Sermon and Worship Resources (2024)

Abram is a well-known biblical character whose life is detailed in Gen. 11:25 25:11. Abram’s name (which means “exalted father”) is changed in Gen. 17:5 to “Abraham,” meaning “father of many nations.”

The narrative account in Genesis details one hundred years of Abraham’s life and moves quickly through the first seventy-five years of events. In just a few verses (11:26–31) we learn that Abram was the son of Terah, the brother of Haran and Nahor, the husband of the barren Sarai (later Sarah), and the uncle of Lot, the son of Haran, who died in Ur of the Chaldees. The plot line marks significant events in Abraham’s life chronologically. He left Harran at the age of 75 (12:4), was 86 when Hagar gave birth to Ishmael (16:16), 99 when the Lord appeared to him (17:17) and when he was circumcised (17:24), 100 when Sarah gave birth to Isaac (21:5), and 175 when he died (25:7). In summary, the biblical narrator paces the reader quickly through the story in such a way as to highlight a twenty-five-year period of Abraham’s life between the ages of 75 and 100.

The NT features Abraham in several significant ways. The intimate connection between God and Abraham is noted in the identification of God as “the God of Abraham” in Acts 7:32 (cf. Exod. 3:6). The NT also celebrates the character of Abraham as a man of faith who received the promise (Gal. 3:9; Heb. 6:15). Abraham is most importantly an example of how one is justified by faith (Rom. 4:1, 12) and an illustration of what it means to walk by faith (James 2:21, 23).

Those who exercise faith in the living God, as did Abraham, are referred to as “children of Abraham” (Gal. 3:7). Regarding the covenant promises made to Abraham in the OT, the NT writers highlight the promises of seed and blessing. According to Paul, the seed of Abraham is ultimately fulfilled in Christ, and those who believe in Christ are the seed of Abraham (Gal. 3:16, 29). In a similar way, those who have Abraham-like faith are blessed (3:9). The blessing imparted to Abraham comes to the Gentiles through the redemption of Christ and is associated with the impartation of the Spirit (3:14).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The divine name, YHWH, revealed to Moses (Exod. 3:14) is related to hayah, the Hebrew verb for “to be.” The LXX renders this name with the phrase “I am” (egō eimi), which later OT writings employ as a title for God (Isa. 43:25; 51:12; 52:6).

A significant feature in the Fourth Gospel is John’s record of seven predicated “I am” statements within Jesus’ teaching: “I am the bread of life” (6:35); “I am the light of the world” (8:12); “I am the gate for the sheep” (10:7); “I am the good shepherd” (10:11); “I am the resurrection and the life” (11:25); “I am the way and the truth and the life” (14:6); and “I am the true vine” (15:1). With each metaphor Jesus expresses a contrast between himself and another. For instance, Jesus’ claim to be the bread of life differentiates him from the manna that appeared in the wilderness (6:49), while his identification as the good shepherd stands in contrast to the hired hand who abandons the sheep in a time of trouble (10:12 13). In these instances “I am” is likely an intentional choice meant to echo the divine name and reveal Jesus’ relationship of unity with God the Father.

The meaning of additional unpredicated but emphatic “I am” declarations in Greek by Jesus is debated (Mark 6:50; 14:62; Luke 24:39; John 6:20; 8:24, 28, 58; 13:19; 18:5). In response to Jesus’ declaration of “I am,” the high priest accuses him of blasphemy (Mark 14:64), the Jews desire to stone him (John 8:59), and the officials who come to arrest him “[draw] back and [fall] to the ground” (John 18:6). These reactions suggest that at least some who heard Jesus utter these words interpreted them as his claim to equality with God (cf. John 5:18).

