailable written records and astronomically fixed dates.

BeforeWorld War I, the first and only American excavation in Palestinethat deserves mention is that of George A. Reisner and architectClarence S. Fisher between 1908 and 1910 at Sebastiyeh (biblicalSamaria). The rest are usually considered to have resembled “treasurehunts.” By the use of systematic digging and recording inPalestine, the Reisner-Fisher method, which was far morecomprehensive and meticulous than Petrie’s, greatly improvedPalestinian archaeology.

Thefirst golden age.The “golden age” of American excavation in Palestinefollowed a few decades later, after World War I in the 1920s and1930s. Numerous and well-financed archaeological digs started at thefollowing biblical sites: Ai, Bethel, Beth-shean, Beth-shemesh,Beth-zur, Debir, Gibeah, Jericho, Mizpah, Samaria, Shechem, andothers. All of these excavations, however, were overshadowed by thework of Orientalist W. F. Albright at Tell Beit Mirsim (identitystill disputed, but perhaps Debir).

Itwas Albright and those of the American school in Jerusalem (now theAlbright Institute of Archaeology) who dominated the scene in theseformative years. Albright refined Petrie’s methodology andintegrated very well archaeology, biblical research, and ancient NearEastern studies, thus establishing biblical (and Palestinian)archaeology as a discipline in its own right. He also envisioned an“archaeological revolution” that would open up the lands,peoples, and lost sites of the ancient Near East so that the Biblewould be better understood and also gain new credibility. Hecertainly was reacting against the spirit of his time, when steriledebates of textual and literary criticism (especially of theskeptical variety) were prevalent in both European and Americanliberalism, and this seems to have led some to believe thatarchaeology’s primary function was to “prove the Bibletrue.”

Thesecond golden age.A second “golden age” of biblical archaeology is usuallyconsidered to have arrived after World War II when variousforeign teams worked throughout the Middle East in cooperation withlocal archaeologists, a trend that continues today. The archaeologyof Palestine advanced rapidly, with significant improvements in thetechniques of digging and recording. The greatest influence onarchaeological method at this time belongs to Kathleen Kenyon(English excavator of Jericho [Tell es-Sultan]), whosestratigraphical method (known as the Wheeler-Kenyon method) is usedeven today by excavators, with modifications. Other importantarchaeologists who contributed significantly to the biblicalarchaeology movement are Yigael Yadin of Israel and G. E. Wrightof the United States.

Duringthe height of its prominence and promise, biblical archaeology becamean important component for the biblical theology movement and alsofor Christian apologetics (especially as represented by Joseph Freeof Wheaton College). In fact, one of the greatest theologians in thebiblical theology movement, G. E. Wright, was also Albright’sstudent. He conducted a major excavation at Tell Balath (biblicalShechem), following the Wheeler-Kenyon method and emphasizing potterychronology in the tradition of the Albright school. More important,Shechem was a training ground for many American archaeologists whereWright created a new school of field archaeology.

Thenew archaeology.In the 1960s, under the influence of the social and natural sciences,the “new archaeology” that developed tended to focus onthe comprehensive study of humans as species (and not on historicalissues). William G. Dever (a student and follower of G. E.Wright at the important Tel Gezer project) argued forcefully andsuccessfully for the “liberation” of Near Easternarchaeology from biblical studies and preferred the term (prevalenttoday in most American schools) “Syro-Palestinian archaeology.”Today, with very few exceptions (e.g., Harvard University), mostAmerican universities offer classes in the archaeology ofSyria-Palestine (this was apparently Albright’s old alternateterm for biblical archaeology), not in biblical archaeology. The nameof the popular magazine Biblical Archaeologist was also changed toAncient Near Eastern Archaeology, despite protests from many of itsreaders.

Thenew archaeology began with the realization in the 1960s that muchdata of potential significance has been overlooked, and perhaps evenvital evidence has been discarded. New questions and methodsdeveloped from the frustration that old questions have not beenanswered satisfactorily. The temporal and geographical horizons ofthe new archaeology broadened to include the Paleolithic period(c. 100,000 BC) through the Ottoman era (AD 1922), and attentionis now paid to the neglected periods of Judaism and earlyChristianity.

Moreimportant, the composition of the dig staff broadened considerably toinclude a much larger body of scientists to assist in answering thenew questions posed. Today, the field archaeologists (besideshistorians, linguists, and ceramic experts) are supported bygeologists, anthropologists, paleoethnobotanists, zoologists,climatologists, hydrologists, ethnographers, and, more recently,statisticians and computer experts. It is clear that the newarchaeology is done in a very interdisciplinary way. The Tell Hesbanand Khirbat en-Nahas excavations (both in Jordan) are good models ofthis type of interdisciplinary research. Bones, seeds, and otherorganic materials are now saved and carefully recorded to addressquestions related to economic strategies, social differentiation,diet, disease, and the like. Soil and pollen samples are taken,extensive regional and environmental surveys are carried out, andmaterial culture samples and artifacts are submitted forsophisticated analysis. It is ironic (according to Dever) that thisnew and “secular” archaeology, while demanding moreautonomy from the Bible, promises to contribute even more to biblicalstudies as it grows in precision and sophistication.

Thenew archaeology and Syro-Palestinian archaeology of today haveadvantages and disadvantages. They have the advantages of staff whoare better equipped and trained, as well as educated volunteers whousually have genuine interest in their work. More important, theirconclusions have the advantage of being based on data that is morescientifically obtained and analyzed. Many of the digs run fieldschools modeled on the ones from the Gezer project (1964–1973),which trained hundreds of student volunteers. These are all good anduseful for both participants and their projects, but they have led tosignificant rises in the costs of an excavation. Thus, a typicalsix-week season is estimated now to cost in excess of one hundredthousand dollars. Since the new archaeology has led to a“secularization” of biblical archaeology and churches andseminaries have gradually stopped sponsoring these projects, thefunds have had to come increasingly from federal and public sourcesof support. The National Endowment for the Humanities (and privatedonors later) became the major source of funds in the 1970s.

Approachesto the Bible in Modern Archaeology

Thereis no doubt that the new archaeology has introduced many usefulscientific improvements in the field. (Of course, these scientificimprovements were embraced by both biblical and Syro-Palestinianarchaeologists in the 1970s, and the distinction between these twogroups has become largely imaginary.) At the same time, however, ithas brought new biases against the biblical text. The Bible, inDever’s view, was never intended as a historical document andshould be viewed with “considerable suspicion” forreconstructing the history of the ancient Near East. Otherarchaeologists in the field (and also historians) have an even morenegative attitude toward the Bible. However, it must be emphasizedthat all (or at least most) agree that the Bible has its role in thearchaeology of Syria-Palestine. The question has to do with how theBible should be used.

Maximalistand minimalist approaches.The two schools of thought that seem the loudest in the debate amongbiblical and/or Syro-Palestinian archaeologists are usually labeled“maximalist” and “minimalist.” (To theseKenneth A. Kitchen adds the label “factualist.”According to Kitchen, the agenda of a “factualist” isneither to prove nor to disprove any theory concerning the earlyhistory of Israel, but simply to examine the facts and let the dataspeak for itself.)

Themaximalist school has a strong view of the historical reliability ofScripture and emphasizes synergy between archaeology and biblicalstudies. Others consider this to be a naive approach to Scripture andan uncritical acceptance of the information that it tries tocommunicate. The maximalists follow the scholarship of W. F.Albright and his student John Bright, and they assume that the OTspeaks of historical realities. When seeking to reconstruct thehistory of ancient Israel, they readily and confidently refer to thebiblical record as a valid and significant source for their research.They are also confident that when all the data is in, a biblicalhistory of Israel (aided by archaeology) will exhibit a closecorrespondence with the real history of Israel.

Theminimalist school is generally skeptical concerning the historicalreliability of the biblical text. Many advocates of this approachargue that the OT was written primarily during the Hellenistic period(it certainly is postexilic), centuries after the events that itclaims to describe. A community around Jerusalem created thetraditions found in the Bible in order to give account for themselvesand their distinctive religious notions and practices. According tothis approach, any correlation between the Bible and thearchaeological record is suspect a priori. When there aretensions between biblical and extrabiblical records (includingarchaeology), the extrabiblical records are to be preferred asevidence, and the contradictions are usually emphasized to underminethe reliability of the Bible as a historical source.

Theminimalist movement has developed gradually. Although a century agothere were many who questioned the historicity of the first chaptersof Genesis, most accepted the essential historicity of thepatriarchs, the exodus from Egypt under Moses, the conquest of Canaanby Joshua, the historicity of David and Solomon, and the rest of theOT narrative. During the past forty years, however, serious doubt hasbeen cast on all of these events.

Thestance of the minimalists led to peculiar (and rarely settled)controversies over issues such as the legitimacy of reading “thehouse of David” in the Tel Dan inscription (discovered in1993), the Siloam Tunnel inscription (which overlaps with 2 Chron.32 and is traditionally ascribed to Hezekiah), the very existence ofJerusalem during the days of David and Solomon, and even theexistence of these two kings.

Afresh approach.Is there a way to move beyond the current state of the debate? Somebelieve that there is hope by using a fresh approach to biblicalarchaeology, one that follows in the footsteps of Lawrence Stager andPhilip King (see their book, Life in Biblical Israel  ).This approach does not try to reconstruct history or simplyilluminate the Bible; rather, it seeks to enter into the world of theancients to acquire a fuller understanding of Israelite society andits literary record through the combined use of artifacts, sociology,and ethnography. Textual and archaeological data are brought into ahistorical discourse by “selecting and interpreting themthrough the problematics of social history.” Thus, biblicalarchaeology in the older sense is making a comeback by hearkeningback to the integrative works of the nineteenth century, but withvast amounts of new data. This “new biblical archaeology”should not be driven by apologetic purposes and should not aim to“prove the truth of the Bible.” It should have moremodest and realistic goals, considering the limitations ofarchaeology (see below).

Evangelicalarchaeologists, confident in the truth of the Bible (which can standby itself despite its many attacks from within and without), shouldhave as their goal the understanding of the biblical world in itsgeographical, cultural, and historical setting. They should usearchaeology and linguistics to correlate biblical texts and ancientartifacts against the background of the historical and geographicalsetting. When historical questions are posed, the cumulative evidenceshould lead to probability and plausibility rather than a defensivequest for final proof. This attempt to follow historical probabilityvis-à-vis the Bible is different from setting out a prioriwith a defensive Bible-proving agenda.

Thisnew approach will not make the Scriptures say more than judiciousassessment of the evidence will allow (a problem that plagues someconservative interpreters), but neither will it cast undue skepticismon the Scriptures’ historical value (the problem of theminimalists). It endeavors to pay close attention both to theliterary nature and intentions of the biblical text and to thefragmentary nature of the archaeological record.

Thesenew biblical archaeologists do not set out again “to prove theBible.” Instead, they seek to situate the texts of the OT intheir historical and cultural contexts and to demonstrate howawareness of the extrabiblical world can open new doors into theBible. Their goals are more modest, not because of a lower view ofScripture, but rather because of a clearer understanding of thelimitations and fragmentary nature of archaeology despite itsconsiderable refinement in the recent decades.

TheLimitations of Archaeology

Archaeologyhas limitations because of the vast amount of time and area to becovered and because of the hazards of preservation. Objects of wood,leatherwork, basketry, papyrus, and cloth rarely survive, and metals(especially precious metals) were frequently recycled. It is alsoimportant to realize that no biblical site has ever been completelyexcavated, and most of the excavations tend to pay greater attentionto the major buildings (citadels, temples, palaces) rather than thehomes of the general population.

Onlyin recent years have accurate methods of stratification and recordingenabled comparisons to be made between sites, and the reliability ofsome foundational excavations in the Holy Land is rightly questionedby the finds from newer excavations (e.g., Megiddo, Gezer, and Hazorare being reexcavated in part to clarify and answer questions raisedby previous excavations and debates). This is understandable becausemost of the foundational excavations in the Holy Land did not haveaccess to the accurate methods of stratification, recording, andscientific analysis available today. Many useful artifacts andespecially organic objects were routinely discarded in the earlierexcavations.

Ingeneral, earlier levels of a site are more likely to have beendisturbed by the activities of later periods, and it was very commonfor older buildings (and sometimes even monumental inscriptions) tobe dismantled and the (stone) blocks reused for later buildings oreven roads. The objects that archaeologists discover survive and aremost often found by accident. Consequently, given the limitations andpitfalls of archaeology (especially the way it was done in theearliest part of the twentieth century), one must have realistic andmore modest expectations about what archaeology can recover, andrealize that the further one goes in time, the less archaeologicalinformation may be available for comparison and useful analysis. Addto this that some of the central characters of the Bible (e.g.,Abraham, Moses, most of the judges, Ezra) were not major players inthe world of their time, and that some important sites have neverbeen excavated (e.g., Damascus, Hebron), and it becomes clear thatthere are considerable reasons to have more realistic and modestexpectations about what archaeology can accomplish.

Therole and possibility of accurately interpreting archaeologicalremains should also be taken into consideration, especially sincethere are well-documented cases in which the interpretation of theexcavator has turned out to be false (e.g., the “DegeneratedAshtoreth Plaque” of R. A. S. Macalister from Gezer).Anyone who has ever participated in an archaeological excavation ledby a group of experts in the field can remember debates that tookplace among these experts, not only about the dating of variouspieces of pottery, but even about the role and dating of well-definedand visible monumental architecture. While this is understandable anddesirable, and many times leads to the refinement and corrections ofunwarranted early assumptions, the process shows the difficultyinherent in interpreting the fragmentary remains of a deadcivilization far removed from our times and settings.

MaterialRemains and Written Sources

Itis a sobering fact that archaeology cannot provide the basis forhistory. Material remains can reveal climate changes and theirimpact, sequences of human cultures and their products, traces ofdestruction and desertion, changes in building techniques and art.Nevertheless, the persons involved remain anonymous, their thoughts,motives and faith a mystery, and the specific events of their timeslargely unknown (e.g., the destruction by fire of Lachish IIcould not have been accurately dated and related without the biblicalreport in Jer. 34:7). It is the written documents (many timesrecovered through archaeology) that can reveal the names of kings andkingdoms, their dates and deeds, and the fruits of their thinking inliterature. It is the testimony of these texts, rightly evaluated,that can add the “flesh and features” to the “bones”archaeology discovers (Allan Millard).

Onthe other hand, the material remains of life (pottery, jewelry,tools, weapons, cultic objects, architecture, etc.) as recoveredthrough archaeology can bring color to the textual references.Nevertheless, the written sources are essential and provide the mostvaluable information for recovering the history and faith of anyancient nation. It is the duty of the biblical scholar andarchaeologist to interpret correctly the available data fromSyria-Palestine and to arrive at plausible explanations concerningthe biblical world. The combination of texts (biblical andextrabiblical), material culture (archaeology), geography, andhistory holds considerable promise to help scholars better define thecontext of Scripture.

Thereis no doubt that this approach to archaeology holds considerablepotential as it is generating more material than is possible for anyperson (or even school) to encompass. As one of the most quicklychanging social sciences today, both in theoretical advances and newdata, archaeology is and will be the source of new insights intobiblical life and times. It seems that the “archaeologicalrevolution” predicted by W. F. Albright is far from over;it probably has only begun.

Theevidence for this revolution from the evangelical field is visible invarious ways. The rest of this entry briefly presents some selectivearchaeological data that helps define the context and thatcomplements (since the writers of the Bible were selective in theirreporting), challenges, or confirms the narrative of the Bible. Thedata should help the interpreter of the Bible bridge thegeographical, temporal, and cultural gap that leads to the ancientwriter.

TheCannanite (Bronze) Age (3300–1200 BC)

EarlyBronze Age.Towns with mud-brick walls begin to appear in Canaan in the EarlyBronze Age I (before 3000 BC). Evidence of occupation in thethird millennium is found at Beth-yerah, Beth-shan, Gezer, Jerusalem,Jericho, Arad, Megiddo, and Ai, among others. There was a differencebetween the pottery of the north (Beth-yerah) and that of the south,while the most striking development was that of the fine “KhirbetKerak” ware.

MiddleBronze Age.About 2200 BC (Middle Bronze Age I) there arrived a distinctivenomadic people identified with the Amorites of the Bible (Num. 13:29;Josh. 5:1; 10:6). They had distinctive burial customs, pottery, andweapons that show connection with the city-states of Syria. It ismost likely that their kings included the Asiatic “ForeignRulers” (Hyksos) who conquered Egypt in the eighteenth centuryBC. This was a time of wealth and frequent warfare between cities. Itseems that the Middle Bronze Age was a time when seminomadic groups(including a group called “Habiru,” who are also found inthe Late Bronze Age) infiltrated the land between defended towns. Itis possible that the patriarchs were among these Habiru, whoinfiltrated mostly the hill country and the Negev. In fact, it isdemonstrable from a comparison with the eighteenth-century BC textsfrom Mari (on the Euphrates River) that the pastoral traditions ofGenesis fit the early second-millennium BC context much better thanlater periods.

Thetowns and houses of the Middle Bronze Age were violently destroyed inthe fifteenth century BC, most likely by the Egyptians, who expelledthe Hyksos. Despite the trade that seems to have continued with theeastern Mediterranean (Mycenaean pottery), the hill towns ofPalestine were now poorer and fewer than the coastal cities. Thissituation is clearly reflected in the Amarna letters between thekings of Canaan and Egypt. The major cities were reoccupied, but manyof them were destroyed later in the thirteenth century.

LateBronze Age.It is in the Late Bronze Age (c. 1550–1200 BC) that thebiblical account is usually challenged by the archaeologicaldiscoveries. Even if one accepts the reasonable interpretation thatJoshua burned only three cities (Jericho, Ai, Hazor) in his campaign(see Josh. 6:24; 8:28; 11:13), the evidence of destruction from bothJericho and Ai is highly questionable. Thus, while it is widelybelieved that Jericho was abandoned around 1325 BC, the fallen wallsonce thought to belong to this period were dated much earlier byKathleen Kenyon (Early Bronze). The evidence from Ai (et-Tell) iseven less promising, unless Bryan Wood is correct in hisidentification of Ai with Khirbet el-Maqatir.

Basedon the apparent lack of change in material culture during the LateBronze Age, mainstream archaeologists commonly classify theIsraelites as dissident Canaanites who moved into the hill country.

Althoughit cannot be conclusively demonstrated from archaeology that theIsraelites were not Canaanites but rather came to Canaan from theoutside, the mainstream interpretation has serious problems of itsown. There was clearly a new pattern of simple farming in the hills,characterized by four-room houses whose inhabitants used manycollared-rim jars, and there is an almost complete absence of pigbones (which usually are found in the Canaanite cities) in thehill-country sites. More important, there is strong evidence that theIsraelites were worshiping their own national God (YHWH) by the ninthcentury BC, in sharp contrast to the polytheistic religion of Canaan(as illuminated by the culture in neighboring Ugarit). The personalnames of individuals in the eighth and seventh centuries BC arealmost exclusively Yahwistic.

Anothervery significant change is the abandonment of the shrines in towns ofthe Late Bronze Age. Not a single site can be identified in whichworship continued from the Late Bronze Age well into the Iron Age (itseems that by 1000 BC the Canaanites disappeared as an entity in thearea occupied by Israel). It is highly unlikely that the Canaaniteswho moved from towns into the hill-country sites would have abandonedtheir divinities (whose need they must have felt greatly while facingthe uncertainties of the wilderness), and it is even more unlikelythat people who had come from different towns with different deitieswould have accepted almost universally a new patron deity of obscureprovenance. The continuity in material culture of a nation that wasto take over the homes and all the equipment of the Canaanites shouldnot be surprising in light of the commands of the Bible (Deut.6:10–11). The almost universal rise of the worship of the Godof Israel, and the mention of Israel as a group of people in theStela of Merneptah (c. 1208 BC), argue forcefully that theIsraelites were not really Canaanites.

TheIsraelite (Iron) Age (1200–586 BC)

Bythe twelfth century, the Philistine settlement of southwest Canaan isattested by a new type of pottery with Late Mycenaean affinities.This new type of pottery was found throughout Philistia, theShephelah, and as far north as Joppa. Wealthy and well-constructedCanaanite cities held out for at least another century (Beth-Shean,Gezer, and Megiddo?). The evidence for Israelites comes from thesmall villages throughout the hill country and Galilee.Traditionally, as mentioned above, they are recognized by theirfour-room houses, large number of storage pits for grain, largestorage jars with thick-collared rims, and preference for terracinghillsides for farming.

