Gospel Of The Hebrews Quotes

Around the years 20 to 35 of the Current Era, a mystic Hebrew Yogi by the name of Yehōshùa began teaching people about a spiritual dimension, or the Kingdom of Heaven, that can be found within Man, despite the fact that many people are still unaware of this spiritual state. Yehōshùa, better known in our times as Jesus, did not teach The Way directly to the people, but by the use of parables, elucidating their deepest meanings to those who were closest to him...

The Self says ‘I AM’–as in the very grand sayings of Christ, especially in the Gospel of John, in which he says in the state of onenenss with Yahweh (which in Hebrew means ‘I AM’), I AM is the way and the truth and the life–but the ego says ‘I am this’ or ‘I am that,’ thus attaching itself only to a small portion of the Vastness. (62)

They were staggered to learn that a real tangible person, living in Minnesota, and married to their own flesh-and-blood relation, could apparently believe that divorce may not always be immoral; that illegitimate children do not bear any special and guaranteed form of curse; that there are ethical authorities outside of the Hebrew Bible; that men have drunk wine yet not died in the gutter; that the capitalistic system of distribution and the Baptist wedding-ceremony were not known in the Garden of Eden; that mushrooms are as edible as corn-beef hash; that the word "dude" is no longer frequently used; that there are Ministers of the Gospel who accept evolution; that some persons of apparent intelligence and business ability do not always vote the Republican ticket straight; that it is not a universal custom to wear scratchy flannels next the skin in winter; that a violin is not inherently more immoral than a chapel organ; that some poets do not have long hair; and that Jews are not always peddlers or pants-makers. "Where does she get all them theories?" marveled Uncle Whittier Smail; while Aunt Bessie inquired, "Do you suppose there's many folks got notions like hers? My! If there are," and her tone settled the fact that there were not, "I just don't know what the world's coming to!

What was ridiculous about Christianity, from the perspective of a cultivated pagan, was not only its language—the crude style of the Gospels’ Greek resting on the barbarous otherness of Hebrew and Aramaic—but also its exaltation of divine humiliation and pain conjoined with an arrogant triumphalism.

It is, generally speaking, a far more pleasant task to preach the gospel to lost poor sinners than to minister to the needs of wayward saints.

Paul suggests that gentiles can practice a law written in their hearts, which will be seen as not only equal to but also above the written Torah…It should be remembered that in Paul’s day the only religious law for Paul was that of the Jewish Bible, in Hebrew… Though Torah and the New Testament, including Paul’s letters, will eventually shape church law, the New Testament’s books are not in themselves composed as law. They are not a self-consciously composed constitution. They contain no Ten Commandments in form or statement.

1. My contention is that "Surah" is an arabicized form of the Hebrew name 171'01 B' surah, that is, Gospel, given to the Christian Gospels during the early centuries of Christianity and adopted in the Qur'an for "revelation.

Bible consists of sixty-six books written by some forty different authors over a period of about 1,500 years. The authors came from every imaginable background—“kings, peasants, philosophers, fishermen, poets, statesmen and scholars. It was written on at least three different continents in three different languages—Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek—yet, there is a thread of continuity from Genesis to Revelation.

The scriptures of all three of the great monotheisms show that they began similarly as popular movements in protest against the privilege and arrogance of power, whether that of kings as in the Hebrew bible, or the Roman Empire as in the Gospels, or a tribal elite as in the Quran. All three, that is, were originally driven by ideals of justice and egalitarianism, rejecting the inequities of human power in favor of a higher and more just one.

These traditions were adopted from the people of the Nile Valley by the Hebrews, eventually embraced by the Christians and woven into the Gospels.

The Hebrew word for “glory” (kabod) literally means “weight.” To give something glory in your life (or, to worship it) is to give it so much weight that you couldn’t imagine doing life without it.

In addition to the eternal, mystical Silence and the Holy Spirit, certain gnostics suggest a third characterization of the divine Mother: as Wisdom. Here the Greek feminine term for “wisdom,” sophia, translates a Hebrew feminine term, hokhmah.

Women became "wives" in English Bible translations, even when they would not have been considered wives in the biblical world. The word marriage never appears in the Hebrew text. But it appears fifty times in the Geneva Bible and nineteen times in the KJV.

Go and tell," I whispered to him. There was little voice left in me, but I whispered it firmly. Then I took the Gospel from the table, the Russian translation, and showed him John, chapter 12, verse 24: "Verily, verily, I say unto you, except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit." I had read this verse just before he came. He read it. "True," he said, and smiled bitterly. "Yes, in these books," he said, after a pause, one finds all sorts of terrible things. It is easy to shove them under someone's nose. Who wrote them, were they human beings?" "The Holy Spirit wrote them," I said. "Its easy for you to babble," he smiled again, but this time almost hatefully. I again took the book, opened it to a different place, and showed him the Epistle to the Hebrews, chapter 10, verse 31. He read: "It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." He read it and threw the book aside. He even began trembling all over. "A fearful verse," he said. "You picked a good one, I must say.

The right’s contention that we are a “Christian nation” that has fallen from pure origins and can achieve redemption by some kind of return to Christian values is based on wishful thinking, not convincing historical argument. Writing to the Hebrew Congregation in Newport, Rhode Island, in 1790, President Washington assured his Jewish countrymen that America “gives…bigotry no sanction.” In a treaty with the Muslim nation of Tripoli initiated by Washington, completed by John Adams, and ratified by the Senate in 1797, the Founders declared that “the government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion….

Centuries of high quality Arabic Christian literature remain, for the most part, unpublished and unknown.' All of these sources, Syriac, Hebrew/Aramaic and Arabic, share the broader culture of the ancient Middle East, and all of them are ethnically closer to the Semitic world of Jesus than the Greek and Latin cultures of the West.

Underline this thought: assurance, peace, access to God, knowledge that He is our Father, and strength to overcome temptation all depend on this-the Son of God took our flesh and bore our sins in such a way that further sacrifice for sin is both unnecessary and unintelligible. Christ died our death, and now in His resurrection He continues to wear our nature forever, and in it He lives for us before the face of God. He could not do more for us than He has done; we need no other resources to enable us to walk through this world into the next. You and I need a Savior who is near us, is one with us, understands us. All of this the Lord Jesus is, Hebrews affirms. Fix your gaze on this Christ and your whole Christian life will be transformed.

The triad, being the fundamental principle of the whole Kabalah, or Sacred Tradition of our fathers, was necessarily the fundamental dogma of Christianity, the apparent dualism of which it explains by the intervention of a harmonious and all-powerful unity. Christ did not put His teaching into writing, and only revealed it in secret to His favored disciple, the one Kabalist, and he a great Kabalist, among the apostles. So is the Apocalypse the book of the Gnosis or Secret Doctrine of the first Christians, and the key of this doctrine is indicated by an occult versicle of the Lord's Prayer, which the Vulgate leaves untranslated, while in the Greek Rite, the priests only are permitted to pronounce it. This versicle, completely kabalistic, is found in the Greek text of the Gospel according to St Matthew, and in several Hebrew copies, as follows: Ὅτι σοῦ ἐστιν ἡ βασιλεία καὶ ἡ δύναμις καὶ ἡ δόξα εις τοὺς αἰῶνας. ἀμήν. The sacred word MALKUTH substituted for KETHER, which is its kabalistic correspondent, and the equipoise of GEBURAH and CHESED, repeating itself in the circles of heavens called eons by the Gnostics, provided the keystone of the whole Christian Temple in the occult versicle. It has been retained by Protestants in their New Testament, but they have failed to discern its lofty and wonderful meaning, which would have unveiled to them all the Mysteries of the Apocalypse. There is, however, a tradition in the Church that the manifestation of this mysteries is reserved till the last times.

Listen carefully here, because I’m afraid we’ll lose those of you who have seen so much defeat, you have unknowingly stopped believing that victory is possible. Every person has the choice to think and act and respond in light of the gospel. It’s true that a marriage can fail because of one person’s refusal to do this. But it’s also quite possible for a marriage to thrive because of only one person’s commitment to do this. Ultimate victory is knowing that you have honored Christ at any cost, and your conscience is at rest in His presence. Consider him who endured from sinners such hostility against himself, so that you may not grow weary or fainthearted. In your struggle against sin you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your blood. (Hebrews 12:3–4)

He came down all the way to us, saved us by the death and resurrection of his Son, and continues to provide for our temporal and eternal welfare. But that’s not all: After this he still accommodates, coming all the way down to us again here and now as he uses the most everyday and common elements that are familiar to both the uneducated and the academic: water, bread, and wine. Here God even accommodates to our weakness by allowing us to “taste and see that the Lord is good,” to catch a glimpse of his goodness as he passes by. The writer to the Hebrews calls it tasting of “the powers of the coming age” (Heb. 6:5). Isn’t it a bit arrogant, therefore, for us to respond to this gracious condescension by asking, “But what about the teenagers? How can we make the gospel relevant to people today?

The New Testament quotes from the Psalter more often than from any other Old Testament book. • Of the 283 direct quotes of the Old Testament in the New, 116 (41 percent) are from the Psalms.5 • The Psalms are used more than fifty times in the Gospels to allude to the person and work of Jesus Christ.6 • When the author of Hebrews sought biblical proof that Jesus was God, at least seven of his citations were from the book of Psalms.

