To understand who Jesus in the Old Testament was, one must first understand who he was in the New Testament. The New Testament refers to Jesus as Christ which means Messiah borrowed from the Hebrew word and the Greek word which means the chosen one or the anointed one. Most of the apostles that came after the death of Jesus Christ and those who were his students refer to him as Jesus the Messiah. This means that they believed that he is the very same person that was prophesied in the Old Testament by many prophets, for instance, Jeremiah, Daniel, Isaiah, and Ezekiel. “It is not easy to determine what constitutes allusion in the Old Testament”[1]. The paper aims at relating the New Testament to the Old Testament to offer a summary and emphasis on the topic of discussion.

Summary

The Old Testament presents a God of juice and punishment on those who disobeyed his rules, for instance, he, the father, sent plagues on Egypt as punishment for what they had done to the children of Israel. He too gained freedom on Sodom, but Jesus comes in the New Testament and offers a different approach to love and compassion offering humankind forgiveness and in the most important part and foundation of Christianity, he as for their sins. The Old Testament offers a prophecy of a son, born in the lineage of David as a praise to God the father. It also describes that no one had seen the Father nor heard him directly unlike Jesus that is born of the origin Mary ad walks among men in a day that God the Father had not done before.

Jesus is the fulfillment of the Old Testament. In Genesis, God creates the world from the word of the mount and later but because of human sin, he offered a promise that the Messiah would be born in the very lineage of David. While he was under arrest, Jesus referred to Himself as ‘I AM’ which is also the divine name of God as He had used it while in the Exodus to Moses, and thus, he brought in a confirmation that God the Father has never been seen or heard by man before. In the same instance, Christ had predated Abraham, which made the Jews quite angry but it also brought out the new meaning. This offered a probability that he, Jesus had the probability of being the son of God[2].

The Old Testament has fifty-two prophecies on the coming of Jesus Christ and thus if we considered that the Old Testament prophesies are void and invalid, Christianity as we know it does not have meaning. The savior that had been affirmed in the Old Testament would not have been born and thus he would have been just a man fulfilling his mission, and thus, there is relevance that has been created by the Old Testament.

Jesus himself did not claim to be the Son of God in the New Testament he responded that it was the people that called him. Thus, it brings out a question on whether he was the actual fulfillment of what had been prophesied but in affirming the place of Jesus in the Bible. Jesus accepts to die for human sins as he had been ordered by God the father claiming that His will should be done which confirms the validity of his coming and the ascending to the father after his work was done[3].

After the death of Jesus Christ, Christianity evolved, and new movements were formed, unlike the olden days where the Roman Catholic church was dominant at that time[4]. The apostles of Jesus Christ had learned new philosophies that they had learned from their teachers. They spread out and continued the work that the Son of God had started.

Paul, one of the apostles of Jesus Christ, explains how the church was formed. He states that they built the development of the New Testament church that emerged after the death of Jesus through the New Testament. Then the prophets who wrote the Old Testament and Jesus Christ himself being the cornerstone of all of it (Ephesians 2:20)[5].

Peter another apostle preached on the day of Pentecost a very powerful sermon at the beginning of the New Testament church and on that day he converted 3000 people and his sermon only entailed scriptures from the Old Testaments (Acts 2:14-41)[6].

Conclusion

Most of the books in the New Testament make lots of direct quotes from the Old Testament except for four books. Many individuals today misinterpret the New Testament living like the Old Testament is not part of the new teachings. This is not the case as it is seen on numerous occasions that we have seen the Old Testament being involved directly with the New Testament. Jesus Christ believed in the Old Testament teachings and prophets. The books of the Old Testament inspire and retain a permanent value, they do not depreciate but hold a huge significance as none of the old covenant has ever been revoked.

Bibliography

FRANCE, R. T. Jesus and the Old Testament. [Downers Grove, Ill.]: Inter-Varsity Press, 1971.

GUTHRIE, NANCY. The One Year Book of Discovering Jesus in the Old Testament. Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2012.

[1] R. T France, Jesus and the Old Testament ([Downers Grove, Ill.]: Inter-Varsity Press, 1971). p.15

[2] Nancy Guthrie, The One Year Book Of Discovering Jesus In The Old Testament (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2012). Feb 4.

[3] Nancy Guthrie (2012). Feb 8.

[4] R. T France (1971), p.17

[5] Nancy Guthrie (2012). Feb 8. September 12.

[6] R. T France (1971). P.35-37

The post Jesus and the Old Testament appeared first on Students of Scriptures.

Many so-called progressive Christians have a problem with the Old Testament in the Bible. Some Christians argue that the Old Testament was written many years ago rendering most of its content irrelevant in this modern world. However, there is a much bigger issue. There are some Christians and even non-Christians who criticize Old Testament as misogynistic and demeaning to women. Misogynistic is derived from the word ‘misogyny’ which refers to hatred for women[1]. In this case, the issue of whether the Old Testament is misogynistic and demeaning to women or not is very tricky and requires skeptical analysis of the scriptures and other related literature. Therefore, this paper will focus on the allegation that Old Testament is misogynistic and demeaning to women

Is Old Testament Misogynistic and Demeaning to Women?

            The idea that the Old Testament is misogynistic and demeaning to women is misguided. Throughout the Bible, we do not find a God who is gender-specific but one who loves all the people. The Ten Commandments is proved God’s love and respect for all people. For instance, in the fifth commandment, God commands children to honor both of their parents[2]. He does not say ‘father’ but ‘parents,’ meaning both the mother and the father. In addition to that, we find God warning against coveting the other man’s wife[3]. Categorically, God states, you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife[4]. By warning other men against desiring another man’s wife, God was protecting the dignity of married women.

Critics of the Old Testament argue that God treats women like property owned by a man. The criticism is based on the payment of dowry to the girl’s father. The term ‘bride-price’ which has been repeatedly used in the current Bible translation sounds as if the daughter is a product for sale or merchandise. However, a deeper and critical look at the Bible in the same Old Testament proves otherwise. A better analysis of the term ‘mohar’ which was used in the first Hebrew Bible translates to ‘marriage gift’ rather than ‘bride-price’. The marriage gift was like a deposit given to the father. For that matter, by giving the gift, the groom showed devotion and commitment rather than pay for the merchandise. Also, paying the mohar was an act of good faith to show the girl’s family that he is not taking their daughter as a sexual object but rather a life partner[5].

The issue of women as prisoners of war or spoils of war is critical to this discussion. In Deuteronomy 20: 13-14, the Bible says, “And when the LORD your God gives it into your hand, you shall put all its males to the sword, but the women and the little ones, the livestock, and everything else in the city, all its spoil, you shall take as plunder for yourselves. And you shall enjoy the spoil of your enemies, which the LORD your God has given you.”[6] In the next chapter, God describes a scenario where a man comes across a beautiful woman in the war and wants to take her home to become his wife. God gives very clear instructions to be followed under such circumstances. All these scriptures are interpreted by most people as an act of misogyny and also demeaning to women[7].

It is important to mention that the law was not meant to be perfect. However, it was meant to represent God in the sinful nature of human beings[8]. It would have been great if we all lived in a perfect world where everyone loved each other and hence lived in peace. There would be no war. However, the reality is different. Even in these Biblical times, there were wars everywhere. Men were directly involved in combat, and that meant they were casualties of war. That means that if your side was defeated, most of the women were left windows with no prospects of marriage. Hence, taking women as spoils of war was aimed at protecting them. In Deuteronomy 20: 1-12, we are told that the Israelite soldiers were not supposed to leave these women to feed themselves. So, by taking them, they ensured that they were fed and protected[9].

Taking the women as prisoners of war can be considered as taking the women as slaves or captives. However, the reality stands out differently. The women captured were allowed to shave and cut their nails, all by themselves. Also, they removed their clothes of captivity by themselves and mourned for their parents for a full month. The period of mourning was important in making the transition into new life. More importantly, if the man were not satisfied by the woman, he could not sell her off as a slave. The woman was to remain in Israel protected from any mistreatment[10].

Raping of female prisoners was allowed by the Eastern cultures surrounding the Israelites. However, the Law of Moses barred the Israelite soldiers from such acts. The Israelites were not allowed to have even sex with a beautiful female captive or even marry her quickly. Therefore, the culture of lust was discouraged among the Israelites even in the face of war.

Sexual morality is also a very controversial issue in the Bible. Some texts in the Book of Deuteronomy have been used to depict the whole Old Testament as demeaning to women. Some laws administered in this book are considered arbitrary and insensitive to women[11]. Deuteronomy 23: 13-21 talks of virginity among women. The scripture describes the process to be followed in case a man took a woman and found a problem with her virginity that was a mark of purity[12]. The scripture talks of displaying the evidence for virginity among the elders. Such an act is humiliating to the woman, even in circumstances when all the allegations are not true. However, before rushing to condemn the law, it is important to evaluate it for the merits and demerits.

First of all, such a lengthy process of ascertaining the truth of the matter would prevent men from making a false accusation for a matter that has tough penalties. Hence, we can say, since the law is said to be oppressive to women, it at the same time protects them against false accusations[13]. The law also promoted honesty and purity in marriage. In those times and even today, God highly commands us to maintain purity in our marriages. For that matter, maintaining virginity among the Israelites was one way of ensuring honesty and purity in the marriage.

Thirdly and most importantly, the same law did not allow men to divorce their wives. This is a fact is often overlooked. The culture required the man to provide and protect his wife. Therefore, a woman with a husband was considered stable in society. Protection against divorce was a privilege that not many women in other cultures enjoyed[14].

Polygamy is a critical issue in this whole discussion. Many critics of the old Testaments condemn it for endorsing polygamy. Polygamy is seen to diminish the value of women. Therefore, agreeing that Old Testament endorses polygamy is the same as saying it is demeaning to women. A historical and cultural background will help understand the fact that Old Testament does not endorse polygamy.

Exodus 21:7-11 “When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she shall not go out as the male slaves do.  If she does not please her master, who has designated her for himself, then he shall let her be redeemed. He shall have no right to sell her to a foreign people since he has broken faith with her….”[15] A look at the scripture seems to allow the master to practice polygamy. However, it is important to point out that the law at the time was casuistic which is evidence by use of ‘if” clause. Hence, in this scripture, God talks of how he wants to see the affairs. If you continue reading the scripture, the son of the master is mentioned. That is to say, the slave daughter is being taken as the second wife. However, there is a possibility that the master’s wife is dead[16].

The other scripture in the Old Testament that touches on polygamy is Deuteronomy 21:15-17…. “If a man has two wives, the one loved, and the other unloved, and both the loved and the unloved have borne him children, and if the firstborn son belongs to the unloved, then on the day when he assigns his possessions as an inheritance to his sons, he may not treat the son of the loved as the firstborn in preference to the son of the unloved, who is the firstborn, but he shall acknowledge the firstborn, the son of the unloved, by giving him a double portion of all that he has, for he is the first-fruits of his strength. The right of the firstborn is his.”[17]

Although the critics can use this scripture to conclude that the Old Testament endorses polygamy, it is important to consider few points. First, the scripture does not mention if the two wives are alive. More importantly, the law recognizes the problems that are likely to arise whenever a man has more than one wife. One of the problems is loving one wife more than the other. Hence, God warns us through the scripture of the consequences of being in a polygamous marriage. In the book of Genesis, we are told the story of Jacob and how he married two wives. We see later in the same book the wives competing on who will give him more sons. Also, Leah was unloved while Rachel was the loved one. This is in no way a picture of a beautiful marriage[18].

Conclusion

Conclusively, the idea of the old testament being misogynistic and demeaning to women is untrue and based on a wrong interpretation of scriptures or judging the scriptures based on the modern context instead of the ancient one[19]. God commands children to honor both of their parents. In addition to that, it addresses their needs even in the time of the war. From this discussion, it is also evident that the Old Testament does not in any way support or endorses polygamy as held by the critics.

Bibliography

Bach, Alice. Women in the Hebrew Bible a Reader. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis, 2013.

Bohlin, Sue. “Christianity: The Best Thing That Ever Happened to Women.” Bible.org. 2005.      Accessed September 15, 2015. https://bible.org/article/christianity-best-thing-ever- happened-women.

Copan, Paul. Is God a Moral Monster?: Making Sense of the Old Testament God. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2011.