Archaeologically,it is very difficult to at­trib­ute the construction ofcities to any king of the united monarchy (but see the recentdiscovery below). Saul had a citadel at Gibeah (Tell el-Fûl),and the first fortification there has been attributed to him. Itshows the adoption of a new fortification system of casemate wall,characteristic of this period. Similar casemate walls have been foundat Shechem, Beth-shemesh, and Beit Mirsim (and later even in Moab). Asmall town at Megiddo, whose houses form a defensive ring around theperimeter of the mound, has been attributed to David.

Though1 Kings 9:15 reports how Solomon built up Hazor, Megiddo, andGezer, the dating of the six-chambered gates found in all of thesesites and the related walls is still being debated. A much morerecent excavation from Khirbat en-Nahas in Jordan has foundindustrial-scale production of copper in a region and at a time thatcorrelates well with the narrative about Solomon (see 1 Kings7:46).

Anothervery recent and impressive find comes from Khirbet Qeiyafa (mostlikely Shaaraim [Josh. 15:36; 1 Sam. 17:52; 1 Chron.4:31–32]). This site, located in the western part of the highShephelah (near Azekah), was recently excavated by Yosef Garfinkeland Saar Ganor of Hebrew University, Jerusalem. On the basis of fourburnt olive pits tested at Oxford University, the excavators datedthis fortified city to the time of David. They concluded that themassive construction of the city wall (which required two hundredthousand tons of stone) supports the existence of a centralizedpolitical organization, a state—a conclusion that hasfar-reaching implications for the disputed chronology of Iron Age IIA(1000–900 BC). They also found a five-line inscription,indicating that writing was practiced in the region. This inscriptionis important because it seems to be the longest proto-Canaaniteinscription ever found, and the earliest Hebrew inscription known todate.

TheHellenistic-Roman Period (332 BC and Following)

Herodthe Great (37–4 BC) was the ambitious ruler who carried throughmost of the grand building projects that still dot the Holy Landtoday. At Jerusalem, which is still being excavated, the massivewalls that he built for the platform of the temple are still visibletoday both above and below the ground. Other ruins associated withHerod have been found at Caesarea, Jericho, Herodium (nearBethlehem), Masada, and also in Jordan.

Oneof the most important inscriptions for NT studies (especially theGospels) was found by the Italian excavators of Caesarea. Theseexcavators found that the inscription refers to Pontius Pilate,prefect of Judea. Other inscriptions from Greece and Turkey areconnected with the events described in Acts and Paul’s letters.Thus, in Corinth a door inscription (“Synagogue of theHebrews”) may indicate the place where Paul preached (Acts18:4). Excavations there revealed a text naming Erastus as abenefactor. This may be the city treasurer of Rom. 16:23. Near Lystrainscriptions record the dedication to Zeus of a statue of Hermes bysome Lycaonians, and nearby was a stone altar for Zeus and Hermes.This explains the identification of Barnabas with Zeus (Jupiter) andPaul with Hermes (Mercury) in Acts 14:11–12.

Itis clear from the selective sample of data presented here that thefield of archaeology has contributed considerably to the context andunderstanding of the biblical world. All the signs and recentexcavations suggest that there are continuing and exciting prospectsto be found in the newer (biblical) archaeology.

Archaeology is the scientific study of the material remainsof past human life and activities. It can also be described as theprocedure by which ancient artifacts are recovered, identified, andinterpreted. Archaeology deals with both the prehistorical andhistorical periods and encompasses both written (epigraphical) andunwritten (artifactual) discoveries. Even though literary remains(inscriptions, ostraca [potsherds], seals) are typically the subjectof other disciplines, archaeological investigation usually isresponsible for their discovery. Without archaeology much of theavailable written evidence would have remained buried forever in theground. Unwritten materials include everything made by humans, suchas fortifications, pottery, tools, jewelry, and weapons.

Biblicalarchaeology more narrowly focuses on the material remains of Israeland its neighboring countries that relate to the biblical period andnarrative. For example, ancient texts recovered from sites such asMari, Ugarit, Ebla, and Amarna shed valuable light on the biblicalrecord and on the history and religion of the ancient Near East.Biblical archaeology may be understood as the process of correlatingarchaeological evidence with the biblical record. Archaeology and theBible are closely related because they inform each other. Thus, eventhough archaeology and biblical studies are independent disciplines,they are certainly interrelated.

TheHistory of Biblical Archaeology

Tounderstand better the meaning of biblical archaeology, it isnecessary to briefly trace its history. Before the 1800s little wasknown about the Bible’s background, despite its central role inthe religion and culture of the world, because the Bible was theprimary source for access to the history of ancient Israel and itsneighbors. There were few sources to which the Scripture historianscould appeal besides the apocryphal writings and the works ofJosephus, because the early Greek historians (Herodotus andThucydides) were of limited value, given their interest in the “majorplayers” of history.

Thediscovery of the Rosetta Stone (dated 196 BC) in 1799 and itsdecipherment in 1822 by J. F. Champollion opened wide the doorsto ancient Egypt’s history. Within twenty-five years, by thedecipherment of Akkadian cuneiform by Henry Rawlinson (1846), theworld had the key to reading and interpreting thousands of tabletsand monumental texts from ancient Babylonia, Assyria, and even theland of the Hittites. These two major developments allowed the voicesfrom the ancient world of the Bible to speak once more and encouragedhistorians to look at the Bible as supported by the background datacoming from the rest of the ancient Near East. As a result of thesedevelopments, a new interest was kindled in ancient Near Easterncultures and the material remains (realia) that they left behind,coupled with a renewed interest in the setting of the biblical text.

Initialexcavations of biblical sites.Thebeginnings of scientific exploration of Palestine can be traced to1838 when American Edward Robinson (geographer and explorer) aided bythe Arabist Eli Smith undertook a historic trip to the Holy Land andsucceeded in identifying over one hundred biblical sites, effectivelylaying the foundations for biblical archaeology and geography. Thisled to the establishment of the British Palestine Exploration Fund in1865 for the purpose of exploring Palestine systematically andscientifically, and to several of the geographic surveys of westernPalestine and Transjordan.

Thebeginning of major excavations of biblical sites was not far behind,and in 1890 William M. F. Petrie (a renowned Egyptologist then)initiated what is widely regarded as the first modern archaeologicalexcavation in the Holy Land. He excavated Tell el-Hesi(identification still uncertain) in the northern Negev, and his workunderlies archaeological inquiry in the Holy Land to this day. Morespecifically, Petrie laid the foundations of modern archaeology byhis application of stratigraphy and ceramic typology.

Stratigraphyis the technique of digging a tell (a cone-shaped mound that containsthe remains of successive human occupation over a long period oftime) layer by layer while carefully separating and recording thecontents of each occupational layer. This technique tries to untanglethese layers in the reverse order (the older layers of occupation arealways below the newer layers) of their deposition and to reconstructthe history of a site period by period.

Typologyis the technique of classifying artifacts based on their externalcharacteristics (shape, ware, and decoration). Pottery is consideredan accurate tool for dating the occupational layers of a tell, andceramic typology is the art of charting changes in local potterystyles. By analyzing the pottery lying within successive layers atHesi, Petrie was able to construct a relative chronological frameworkfor Palestine. To arrive at a more absolute chronology, theresearchers from Palestine usually need (especially in the earlierperiods) to correlate their findings with similar styles fromneighboring areas, such as Egypt and Mesopotamia, where there areavailable written records and astronomically fixed dates.

BeforeWorld War I, the first and only American excavation in Palestinethat deserves mention is that of George A. Reisner and architectClarence S. Fisher between 1908 and 1910 at Sebastiyeh (biblicalSamaria). The rest are usually considered to have resembled “treasurehunts.” By the use of systematic digging and recording inPalestine, the Reisner-Fisher method, which was far morecomprehensive and meticulous than Petrie’s, greatly improvedPalestinian archaeology.

Thefirst golden age.The “golden age” of American excavation in Palestinefollowed a few decades later, after World War I in the 1920s and1930s. Numerous and well-financed archaeological digs started at thefollowing biblical sites: Ai, Bethel, Beth-shean, Beth-shemesh,Beth-zur, Debir, Gibeah, Jericho, Mizpah, Samaria, Shechem, andothers. All of these excavations, however, were overshadowed by thework of Orientalist W. F. Albright at Tell Beit Mirsim (identitystill disputed, but perhaps Debir).

Itwas Albright and those of the American school in Jerusalem (now theAlbright Institute of Archaeology) who dominated the scene in theseformative years. Albright refined Petrie’s methodology andintegrated very well archaeology, biblical research, and ancient NearEastern studies, thus establishing biblical (and Palestinian)archaeology as a discipline in its own right. He also envisioned an“archaeological revolution” that would open up the lands,peoples, and lost sites of the ancient Near East so that the Biblewould be better understood and also gain new credibility. Hecertainly was reacting against the spirit of his time, when steriledebates of textual and literary criticism (especially of theskeptical variety) were prevalent in both European and Americanliberalism, and this seems to have led some to believe thatarchaeology’s primary function was to “prove the Bibletrue.”

Thesecond golden age.A second “golden age” of biblical archaeology is usuallyconsidered to have arrived after World War II when variousforeign teams worked throughout the Middle East in cooperation withlocal archaeologists, a trend that continues today. The archaeologyof Palestine advanced rapidly, with significant improvements in thetechniques of digging and recording. The greatest influence onarchaeological method at this time belongs to Kathleen Kenyon(English excavator of Jericho [Tell es-Sultan]), whosestratigraphical method (known as the Wheeler-Kenyon method) is usedeven today by excavators, with modifications. Other importantarchaeologists who contributed significantly to the biblicalarchaeology movement are Yigael Yadin of Israel and G. E. Wrightof the United States.

Duringthe height of its prominence and promise, biblical archaeology becamean important component for the biblical theology movement and alsofor Christian apologetics (especially as represented by Joseph Freeof Wheaton College). In fact, one of the greatest theologians in thebiblical theology movement, G. E. Wright, was also Albright’sstudent. He conducted a major excavation at Tell Balath (biblicalShechem), following the Wheeler-Kenyon method and emphasizing potterychronology in the tradition of the Albright school. More important,Shechem was a training ground for many American archaeologists whereWright created a new school of field archaeology.

Thenew archaeology.In the 1960s, under the influence of the social and natural sciences,the “new archaeology” that developed tended to focus onthe comprehensive study of humans as species (and not on historicalissues). William G. Dever (a student and follower of G. E.Wright at the important Tel Gezer project) argued forcefully andsuccessfully for the “liberation” of Near Easternarchaeology from biblical studies and preferred the term (prevalenttoday in most American schools) “Syro-Palestinian archaeology.”Today, with very few exceptions (e.g., Harvard University), mostAmerican universities offer classes in the archaeology ofSyria-Palestine (this was apparently Albright’s old alternateterm for biblical archaeology), not in biblical archaeology. The nameof the popular magazine Biblical Archaeologist was also changed toAncient Near Eastern Archaeology, despite protests from many of itsreaders.

Thenew archaeology began with the realization in the 1960s that muchdata of potential significance has been overlooked, and perhaps evenvital evidence has been discarded. New questions and methodsdeveloped from the frustration that old questions have not beenanswered satisfactorily. The temporal and geographical horizons ofthe new archaeology broadened to include the Paleolithic period(c. 100,000 BC) through the Ottoman era (AD 1922), and attentionis now paid to the neglected periods of Judaism and earlyChristianity.

Moreimportant, the composition of the dig staff broadened considerably toinclude a much larger body of scientists to assist in answering thenew questions posed. Today, the field archaeologists (besideshistorians, linguists, and ceramic experts) are supported bygeologists, anthropologists, paleoethnobotanists, zoologists,climatologists, hydrologists, ethnographers, and, more recently,statisticians and computer experts. It is clear that the newarchaeology is done in a very interdisciplinary way. The Tell Hesbanand Khirbat en-Nahas excavations (both in Jordan) are good models ofthis type of interdisciplinary research. Bones, seeds, and otherorganic materials are now saved and carefully recorded to addressquestions related to economic strategies, social differentiation,diet, disease, and the like. Soil and pollen samples are taken,extensive regional and environmental surveys are carried out, andmaterial culture samples and artifacts are submitted forsophisticated analysis. It is ironic (according to Dever) that thisnew and “secular” archaeology, while demanding moreautonomy from the Bible, promises to contribute even more to biblicalstudies as it grows in precision and sophistication.

Thenew archaeology and Syro-Palestinian archaeology of today haveadvantages and disadvantages. They have the advantages of staff whoare better equipped and trained, as well as educated volunteers whousually have genuine interest in their work. More important, theirconclusions have the advantage of being based on data that is morescientifically obtained and analyzed. Many of the digs run fieldschools modeled on the ones from the Gezer project (1964–1973),which trained hundreds of student volunteers. These are all good anduseful for both participants and their projects, but they have led tosignificant rises in the costs of an excavation. Thus, a typicalsix-week season is estimated now to cost in excess of one hundredthousand dollars. Since the new archaeology has led to a“secularization” of biblical archaeology and churches andseminaries have gradually stopped sponsoring these projects, thefunds have had to come increasingly from federal and public sourcesof support. The National Endowment for the Humanities (and privatedonors later) became the major source of funds in the 1970s.

Approachesto the Bible in Modern Archaeology

Thereis no doubt that the new archaeology has introduced many usefulscientific improvements in the field. (Of course, these scientificimprovements were embraced by both biblical and Syro-Palestinianarchaeologists in the 1970s, and the distinction between these twogroups has become largely imaginary.) At the same time, however, ithas brought new biases against the biblical text. The Bible, inDever’s view, was never intended as a historical document andshould be viewed with “considerable suspicion” forreconstructing the history of the ancient Near East. Otherarchaeologists in the field (and also historians) have an even morenegative attitude toward the Bible. However, it must be emphasizedthat all (or at least most) agree that the Bible has its role in thearchaeology of Syria-Palestine. The question has to do with how theBible should be used.

Maximalistand minimalist approaches.The two schools of thought that seem the loudest in the debate amongbiblical and/or Syro-Palestinian archaeologists are usually labeled“maximalist” and “minimalist.” (To theseKenneth A. Kitchen adds the label “factualist.”According to Kitchen, the agenda of a “factualist” isneither to prove nor to disprove any theory concerning the earlyhistory of Israel, but simply to examine the facts and let the dataspeak for itself.)

Themaximalist school has a strong view of the historical reliability ofScripture and emphasizes synergy between archaeology and biblicalstudies. Others consider this to be a naive approach to Scripture andan uncritical acceptance of the information that it tries tocommunicate. The maximalists follow the scholarship of W. F.Albright and his student John Bright, and they assume that the OTspeaks of historical realities. When seeking to reconstruct thehistory of ancient Israel, they readily and confidently refer to thebiblical record as a valid and significant source for their research.They are also confident that when all the data is in, a biblicalhistory of Israel (aided by archaeology) will exhibit a closecorrespondence with the real history of Israel.

Theminimalist school is generally skeptical concerning the historicalreliability of the biblical text. Many advocates of this approachargue that the OT was written primarily during the Hellenistic period(it certainly is postexilic), centuries after the events that itclaims to describe. A community around Jerusalem created thetraditions found in the Bible in order to give account for themselvesand their distinctive religious notions and practices. According tothis approach, any correlation between the Bible and thearchaeological record is suspect a priori. When there aretensions between biblical and extrabiblical records (includingarchaeology), the extrabiblical records are to be preferred asevidence, and the contradictions are usually emphasized to underminethe reliability of the Bible as a historical source.

Theminimalist movement has developed gradually. Although a century agothere were many who questioned the historicity of the first chaptersof Genesis, most accepted the essential historicity of thepatriarchs, the exodus from Egypt under Moses, the conquest of Canaanby Joshua, the historicity of David and Solomon, and the rest of theOT narrative. During the past forty years, however, serious doubt hasbeen cast on all of these events.

Thestance of the minimalists led to peculiar (and rarely settled)controversies over issues such as the legitimacy of reading “thehouse of David” in the Tel Dan inscription (discovered in1993), the Siloam Tunnel inscription (which overlaps with 2 Chron.32 and is traditionally ascribed to Hezekiah), the very existence ofJerusalem during the days of David and Solomon, and even theexistence of these two kings.

Afresh approach.Is there a way to move beyond the current state of the debate? Somebelieve that there is hope by using a fresh approach to biblicalarchaeology, one that follows in the footsteps of Lawrence Stager andPhilip King (see their book, Life in Biblical Israel  ).This approach does not try to reconstruct history or simplyilluminate the Bible; rather, it seeks to enter into the world of theancients to acquire a fuller understanding of Israelite society andits literary record through the combined use of artifacts, sociology,and ethnography. Textual and archaeological data are brought into ahistorical discourse by “selecting and interpreting themthrough the problematics of social history.” Thus, biblicalarchaeology in the older sense is making a comeback by hearkeningback to the integrative works of the nineteenth century, but withvast amounts of new data. This “new biblical archaeology”should not be driven by apologetic purposes and should not aim to“prove the truth of the Bible.” It should have moremodest and realistic goals, considering the limitations ofarchaeology (see below).

Evangelicalarchaeologists, confident in the truth of the Bible (which can standby itself despite its many attacks from within and without), shouldhave as their goal the understanding of the biblical world in itsgeographical, cultural, and historical setting. They should usearchaeology and linguistics to correlate biblical texts and ancientartifacts against the background of the historical and geographicalsetting. When historical questions are posed, the cumulative evidenceshould lead to probability and plausibility rather than a defensivequest for final proof. This attempt to follow historical probabilityvis-à-vis the Bible is different from setting out a prioriwith a defensive Bible-proving agenda.

Thisnew approach will not make the Scriptures say more than judiciousassessment of the evidence will allow (a problem that plagues someconservative interpreters), but neither will it cast undue skepticismon the Scriptures’ historical value (the problem of theminimalists). It endeavors to pay close attention both to theliterary nature and intentions of the biblical text and to thefragmentary nature of the archaeological record.

Thesenew biblical archaeologists do not set out again “to prove theBible.” Instead, they seek to situate the texts of the OT intheir historical and cultural contexts and to demonstrate howawareness of the extrabiblical world can open new doors into theBible. Their goals are more modest, not because of a lower view ofScripture, but rather because of a clearer understanding of thelimitations and fragmentary nature of archaeology despite itsconsiderable refinement in the recent decades.

TheLimitations of Archaeology

Archaeologyhas limitations because of the vast amount of time and area to becovered and because of the hazards of preservation. Objects of wood,leatherwork, basketry, papyrus, and cloth rarely survive, and metals(especially precious metals) were frequently recycled. It is alsoimportant to realize that no biblical site has ever been completelyexcavated, and most of the excavations tend to pay greater attentionto the major buildings (citadels, temples, palaces) rather than thehomes of the general population.

Onlyin recent years have accurate methods of stratification and recordingenabled comparisons to be made between sites, and the reliability ofsome foundational excavations in the Holy Land is rightly questionedby the finds from newer excavations (e.g., Megiddo, Gezer, and Hazorare being reexcavated in part to clarify and answer questions raisedby previous excavations and debates). This is understandable becausemost of the foundational excavations in the Holy Land did not haveaccess to the accurate methods of stratification, recording, andscientific analysis available today. Many useful artifacts andespecially organic objects were routinely discarded in the earlierexcavations.

Ingeneral, earlier levels of a site are more likely to have beendisturbed by the activities of later periods, and it was very commonfor older buildings (and sometimes even monumental inscriptions) tobe dismantled and the (stone) blocks reused for later buildings oreven roads. The objects that archaeologists discover survive and aremost often found by accident. Consequently, given the limitations andpitfalls of archaeology (especially the way it was done in theearliest part of the twentieth century), one must have realistic andmore modest expectations about what archaeology can recover, andrealize that the further one goes in time, the less archaeologicalinformation may be available for comparison and useful analysis. Addto this that some of the central characters of the Bible (e.g.,Abraham, Moses, most of the judges, Ezra) were not major players inthe world of their time, and that some important sites have neverbeen excavated (e.g., Damascus, Hebron), and it becomes clear thatthere are considerable reasons to have more realistic and modestexpectations about what archaeology can accomplish.