The English word Atonement comes from the ancient Hebrew word kaphar, which means to cover. When Adam and Eve partook of the fruit and discovered their nakedness in the Garden of Eden, God sent Jesus to make coats of skins to cover them. Coats of skins don’t grow on trees. They had to be made from an animal, which meant an animal had to be killed. Perhaps that was the very first animal sacrifice. Because of that sacrifice, Adam and Eve were covered physically. In the same way, through Jesus’ sacrifice we are also covered emotionally and spiritually. When Adam and Eve left the garden, the only things they could take to remind them of Eden were the coats of skins. The one physical thing we take with us out of the temple to remind us of that heavenly place is a similar covering. The garment reminds us of our covenants, protects us, and even promotes modesty. However, it is also a powerful and personal symbol of the Atonement—a continuous reminder both night and day that because of Jesus’ sacrifice, we are covered. (I am indebted to Guinevere Woolstenhulme, a religion teacher at BYU, for insights about kaphar.) Jesus covers us (see Alma 7) when we feel worthless and inadequate. Christ referred to himself as “Alpha and Omega” (3 Nephi 9:18). Alpha and omega are the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet. Christ is surely the beginning and the end. Those who study statistics learn that the letter alpha is used to represent the level of significance in a research study. Jesus is also the one who gives value and significance to everything. Robert L. Millet writes, “In a world that offers flimsy and fleeting remedies for mortal despair, Jesus comes to us in our moments of need with a ‘more excellent hope’ (Ether 12:32)” (Grace Works, 62). Jesus covers us when we feel lost and discouraged. Christ referred to Himself as the “light” (3 Nephi 18:16). He doesn’t always clear the path, but He does illuminate it. Along with being the light, He also lightens our loads. “For my yoke is easy,” He said, “and my burden is light” (Matthew 11:30). He doesn’t always take burdens away from us, but He strengthens us for the task of carrying them and promises they will be for our good. Jesus covers us when we feel abused and hurt. Joseph Smith taught that because Christ met the demands of justice, all injustices will be made right for the faithful in the eternal scheme of things (see Teachings, 296). Marie K. Hafen has said, “The gospel of Jesus Christ was not given us to prevent our pain. The gospel was given us to heal our pain” (“Eve Heard All These Things,” 27). Jesus covers us when we feel defenseless and abandoned. Christ referred to Himself as our “advocate” (D&C 29:5): one who believes in us and stands up to defend us. We read, “The Lord is my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer; my God, my strength, in whom I will trust; my buckler” (Psalm 18:2). A buckler is a shield used to divert blows. Jesus doesn’t always protect us from unpleasant consequences of illness or the choices of others, since they are all part of what we are here on earth to experience. However, He does shield us from fear in those dark times and delivers us from having to face those difficulties alone. … We’ve already learned that the Hebrew word that is translated into English as Atonement means “to cover.” In Arabic or Aramaic, the verb meaning to atone is kafat, which means “to embrace.” Not only can we be covered, helped, and comforted by the Savior, but we can be “encircled about eternally in the arms of his love” (2 Nephi 1:15). We can be “clasped in the arms of Jesus” (Mormon 5:11). In our day the Savior has said, “Be faithful and diligent in keeping the commandments of God, and I will encircle thee in the arms of my love” (D&C 6:20). (Brad Wilcox, The Continuous Atonement, pp. 47-49, 60).

You’re right. It’s not right to condemn this child because she was not born a Brahman?” “Of course not.” “Then is it right to condemn her because she is not born a Jew?” “What do you mean?” “A man who is born a gentile may not see the kingdom of God. Are we, as Hebrews, any different from them? The lambs at the temple on Passover? The wealth and power of the Sadducees while others go hungry? At least the Untouchables can reach their reward eventually, through karma and rebirth. We don’t allow any gentile to do so.

The constancy and faithfulness of God is an assured reality. Whereas even the apparently stable earth and heavens can perish (v. 25–26), more permanent and fixed even than these is God himself. He is the same, and his years have no end (v. 27). Hebrews 1:10–12 quotes these verses (Ps. 102:25–27) and applies them to Christ, through whom God created (cf. Heb. 1:2) and redeemed (cf. Heb. 2:17–18) the world. Believers of all generations may put their hope in Christ, who is the same yesterday, today, and forever (cf. Heb. 13:8). He is their salvation. He is their hope. In him the people of God “shall dwell secure” (Ps. 102:28).

The culture that created the KJV championed marriage as the ideal state decreed by God. The holy (male-headed) household formed the center of English society, from the household of the urban merchant to the lordly estates of the members of Parliament. Law codes favored husbands and male heirs by excluding women from inheritance, reducing married women to the legal status of children, and elevating marriage as key for securing masculine social rank and authority. Yet early modern biblical scholars found that marriage was puzzlingly absent from the Old Testament (the Hebrew Bible), especially for an institution thought to be championed by God.

More specifically, the Hebrew Bible tells the story of a people who move away from slavery under Pharaoh—a system that requires many people to produce more and more with less and less for the few with power, that requires them to give their lives to production in order to enhance the wealth of the powerful (in other words, the “rat race”)—into a covenant with their God and with each other. This covenant lifts up the ideal of “neighborhood”—a community in which the members care for one another, share in abundance, acquire no more than is needed, and especially look out for the poorest or the least powerful of those in the neighborhood (in the language of the Old Testament prophets: “the widow, the immigrant, and the orphan”).

For the disciples, Jesus is not a mere prophet heralding the latest divine message. Jesus is a revolution. Note the very first verse of John’s Gospel: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” These three simple statements carry hitherto unknown and inconceivable ideas about God that are destined to change the world. As a good Jew, John certainly knows the first verse in the Hebrew Bible: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”2 But John has met Jesus, and “saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father.”3 While John certainly agrees that God created all things, he cannot leave it at that, for he has seen something that has changed his understanding of everything. Note the parallel

Hebrews has been referred to as the fifth gospel because it tells of Jesus’ finished work on earth and His continuing work in heaven. There is no other book in the New Testament that helps us to understand the present ministry of Christ as does the book of Hebrews. Many Christians know little about Christ’s present work for His people. Hebrews shows us that just as God led the Israelites from Egypt through the barren wilderness, protecting them from danger, supplying all their needs, teaching them, training them, and eventually bringing them into the rich land of Canaan, so Christ is at this present time helping His children, by intercession, inspiration, instruction, and indwelling, to enter into the spiritual rest land of abundant living, a taste of the heavenly glories to come.

All people have religions. It's like we have religion receptors built into our brain cells, or something, and we'll latch onto anything that'll fill that niche for us. Now, religion used to be essentially viral -- a piece of information that replicated inside the human mind, jumping from one person to the next. That's the way it used to be, and unfortunately, that's the way it's headed right now. But there have been several efforts to deliver us from the hands of primitive, irrational religion. The first was made by someone named Enki about four thousand years ago. The second was made by Hebrew scholars in the eighth century B.C., driven out of their homeland by the invasion of Sargon II, but eventually it just devolved into empty legalism. Another attempt was made by Jesus -- that one was hijacked by viral influences within fifty days of his death. The virus was suppressed by the Catholic Church, but we're in the middle of a big epidemic that started in Kansas in 1900 and has been gathering momentum ever since." "Do you believe in God or not?" Hiro says. First things first. "Definitely." "Do you believe in Jesus?" "Yes. But not in the physical, bodily resurrection of Jesus." "How can you be a Christian without believing in that?" "I would say," Juanita says, "how can you be a Christian with it? Anyone who takes the trouble to study the gospels can see that the bodily resurrection is a myth that was tacked onto the real story several years after the real histories were written. It's so National Enquirer-esque, don't you think?

We’ve been instructed to reject any trace of poetry, myth, hyperbole, or symbolism even when those literary forms are virtually shouting at us from the page via talking snakes and enchanted trees. That’s because there’s a curious but popular notion circulating around the church these days that says God would never stoop to using ancient genre categories to communicate. Speaking to ancient people using their own language, literary structures, and cosmological assumptions would be beneath God, it is said, for only our modern categories of science and history can convey the truth in any meaningful way. In addition to once again prioritizing modern, Western (and often uniquely American) concerns, this notion overlooks one of the most central themes of Scripture itself: God stoops. From walking with Adam and Eve through the garden of Eden, to traveling with the liberated Hebrew slaves in a pillar of cloud and fire, to slipping into flesh and eating, laughing, suffering, healing, weeping, and dying among us as part of humanity, the God of Scripture stoops and stoops and stoops and stoops. At the heart of the gospel message is the story of a God who stoops to the point of death on a cross. Dignified or not, believable or not, ours is a God perpetually on bended knee, doing everything it takes to convince stubborn and petulant children that they are seen and loved. It is no more beneath God to speak to us using poetry, proverb, letters, and legend than it is for a mother to read storybooks to her daughter at bedtime. This is who God is. This is what God does.

In addition, Christ Jesus spoke a language called Aramaic. While He was born Jewish and could read the Hebrew sacred texts, it is probable that He did not speak Hebrew with his Apostles or with those people who came to hear Him speak. For, it was not common during the time of Christ Jesus for the Jewish people to speak in Hebrew. Extremely few people in ancient times could read or write. The Jewish people of the time of Christ Jesus spoke Aramaic. The New Testament Gospels, on the other hand, were written in Greek. Thus, before even beginning to speak about all the errors created by innumerable scribes re-copying the Gospels over and over again, we must confront the fact that when Christ Jesus spoke, he spoke in Aramaic. We know that the authors of the Gospels in the New Testament were not the persons traditionally named as the authors of these Gospels: Saint Mark did not write the Gospel of Mark; Saint Matthew did not write the Gospel of Matthew and so on. In order to create each one of the New Testament Gospels, some author who spoke and wrote in Greek had to have read a document already written in Aramaic (or possibly Hebrew, although this is unlikely), or possibly sat and listened as one of the Apostles or followers of Christ Jesus related the stories to him in Aramaic and then the author who spoke and wrote in Greek, translated the Aramaic tales into Greek. So, straightaway, we realize that it is impossible that we are reading the exact words of Christ Jesus; the best that we can hope for is that we are reading the best translation of Christ Jesus’ words from Aramaic, into Greek and finally into English.