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rocks and stones were found naturally on the ground (Job 8:17; Ps. 91:12; Isa. 5:2; Mark 5:5; Luke 3:8). They could be heaped or piled up as a sign of disgrace (Josh. 7:26; 8:29; 2Sam. 18:17), as a marker or memorial (Gen. 31:4650), or as an altar (Exod. 20:25). A single rock or stone could also be used as a place marker (Gen. 28:22; 35:14, 20; 1Sam. 7:12), especially standing stones (Deut. 27:2–8; Josh. 4:3–9). Large stones could also be used to cover a well (Gen. 29:2–3) or to seal a cave or tomb, such as at the tombs of Lazarus (John 11:38–39) and of Jesus (Matt. 27:60; Mark 16:3–4).

Stone was used as a construction material, particularly for the temple (1Kings 5:15–18; 1Chron. 2:22; Ezra 5:8; Hag. 2:15; Mark 13:1–2). Stone was used in a building’s foundation and for the cornerstone or capstone (1Kings 5:17; Jer. 51:26; Isa. 28:16), as well as for the walls (Hab. 2:11). Psalm 118:22 refers metaphorically to the stone rejected by the builders becoming the cornerstone. In the NT, this is interpreted as referring to Jesus (Matt. 21:42; Mark 12:10; Luke 20:17; Acts 4:11; 1Pet. 2:7; cf. Eph. 2:20). Stone could also function as a writing material (Josh. 8:32), such as the tablets on which the Ten Commandments were inscribed (Exod. 24:12; Deut. 9:9–11; 1Kings 8:9; cf. 2Cor. 3:3, 7). Stone was also carved, although at Sinai the Israelites are instructed not to use cut or “dressed” stones when constructing an altar (Exod. 20:25; cf. Josh. 8:31). The phrase “carved stone” refers specifically to idols, since stone was one material used for crafting false gods (Lev. 26:1; cf. Deut. 4:28; 29:17; 2Kings 19:18; Isa. 37:19; Rev. 9:20); the term “stone” itself can therefore be used to refer to an idol, especially in the phrase “wood and stone” (Jer. 3:9; Ezek. 20:32).

Stones were used as a weapon or instrument of destruction, whether thrown by hand (Num. 35:17, 23) or flung with a sling (Judg. 20:16; 1Sam. 17:40, 49–50; Prov. 26:8). The verb “to stone” refers to the throwing of stones at an individual, which typically functioned as an official manner of execution (Exod. 19:13; 21:28–29; Deut. 21:20–21; 1Kings 21:13–15; John 8:5; Acts 7:58–59), although it was at times the action of an angry crowd (Exod. 17:4; 1Kings 12:18; cf. John 8:59).

The phrases “precious stones” and “costly stones” refer to gems (2Sam. 12:30; Esther 1:6; Isa. 54:12; 1Cor. 3:12). Gems were used as a display of wealth or honor (1Kings 10:2, 10–11; 2Chron. 32:27; Ezek. 27:22) and for decoration (1Chron. 3:6; Rev. 17:4; 18:16). The two stones on the high priest’s ephod and the twelve precious stones on his breastpiece represented the twelve tribes (Exod. 25:7; 28:9–12, 17–21), a symbolism echoed in the twelve types of precious stones adorning the foundations of the new Jerusalem (Rev. 21:19–20).

Rocks and stones are used often in metaphors or similes (e.g., hard as a rock, still as a stone). They can represent something that is common (1Kings 10:27; Job 5:23; Matt. 3:9; 4:3), strong (Job 6:12), hard (Job 38:30; 41:24), heavy (Exod. 15:5; Prov. 27:3), motionless (Exod. 15:16), or immovable (Zech. 12:3). A “heart of stone” describes coldheartedness (Ezek. 11:19; 36:26). A “stumbling stone,” which is literally a stone that causes one to stumble (Isa. 8:14), is used in the NT as a metaphor for an obstacle to faith in Jesus (Rom. 9:32–33; 1Pet. 2:8).

“Word” is used in the Bible to refer to the speech of God in oral, written, or incarnate form. In each of these uses, God desires to make himself known to his people. The communication of God is always personal and relational, whether he speaks to call things into existence (Gen. 1) or to address an individual directly (Gen. 2:1617; Exod. 3:14). The prophets and the apostles received the word of God (Deut. 18:14–22; John 16:13), some of which was proclaimed but not recorded. The greatest revelation in this regard is the person of Jesus Christ, who is called the “Word” of God (John 1:1, 14).