Therole and possibility of accurately interpreting archaeologicalremains should also be taken into consideration, especially sincethere are well-documented cases in which the interpretation of theexcavator has turned out to be false (e.g., the “DegeneratedAshtoreth Plaque” of R. A. S. Macalister from Gezer).Anyone who has ever participated in an archaeological excavation ledby a group of experts in the field can remember debates that tookplace among these experts, not only about the dating of variouspieces of pottery, but even about the role and dating of well-definedand visible monumental architecture. While this is understandable anddesirable, and many times leads to the refinement and corrections ofunwarranted early assumptions, the process shows the difficultyinherent in interpreting the fragmentary remains of a deadcivilization far removed from our times and settings.

MaterialRemains and Written Sources

Itis a sobering fact that archaeology cannot provide the basis forhistory. Material remains can reveal climate changes and theirimpact, sequences of human cultures and their products, traces ofdestruction and desertion, changes in building techniques and art.Nevertheless, the persons involved remain anonymous, their thoughts,motives and faith a mystery, and the specific events of their timeslargely unknown (e.g., the destruction by fire of Lachish IIcould not have been accurately dated and related without the biblicalreport in Jer. 34:7). It is the written documents (many timesrecovered through archaeology) that can reveal the names of kings andkingdoms, their dates and deeds, and the fruits of their thinking inliterature. It is the testimony of these texts, rightly evaluated,that can add the “flesh and features” to the “bones”archaeology discovers (Allan Millard).

Onthe other hand, the material remains of life (pottery, jewelry,tools, weapons, cultic objects, architecture, etc.) as recoveredthrough archaeology can bring color to the textual references.Nevertheless, the written sources are essential and provide the mostvaluable information for recovering the history and faith of anyancient nation. It is the duty of the biblical scholar andarchaeologist to interpret correctly the available data fromSyria-Palestine and to arrive at plausible explanations concerningthe biblical world. The combination of texts (biblical andextrabiblical), material culture (archaeology), geography, andhistory holds considerable promise to help scholars better define thecontext of Scripture.

Thereis no doubt that this approach to archaeology holds considerablepotential as it is generating more material than is possible for anyperson (or even school) to encompass. As one of the most quicklychanging social sciences today, both in theoretical advances and newdata, archaeology is and will be the source of new insights intobiblical life and times. It seems that the “archaeologicalrevolution” predicted by W. F. Albright is far from over;it probably has only begun.

Theevidence for this revolution from the evangelical field is visible invarious ways. The rest of this entry briefly presents some selectivearchaeological data that helps define the context and thatcomplements (since the writers of the Bible were selective in theirreporting), challenges, or confirms the narrative of the Bible. Thedata should help the interpreter of the Bible bridge thegeographical, temporal, and cultural gap that leads to the ancientwriter.

TheCannanite (Bronze) Age (3300–1200 BC)

EarlyBronze Age.Towns with mud-brick walls begin to appear in Canaan in the EarlyBronze Age I (before 3000 BC). Evidence of occupation in thethird millennium is found at Beth-yerah, Beth-shan, Gezer, Jerusalem,Jericho, Arad, Megiddo, and Ai, among others. There was a differencebetween the pottery of the north (Beth-yerah) and that of the south,while the most striking development was that of the fine “KhirbetKerak” ware.

MiddleBronze Age.About 2200 BC (Middle Bronze Age I) there arrived a distinctivenomadic people identified with the Amorites of the Bible (Num. 13:29;Josh. 5:1; 10:6). They had distinctive burial customs, pottery, andweapons that show connection with the city-states of Syria. It ismost likely that their kings included the Asiatic “ForeignRulers” (Hyksos) who conquered Egypt in the eighteenth centuryBC. This was a time of wealth and frequent warfare between cities. Itseems that the Middle Bronze Age was a time when seminomadic groups(including a group called “Habiru,” who are also found inthe Late Bronze Age) infiltrated the land between defended towns. Itis possible that the patriarchs were among these Habiru, whoinfiltrated mostly the hill country and the Negev. In fact, it isdemonstrable from a comparison with the eighteenth-century BC textsfrom Mari (on the Euphrates River) that the pastoral traditions ofGenesis fit the early second-millennium BC context much better thanlater periods.

Thetowns and houses of the Middle Bronze Age were violently destroyed inthe fifteenth century BC, most likely by the Egyptians, who expelledthe Hyksos. Despite the trade that seems to have continued with theeastern Mediterranean (Mycenaean pottery), the hill towns ofPalestine were now poorer and fewer than the coastal cities. Thissituation is clearly reflected in the Amarna letters between thekings of Canaan and Egypt. The major cities were reoccupied, but manyof them were destroyed later in the thirteenth century.

LateBronze Age.It is in the Late Bronze Age (c. 1550–1200 BC) that thebiblical account is usually challenged by the archaeologicaldiscoveries. Even if one accepts the reasonable interpretation thatJoshua burned only three cities (Jericho, Ai, Hazor) in his campaign(see Josh. 6:24; 8:28; 11:13), the evidence of destruction from bothJericho and Ai is highly questionable. Thus, while it is widelybelieved that Jericho was abandoned around 1325 BC, the fallen wallsonce thought to belong to this period were dated much earlier byKathleen Kenyon (Early Bronze). The evidence from Ai (et-Tell) iseven less promising, unless Bryan Wood is correct in hisidentification of Ai with Khirbet el-Maqatir.

Basedon the apparent lack of change in material culture during the LateBronze Age, mainstream archaeologists commonly classify theIsraelites as dissident Canaanites who moved into the hill country.

Althoughit cannot be conclusively demonstrated from archaeology that theIsraelites were not Canaanites but rather came to Canaan from theoutside, the mainstream interpretation has serious problems of itsown. There was clearly a new pattern of simple farming in the hills,characterized by four-room houses whose inhabitants used manycollared-rim jars, and there is an almost complete absence of pigbones (which usually are found in the Canaanite cities) in thehill-country sites. More important, there is strong evidence that theIsraelites were worshiping their own national God (YHWH) by the ninthcentury BC, in sharp contrast to the polytheistic religion of Canaan(as illuminated by the culture in neighboring Ugarit). The personalnames of individuals in the eighth and seventh centuries BC arealmost exclusively Yahwistic.

Anothervery significant change is the abandonment of the shrines in towns ofthe Late Bronze Age. Not a single site can be identified in whichworship continued from the Late Bronze Age well into the Iron Age (itseems that by 1000 BC the Canaanites disappeared as an entity in thearea occupied by Israel). It is highly unlikely that the Canaaniteswho moved from towns into the hill-country sites would have abandonedtheir divinities (whose need they must have felt greatly while facingthe uncertainties of the wilderness), and it is even more unlikelythat people who had come from different towns with different deitieswould have accepted almost universally a new patron deity of obscureprovenance. The continuity in material culture of a nation that wasto take over the homes and all the equipment of the Canaanites shouldnot be surprising in light of the commands of the Bible (Deut.6:10–11). The almost universal rise of the worship of the Godof Israel, and the mention of Israel as a group of people in theStela of Merneptah (c. 1208 BC), argue forcefully that theIsraelites were not really Canaanites.

TheIsraelite (Iron) Age (1200–586 BC)

Bythe twelfth century, the Philistine settlement of southwest Canaan isattested by a new type of pottery with Late Mycenaean affinities.This new type of pottery was found throughout Philistia, theShephelah, and as far north as Joppa. Wealthy and well-constructedCanaanite cities held out for at least another century (Beth-Shean,Gezer, and Megiddo?). The evidence for Israelites comes from thesmall villages throughout the hill country and Galilee.Traditionally, as mentioned above, they are recognized by theirfour-room houses, large number of storage pits for grain, largestorage jars with thick-collared rims, and preference for terracinghillsides for farming.

Archaeologically,it is very difficult to at­trib­ute the construction ofcities to any king of the united monarchy (but see the recentdiscovery below). Saul had a citadel at Gibeah (Tell el-Fûl),and the first fortification there has been attributed to him. Itshows the adoption of a new fortification system of casemate wall,characteristic of this period. Similar casemate walls have been foundat Shechem, Beth-shemesh, and Beit Mirsim (and later even in Moab). Asmall town at Megiddo, whose houses form a defensive ring around theperimeter of the mound, has been attributed to David.

Though1 Kings 9:15 reports how Solomon built up Hazor, Megiddo, andGezer, the dating of the six-chambered gates found in all of thesesites and the related walls is still being debated. A much morerecent excavation from Khirbat en-Nahas in Jordan has foundindustrial-scale production of copper in a region and at a time thatcorrelates well with the narrative about Solomon (see 1 Kings7:46).

Anothervery recent and impressive find comes from Khirbet Qeiyafa (mostlikely Shaaraim [Josh. 15:36; 1 Sam. 17:52; 1 Chron.4:31–32]). This site, located in the western part of the highShephelah (near Azekah), was recently excavated by Yosef Garfinkeland Saar Ganor of Hebrew University, Jerusalem. On the basis of fourburnt olive pits tested at Oxford University, the excavators datedthis fortified city to the time of David. They concluded that themassive construction of the city wall (which required two hundredthousand tons of stone) supports the existence of a centralizedpolitical organization, a state—a conclusion that hasfar-reaching implications for the disputed chronology of Iron Age IIA(1000–900 BC). They also found a five-line inscription,indicating that writing was practiced in the region. This inscriptionis important because it seems to be the longest proto-Canaaniteinscription ever found, and the earliest Hebrew inscription known todate.

TheHellenistic-Roman Period (332 BC and Following)

Herodthe Great (37–4 BC) was the ambitious ruler who carried throughmost of the grand building projects that still dot the Holy Landtoday. At Jerusalem, which is still being excavated, the massivewalls that he built for the platform of the temple are still visibletoday both above and below the ground. Other ruins associated withHerod have been found at Caesarea, Jericho, Herodium (nearBethlehem), Masada, and also in Jordan.

Oneof the most important inscriptions for NT studies (especially theGospels) was found by the Italian excavators of Caesarea. Theseexcavators found that the inscription refers to Pontius Pilate,prefect of Judea. Other inscriptions from Greece and Turkey areconnected with the events described in Acts and Paul’s letters.Thus, in Corinth a door inscription (“Synagogue of theHebrews”) may indicate the place where Paul preached (Acts18:4). Excavations there revealed a text naming Erastus as abenefactor. This may be the city treasurer of Rom. 16:23. Near Lystrainscriptions record the dedication to Zeus of a statue of Hermes bysome Lycaonians, and nearby was a stone altar for Zeus and Hermes.This explains the identification of Barnabas with Zeus (Jupiter) andPaul with Hermes (Mercury) in Acts 14:11–12.

Itis clear from the selective sample of data presented here that thefield of archaeology has contributed considerably to the context andunderstanding of the biblical world. All the signs and recentexcavations suggest that there are continuing and exciting prospectsto be found in the newer (biblical) archaeology.

One of the largest, wealthiest, and most prestigious cities in ancient Greece.

Location and important features. Corinth is located about fifty miles west of Athens on the narrow isthmus that connects mainland Greece with the Peloponnesus.

Corinth had two harbors. Lechaeum was about 1.5 miles west on the Corinthian Gulf and was enclosed within the six-mile-long city walls. Cenchreae was about 6.5 miles east on the Saronic Gulf. Paul sailed from Cenchreae to Syria to end his second missionary journey (Acts 18:18). Corinth’s location made it an international crossroads of commerce and travel. Because of the narrowness of the isthmus, it controlled the land routes between the Peloponnesus and mainland Greece.

With its two harbors, Corinth served as a gateway between Asia and Europe. Instead of sailing all the way around the Peloponnesian peninsula, it was faster and cheaper for ships to dock at one harbor and have cargo transferred across the narrow isthmus to the other harbor. The diolkos was the road upon which cargo and even small ships were carried across. In 602 BC Periander became the first to attempt to cut a canal across the isthmus, but he soon gave up after a negative oracle from Delphi. Later Roman emperors, including Julius Caesar, Caligula, and Nero, tried but failed. Strabo credited the location of Corinth as a key to its wealth, but he also recognized its temples, artisans, and the Isthmian games as major sources of wealth.

Corinth boasted the most impressive acropolis in Greece, its Acrocorinth towering eighteen hundred feet above the city. The Acrocorinth served as a fortress and hosted temples, the most famous of which was the temple of Aphrodite, which in the old city (destroyed by the Romans in 146 BC) had boasted a thousand temple slaves and prostitutes. Its presence contributed to Corinth’s reputation as an excessively immoral city. A Greek verb was coined, korinthiazomai (lit., “to Corinthianize”), which meant “to practice sexual immorality.” Like other prominent Greek cities, Corinth contained numerous temples to various gods and emperors. Asclepius was the god of healing, and his sanctuary made Corinth one of the premier medical centers. The temple of Apollo was one of the oldest temples in Greece, built in the sixth century BC in the Doric order.

Since in 44 BC Julius Caesar had rebuilt Corinth as a Roman colony, the city was laid out along a Roman grid system. By the time of Paul, Corinth’s architecture reflected the transition from Greek culture to a Roman colony. The predominance of Latin inscriptions over Greek inscriptions during the first century AD further demonstrates the Roman character of the city. As would be expected of a large Roman city in Greece, Corinth had a large forum in the city center surrounded by many commercial and civic buildings, including basilicas, water fountains, shops, public toilets, and a bouleutērion (council chamber). Its large theater was nearby.

Played every two years just ten miles from Corinth, the Isthmian games were one of four permanent Panhellenic games. The Isthmian games were played in AD 51, the same year Paul appeared before Gallio. The games brought considerable prestige and wealth to Corinth.

From ancient to modern times. The first occupation of Corinth began in the Stone Age, and by 1100 BC it was very prosperous and may be the “wealthy Corinth” mentioned in Homer’s Iliad. As one of the most prominent Greek city-states, it contributed to the development of Greece’s culture and wealth. It was a colonizing city-state and planted settlements across Greece and the Mediterranean. However, Corinth never fully recovered its former prominence after its defeat in the Peloponnesian War, which left Sparta victorious and Greece exhausted. Corinth later fell under the influence of the Macedonians for about 150 years until the arrival of the Romans in 196 BC. After years of opposition to the Romans, it was destroyed, and its inhabitants were sold into slavery in 146 BC (1 Macc. 8:9–11). Corinth’s fortunes changed when Julius Caesar established it as a Roman colony and Augustus later made it the capital of Achaia.

By the time of Paul’s arrival, Corinth was one of the most important commercial centers in the entire Roman Empire and the largest city in Greece, with a free population of about 300,000 and an additional 460,000 slaves. Corinth had a significant Jewish population, especially after AD 49, when the Jews were expelled from Rome (Acts 18:2). During Paul’s year and a half of ministry, he regularly argued in the synagogue (18:4). An inscription from the synagogue’s lintel has been found. In AD 51 many of the Jews brought Paul before Gallio, the proconsul of Achaia, on charges of “persuading the people to worship God in ways contrary to the law” (18:13). As Paul stood at the bēma (judgment seat), Gallio dismissed the charges and expelled the Jews from the court (18:12–17). The bēma, a platform where speakers stood and citizens appeared before officials, has been located and identified by archaeologists. Archaeologists have also found near the theater an inscription that reads, “Erastus, in return for his aedileship, laid this pavement at his own expense.” This is likely the same Erastus who was Corinth’s city treasurer and who became a Christian (Rom. 16:23; 2 Tim. 4:20). Corinth played a significant role in Paul’s ministry, as he visited it on multiple occasions (1 Cor. 12:14; 13:1), wrote 1–2 Corinthians to its church, and likely wrote Romans and 1–2 Thessalonians from there. Other early church leaders also ministered in Corinth, such as Apollos (Acts 19:1).

In spite of numerous devastating earthquakes and conquests by foreign powers, Corinth remained an important but not prominent city over the centuries. At the founding of modern Greece, it was considered a candidate for the capital.

Unlike modern systems of jurisprudence, the Bible does not draw distinctions between criminal, civil, family, and religious law, either in its terminology or in its presentation of legal material. In the Bible, acts of deviance that are defined as criminal in virtually all societies are discussed alongside violations of a culturally specific, religious nature. For instance, the Ten Commandments prohibit murder and dishonoring parents (Exod. 20:12–13), as well as commanding Sabbath observance (Exod. 20:8–11). Any attempt to extract a system of criminal law from biblical materials must account for the fact that every culture defines deviance differently, with respect not only to specific acts but also to categories of deviance.

When viewed from the standpoint of the Bible’s organization of legal material, the terminology used, and the sanctions applied, there is substantial overlap in the Bible between “crime” and what modern societies define as noncriminal deviance. For present purposes, we might define “crime” broadly as including any act of social deviance that merits the application of a sanction by society at large (as opposed to the ad hoc fiats of rulers, as in Gen. 26:11) and that can be prohibited in a generally applied rule (even accounting for differences between free citizens and slaves, as in Exod. 21:18–21). As we will see, the Bible requires punishments, often severe, for a broad spectrum of offenses.

Capital Crimes

The Pentateuch mandates the death penalty for a wide variety of crimes. Often the mode of execution is unspecified. Where a particular mode is prescribed, the death penalty most often consisted of stoning (as in Num. 15:35) and less frequently of burning (Lev. 20:14) or shooting with arrows (Exod. 19:13).

Crimes incurring the death penalty include killing or murder (Exod. 21:12–14; Lev. 24:17; Num. 35:16), though the crime is aggravated or lessened depending on the intention behind it (Exod. 21:13–14) and whether a weapon is involved (Num. 35:16); attacking parents (Exod. 21:15); kidnapping and slave trading (Exod. 21:16; Deut. 24:7); cursing parents (Exod 21:17; Lev. 20:9); negligence resulting in death (Exod. 21:29); bestial*ty (Exod. 22:19; Lev. 20:15–16); breach of the Sabbath (Exod. 31:14–15; Num. 15:35); child sacrifice (Lev. 20:2); adultery (Lev. 20:10; Deut. 22:22); incest (Lev. 20:11–12); hom*osexuality (Lev. 20:13); marrying a woman and her mother (Lev. 20:14); witchcraft (Exod. 22:18; Lev. 20:27); blasphemy (Exod. 24:16); unauthorized approach to the tabernacle (Num. 1:51); idolatry (Num. 25:5); false prophecy and divination (Deut. 13:5); presumptuous prophecy (Deut. 18:20); enticing others to idolatry (Deut. 13:6–10); false testimony in a capital case (Deut. 19:19); and contempt for authorities (Deut. 17:2; Josh. 1:18).

When the body of an executed criminal was displayed by hanging, it had to be removed by nightfall (Deut. 21:22). The death penalty was not to be applied vicariously to family members of criminals (Deut. 24:16). In OT texts, execution was to be carried out by the victims (Deut. 13:9), families of victims (the “avenger of blood” of Num. 35:19), or witnesses to the crime.

The NT mentions an official or professional executioner (Mark 6:27). Paul declares that the authorities rightly derive the power of the sword from God (Rom. 13:4).

Punishments for Noncapital Crimes

Corporal punishment. Beating as a criminal punishment is rare in the OT (Jer. 20:2; 37:15). Most OT references to beating occur in the context of the household, as a punishment for slaves or children. Deuteronomy 25:3 limits the number of strokes in a flogging to forty (see 2 Cor. 11:24). Flogging was commonly applied as a criminal punishment in Roman times, and it was a common mode of discipline within the Roman military (Acts 16:22; 2 Cor. 11:25; 1 Pet. 2:20).

Restitution. Crimes against property were punished by compelling the offender to make restitution by repaying, often in an amount that exceeded the actual damages, including in cases of theft or negligence (Exod. 21:33; 22:3–15); killing an animal (Lev. 24:18, 21); having sexual relations with a virgin not pledged to be married (Exod. 22:16); injuring a pregnant woman (Exod. 21:22); harming a slave (Exod. 21:26–27). Financial restitution could not be made for murder (Num. 35:31).

Retribution. The notion of the lex talionis, the law of retribution, is stated in Exod. 21:23–24: “life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot” (cf. Lev. 24:19–20; Deut. 19:21; Matt. 5:38). This formula appears in other ancient legal traditions. The idea of bodily mutilation may strike modern readers as barbaric, but such laws may actually have been relatively enlightened by ancient standards, as they imposed a proportional limit on retribution.