The call for justice was a protest as fierce as those of the biblical prophets and of Jesus, and the similarity of the call was no coincidence. As with early Judaism and early Christianity, early Islam would be rooted in opposition to a corrupt status quo. Its protest of inequity would be an integral part of the demand for inclusiveness, for unity and equality under the umbrella of the one god regardless of lineage, wealth, age, or gender. This is what would make it so appealing to the disenfranchised, those who didn't matter in the grand Meccan scheme of things, like slaves and freedmen, widows and orphans, all those cut out of the elite by birth or circumstance. And it spoke equally to the young and idealistic, those who had not yet learned to knuckle under to the way things were and who responded to the deeply egalitarian strain of the verses. All were equal before God, the thirteen-year-old Ali as important as the most respected graybeard, the daughter as much as the son, the African slave as much as the highborn noble. It was a potent and potentially radical re-envisioning of society. This was a matter of politics as much as of faith. The scriptures of all three of the great monotheisms show that they began similarly as popular movements in protest against the privilege and arrogance of power, whether that of kings as in the Hebrew bible, or the Roman Empire as in the Gospels, or a tribal elite as in the Quran. All three, that is, were originally driven by ideals of justice and egalitarianism, rejecting the inequities of human power in favor of a higher and more just one. No matter how far they might have strayed from their origins as they became institutionalized over time, the historical record clearly indicates that what we now call the drive for social justice was the idealistic underpinning of monotheistic faith.

The most consistent execution of this project is to be found in the Letter to the Hebrews, which connects the death of Jesus on the Cross with the ritual and theology of the Jewish feast of reconciliation and expounds it as the true cosmic reconciliation feast. The train of thought in the letter could be briefly summarized more or less as follows: All the sacrificial activity of mankind, all attempts to conciliate God by cult and ritual—and the world is full of them—were bound to remain useless human work, because God does not seek bulls and goats or whatever may be ritually offered to him. One can sacrifice whole hecatombs of animals to God all over the world; he does not need them, because they all belong to him anyway, and nothing is given to the Lord of All when such things are burned in his honor. “I will accept no bull from your house, nor he-goat from your folds. For every beast of the forest is mine, the cattle on a thousand hills. I know all the birds of the air, and all that moves in the field is mine. If I were hungry, I would not tell you; for the world and all that is in it is mine. Do I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats? Offer to God a sacrifice of thanksgiving. . . .” So runs a saying of God in the Old Testament (Ps 50 [49]:9-14). The author of the Letter to the Hebrews places himself in the spiritual line of this and similar texts. With still more conclusive emphasis he stresses the fruitlessness of ritual effort. God does not seek bulls and goats but man; man’s unqualified Yes to God could alone form true worship. Everything belongs to God, but to man is lent the freedom to say Yes or No, the freedom to love or to reject; love’s free Yes is the only thing for which God must wait—the only worship or “sacrifice” that can have any meaning. But the Yes to God, in which man gives himself back to God, cannot be replaced or represented by the blood of bulls and goats. “For what can a man give in return for his life”, it says at one point in the Gospel (Mk 8:37). The answer can only be: There is nothing with which he could compensate for himself. But

[T]he ancients, knowing nothing about vaporisation, drew an absolute line between solids and liquids on the one hand and what we call gases on the other. The name they gave to what we call gas was spiritus (Latin), pneuma (Greek) or ruach and neshama (Hebrew). In each case the word could mean air, breath or wind. The ancients thought of the wind as the breath of God. So when the Hebrews offered their account of the world’s origin, they said the powerful wind (ruach) of God fluttered over the waters. And when they told of the origin of humankind, they said that God made humans out of the dust of the earth, breathed his gentle breath (neshama) into them and they became living persons. Further, it was as obvious to ancients as it is to us that the best way of distinguishing between a living person and a corpse is to look for breath— for a living person breathes. Breath was believed to be the very essence of what constitutes a living human being, and thus the very principle of life. But for the ancients breath, air and wind were all the same. When a man dies, said Ecclesiastes, “the dust returns to the earth and the breath returns to God”. When Jesus died on the cross, according to Luke, he said, “Father into your hands I commit my spirit (pneuma)” and, “having said this he breathed his last”. Of course we are used to hearing the word ‘spirit’ in one place and ‘breath’ in the other, but in the Greek original the same word, pneuma, is used. Similarly in the King James Version (still nearer to the medieval world-view than we are) Matthew reports that “Jesus cried with a loud voice and gave up the ghost (pneuma)”. During the transition to the modern world people continued to speak about spirit without realising that they were no longer talking about something originally conceived to be as tangible as the air we breathe. Christians continued to speak of God as spirit and referred to what they called the power of the Holy Spirit. Preachers continued to expound the story of Jesus and Nicodemus in John’s Gospel (where being born again of the spirit is described in terms of the blowing of the wind), but failed to draw attention to the fact that in this story the same word is sometimes translated ‘wind’ and sometimes ‘spirit’. Only slowly has it dawned upon us that in talking about spirit we are talking about something far less substantial than wind or the air that we breathe. Indeed, spirit has no substance at all. It has become a purely abstract term that has no external referent. It continues in usage as a frozen metaphor from a now obsolete worldview, and its only possible meaning is a metaphorical or symbolic one. Conservative Christians continue to speak about the Holy Spirit, the power of the spirit and so on, as if it were an oozy something that operates like the wind. Without being wholly aware of the fact, they live in the medieval world for religious purposes and return to the modern world for the mundane business of daily living.

At the end of this Sabbath encounter with the religious leaders Mark records a remarkable sentence that sums up one of the main themes of the New Testament, “Then the Pharisees went out and began to plot with the Herodians how they might kill Jesus.” The Herodians were the supporters of Herod, the nastiest of the corrupt kings who ruled Israel, representing the Roman occupying power and its political system. In any country that the Romans conquered, they set up rulers. And wherever the Romans went, they brought along the culture of Greece—Greek philosophy, the Greek approach to sex and the body, the Greek approach to truth. Conquered societies like Israel felt assaulted by these immoral, cosmopolitan, pagan values. In these countries there were cultural resistance movements; and in Israel that was the Pharisees. They put all their emphasis on living by the teachings of the Hebrew Scriptures and putting up big hedges around themselves to prevent contamination by the pagans. See what was going on? The Herodians were moving with the times, while the Pharisees upheld traditional virtues. The Pharisees believed their society was being overwhelmed with pluralism and paganism, and they were calling for a return to traditional moral values. These two groups had been longtime enemies of each other—but now they agree: They have to get rid of Jesus. These two groups were not used to cooperating, but now they do. In fact, the Pharisees, the religious people, take the lead in doing so. That’s why I say this sentence hints at one of the main themes of the New Testament. The gospel of Jesus Christ is an offense to both religion and irreligion. It can’t be co-opted by either moralism or relativism. The “traditional values” approach to life is moral conformity—the approach taken by the Pharisees. It is that you must lead a very, very good life. The progressive approach, embodied in the Herodians, is self-discovery—you have to decide what is right or wrong for you. And according to the Bible, both of these are ways of being your own savior and lord. Both are hostile to the message of Jesus. And not only that, both lead to self-righteousness. The moralist says, “The good people are in and the bad people are out—and of course we’re the good ones.” The self-discovery person says, “Oh, no, the progressive, open-minded people are in and the judgmental bigots are out—and of course we’re the open-minded ones.” In Western cosmopolitan culture there’s an enormous amount of self-righteousness about self-righteousness. We progressive urbanites are so much better than people who think they’re better than other people. We disdain those religious, moralistic types who look down on others. Do you see the irony, how the way of self-discovery leads to as much superiority and self-righteousness as religion does? The gospel does not say, “the good are in and the bad are out,” nor “the open-minded are in and the judgmental are out.” The gospel says the humble are in and the proud are out. The gospel says the people who know they’re not better, not more open-minded, not more moral than anyone else, are in, and the people who think they’re on the right side of the divide are most in danger.

Babel led to an explosion in the number of languages. That was part of Enki's plan. Monocultures, like a field of corn, are susceptible to infections, but genetically diverse cultures, like a prairie, are extremely robust. After a few thousand years, one new language developed - Hebrew - that possessed exceptional flexibility and power. The deuteronomists, a group of radical monotheists in the sixth and seventh centuries B.C., were the first to take advantage of it. They lived in a time of extreme nationalism and xenophobia, which made it easier for them to reject foreign ideas like Asherah worship. They formalized their old stories into the Torah and implanted within it a law that insured its propagation throughout history - a law that said, in effect, 'make an exact copy of me and read it every day.' And they encouraged a sort of informational hygiene, a belief in copying things strictly and taking great care with information, which as they understood, is potentially dangerous. They made data a controlled substance... [and] gone beyond that. There is evidence of carefully planned biological warfare against the army of Sennacherib when he tried to conquer Jerusalem. So the deuteronomists may have had an en of their very own. Or maybe they just understood viruses well enough that they knew how to take advantage of naturally occurring strains. The skills cultivated by these people were passed down in secret from one generation to the next and manifested themselves two thousand years later, in Europe, among the Kabbalistic sorcerers, ba'al shems, masters of the divine name. In any case, this was the birth of rational religion. All of the subsequent monotheistic religions - known by Muslims, appropriately, as religions of the Book - incorporated those ideas to some extent. For example, the Koran states over and over again that it is a transcript, an exact copy, of a book in Heaven. Naturally, anyone who believes that will not dare to alter the text in any way! Ideas such as these were so effective in preventing the spread of Asherah that, eventually, every square inch of the territory where the viral cult had once thrived was under the sway of Islam, Christianity, or Judaism. But because of its latency - coiled about the brainstem of those it infects, passed from one generation to the next - it always finds ways to resurface. In the case of Judaism, it came in the form of the Pharisees, who imposed a rigid legalistic theocracy on the Hebrews. With its rigid adherence to laws stored in a temple, administered by priestly types vested with civil authority, it resembled the old Sumerian system, and was just as stifling. The ministry of Jesus Christ was an effort to break Judaism out of this condition... an echo of what Enki did. Christ's gospel is a new namshub, an attempt to take religion out of the temple, out of the hands of the priesthood, and bring the Kingdom of God to everyone. That is the message explicitly spelled out by his sermons, and it is the message symbolically embodied in the empty tomb. After the crucifixion, the apostles went to his tomb hoping to find his body and instead found nothing. The message was clear enough; We are not to idolize Jesus, because his ideas stand alone, his church is no longer centralized in one person but dispersed among all the people.