The psalmist declared God’s word to be an eternal object of hope and trust that gives light and direction (Ps. 119), and Jesus declared the word to be truth (John 17:17). The word is particularized and intimately connected with God himself by means of the key phrases “your word,” “the word of God,” “the word of the Lord,” “word about Christ,” and “the word of Christ” (Rom. 10:17; Col. 3:16). Our understanding of the word is informed by a variety of terms and contexts in the canon of Scripture, a collection of which is found in Ps. 119.

The theme of the word in Ps. 119 is continued and clarified in the NT, accentuating the intimate connection between the word of God and God himself. The “Word” of God is the eternal Lord Jesus Christ (John 1:1; 1John 1:1–4), who took on flesh and blood so that we might see the glory of the eternal God. The sovereign glory of Christ as the Word of God is depicted in the vision of John in Rev. 19:13. As the Word of God, Jesus Christ ultimately gives us our lives (John 1:4; 6:33; 10:10), sustains our lives (John 5:24; 6:51, 54; 8:51), and ultimately renders a just judgment regarding our lives (John 5:30; 8:16, 26; 9:39; cf. Matt. 25:31–33; Heb. 4:12).

The Gospels list demon possession among the maladies thatJesus and his disciples (and later the apostles) cured (e.g., Matt.4:24). While the NT does not offer an explicit theory of demonpossession or an account of how it differs from illnesses withnondemonic causes, the Gospels are rich in descriptions of thesuffering of the demon-possessed. Demons caused muteness (Matt.9:32–33; Luke 11:14), blindness (Matt. 12:22), and seizures(Matt. 17:15; Luke 4:35; 9:42), as well as symptoms that modernsassociate with various forms of mental illness, including strangeverbal outbursts (Matt. 8:28–34; Luke 4:34). The story of theGerasene demoniac is especially troubling (Luke 8:26–39 pars.).The demoniac (or demoniacs, according to Matt. 8:28) wore no clothes,lived outside his city among the tombs, howled, cut himself withstones, and shouted under the control of the demons. He was able tobreak chains that were placed on his body as restraints. Manydemoniacs who appear in the Gospels are men, but demon possessionalso affected women (Matt. 15:22–28). The Gospels do notdescribe the onset of demon possession.

Inaddition to these descriptions of demon possession, the recordedperceptions of Jesus’ contemporaries offer insight into how itwas understood in antiquity. Some thought that John the Baptist wasdemon-possessed (Matt. 11:18; Luke 7:33) because he “cameneither eating nor drinking”—that is, he adhered to anextreme ascetic diet and lifestyle. Jesus was thought to derive hispower to cast out demons from collusion with Beelzebul (Mark 3:22).In the Gospel of John, in contrast to the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus’ability to heal leads his contemporaries to the opposite conclusion,that he is not demon-possessed (John 10:20–21). Instead, thecharge of demon possession in the Gospel of John stems from theperception that Jesus’ religious teachings were unorthodox(John 8:48–52). Paul also correlates heresy with demonicinfluence (1Tim.4:1).

Itis important to note that in the NT, demon possession is almostalways portrayed as a terrible affliction. The idea of harnessing thepower of a demon for one’s own benefit, which was widespread inantiquity and the Middle Ages, is not a major focus in the NT, thoughit is reflected in the story of the girl who was possessed by afortune-telling spirit (Acts 16:16) and in cases in which Jesus’contemporaries attributed (falsely) his healing power to demonicpossession.