Lefebvre, Matt. “The Relevance of the Old Testament-Is God Misogynistic?” Warranted Belief.   August 20, 2011. Accessed September 15, 2015.             https://warrantedbelief.wordpress.com/2011/08/20/the-relevance-of-the-old-testament-is-

Pinker, Aron. “Qohelet’s Views on Women—Misogyny or Standard Perceptions? An Analysis of Qohelet 7,23–29 and 9,9.” Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament, 2012, 157-91.

Summers, Anne. The Misogyny Factor. [America’s ed. Sydney, N.S.W.: NewSouth Pub., 2013.

[1]Summers, Anne. The Misogyny Factor.

[2]Exodus 20:2-17 ESV.

[3] Ibid

[4]Exodus 20:2-17 ESV.

[5]Copan, Paul. Is God a Moral Monster?: Making Sense of the Old Testament God. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2011.

[6]Deuteronomy 20: 13-14

[7] Ibid

[8]Lefebvre, Matt. “The Relevance of the Old Testament-Is God Misogynistic?” Warranted Belief.

[9]Deuteronomy 20: 1-12 ESV.

[10]Copan, Paul. Is God a Moral Monster?: Making Sense of the Old Testament God.

[11]Bach, Alice. Women in the Hebrew Bible a Reader. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis, 2013.

[12]Deuteronomy 23: 13-21 ESV.

[13]Bohlin, Sue. “Christianity: The Best Thing That Ever Happened to Women,”

[14]Pinker, Aron. “Qohelet’s Views on Women—Misogyny or Standard Perceptions? An Analysis of Qohelet 7,23–29 and 9,9.”

[15]Exodus 21:7-11 ESV

[16]Lefebvre, Matt. “The Relevance of the Old Testament-Is God Misogynistic?” Warranted Belief.

[17]Deuteronomy 21:15-17 ESV

[18]Lefebvre, Matt. “The Relevance of the Old Testament-Is God Misogynistic?” Warranted Belief.

[19]Copan, Paul. Is God a Moral Monster?: Making Sense of the Old Testament God.

The post Old Testament and Ethics: Is Old Testament Misogynistic and Demeaning to Women? appeared first on Students of Scriptures.

The figurative expression of Old Testament prophecies and some of their manifestations rendered divine languages in simple and relatable human terminologies. Both the minor and major prophets in the Old Testament used metaphors to facilitate such simplicity of divine communication. It conveyed some metaphors in familiar and self-explanatory contexts, while others remained unfamiliar, confusing, and sometimes disturbing. The latter category of metaphors portrays God in ways that seem contradictory to His nature. An example would be the case where God is portrayed as a hateful parent in Hosea 11: 5-7 despite the universal knowledge that he is a loving father (Hos 11: 4). Of interest in this write-up is an exploration of the prophetic rhetoric for these metaphors to identify the different ways in which the metaphorical images intersect and build off each other. Five prophetic books of Ezekiel, Isaiah, Daniel, Hosea, and Jeremiah have been considered. These prophets present diverse forms of metaphors to establish the character of God or the nature of His relationship with the people. Drawing upon specific Bible verses, the present article provides a sharp critique of the Old Testament prophetic rhetoric, paying significant attention to the fullness of metaphorical messages across the prophetic books mentioned above.

The Metaphor of Marriage

Theme of marriage abounds in the prophetic corpus. The book of Jeremiah provides a rich ground for exploring the metaphor of marriage in God-human relationships. The pact between God and His people is often portrayed as the relationship between the husband and the wife. Jeremiah best describes a monogamous marriage between God and Israel in chapter 2. He writes, “I remember the loyalty of your youth, your love as a bride in a land not sown. Israel was holy to the LORD, the first fruits of His harvest.” (Jer 2:2–3)

As the husband, God meets his matrimonial duties of providing for the needs of the wife, uplifts the wife, and expects her compliance with the Lord’s plans. Also clear in this section is the value that God gives to Israel, his wife. In the metaphor, God likens the wife to ‘first fruits of the harvest,’ which, consistent with Leviticus 22: 10-16, is evidence that Israel was God’s priority from among the rest of the tribes, or His first-choice possession. Jeremiah’s portrayal of this divine marriage builds on the earlier description provided by Prophet Isaiah, who stated that “Your husband is your maker – his name is Yahweh of Hosts” (Isa 54:5). Jeremiah continues to recognize how Israel contradicts God’s expectations and proves to be unfaithful. He mentions the Israelites’ desire to ‘follow useless idols’ (Jer 2:8). Prophet Hosea builds upon Jeremiah’s prophecy by marrying a harlot called Gomer. Marital union between Gomer and Hosea is metaphorical and symbolizes Israelites’ infidelity to God as evidenced by their preference for ‘useless idols’ (Jer 2: 8).

Figurative language, as used to describe marriage in the sections above, takes the form of direct metaphors. The direct metaphors are suited to these religious contexts because they are a primary means through which the Israelites could conceptualize the unknown religious situations to what is already known. What a direct metaphor does is portray one thing (A) in terms of another (B) when in fact they do not belong to the same domain. For instance, God as the husband (God= A; husband = B). These two elements belong to different domains; one of which Israel already comprehends (husband) and another which they do not relate to on a deeper level (God). God belongs to the divine domain, and very few Israelites would claim to have direct knowledge of his feelings. However, the Husband is in the domain of humanity and everyone has a direct understanding of how a human husband feels towards the wife. Therefore, Israelites could understand the Lord’s feelings towards them by comparing his emotions to those of a human husband to the wife.

The Metaphor of Adultery

The metaphors in the prophetic corpus also bear theme of sexual perversion. Overall, the prophets use the word ‘prostitution’ to symbolize Israel’s spiritual unfaithfulness to God (Hos: 4: 14; Eze 23; Isa 23: 15-18). Still, there are nuanced differences in the aspects of prostitution in different prophetic contexts. For instance, Hosea believes that prostitution is more than Gomer’s infidelity. He asserts that prostitution describes the behavioral departure, estrangement, and lack of spiritual effort desired by God. It may also mean inconsistencies or incongruous tendencies, cultic practices, and other forms of spiritual defilement. Therefore, Hosea’s metaphor of unfaithfulness was a composite of all the different behaviors adopted by the Israelites that distanced them from God.

In Jeremiah, the same metaphorical portrayal of unfaithfulness as general wickedness persists. Most of the mentions of unfaithfulness in Jer 2: 1-4 to Jer 4 are about the prophetic messages condemning the absurd, senseless, purposeless, and sometimes ridiculous tendencies that were widespread in Judah. Israel is symbolic of the purposelessness of an adulterous woman who is bound to remain directionless because of the lack of a man as the head. A promiscuous woman is directionless because she has not pledged her loyalty to a single man who can give her a sense of direction. As mentioned in the earlier sections, God is supposed to be Israel’s husband (Isa 54: 5). However, following Israel’s unfaithfulness, she gets separated from God (Isa. 50: 1). Therefore, like an unfaithful woman, Israel lacks a sense of direction and cannot make meaningful progress as a nation.

From a deeper perspective, the metaphor of unfaithfulness qualifies more than a metonymy than a standard metaphor. This mode of expression seems to like two elements that belong to the same domain. For instance, unfaithfulness is an umbrella term for all the wickedness and religious shortcomings that characterized the relationship between God and the Israelites. Unfaithfulness in a woman manifests in different forms (A= sexual perversion, lies, lack of trust); but each of these elements make up unfaithfulness (B). Therefore, metonymy arises in using B in place of the elements covered under A. The purpose of using metonymy was to bring the Novice Israelites into understanding the different wickedness that strained their relationship with God, but which they could not otherwise understand.

The Unique Metaphors in the Book of Daniel

The metaphors in the Book of Daniel have a parallel structure to the ones presented in the earlier sections. The imagery in the prophecies of Daniel takes the form of dreams and visions. Dreams and visions are powerful elements of prophecy that remain relevant as God’s way of communicating with his people through the prophets. Several prophets have had dreams or visions because it is the Lord’s preferred means of communication to the people. He says: “Hear now my words: If there is a prophet amongst you, I, the Lord, make myself known to him in a vision; I speak to him in a dream” (Num 12:16).

It also considered dreams also as metaphor because their interpretation explains the metaphors that they carry in their messages. For instance, in Chapter 2 of Daniel, Nebuchadnezzar had a dream that was a secret from God, and the meaning of the dream could only be understood by first interpreting the metaphor. Daniel drew on the imagery of the dream to express what had been inexpressible to all the fortune-tellers in Nebuchadnezzar’s palace. Daniel confronted the King in verse 38 and declared, “You are this head of gold.” A king is the head of a kingdom, and the image of the head translates to a leader, or for the case of Nebuchadnezzar, the King. Also, the actions that happen in the dream will manifest in real life. The dream becomes a metaphor for actual life events.

Interpreting the metaphor in Daniel’s dream created another metaphor because the successive kings who would take after Nebuchadnezzar can be seen as hypothetical. It implies that the coded message in the prophecy can also be considered a parable. However, the parable does not disqualify the metaphorical aspect of the dream, regardless. Rather, like any other imagery, the parable compares two elements by portraying one as an indirect image of the other. That the juxtaposition of the kings with the leadership that would succeed Nebuchadnezzar qualifies Daniel’s dream as a metaphor rather than just an analogy. It is notable, however, that the metaphors in dreams are not restricted to the prophet’s interpretation. Some of Daniel’s visions revealed the complexity of metaphors. Some divine messages communicated to Daniel as visions were so complex that an angel of the Lord explained Daniel (Dan 6)

Conclusion

To sum up, understanding the writings of the Old Testament prophets requires a reader to be aware of the Jewish tradition and context of prophecy. This assertion cuts across the entire prophetic corpus because both the Minor and the Major Prophets used metaphors. One metaphor that is central to the OT prophecies is God’s relationship with the people of Israel portrayed as marriage. Jeremiah provides an elaborate use of marriage-divorce imagery to shed light on the quality of the relationship between God and Israel. Positive image of a groom’s unrelenting love for her bride is contrasted with the wife’s subsequent disloyalty. The challenging marriage is metaphorical of God’s desire to build close bonds with the Israelites despite the former’s persistent indifference. Other prophets also shared the image of a troubled relationship between God and Israel, such as Ezekiel, Hosea, and Isaiah. Each of these prophets likens the wife’s infidelity to Israel’s disloyalty to the Lord’s commandments.

In another metaphor, the unfaithfulness of Hosea’s adulterous wife is an umbrella term that summarizes different behavioral traits. An unfaithful wife lies about her movements, pretends in the presence of her spouse, feigns innocence, and does not appreciate her husband’s efforts to unify the family. These behavioral tendencies represent the actual practices that characterized Israel’s disloyalty to God. The Israelites worshipped idols but still cried to God for help when they encountered misfortunes. They also failed to recognize God’s effort at bringing them back to righteousness and instead played the victim for being cast out by God. It presented a different type of metaphorical writing is presented in the book of Daniel, where metaphors take the form of dreams and visions and their respective interpretations. This category of metaphors is clear in Daniel’s interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream.

It expressed some metaphors through writings from inspired prophets. However, the metaphorical coding of divine messages was not limited to direct speeches and ordinary writings. Rather, the statements were also codified in dreams and visions, as clear in Daniel 2. That the prophetic rhetoric uses metaphors in different forms. Despite the form taken by a metaphor, they served common purposes that can be summarized into three major functions. First, these metaphors transferred divine emotional attitudes in ways that the people of Israel could relate to. Second, the metaphors persuaded their targeted audience to pursue a specific course of action. Last, the metaphors enabled the audience or interpreters to make an expression of their cognitive insights by converting twisted knowledge into literal terms to understand normal human circumstances.

The post Old Testament Literary Issues appeared first on Students of Scriptures.

The Old Testament’s witness to the Messiah remains a contested issue. At the heart of the debate are the differences in the contextual interpretations of the two testaments. A section of theologians argues Mosaic Law binds the Old Testament, for which reason its interpretations do not bear any correspondence to the Messianic age. In stark contrast are the theological opinions linking the Old Testament with prophecies of an eschatological Messiah. The latter school of thought perceives God’s work of salvation as a strategy that works through space and time, whereby different prophecies are set on different historical settings but fulfilled in different timelines in the future. On this account, some prophecies predict a God-sent king, who, in his uniqueness and Davidic dynasty, will bring glory to Israel. This discussion traces the Messianic vision to the Garden of Eden, where prophecy unveils that the seed of the woman shall bring forth a ruler to break the spell of sin. Thereafter, the article builds on a dynasty of David from where a king will rise to liberate all Israel from all bondage. The discussion closes by analyzing the person and role of the Messiah as prophesied by prophet Isaiah.