By the way, his name was Joshua. Jesus is the Greek translation of the Hebrew Yeshua, which is Joshua. Christ is not a last name. It’s the Greek for messiah, a Hebrew word meaning anointed. I have no idea what the “H” in Jesus H. Christ stood for. It’s one of the things I should have asked him. Me? I am Levi who is called Biff. No middle initial. Joshua was my best friend.

First-century listeners would recognize the financial returns described in the parable as inherently dubious instances of acquisitive economic activity (i.e., using money to make money). Moreover, the usual rates of return at that time were 4–12 percent, and anything greater was considered to be oppressive.12 Recall also that in the first century the economy was seen as a “fixed pie” meaning that in order for one person to gain ten pounds (equivalent of three years’ labor), someone else would have to lose ten pounds. In other words, in order for the rich nobleman to get richer, someone else would have to get poorer.13 And finally, note that collecting interest on money went against the usury laws of Hebrew Scriptures, and that elsewhere Jesus is clearly opposed to the exploitive practices of money-changers.14 In sum, although the social elite may have found it commendable to amass riches via five- and tenfold returns on money, it seems likely that the vast majority of people in the first century would have found this to be morally and ethically reprehensible. Is it Responsible

Did Matthew, Mark, and Luke use Paul’s Epistles in writing their Gospels? I think they did, and this book shows why I think so. An investigation of the literary background of the Synoptic Gospels shows that Paul’s Epistles and Hebrews, which most scholars believe was not written by Paul, influenced the stories that the synoptic evangelists told about Jesus.

Each Gospel has its own purpose, theme, and flavor. For example, the Gospel of Matthew was written for Jewish Christians, contains many references to the Hebrew Scriptures, has the Kingdom of Heaven as its central theme, and gives us the image of Jesus the Messiah as the climax and fulfillment of the prophets and patriarchs of old. The Gospel of Mark, which explains Jewish customs to its audience, was written for Gentile Christians, most likely at Rome. This Gospel is concerned particularly with the issue of persecution and gives us the image of Jesus, the Son of God, as miracle-worker and exorcist. The Gospel of Luke, which is particularly concerned with the salvation of the Gentiles, was also written to a Gentile audience and it gives us a view to the personal touch of Jesus in his ministry. The Gospel of John presupposes that its readers are already familiar with the basic story and sets out by way of signs and discourses to inspire deeper faith in Jesus’ divinity and his fulfillment of the Old Covenant.

That’s the message of the gospel: the work of salvation is completed. It is finished. There’s nothing we can add to it, and to add to it would mean taking away from it. God offers the lost world a finished work, a completed salvation. All the sinner has to do is believe on Jesus Christ. The Book of Hebrews explains this completed salvation: “But now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment, so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many” (Heb. 9:26–28). “For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins.… But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God.…” (Heb. 10:4, 12). The work of salvation is completed. “It is finished!” Our Lord died, was buried, arose from the dead, and returned to glory. There he sat down because the work was finished (Heb. 1:3). In the Old Testament tabernacle, there were no chairs because the priests’ work was never finished. But Jesus Christ sat down in heaven because his work was finished. Since salvation is a finished work, we dare not add anything to it, take anything from it, or substitute anything for it. There is only one way of salvation: personal faith in the finished work of the Lord Jesus Christ. When my Lord died, he cried, “Tetelestai! It is finished!” It was a familiar word shouted by a faithful Savior about a finished work. It has well been said that Jesus didn’t make the “down payment” on the cross and then expect us to keep up the installments. Salvation isn’t on the installment plan. Jesus paid it all, and that means that redemption is a finished work. Lifted up was He to die, “It is finished” was His cry; Now in heav’n exalted high, Hallelujah, what a Savior! (Philip P. Bliss) Is he your Savior? He can be if you will accept his finished work on the cross, make it personal (“Christ died for my sins”), and ask Jesus to save you. “For whoever calls upon the name of the LORD shall be saved” (Joel 2:32; Acts 2:21; Rom. 10:13).

garden to be a tranquil oasis within the bustling city. There was a fragrance of trumpet lilies and a pleasant rustling of shade trees. In the darkness he couldn’t well distinguish the outcrop of quarry rock above the garden, notable for a formation that very much resembles a human skull. It was precisely this deep-socketed natural sculpture that led Charles Gordon, a British general visiting Jerusalem in 1883, to explore the site further: as stated in the Gospels, of Jesus and the crucifixion, “And he bearing his cross went forth into a place called the place of a skull, which is called in the Hebrew, Golgotha” (John 19:17).

Jesus came preaching repentance and faith: “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel” (Mark 1:15, italics added).4 The gospel is something that must be believed. When the Bible speaks of belief, it draws from Hebrew culture, where belief was a whole person phenomenon (heart, soul, and mind). In Western culture, belief is often relegated to the mind, a matter of intellectual assent. But when Jesus called people to believe the gospel, he called for a radical reorientation of not just their intellectual beliefs, but their personal devotion and life response. In this sense, you could say that the preaching of the gospel calls a person to make doctrinal, personal, and missional changes. This threefold response mirrors the three dimensions of the gospel. Our doctrines change based on beliefs about history, our lives change based on beliefs about the person of Christ and what he has done for us, and our mission changes as we seek to renew our surroundings.

We forget that God is most clearly revealed, not in the nascent understanding of the ancient Hebrews but in the Word made flesh.

The New Testament varies widely as well, with the Gospel writers understanding Jesus’ death as a Passover sacrifice and the author of Hebrews considering it a Yom Kippur sacrifice. Mixing those two is a bit like putting a Christmas tree up on Easter, which is basically what Paul does in his various letters.

The Lord is gracious (Psalm 111:4). He is the giver of grace (Proverbs 3:34). He is the God of all grace (1 Peter 5:10). His throne is a throne of grace (Hebrews 4:16). The Holy Spirit is called the Spirit of grace (Hebrews 10:29). Our message is called “The Gospel of the Grace of God” and “The Word of His Grace” (Acts 20:24, 32).

Lamin Sanneh argues that translating the gospel from the words of Aramaic and Hebrew into Greek simultaneously relativized the Jewish roots and destigmatized the Gentile cultures.22

Do we not know that the Apostles spoke all tongues? How is it then that their gospels and their epistles are only in Hebrew, as S. Jerome witnesses928of the Gospel of S. Matthew; in Latin, as some think concerning that of S. Mark,929 and in Greek, as is held concerning the other Gospels which were the three languages chosen at Our Lord’s very cross for the preaching of the Crucified? Did they not carry the Gospel throughout the world? And in the world were there no other languages but these three? Truly there were, and yet they did not judge it expedient to vary their writings in so many languages. Who then shall despise the custom of our Church, which has for its warrant the imitation of the Apostles?930 Now for this, besides the great weight it should have to put down all our curious questionings, there is a reason which I hold to be most sound: it is that these other languages are not fixed, they change between town and town; in accents, in phrases and in words, they are altered, and vary from season to season and from age to age.

Each Gospel has its own purpose, theme, and flavor. For example, the Gospel of Matthew was written for Jewish Christians, contains many references to the Hebrew Scriptures, has the Kingdom of Heaven as its central theme, and gives us the image of Jesus the Messiah as the climax and fulfillment of the prophets and patriarchs of old. The Gospel of Mark, which explains Jewish customs to its audience, was written for Gentile Christians, most likely at Rome. This Gospel is concerned particularly with the issue of persecution and gives us the image of Jesus, the Son of God, as miracle-worker and exorcist.

Over the two centuries before Jesus, the celebration had taken on quite a bit of Greek Socratic (Hellenistic) influence, which suited Jewish social tradition quite nicely, so what had begun as the recitation of a story had morphed into almost a question and response ritual. On the morning of Preparation Day for the celebration, the head of the household took a lamb to The Temple for slaughter. Then, he would bring the meat home so that it, together with the other prescribed ritual foodstuffs, could be properly prepared. Eventually, when it was time for the meal, those gathered would be called to table for a joyous repast. But the feast included an important ritual. Someone at table would query those gathered, following an informal script that revolved around four questions that not only told the great Story of Exodus, but also applied it to the participants’ present lives. So we might imagine: “This is the story of our slavery, and today we are enslaved…” “We wandered for forty years in the arid desert, and today we find that we are wandering, unable to make a decision…” “But at last we arrived in the Promised Land, and we’re planning … this year, God-willing.” Followed by, “Since then we have been committed to making ourselves and our people thrive in God’s promise of this Land—and look around this table and see the kernel of the community that needs our love, every day.” From this deep annual ritual and the understandings flowing from it, we can well imagine how this core metaphor became a spiritual springboard for every Hebrew’s journey with God—a journey of freedom and liberation, one with four sequential paths that continually repeated in the lives of every individual, and in the life of the community. So there is the key—and it is a far-reaching link, indeed. The explanation for early Christians’ natural comfort with being Followers of The Way was specifically and profoundly rooted in their Jewish traditions and almost certainly, the principal of fourness, in ancient rituals from prehistory. The sequence was well-known to them, and the road well-marked. Yet, as Christians did in so many other ways, they expanded the journey from that of their predecessors, pushing beyond the liberation of a single tribe and outer freedom from an oppressive Pharaoh. Christians took the framework of freedom and crafted an identifiable, cyclical inner journey of transformation available to everyone, incorporating the living reality of Jesus the Christ. And soon, The Way came to be understood by early Christians as the ongoing gradual process of transformation into the image of the eternal Christ in whom they believed they were already made.