The Gospels list demon possession among the maladies thatJesus and his disciples (and later the apostles) cured (e.g., Matt.4:24). While the NT does not offer an explicit theory of demonpossession or an account of how it differs from illnesses withnondemonic causes, the Gospels are rich in descriptions of thesuffering of the demon-possessed. Demons caused muteness (Matt.9:32–33; Luke 11:14), blindness (Matt. 12:22), and seizures(Matt. 17:15; Luke 4:35; 9:42), as well as symptoms that modernsassociate with various forms of mental illness, including strangeverbal outbursts (Matt. 8:28–34; Luke 4:34). The story of theGerasene demoniac is especially troubling (Luke 8:26–39 pars.).The demoniac (or demoniacs, according to Matt. 8:28) wore no clothes,lived outside his city among the tombs, howled, cut himself withstones, and shouted under the control of the demons. He was able tobreak chains that were placed on his body as restraints. Manydemoniacs who appear in the Gospels are men, but demon possessionalso affected women (Matt. 15:22–28). The Gospels do notdescribe the onset of demon possession.

Inaddition to these descriptions of demon possession, the recordedperceptions of Jesus’ contemporaries offer insight into how itwas understood in antiquity. Some thought that John the Baptist wasdemon-possessed (Matt. 11:18; Luke 7:33) because he “cameneither eating nor drinking”—that is, he adhered to anextreme ascetic diet and lifestyle. Jesus was thought to derive hispower to cast out demons from collusion with Beelzebul (Mark 3:22).In the Gospel of John, in contrast to the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus’ability to heal leads his contemporaries to the opposite conclusion,that he is not demon-possessed (John 10:20–21). Instead, thecharge of demon possession in the Gospel of John stems from theperception that Jesus’ religious teachings were unorthodox(John 8:48–52). Paul also correlates heresy with demonicinfluence (1Tim.4:1).

Itis important to note that in the NT, demon possession is almostalways portrayed as a terrible affliction. The idea of harnessing thepower of a demon for one’s own benefit, which was widespread inantiquity and the Middle Ages, is not a major focus in the NT, thoughit is reflected in the story of the girl who was possessed by afortune-telling spirit (Acts 16:16) and in cases in which Jesus’contemporaries attributed (falsely) his healing power to demonicpossession.

The divine name, YHWH, revealed to Moses (Exod. 3:14) isrelated to hayah, the Hebrew verb for “to be.” The LXXrenders this name with the phrase “I am” (egō eimi),which later OT writings employ as a title for God (Isa. 43:25; 51:12;52:6).

Asignificant feature in the Fourth Gospel is John’s record ofseven predicated “I am” statements within Jesus’teaching: “I am the bread of life” (6:35); “I amthe light of the world” (8:12); “I am the gate for thesheep” (10:7); “I am the good shepherd” (10:11); “Iam the resurrection and the life” (11:25); “I am the wayand the truth and the life” (14:6); and “I am the truevine” (15:1). With each metaphor Jesus expresses a contrastbetween himself and another. For instance, Jesus’ claim to bethe bread of life differentiates him from the manna that appeared inthe wilderness (6:49), while his identification as the good shepherdstands in contrast to the hired hand who abandons the sheep in a timeof trouble (10:12–13). In these instances “I am” islikely an intentional choice meant to echo the divine name and revealJesus’ relationship of unity with God the Father.

Themeaning of additional unpredicated but emphatic “I am”declarations in Greek by Jesus is debated (Mark 6:50; 14:62; Luke24:39; John 6:20; 8:24, 28, 58; 13:19; 18:5). In response to Jesus’declaration of “I am,” the high priest accuses him ofblasphemy (Mark 14:64), the Jews desire to stone him (John 8:59), andthe officials who come to arrest him “[draw] back and [fall] tothe ground” (John 18:6). These reactions suggest that at leastsome who heard Jesus utter these words interpreted them as his claimto equality with God (cf. John 5:18).

According to the Bible, the Samaritans are the descendants ofthe peoples whom SargonII settled in Samaria after he conqueredit and the northern Israelites (see also Samaria). As such, they werenot quite Jewish, not quite Gentile. Although there is a Samaritanreligious sect, it is a mistake to equate Samaritans in the Biblewith one of the sectarians in every instance. Samaritans arementioned rarely in the OT; for example, 2Kings 17:29 reportsthat the Samaritans worshiped the gods that they brought from theirhome countries at high places that they made.