The Pentateuch

The OT prophecies about the Messiah in the book of Genesis do not single out a specific ruler. The dominant expectation in the book is that of an offspring of a woman, who will rise and lead Adam’s generation to victory. The Messianic vision is attributed to the seed of the woman (Gen 3: 15). The continuity of this anticipation becomes more defined as the Pentateuch progresses, and it becomes apparent that the collective offspring of Jacob will give rise to kings in the lineage of Judah. These kings will be pivotal to the realization of the Messianic victory. There is a great deal of consistency in this portrayal because several dynasties rose and disappeared in the Northern Kingdom while King David’s dynasty continued ruling over Judah for centuries until the Babylon conquest. Then from that very dynasty arose a renewed reign that continued the dynasty on spiritual dimensions. It implies that the Pentateuch had predicted how the leadership of Israel would unfold even before the ultimate reign of the Messiah.

Other than Genesis, different passages in the rest of the Pentateuch predict the coming of a single ruler. For instance, in numbers, Moses writes:

I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near: A star shall come out of Jacob, and a scepter shall rise out of Israel; it shall crush the forehead of Moab and break down all the sons of Sheth. Edom shall be dispossessed; Seir also, his enemies, shall be disposed of. Israel is doing valiantly. And one from Jacob shall exercise dominion and destroy the survivors of cities. (Num 24: 17-19).

The cosmic nature of this prophecy, coupled with the specific setting in which the prophecy was made, may obscure its meaning. However, there remains the possibility that the passage foreshadows a greater display of authority that will not have been seen in the generations that precede its unveiling. This authority foreshadows the reign of the Messiah.

David’s Lineage

The Messianic was also built upon the Old Testament prophecies that attributed the origins of the Messiah to the Davidic dynasty. When David seeks to establish a royal dynasty in Israel through his offspring, God makes a covenant with David to preserve that dynasty forever. However, while God’s commitment to the Davidic dynasty serves to keep the lineage intact, he is forced to punish the kings for their disregard of the Mosaic Law. It is on the grounds of these punishments that the dynasty ends following the Babylonian annex. However, God’s commitment to King David is that He would establish on him an everlasting Dynasty. So, while the Davidic kingship seems to cease when Babylonians conquer Israel, hope abounds that from David’s bloodline will spring an eternal of Israel.

Isaiah then brings a Davidic hope, prophesying that God will raise “a shoot from the stump of Jesse.” This prophecy hints at the new dawn to the Davidic dynasty the Babylonians had chopped that down. The new king from the Davidic dynasty would be set apart from his predecessors because he would reign. However, a mortal human being cannot rule forever. Therefore, the concept of ‘forever’ applies to spiritual matters. It is plausible that Isaiah’s reiteration of an eternal rule of the Messiah implied a Messianic kingdom that resonates with spirituality. Prophet Jeremiah also seen the spiritual aspect in the king’s description terming him as “Lord our righteousness.” (Jer 23: 6).

The Messianic hope presented through the Davidic dynasty reveals the Messiah would be a spiritual king. He will bring his people to righteousness, which reflects God’s redemptive power. The Davidic dynasty carries a continuous story of the Old Testament’s prediction of the Messiah. The expectations about Messiah that link to the Davidic dynasty are not exhaustive of what the Old Testament has to say about Jesus. It is just a single indicator among the many prophecies that point to the coming existence of Jesus Christ.

One area of concern regarding the Davidic associations with Messiah is on the person of Jesus Christ and his destiny. The Jewish interpretation of the Davidic Lineage built an expectation of an earthly king who would liberate Israel from the Roman conquest. Yet, prophecies show the king will establish a kingdom of righteousness by liberating the people from the bondage of sin. It is a central prophecy made by Isaiah when he writes the servant will bring salvation to the people (Isa: 52: 10).

Isaiah’s Prediction of the Person of Messiah and his Destiny

The book of Isaiah is among the many Old Testament books that were set in a unique setting while predicting the events in another. Isaiah made predictions of an eschatological Messiah under the theme of ‘The Servant of the Lord.’ Shall be four different passages in the book of Isaiah that differentiate the servant of the Lord. He makes the first two references in Isa. 42: 1-6 and 49: 1-3. He further mentions of the servant of the Lord in 50: 4-9 and 52: 13-53:12. Each of the passages builds off each other to create a complete picture of the Messianic role of the servant who, in order to save the people, must bear the burdens of their sins. Isaiah begins by establishing the mission of the servant (Isa 42: 1-6). With Isaiah as the mouthpiece, the speaker in verses 1-4 is God. It is God who designates the Messianic roles to the servant. One thing that becomes clear is the endowments of the servant with the spirit that will enable him to fulfill the demanding mission of being a fountain of Justice to all nations of the world.

The second passage highlights the obstacles awaiting the servant (Isa 49: 1-13). This passage is confusing at first reading because a shallow interpretation of the verse can lead to the understanding that the servant being described is Israel. However, that the servant is also assigned bringing Israel back to its God (Isa 49: 5) implies that the servant is an individual with the task to collect the Israelites under one identity, and not Israel itself. Up to this point, this second passage is expansive enough to include the role of the prophet Isaiah and that of the Messiah.

Then in the subsequent passages, the oracle reveals the servant will be condemned to afflictions (Isa 50: 4-9) and that the suffering will lead to his death (Isa 52-53). The unveiling of the actual identity of the servant as the Messiah builds from verse 13. Isa 52: 13 describes the exaltation of the servant, verse 14 on his unwarranted humiliation, and 15 on his impactful presence in the entire world. The elaborations of his supernatural preeminence are further highlighted in chapter 13. The chapter describes the servant’s ironic coming, humiliation, and suffering and his exaltation.

Still, there must be a distinction between the servant and any ordinary prophet for him to qualify as Messiah. This is where chapter 53 plays a significant role. In this chapter, the servant is likened to the arm of the Lord (Isa 53: 1), which can be understood by reviewing other portrayals of this arm elsewhere in Isaiah. Isa 40: 10 provides that the arm is seen to rule in the place of God. The arm will also be a source of trust for the Gentiles (Isa 51: 5), which as a result, will render the arm a redeemer (Isa 51: 9) and someone to provide salvation to the people (52: 10). These are consistent with the expectations of the true Messiah, implying that the servant being described is the Messiah.

It is noteworthy that Isa 50: 4-9 depicts the Messiah as afflicted without highlighting the reasons behind his suffering. However, in Isa 53, the reasons for the afflictions are mentioned. The prophet notes the Messiah would be wounded for the transgressions of Israel and be bruised for the iniquities of the people. This shows that the Messiah will end up as the sacrifice for the wrongdoings of the people, saving them from all iniquity and establishing an everlasting spiritual kingdom of righteous people.

Conclusion

In sum, a collection of verses in the Old Testament challenges the general perception that the Old Testament is focused on the Mosaic Law. A deeper analysis of these verses and how they relate with each other set forth a consistent, sweeping vision of the Messiah. Each of the many verses that bear the prophecies of Israel’s savior contributes to the bigger picture of who Messiah ought to be.

The Old Testament’s witness to Christ as the Messiah stretches from the Pentateuch to Malachi. Right after the fall of man, God promised that the seed of a woman would destroy the serpent. Humanity had just fallen victim to Satan’s deception by partaking in the deadly fruit that brings forth the knowledge of good and evil. Humanity was already enslaved in sin under heeding to Satan’s deception. Several millenniums later, Isaiah continued the prophecy of the seed of woman by proclaiming that a virgin would deliver a son named Immanuel (Isa: 714). Immanuel would restore victory to Ephraim if ‘the land of the two kings that Israel dreads will be laid to waste’ (Isa 7: 16). These verses reinforce each other in supporting the OT prophecies about the Messiah.

OT themes such as the Davidic dynasty and the suffering servant further add details to the prophecies about the origin, personality, purpose, and destiny of the Messiah. Messiah would spring from the Davidic dynasty and lead a life of suffering and dejection in the quest to bear the transgressions of humanity. The intertextuality of selected OT passages sets a rich ground for understanding the OT witness about the Messiah. When the different small prophecies that were written in different historical settings merge, the Old Testament is indeed a coherent literary work, inspired to reveal the intrinsic glory of the Messiah.

The post Old Testament Theological Issues appeared first on Students of Scriptures.

The doctrinal theme of eternal punishment in the Bible has been interpreted diversely, leading to differences in how people understand judgment and eschatology. The clergy have utilized the importance of the perpetuity of the hellfire and doctrine of torment to force people to have faith in Christ and to avoid the blasting furnace of hellfire. Revelation 14:10-11 is concerned with the extent and nature of the punishment. The pericope provides a dire warning of eternal torment to those individuals who will worship Satan and receive the mark of the beast. The doctrinal tenets of the modern Church underscore the belief that the last judgment of the sinners to be facilitated and witnessed by Jesus and the holy angels will lead to everlasting and distressing chastisement.[1] Most evangelists repeat the message of eternal torment as an important component of faithful theological belief. The doctrine is presumed to be scriptural, and people are submissive to it under the strain of authority.

Mostly, there are no exegetical discussions that are cited during the interpretation of Revelation 14:10-11. The three main features of the pericope include the imageries that depict the traditional doctrine of hell. The passage suggests that the concept of judgment involving eternal torment describes how unbelievers will be punished with fire that would not be consumed and sulphur.[2] Besides, they will have no rest days demonstrating that their suffering will be perpetual. Furthermore, Revelation 14:10-11 presents the perpetuity of hellfire and the tribulations of the sinners who worship Satan as a judgment. The author used several imageries found in the Old Testament, such as the destruction of Edom, the ancient, as well as Sodom and Gomorrah (Isaiah 34:10, 13:19; Genesis 19:28). The passage presents a symbolical depiction of the final reality of the sinners who will be judged as opposed to the moment of eternal torment.[3] Unbelievers who will worship Satan will not have the eternal rest that is promised to the believers. Consequently, this scholarly work provides an exegetical interpretation of the doctrine of hell as eternal torment as written in Revelation 14: 10-11. Notably, God will ultimately judge His enemies with unconditional destruction and extermination.

Historical Analysis of the Book of Revelation 14: 10-11

Early Church customs and literature attest that the book of Revelation was written by John the Apostle in 95 A.D.[4] In Revelation 1:19, Jesus Christ specified that the author was foretelling his impending Second coming and the judgment of the sinners. John used imageries and allegories since he lacked sufficient words to connote the numerous things that he had seen. Besides, the writer used his prehistoric language predominantly spoken during his time to narrate his visions. Majorly, the author sought to offer comfort to the early Christian congregation, as attested by the pastoral tone utilized in Revelation.

Authorship of the Book of Revelation

Internal Evidence

Johannian composition of the book of Revelation is reinforced by numerous pieces of internal proofs. The early Christians actively got involved in the author’s divinatory ministry (Rev 3; 22:6-10, 18-19). Notably, the writer referred to himself as John in nearly five instances and confirmed that he was among the believers who being persecuted and banished in Patmos during the Domitic reign due to their resounding faith in Christ (Rev 1:1, 4, 9; 21:2; 22:8). The historical evidence has been corroborated by Eusebius, an early Church historian who described how Christians, including Paul and John, were oppressed by the Roman rulers.[5] Additionally, the writer witnessed Jesus Christ’s early salvation mission (Rev 1:2), which may strongly prove he was among the key disciples of Jesus Christ during His earthy ministry on earth. Notably, John the Apostle was one of the favorite Disciples of Christ and accompanied the Messiah in key events such as the transfiguration. Besides, John and Peter were among the first people to arrive at the empty tomb where Jesus was buried after His crucifixion.

Moreover, the Jewish lexes and expressions utilized in the Scripture suggest the writer was a Hebrew. Markedly, several words are derived from the Jewish language are commonly used, for instance, “Hallelujah,” “Amen,” “the children of Israel,” “Abaddon,” “synagogue,” and “the tribe of Judah,” among others (Rev 2:7, 2:9, 2:14, 3:9, 9:11, 14, 2:17, 19:1-6, 22:2). Additionally, descriptions of the Jewish Temple are included in the initial chapters of the book. Similarly, the book of Revelation indicates that the person who wrote letters that were sent to the seven churches was a powerful overseer of the institutions and congregations.[6] Available evidence shows evangelist Paul was succeeded by John the Apostle, which forced the latter to relocate to Asia Minor where the churches were concentrated, proving that John wrote the apocalyptic book.[7] Furthermore, the structure and content of Revelation closely resemble other of John’s texts. Comparable catchphrases and wordings are utilized in both Johannine writings in the New Testament. For instance, the term “Lamb of God” is utilized nearly 27 times in both the Revelation and Fourth Gospel.[8] Besides, the unique idioms, such as “Word of God” and “God is light,” are mostly John’s compositions in both the gospel and epistles (Rev 19:13; John 1:4; 1 John 1:5).