The name of the child, “Jesus,” is a Greek translation of the Hebrew, “Joshua,

The same law that was engraved upon the tables of stone is written by the Holy Spirit upon the tables of the heart. Instead of going about to establish our own righteousness we accept the righteousness of Christ. His blood atones for our sins. His obedience is accepted for us. Then the heart renewed by the Holy Spirit will bring forth “the fruits of the Spirit.” Through the grace of Christ we shall live in obedience to the law of God written upon our hearts. Having the Spirit of Christ, we shall walk even as he walked. Through the prophet he declared of himself, “I delight to do Thy will, O My God: yea, Thy law is within My heart.” Psalm 40:8. And when among men he said, “The Father hath not left Me alone; for I do always those things that please him.” John 8:29. [373] The apostle Paul clearly presents the relation between faith and the law under the new covenant. He says: “Being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.” “Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.” “For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh”—it could not justify man, because in his sinful nature he could not keep the law—“God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” Romans 5:1; 3:31; 8:3, 4. God’s work is the same in all time, although there are different degrees of development and different manifestations of his power, to meet the wants of men in the different ages. Beginning with the first gospel promise, and coming down through the patriarchal and Jewish ages, and even to the present time, there has been a gradual unfolding of the purposes of God in the plan of redemption. The Saviour typified in the rites and ceremonies of the Jewish law is the very same that is revealed in the gospel. The clouds that enveloped his divine form have rolled back; the mists and shades have disappeared; and Jesus, the world’s Redeemer, stands revealed. He who proclaimed the law from Sinai, and delivered to Moses the precepts of the ritual law, is the same that spoke the Sermon on the Mount. The great principles of love to God, which he set forth as the foundation of the law and the prophets, are only a reiteration of what he had spoken through Moses to the hebrew people: “hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord: and thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.” Deuteronomy 6:4, 5. “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” Leviticus 19:18. The teacher is the same in both dispensations. God’s claims are the same. The principles of his government are the same. For all proceed from him “with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.” James 1:17. [374] Chapter

There also has to be a lot of meditation. We ought to learn to live in our Bibles. Get one with print big enough to read so it does not punish your eyes. Look around until you find a good one, and then learn to love it. Begin with the Gospel of John, then read the Psalms. Isaiah is another great book to help you and lift you. When you feel you want to do it, go on to Romans and Hebrews and some of the deeper theological books. But get into the Bible. Do not just read the little passages you like, but in the course of a year or two see that you read it through. Your thoughts will one day come up before God’s judgment. We are responsible for our premeditative thoughts. They make our mind a temple where God can dwell with pleasure, or they make our mind a stable where Christ is angry, ties a rope and drives out the cattle. It is all up to us.

hell and we eliminate something vital to God’s character, namely that our God is a consuming fire (Hebrews 12:29), completely holy, infinitely pure and righteous (Hebrews 1:9), a God who will not let the guilty go unpunished (Exodus 34:7). Eliminating hell changes who God is. Removing hell doesn’t make God more loving. It makes him smaller, more like us. Thankfully, the gospel is about the good news that God is holy.

Hebrews 2:5–18 Suffering does not oppose love; it is a result of it. One of the grand purposes of human existence is to look more and more like Jesus. This is God’s plan for us. It is one of the greatest gifts he could give. It is evidence that he has brought us into his family. If Jesus learned obedience through suffering, we will too. A path without hardships should cause us to wonder if we really belong to God. The challenge for us is to think as God thinks. In other words, our present thinking must be turned upside-down. We once thought that suffering was to be avoided at all costs; now we must understand that the path to becoming more like Jesus goes through hardship, and it is much better than the path of brief and superficial comfort without Jesus. When we understand this grand purpose, we discover that suffering does not oppose love; it is a result of it (Hebrews 12:8). We are under the mistaken impression that divine love cannot coexist with human pain. Such thinking is one of Satan’s most effective strategies. It must be attacked with the gospel of grace. Edward T. Welch

In order to create each one of the New Testament Gospels, some author who spoke and wrote in Greek had to have read a document already written in Aramaic (or possibly Hebrew, although this is unlikely), or possibly sat and listened as one of the Apostles or followers of Christ Jesus related the stories to him in Aramaic and then the author who spoke and wrote in Greek, translated the Aramaic tales into Greek. So, straightaway, you realize that it is impossible that you are reading the exact words of Christ Jesus; the best that you can hope for is that you are reading the best translation of Christ Jesus' words from Aramaic, into Greek and finally into English.

An individual may have quite strong faith, much grace, and rich evidence of fruitful service yet lack full assurance because of natural temperament. We are, after all, physico-psychical unities. A melancholic disposition de facto creates obstacles to the enjoyment of assurance—partly because it creates obstacles to the enjoyment of everything. In this context, it is significant that the exhortation of the author of Hebrews to approach God in full assurance of faith (Heb. 10:22) is ultimately based on his exposition of the humanity of Christ as a merciful and sympathetic high priest, who has taken our frail flesh in a fallen world, shared our infirmities, experienced our temptations, and known what it is to pray with loud crying and tears.25 Those who are of a melancholic spirit and are prone to doubt need to have their minds steeped in the assurances of divine grace that are to be found in such a Savior fully clothed in the garments of his gospel. Such believers often feel Christ to be distant, so what Hebrews does is bring him near.26 The one whose penultimate recorded words in the frailty of pre-resurrection humanity began with an interrogative “My God, why?” is the God who is near enough to those who feel themselves distant from him to bring them into assurance of his grace.

The New Testament was written as the Age of Pisces was beginning. It was an update of the Mosaic Old Testament. The age was moving from Aries to Pisces. Thus, the Gospels of the New Testament have many fish references. “Jesus” is the Greek version of the Hebrew Joshua. The biblical Joshua was the “sun of nun” (Joshua 1:1). In Hebrew, “Nun” means fish.

Sit at my right hand . . .”: Christ is not sitting there to rest, or to recuperate, but to reign. What is the right hand of God but the place of all authority? And if Christ was the agent of creation, what will he do now as the agent of re-creation? “until I make . . .”: Christ is reigning now, and he will continue to reign until his will is fully accomplished. He did not leave in order that his will would not be done. He left and assumed the position of all rule and authority, over every nation and tribe, and he will continue to sit at the right hand of the Father until . . . In other words, while Christ is seated there, before his return, all his enemies (with death the only exception) will be subdued to him. This will be through the means that he ordained, which is the preaching of the gospel. Through the declaration of Christ’s mediatorial lordship, and the basis of it, which is his death and resurrection, everything will be put right. “your enemies . . .”: Christ is being spoken of here as king, and these enemies are any enemies of his kingdom. The fact that Christ is reigning does not mean that he has no enemies. It means he has those enemies well in hand. The devil’s capital city has fallen, and the proclamation of the gospel throughout the world is the mopping- up operation in the hinterlands. In these outlying areas, there are still enemies to Christ’s kingdom. There are still those who say, “We do not want this man to rule over us.” That’s too bad. “a footstool for your feet . . .”: Christ’s enemies, all of them, will be subdued and brought under his visible authority. They are under his authority now; this will be made manifest to all so that it is beyond dispute. Christ is Lord; the time is coming when every tongue will confess that he is Lord, and every knee will bow. But this is so important—we do not confess that he is Lord as the means of making him Lord. He is Lord, and over time his lordship will be manifested through the fact that the whole earth confesses it. We are preaching and announcing and declaring an accomplished fact.

My fear is that, perhaps without even realizing it, we’ve fallen into the very dangerous habit of neglecting God’s commands in favor of our logic. For example, if I invite the most famous Christian artist to do a concert at my church, I’m sure to get a crowd of people, maybe even some open-minded unbelievers. I can give a gospel presentation in the middle and an altar call at the end, and through a couple hours of work, I’m almost guaranteed to have some kind of positive response. On the other hand, if I commit to becoming like family with a few other believers, I could spend years pouring time and energy into building those relationships, and I have no idea how that is going to affect any unbelievers. I would have to put all my hope in a promise. When I look at those two options, there’s no question which one makes more sense in the flesh. Many people stop right there and make their decision. But I would ask you to consider: • Does marching around a city seven times and blowing trumpets sound like the most effective way to conquer a city? • Does a little shepherd boy with a slingshot sound like the best candidate to defeat a giant warrior? This list could be expanded at length, but you get the point. God often asks people to pursue strategies that don’t make the most logical sense. If they did make sense to us, we wouldn’t need faith. And without faith, it is impossible to please God (Hebrews 11:6) God’s ways are not our ways. He has not asked us to strategize; He has asked us to obey. It seems simple, so why haven’t we obeyed? I can’t speak for you, but I know what usually keeps me from staying committed to His plan: disbelief.

The Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament that came into being around 200 BCE, interpreted the revelation of God’s name according to Hellenistic philosophical thought and translated it as “I am the one who is” (Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν). This translation made history and shaped theological thought for many centuries. On the basis of this translation, one was convinced that what is the highest in thought—Being—and what is highest in faith—God, correlate to each other. In this conviction one saw confirmation that believing and thinking are not opposed to each other, but rather correspond to each other. This interpretation is already found in the Hellenistic Jewish philosopher Philo († 40 CE). However, Tertullian soon asked: “What does Jerusalem have to do with Athens?”14 Most notably, Blaise Pascal, after having a mystical experience, highlighted the difference between the God of the philosophers and the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in his famous Memorial of 1654.15

Other than family, I believe we as leaders need four people in our lives: A friend to have fun together. “A joyful heart is good medicine, but a crushed spirit dries up the bones” (Proverbs 17:22). Don’t miss this vital relationship. An advocate to look out for our best interests and one who will open their mouth when we need something (Proverbs 31:8–9). A coach to help guide our life and ministry (Hebrews 3:12–13; 10:24–25). A confidant with whom we can be completely honest without consequence (1 John 1:7).

CHAPTER ONE The Entrance into Jerusalem and the Cleansing of the Temple 1. The Entrance into Jerusalem Saint John’s Gospel speaks of three Passover feasts celebrated by Jesus in the course of his public ministry: the first, which is linked to the cleansing of the Temple (2:13-25), the Passover of the multiplication of the loaves (6:4), and finally the Passover of his death and Resurrection (for example, 12:1, 13:1), which became “his” great Passover, the basis for the Christian celebration of Easter, the Christian Passover. The Synoptics contain just one Passover feast—that of the Cross and Resurrection; indeed, in Saint Luke’s Gospel, Jesus’ path is presented as a single pilgrim ascent from Galilee to Jerusalem. To begin with, it is an “ascent” in a geographical sense: the Sea of Galilee is situated about 690 feet below sea level, whereas Jerusalem is on average 2500 feet above. The Synoptics each contain three prophecies of Jesus’ Passion as steps in this ascent, steps that at the same time point to the inner ascent that is accomplished in the outward climb: going up to the Temple as the place where God wished “his name [to] dwell”, in the words of the Book of Deuteronomy (12:11, 14:23). The ultimate goal of Jesus’ “ascent” is his self-offering on the Cross, which supplants the old sacrifices; it is the ascent that the Letter to the Hebrews describes as going up, not to a sanctuary made by human hands, but to heaven itself, into the presence of God (9:24). This ascent into God’s presence leads via the Cross—it is the ascent toward “loving to the end” (cf. Jn 13:1), which is the real mountain of God. The immediate goal of Jesus’ pilgrim journey is, of course, Jerusalem, the Holy City with its Temple, and the “Passover of the Jews”, as John calls it (2:13).