Incarceration. In modern societies, incarceration and probation account for the vast majority of the punishments resulting from criminal offenses. In the OT, incarceration is rarely mentioned apart from the imprisonment of war captives (e.g., Judg. 16:21) and political dissidents. Jeremiah was imprisoned several times for his criticism of the regime (Jer. 32:2; 37:15). Throughout the Bible, prisoners often are guarded by soldiers rather than by professional jailers.

Paul imprisoned Christians prior to his conversion (Acts 8:3), and he himself was imprisoned or placed under arrest several times (e.g., Acts 16:23; 20:23; 24:27; Rom. 16:7). John the Baptist was imprisoned after he criticized Herod (Mark 6:17). Again, in both cases, incarceration was used to silence and segregate someone whose free movement in society threatened political stability rather than to punish a common criminal. In Matt. 5:25–26 Jesus refers to imprisonment for an unspecified reason, though the threat that “you will not get out until you have paid the last penny” suggests that incarceration was a substitute for an unpaid fine or monetary penalty. This recalls Exod. 22:3, which mandates that a thief who could not make financial restitution for theft must be sold (as a slave).

Banishment and cities of refuge. A number of OT passages refer to the “cutting off” of a person from the community. It is not clear whether this language refers to exile or the death penalty; several of the crimes thus punished are known to be capital crimes in other texts.

The law of Num. 35:6–34 establishes six “cities of refuge” among the towns allotted to the Levites. To these cities an unintentional killer could flee from the “avenger of blood,” a relative of the victim, until such time as the case could be adjudicated by the whole community. A killer who was found to have acted unintentionally and without malice could remain in the city of refuge, safe from retribution, until the death of the high priest, at which time the killer was free to return home with impunity.

Trials and Judgments

In biblical times Israel did not have an independent judiciary. Judgments in criminal cases were rendered by local elders (Josh. 20:4), communities (Num. 35:24), monarchs, or other rulers and officials. The judges of the book of Judges were primarily military rulers, though they may have also adjudicated cases as a function of their military and political power (Judg. 4:5). Cases were decided on the basis of eyewitness testimony (Num. 35:30) and, in the case of capital crimes, on the basis of multiple witnesses (Deut. 17:6). In some cases, the Bible provides detailed statutory criteria for making such judgments, as in the discussion in Num. 35:16–28 of the difference between murder and unintentional killing. In some cases, where the determination of guilt or innocence would have been impossible, as in the case of suspected adultery, a verdict could be attained through divination (Num. 5:11–31). As already noted, the judgment of some cases could be affected by the slave status of those involved (Exod. 20:20–21; see also 22:8–9).

The trial and execution of Naboth, though ultimately a subversion of justice of the highest order, offers an insight into the operation of justice in Israel in the monarchic period (1 Kings 21:1–16). Naboth was accused on a trumped-up charge of blasphemy, a capital crime (Exod. 24:16). He was tried by the notables of his city, and on the testimony of two (false) witnesses (Deut. 17:6), he was then stoned to death.

From the standpoint of OT law, the trial and execution of Jesus were complicated by the context of concurrent systems of Jewish and Roman law and government. Like Naboth, Jesus was accused by false witnesses (Matt. 26:60–61). Ultimately, the Sanhedrin determined that because Jesus had blasphemed in its presence by identifying himself as the Messiah and the Son of God, further witness testimony was unnecessary in order to achieve the desired result, the death penalty (Matt. 26:65–66; John 19:7). Ultimately, the Sanhedrin had to involve the Roman governor because it lacked the authority to execute a criminal (John 18:31). By the time Jesus was taken before Pilate, the charge had been changed from a religious one to a political one: Jesus claimed to be the king of the Jews, thus subverting Roman authority (Matt. 26:11–12). Eventually, Pilate tortured and executed Jesus not because he saw merit in the charges but rather to avoid a riot (Matt. 27:24; John 19:4, 12). Luke reports that Jesus also had a trial before Herod Antipas, the ruler to whom Jesus was subject as a Galilean (23:7). Thus, the trial of Jesus in some ways reflects both Jewish and Roman law, but it also involves some purely pragmatic (and legally and morally questionable) actions on the part of both the Sanhedrin and Pilate.

Unlike modern systems of jurisprudence, the Bible does not draw distinctions between criminal, civil, family, and religious law, either in its terminology or in its presentation of legal material. In the Bible, acts of deviance that are defined as criminal in virtually all societies are discussed alongside violations of a culturally specific, religious nature. For instance, the Ten Commandments prohibit murder and dishonoring parents (Exod. 20:12–13), as well as commanding Sabbath observance (Exod. 20:8–11). Any attempt to extract a system of criminal law from biblical materials must account for the fact that every culture defines deviance differently, with respect not only to specific acts but also to categories of deviance.

When viewed from the standpoint of the Bible’s organization of legal material, the terminology used, and the sanctions applied, there is substantial overlap in the Bible between “crime” and what modern societies define as noncriminal deviance. For present purposes, we might define “crime” broadly as including any act of social deviance that merits the application of a sanction by society at large (as opposed to the ad hoc fiats of rulers, as in Gen. 26:11) and that can be prohibited in a generally applied rule (even accounting for differences between free citizens and slaves, as in Exod. 21:18–21). As we will see, the Bible requires punishments, often severe, for a broad spectrum of offenses.

Capital Crimes

The Pentateuch mandates the death penalty for a wide variety of crimes. Often the mode of execution is unspecified. Where a particular mode is prescribed, the death penalty most often consisted of stoning (as in Num. 15:35) and less frequently of burning (Lev. 20:14) or shooting with arrows (Exod. 19:13).

Crimes incurring the death penalty include killing or murder (Exod. 21:12–14; Lev. 24:17; Num. 35:16), though the crime is aggravated or lessened depending on the intention behind it (Exod. 21:13–14) and whether a weapon is involved (Num. 35:16); attacking parents (Exod. 21:15); kidnapping and slave trading (Exod. 21:16; Deut. 24:7); cursing parents (Exod 21:17; Lev. 20:9); negligence resulting in death (Exod. 21:29); bestial*ty (Exod. 22:19; Lev. 20:15–16); breach of the Sabbath (Exod. 31:14–15; Num. 15:35); child sacrifice (Lev. 20:2); adultery (Lev. 20:10; Deut. 22:22); incest (Lev. 20:11–12); hom*osexuality (Lev. 20:13); marrying a woman and her mother (Lev. 20:14); witchcraft (Exod. 22:18; Lev. 20:27); blasphemy (Exod. 24:16); unauthorized approach to the tabernacle (Num. 1:51); idolatry (Num. 25:5); false prophecy and divination (Deut. 13:5); presumptuous prophecy (Deut. 18:20); enticing others to idolatry (Deut. 13:6–10); false testimony in a capital case (Deut. 19:19); and contempt for authorities (Deut. 17:2; Josh. 1:18).

When the body of an executed criminal was displayed by hanging, it had to be removed by nightfall (Deut. 21:22). The death penalty was not to be applied vicariously to family members of criminals (Deut. 24:16). In OT texts, execution was to be carried out by the victims (Deut. 13:9), families of victims (the “avenger of blood” of Num. 35:19), or witnesses to the crime.

The NT mentions an official or professional executioner (Mark 6:27). Paul declares that the authorities rightly derive the power of the sword from God (Rom. 13:4).

Punishments for Noncapital Crimes

Corporal punishment. Beating as a criminal punishment is rare in the OT (Jer. 20:2; 37:15). Most OT references to beating occur in the context of the household, as a punishment for slaves or children. Deuteronomy 25:3 limits the number of strokes in a flogging to forty (see 2 Cor. 11:24). Flogging was commonly applied as a criminal punishment in Roman times, and it was a common mode of discipline within the Roman military (Acts 16:22; 2 Cor. 11:25; 1 Pet. 2:20).

Restitution. Crimes against property were punished by compelling the offender to make restitution by repaying, often in an amount that exceeded the actual damages, including in cases of theft or negligence (Exod. 21:33; 22:3–15); killing an animal (Lev. 24:18, 21); having sexual relations with a virgin not pledged to be married (Exod. 22:16); injuring a pregnant woman (Exod. 21:22); harming a slave (Exod. 21:26–27). Financial restitution could not be made for murder (Num. 35:31).

Retribution. The notion of the lex talionis, the law of retribution, is stated in Exod. 21:23–24: “life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot” (cf. Lev. 24:19–20; Deut. 19:21; Matt. 5:38). This formula appears in other ancient legal traditions. The idea of bodily mutilation may strike modern readers as barbaric, but such laws may actually have been relatively enlightened by ancient standards, as they imposed a proportional limit on retribution.

Incarceration. In modern societies, incarceration and probation account for the vast majority of the punishments resulting from criminal offenses. In the OT, incarceration is rarely mentioned apart from the imprisonment of war captives (e.g., Judg. 16:21) and political dissidents. Jeremiah was imprisoned several times for his criticism of the regime (Jer. 32:2; 37:15). Throughout the Bible, prisoners often are guarded by soldiers rather than by professional jailers.

Paul imprisoned Christians prior to his conversion (Acts 8:3), and he himself was imprisoned or placed under arrest several times (e.g., Acts 16:23; 20:23; 24:27; Rom. 16:7). John the Baptist was imprisoned after he criticized Herod (Mark 6:17). Again, in both cases, incarceration was used to silence and segregate someone whose free movement in society threatened political stability rather than to punish a common criminal. In Matt. 5:25–26 Jesus refers to imprisonment for an unspecified reason, though the threat that “you will not get out until you have paid the last penny” suggests that incarceration was a substitute for an unpaid fine or monetary penalty. This recalls Exod. 22:3, which mandates that a thief who could not make financial restitution for theft must be sold (as a slave).

Banishment and cities of refuge. A number of OT passages refer to the “cutting off” of a person from the community. It is not clear whether this language refers to exile or the death penalty; several of the crimes thus punished are known to be capital crimes in other texts.

The law of Num. 35:6–34 establishes six “cities of refuge” among the towns allotted to the Levites. To these cities an unintentional killer could flee from the “avenger of blood,” a relative of the victim, until such time as the case could be adjudicated by the whole community. A killer who was found to have acted unintentionally and without malice could remain in the city of refuge, safe from retribution, until the death of the high priest, at which time the killer was free to return home with impunity.

Trials and Judgments

In biblical times Israel did not have an independent judiciary. Judgments in criminal cases were rendered by local elders (Josh. 20:4), communities (Num. 35:24), monarchs, or other rulers and officials. The judges of the book of Judges were primarily military rulers, though they may have also adjudicated cases as a function of their military and political power (Judg. 4:5). Cases were decided on the basis of eyewitness testimony (Num. 35:30) and, in the case of capital crimes, on the basis of multiple witnesses (Deut. 17:6). In some cases, the Bible provides detailed statutory criteria for making such judgments, as in the discussion in Num. 35:16–28 of the difference between murder and unintentional killing. In some cases, where the determination of guilt or innocence would have been impossible, as in the case of suspected adultery, a verdict could be attained through divination (Num. 5:11–31). As already noted, the judgment of some cases could be affected by the slave status of those involved (Exod. 20:20–21; see also 22:8–9).

The trial and execution of Naboth, though ultimately a subversion of justice of the highest order, offers an insight into the operation of justice in Israel in the monarchic period (1 Kings 21:1–16). Naboth was accused on a trumped-up charge of blasphemy, a capital crime (Exod. 24:16). He was tried by the notables of his city, and on the testimony of two (false) witnesses (Deut. 17:6), he was then stoned to death.

From the standpoint of OT law, the trial and execution of Jesus were complicated by the context of concurrent systems of Jewish and Roman law and government. Like Naboth, Jesus was accused by false witnesses (Matt. 26:60–61). Ultimately, the Sanhedrin determined that because Jesus had blasphemed in its presence by identifying himself as the Messiah and the Son of God, further witness testimony was unnecessary in order to achieve the desired result, the death penalty (Matt. 26:65–66; John 19:7). Ultimately, the Sanhedrin had to involve the Roman governor because it lacked the authority to execute a criminal (John 18:31). By the time Jesus was taken before Pilate, the charge had been changed from a religious one to a political one: Jesus claimed to be the king of the Jews, thus subverting Roman authority (Matt. 26:11–12). Eventually, Pilate tortured and executed Jesus not because he saw merit in the charges but rather to avoid a riot (Matt. 27:24; John 19:4, 12). Luke reports that Jesus also had a trial before Herod Antipas, the ruler to whom Jesus was subject as a Galilean (23:7). Thus, the trial of Jesus in some ways reflects both Jewish and Roman law, but it also involves some purely pragmatic (and legally and morally questionable) actions on the part of both the Sanhedrin and Pilate.

Unlike modern systems of jurisprudence, the Bible does not draw distinctions between criminal, civil, family, and religious law, either in its terminology or in its presentation of legal material. In the Bible, acts of deviance that are defined as criminal in virtually all societies are discussed alongside violations of a culturally specific, religious nature. For instance, the Ten Commandments prohibit murder and dishonoring parents (Exod. 20:12–13), as well as commanding Sabbath observance (Exod. 20:8–11). Any attempt to extract a system of criminal law from biblical materials must account for the fact that every culture defines deviance differently, with respect not only to specific acts but also to categories of deviance.

When viewed from the standpoint of the Bible’s organization of legal material, the terminology used, and the sanctions applied, there is substantial overlap in the Bible between “crime” and what modern societies define as noncriminal deviance. For present purposes, we might define “crime” broadly as including any act of social deviance that merits the application of a sanction by society at large (as opposed to the ad hoc fiats of rulers, as in Gen. 26:11) and that can be prohibited in a generally applied rule (even accounting for differences between free citizens and slaves, as in Exod. 21:18–21). As we will see, the Bible requires punishments, often severe, for a broad spectrum of offenses.

Capital Crimes

The Pentateuch mandates the death penalty for a wide variety of crimes. Often the mode of execution is unspecified. Where a particular mode is prescribed, the death penalty most often consisted of stoning (as in Num. 15:35) and less frequently of burning (Lev. 20:14) or shooting with arrows (Exod. 19:13).

Crimes incurring the death penalty include killing or murder (Exod. 21:12–14; Lev. 24:17; Num. 35:16), though the crime is aggravated or lessened depending on the intention behind it (Exod. 21:13–14) and whether a weapon is involved (Num. 35:16); attacking parents (Exod. 21:15); kidnapping and slave trading (Exod. 21:16; Deut. 24:7); cursing parents (Exod 21:17; Lev. 20:9); negligence resulting in death (Exod. 21:29); bestial*ty (Exod. 22:19; Lev. 20:15–16); breach of the Sabbath (Exod. 31:14–15; Num. 15:35); child sacrifice (Lev. 20:2); adultery (Lev. 20:10; Deut. 22:22); incest (Lev. 20:11–12); hom*osexuality (Lev. 20:13); marrying a woman and her mother (Lev. 20:14); witchcraft (Exod. 22:18; Lev. 20:27); blasphemy (Exod. 24:16); unauthorized approach to the tabernacle (Num. 1:51); idolatry (Num. 25:5); false prophecy and divination (Deut. 13:5); presumptuous prophecy (Deut. 18:20); enticing others to idolatry (Deut. 13:6–10); false testimony in a capital case (Deut. 19:19); and contempt for authorities (Deut. 17:2; Josh. 1:18).

When the body of an executed criminal was displayed by hanging, it had to be removed by nightfall (Deut. 21:22). The death penalty was not to be applied vicariously to family members of criminals (Deut. 24:16). In OT texts, execution was to be carried out by the victims (Deut. 13:9), families of victims (the “avenger of blood” of Num. 35:19), or witnesses to the crime.

The NT mentions an official or professional executioner (Mark 6:27). Paul declares that the authorities rightly derive the power of the sword from God (Rom. 13:4).

Punishments for Noncapital Crimes

Corporal punishment. Beating as a criminal punishment is rare in the OT (Jer. 20:2; 37:15). Most OT references to beating occur in the context of the household, as a punishment for slaves or children. Deuteronomy 25:3 limits the number of strokes in a flogging to forty (see 2 Cor. 11:24). Flogging was commonly applied as a criminal punishment in Roman times, and it was a common mode of discipline within the Roman military (Acts 16:22; 2 Cor. 11:25; 1 Pet. 2:20).

Restitution. Crimes against property were punished by compelling the offender to make restitution by repaying, often in an amount that exceeded the actual damages, including in cases of theft or negligence (Exod. 21:33; 22:3–15); killing an animal (Lev. 24:18, 21); having sexual relations with a virgin not pledged to be married (Exod. 22:16); injuring a pregnant woman (Exod. 21:22); harming a slave (Exod. 21:26–27). Financial restitution could not be made for murder (Num. 35:31).

Retribution. The notion of the lex talionis, the law of retribution, is stated in Exod. 21:23–24: “life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot” (cf. Lev. 24:19–20; Deut. 19:21; Matt. 5:38). This formula appears in other ancient legal traditions. The idea of bodily mutilation may strike modern readers as barbaric, but such laws may actually have been relatively enlightened by ancient standards, as they imposed a proportional limit on retribution.

Incarceration. In modern societies, incarceration and probation account for the vast majority of the punishments resulting from criminal offenses. In the OT, incarceration is rarely mentioned apart from the imprisonment of war captives (e.g., Judg. 16:21) and political dissidents. Jeremiah was imprisoned several times for his criticism of the regime (Jer. 32:2; 37:15). Throughout the Bible, prisoners often are guarded by soldiers rather than by professional jailers.

Paul imprisoned Christians prior to his conversion (Acts 8:3), and he himself was imprisoned or placed under arrest several times (e.g., Acts 16:23; 20:23; 24:27; Rom. 16:7). John the Baptist was imprisoned after he criticized Herod (Mark 6:17). Again, in both cases, incarceration was used to silence and segregate someone whose free movement in society threatened political stability rather than to punish a common criminal. In Matt. 5:25–26 Jesus refers to imprisonment for an unspecified reason, though the threat that “you will not get out until you have paid the last penny” suggests that incarceration was a substitute for an unpaid fine or monetary penalty. This recalls Exod. 22:3, which mandates that a thief who could not make financial restitution for theft must be sold (as a slave).

Banishment and cities of refuge. A number of OT passages refer to the “cutting off” of a person from the community. It is not clear whether this language refers to exile or the death penalty; several of the crimes thus punished are known to be capital crimes in other texts.

The law of Num. 35:6–34 establishes six “cities of refuge” among the towns allotted to the Levites. To these cities an unintentional killer could flee from the “avenger of blood,” a relative of the victim, until such time as the case could be adjudicated by the whole community. A killer who was found to have acted unintentionally and without malice could remain in the city of refuge, safe from retribution, until the death of the high priest, at which time the killer was free to return home with impunity.

Trials and Judgments

In biblical times Israel did not have an independent judiciary. Judgments in criminal cases were rendered by local elders (Josh. 20:4), communities (Num. 35:24), monarchs, or other rulers and officials. The judges of the book of Judges were primarily military rulers, though they may have also adjudicated cases as a function of their military and political power (Judg. 4:5). Cases were decided on the basis of eyewitness testimony (Num. 35:30) and, in the case of capital crimes, on the basis of multiple witnesses (Deut. 17:6). In some cases, the Bible provides detailed statutory criteria for making such judgments, as in the discussion in Num. 35:16–28 of the difference between murder and unintentional killing. In some cases, where the determination of guilt or innocence would have been impossible, as in the case of suspected adultery, a verdict could be attained through divination (Num. 5:11–31). As already noted, the judgment of some cases could be affected by the slave status of those involved (Exod. 20:20–21; see also 22:8–9).

The trial and execution of Naboth, though ultimately a subversion of justice of the highest order, offers an insight into the operation of justice in Israel in the monarchic period (1 Kings 21:1–16). Naboth was accused on a trumped-up charge of blasphemy, a capital crime (Exod. 24:16). He was tried by the notables of his city, and on the testimony of two (false) witnesses (Deut. 17:6), he was then stoned to death.