TheNT mentions the Samaritans. The story of the woman at the well inJohn 4 depicts Jesus ministering to a Samaritan. We learn in thispassage (John 4:9) that Jews like Jesus did not eat or drink from thesame vessel as a Samaritan since they believed it would render themritually unclean [see NET: “For Jews use nothing in common withSamaritans”]. One of the chief points of contention betweenJews and Samaritans is highlighted in this passage: Samaritansbelieve that Mount Gerizim is God’s chosen worship site, notZion. Also alluded to here is the Samaritans’ belief in a“returning one” (Aram. taheb), who will guide theSamaritans to repentance and reestablish proper worship. In John 8:48Jesus’ opponents level a charge against him, asking him if heis not indeed a Samaritan and possessed by a demon.

Inthe Synoptic Gospels, Samaritans are variously depicted as beingincluded in Jesus’ ministry (Luke 9:52) or excluded from it(Matt. 10:5). In other places in the Gospels, Samaritans are used asa foil by which Jesus indicts his listeners for not following God aswell as they should. His Jewish audience would not have missed thepoint in his parable when the Samaritan proves to be a morecompassionate neighbor than the priest or Levite (Luke 10:25–37),or when Jesus heals ten lepers and only one, a Samaritan, returns topraise God and give thanks (17:16). Given Luke’s emphasis onthe inclusive nature of the Gospel, his mentioning of Samaritans insuch positive ways highlights that emphasis.

Inthe book of Acts, Luke continues to use the Samaritans as an exampleof how the Gospel is for everyone. Peter and John, after confirmingthat Samaria had received and responded to the word, preached in thevillages of the Samaritans (Acts 8:14–25).

Scholarsare not certain when Jews and Samaritans became two differentreligious groups, but most likely this happened when John Hyrcanusdestroyed the Samaritan temple on Mount Gerizim in 128 BC. Althoughthere were tensions before this, as is evident in Nehemiah and inJosephus, before the destruction of their temple the rift probablywas not complete.

TheSamaritans exist today and have the following basic beliefs:(1)There is only one God. (2)Moses was the last andgreatest prophet. (3)The five books of Moses are the onlyauthoritative Scripture. (4)Mount Gerizim is God’s chosenplace. (5)There will be a day of judgment and recompense.(6)The “returning one,” the Taheb, will appear.

Reconstructingthe beliefs of the Samaritans before the fourth century AD isdifficult because all we have before then are the sparse statementsof outside sources and archaeological remains. Archaeological remainsof a Samaritan synagogue on the Greek island of Delos includededicatory inscriptions dated from the late third to early secondcenturies BC and the second to first centuries BC. These inscriptionsmention those who worship on Mount Gerizim.

A mineral cluster or rock. Although the terms “rock”and “stone” are occasionally used synonymously, “rock”usually refers to a large geological formation such as a cliff, cave,outcropping, or bedrock, while “stone” is preferred whenthe rock is small enough to be fashioned or handled by human beings.“Stone” can also function as an adjective, referring to amaterial made of stone, or as a verb, referring to the casting ofstones.

Rocksand stones were found naturally on the ground (Job 8:17; Ps. 91:12;Isa. 5:2; Mark 5:5; Luke 3:8). They could be heaped or piled up as asign of disgrace (Josh. 7:26; 8:29; 2Sam. 18:17), as a markeror memorial (Gen. 31:46–50), or as an altar (Exod. 20:25). Asingle rock or stone could also be used as a place marker (Gen.28:22; 35:14, 20; 1Sam. 7:12), especially standing stones(Deut. 27:2–8; Josh. 4:3–9). Large stones could also beused to cover a well (Gen. 29:2–3) or to seal a cave or tomb,such as at the tombs of Lazarus (John 11:38–39) and of Jesus(Matt. 27:60; Mark 16:3–4).