Moreover, the Johannine literature distinctly emphasizes the significance of the number seven, for example, the word “seven” is utilized more than fifty times in the Apocalypse to indicate different phenomenon such as seven plagues, spirits, churches, angels, trumpets, and mountains, among others.[9] Similarly, the Fourth Gospel mentions seven “I Am” testaments made by Jesus Christ. Besides, both the apocalyptic writing and the Gospel of John share close connections in how they describe Christology. John’s writings focused on the mysticism of Christ while recognizing His divine spot in the Holy Trinity (Rev 3:12; 14:1, 14). Furthermore, the author differentiated between the supremacy of Yahweh and the subordinate power of the Lamb or Jesus (Rev 7:19). Besides, the author recognized Christ’s interminable nature by recognizing and praised Him using majestic and divines names, for instance, “Alpha and Omega,” “Word of God,” and “Holy and True,” among others. Notably, Johannine scriptures indicate that Christ will come to judge and punish the sinners.

External Evidence

Patristic evidence attributed to the founding figures, doctors, clergy, and theologians during the development of the early Church reinforces the argument that John the Apostle wrote the prophetic and apocalyptic revelation. Specifically, Irenaeus, Apollonius, Justin Martyr, and Theophilus of Antioch have all attested to the validity of Johannine authorship of the revelation. They played a role in ensuring the book of Revelation was included in the New Testament.[10] Similarly, Tertullian, Gregory Nazianzen, Clement of Alexandria, Hippolytus, Eusebius, Origen, Victorinus, Jerome, and Athanasius are some notable theologians, clergymen, and church historian who have broadly referred to the Revelation in their seminal work and confirmed that John wrote the prophetic book.[11] Alternatively, different scholars, such as Dionysius, Marcion, Epiphanius of Salamis, and Council of Laodicea (ca.360), among others, have rejected John’s authorship of the book claiming the writer did not ascribe apostolic title to his work since he was neither an apostle nor a Hebrew prophet.[12] Nonetheless, the corroborated evidence contained in writings of early Christian tradition overwhelmingly supports Johannine’s composition of the Apocalypse while under divine guidance.

Dating of the Book of Revelation

Several dates have been proposed to ascertain the proximate time when Revelation was authored. The major categories include the late date (A.D. 98-117), middle date (A.D. 54-68 A.D), and the early date (A.D. 41-54).[13]Nonetheless, scholars emphasize that the book was authored during the time of Emperor Nero (54-68 A.D.). The Roman ruler was responsible for persecuting the Christians and the destruction of the Jerusalem temple. Similarly, Irenaeus supported the middle age estimation (A.D. 81-96), asserting Revelation was written when Domitian ruled the Roman Empire.[14] Moreover, Irenaeus’ seminal work titled, Against Heresies, acknowledged 11 times that John wrote the Revelation.[15] Consequently, based on the book’s canonicity, it is universally accepted by historians and theologians that Revelation was composed by John the Apostles almost A.D. 95 after he received a vision from Christ.[16] Importantly, Rev 1:9-10 and evidence provided by Sophronius, patriarch of Jerusalem, are regarded as important internal and external validations that confirm John composed the prophetic and apocalyptic Revelation while still being imprisoned in Patmos.

The significance of determining authorship and dating of Revelation is largely to find out how John the apostles capitalized on the philosophy of perpetual torment in his scriptural writings contained in the New Testament. Notably, the Fourth John assumes that the singular path to receiving eternal life is having unrelenting devotion towards Jesus Christ as the savior. John’s gospel does not focus much on the punishment that awaits sinners. The subject of salvation for believers is widely covered in John’s scriptures (John 3:15, 16, 36; 5:24; 20:31; 1 John 5:11-13). The book reveals the consequence for sinners who refuse to accept Jesus as their savior. Such nonbelievers will be doomed to eternal torment.

Occasion and Audience of the Book of Revelation

Jesus Christ presented a vision of the Apocalypse to John the Apostle while still imprisoned in Patmos. Christ wanted to remind the Church about the terrible punishment that awaits the nonbelievers for their unfaithfulness. Jesus directed John to write the apparition and share it with the seven churches, namely Pergamos, Smyrna, Philadelphia, Ephesus, Sardis, Laodicea, and Thyatira, which were found in Minor Asia (Rev 1:9-11). The strategic location of the seven cities, specifically along the well-traveled Roman roads, allowed the prophetic and apocalyptic text to be widely distributed, read and understood by the Christians. In Revelation 2:9, 3:2, and 13, Christ reminded them of His companionship since the early Christians were facing persecution during the Domitic period (81-96 A.D.). The churches struggled with internal and external challenges, which impacted their faith. Nonetheless, the Christians in Sardis and Smyrna proved to be resilient despite the misfortunes, societal influences, and tyranny (Rev 3: 4). The external influences and internal wrangles led some Christians to adopt wicked lifestyles and abandoned their faith and obedience to Yahweh (Rev 2: 6, 14, 20; 3:15). Notably, churches’ tribulations were a central highlight of John the Apostle’s ministry. He encouraged the brethren to deal with all issues that threatened the early churches and overcome the dreadful persecutions.[17] The revelation sought to connect spirituality and apocalyptic events to encourage the Church congregation and nonbelievers to be always alert and ready for the coming of Jesus as a righteous way of avoiding eternal torment (Rev 2:7, 11, 16; 3: 21).

Setting and Purpose of the Book of Revelation

In the initial chapter of the Revelation, bible readers are informed that John was given the apocalyptic vision while being held in captivity in Patmos (Rev 1:9). Arguments about the identity of the Patmos as the place the book was authored is less contentious as John strongly hinted where he received the apparition and was asked to share it with the early Churches. The overall objective of Revelation is that the Lord will judge those people who persecute faithful believers. The author sought to support righteous discipleship by encouraging Christian to strongly endure their misery, especially the prospects of martyrdom akin to how Jesus conquered evil and darkness. The Revelation represents victory and redemption of those who trust in Jesus Christ as a glorious ruler and the Lamb sacrificed to save people from mortal sin.

Additionally, the book describes God’s intention to liberate people from the bondage of sin and protect them from the eternal fire in hell to demonstrate his love and grace. Importantly, the Johannine revelation sought to provide comfort, assurance, and hope to the brethren owing to the tribulations that they endured.[18] God promised them eternal rewards in heaven for their resilience and devotion. Consequently, the book serves a consolatory purpose by reassuring the believers about the Lord’s consolation and protection. Additionally, the doctrinal objective is also evident in the vision as it emphasizes God’s providence and restoration that will be strongly evident when Christ returns. Lastly, the prophetic text achieves the practical and hortative goal by encouraging both the believers and sinners to be spiritually, mentally, and physically ready to receive Christ again.

Furthermore, John focused on the divergent nature of good and evil, Jesus and Satan, in addition to how Christ will ultimately emerge victoriously. The people have a choice to solely worship the Lord. Other major themes include God’s kingdom, adoration, and deliverance. Revelation emphasizes how Christ is the victor when it comes to solving the phenomenal controversy of good and evil. Consequently, the angel’s message purposely focused on the primeval context and prevailing circumstances that the early Christians had to endure. Moreover, John made a prophetic call to inspire the brethren to be resilient in the wake of oppression, maintain their divine commitments, and avoid the negative pressures of the environment, especially the pervading popular culture in the Greco-Roman society.[19] Consequently, another dominant thematic issue includes the judgment day that will be heralded by the return of the Messiah. The Scripture solely focuses on inspiring the brethren to demonstrate determination and faithfulness regardless of the severity of current and future tribulations. Importantly, through Jesus, God would deliver absolute triumph over Satan’s power and control. Jesus’ Second Coming and judgment represent the defeat of Satan and his endeavors to subvert piety and devotion among believers.

Literary Analysis of Revelation 14: 10-11

Literary Structure

Revelation 13 and 14 can be taken to be parallel. Chapter 13 demonstrates the attack on the wicked remnant, and Revelation 14 addresses the faithful remnant. In chapter 14, verses 1-5 and 6-12, the reader can see the transition to the wicked people from the remnant. In Revelation 13, the author describes the dragon engaged in warfare with the remnant of the woman, which progresses to the point of death threats issued to the remnant after the chapter. However, in the fourteenth chapter, the visualization opens up with observing the remnant, which includes 144,000 faithful continuing to adore and venerate God, despite facing the danger of being persecuted.[20] Also, chapter 13 indicates that those who face impending doom are the remnant of God who refuses to bow down to the beast, while in chapter 14, death awaits those who show devotion to the beast and abandon their Creator. Therefore, the message by the three angels could be viewed as the ultimate petition to those who partake in adoring and venerating the beast. The pericope represents that message of hope, “the eternal gospel” by the angel to pass on to “every nation tribe, language, and people” on earth (14:6). The events included in the warning are about to happen as soon after this, there are two consecutive harvests of the beast-worshiping remnant, and it introduces the happenings of seven bowls of God’s wrath described in chapter 15.

Genre

The author of the book of Revelation uses multiple literary styles, including prophecy, letter, and apocalypse in writing the text. However, the book is predominated by the apocalyptic style and, therefore, assigned to the apocalyptic literature literary genre. The form of the genre incorporates the literary device of visions to make the message vivid by uncovering it through symbols and signs.[21] Revelation 14:11 is characterized by the use of various such symbols as the “smoke,” the “beast” and its image, and the “mark” of its name, which specifically places it under the symbolism sub-genre of apocalyptic literature.[22] It is marked by symbolic angels, a comparison between evil and good, as well as prophecies of terror and the end of the world. Numbers are also a significant element of its literary device. Revelation is the only text in the New Testament that includes the literary genre of apocalyptic literature. Other examples where the style is applied are found in the Old Testament, including the books of Zechariah and Daniel, as well as in particular passages like Isaiah 24-17 and Ezekiel 37-39.[23]  Revelation 1:1 highlights the symbolic aspect of the apocalyptic writing that the author tries to unravel. While addressing multiple Christian communities in Minor Asia, the author tries to recount what he has heard, seen, or recognized in the course of his vision presented to him by Jesus. The text is identified as a “revelation,” which appeals to the idea of unveiling something that was previously hidden, covered, or in secret.[24] The audience is encouraged to view all actions and portrayed in the book as figurative and symbolic, except in cases where the author indicates the literal meaning that must be assumed. To have a proper understanding of Revelation 14: 10-11, it is important to interpret the passage’s apocalyptic symbolism. The passage also focuses on symbolism, which requires analysis to comprehend the message communicated through its characters, features, and events. The three key symbols tied to the end of times include the smoke, the beast, and the mark.

The Smoke

The smoke, as used to depict the end of times in Revelation 14:11, is a symbol of terror and destruction by God’s wrath upon those who revere Satan. In the phrase, “and the smoke of their torment,” the term smoke is followed by the word torment, which signifies that the final days will be characterized by the painful annihilation of those who refuse to worship God and instead choose to go against His will. As Everett observed, the symbolism is drawn from the events of destruction that were seen in Sodom and Gomorrah as described in Genesis 19:28.[25] The demolition of the cities as witnessed by Abraham is considered a signal of the destruction of the impious, and the smoke that went up from them is an emblem of what rises from the place where wicked people undergo eternal suffering. The source of the smoke in the current passage will be the bodies of the wicked in burning sulfur, which constitutes part of God’s cup of anger upon those who worship the beast.[26] Moreover, the fact that the smoke ascends forever and ever signifies the eternal nature of the torment, which is also implicated in Mathew 25:46, whereby the sinners will be sent away to eternal punishment. This will mark a permanent end to all forms of evil and result in a situation whereby all humans on earth will worship God alone.

The Beast and the Mark

The book of Revelation 14:11 talks of the beast which is capable of stealing people’s souls from God. In this context, the term “beast” is utilized to portray a wild, adversarial creature which humans should make every effort to avoid. However, “beast” is symbolic, and the context is not describing an actual animal.[27] It represents Satan, who tries to antagonize God and compete with him in winning the souls of men. The beast uses its “mark” to identify the people who are devoted to Satan.[28] The mark, which is identified as the number 666, has received many controversial interpretations, with many analysts trying to unravel its literal meaning in the modern world.[29] However, Everett revealed that the number “666” could be considered as a furtive representation of the ancient pagan mysteries elated to devil worshipping.[30] Therefore, the author of Revelation used the symbolism of the mark to refer to the practice of deserting God’s teachings and embracing paganism as their way of life.