From the standpoint of OT law, the trial and execution of Jesus were complicated by the context of concurrent systems of Jewish and Roman law and government. Like Naboth, Jesus was accused by false witnesses (Matt. 26:60–61). Ultimately, the Sanhedrin determined that because Jesus had blasphemed in its presence by identifying himself as the Messiah and the Son of God, further witness testimony was unnecessary in order to achieve the desired result, the death penalty (Matt. 26:65–66; John 19:7). Ultimately, the Sanhedrin had to involve the Roman governor because it lacked the authority to execute a criminal (John 18:31). By the time Jesus was taken before Pilate, the charge had been changed from a religious one to a political one: Jesus claimed to be the king of the Jews, thus subverting Roman authority (Matt. 26:11–12). Eventually, Pilate tortured and executed Jesus not because he saw merit in the charges but rather to avoid a riot (Matt. 27:24; John 19:4, 12). Luke reports that Jesus also had a trial before Herod Antipas, the ruler to whom Jesus was subject as a Galilean (23:7). Thus, the trial of Jesus in some ways reflects both Jewish and Roman law, but it also involves some purely pragmatic (and legally and morally questionable) actions on the part of both the Sanhedrin and Pilate.

Although the Bible is dominated by a patriarchal perspective,as one would expect from the ancient Near East, there is also avaluing of women that comes to the surface. Although this falls shortof what we would call “gender equality” today, the Bibledoes make overtures in that direction. Already in the Genesiscreation story, men and women are described as the two halves ofhumanity, who together participate in the mandate to fill and subduethe earth (Gen. 1:26–28). Eve is created from the side of Adam,indicating equality in their very beings (2:21–23).

Inhis own ministry, Jesus includes women in ways that were unusual forhis context. In first-century Palestine, learning from spiritualteachers was a privilege reserved exclusively for men. However, inthe story of Mary and Martha (Luke 10:38–42), Jesus commendsMary for breaking her expected role as a woman in order to follow himand learn at his feet. Martha, however, receives a sharp rebuke forallowing domestic duties to hinder her discipleship. Jesus’first resurrection appearance is to women in all of the Gospels, eventhough the testimony of a woman was generally not considered valid inlegal matters in first-century Palestine (although rabbinicl*terature suggests it was considered valid testimony for a woman toconfirm a man’s death). Jesus takes particular efforts toelevate the position of women, despite a possible tarnishing of hispublic image.

Theconcern for greater gender equality extends into the rest of the NT.Paul says that in Christ all are one regardless of ethnicity, status,or gender (Gal. 3:28). Paul also refers to women as coworkers in thegospel (Rom. 16:3) and as deacons (16:1). Although frequently citedin order to support a hierarchal family structure, the householdcodes (Eph. 5:21–6:9; Col. 3:18–4:1; Titus 2:1–10;1Pet. 2:18–3:7) are a step toward gender equality in theGreco-Roman culture, since secular household codes usually placedresponsibilities on wives, not husbands. That Paul givesresponsibilities to husbands is a significant shift toward amutuality of devotion and obligation.

In the Bible, gestures are made with either parts of the bodyor items, such as clothing and rings, directly connected to the body.For this reason, it makes sense to classify biblical gestures inrelation to the different body parts that are identified with thegestures. It is, however, challenging to know where to draw a line onclassifying a gesture. For example, a devious person is described inProv. 6:13 as one “who winks maliciously with his eye, signalswith his feet and motions with his fingers.” It is unclearwhether this is a single gesture or multiple ones, and whether allsignify different things or the same thing.

Head

Gesturesthat relate to the head range from simple head motions to semiviolentacts such as hair pulling. Simple head motions include lifting ofone’s head in honor (Gen. 40:13), bowing one’s head inmourning (Ps. 35:14), tossing one’s head in mockery andderision (2Kings 19:21), and shaking one’s head as insult(Ps. 22:7; Mark 15:29).

Acommon action is the shaving of the head, which can be forpurification (Lev. 14:8–9; Num. 6:9; 8:7 [includes all bodyhair]), mourning (Deut. 21:11–13; Job 1:20; Isa. 15:2; Jer.16:6; 47:5; 48:37; Ezek. 27:31; Amos 8:10; Mic. 1:16), remorse (Jer.41:5), or shaming (Jer. 2:16). However, priests are forbidden fromshaving their heads even in mourning (Lev. 21:5; Ezek. 44:20), whilethe high priest is to wear a turban on his head during sacrificialduties (Exod. 29:6).

Anointingof the head is done when a priest or king is installed (Exod. 29:7;Ps. 23:5) or simply as a sign of God’s goodness and blessing ona person (Eccles. 9:8). Blessing may also involve placing a hand onthe head of the person being blessed (Gen. 48:14–18; Exod.29:19), while the same gesture on the head of sacrificial animals isa symbolic means of transferring sin (Lev. 3:2, 8, 13; 4:4, 15, 24,29, 33; 8:18, 22).

Inthe OT, a woman’s head can be shaved in mourning (Deut.21:12–13; cf. Jer. 47:5), but in the NT, a shaved head can be acause for disgrace (1Cor. 11:5–6).

Face.Facial gestures range from expressions to actions such as touching orcovering the face. A face can be downcast in anger (Gen. 4:5–6)or bowed to the ground in honor (Gen. 48:12), in dejection (Josh.7:6), in humility (Ruth 2:10), in worship (2Chron. 20:18; Ps.138:2), in subjection, supplication, reverence (1Sam. 20:41;25:41; 28:14; 2Sam. 14:4, 22; 18:28; 24:20; 1Kings 1:23;1Chron. 21:20), or in dread (e.g., Moses before Yahweh [Exod.3:6]).

Theface can be covered or veiled as an indication of uncleanness (Lev.13:45), in grief/mourning (2Sam. 19:4; Ezek. 24:17), inresignation (1Kings 19:13), with intent to deceive in adultery(Job 24:15), or in horror of judgment (Esther 7:8; Ezek. 12:6, 12).It can also be buried in the dust in remorse (Lam. 3:29).

Godcan be described as hiding or turning away his face againstwickedness and evil (Deut. 31:18; 32:20; Ps. 34:16; Isa. 8:17; Jer.33:5; Ezek. 7:22; 15:7; 20:46; 21:2) or in an act of withholdingblessings (Job 13:15; Pss. 10:1; 13:1; 27:9; 30:7; 34:16; Isa. 54:8;59:2; 64:7). God can also turn his face toward a place in judgment(Ezek. 4:3, 7; 6:2). In 1Sam. 5:3–4 the idol of thePhilistine god Dagon falls facedown before the ark of the covenant,apparently overpowered by Yahweh.

Actsof humiliation or dishonor can involve spitting in the face (Num.12:14; Deut. 25:9; Job 17:6; 30:10; Isa. 50:6), slapping the face(1Kings 22:24; 2Chron. 18:23; Job 16:10; Lam. 3:30; Mic.5:1), pulling a skirt up over someone’s face in shamingjudgment (Jer. 13:26; Nah. 3:5), and hooking and dragging someone bythe nose (2Kings 19:28). Although being struck on the cheek ishumiliating, Jesus instructs his disciples to “turn the othercheek” as a sign of resistance to violence (Matt. 5:39; Luke6:29).

Onecan lift one’s face in worship (2Kings 20:2; Job 22:26;Isa. 38:2) or in confidence (Job 11:15) and can fail to lift it inshame and disgrace (Ezra 9:6). Although the shaving of beards inmourning is common practice (Ezra 9:3; Isa. 15:2; Jer. 41:5; 48:37),the forced shaving of beards is an act of shaming and insulting(2Sam. 10:4; 1Chron. 19:4–5; Isa. 7:20; 50:6).

Eyes.Winking the eye is perceived as an evil, deceptive, or malicious act(Ps. 35:19; Prov. 6:13; 16:30). Eyes can be lifted up in worship andexpectation (Pss. 121:1; 123:1).

Mouth.Pursed lips can characterize an evil person (Prov. 16:30), while ahand can be clapped over the mouth in awe and submission (Job 21:5;40:4). Psalm 72:9 looks to the righteous king before whom the deserttribes will bow and whose “enemies lick the dust” indefeat.

Ears.An Israelite slave for life is to have a hole punched through his orher earlobe, held against a doorpost, with an awl (Exod. 21:6; Deut.15:17). Blood is sprinkled on the lobe of the right ear forpurification (Exod. 29:20; Lev. 8:23–24; 14:17), whilesupplication can be described as asking for the turning of an ear(2Kings 19:16; Ps. 31:2). Turning one’s ear signifiespaying attention or taking something to heart (Ps. 49:4; Prov. 4:20;5:13).

Neck.The neck can be adorned (Song 1:10) as a sign of pride and honor(Gen. 41:42; Judg. 5:30; Prov. 1:9; Ezek. 16:11) or outstretched inarrogance (Ps. 75:5 TNIV: “Do not lift your horns againstheaven; do not speak with outstretched neck”). Jeremiah put ayoke on his neck as a prophetic sign of the approaching Babylonianconquest (Jer. 27–28). While putting someone’s neck in ayoke is an act of triumphal conquest (Ps. 105:18), stepping on theneck of a subdued enemy is an act of subjugation and humiliation(Josh. 10:24).

Body

Nakednessin public is considered shameful (Gen. 9:22–23; Nah. 3:5; Rev.3:18), so that it is sometimes pictured as part of divine judgment(Deut. 28:48; Isa. 47:2–3; Lam. 1:8; Mic. 1:11) or as a sign ofpromiscuity (Isa. 57:8; Ezek. 16:36). An unkempt body can be a signof mourning, as it is for Mephibosheth (2Sam. 19:24). A certainkind of body covering is a sign of marriage proposal or protection(Ezek. 16:8; 23:18; Hos. 2:9). Body dismembering, even in war, is anact of humiliation (2Sam. 4:12).

Chest.In self-mortification, one can pound one’s chest in mourning(Ezek. 21:12) or in remorse (Jer. 31:19; Luke 18:13). The breasts ofsacrificial animals are waved before God as a “wave offering”before being eaten (Exod. 29:26; Lev. 7:30; Num. 6:20).

Hand,arm.Hand gestures include motions such as lifting hands in worship,clapping hands in joy, and clapping a hand over one’s mouth inawe. The expression “outstretched arm” (Exod. 6:6; Deut.4:34; 5:15; 7:19; 9:29; 11:2; 26:8; 1Kings 8:42; 2Kings17:36; 2Chron. 6:32; Ps. 136:12; Jer. 21:5; 27:5; 32:17, 21;Ezek. 20:33–34) indicates power, might, strength. It is oftenused of God to indicate his ability to defeat powerful armies andenemies. God is implored by the psalmist to lift his hand and act forthe sake of the righteous (Ps. 10:12).

Sincethe right hand is the hand of power, the act of sitting at the righthand indicates being favored (1Kings 2:19; Ps. 110:1; Matt.22:44; Mark 12:36; Luke 20:43; Acts 2:35; Heb. 1:3; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2;1Pet. 3:22). When taking an oath, one places a hand under thethigh/crotch (Gen. 24:2; 47:29), most likely the right hand (see Gen.48:14, 17–18; Lev. 8:23; 14:14).

Clappingthe hands can be a sign of awe (Ezek. 6:11), malice, or remorse(25:6), while a bared arm can be a sign of judgment (4:7). Job clapshis hand over his mouth in awe of God and in submission andrepentance (Job 40:4–5).

Handscan be lifted in worship (1Kings 8:22; 1Tim. 2:8), tobeseech (Ps. 28:2), to protect and bless (Ps. 10:12), in an oath(Deut. 32:40), or to harm (Exod. 24:11; 1Sam. 24:6, 10;2Sam.1:14; 18:12).

Pilatewashes his hands to proclaim his innocence over the death of Jesus(Matt. 27:24), while 1Pet. 5:6 urges believers to humblethemselves “under God’s mighty hand,” so that indue time they will be lifted up.

Buttocks.Exposure of the buttocks can serve as a humiliating insult andprovocation, as happens to David’s men (2Sam. 10:4;1Chron. 19:4) and Egyptian and Cush*te captives (Isa. 20:4).

Leg.The leg or thigh is often a euphemism for the male reproductiveorgans, so that putting one’s hand under a thigh in oath (Gen.24:2; 47:29) may involve actually grabbing the genitalia. Animalthighs are waved to God in offering before being consumed (Lev. 9:21;10:14; Num. 6:20), while oaths administered to uncover adultery causea guilty woman’s thighs to waste (Num. 5:2–27).

Themost common gesture involving the knee is bowing, in worship orreverence (Deut. 33:3; Isa. 45:23; Rom. 11:4; 14:11; Phil. 2:10), indefeat (2Sam. 22:40; Ps. 18:38; Isa. 60:14), in distress (Ps.57:6), or in respect (1Kings 1:31). In what seems to be asomewhat awkward position, Elijah puts his face between his knees inprayer (1Kings 18:42).

Feet.Gestures involving the feet are probably the most common gestures inthe Bible. Feet can be washed in hospitality (Gen. 18:4; 19:2; 24:32;43:24; 1Sam. 25:41), in ablution (Exod. 30:19, 21; 40:31), orin supplication (1Sam. 25:41). Feet can be bathed in oil as ablessing (Deut. 33:24), uncovered in marriage proposals (Ezek. 16:8;cf. Ruth 3:4, 7), and stamped in remorse (Ezek. 25:6), and sandalscan be removed from them in honor (Exod. 3:1–10) or disgrace(Deut. 25:9). The heavenly seraphs cover their feet in supplicationbefore the throne of God (Isa. 6:2), while the feet of humans cansignal deception (Prov. 6:13).

Enemiescan be placed under one’s feet in subjugation (1Kings5:3; Pss. 8:6; 18:39; 45:5; 47:3; 110:1; Mal. 4:3; Rom. 16:20), havetheir feet shackled or ensnared (Job 13:27; 33:11; Pss. 25:15;105:18), and be forced to lick the feet of victors in humiliation anddefeat (Isa. 49:23). The righteous will bathe their feet in the bloodof their enemies in revenge (Pss. 58:10; 68:23).

Thoseoverwhelmed can grovel at the feet of the powerful (2Kings4:27, 37; Esther 8:3; Matt. 28:9; Mark 5:33; 7:25; Acts 10:25), whilethose emboldened can rise to their feet in confidence (Ezek. 2:1–2;3:24; Dan. 8:18).

Inthe NT, dust can be shaken off one’s feet as an indication ofdivine judgment (Matt. 10:14; Mark 6:11; Luke 9:5), even as lying ata person’s feet is a recognition of authority/submission (Matt.15:30; Mark 5:33; Luke 8:28, 35, 41, 47; 10:39; 17:16; Acts 4:37;5:2). A woman publicly washes Jesus’ feet with her tears, wipesthem with her hair, and kisses and perfumes them in what seems an actof love and repentance; but Jesus indicates that she has prepared hisbody for burial (Luke 7:38–46; John 11:2; 12:3). Jesus washeshis disciples’ feet as instruction on servanthood anddiscipleship (John 13:5–14).

Fingers,Toes.Different fingers seem to have different roles assigned them. Afinger sprinkles blood in cleansing (Lev. 4:6, 17, 25, 30, 34; 8:15;9:9; 14:16; 16:14, 19; Num. 19:4), while blood on the tip of theright thumb and on the right big toe is for cleansing (Exod. 29:20;Lev. 8:23–24; 14:17, 25, 28).

Onewears a signet ring as a sign of power (Esther 3:10) or a gesture ofrestoration and forgiveness (Luke 15:22). But fingers can also motionin deception (Prov. 6:13) or point in blame (Isa. 58:9). Jesus writeswith his finger on the ground, apparently as a gesture ofindifference to those pointing accusing fingers (John 8:6).

Clothesand Shoes

Garments.Garments attain significance as they are related to specificemotions. Wearing sackcloth and ashes in mourning is common (Gen.37:34; Ezek. 7:18; 2Sam. 3:31), while ripping garments inmourning is also frequently attested (Gen. 37:34; 44:13; Lev. 10:6;21:10; Josh. 7:6; 2Sam. 1:11; 3:31; 13:31; 1Kings 21:27;2Kings 2:12; 19:1; Esther 4:1; Isa. 32:11; 37:1; Jer. 41:5).

Rippingsomeone’s clothing to expose nakedness (Ezek. 16:39; 2Sam.10:4) or pulling a person’s skirts up over the face (Jer.13:26) is an act of shaming or insulting. But tearing one’sclothes off can be a sign of fury (Matt. 26:65). Persons withdefiling diseases are expected to warn off others by wearing tornclothes and shouting, “Unclean! Unclean!” (Lev. 13:45).

Bylaying their clothes at Saul’s feet, the crowd may beacknowledging his authority in the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58).

Sandals.A woman can remove a man’s sandal in contempt (Deut. 25:5–10),while a sandal can be removed by a kinsman-redeemer to indicategiving up a right or as a transfer of property (Ruth 4:7–8). Asandal can also be removed in mourning (Ezek. 24:17) or be cast overa piece of land to claim ownership (Pss. 60:8; 108:9).

PropheticGestures

Propheticgestures in the OT are mostly concerned with the call to repentanceand approaching judgments upon failure to heed the warning. Jeremiahputs a yoke on his neck (Jer. 27–28; cf. Deut. 28:48), Ezekielcooks with dung (Ezek. 4:12) and sleeps on his left side for 390 daysand then on his right side for 40 days (4:5–6), Isaiah stripsoff his clothing (Isa. 20:2–3; 32:11), and Hosea marries anunfaithful wife (Hos. 1:1–3).

Inthe NT, Jesus cleanses the temple as an act of symbolic judgment(Matt. 21:12; Mark 11:15; John 2:15). He also breaks bread and drinkswine (Matt. 26:26; Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19; 24:30, 35; Acts 2:46;20:11; 27:35; 1Cor. 11:24–25) and washes his disciples’feet (John 13:1–13), thereby establishing symbolic Christianpractices.

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

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

Agricultureand Farming

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

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

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

Herdingand Hunting

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

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

Buildersand Craftsmen

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

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

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

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

Musicians

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

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

Government,Politics, and Military

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

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

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

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

Tradeand Economics

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

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

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

Servantsand Slaves

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

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

ReligiousService

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

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

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

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

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

Agricultureand Farming

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

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

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

Herdingand Hunting

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

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

Buildersand Craftsmen

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

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

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

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

Musicians

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

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

Government,Politics, and Military

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

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

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

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

Tradeand Economics

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

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

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

Servantsand Slaves

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

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

ReligiousService

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

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

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

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

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

Agricultureand Farming

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

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

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

Herdingand Hunting

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

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

Buildersand Craftsmen

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

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

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

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

Musicians

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

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

Government,Politics, and Military

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

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

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

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

Tradeand Economics

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

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

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

Servantsand Slaves

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

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

ReligiousService

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

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

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

Unlike modern systems of jurisprudence, the Bible does not draw distinctions between criminal, civil, family, and religious law, either in its terminology or in its presentation of legal material. In the Bible, acts of deviance that are defined as criminal in virtually all societies are discussed alongside violations of a culturally specific, religious nature. For instance, the Ten Commandments prohibit murder and dishonoring parents (Exod. 20:12–13), as well as commanding Sabbath observance (Exod. 20:8–11). Any attempt to extract a system of criminal law from biblical materials must account for the fact that every culture defines deviance differently, with respect not only to specific acts but also to categories of deviance.

When viewed from the standpoint of the Bible’s organization of legal material, the terminology used, and the sanctions applied, there is substantial overlap in the Bible between “crime” and what modern societies define as noncriminal deviance. For present purposes, we might define “crime” broadly as including any act of social deviance that merits the application of a sanction by society at large (as opposed to the ad hoc fiats of rulers, as in Gen. 26:11) and that can be prohibited in a generally applied rule (even accounting for differences between free citizens and slaves, as in Exod. 21:18–21). As we will see, the Bible requires punishments, often severe, for a broad spectrum of offenses.

Capital Crimes

The Pentateuch mandates the death penalty for a wide variety of crimes. Often the mode of execution is unspecified. Where a particular mode is prescribed, the death penalty most often consisted of stoning (as in Num. 15:35) and less frequently of burning (Lev. 20:14) or shooting with arrows (Exod. 19:13).