The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He anointed Me to preach the gospel to the poor. He has sent Me to proclaim release to the captives, and recovery of sight to the blind, to set free those who are downtrodden, to proclaim the favorable year of the Lord. —LUKE 4:18–19, EMPHASIS ADDED And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect. —ROMANS 12:2, EMPHASIS ADDED Put to death your members which are on the earth: fornication, uncleanness, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry. . . . Do not lie to one another, since you have put off the old man with his deeds. —COLOSSIANS 3:5, 9, NKJV, EMPHASIS ADDED And so, as those who have been chosen of God, holy and beloved, put on a heart of compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness, and patience. —COLOSSIANS 3:12, EMPHASIS ADDED See to it that no one comes short of the grace of God; that no root of bitterness springing up causes trouble, and by it many be defiled. —HEBREWS 12:15, EMPHASIS ADDED Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you clean the outside of the cup and of the dish, but inside they are full of robbery and self-indulgence. You blind Pharisee, first clean the inside of the cup and of the dish, so that the outside of it may become clean also. —MATTHEW 23:25–26, EMPHASIS ADDED And like living stones be yourselves built into a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. For it stands in scripture: “Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a cornerstone chosen and precious, and he who believes in him will not be put to shame.” —1 PETER 2:5–6, RSV, EMPHASIS ADDED I

And the word for breath is the same as the word for spirit; this is true not only in Hebrew (ruakh), but also in Greek (pneuma) and Latin (spiritus). Thus Yeshua and Miriam shared the same breath and allowed themselves to be borne by the same spirit.

Marc Z. Brettler: The Pentateuch; The Historical Books; The Poetical and Wisdom Books, The Canons of the Bible [with Pheme Perkins]; The Hebrew Bible's Interpretation of Itself; Jewish Interpretation in the Premodern Era Michael D. Coogan: Textual Criticism [with Pheme Perkins]; Translations of the Bible into English [with Pheme Perkins]; The Interpretation of the Bible: From the Nineteenth to the Mid‐ twentieth Centuries; The Geography of the Bible; The Ancient Near East; Time [with Pheme Perkins] Carol A. Newsom: The Apocryphal/ Deuterocanonical Books; Christian Interpretation in the Premodern Era; Contemporary Methods in Biblical Study; The Persian and Hellenistic Periods Pheme Perkins: The Gospels; Letters/ Epistles in the New Testament; The Canons of the Bible [with Marc Z. Brettler]; Textual Criticism [with Michael D. Coogan]; Translation of the Bible into English [with Michael D. Coogan]; The New Testament Interprets the Jewish Scriptures; The Roman Period; Time [with Michael D. Coogan]

Further, I mean that God offers salvation to individuals and concomitantly grace enables them to make a real choice to either follow Christ or not follow Christ. The means of this grace enablement include but are not limited to: Gods’ salvific love for all (John 3:16), God’s manifestation of His power so that all may know He is the Sovereign (Isaiah 45:21—22) and Creator (Romans 1:18—20), which assures that everyone has opportunity to know about Him. Christ paying for all sins (John 1:29), conviction of the Holy Spirit (John 16:7—11), working of the Holy Spirit (Hebrews 6:1—6), enlightening of the Son (John 1:9), God’s teaching (John 6:45), God opening hearts (Acts 16:14), and the power of the gospel (Romans 1:16), without such redemptive grace, no one seeks or comes to God (Romans 3:11). Further, I believe that man, because of these gracious provisions and workings of God, can choose to seek and find God (Jeremiah 29:13; Acts 17:11—12). Moreover, no one can come to God without God drawing (John 6:44), and that God is drawing all men, individuals (John 12:32). The same Greek word for draw, helkuō, is used in both verses.” About 115 passages condition salvation on believing alone, and about 35 simply on faith.”140 Other grace enablements may include providential workings in and through other people, situations, and timing or circumstances that are a part of grace to provide an opportunity for every individual to choose to follow Christ.

Because of his victory over the grave, Christ is now seated at the right hand of his Father, not for rest, but for rule. He is to reign from there until his enemies are made his footstool. Heaven must receive him, must hold him, until all is subdued in his name through the preaching of the gospel. Only then will he return, and destroy the last remaining enemy, which is death.

We are told here that Christ came in order to destroy the devil in his princedom over death. This conquering aspect of the cross is seen in the New Testament again and again. “Now is the judgment of this world; now will the ruler of this world be cast out. And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself” (John 12:31–32). What will Jesus do in his death? He will cast out the ruler of this world. What will Jesus do in his death? He will draw all peoples to himself. Why do I believe that through the preaching of the gospel, the kingdom of Christ will grow and expand until it fills the earth with the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea? Why do I think this? For two reasons. Because Jesus died and consequently, one, the ruler of this world has been cast out, and two, all peoples are being drawn to Jesus.

its own tongue the glory and grace of Jesus while the water which they all drink speaks loudest of all, "If anyone is thirsty, let him come to me and drink" (John 7:37). So this beautiful gospel speaks to man, not only in the tenderest words of human language, the most profound discourses of human thought, but it lays under tribute every figure of Hebrew history and the natural world as an alphabet to express in the glowing language of symbol and type the abundant grace of Him who is the First and the Last, both in nature, revelation and His people's hearts and lives.

Religious knowledge of Jesus Christ comes from five principle written sources. The earliest of these are a number of letters penned by Paul—who didn’t know Jesus personally—twenty to thirty years after Jesus’s death. The remainder come much later, from the Gospels of the New Testament. These were four books written anonymously forty to sixty years after Jesus’s death. None of the authors knew Jesus, lived in Judea, or spoke his language. “These anonymous works were circulated for decades before they were finally given titles, each taken from the names of men with links to Jesus, confusing many into thinking that these were the actual authors. Specifically, these anonymous works became known as the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. “Most theologians pull different passages from different books to make their points, and don’t treat them as separate works, written at different times. But because they are, and because the authors didn’t know Jesus, there are any number of significant conflicting accounts between them. This is inevitable since none of them were written by eyewitnesses. The information came from the oral tradition, from stories handed down for decades, since no one took careful notes of what Jesus said at the time he said it.   “In four of these five accounts, Jesus never calls himself god or considers himself god. Nor do any of his disciples.” The AI paused for effect. “He and his followers did claim that he was the messiah, however. In fact, Christ is the Latin translation of the Hebrew word for messiah. But at the time of Christ, the messiah wasn’t considered a divine figure. Rather, this term simply referred to a great leader, in King David’s line, who would rule the Jewish people with God’s blessing, a role Jesus believed he would fulfill. And passages of the New Testament do, indeed, refer to him as King of the Jews.

However, what Girard uncovers in the literature of the Jewish and Christian religions offers another narrative perspective. While other religious myths tend to conceal the scapegoat mechanism by framing reality from the perspective of the persecutors, the biblical stories speak from the perspective of the victim.26 In the Hebrew Scriptures, Israel tells the story of their people and their God with a focus on their own failures.27 They are the slave people whom God rescues, the unfaithful covenant breakers whom God forgives, and their laws and stories reveal God’s preference for the victimized and downtrodden. Instead of keeping victims invisible, the Bible tells their stories: Abel whose blood cries out from the ground, Joseph who is a victim of his brothers’ mimetic violence, and Hagar who is sent into the wilderness as Sarah’s scapegoat.

. The ultimate rest, the writer of Hebrews insists, can only be the Gospel, in which men and women cease from their works (as God rested from his at Creation). All of this argumentation depends on reading the Bible in its salvation-historical progression, that is, reading it sequentially along its story-line and observing how the bits not only hang together but point forward and anticipate greater things to come. The argument is not one of analogy but of typology. That is what is calling us to persevering faith and obedience; that is part of what makes the word of God living, active, and penetrating (4:12-13).

The teachings of the Kingdom of God in the Synoptic Gospels, eternal life in John, justification and the life in Christ in Paul, the heavenly High Priest in Hebrews, and the Lamb who is a Lion and a conquering Son of Man in the Revelation are diverse ways of describing various aspects and depths of meaning embodied in the one great redemptive event — the person and work of Jesus Christ.

Hebrews is instructive again in this context. Its summons to draw near in full assurance of faith is coupled with the exhortation not to neglect worship and fellowship.37 The ministry of God’s Word; the mutual instruction believers give one another through singing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs; the encouragement believers give each other as they stir one another up to love and good works—all these are, as divine ordinances, ways of promoting in us an increase of assurance that we really are Christ’s, since we love him, we love his Word, and we love his people. The neglect of them correspondingly tends to hinder and diminish assurance.

Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard their own language being spoken. Utterly amazed, they asked: “Aren’t all these who are speaking Galileans? Then how is it that each of us hears them in our native language? (Acts 2:5-8). Verses 11–13 again say that they were all “amazed,” but this second amazement was because of what they heard. It was not merely hearing in their own language, but it was the content of the message that they heard that amazed them. Verse 11 says they heard the “wonders of God in [their] own tongues!” They heard the Gospel. However, they were amazed because they were hearing the “wonders of God” not in the sacred Hebrew language but in Gentiles’ languages. This is the heart of the message of the miraculous sign of tongues. As we shall see, God speaking the gospel in Gentile languages instead of the sacred Hebrew language was a deliberate rebuke by God and signaled that God was turning from the Jews to the Gentiles. The Jews heard the gospel in Gentile languages. They were not drunk, but they were confused. They were witnessing the unthinkable. God was showing grace to the Gentiles and was giving the Gentiles the same privileges as the Jews.

recall one of the greatest stories of the Hebrew Bible – the story of the dove that, after having been released by Noah several times, finally came to rest on dry ground. (Gen. 8) The dove became a symbol of safety, hope, peace and future. At the time of Jesus’ baptism, the dove rested once again on the ultimate symbol of safety, hope, peace and future – the King of Israel, Jesus.