Exposition/Interpretation of Revelation 14: 10-11

There is a need to consider symbolism and assessment of Biblical background while assessing how final judgment is described in Revelation 14:11. The Biblical imagery of judgment by fire and sulphur does not emphasize eternal torment but the pivotal annihilation of God’s enemies.[31] The context of Revelation 14: 10-11 can be traced to the oracle of Edom’s destruction and the story of Sodom and Gomorrah’s devastation (Genesis 19:28; Isaiah 34:10). Furthermore, the moment of judgment is referenced by the torment encountered by God’s enemies in the presence of the Lamb and the angels. The adversaries’ annihilation is a symbol of their extinction as described in Isaiah 34 and Genesis 19. Consequently, Revelation 14: 10-11 attempts to provide an alternative account regarding the defeat of God’s enemies. The pericope can be compared to Revelation 18 that details the fall of Babylon, whereby the natives faced the full wrath of God’s torment in their final judgment.[32] The excruciating moment of vicious judgment or eternal torment is described through the use of sulphur and fire. Alternatively, the memorial and depiction of devastation or the evidence of enduring, eternal distress after God’s judgment are represented by the smoke of the suffering that will rise eternally.[33] The sinners will have no rest day demonstrating the unrelenting nature of God’s eternal reprimand.

The message proclaimed by the three angels has three major features that enable biblical readers to correctly interpret Revelation 14: 10-11. Notably, John uses the verb εἶδον to draw readers’ attention from the account of the righteous people who will enter God’s Kingdom.[34] Consequently, the message was not intended for the remnants who also feared God, and their foreheads bore the seal of the Lord. The message can be perceived as a caution to the earth and its populations that they must be righteous to be written in the book of life.[35] The passage also warns people against being unfaithful and their wickedness. Those individuals who worship the beast will face God’s judgment and complete devastation that will eliminate the wicked eternally (Revelation 14:11, 15:7). The righteous are promised a place in paradise where they will live with God forever. John presents a climatic warning message in Revelation 14:10-11 for the disobedient and sinful people as well as those who will lack the seal of the Lord on their foreheads. The outcome of venerating the unholy trinity will lead to judgment and perpetual devastation for the wickedness.

Canonical Analysis of Revelation 14: 10-11

The Immediate Context of Revelation 14: 10-11

The book of Revelation focuses on the issue of eternal fire and judgment. John provides a comprehensive assessment of the eschatological devastation and annihilation that will happen in Babylon (Rev 18:18; 21). Similarly, Revelation 20:10 details how Satan and his followers will be cast into eternal torment. The eschatological judgment, also known as κατέφαγεν, will involve sheer obliteration of the sinful people who will not be included in the book of life, Satan, and his angels.[36] They will be cast in a lake of eternal fire to face their second death (Rev 20: 14, 15). Revelation 12:1 to 14:20 describes the great controversy theme where the dragon is symbolically depicted devouring Jesus, fighting God, and oppresses His people. Furthermore, Revelation 13 narrates how the dragon, notably the faithful woman, as well as how the land and sea beast collectively strive to ensure people worship Satan. The unholy trinity proved to be a threat as many people were martyred for standing firm against venerating the beast (Revelation 13:15).

Additionally, Revelation 14 includes a symbolical representation of the 144,000 people to denote the faithful remnants who survived the purge since they continued to worship God and had their seals on the forehead.[37]Ultimately, the three angels were sent to warn the world about the impending God’s judgment, the second coming of Jesus Christ, and the separation of the harvest. The book of Revelation focused on the concept of judgment for those who declined to repent and worship Yahweh (Revelation 12:1-14:20). Eschatological people are urged to leave Babylon and accept the true God’s divinity to avoid punishment. Notable, Satan capitalizes on fear to compel people to obey and worship him. Nonetheless, God neutralizes the beasts’ threats and strengthens people to secure their allegiance.

The Wider Context of Revelation 14: 10-11

Revelation 14:14-20 comprehensively describes how the three angels will announce the final harvest judgment. The description contains imagery and verbal clues similar to those in Revelation 14:9-11 that also provide warning proclamation. The verses focus on the eternal, conscious torment after the judgment, but it will end in the elimination and destruction of God’s enemies. Revelation 14:10-11 can be compared with Isaiah 34:8-17 that focuses on the oracle against Edom. Moreover, Isaiah 34 describes the eschatological judgment for those who opposed God’s kingdom. Notably, a smoke that burns forever, an endless judgment, and flaming sulphur are mentioned in the Isaianic passage and Revelation 14:11 to signify the destruction of Edom or God’s wrath against the unbelievers. John adopted inverted parallelism to describe how an individual will receive the mark of the beast and its image on their hands and forehead for worshipping him.[38] Besides, sulphur and fire will be used to torture the unsaved in the presence of Lamb and the holy angels.

The imagery of devastation is also depicted in other parts of the Bible, especially the Old Testament, for instance, the prophecy of Edom (Isaiah 34) and the story of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19). Analysis of both passages, there is evidence that such places will be completely ruined and no person will be spared, and the fire will burn ceaselessly. Notably, the assessment is consistent with Biblical theology that emphasizes the pericope means the elimination of sinfulness when people refuse to obey God and eternal life. The traditionalist understanding of Revelation 14:10-11 disregards the disconfirmation of the doctrine of eternal torment. The pericope includes a warning to God’s enemies that they will be harshly judged. Some theologians state that the Book of Revelation recapitulates the visions regarding divine judgment. There are several resembling accounts of how God will judge His foes (Rev 11:15-18; 14:6-20; 19:6-20). Notably, the proclamation about the impending judgment on Babylon is clearly described in Revelation 14 and 18. Besides, the angel’s proclamation on judgment upon God’s nemeses is similarly covered in Revelation 19:17-20:10 and Revelation 14:9-11. Furthermore, the inviolability of the martyrs is detailed in both Revelation 20:11-21 and Revelation 14:12-13. The semantic of final, decisive devastation immensely focuses on judgment rather than eternal torment described in Revelation 14:11. The similar imagery of how the smoke will rise perpetually are evident in Revelation 18:18 and 19:3. Moreover, Revelation 14:9-11 also contains similarities with Revelation 6: 12-1, particularly on when the terrible and intense God’s judgment will come. Both passages describe the fury of the Lord in full strength against the sinners. Despite focusing on portraying the final judgment, the book of Revelation minimally details the enduring, ceaseless conscious punishment.

Application of Revelation 14: 10-11

There are many ways in which the message in Revelation 14:11 can be applied in today’s context. Some of the theological implications arising from the passage concern sin and how the Creator deals with those who choose to lead wicked ways. On one hand, sin represents a wrecked relationship between God and humans. Once Adam and Eve committed the sinful act while in the Garden of Eden as indicated in the book of Genesis, God already had a plan in place to save man and re-establish the link that was destroyed as a result of sin.[39] The Bible, particularly the New Testament, includes numerous instances that demonstrate God’s salvation and ways of regaining this relationship. Jesus’ death on the cross afforded humans the privilege to have their sins wiped out as long as they showed remorse and asked for forgiveness for their misdeeds.

Similarly, the passage of Revelation 14:11 emphasizes the idea that the Creator does not perpetuate transgression but will eliminate it. God is never pleased with sinfulness, and the text of Revelation covers numerous scenarios where He is pleading with humans to repent and change their evil ways. He is also a jealous God who seeks to retain His position as the mightiest before all creatures. Ultimately, those who disobey him are doomed to death. Also, sin never wins in the presence of God, but only His eternal kingdom.[40] Therefore, He will eradicate any false prophets, the beast, and their followers. Christians are encouraged to leave their sinful ways, follow Jesus, and worship God in spirit and truth. This implies showing full dedication to serving the Lord in their day-to-day lives. The Christian clergy must correctly emphasize the infinity of the hellfire and doctrine of eternal torment to provide a basis for modern churches and Christians to strengthen their faith in Christ and to avoid the severe judgment that will involve being cast in eternal hellfire.

Revelation 14:10-11 references the account of Sodom and Gomorrah as written in Genesis 19:28. The obliteration of the two cities is theologically translated to mean the annihilation of the sinners. The sinners will endure eternal and severe suffering. The New Testament doctrine is quite compacted and definitive on the eternal torment of the sinners. Notably, Christ also focused on the subject of punishment for the wicked or divine wrath more than his disciples. Nonetheless, Christians are encouraged to faithful to God, especially in times of trial.[41] The gospel calls on people to fear God and glorify Him since it helps to uproot the bases of the antichrist and his dominion. Any person who continues to worship the beast and promote his cause must expect to be perpetually depressed in body and soul. Professing Jesus’ faith and being obedient to God’s commandment will protect the believers from any suffering.[42]Furthermore, Christians are called to be ready to be killed in the state of union and cause of the Lord. Such martyrdom will allow believers to receive eternal rest from all persecution, sorrow, temptation, and sin. The Lamb will judge and condemn the followers or worshippers of the beasts, while the holy angels will act as the executioners who will assemble and separate them from the virtuous people then throw them into the blast furnace of hellfire.[43] Besides, the holy angels will be present throughout the ordeal to spectate and rejoice in their eternal torment. The glory and power of the Lamb and the holy angels will worsen the suffering of the sinful people. The fury of the Lord against wickedness will be unmerciful and without hope.

Revelation 14: 10-11 focuses on presenting the image of God’s triumph and the defeat of the beast.  Immediately after the second angel proclaimed the fall of Babylon owing to its wickedness, spiritual fornication, and rebellion against God, the third angel cautioned the people about the imminent judgment. The unbelievers will face the full wrath of God for worshipping the beast.[44] They will be condemned to hellfire and brimstone where the smoke of their suffering perpetually rises. The people will have no rest forever for receiving the mark on Satan on their forehead or hands. Loyalty to the antichrist and his dominion will lead to God’s strong punishment.[45] The same message is reiterated in Jeremiah 25:15 and Psalm 75:8.  Consequently, the adversaries of God will not escape His anger and wrath, since Jesus Himself could not avoid it if were possible (Matthew 26:39). God’s fury is steadfast hostility towards unrighteousness and sin. Revelation 14: 10-11 teaches numerous significant truths regarding hell and the eternal fate of the condemned sinners. The real torment will be largely abhorrent and hurting. God will be present in hell through His angels and the Lamb to proclaim His virtuous judgment, holy justice, sacredness, and fury against sin. The majority of the unbelievers who worshipped the beast and were sent to hell would wish that God was absent. Nonetheless, since the veneration of Satan on earth was not interrupted by penitence, the eternal torment of the unbelievers will also not be stopped by deferred repentance sought in hell.

Conclusion

Revelation 14:11 is categorized in apocalyptic literature as it mainly focuses on prophecies on the events that are generally connected to the description of the end of times. The passage incorporates the use of symbolism to make the audience understand the happenings associated with the end times. The smoke that ascends forever from torment could be viewed as the consequences faced by those who fail to worship God or turn away from their sins. They await destruction and eternal torment and will neither see the kingdom of God nor receive rest. The book of Revelation is relevant to modern Christian despite its medieval authorship to the early church. The original historical context of the apocalypse is transcended by the numerous spiritual truths. Nonetheless, evangelists, theologians, and the larger congregation of believers must be cautious of the exegetical interpretation of the Revelation. Failure to correctly analyze the complex imageries, symbols, and prophecies contained in the book can easily distort the message.

Moreover, Revelation 14: 10-11 has a universal application that is constrained to the churches in Asia Minor. The pericope assists in strengthening the faith of the brethren by demonstrating how worshipping the true God will lead to eternal rest while evil and wickedness will be judged harshly. Furthermore, the passage assures those persecuted Christians to be firm believers in God’s power, providence, and divinity. They will be written in the book of life and escape the eternal torment that is characterized by hellfire that will burn perpetually. The prophetic and apocalyptic message in Revelation 14: 10-11 provides comfort, encouragement, and exhortation to the righteous people that God will always be with them and guide them to subdue Satan’s fears and threats, which are aimed at forcing them to worship and glorify him. The passage comprehensively advances the general theme of the book of Revelation, namely, God’s plan to bring the entire cosmos under His dominion and power. Moreover, Revelation reminds believers to anticipate suffering, but they are called to be faithful and trustful of God’s sovereignty and accept that Jesus Christ reigns supreme and will ensure righteousness triumphs over evil.