Crimes incurring the death penalty include killing or murder (Exod. 21:12–14; Lev. 24:17; Num. 35:16), though the crime is aggravated or lessened depending on the intention behind it (Exod. 21:13–14) and whether a weapon is involved (Num. 35:16); attacking parents (Exod. 21:15); kidnapping and slave trading (Exod. 21:16; Deut. 24:7); cursing parents (Exod 21:17; Lev. 20:9); negligence resulting in death (Exod. 21:29); bestial*ty (Exod. 22:19; Lev. 20:15–16); breach of the Sabbath (Exod. 31:14–15; Num. 15:35); child sacrifice (Lev. 20:2); adultery (Lev. 20:10; Deut. 22:22); incest (Lev. 20:11–12); hom*osexuality (Lev. 20:13); marrying a woman and her mother (Lev. 20:14); witchcraft (Exod. 22:18; Lev. 20:27); blasphemy (Exod. 24:16); unauthorized approach to the tabernacle (Num. 1:51); idolatry (Num. 25:5); false prophecy and divination (Deut. 13:5); presumptuous prophecy (Deut. 18:20); enticing others to idolatry (Deut. 13:6–10); false testimony in a capital case (Deut. 19:19); and contempt for authorities (Deut. 17:2; Josh. 1:18).

When the body of an executed criminal was displayed by hanging, it had to be removed by nightfall (Deut. 21:22). The death penalty was not to be applied vicariously to family members of criminals (Deut. 24:16). In OT texts, execution was to be carried out by the victims (Deut. 13:9), families of victims (the “avenger of blood” of Num. 35:19), or witnesses to the crime.

The NT mentions an official or professional executioner (Mark 6:27). Paul declares that the authorities rightly derive the power of the sword from God (Rom. 13:4).

Punishments for Noncapital Crimes

Corporal punishment. Beating as a criminal punishment is rare in the OT (Jer. 20:2; 37:15). Most OT references to beating occur in the context of the household, as a punishment for slaves or children. Deuteronomy 25:3 limits the number of strokes in a flogging to forty (see 2 Cor. 11:24). Flogging was commonly applied as a criminal punishment in Roman times, and it was a common mode of discipline within the Roman military (Acts 16:22; 2 Cor. 11:25; 1 Pet. 2:20).

Restitution. Crimes against property were punished by compelling the offender to make restitution by repaying, often in an amount that exceeded the actual damages, including in cases of theft or negligence (Exod. 21:33; 22:3–15); killing an animal (Lev. 24:18, 21); having sexual relations with a virgin not pledged to be married (Exod. 22:16); injuring a pregnant woman (Exod. 21:22); harming a slave (Exod. 21:26–27). Financial restitution could not be made for murder (Num. 35:31).

Retribution. The notion of the lex talionis, the law of retribution, is stated in Exod. 21:23–24: “life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot” (cf. Lev. 24:19–20; Deut. 19:21; Matt. 5:38). This formula appears in other ancient legal traditions. The idea of bodily mutilation may strike modern readers as barbaric, but such laws may actually have been relatively enlightened by ancient standards, as they imposed a proportional limit on retribution.

Incarceration. In modern societies, incarceration and probation account for the vast majority of the punishments resulting from criminal offenses. In the OT, incarceration is rarely mentioned apart from the imprisonment of war captives (e.g., Judg. 16:21) and political dissidents. Jeremiah was imprisoned several times for his criticism of the regime (Jer. 32:2; 37:15). Throughout the Bible, prisoners often are guarded by soldiers rather than by professional jailers.

Paul imprisoned Christians prior to his conversion (Acts 8:3), and he himself was imprisoned or placed under arrest several times (e.g., Acts 16:23; 20:23; 24:27; Rom. 16:7). John the Baptist was imprisoned after he criticized Herod (Mark 6:17). Again, in both cases, incarceration was used to silence and segregate someone whose free movement in society threatened political stability rather than to punish a common criminal. In Matt. 5:25–26 Jesus refers to imprisonment for an unspecified reason, though the threat that “you will not get out until you have paid the last penny” suggests that incarceration was a substitute for an unpaid fine or monetary penalty. This recalls Exod. 22:3, which mandates that a thief who could not make financial restitution for theft must be sold (as a slave).

Banishment and cities of refuge. A number of OT passages refer to the “cutting off” of a person from the community. It is not clear whether this language refers to exile or the death penalty; several of the crimes thus punished are known to be capital crimes in other texts.

The law of Num. 35:6–34 establishes six “cities of refuge” among the towns allotted to the Levites. To these cities an unintentional killer could flee from the “avenger of blood,” a relative of the victim, until such time as the case could be adjudicated by the whole community. A killer who was found to have acted unintentionally and without malice could remain in the city of refuge, safe from retribution, until the death of the high priest, at which time the killer was free to return home with impunity.

Trials and Judgments

In biblical times Israel did not have an independent judiciary. Judgments in criminal cases were rendered by local elders (Josh. 20:4), communities (Num. 35:24), monarchs, or other rulers and officials. The judges of the book of Judges were primarily military rulers, though they may have also adjudicated cases as a function of their military and political power (Judg. 4:5). Cases were decided on the basis of eyewitness testimony (Num. 35:30) and, in the case of capital crimes, on the basis of multiple witnesses (Deut. 17:6). In some cases, the Bible provides detailed statutory criteria for making such judgments, as in the discussion in Num. 35:16–28 of the difference between murder and unintentional killing. In some cases, where the determination of guilt or innocence would have been impossible, as in the case of suspected adultery, a verdict could be attained through divination (Num. 5:11–31). As already noted, the judgment of some cases could be affected by the slave status of those involved (Exod. 20:20–21; see also 22:8–9).

The trial and execution of Naboth, though ultimately a subversion of justice of the highest order, offers an insight into the operation of justice in Israel in the monarchic period (1 Kings 21:1–16). Naboth was accused on a trumped-up charge of blasphemy, a capital crime (Exod. 24:16). He was tried by the notables of his city, and on the testimony of two (false) witnesses (Deut. 17:6), he was then stoned to death.

From the standpoint of OT law, the trial and execution of Jesus were complicated by the context of concurrent systems of Jewish and Roman law and government. Like Naboth, Jesus was accused by false witnesses (Matt. 26:60–61). Ultimately, the Sanhedrin determined that because Jesus had blasphemed in its presence by identifying himself as the Messiah and the Son of God, further witness testimony was unnecessary in order to achieve the desired result, the death penalty (Matt. 26:65–66; John 19:7). Ultimately, the Sanhedrin had to involve the Roman governor because it lacked the authority to execute a criminal (John 18:31). By the time Jesus was taken before Pilate, the charge had been changed from a religious one to a political one: Jesus claimed to be the king of the Jews, thus subverting Roman authority (Matt. 26:11–12). Eventually, Pilate tortured and executed Jesus not because he saw merit in the charges but rather to avoid a riot (Matt. 27:24; John 19:4, 12). Luke reports that Jesus also had a trial before Herod Antipas, the ruler to whom Jesus was subject as a Galilean (23:7). Thus, the trial of Jesus in some ways reflects both Jewish and Roman law, but it also involves some purely pragmatic (and legally and morally questionable) actions on the part of both the Sanhedrin and Pilate.

Unlike modern systems of jurisprudence, the Bible does not draw distinctions between criminal, civil, family, and religious law, either in its terminology or in its presentation of legal material. In the Bible, acts of deviance that are defined as criminal in virtually all societies are discussed alongside violations of a culturally specific, religious nature. For instance, the Ten Commandments prohibit murder and dishonoring parents (Exod. 20:12–13), as well as commanding Sabbath observance (Exod. 20:8–11). Any attempt to extract a system of criminal law from biblical materials must account for the fact that every culture defines deviance differently, with respect not only to specific acts but also to categories of deviance.

When viewed from the standpoint of the Bible’s organization of legal material, the terminology used, and the sanctions applied, there is substantial overlap in the Bible between “crime” and what modern societies define as noncriminal deviance. For present purposes, we might define “crime” broadly as including any act of social deviance that merits the application of a sanction by society at large (as opposed to the ad hoc fiats of rulers, as in Gen. 26:11) and that can be prohibited in a generally applied rule (even accounting for differences between free citizens and slaves, as in Exod. 21:18–21). As we will see, the Bible requires punishments, often severe, for a broad spectrum of offenses.

Capital Crimes

The Pentateuch mandates the death penalty for a wide variety of crimes. Often the mode of execution is unspecified. Where a particular mode is prescribed, the death penalty most often consisted of stoning (as in Num. 15:35) and less frequently of burning (Lev. 20:14) or shooting with arrows (Exod. 19:13).

Crimes incurring the death penalty include killing or murder (Exod. 21:12–14; Lev. 24:17; Num. 35:16), though the crime is aggravated or lessened depending on the intention behind it (Exod. 21:13–14) and whether a weapon is involved (Num. 35:16); attacking parents (Exod. 21:15); kidnapping and slave trading (Exod. 21:16; Deut. 24:7); cursing parents (Exod 21:17; Lev. 20:9); negligence resulting in death (Exod. 21:29); bestial*ty (Exod. 22:19; Lev. 20:15–16); breach of the Sabbath (Exod. 31:14–15; Num. 15:35); child sacrifice (Lev. 20:2); adultery (Lev. 20:10; Deut. 22:22); incest (Lev. 20:11–12); hom*osexuality (Lev. 20:13); marrying a woman and her mother (Lev. 20:14); witchcraft (Exod. 22:18; Lev. 20:27); blasphemy (Exod. 24:16); unauthorized approach to the tabernacle (Num. 1:51); idolatry (Num. 25:5); false prophecy and divination (Deut. 13:5); presumptuous prophecy (Deut. 18:20); enticing others to idolatry (Deut. 13:6–10); false testimony in a capital case (Deut. 19:19); and contempt for authorities (Deut. 17:2; Josh. 1:18).

When the body of an executed criminal was displayed by hanging, it had to be removed by nightfall (Deut. 21:22). The death penalty was not to be applied vicariously to family members of criminals (Deut. 24:16). In OT texts, execution was to be carried out by the victims (Deut. 13:9), families of victims (the “avenger of blood” of Num. 35:19), or witnesses to the crime.

The NT mentions an official or professional executioner (Mark 6:27). Paul declares that the authorities rightly derive the power of the sword from God (Rom. 13:4).

Punishments for Noncapital Crimes

Corporal punishment. Beating as a criminal punishment is rare in the OT (Jer. 20:2; 37:15). Most OT references to beating occur in the context of the household, as a punishment for slaves or children. Deuteronomy 25:3 limits the number of strokes in a flogging to forty (see 2 Cor. 11:24). Flogging was commonly applied as a criminal punishment in Roman times, and it was a common mode of discipline within the Roman military (Acts 16:22; 2 Cor. 11:25; 1 Pet. 2:20).

Restitution. Crimes against property were punished by compelling the offender to make restitution by repaying, often in an amount that exceeded the actual damages, including in cases of theft or negligence (Exod. 21:33; 22:3–15); killing an animal (Lev. 24:18, 21); having sexual relations with a virgin not pledged to be married (Exod. 22:16); injuring a pregnant woman (Exod. 21:22); harming a slave (Exod. 21:26–27). Financial restitution could not be made for murder (Num. 35:31).

Retribution. The notion of the lex talionis, the law of retribution, is stated in Exod. 21:23–24: “life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot” (cf. Lev. 24:19–20; Deut. 19:21; Matt. 5:38). This formula appears in other ancient legal traditions. The idea of bodily mutilation may strike modern readers as barbaric, but such laws may actually have been relatively enlightened by ancient standards, as they imposed a proportional limit on retribution.

Incarceration. In modern societies, incarceration and probation account for the vast majority of the punishments resulting from criminal offenses. In the OT, incarceration is rarely mentioned apart from the imprisonment of war captives (e.g., Judg. 16:21) and political dissidents. Jeremiah was imprisoned several times for his criticism of the regime (Jer. 32:2; 37:15). Throughout the Bible, prisoners often are guarded by soldiers rather than by professional jailers.

Paul imprisoned Christians prior to his conversion (Acts 8:3), and he himself was imprisoned or placed under arrest several times (e.g., Acts 16:23; 20:23; 24:27; Rom. 16:7). John the Baptist was imprisoned after he criticized Herod (Mark 6:17). Again, in both cases, incarceration was used to silence and segregate someone whose free movement in society threatened political stability rather than to punish a common criminal. In Matt. 5:25–26 Jesus refers to imprisonment for an unspecified reason, though the threat that “you will not get out until you have paid the last penny” suggests that incarceration was a substitute for an unpaid fine or monetary penalty. This recalls Exod. 22:3, which mandates that a thief who could not make financial restitution for theft must be sold (as a slave).

Banishment and cities of refuge. A number of OT passages refer to the “cutting off” of a person from the community. It is not clear whether this language refers to exile or the death penalty; several of the crimes thus punished are known to be capital crimes in other texts.

The law of Num. 35:6–34 establishes six “cities of refuge” among the towns allotted to the Levites. To these cities an unintentional killer could flee from the “avenger of blood,” a relative of the victim, until such time as the case could be adjudicated by the whole community. A killer who was found to have acted unintentionally and without malice could remain in the city of refuge, safe from retribution, until the death of the high priest, at which time the killer was free to return home with impunity.

Trials and Judgments

In biblical times Israel did not have an independent judiciary. Judgments in criminal cases were rendered by local elders (Josh. 20:4), communities (Num. 35:24), monarchs, or other rulers and officials. The judges of the book of Judges were primarily military rulers, though they may have also adjudicated cases as a function of their military and political power (Judg. 4:5). Cases were decided on the basis of eyewitness testimony (Num. 35:30) and, in the case of capital crimes, on the basis of multiple witnesses (Deut. 17:6). In some cases, the Bible provides detailed statutory criteria for making such judgments, as in the discussion in Num. 35:16–28 of the difference between murder and unintentional killing. In some cases, where the determination of guilt or innocence would have been impossible, as in the case of suspected adultery, a verdict could be attained through divination (Num. 5:11–31). As already noted, the judgment of some cases could be affected by the slave status of those involved (Exod. 20:20–21; see also 22:8–9).

The trial and execution of Naboth, though ultimately a subversion of justice of the highest order, offers an insight into the operation of justice in Israel in the monarchic period (1 Kings 21:1–16). Naboth was accused on a trumped-up charge of blasphemy, a capital crime (Exod. 24:16). He was tried by the notables of his city, and on the testimony of two (false) witnesses (Deut. 17:6), he was then stoned to death.

From the standpoint of OT law, the trial and execution of Jesus were complicated by the context of concurrent systems of Jewish and Roman law and government. Like Naboth, Jesus was accused by false witnesses (Matt. 26:60–61). Ultimately, the Sanhedrin determined that because Jesus had blasphemed in its presence by identifying himself as the Messiah and the Son of God, further witness testimony was unnecessary in order to achieve the desired result, the death penalty (Matt. 26:65–66; John 19:7). Ultimately, the Sanhedrin had to involve the Roman governor because it lacked the authority to execute a criminal (John 18:31). By the time Jesus was taken before Pilate, the charge had been changed from a religious one to a political one: Jesus claimed to be the king of the Jews, thus subverting Roman authority (Matt. 26:11–12). Eventually, Pilate tortured and executed Jesus not because he saw merit in the charges but rather to avoid a riot (Matt. 27:24; John 19:4, 12). Luke reports that Jesus also had a trial before Herod Antipas, the ruler to whom Jesus was subject as a Galilean (23:7). Thus, the trial of Jesus in some ways reflects both Jewish and Roman law, but it also involves some purely pragmatic (and legally and morally questionable) actions on the part of both the Sanhedrin and Pilate.

Terminology.Themodern scientific category of reptiles (air-breathing, cold-bloodedvertebrates) has no precise equivalent in the biblical vocabulary.The Hebrews described creatures by the way they moved, as “crawlingthings” (zakhal[Deut.32:24; Mic. 7:17]), “creeping things” (remes[Gen. 1:25–26]), and “swarming things” (sherets[Gen. 7:21]). All these terms, which probably overlapped, includedboth reptiles and small mammals.

Nakhash(e.g., Gen. 3) is the commonest general term for snakes and otherreptiles. Rarer terms are tannin(translated “snake” in Exod. 7:9, but more usuallymeaning a mythical “dragon”) and sarap(used, on its own or qualifying nakhash, of the fiery serpents inNum. 21:6, 8; Isa. 14:29; 30:6). In Greek, herpeton(Acts 10:12; 11:6; Rom. 1:23; James 3:7) includes snakes and lizards,while the generic word for snake is ophis(e.g., Matt. 7:10).

Besidesthese general terms, Scripture mentions the following: (1)thecrocodile (liwyatan)found in Egypt and Israel and sometimes portrayed in poetry as amythical monster (Job 3:8; 41:1; Pss. 74:14; 104:26; Isa. 27:1);(2)a variety of lizards, probably including geckos, skinks, andchameleons (Lev. 11:29, 30; Prov. 30:28); (3)a variety ofpoisonous snakes, including the cobra, or asp (Deut. 32:33; Rom.3:13), and the viper, or adder (Isa. 59:5; Acts 28:3).

Althoughtortoises are common in the Middle East, the KJV translation of theHebrew word tsabas “tortoise” in Lev. 11:29 almost certainly is wrong.However, since at least eighty kinds of reptile are found in Israel,precise identifications beyond this are difficult.

Reptilesin the Bible. Thesnake is an important image in Scripture. It is a snake that temptsAdam and Eve (Gen. 3:1; 2Cor. 11:3), and in the first promiseof salvation God says that the seed of woman will crush the snake’shead (Gen. 3:15). From that moment, the snake is condemned to crawlon its belly and eat dust (Gen. 3:14; Isa. 65:25).

Allsuch crawling creatures were unclean in OT law (Lev. 11:29–31).Although some Middle Eastern snakes are nonpoisonous, the OT alwaysportrays snakes as harmful as well as unclean (Deut. 8:15; 32:24, 33;Job 20:14, 16; Eccles. 10:8, 11; Isa. 30:6; Amos 5:19; Matt. 7:10;Luke 11:11). Because the venom was associated with the snake’stongue, the snake was a symbol of treacherous, lying speech as wellas of physical danger (Gen. 49:17; Pss. 58:4; 140:3; Prov. 23:32;Isa. 14:29; Jer. 8:17; 51:34; Matt. 23:33; Rev. 9:19), shrewdness(Matt. 10:16), and degradation (Mic. 7:17). For snakes to be renderedharmless was a sign of divine intervention (Ps. 91:13) and of themessianic age (Isa. 11:8; Luke 10:19; Mark 16:18). Paul and Johnidentify the snake in Eden with Satan and look forward to his totaldestruction in the last days (Rom. 16:20; Rev. 12:9–17;20:2–3).

Snakesfeature three times in biblical miracles. First, Aaron’s rodwas transformed into a serpent that, when Pharaoh’s magiciansreplicated the feat, devoured the magicians’ serpents (Exod.7:10–15; cf. 4:3–4). This would have impressed Pharaohall the more because the snake was a symbol of the pharaoh’spower. Second, when God sent poisonous snakes to punish theIsraelites, who repented, God told Moses to set up a bronze snake ona pole; anyone who looked at the bronze snake (which only much laterbecame an object of idolatry) was saved (Num. 21:6–9; 2Kings18:4). This prefigured the cross, on which Christ became a curse forus (John 3:14; 1Cor. 10:9; Gal. 3:10). Third, Paul was bittenby a snake and suffered no harm (Acts 28:3–6).

Paul’s second letter to the Thessalonians addresses achurch troubled by an overly realized eschatology. Whereas at thetime ofthe first letter the Thessalonians were expecting theimminent return of Christ (1Thess. 5:6), by thetime ofthe second letter some believed that Christ had already come(2Thess. 2:2). Because of this, some were being drawn fromtheir work into idleness (2Thess. 3:6). Paul’s purpose,then, was to correct their eschatology, restore them to their tasks,and rebuild their confidence in Christ. He does this both byemphasizing Jesus Christ as Lord (the letter is uniquely consistentin the NT in applying the title “Lord” [Gk. kyrios] toJesus) and by describing two apocalyptic events that must happenbefore the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ: the great apostasy andthe appearance of the man of lawlessness (2Thess. 2:3).Scholars have noted that Paul most often refers to Jesus as Lord inhortatory and eschatological passages. Indeed, though brief,2Thessalonians emphasizes exhortation and eschatology.