Why is Melchizedek so Important? Hebrews 7:4 raises and answers that very question. The main purpose of this section in Hebrews is not to show that Melchizedek is greater than Aaron. It does that very clearly, but it does it in a way designed to show that Melchizedek is also greater than Abraham himself. The main purpose of the writer of Hebrews in this section is to show that the gospel of grace not only predates both Moses and Aaron, but it also predates the patriarch Abraham himself. The religion that we espouse was in existence long before Israel and Judaism existed. The gospel of sovereign grace is not integrally connected to anything that is Jewish. This is a masterful argument. What is essential to see is that everything in the old covenant, including the basic covenant document itself, is finished, and in each case something much better has taken its place.

By receiving His baptism, Jesus took-on the sins of all the people in this world, and then bore witness to His salvation for 3 years. After this period of three years, He died on the Cross shedding His blood and He was resurrected on the third day. By doing this, He perfected salvation for all those who believe in this Truth, and now sits at the right-hand of the throne of God the Father. In addition, the disciples of Jesus stated, “So Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation” (Hebrews 9:28). This passage means that the Lord will appear a second time only to those who are ‘apart from sin’ and are waiting for Him. In other words for those who by faith, have received salvation through the atonement for sins by believing in the baptism Jesus received and His blood on the Cross.

Aaron’s garments were worn by Eleazar his son, and Eleazar became the High Priest in place of Aaron (Numbers 20:23-29). The writer of the Book of Hebrews bore witness to the fact that

If we look at the Book of Hebrews, we find Jesus to be the High Priest of Heaven after the order of Melchizedek. He is without genealogy, and He is not even a descendant of Aaron. Jesus Christ is not a descendant of Adam either, but rather, He is the Son of God. Moreover, because He is our Creator and the One who calls Himself “I am who I am,” He does not possess any genealogy. However, despite this, He put aside His glory of Heaven and came down to this earth so that He could to save His creation. When His creation were gasping for life after having fallen into sin due to the devil’s temptations, He came down to this earth in the flesh of a man and received baptism in the Jordan River in order to save mankind completely by atoning for all their sins.

The author of this letter [to the Hebrews] mainly and chiefly treats of the excellency of Christ and the gospel covenant or ministration [that is, the new covenant] above that of the law... [He treats] of the excellency of Jesus – a truth of very great concern, and, as it is the duty, so it should be the care, of every gospel minister and Christian, to keep up the dignity and excellency of Jesus Christ in his person, work and offices... Our work... is to exalt the true Christ... above angels (Heb. 1:4)... above Moses (Heb. 3:5-6)... above the priests, or priesthood, under the law (Heb. 5 and 7), and so consequently above the Old Testament [that is, the old-covenant] ministry and ministration – in authority, dignity and excellency. Hence he came to take away, or put an end to, that ministry, or priesthood and covenant, which is the second special work of the writer in this letter to the Hebrews, and should be of all good men – to exalt the new covenant above the old, which is the truth declared in the Scripture read unto you: ‘He takes away the first, that he may establish the second’; that is, [he takes away] the first or old covenant or testament, that he might establish the second. Now that it is the two covenants that it is here intended is clear, for the word ‘he’ and ‘first’ and ‘second’ are relatives: the word ‘he’ relates to Christ (Heb. 9:24,28), ‘first’ and ‘second’ relate to the first and second covenants (Heb. 8:6-8), which are called the old and the new covenants (Heb. 8:13).

In the Hebrew language, the word for “anointed one” is mashiach, from which we get our word messiah. In Greek, the language of the New Testament, the translation of mashiach is christos, whence we get our word Christ.

If the Bible wasn’t corrupted in a massive and conspiratorial fashion, Islam can’t be trusted. Correcting the Torah and Gospels, setting the record straight, returning to the true religion, were central to Muhammad’s mission. If the scripture wasn’t garbled, Islam loses its justification. If the Bible wasn’t massively degraded—to the point that it would be unrecognizable—the cornerstone of Islam is a lie. To believe that Team Islam was right, and the Hebrew prophets were wrong, one has to dismiss the fact that most of the Qur’an’s stories and characters were lifted from Jewish oral traditions in the Talmud.

Matthew has also juggled the most favorable readings from various avail able editions and translations of the Old Testament to arrive at a reading of each prophecy that will best match the "fulfillments"! [...] Matthew quotes the Greek Septuagint translation of Isa. 7:14 ("Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and you shall call his name Emannuel"), already a complex and redacted passage in Isaiah. In Isaiah's context the oracle evidently means to assure the chicken-hearted King Ahaz that God would intervene on behalf of Judah in a matter of a very few years, no more than required for a child, soon to be conceived, to grow to the age where he can decline baby food he doesn't like. Assyria will by then have wiped the allies Samaria and Syria off the map. Obviously Isaiah cannot have intended this prophecy to predict events in the life of Jesus more than seven centuries later. Matthew cannot have thought that he did. Like the authors of the Dead Sea Scrolls, he must have imagined the verse contained a hidden message, only newly discernible in light of the advent of Jesus the Messiah. [...] And in this context, it is important to know that the word translated "virgin" in the King James and New International Versions is the Hebrew almah and means the same as the ambiguous word "maiden," not necessarily innocent of sexual intercourse, [...] Matthew, though, chooses to quote not the Hebrew but rather the Septuagint Greek version where the word parthenos is used. This Greek word is usually thought to have the narrower meaning "sexually virginal." Since Matthew seems to want to tell us that Jesus was conceived virginally, miraculously, he prefers using a version of the Bible that seems to contain an appropriate prediction.

The idea that Jesus was raised on the third day is not necessarily a historical recollection of when the resurrection happened, but a theological claim of its significance. I should point out that the Gospels do not indicate on which day Jesus was raised. [...] this “third day” is said to have been in accordance with the testimony of scripture, which for any early Christian author would not have been the New Testament (which had not yet been written) but the Hebrew Bible. There is a widespread view among scholars that the author of this statement is indicating that in his resurrection on the third day Jesus is thought to have fulfilled the saying of the Hebrew prophet Hosea: “After two days he will revive us; on the third day he will raise us up, that we may live before him” (Hos. 6:2). Other scholars—a minority of them, although I find myself attracted to this view—think that the reference is to the book of Jonah, [...] Jesus himself is recorded in the Gospels as likening his upcoming death and resurrection to “the sign of Jonah” (Matt. 12:39–41). Whether the reference is to Hosea or Jonah, why would it be necessary to say that the resurrection happened on the third day? Because that is what was predicted in scripture. This is a theological claim that Jesus’s death and resurrection happened according to plan.

Study Romans, Galatians, Peter’s epistles, Hebrews, James, or Revelation and ask yourself, “Why do these authors quote or allude to the Torah much more frequently than they do the words of Jesus? Because no gospels had yet been written?” No, that can hardly be the reason. Even if Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were not yet written, the teachings and sayings of Jesus would have been circulating orally. Then why does Moses get more apostolic press than Christ’s own words? The reason is straightforward: Jesus himself repeatedly affirmed that all things had already been written about him in Moses and the prophets. Far from ignoring the words of Jesus in their writings, therefore, the apostles strongly affirm them, for in quoting predominately from the Tanak, they confess, “You know what? Jesus is right. These Scriptures are all about him.

Research for this book has made me aware of aspects of Christianity I find disturbing. During the past several years, rereading the gospels, I was struck by how their vision of supernatural struggle both expresses conflict and raises it to cosmic dimensions. This research, then, reveals certain fault lines in Christian tradition that have allowed for the demonizing of others throughout Christian history—fault lines that go back nearly two thousand years to the origins of the Christian movement. While writing this book I often recalled a saying of Søren Kierkegaard: "An unconscious relationship is more powerful than a conscious one." For nearly two thousand years, for example, many Christians have taken for granted that Jews killed Jesus and the Romans were merely their reluctant agents, and that this implicates not only the perpetrators but (as Matthew insists) all their progeny in evil. Throughout the centuries, countless Christians listening to the gospels absorbed, along with the quite contrary sayings of Jesus, the association between the forces of evil and Jesus’ Jewish enemies. Whether illiterate or sophisticated, those who heard the gospel stories, or saw them illustrated in their churches, generally assumed both their historical accuracy and their religious validity. Especially since the nineteenth century, however, increasing numbers of scholars have applied literary and historical analysis to the gospels—the so-called higher criticism. Their critical analysis indicated that the authors of Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source from which to construct their amplified gospels. Many scholars assumed that Mark was the most historically reliable because it was the simplest in style and was written closer to the time of Jesus than the others were. But historical accuracy may not have been the gospel writers’ first consideration. Further analysis demonstrated how passages from the prophetic writings and the psalms of the Hebrew Bible were woven into the gospel narratives. Barnabas Lindars and others suggested that Christian writers often expanded biblical passages into whole episodes that “proved,” to the satisfaction of many believers, that events predicted by the prophets found their fulfillment in Jesus’ coming.