Bibliography

Aune, David E. Revelation 6–16: Word Biblical Commentary, 52B. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1998.

Bacchiocchi, Samuele. “Hell: Eternal Torment or Annihilation?” Endtime Issues 7, no. 2 (1999): 1-8.

Bowles, Ralph G. “Does Revelation 14: 11 Teach Eternal Torment?” Rethinking Hell: Readings in Evangelical Conditionalism, 9, no. 3 (2014): 138-54.

Craigen, Trevor P. “Eternal Punishment in John’s Revelation.” The Master’s Seminary Journal 9, no. 2 (1998): 191-201.

Davis, Christopher A. Revelation. Harare: College Press, 2000.

Duke, Rodney K. “Eternal Torment or Destruction? Interpreting Final Judgment Texts.” Evangelical Quarterly 88, no. 3 (2016).

Kistemaker, Simon J., and William Hendriksen. Exposition of the Book of Revelation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 2001.

Osborne, Grant R. Revelation: Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Michigan: Baker Academic, 2002.

Paulien, Jon. “Beale, GK The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text.” Andrews University Seminary Studies 38, no. 2 (2000): 313-314.

Powys, David J. ‘Hell’: A Hard Look at a Hard Question: The Fate of the Unrighteous in New Testament Thought. Oregon: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2007.

Resseguie, James L. The Revelation of John: A Narrative Commentary. Michigan: Baker Academic, 2009.

Savige, Craig. “Biblical answers about Hell.” Accessed November 28, 2020, http://victoryfaithcentre.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/AnswersHell.pdf

Stefanovic, Ranko. Revelation of Jesus Christ: Commentary on the Book of Revelation. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 2009.

Sweeney, Jon M. Inventing Hell: Dante, the Bible and Eternal Torment. London: Hachette UK, 2014.

Swete, Henry Barclay. The Apocalypse of St. John: The Greek Text with Introduction Notes and Indices. Oregon: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1999.

[1] David J. Powys, ‘Hell’: A Hard Look at a Hard Question: The Fate of the Unrighteous in New Testament Thought. (Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2007), 11.

[2] Ibid., 15.

[3] Gary H. Everett, Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures: The Book of Revelation (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2018), 5.

[4] Ibid., 4.

[5] Everett, Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures, 6.

[6] Ibid., 6.

[7] Ibid., 7.

[8] Ibid., 8.

[9] Ibid., 6-10.

[10] Ibid., 11.

[11] Ibid., 13

[12] Ibid., 13.

[13] Ibid., 17.

[14] Ibid., 17.

[15] Ibid., 17.

[16] Ibid., 17.

[17] Everett, Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures, 19

[18] Ibid., 22.

[19] Everett, Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures, 19-22.

[20] Everett, Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures, 19.

[21] Everett, Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures, 19.

[22] Ibid., 19.

[23] Ibid., 33.

[24] Ibid., 33-34.

[25] Everett, Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures, 19.

[26] Duke, Rodney K. “Eternal Torment or Destruction? Interpreting Final Judgment Texts.” Evangelical Quarterly 88, no. 3 (2016): 5.

[27] Everett, Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures, 20.

[28] Ibid., 19-20.

[29] Ibid., 20.

[30] Ibid., 19-20.

[31] Simon J. Kistemaker and William Hendriksen, Exposition of the Book of Revelation. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 2001), 26.

[32] Jon Paulien, “Beale, GK The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text.” Andrews University Seminary Studies 38, no. 2 (2000): 314.

[33] Grant R. Osborne, Revelation: Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002), 16.

[34] Christopher A. Davis, Revelation. (Harare: College Press, 2000), 21.

[35] Craig Savige, “Biblical answers about Hell.” Accessed November 28, 2020, http://victoryfaithcentre.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/AnswersHell.pdf

[36] David E. Aune, Revelation 6–16: Word Biblical Commentary, 52B. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1998), 18.

[37] Ranko Stefanovic, Revelation of Jesus Christ: Commentary on the Book of Revelation. (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 2009), 34.

[38] Everett, Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures, 20.

[39] Swete, Henry Barclay. The Apocalypse of St. John: The Greek Text with Introduction Notes and Indices. (Oregon: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1999), 11.

[40] James L. Resseguie, The Revelation of John: A Narrative Commentary. (Michigan: Baker Academic, 2009), 56.

[41] Ralph G. Bowles, “Does Revelation 14: 11 Teach Eternal Torment?” Rethinking Hell: Readings in Evangelical Conditionalism, 9, no. 3 (2014): 148.

[42] Trevor P. Craigen. “Eternal Punishment in John’s Revelation.” The Master’s Seminary Journal 9, no. 2 (1998): 195.

[43] Samuele Bacchiocchi. “Hell: Eternal Torment or Annihilation?” Endtime Issues 7, no. 2 (1999): 4.

[44] Jon M. Sweeney, Inventing Hell: Dante, the Bible and Eternal Torment. (London: Hachette UK, 2014), 52.

[45] Bowles, “Does Revelation 14: 11 Teach Eternal Torment?” 142.

The post Exposition of the Book of Revelation 14:11 appeared first on Students of Scriptures.

The letter to Romans is one of the essential Pauline epistles initially written by Paul, the apostle. It distinguishes itself as the most precise and systematically organized overview of Christianity values and dogmas as compared to the rest of Paul’s letters. Generally, Paul introduces Roman’s epistles by offering insights into the observable or physical nature of the world, particularly emphasizing the sinfulness of humankind[1]. With this, Paul first highlights the origin of sin and how all humanity has been tainted by the iniquity that resulted due to man’s rebellion against the ultimate creator of the universe-God. However, he sheds light on the above condemnation by outlining God’s plan of salvation through the blood of Jesus Christ. Further, Paul indicates that receiving salvation is not the absolute objective of Christianity, it is a continuous process as everyone is sanctified as they fuel their pursuits of eternal life. Realistically, how Paul handled the issues in this apostolic letter provides a logical and comprehensive analysis of how an individual can be saved from the eternal penalty and consequences of their sins.

However, regardless of the positive implications of Paul’s letters to the Romans in the scope of inclusive Christian life and journey, it is apparent that Paul had numerous objectives and aims while writing the scripture. Unlike other gospels in the New Testament, such as the Gospel of John, which was solely focused on preaching the message of salvation, it is evident that Paul was in an urge to address several issues and matters pertaining to the subjects of the origin of sins and the probable escape route for humankind. In this concern, numerous theories have been devised by diverse scholars and theologians to explore and grasp the fundamental reasons that prompted Paul to write his epistle to the Romans. According to Porter, there are various and distinct philosophies that have been derived throughout human history concerning  the actual purpose of Romans[2]. Although each of the theories discussed by Porter in his manuscript exhibits some weaknesses, I find the Compendium of the Christian Religion theory to be the most compelling as compared to other philosophical frameworks.

Generally, the Compendium of the Christian Religion theory is among the oldest conceptual in the world focused on deriving the root of the Romanian epistle and remains to be one of the relatively reliable and accurate sources of information concerning Paul’s intent to script this letter. According to this theory, Phillip Melanchthon argued that the letter was initially written to Paul to the unknown church in Rome, where he systematically outlines his anticipated visit to Rome, as well as his corresponding traveling plan. The antecedent verses of the epistle appropriately justify Paul’s initial prompt to authoring this letter. In my view, the fundamental reasons which necessitated or inspired Paul to write the epistle of Romans were to inform and prepare the Romanian Christians about his much-anticipated visit to Rome and establishing early friendship ties with them as a way of preventing any possible resistance/rebellion and conflict that may be perpetrated by the regional believers.

The Authorship of Ephesians

Generally, authorship of Ephesians has emerged to be a relatively controversial and widely debated topic among distinct scholars, historians, and theologians, among others, throughout history. Although substantial scholarly resources have consent and attributed this letter to Paul’s original work, many people are yet to justify the validity of this evidence. Notable numbers of evangelical writers doubt the legitimacy of this epistle. While some reputable theologians and Biblical scholars may inculpate evangelicals of a divulgence bias with regards to the above problem, such an accusation denotes a casual disregarding of the massive evidence that strongly inclines the vast majority of people in support of Pauline authorship.

Further, the subgroup of individuals who certainly believe that the views of the Ephesians correspond to Paul’s teachings and philosophy although he was not involved in the writing of the book could corroborate the inconsistency of this postulation. Nonetheless, the respective derivation is dependent on how they apprehend or interpret the existing autobiographical information and elucidates theology. However, regardless of the prevailing assumptions and theories aimed at offering divergent opinions about the authorship of Ephesians, vast evidence affirms that Paul is undeniably the writer of Ephesians. Typically, Ephesians constitute an extensive embodiment of materials reported in the context of the first person’s discourse of the apostle to the Christians of Ephesus.

For instance, according to Ephesians (3:2-6), Paul generally provides the accounts of his mystery stewardship and which appropriately reflects the elements of his apostolic endeavors. Additionally, Paul wrote a prayer for his audience, in which he even introduced himself in the context of the first persona as “I Paul” and continues by saying “the prisoner of Jesus Christ” (Ephesians 3:1). In this case, Paul was trying to recount the unfolding episodes that transpired during his initial call to become a gospel minister. Ultimately, Paul concludes the letter to Ephesians by remarking about his assistance, known as Tychicus, who will be tasked with the delivery of the epistle to Ephesians (Ephesians 6:21). With this in mind, it is logical to conclude that the respective explanations overrule the argument presented by those in support of the pseudepigraphy authorship. Moreover, Paul’s indications of the specific associate whom he will send to convey the letter to the Ephesus in the final section of Ephesians is a precise justification that the epistle is a legitimate product of Paul, and therefore, was not composed by any of  Paul`s partners.

Bibliography

Guerra, Anthony J. Romans and the Apologetic Tradition: The Purpose, Genre and Audience of Paul’s Letter. Vol. 81. Cambridge University Press, 1995.

Porter, Stanley E. The Apostle Paul: His Life, Thought, and Letters. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2016.

[1]Anthony J. Guerra, Romans and the Apologetic Tradition: The Purpose, Genre and Audience of Paul’s Letter (Cambridge University Press, 1995), 126.

[2] Stanley Porter, The Apostle Paul: His Life, Thought, and Letters (Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2016), 302.

The post The Purpose of Romans appeared first on Students of Scriptures.

In modern Biblical studies, the problem of the interpretation of Pauline’s writing is one of the most disputable issues. In his book, Paul and His Recent Interpreters: Some Contemporary Debates, Wright critiques the major schools of thought in recent Pauline scholarship. The author provides a sophisticated and judicious analysis of the seminal works created by the most outstanding theological thinkers of the previous centuries. The list of the works included in the book is an extensive one, and it contains the representatives of the German school of theology such as Bultmann, Bornkamm, Conzelmann, Jeremias, Käsemann, Wrede, Schlatter, and Schweitzer. It also offers a comprehensive analysis of Sanders’s Paul and Palestinian Judaism and Meeks’s The First Urban Christians. The book contains three main parts that disclose three wide categories. The first part is defined by its author as the representation of Paul and his Jewish world, and it comprises chapters 1-4. The second part deals with Paul and ‘apocalyptic’ writing and is represented in chapter 5. Finally, chapters 6-10 depict Paul and his ‘social world.’ The current paper aims to analyze the bulk of literature connected with extensive Pauline writing, consider recent developments in Pauline scholarship, evaluate the current state of the discipline and the major schools of theological thought, and define the spheres of its practical application.