LiteraryConsiderations

Authorshipand the question of pseudo-nymity. Asearly as AD 110, Polycarp of Smyrna alluded to 2Thessaloniansin his letter to the Philippians (Pol. Phil. 11:4), and both Marcionand the Muratorian Canon refer to the epistle. It was known toIgnatius, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and Tertullian. In the modern era,beginning at the end of the eighteenth century, the Paulineauthorship of the epistle was questioned, first by J.E.C.Schmidt, then by F.C. Baur, and more fully by W.Wrede,who dated the letter to a little before the date implied inPolycarp’s letter.

Comparisonof 1 and 2Thessalonians.The case for pseudonymous authorship depends largely on a comparisonbetween 1Thessalonians and 2Thessalonians. The lettersshare a number of similarities in language, style, and content,including similarly worded salutations (1Thess. 1:1; 2Thess.1:1–2), expressions of thanks (1Thess. 1:2; 2:13; 3:9;2Thess. 1:3; 2:13), intercessory prayers (1Thess. 3:11;2Thess. 2:16), references to the broad reputation of theThessalonian church (1Thess. 1:1–10; 2Thess.1:3–4), the persecution of the Thessalonian church (1Thess.2:14–16; 2Thess. 1:5–10), divine election (1Thess.1:4; 2Thess. 2:13), references to a personalized antagonist(“Satan” in 1Thess. 2:18; “the evil one”in 2Thess. 3:3), the exhortation to avoid idleness (1Thess.4:11–12; 5:14; 2Thess. 3:7–13), a common concernfor the parousia and its anticipation (1Thess. 4:13–5:11;2Thess. 2:1–11), and a number of stylistic resemblances(cf. 1Thess. 3:11 with 2Thess. 2:16; 1Thess. 4:1with 2Thess. 3:1; 1Thess. 5:23 with 2Thess. 3:16).

Inaddition to resemblances, advocates of pseudonymous authorship haveperceived some deep discontinuities between the letters. Thequestion, then, is to devise a theory to explain both types offeatures (see below). In 1Thessalonians the parousia isdepicted as an imminent event that could occur at any moment, “likea thief in the night” (1Thess. 5:2), whereas in2Thessalonians the basic supposition is that the end will comenot unexpectedly but only following the series of public eventsdescribed in 2Thess. 2:3–4. The imminent tone of1Thessalonians can be compared to that of 1Corinthians(an undisputedly Pauline letter), while the attitude of2Thessalonians and its acceptance of an indefinite delay of theparousia find no obvious parallel in the other letters widelyaccepted as written by Paul, but have been described as best fittinga context in the last quarter of the first century, within the milieuof eschatological debate that gave rise to two other disputed Paulineletters, Ephesians and Colossians. Although we should not facilelyharmonize the differences between the letters, neither should weoverstate the imminence of eschatological expectation in1Thessalonians, where, as in 2Thessalonians, Paul remindshis readers that in fact they will not be surprised by the parousia(1Thess. 5:4)—although, admittedly, less apocalypticdetail is given than in 2Thessalonians. Moreover, both lettersgive ample attention to life in the period of eschatologicalanticipation (2Thess. 3:1–16), particularly to thetemptation to idleness (1Thess. 4:11–12; 5:14; 2Thess.3:7–13).

In2Thess. 2:2 the author warns against letters circulating inPaul’s name but falsely attributed to him. As proponents of thepseudonymous authorship of 2Thessalonians have pointed out,this problem is unlikely to have arisen during the lifetime of Paulhimself, as he would have been able to discredit such letters. Also,the handwritten signature at the end of the letter (2Thess.3:17 [the rest of the letter would have been dictated to a secretary,as in Rom. 16:22]) and the special emphasis placed on it (compared to1Cor. 16:21; Gal. 6:11; and in a disputed Pauline letter, Col.4:18) have been taken as indicating an attempt to deceive, or atleast as consistent with what a pseudonymous author would have deemednecessary to pass off the letter as the work of the famous apostle.Of course, this argument depends on the fact that Paul actually didsign some of his genuine letters in this way, though 2Thess.3:17 does admittedly go beyond the other examples listed as a pleafor authenticity, even to the point of raising suspicion. On theother hand, if falsely attributed letters were being passed around inPaul’s lifetime, the extra emphasis on his personal mark wouldbe called for.

Finally,some have described a shift in tone between the two letters, fromjoyfulness to somberness. Supposing that 2Thessalonians waswritten some years after 1Thessalonians and the death of Paul,this has been taken as a reflection of eschatological disappointmentduring the interim and a readjustment of expectations to the realityof a longer-than-anticipated delay in the parousia. However, thedifference in tone, as well as the difference in theological emphasisnoted above, might simply reflect differences in the sets ofcirc*mstances that occasioned the two letters, and the tone of bothletters could be construed as coming from the mind of a singleauthor.

Relationshipbetween 1 and 2Thessalonians.Considering similarities and differences together, the proponents ofpseudonymous authorship judge the theological, linguistic, andstylistic differences to be substantive and real and to reflect botha significant lapse in time and the work of two distinct authors. Inthis view, the long list of resemblances indicates only that2Thessalonians is a rather studied imitation of1Thessalonians. If Paul wrote both letters, why would he haverepeated so much of his earlier letter in the second and done sowithin a relatively short span of time? As alternatives to the theoryof pseudonymous authorship, several proposals have been advanced toexplain this unexpected behavior, including the notions that theletters were addressed to two groups within the city of Thessalonica(Jewish and Gentile); that each letter reflects the differingauthorial contributions from the three senders of both letters (Paul,Silas, and Timothy [1Thess. 1:1; 2Thess. 1:1]); that oneof the letters was addressed privately to a restricted group withinthe community; that 2Thessalonians was written not shortlyafter 1Thessalonians but rather following a second visit toThessalonica (see Acts 20:1–2), during which developments notrecorded in Acts would have set the stage for the distinctiveemphases of the second letter; or that reversing the chronologicalpriority of the letters so that 2Thessalonians preceded1Thessalonians provides a scenario in which the Paulineauthorship of 2Thessalonians can plausibly be maintained. Atpresent, the authorship of 2Thessalonians remains a matter ofdispute among biblical scholars.

Theologicalconsiderations.Apart from the internal evidence discussed above, the theory ofpseudonymous authorship raises theological questions. How does thepossibility that Paul did not write the letter bear on the authorityof this letter as Scripture? Is the intent to deceive as to theauthorship of the letter consistent with the belief that the letterwas divinely inspired by a holy God? In terms of its history ofreception, 2Thessalonians has the highest pedigree and, asnoted above, was alluded to as early as the first part of the secondcentury. The Pauline authorship of the book and its status in thecanon do not seem to have been a matter of dispute in antiquity.Responding to critical assessments of the book’s authorship anddate in the modern era (and more broadly to assessments of other“disputed Pauline letters”), some evangelical theologiansand biblical scholars have argued that epistolary pseudepigraphy wasnot considered respectable in antiquity; that is, such a practice wasconsidered tantamount to forgery and an intent to deceive. The earlychurch would not have knowingly accepted into the canon any letterknown to have been pseudepigraphically authored and promulgated. Inlight of this reconstruction of ancient attitudes, the proposal ofpseudonymity in the case of 2Thessalonians and other supposedlyPauline letters becomes a significant theological problem.

Inaddressing this issue, it should be noted that the concept ofauthorship was and is somewhat flexible. Paul did not likely writewith his own hand any of the letters in the NT, apart from adding hissignature at the end of 1Corinthians, Galatians, and possibly2Thessalonians and Colossians. In each instance the degree towhich the scribe or amanuensis contributed to the wording or contentof each letter (see Rom. 16:22) is unclear. In the case of2Thessalonians and some other Pauline Epistles, the letteroriginated from a group of three associates: Paul, Silas, andTimothy. It is unclear to what extent Silas and Timothy should beconsidered as having made an authorial contribution to the letter.Admittedly, the theory of pseudonymous authorship of 2Thessaloniansgoes far beyond any of these cases, since, as generally articulated,it involves dating the letter to the last quarter of the firstcentury, at least ten years or so after the death of Paul. In termsof the theological problem described above, a letter authored inPaul’s name under such circ*mstances represents a qualitativelydifferent scenario than one written by associates during his lifetimeyet ultimately knowingly authorized and sent (and signed) by theapostle himself. Still, the range of meanings entailed in the conceptof “authorship” should lead to circ*mspection inevaluating the theological implications of the theory of pseudonymousauthorship. Reducing this theory to the possible element of deceptionmay risk oversimplifying and even demonizing the motivations and aimsof the pseudonymous author. (See also Pseudepigraphy, Pseudonymity.)

Date.As is obvious from the foregoing discussion of authorship, the dateof 2Thessalonians is bound up in the question of authorship. IfPaul wrote 2Thessalonians, it would have to have been prior tohis death in the mid-60s. FirstThessalonians was likely writtenaround AD 50, and 2Thessalonians may have been written shortlythereafter, if it was written prior to Paul’s second visit tothe region of Macedonia (Acts 20:1–2), during his time inCorinth (18:1–5) or Ephesus. A second visit to the city is notmentioned in 2Thessalonians, and in contrast to the evidence ofActs 18:5 regarding the second missionary journey of Paul, we cannotwith certainty place the three authors of 2Thessalonians (Paul,Timothy, and Silas) together at a later date. Advocates ofpseu-don-y-mous authorship usually date the letter to the lastquarter of the first century in order to allow some time for thesupposed development in eschatological expectation between the twoletters, and probably also for the collection of Paul’s lettersin later years to provide the background for the reference in2Thess. 3:17 to “all my letters.” At any rate, itshould be dated prior to the composition of Polycarp’s letterto the Philippians around AD 110.

Ifpseudonymous authorship is accepted, then two passages in the letterthat refer to events after Paul’s death may bear on a moreprecise dating of the composition. First, the reference to “God’stemple” in 2Thess. 2:4, if it refers to the temple inJerusalem, would suggest a date prior to AD 70, when that edifice wasdestroyed. Second, some have argued that the reference to therevelation of the “man of lawlessness” in 2Thess.2:3 refers to an expectation that the emperor Nero was to come backfrom the dead. This would suggest a date after Nero’s death inAD 68. Both passages can be explained in other ways: the figure ofGod’s temple continued to be invoked symbolically after AD 70,and the “man of lawlessness” is obscure enough to inspirecaution in too quickly identifying him with a historical person.

Outline

I.Introductory Greeting and Thanksgiving (1:1–12)

A.Greetings from Paul, Silas, and Timothy (1:1–2)

B.Thanksgiving (1:3–10)

C.Prayer (1:11–12)

II.The Coming of Christ (2:1–12)

A.Warnings against reports that Christ has come (2:1–2)

B.The man of lawlessness and the great apostasy must come first (2:3–7)

C.God will ensure the destruction of both through Christ (2:8–12)

III.Exhortations (2:13–3:15)

A.Thanksgiving and prayer (2:13–3:5)

B.Exhortation to avoid idleness in themselves and in others (3:6–15)

IV.Closing Prayer and Benediction (3:16–18)

The serpent (nakhash) initially appears in Gen. 3:1, endowedwith wisdom and the capacity to speak. In addressing Eve, itintentionally changes God’s positive command to eat from alltrees of the garden, with one exception, to a comprehensiveprohibition and then goes on to contradict God and promise thateating will make Adam and Eve “like God, knowing good and evil”(3:5). While an explicit identity for the serpent is not given atthis point, the curse pronounced against the creature (Gen. 3:14–15)has transcendent implications (cf. Rom. 16:20). By the firstcenturies BC and AD, the serpent became linked with the malevolentfigure of Satan, the devil, the great dragon. This connection is mostcomprehensively articulated for the Christian community in Rev.12:9–15; 20:2. Eve acknowledged its deceptive wiles (Gen.3:13), a point that both Jesus (John 8:44) and Paul (2Cor.11:3) reinforce.

Deadlysnakes were recognized and feared denizens of the great and terriblewilderness (Deut. 8:15) as the Israelites made their way toward thepromised land. When the people spoke against God and Moses, God sentburning serpents that bit the people (Num. 21:6–9). Moses’action in elevating a bronze serpent on the pole served as theparadigm for Jesus’ reference to lifting up the Son of Man(John 3:14) and the necessity of belief in the unlikely prospect of acrucified Messiah. Later, this bronze snake became an object ofworship, and Hezekiah destroyed it (2Kings 18:4). Becauseserpents were so dangerous, their venom was a figure for utterlydestructive evil (Ps. 140:3).

Isaiah27:1 moves the sphere of activities from barren wilderness totumultuous water: “In that day, the Lord will punish with hissword—his fierce, great and powerful sword—Leviathan thegliding serpent, Leviathan the coiling serpent; he will slay themonster of the sea.” The same motif is evident in Ps. 74:13–14,which declares that God broke the “heads” of the seamonsters and smashed the “heads” of Leviathan (cf. Gen.3:15). The “fleeing serpent” of Isaiah also appears inJob 26:12–13, which describes God cutting Rahab in pieces andpiercing the “gliding serpent.” Around the central figureof the serpent, a land creature, are watery glimpses of the mythicand shadowy Leviathan, a sea monster, and Rahab, all of whichrepresent a creature opposed by God. It is likely that thismalevolent cosmic figure is lurking below the surface of thecrocodile-infested waters of Job 41, a subtle but powerful closure tothe contest with which the book commenced; although Job could notrestrain Leviathan, God does.

Themotifs that recur in these passages were also part of the mythologiesof cultures surrounding ancient Israel. The Enuma Elish (a Babyloniancreation story) depicts the violent battle between the goddess Tiamatand the god Marduk that involved monster-serpents and roaringdragons. Closer to Israelite culture, in the Canaanite myth of Baaland Anat, we read that Anat claimed to crush the crooked serpent withseven heads. Just as serpents and related figures in the biblicaltext occasionally crossed the flexible boundaries between good andevil, in the wider cultural context of the ancient Near East theserpent served as a metaphor for a vast complex that included life,fertility, and wisdom, as well as chaos and death.

Forthe Christian community receiving the Revelation of John, “thegreat dragon, that ancient serpent” (20:2), presented apowerful metaphor. Wise, shrewd, quick, beguiling, and terrifying, ithad been in opposition to God in the age-old conflict between goodand evil, the reality of which was expressed across culturalboundaries and a part of which was enveloping the church in the RomanEmpire of late antiquity. Even its defeat was not instantaneous; the“head” of the serpent, struck by the death andresurrection of Jesus Christ, would bear one final blow; the cosmicevil would be ultimately and completely defeated to accomplish thepurposes of God. See also Venomous Serpent.

Unlike modern systems of jurisprudence, the Bible does not draw distinctions between criminal, civil, family, and religious law, either in its terminology or in its presentation of legal material. In the Bible, acts of deviance that are defined as criminal in virtually all societies are discussed alongside violations of a culturally specific, religious nature. For instance, the Ten Commandments prohibit murder and dishonoring parents (Exod. 20:12–13), as well as commanding Sabbath observance (Exod. 20:8–11). Any attempt to extract a system of criminal law from biblical materials must account for the fact that every culture defines deviance differently, with respect not only to specific acts but also to categories of deviance.

When viewed from the standpoint of the Bible’s organization of legal material, the terminology used, and the sanctions applied, there is substantial overlap in the Bible between “crime” and what modern societies define as noncriminal deviance. For present purposes, we might define “crime” broadly as including any act of social deviance that merits the application of a sanction by society at large (as opposed to the ad hoc fiats of rulers, as in Gen. 26:11) and that can be prohibited in a generally applied rule (even accounting for differences between free citizens and slaves, as in Exod. 21:18–21). As we will see, the Bible requires punishments, often severe, for a broad spectrum of offenses.

Capital Crimes

The Pentateuch mandates the death penalty for a wide variety of crimes. Often the mode of execution is unspecified. Where a particular mode is prescribed, the death penalty most often consisted of stoning (as in Num. 15:35) and less frequently of burning (Lev. 20:14) or shooting with arrows (Exod. 19:13).

Crimes incurring the death penalty include killing or murder (Exod. 21:12–14; Lev. 24:17; Num. 35:16), though the crime is aggravated or lessened depending on the intention behind it (Exod. 21:13–14) and whether a weapon is involved (Num. 35:16); attacking parents (Exod. 21:15); kidnapping and slave trading (Exod. 21:16; Deut. 24:7); cursing parents (Exod 21:17; Lev. 20:9); negligence resulting in death (Exod. 21:29); bestial*ty (Exod. 22:19; Lev. 20:15–16); breach of the Sabbath (Exod. 31:14–15; Num. 15:35); child sacrifice (Lev. 20:2); adultery (Lev. 20:10; Deut. 22:22); incest (Lev. 20:11–12); hom*osexuality (Lev. 20:13); marrying a woman and her mother (Lev. 20:14); witchcraft (Exod. 22:18; Lev. 20:27); blasphemy (Exod. 24:16); unauthorized approach to the tabernacle (Num. 1:51); idolatry (Num. 25:5); false prophecy and divination (Deut. 13:5); presumptuous prophecy (Deut. 18:20); enticing others to idolatry (Deut. 13:6–10); false testimony in a capital case (Deut. 19:19); and contempt for authorities (Deut. 17:2; Josh. 1:18).

When the body of an executed criminal was displayed by hanging, it had to be removed by nightfall (Deut. 21:22). The death penalty was not to be applied vicariously to family members of criminals (Deut. 24:16). In OT texts, execution was to be carried out by the victims (Deut. 13:9), families of victims (the “avenger of blood” of Num. 35:19), or witnesses to the crime.

The NT mentions an official or professional executioner (Mark 6:27). Paul declares that the authorities rightly derive the power of the sword from God (Rom. 13:4).

Punishments for Noncapital Crimes

Corporal punishment. Beating as a criminal punishment is rare in the OT (Jer. 20:2; 37:15). Most OT references to beating occur in the context of the household, as a punishment for slaves or children. Deuteronomy 25:3 limits the number of strokes in a flogging to forty (see 2 Cor. 11:24). Flogging was commonly applied as a criminal punishment in Roman times, and it was a common mode of discipline within the Roman military (Acts 16:22; 2 Cor. 11:25; 1 Pet. 2:20).

Restitution. Crimes against property were punished by compelling the offender to make restitution by repaying, often in an amount that exceeded the actual damages, including in cases of theft or negligence (Exod. 21:33; 22:3–15); killing an animal (Lev. 24:18, 21); having sexual relations with a virgin not pledged to be married (Exod. 22:16); injuring a pregnant woman (Exod. 21:22); harming a slave (Exod. 21:26–27). Financial restitution could not be made for murder (Num. 35:31).

Retribution. The notion of the lex talionis, the law of retribution, is stated in Exod. 21:23–24: “life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot” (cf. Lev. 24:19–20; Deut. 19:21; Matt. 5:38). This formula appears in other ancient legal traditions. The idea of bodily mutilation may strike modern readers as barbaric, but such laws may actually have been relatively enlightened by ancient standards, as they imposed a proportional limit on retribution.

Incarceration. In modern societies, incarceration and probation account for the vast majority of the punishments resulting from criminal offenses. In the OT, incarceration is rarely mentioned apart from the imprisonment of war captives (e.g., Judg. 16:21) and political dissidents. Jeremiah was imprisoned several times for his criticism of the regime (Jer. 32:2; 37:15). Throughout the Bible, prisoners often are guarded by soldiers rather than by professional jailers.

Paul imprisoned Christians prior to his conversion (Acts 8:3), and he himself was imprisoned or placed under arrest several times (e.g., Acts 16:23; 20:23; 24:27; Rom. 16:7). John the Baptist was imprisoned after he criticized Herod (Mark 6:17). Again, in both cases, incarceration was used to silence and segregate someone whose free movement in society threatened political stability rather than to punish a common criminal. In Matt. 5:25–26 Jesus refers to imprisonment for an unspecified reason, though the threat that “you will not get out until you have paid the last penny” suggests that incarceration was a substitute for an unpaid fine or monetary penalty. This recalls Exod. 22:3, which mandates that a thief who could not make financial restitution for theft must be sold (as a slave).

Banishment and cities of refuge. A number of OT passages refer to the “cutting off” of a person from the community. It is not clear whether this language refers to exile or the death penalty; several of the crimes thus punished are known to be capital crimes in other texts.

The law of Num. 35:6–34 establishes six “cities of refuge” among the towns allotted to the Levites. To these cities an unintentional killer could flee from the “avenger of blood,” a relative of the victim, until such time as the case could be adjudicated by the whole community. A killer who was found to have acted unintentionally and without malice could remain in the city of refuge, safe from retribution, until the death of the high priest, at which time the killer was free to return home with impunity.