February 15,1978 Based upon ancient and modern revelation. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints gladly teaches and declares the Christian doctrine that all men and women are brothers and sisters, not only by blood relationship from common mortal progenitors but as literal spirit children of an Eternal Father. The great religious leaders of the world such as Mohammed, Confucius, and the Reformers, as well as philosophers including Socrates, Plato, and others, received a portion of God's light. Moral truths were given to them by God to enlighten whole nations and to bring a higher level of understanding to individuals. The Hebrew prophets prepared the way for the coming of Jesus Christ, the promised Messiah, who should provide salvation for all mankind who believe in the gospel. Consistent with these truths, we believe that God has given and will give to all peoples sufficient knowledge to help them on their way to eternal salvation, either in this life or in the life to come. We also declare that the gospel of Jesus Christ, restored to His Church in our day, provides the only way to a mortal life of happiness and a fulness of joy forever. For those who have not received this gospel, the opportunity will come to them in the life hereafter if not in this life. Our message therefore is one of special love and concern for the eternal welfare of all men and women, regardless of religious belief, race, or nationality, knowing that we are truly brothers and sisters because we are sons and daughters of the same Eternal Father.

(in The Sacred Poetry of the Hebrews, 1747) argues that the Bible can fruitfully be approached as Hebrew poetry. He points out that the words for poet and prophet are the same in Hebrew; he treats the Old Testament prophets as the poets of their era—and thus made it possible for modern poets to claim the role of prophet for their era. The concept of the modern poet-prophet runs from Lowth to Blake, to Herder, and to Whitman. If we can approach Homeric poetry as Greek religion and Hebrew religion as Jewish poetry, the result is, on one side, skepticism about the historical reliability of either text, but on the other side, the elevation of the poet as the prophet of the present age, the truth teller, the gospel maker, the primary witness for his time and place.

It is often a “trick” in some Churches to disregard the Old Testament and teach strictly “Pauline Gospels”.

Question 5. Is the moral law which you say was the substance of the Old Covenant from Mount Sinai, done away to believers in the New Covenant as it was a rule of life, etc.? Answer. Doubtless it is done away to believers, and that, firstly, as it was a covenant from Mount Sinai, and secondly a ministry of Moses. 1. That it was and is done away to believers is evident, Romans 7:4-6, where the apostle said, Wherefore my brothers ye also are become dead to the law, etc. and But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held, etc. This was the moral law, for it was that law that discovered sin, even that sin forbidden in that moral law, Thou shall not covet. Ye are not under the law but under grace (chapter 6:14). That very law written on tablets of stone is said to be done away with (2 Cor. 3:7 & 11) and abolished (verse 13); and if any will say it is the ministration that is done away and not the rule, I say it must be done away as it was then a rule, without which the ministration could not cease. It was its being given as a rule that made it a ministration. Therefore I say, that it is done away, first as it was a covenant from Mount Sinai, so it is clear turned out and has no place in the gospel, even as Hagar, the Old Covenant in an allegory must be thrown out of Abraham's house (Gen. 21:10; Gal. 4:22-30): Cast out the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the free woman. So that, when the free woman is come to be fruitful, the bondwoman with her son must be cast out. So likewise, Hebrews 12:18-24: We are not come to the mount that might not [ed: word absent in Scripture] be touched, that is, to Mount Sinai, but ye are come unto Mount Sion and to Jesus the mediator of the New Covenant, all of which demonstrates that the law as it was a covenant, from Mount Sinai, is done away to believers. 2. As it was a ministration by Moses, so it is done away with and abolished, and is not to be preached or received (as in the hand of Moses) as it was ministered forth, received and obeyed in the Old Covenant. For it was ministered then on life and death, and was (through man's weakness) a ministration of death and not of life. So that I understand all those expressions to relate to those particulars, when the Scripture says that the law is abolished and done away, that believers are dead to it, delivered from it, are not under it, and the bondwoman must be cast out with her son. And yet believers are not without law to God but under the law of Christ, yea and that under the moral law. But as given from Mount Zion, ministered forth in the hand of Christ, not in the hand of Moses, for if we take it from Moses we must be Moses' disciples. But if from Christ, as given forth in the gospel account, then we are Christ's disciples indeed, and receive it in power (from Christ, the minister and mediator) to live to God according to it, not for righteousness unto justification. But Jesus Christ having fulfilled all its righteousness, having born the curse for us. It is a rule of righteousness, of conversation to the honor of Him that has done all for us in point of justification to eternal life. And so it is become a law of love, a royal law of liberty to all that are by faith in the New Covenant, and a law to which every believer is duty bound to Jesus Christ, to own as His precious rule of life to honor Him by it, as it is given forth by Him in the gospel and not in any other way.

In the many places where the phrase zoe aionios appears in the gospels, and in Paul’s letters for that matter, it refers to one aspect of an ancient Jewish belief about how time was divided up. In this viewpoint, there were two “aions” (we sometimes use the word “eon” in that sense): the “present age,” ha-olam hazeh in Hebrew, and the “age to come,” ha-olam ha-ba. The “age to come,” many ancient Jews believed, would arrive one day to bring God’s justice, peace, and healing to the world as it groaned and toiled within the “present age.” You can see Paul, for instance, referring to this idea in Galatians 1:4, where he speaks of Jesus giving himself for our sins “to rescue us from the present evil age.” In other words, Jesus has inaugurated, ushered in, the “age to come.” But there is no sense that this “age to come” is “eternal” in the sense of being outside space, time, and matter. Far from it. The ancient Jews were creational monotheists. For them, God’s great future purpose was not to rescue people out of the world, but to rescue the world itself, people included, from its present state of corruption and decay.

Because Jewish thinking took many forms in different parts of the ancient world, it is valuable to be more precise in this case. Whereas Jewish people who liked apocalyptic literature would particularly appreciate Revelation, Jews in the Diaspora would appreciate Hebrews, and groups such as the Essenes might appreciate John’s Gospel, Matthew often moves in a more “rabbinic” world. That is, the views and arguments of teachers and interpreters of the law, who came to be called rabbis, are very relevant to Matthew’s Gospel. Most of the sources from which we know rabbinic thought are later, but they offer numerous parallels to Matthew’s ways of handling Scripture and intimate understanding of Pharisaic debates with Jesus (e.g., see notes on 19:3; 23:25–26). Because Jesus was himself a sage and engaged in discussion, and often debate, with Pharisaic teachers, Matthew continues to engage a world within which Jesus himself moved. ◆

For whoever wishes to save his life [in this world] will [eventually] lose it [through death], but whoever loses his life [in this world] for My sake and the gospel’s will save it [from the consequences of sin and separation from God]. [Matt 10:39; Luke 17:33; John 12:25] 36“For what does it benefit a man to gain the whole world [with all its pleasures], and forfeit his soul? 37“For what will a man give in exchange for his soul and eternal life [in God’s kingdom

(Prov. 31:10–11) This woman is a role model. She is a high-capacity woman, very capable as “a helper fit for him.” In fact, the phrase “an excellent wife” in verse 10 can be translated more literally “a woman of strength.” The Septuagint, the ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, even renders the phrase as “a manly woman.” This iconic woman is strong. How so? This poem goes on to say that she works hard, she makes money, she is kind to the poor, she is fearless about the future, she enhances her husband’s reputation, she speaks with wisdom, plus more. Verse 17 sums it up: “She

The Hebrew Scriptures, of which Daniel’s writings are a part, are divided into three groups known as Torah (Law), Nebi’im (Prophets), and Kethubim (Writings).

We are mad if we imagine that the God of love revealed in Jesus will bless us in waging war. That is madness! But it’s a pervasive and beloved madness. And I know from experience that it’s hard to oppose a crowd fuming for war. When we have identified a hated enemy, we want to be assured that God is on our side as we go to war with our enemy. And we believe that surely God is on our side, because we feel so unified in the moment. Everyone knows the nation is most unified in times of war. Nothing unites a nation like war. But what’s so tragic is when Christian leaders pretend that a rally around the war god is compatible with worshipping the God revealed in Jesus Christ. We refuse to face the truth that waging war is incompatible with following Jesus. We forget that God is most clearly revealed, not in the nascent understanding of the ancient Hebrews but in the Word made flesh. We forget that “being disguised under the disfigurement of an ugly crucifixion and death, the Christform upon the cross is paradoxically the clearest revelation of who God is.”6 We forget that “the worst day in history was not a Tuesday in New York, but a Friday in Jerusalem when a consortium of clergy and politicians colluded to run the world on our own terms by crucifying God’s own Son.”7 We forget that when we see Christ dead upon the cross, we discover a God who would rather die than kill his enemies. We forget all of this because the disturbing truth is this—it’s hard to believe in Jesus. When I say it’s hard to believe in Jesus, I mean it’s hard to believe in Jesus’s ideas—in his way of saving the world. For Christians it’s not hard to believe in Jesus as the Son of God, the Second Person of the Trinity—all the Christological stuff the church hammered out in the first five centuries. That’s not hard for us. What’s hard is to believe in Jesus as a political theologian. It’s hard because his ideas for running the world are so radically different from anything we are accustomed to. Which is why, I suspect, for so long, the Gospels have been treated as mere narratives and have not been taken seriously as theological documents in their own right. We want to hear how Jesus was born in Bethlehem, died on the cross, and rose again on the third day. We use these historical bits as the raw material for our theology that we mostly shape from a particular misreading of Paul. In doing this we conveniently screen out Jesus’s own teachings about the kingdom of God and especially his ideas about nonviolence and enemy love.

Attentive readers will also note the significance of the form he uses for much of his teaching—the parable. The parable is the teaching tool of the sage, indicated by the fact that the Greek term for “parable” (parabolē) is used in Greek versions of the OT to translate the Hebrew word “proverb” (māšāl ), a central form of wisdom teaching in the OT. The Jesus of the Gospels is a sage.

said, “Make a cake for yourself and your son, and then make some for me.” That would have been considered more sensible and unselfish. But, no, she was required to make this for him first—and then she and her son could have some. Added to his request was Elijah’s odd claim that this came from the “God of Israel” (1 Kings 17:14). This made the challenge even harder for this Gentile widow. Have you any idea how much the ancient Gentiles in that part of the world hated Israel? They did then and they do now. Elijah, thus, added to the obstacle he had put in her way. Granted, the widow had nothing to lose. It was the best offer she had. So, too, with receiving the Gospel message. You are going to die anyway. This is decreed for us all, for it is appointed unto all men and women “to die once, and after that to face judgment” (Hebrews 9:27). It is the best offer you are going to get in this world.