Section One: Pauline Scholarship during the Late Modern Period (Chapters 1–2)

The first part of the analyzed book is titled “Paul among Jews and Gentiles?” The author proves the claim by stating that Paul should be treated primarily as a figure of ancient history. However, while interpreting his works, it is necessary to avoid such dangers as anachronism and anatopism. By anachronism, the author meant thinking that people who lived many centuries ago saw the world and the relations between God and humans in the way modern people comprehend it.[1] In its turn, anatopism presupposes that people living in various locations have the same ideas of the world and the same outlook.[2] The initial studies of the Pauline heritage began at the end of the 19^th century. According to Wright, the most influential studies of the late nineteenth century created certain problems that modern scholarship has been trying to avoid.[3] These problems included ‘secularization’ or the process that initiated the representation of the ‘historical Paul’ as a ‘religious’ figure. The second problem is the Hegelian Idealism, which interpreted the concept and theory of ‘religion’ through the application of two broad hypothetical streams, namely Judaism and Hellenism. This problem stemmed from the original understanding of the concept of religion that was seen as the moments when a  separate individual or a group of people were in touch with the divinity through worshipping, invoking, or any other manifestations of the activities intended to celebrate its power. Such understanding of religion predetermined the main focus of interest typical for early researchers of Paul’s heritage. The scholars concentrated mainly on the analysis of Paul’s place within the ancient communities. They also intended to define whether the apostle was a Jewish or Hellenist thinker and whether his theological doctrine was meant for the Jewish or gentile audience. It is possible to argue that the mentioned issues created the canvas of the early scientific research of Pauline scholarship.

The first attempt to cope with the contradictions described above was made by Ferdinand Christian Baur, who became one of the most prominent representatives of the so-called  ‘Tübingen School’ that is commonly considered the best-known German theological and exegetical movements. Baur was one of the ardent supporters of the principles of Hegelian Idealism at the beginning of his theological career. The thinker stated that the traditional Christian concept of a transcendent personal God was outdated. Baur did not believe in divine revelation and denied the possibility of miracles as the manifestation of God’s intervention in human history. In this respect, he manifested himself as a supporter of the philosophic approach to theology.

In the middle of Baur’s career, the influence of the mentioned approach became stronger, and he concluded that traditional Christian views should be replaced by the philosophy of Hegel. In Baur’s opinion, Hegel’s views and theories provided the most comprehensive explanation of natural phenomena and the universe. It should be mentioned that in the last fifteen years of his life, Baur radically changed his views and began to reject the Hegelian abstract concept of God. For instance, he did not support the idea according to which  God should be understood as the form of the infinite Spirit and an eternal idea arising from its previous finite manifestation in the course of the developing process of history.[4] Even though Baur returned to rationalism that emphasized universal ethical principles as the meaning of life and the value of Christianity, his Hegelian orientation noticeable in earlier writings on Paul strongly influenced subsequent biblical studies.

The most influential article of Baur was published in 1831, and in it, the scholar laid out the foundations of his understanding of Paul’s theology. He also explained a unique approach to the history of the early Christian church by applying the evolutionary theory established by Hegelian philosophy.[5] Baur applied it to one of the most famous works of the apostle, namely to 1 Corinthians 1: 11-12.[6] Having based his conclusions on the mentioned text, Baur put forward the theory according to which there were two main directions of early Christianity. The first of them was called Judeo-Christianity. It remained within the framework of Judaism and Jewish national isolation and was based on the strict observation of the Law of Moses. Apostle Peter was the main figure in this direction of early Christianity. The second trend was defined as Gentile Christianity. It confessed Christianity as universal evangelism open to all nations that did not emphasize the importance of strictly following the Law of Moses. It also carried a great influence on Hellenism and the cultures associated with it. Paul was attributed as the main figure in this direction of early Christianity.

In his article, Baur stated that the Corinthian “party of Christ” was one of the Judeo-Christian factions that opposed the dominating influence of Paul. The theological doctrine of this party focused on Peter and emphasized its direct relationship with the historical Jesus through the original apostles established by Christ. Baur also argued that in opposition to the continued attacks of Judeo-Christian opponents, Paul developed the doctrine of justification by faith, which became central to his theology. Moreover, this initial and acute conflict between Peter and Paul directs the historical development of the church until the end of the second century, after which it was extinguished by the emerging unity of the hierarchical Catholic Church. The main approach supported by Baur is that Paul stood between the ‘early Jewish’ Christianity and the (later) ‘early catholic’ variety. Besides, Baur tried to prove that original texts written by Paul are only those in which the conflict between Petrine Judaeo-Christianity and Paulinist Gentile Christianity can be easily traced. According to the thinker, only four of Paul’s letters can be considered original, namely Romans, Galatians, and the two Corinthian epistles.[7] It should be mentioned that in the 20^th century, the majority of Baur’s ideas and theories were rejected by the researchers who denied the influence of the inner conflicts in early Christianity. They also offered an approach that emphasized the unifying influence of Paul.

Most New Testament scholars also did not accept Baur’s historical skepticism and his philosophical rationalism, which excluded the supernatural by definition. Despite the weakness of historical and theological judgment, Bauer’s consistent attempt to fully describe the history of the early church based on a purely historical approach without an appeal to miracles proved to be influential. The works of Baur marked the controversy between the teachings of Jesus and Paul’s theology. Even more critical contribution of Baur was his formulation of three key interrelated questions that were later addressed by the scholars of the subsequent epochs. The first question was about the opponents of Paul and the main concepts of the teachings. The second question was Paul’s theory concerning the law and its relationship to the gospel. The third issue was the main focus of Pauline’s theology. These three questions determined the subsequent direction of research.

Albert Schweitzer offered an innovative approach to Pauline debates more than a century ago. Schweitzer made an attempt to define the role of Paul in the development of early Christianity and his relation to Jesus. The scholar debated the view according to which Paul was seen as the Hellenizer or as a person who was a linking element between early Jewish Christianity and late Hellenistic Christianity. In Schweitzer’s opinion, Paul always remained Jewish, but his Judaism was an apocalyptic one, and it was characterized by its radical eschatology. The thinker wrote that the main achievement of Paul was providing Christianity a form that later enabled its Hellenizing.[8] Schweitzer also argues that the letter to Philemon is one of the most important works created by the apostle since it discloses all aspects of his personality. [9] It should be pointed out that the ideas offered by Schweitzer were innovative ones, and they were developed in the more recent research.

Section Two: The New Perspective on Paul (Chapters (3–5)

The new perspective on Paul’s scholarship is commonly associated with the works of Ed P. Sanders and especially with his famous book called Paul and Palestinian Judaism. This seminal book became the culmination of a long process of denial of the approach used in the Christian scholarship concerning Judaism. Sanders’ understanding of Judaism revolutionized the scientific understanding of Paul and his writings. The thinker believed that this religion should be characterized as covenantal nomism, meaning that the covenant given by God requires that people should obey the commandments that provide atonement for sins. He described Judaism as the religion of grace and characterized the Tora as the book, the rules of which should be obeyed because of gratitude and not fear or pride. The book created by Sanders is also based on the idea stating that Paul was a Jewish thinker and not a Hellenistic one.[10]The main conclusions made by the author of the mentioned work resonate with the Reformed tradition of theology. For Paul, there is a unity between the future, present, and past manifested in the notion of the verdict. The apostle stated that there would be a future verdict based on the total account of the life events.[11] This verdict should be anticipated in the present using the justification or the divine declaration represented by the belief in the gospel. At the same time, this notion is based on the past act when God vindicated Jesus by raising Him from the dead.[12] Sanders’ ideas also resonated with the exegetical scholarship, and this fact is often mentioned by the scholars criticizing his achievements. Finally, the analyzed book gained popularity due to its social and cultural location. Its author represented the world described by Wright as the new American ‘religious studies’[13] that embodied a new kind of Pauline investigation. Despite the undeniable influence the work of Sanders had on the development of the scholarship researching the legacy of the apostle, Wright indicates that “I believe he [Sanders] did not ground his thesis deep enough and seemed not to notice some of its weaknesses at that level.”[14] This citation proves that the author of the book has a critical attitude towards several aspects of the analyzed work, but he does not reject its importance and characterizes it as a real milestone of the new studies that shifted the old paradigm of the twentieth-century New Testament theology.

Since the early 1980s, several significant studies were published to re-evaluate the findings made by Sanders and define their impact on the research of Pauline scholarship. The works of Wayne Meeks, Krister Stendahl, and Martin Hengel became a matter of public discussion since they had a lasting impact on the mentioned sphere of knowledge. Still, the most important contribution was made by James Dunn, one of the pioneers of the new wave of scholars who offered their innovative perspective on Paul. Dunn is the author of numerous works that include Theology of Paul the Apostle, Christianity in the Making, a two-volume commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, Galatians, Colossians, and Philemon. In these works, Dunn proves the thesis statement that Judaism of the first century was not legalistic. He also rejected the view according to which the antithesis of such concepts as law and grace should be treated as the main key to Paul’s understanding of the law and the theology of his opponents. In his recent article published in the volume The New Perspective on Paul: Collected Essays, Dunn attempts to prove that there is indeed a single ‘new view’ of Paul. [15] This approach is marked by the following attributive features:

• the term covenant nomism offered by Sanders is the one that accurately describes the structure of the first century Judaism;
• the law of Moses played the role of a social barrier since sanctification for God required separation from other nations;
• Paul’s doctrine of justification by faith was aimed to overcome the barrier that was placed by the law between Jews and gentiles since it presupposed the possibility of salvation for all people, irrespective of whether they were the Jews or belonged to other communities;
• Paul contrasts his doctrine of justification to simply following the commandments since many Christians believed that it was enough for receiving salvation.

In the next chapter of his work, Wright states that the 1990s were marked by the ardent confrontation between the supporters of the new view and classical Lutheran understanding of justification. The most outstanding works belong to such scholars as Simon Gathercole, Andrew Das, Seyoon Kim, Martin Hengel, Friedrich Avemarie, and Austin Farrer. The author indicates that the decline of the Bultmann School in Germany led to the rise of religious studies in Europe and North America that applied a variety of approaches.

Section Three: Apocalyptic Readings of Paul

According to Wright, apocalyptic readings of Paul became one of the main trends in interpreting the texts of the apostle. The first scholar who re-introduced the term ‘apocalyptic’ into the discourse of Pauline studies was Christiaan Beker. In his book, he wrote that the central motif of the Pauline works is the celebration of the divine victory manifested through the death and resurrection of Christ over the evil.[16] Besides, Beker understood apocalyptic writings as the beginning of the divine triumph and not as a negative strain typical for early Christian literature.[17] The other scholars who supported the apocalyptic approach included Ernst Kӓsemann and Klaus Koch. In his book, Wright indicates that Kӓsemann is one of the most outstanding researchers of Pauline scholarship.[18] Being the student of Rudolf Bultmann, Kӓsemann opposed the Gnosticism of his famous teacher. He believed that the application of the apocalyptic approach created a religion-historical matrix necessary for the proper interpretation of Paul’s ideas. One more achievement of Kӓsemann was his break with the Reformation tradition and representing Paul as a religious thinker who was influenced by the Jewish background.

The ideas voiced by Kӓsemann were later developed by Martinus de Boer and Louis Martyn. While commenting on their ideas, Wrights points out that both scholars understand Paul within a Jewish context. They read the phrase pistis Christou as a clear reference to Christ’s ‘faithfulness’ that reached its climax in his death.[19]According to the mentioned scholars, the most important questions of apocalyptic writing were the problems of responsibility for evil and finding rescue from evil.[20] Martyn also offered an innovative approach to the problem of defining the term apocalypse and arguing that it took place the moment Jesus died.[21] In the final chapter of this part, Wright analyzes the work written by Douglas Campbell and states that his book is full of numerous contradictions, and it does not provide a comprehensive understanding of the apocalyptic theory. To illustrate this claim, Wright writes that Campbell opposes a basically ‘Lutheran’ understanding of Paul, but at the same time, he represents the apostle as a Jewish-Christian ‘Teacher’ and as a turn-or-burn preacher.[22] The mentioned contradictions and the lack of systematic approach are seen by Wright as the major issues that prevented the scholar from the proper understanding of the main messages of Paul’s writings.

Section Four: Social-Cultural Studies of Paul and His World (Chapters 10–11)

In chapters 10 and 11, Wright provides the analysis of social-scientific studies of Pauline heritage. According to the author, the study of the New Testament within the framework of its social paradigm reached its highest swing in the early 1980s, even though the roots of this approach have a much longer history.[23] One of the first scholars who insisted on the use of the mentioned approach to the New Testament was Gerd Theissen, who offered the idea of sociological exegesis and was deeply dissatisfied with the interpretation of the Bible as the book that represents only theology and ethics.

The ideas formulated by Theissen were supported by other researchers, namely Emil Schürer and his History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ and Ed Sanders and his Judaism: Practice and Belief. These works offer the representation of Paul as a religious leader who stood on the crossroads between the non-Jewish world and the wider Jewish world of the diaspora.[24] One more important work that became a trigger of the modern interest in social studies of Christianity was Edwin Judge’s book, The Social Pattern of Christian Groups in the First Century. The judge provided a detailed description of the Roman world in the period of late antiquity, and placing the history of early Christianity into a wide paradigm is an advantage of the mentioned study. Several conclusions made by Judge are of particular importance.