Trials and Judgments

In biblical times Israel did not have an independent judiciary. Judgments in criminal cases were rendered by local elders (Josh. 20:4), communities (Num. 35:24), monarchs, or other rulers and officials. The judges of the book of Judges were primarily military rulers, though they may have also adjudicated cases as a function of their military and political power (Judg. 4:5). Cases were decided on the basis of eyewitness testimony (Num. 35:30) and, in the case of capital crimes, on the basis of multiple witnesses (Deut. 17:6). In some cases, the Bible provides detailed statutory criteria for making such judgments, as in the discussion in Num. 35:16–28 of the difference between murder and unintentional killing. In some cases, where the determination of guilt or innocence would have been impossible, as in the case of suspected adultery, a verdict could be attained through divination (Num. 5:11–31). As already noted, the judgment of some cases could be affected by the slave status of those involved (Exod. 20:20–21; see also 22:8–9).

The trial and execution of Naboth, though ultimately a subversion of justice of the highest order, offers an insight into the operation of justice in Israel in the monarchic period (1 Kings 21:1–16). Naboth was accused on a trumped-up charge of blasphemy, a capital crime (Exod. 24:16). He was tried by the notables of his city, and on the testimony of two (false) witnesses (Deut. 17:6), he was then stoned to death.

From the standpoint of OT law, the trial and execution of Jesus were complicated by the context of concurrent systems of Jewish and Roman law and government. Like Naboth, Jesus was accused by false witnesses (Matt. 26:60–61). Ultimately, the Sanhedrin determined that because Jesus had blasphemed in its presence by identifying himself as the Messiah and the Son of God, further witness testimony was unnecessary in order to achieve the desired result, the death penalty (Matt. 26:65–66; John 19:7). Ultimately, the Sanhedrin had to involve the Roman governor because it lacked the authority to execute a criminal (John 18:31). By the time Jesus was taken before Pilate, the charge had been changed from a religious one to a political one: Jesus claimed to be the king of the Jews, thus subverting Roman authority (Matt. 26:11–12). Eventually, Pilate tortured and executed Jesus not because he saw merit in the charges but rather to avoid a riot (Matt. 27:24; John 19:4, 12). Luke reports that Jesus also had a trial before Herod Antipas, the ruler to whom Jesus was subject as a Galilean (23:7). Thus, the trial of Jesus in some ways reflects both Jewish and Roman law, but it also involves some purely pragmatic (and legally and morally questionable) actions on the part of both the Sanhedrin and Pilate.

Unlike modern systems of jurisprudence, the Bible does not draw distinctions between criminal, civil, family, and religious law, either in its terminology or in its presentation of legal material. In the Bible, acts of deviance that are defined as criminal in virtually all societies are discussed alongside violations of a culturally specific, religious nature. For instance, the Ten Commandments prohibit murder and dishonoring parents (Exod. 20:12–13), as well as commanding Sabbath observance (Exod. 20:8–11). Any attempt to extract a system of criminal law from biblical materials must account for the fact that every culture defines deviance differently, with respect not only to specific acts but also to categories of deviance.

When viewed from the standpoint of the Bible’s organization of legal material, the terminology used, and the sanctions applied, there is substantial overlap in the Bible between “crime” and what modern societies define as noncriminal deviance. For present purposes, we might define “crime” broadly as including any act of social deviance that merits the application of a sanction by society at large (as opposed to the ad hoc fiats of rulers, as in Gen. 26:11) and that can be prohibited in a generally applied rule (even accounting for differences between free citizens and slaves, as in Exod. 21:18–21). As we will see, the Bible requires punishments, often severe, for a broad spectrum of offenses.

Capital Crimes

The Pentateuch mandates the death penalty for a wide variety of crimes. Often the mode of execution is unspecified. Where a particular mode is prescribed, the death penalty most often consisted of stoning (as in Num. 15:35) and less frequently of burning (Lev. 20:14) or shooting with arrows (Exod. 19:13).

Crimes incurring the death penalty include killing or murder (Exod. 21:12–14; Lev. 24:17; Num. 35:16), though the crime is aggravated or lessened depending on the intention behind it (Exod. 21:13–14) and whether a weapon is involved (Num. 35:16); attacking parents (Exod. 21:15); kidnapping and slave trading (Exod. 21:16; Deut. 24:7); cursing parents (Exod 21:17; Lev. 20:9); negligence resulting in death (Exod. 21:29); bestial*ty (Exod. 22:19; Lev. 20:15–16); breach of the Sabbath (Exod. 31:14–15; Num. 15:35); child sacrifice (Lev. 20:2); adultery (Lev. 20:10; Deut. 22:22); incest (Lev. 20:11–12); hom*osexuality (Lev. 20:13); marrying a woman and her mother (Lev. 20:14); witchcraft (Exod. 22:18; Lev. 20:27); blasphemy (Exod. 24:16); unauthorized approach to the tabernacle (Num. 1:51); idolatry (Num. 25:5); false prophecy and divination (Deut. 13:5); presumptuous prophecy (Deut. 18:20); enticing others to idolatry (Deut. 13:6–10); false testimony in a capital case (Deut. 19:19); and contempt for authorities (Deut. 17:2; Josh. 1:18).

When the body of an executed criminal was displayed by hanging, it had to be removed by nightfall (Deut. 21:22). The death penalty was not to be applied vicariously to family members of criminals (Deut. 24:16). In OT texts, execution was to be carried out by the victims (Deut. 13:9), families of victims (the “avenger of blood” of Num. 35:19), or witnesses to the crime.

The NT mentions an official or professional executioner (Mark 6:27). Paul declares that the authorities rightly derive the power of the sword from God (Rom. 13:4).

Punishments for Noncapital Crimes

Corporal punishment. Beating as a criminal punishment is rare in the OT (Jer. 20:2; 37:15). Most OT references to beating occur in the context of the household, as a punishment for slaves or children. Deuteronomy 25:3 limits the number of strokes in a flogging to forty (see 2 Cor. 11:24). Flogging was commonly applied as a criminal punishment in Roman times, and it was a common mode of discipline within the Roman military (Acts 16:22; 2 Cor. 11:25; 1 Pet. 2:20).

Restitution. Crimes against property were punished by compelling the offender to make restitution by repaying, often in an amount that exceeded the actual damages, including in cases of theft or negligence (Exod. 21:33; 22:3–15); killing an animal (Lev. 24:18, 21); having sexual relations with a virgin not pledged to be married (Exod. 22:16); injuring a pregnant woman (Exod. 21:22); harming a slave (Exod. 21:26–27). Financial restitution could not be made for murder (Num. 35:31).

Retribution. The notion of the lex talionis, the law of retribution, is stated in Exod. 21:23–24: “life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot” (cf. Lev. 24:19–20; Deut. 19:21; Matt. 5:38). This formula appears in other ancient legal traditions. The idea of bodily mutilation may strike modern readers as barbaric, but such laws may actually have been relatively enlightened by ancient standards, as they imposed a proportional limit on retribution.

Incarceration. In modern societies, incarceration and probation account for the vast majority of the punishments resulting from criminal offenses. In the OT, incarceration is rarely mentioned apart from the imprisonment of war captives (e.g., Judg. 16:21) and political dissidents. Jeremiah was imprisoned several times for his criticism of the regime (Jer. 32:2; 37:15). Throughout the Bible, prisoners often are guarded by soldiers rather than by professional jailers.

Paul imprisoned Christians prior to his conversion (Acts 8:3), and he himself was imprisoned or placed under arrest several times (e.g., Acts 16:23; 20:23; 24:27; Rom. 16:7). John the Baptist was imprisoned after he criticized Herod (Mark 6:17). Again, in both cases, incarceration was used to silence and segregate someone whose free movement in society threatened political stability rather than to punish a common criminal. In Matt. 5:25–26 Jesus refers to imprisonment for an unspecified reason, though the threat that “you will not get out until you have paid the last penny” suggests that incarceration was a substitute for an unpaid fine or monetary penalty. This recalls Exod. 22:3, which mandates that a thief who could not make financial restitution for theft must be sold (as a slave).

Banishment and cities of refuge. A number of OT passages refer to the “cutting off” of a person from the community. It is not clear whether this language refers to exile or the death penalty; several of the crimes thus punished are known to be capital crimes in other texts.

The law of Num. 35:6–34 establishes six “cities of refuge” among the towns allotted to the Levites. To these cities an unintentional killer could flee from the “avenger of blood,” a relative of the victim, until such time as the case could be adjudicated by the whole community. A killer who was found to have acted unintentionally and without malice could remain in the city of refuge, safe from retribution, until the death of the high priest, at which time the killer was free to return home with impunity.

Trials and Judgments

In biblical times Israel did not have an independent judiciary. Judgments in criminal cases were rendered by local elders (Josh. 20:4), communities (Num. 35:24), monarchs, or other rulers and officials. The judges of the book of Judges were primarily military rulers, though they may have also adjudicated cases as a function of their military and political power (Judg. 4:5). Cases were decided on the basis of eyewitness testimony (Num. 35:30) and, in the case of capital crimes, on the basis of multiple witnesses (Deut. 17:6). In some cases, the Bible provides detailed statutory criteria for making such judgments, as in the discussion in Num. 35:16–28 of the difference between murder and unintentional killing. In some cases, where the determination of guilt or innocence would have been impossible, as in the case of suspected adultery, a verdict could be attained through divination (Num. 5:11–31). As already noted, the judgment of some cases could be affected by the slave status of those involved (Exod. 20:20–21; see also 22:8–9).

The trial and execution of Naboth, though ultimately a subversion of justice of the highest order, offers an insight into the operation of justice in Israel in the monarchic period (1 Kings 21:1–16). Naboth was accused on a trumped-up charge of blasphemy, a capital crime (Exod. 24:16). He was tried by the notables of his city, and on the testimony of two (false) witnesses (Deut. 17:6), he was then stoned to death.

From the standpoint of OT law, the trial and execution of Jesus were complicated by the context of concurrent systems of Jewish and Roman law and government. Like Naboth, Jesus was accused by false witnesses (Matt. 26:60–61). Ultimately, the Sanhedrin determined that because Jesus had blasphemed in its presence by identifying himself as the Messiah and the Son of God, further witness testimony was unnecessary in order to achieve the desired result, the death penalty (Matt. 26:65–66; John 19:7). Ultimately, the Sanhedrin had to involve the Roman governor because it lacked the authority to execute a criminal (John 18:31). By the time Jesus was taken before Pilate, the charge had been changed from a religious one to a political one: Jesus claimed to be the king of the Jews, thus subverting Roman authority (Matt. 26:11–12). Eventually, Pilate tortured and executed Jesus not because he saw merit in the charges but rather to avoid a riot (Matt. 27:24; John 19:4, 12). Luke reports that Jesus also had a trial before Herod Antipas, the ruler to whom Jesus was subject as a Galilean (23:7). Thus, the trial of Jesus in some ways reflects both Jewish and Roman law, but it also involves some purely pragmatic (and legally and morally questionable) actions on the part of both the Sanhedrin and Pilate.

Cities, towns, and villages were essential parts of a commoncivilization pattern shared by the ancient Near East and the Bible.Towns and cities were designed to provide the basic needs ofsecurity, shelter, and sustenance to enable their populations toengage in a variety of social, economic, religious, and politicalactivities.

Theurban picture of the biblical world is complicated by severalfactors. The first is the large span of time covered in the Bible.The urban chronology of Scripture begins at the moment of the firstattempt at city building (Gen. 4:17) and ends with the revelation ofthe new Jerusalem, the city of God (Rev. 3:12; 21:2).

Moreover,the Bible is not concerned with providing a detailed commentary onthe expansion of city and urban life. It is true that several of thegreat cities of the ancient Near East and the Greco-Roman world arementioned in the pages of the Bible; however, many of the religious,social, economic, and political factors involved in the developmentof urban life are not identified or discussed. The archaeologicalrecord often suggests a more complex picture.

Inaddition, a wide variety of terms are used broadly andinterchangeably in the Scriptures to describe settlement patterns andsocio-urban structures. For example, the specific differences betweena city, a town, and a village are not clearly identified in thebiblical text. Normally, a city had a fortified wall or other type ofdefensive enclosure, while a town or village did not.

Furthermore,city status was not necessarily determined by size. Ancient citieswere much smaller. During the reign of Solomon, Jerusalem coveredabout thirty-three acres. But by the time of Jesus it measured nearlytwo hundred acres. Jericho, the oldest city in Palestine, was nolarger than ten acres. The archaeological record suggests thatJericho was occupied by at least 7000 BC. Hazor, one of the largestcities in the upper Galilee, covered 175 acres. The dimensions ofPalestinian cities were minuscule compared to the great pagan citiessuch as Nineveh, Babylon, and Rome.

ArchaeologicalEvidence

Archaeologicalevidence suggests that some of the chief concerns of city buildingremained constant over time. Cities were planted along main highwaysor trade routes. Often a city sat at important crossroads orintersections. An adequate water supply was necessary, as were rawmaterials for shelter and industry. The site had to be easy to defendand surrounded by adjacent agricultural land sufficient to sustainthe population. All cities in the ancient Near East built walls andcity gates. Most featured an acropolis or citadel and a workingsystem of city streets. Many cities contained a sanctuary or highplace where individuals could worship.

Atleast four major phases of urbanization in Palestine occurred duringthe biblical period.

EarlyBronze Age II (3000–2700 BC).Although Jericho and other cities had their origin in theChalcolithic period, the Early Bronze Age produced a significantexpansion of urban life. Cities in this period included Megiddo, Ai,Gezer, Arad, Jericho, and others. Larger sites protected byfortifications with gates are characteristic of this period. Temples,fortified citadels, and residential houses were found arranged alongstreets and thoroughfares inside the city. The water supply became acommunity concern, and steps were taken to conserve runoff water intolarge reservoirs or cisterns. Such urban planning presupposes asocial hierarchy in the differentiation of labor and need. Farmers,craftsmen, and traders, as well as priests and rulers, worked andlived side by side in the city.

MiddleBronze Age IIB (1750–1650 BC).In the second wave of urbanization, the Canaanites refortified andrebuilt older settlements such as Dan, Hazor, Megiddo, and Shechem.Other sites, such as Bethel and Beth Shemesh, were established as newsettlements. Distinctive walls, fortifications, gates, and culticarchitecture characterized this period. Mud-brick was a commonconstruction material. Larger city-states controlled agriculturalresources and ruled numerous villages and settlements within theirimmediate vicinity. These city-states often joined together inpolitical alliances. Cuneiform documents from Mari and Hazor providea glimpse into the social, cultural, and political life in the citiesof this period. This wave of urbanization began to decline by theLate Bronze Age.

IronAge II (1000–586 BC).Early Iron Age settlements developed alongside the declining LateBronze cities as rough camps, simple enclosures, and villages in thehighlands of Palestine. Later, during the monarchial period, some ofthe villages and cities expanded into full urban centers, followingroyal hierarchical and administrative blueprints. Cities containedadministrative buildings, enhanced fortifications and gates, newwater systems, and planned street systems offering systematicdrainage. Housing generally followed a typical pattern. Stone becamethe construction material of choice. Both the united monarchy and thedivided kingdoms of Israel and Judah established royal cities,administrative centers, fortified border cities, and fortresses.Urban life gravitated toward the upkeep of a central religious andeconomic royal administration.

Romanperiod.As a champion of all things Hellenic, Alexander the Great introducedthe Greek city, or polis, into the oriental culture of the Levant.This new type of city, with its theaters, gymnasia, statues, andcolonnades, served as a beacon of Greek civilization. Such citiesattracted Greek settlers, traders, and local natives (Acts 18:1–3,18–28; Rom. 16:3–5; 1 Cor. 16:19). The Greek agora(marketplace) replaced the Palestinian city gate as the center oftrade and commerce. Sepphoris and the towns of the Decapolis wereexamples of this type of city in Palestine. The Romans imitated theHellenistic city plan but emphasized one main north-souththoroughfare (cardo) and east-west streets. Building activity inPalestine flourished under Herod the Great (37–4 BC). Herebuilt, expanded, and renamed many Palestinian sites, such asCaesarea, Sebaste, and the Tower of Antonia in Jerusalem. Herodradically changed the landscape of Jerusalem, rebuilding there on amassive scale not only the palace but also the temple.

OldTestament

Thecommon Hebrew word for “city,” ’ir, occurs 1,093times in the OT. English versions normally translate the word as“city,” but sometimes “town” is used. Thesame term is found outside the Bible in one of the Lachish lettersand as a cognate in several Semitic languages. The etymology of ’iris not clear, but it may be related to the Sumerian word for “city,”uru. The word may have originally designated a fortified or protectedplace.

Inthe OT, ’ir can be applied to a wide range of settlements,including villages, towns, and capital cities regardless of size orlocation. For example, Deut. 3:5 speaks of cities fortified with highwalls, gates, and bars in the same sentence with “rural towns”or “country settlements” [NIV: “unwalledvillages”]. On the other hand, a distinction is made between a“walled city” and a “village” in Lev. 25:29,31. In Num. 13:19 Moses specifically charges the spies with the taskof determining whether the Canaanite cities are fortified or morelike camps. Cities given to the Levites in Num. 35:1–8 alsoincluded the surrounding pasturelands connected with them. A numberof times the OT speaks of the fields associated with a city orvillage (Lev. 25:34; Josh. 21:12; Neh. 11:25, 30).

Citieswere also given special designations or names. Cities of refuge areso designated to provide protection for individuals who havecommitted accidental manslaughter (Num. 35:11; Josh. 20:2; 1 Chron.6:57). Jericho was called “the City of Palms” (Deut.34:3; 2 Chron. 28:15). Jerusalem was known as “the City ofDavid” (1 Kings 3:1; 2 Chron. 5:2), “Zion”(Isa. 33:20; Zech. 8:3; Heb. 12:22), and “the holy city”(Isa. 52:1; Rev. 21:1).

Twoother Hebrew terms are often translated “city.” The nounqeret occurs only five times in biblical poetry (Job 29:7; Prov. 8:3;9:3, 14; 11:11). The noun qiryah is found twenty-nine times. It issometimes translated “town” in the NIV (Deut. 2:36; Job39:7; Isa. 25:2; Jer. 49:25; Hos. 7:12). The etymology of either wordis uncertain, but both may be derived from qir (“wall”).In many cases qiryah functions as a synonym of ’ir.

InDeut. 2:36 and 3:4 qiryah is used to designate the towns taken by theIsraelites in Transjordan. Heshbon is identified in Num. 21:28 as the“town” (qiryah; NIV: “city”) of Sihon. Theword qiryah is also found in the names of several towns, such asKiriath Jearim (Josh. 15:9) and Kiriath Sepher (Josh. 15:15). Hebronwas originally Kiriath Arba (Gen. 23:2; 35:27), and Balaam rode toKiriath Huzoth (Num. 22:39). Shaveh Kiriathaim (Gen. 14:5) andKiriathaim (Num. 32:37) contain a form of qiryah.

Smallercommunities were called “villages” or “settlements”(Gen. 25:16; Lev. 25:31; Deut. 2:23). Some of these were connected toa larger city or provincial center. The book of Joshua commonlyspeaks of a city or town and “its villages” (Josh. 13–19;cf. 1 Chron. 6:26). In addition, the Hebrew phrase “daughtersof” (i.e., settlements) is frequently used to identify smallervillages under the jurisdiction of a larger city and dependent uponit (Num. 21:25, 32; 32:42; Josh. 15:45, 47; Neh. 11:25–31).

NewTestament

TheGreek word polis occurs 163 times in the NT and is translated as“town” or “city.” Several sites are calledpolis: Nazareth (Matt. 2:23), Capernaum (Luke 4:31), Arimathea (Luke23:51), Bethlehem (John 7:42), and others. Jerusalem is called “theholy city” (Matt. 4:5; cf. Rev. 3:12), “the city of theGreat King” (Matt. 5:35), and “the city of the livingGod” (Heb. 12:22). During his ministry, Jesus preached in thetowns of Galilee (Matt. 11:1) and Samaria (Matt. 10:5). In the bookof Acts, Paul served as an evangelist to the Greek and Roman citiesin the Mediterranean world.