First of all, his distancing of Christians from the other religious societies of the analyzed epoch is an innovative idea that deserves careful analysis. The judge pointed out that Christians did not practice animal sacrifices, did not have a system of hierarchical priesthood, and did not build impressive sacred buildings. The second conclusion made by the scholar is that Christians were innovators who undermined the molds of the societies they lived in. They were in constant confrontation with the Greco-Roman world, offering an alternative system of the transnational society. [25]The works of Judge and Theissen are commonly considered as the most outstanding books representing the early stage of the modern movement for sociological approaches.

More recent works were created by the members of the Society of Biblical Literature operating in the United States. Its most famous members included Wayne Meeks and John Gager. The other scholars who made a significant contribution to the development of the sociological approach were Bruce Malina, Jerome Neyrey, John H. Elliott, Philip F. Esler, and Robert Jewett. It should be mentioned that under the general term of social approach, Wright means such main categories as description, explanation, prediction, and application.[26] The scholar states that the examples illustrating the mentioned categories can be found in the works of the American researchers, but description remains a dominating method of representing the material related to early Christianity.

In the next chapter of his book, Wright concentrates on the detailed analysis of the works created by Wayne Meeks, whose influence on the social studies of Pauline’s writings was the most noticeable one. The scholar wrote The First Urban Christians as the reaction to the dominating idea according to which Judaism and Hellenism were two incomparable movements separated by two different doctrines. According to Meeks, it was a wrong idea since, in the ancient world, communities could not exist separately without an interchange of information.[27] In the introduction to his book, the researcher demonstrates the interconnection of the cities in which Paul lived and taught with the rural environment and the broadness of the Roman Empire. Then the scholar proceeds to the analysis of the central issue of all sociological studies that he formulates as the social level of Paul’s churches.

Having read the impressive number of resources, Meeks concludes that these communities comprised not only poor people. They served as examples of “a fair cross-section of urban society.”[28] It means that the members of Paul’s churches belonged to different social classes and represented various origins, professions, and levels of wealth. Meeks also offered the idea according to which early Christian communities can be described as local tightly-knit groups the members of which separated themselves from the other religious organizations by practicing monotheism and a strict code of morality. Having commented on the significance of Meeks’ contribution, Wright indicates that this scholar characterized Paul as the person who saw his main aim as “spearheading the scripturally rooted and messianically focused new movement of God.”[29]

The other achievements of the researcher include shifting the focus from the history of religion to the broader understanding of historical processes that took place in the ancient world and the representation of the question of belief within a wide paradigm of the worldview. The next book analyzed by Wright in the chapter is David Horrell’s Solidarity and Difference. The main advantages of this book include comprehensive research of such concepts as boundaries, purity, and identity. This book also offers commentaries on the various models that can be applied to the analysis of Pauline’s writings. These models include communitarian, mediating, and liberal ones. Horrell argues that all of them can be used by scholars, but neither can reflect a complex character of Pauline’s heritage. Still, according to Wright, Horrell’s book is one of the most significant works representing the social-historical approach.

Section Five: Personal Assessment    

It is possible to argue that it is one of the most comprehensive studies reflecting all possible aspects and approaches applied to the research of Apostle Paul’s writings. Wright comments on more than a hundred various books and articles published within the 20^th century and demonstrates both their advantages and drawbacks. The bibliography of the book is extremely extensive, and it represents the authors who worked in Germany, Australia, and the United States. Their contribution is difficult to underestimate, but despite a variety of the used sources, Wright manages to create the methodology that enables him to group the authors by the theories they represent. It is also important that the scholar can spot out the ideas that dominated a certain generation of researchers.

The author of the analyzed book also concludes that all real breakthroughs in Pauline’s studies stemmed from the people’s dissatisfaction with the previously dominating approaches. For instance, the New Perspective on Paul developed as a negative reaction to the improper representation of Judaism as the religion that significantly impacted the development of Christianity. Kӓsemann’s approach can be interpreted as the opposition against Bultmannian existentialism with its inward-looking concentration. Finally, social-historical approaches that dominated the scientific thought of the end of the 20^th century appeared as the reaction to the abstract theology of the word with its lack of practical application. In this way, the author emphasizes the idea that Pauline’s studies can be characterized as the ones having evolutionary development.

While it is impossible to deny that all of the studies included in Wright’s book have certain benefits, their main problem is the limited character in terms of concentration on a certain idea and failing to notice the significance of other approaches. This claim can be easily illustrated by the following example. The approach that seems to be the most applicable to Pauline’s writings in modern times is the social-historical one. It has its clear objective and methodology; the research tasks are easy to understand, and they have a particular practical value. At the same time, it is not clear why the research of historical factors and circumstances influencing the apostle and the churches established by him cannot be compared with the serious linguistic analysis of his writings. In any way, language is the reflection of culture, and a wise concentration on the theology of words will bring extra information that can be effectively used by scholars.

Besides, modern studies seem to ignore the biographical approach to the research of the heritage of the apostle. In the whole volume, there is not a single mentioning of the main life events that shape Paul as one of the most influential leaders of Christianity. Modern scholars do not pay any attention to the fact that Paul was an extremely complex personality who refused his social, religious, and cultural background when he sincerely believed in Jesus Christ. It seems that a careful biographical analysis with the use of modern methods of research can significantly contribute to the development of Pauline scholarship and its popularization. However, at present, the biographical approach is one of the areas that remain underexplored and need further attention of the scholars.

There is also one more moment that is emphasized by Wright and should be supported. This moment is the negative attitude to reductionism that impacts the understanding of Paul’s role in the development of Christianity. As the scholar writes, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, neither apocalyptic nor salvation history, neither participation nor justification: all are one in the Messiah.”[30] It is possible to argue that this citation is the central message of the analyzed book, and it transmits its comprehensive character. The author convincingly proves his main thesis and demonstrates that the research of Pauline writings and their influence on the development of Christianity is a promising sphere of future research that has considerable potential and allows an unlimited number of interpretations. Finally, it is important to mention that the analyzed volume is a part of the work called Paul and the Faithfulness of God in which the author offered his understanding of the apostle’s heritage. Consequently, it is wise to read them together to get a proper idea of Wright’s theological theory and his contribution to the Pauline scholarship.

Bibliography

Wright, Nicholas Thomas. Paul and His Recent Interpreters: Some Contemporary Debates. Fortress Press, 2015.

[1] Nicholas Thomas Wright, Paul and His Recent Interpreters: Some Contemporary Debates (Fortress Press, 2015), 3.

[2] Ibid., 3.

[3] Ibid., 6.

[4] Ibid., 7.

[5] Ibid., 7.

[6] Ibid., 7.

[7] Ibid., 8.

[8] Ibid., 30.

[9] Ibid., 32.

[10] Ibid., 66.

[11] Ibid., 72.

[12] Ibid., 72.

[13] Ibid., 68.

[14] Ibid., 74.

[15] Ibid., 97.

[16] Ibid., 135.

[17] Ibid., 150.

[18] Ibid., 145.

[19] Ibid., 156.

[20] Ibid., 159.

[21] Ibid., 171.

[22] Ibid., 200.

[23] Ibid, 225.

[24] Ibid., 228.

[25] Ibid., 232.

[26] Ibid., 236.

[27] Ibid., 258.

[28] Ibid., 263.

[29] Ibid., 269.

[30] Ibid., 345.

The post Pauline Interpreters appeared first on Students of Scriptures.

The modern-day Christians live in a new time dispensation, where grace supersedes the law. The atonement through the death of Christ led to the abolishment of the york of the law of Moses, accounting for the contrast between the two dispensations. The content of the old testament aligns with the events and doctrines relevant to the saints living during the age. Similarly, the content of the New Testament aligns with issues that emerged after the death of Jesus Christ. Despite the strong evidence of the distinction between the Old and New Testaments, the Bible indicates that all scripture is God-breath and is profitable for teaching, correcting, rebuking, and for training.[1] It is, therefore, imperative to establish a correct interpretation and legitimate application in the lives of Christians. This reflection presents a perspective of teaching or preaching through the lens of both the old and New Testaments.

The distinctions between the New and Old Testament laws in regards to the practices and doctrinal requirements have been highlighted in Block’s analysis in chapter 3 and 4. Preaching based solely on the old testament principles may not be relevant to people living in the contemporary setting, however, integration of the New Testament concepts can lead to a sound understanding of the key issues under analysis.[2] The perspectives for teaching interpretation and legitimate application of both the New and Old Testament could be presented through the analysis of the symbolic events and practices alongside the corresponding interpretations in the New Testament.

The life and death of Jesus Christ depicted myriads of symbols that correlate with old testament occurrences. Cognizant of the confusion that may arise among the followers, Christ pointed out that he had not come to abolish the law, but to bring them to accomplishment.[3] If indeed, Christ came to fulfill the law of Moses, then the events traversing the old testament bear a relationship with that in the life of Jesus. The points of symbolic references for this analysis include the atonement practice, the ten commandments, and access to the holiest place.

Atonement practice is evident in both the New and Old Testaments. In the old testament, the Israelites needed to undergo cleansing to purge their sins. The high priests bore the responsibility of making blood sacrifices, after which, a scapegoat was released into the wilderness, to carry away the sins of the people. In that manner, Israelites were considered clean and redeemed from their sins. The coming of Christ symbolized redemption from sins. John the Baptist described Jesus as the lamb that would take away the sins of the world.[4] Similarly, the gospel, according to John, pointed at God’s love towards the earth demonstrated through the issuance of His only begotten son to save humankind. Christ died, and atonement was made for the sins of the world. The death of Christ replaced the sacrificial lambs slaughtered in the old testament and the scapegoat that took away sins into the wilderness.

The ten commandments were a manifestation of righteousness that God desired from the Israelites. The gist of the commandments was to develop a reverence for God and righteous living among the people. In the old testament dispensation, the commandments epitomized the norms and code of conduct expected of God’s people. After the coming of Jesus Christ, a new manifestation of righteousness emerged, where Christ summed up the 10 commandments into the law of love. In his teachings, Christ commanded the people to love their neighbor as they would love themselves. The concept of love has also been emphasized by apostle Paul when he pointed out that all things are in vain without love; whether there are prophecies, speaking in strange tongues, healing, and other forms of miracles, without love, they are all performed in vain. Thus, the goal of the ten commandments was to establish righteousness among the people. In the new dispensation, Christ attained righteousness through the practice of love demonstrated between people.

The final concept is the access to the holiest place. In the old testament, the holy of holies was only accessed by the priests who communed with God on behalf of the people. In cases where the priests would approach the holiest place with sins in their hearts, God would strike them down to death. The coming of Christ led to the opening of access to the holiest place. Through the death of Christ, people gained access to God without the need for priests as mediators. The symbol for this action was the breaking of the vail that separated the holiest place in the temple. The splitting of the temple veil marked a new dispensation where anyone can approach the throne of God to obtain mercy and forgiveness.

Through the coming of Jesus Christ, a new approach to righteousness, sins cleansing, and communion with God was revealed. The laws of Moses sought to uphold the practice of righteousness and to teach people to love God. The coming of Jesus Christ augmented the theme by teaching people how to love one another and have reverence for God. People also have access to God through prayer, leading to improved divine relationships. Old Testament teaching, therefore, bears a strong correlation with that of the New Testament. Any teaching or preaching should consider the symbolic significance of the practices to enable attachment of the correct meaning. As confusion arises on the application of the old testament scriptures, the symbolic significance of the events and practices can be related and used as a basis for analyzing each occurrence. Besides, the evidence in the current reflection shows that the differences between the old and New Testament practices dwell on principles attributed to the different dispensations.

Bibliography

2 Timothy 3:16-17

Block, Daniel Isaac. The Gospel According to Moses: Theological and Ethical Reflections on the Book of Deuteronomy. 2. 1st ed. Vol. 2. 1. Eugene, OR, NY: Cascade Books, 2012.

John 1:29

Matthew 5:17

[1] 2 Timothy 3:16-17

[2] Daniel Isaac Block, The Gospel According to Moses: Theological and Ethical Reflections on the Book of Deuteronomy, 1st ed., vol. 2 (Eugene, OR, NY: Cascade Books, 2012), 46.

[3] Matthew 5:17

[4] John 1:29

The post A Reflection on Old and New Testament Teachings appeared first on Students of Scriptures.