Stonewas used as a construction material, particularly for the temple(1Kings 5:15–18; 1Chron. 2:22; Ezra 5:8; Hag. 2:15;Mark 13:1–2). Stone was used in a building’s foundationand for the cornerstone or capstone (1Kings 5:17; Jer. 51:26;Isa. 28:16), as well as for the walls (Hab. 2:11). Psalm 118:22refers metaphorically to the stone rejected by the builders becomingthe cornerstone. In the NT, this is interpreted as referring to Jesus(Matt. 21:42; Mark 12:10; Luke 20:17; Acts 4:11; 1Pet. 2:7; cf.Eph. 2:20). Stone could also function as a writing material (Josh.8:32), such as the tablets on which the Ten Commandments wereinscribed (Exod. 24:12; Deut. 9:9–11; 1Kings 8:9; cf.2Cor. 3:3, 7). Stone was also carved, although at Sinai theIsraelites are instructed not to use cut or “dressed”stones when constructing an altar (Exod. 20:25; cf. Josh. 8:31). Thephrase “carved stone” refers specifically to idols, sincestone was one material used for crafting false gods (Lev. 26:1; cf.Deut. 4:28; 29:17; 2Kings 19:18; Isa. 37:19; Rev. 9:20); theterm “stone” itself can therefore be used to refer to anidol, especially in the phrase “wood and stone” (Jer.3:9; Ezek. 20:32).

Stoneswere used as a weapon or instrument of destruction, whether thrown byhand (Num. 35:17, 23) or flung with a sling (Judg. 20:16; 1Sam.17:40, 49–50; Prov. 26:8). The verb “to stone”refers to the throwing of stones at an individual, which typicallyfunctioned as an official manner of execution (Exod. 19:13; 21:28–29;Deut. 21:20–21; 1Kings 21:13–15; John 8:5; Acts7:58–59), although it was at times the action of an angry crowd(Exod. 17:4; 1Kings 12:18; cf. John 8:59).

Thephrases “precious stones” and “costly stones”refer to gems (2Sam. 12:30; Esther 1:6; Isa. 54:12; 1Cor.3:12). Gems were used as a display of wealth or honor (1Kings10:2, 10–11; 2Chron. 32:27; Ezek. 27:22) and fordecoration (1Chron. 3:6; Rev. 17:4; 18:16). The two stones onthe high priest’s ephod and the twelve precious stones on hisbreastpiece represented the twelve tribes (Exod. 25:7; 28:9–12,17–21), a symbolism echoed in the twelve types of preciousstones adorning the foundations of the new Jerusalem (Rev. 21:19–20).

Rocksand stones are used often in metaphors or similes (e.g., hard as arock, still as a stone). They can represent something that is common(1Kings 10:27; Job 5:23; Matt. 3:9; 4:3), strong (Job 6:12),hard (Job 38:30; 41:24), heavy (Exod. 15:5; Prov. 27:3), motionless(Exod. 15:16), or immovable (Zech. 12:3). A “heart of stone”describes coldheartedness (Ezek. 11:19; 36:26). A “stumblingstone,” which is literally a stone that causes one to stumble(Isa. 8:14), is used in the NT as a metaphor for an obstacle to faithin Jesus (Rom. 9:32–33; 1Pet. 2:8).

“Word” is used in the Bible to refer to thespeech of God in oral, written, or incarnate form. In each of theseuses, God desires to make himself known to his people. Thecommunication of God is always personal and relational, whether hespeaks to call things into existence (Gen. 1) or to address anindividual directly (Gen. 2:16–17; Exod. 3:14). The prophetsand the apostles received the word of God (Deut. 18:14–22; John16:13), some of which was proclaimed but not recorded. The greatestrevelation in this regard is the person of Jesus Christ, who iscalled the “Word” of God (John 1:1, 14).

Theprimary focus of this article is the written form of the word of God,the Bible. The psalmist declared God’s word to be an eternalobject of hope and trust that gives light and direction (Ps. 119),and Jesus declared the word to be truth (John 17:17). The word isparticularized and intimately connected with God himself by means ofthe key phrases “your word,” “the word of God,”“the word of the Lord,” “word about Christ,”and “the word of Christ” (Rom. 10:17; Col. 3:16). Ourunderstanding of the word is informed by a variety of terms andcontexts in the canon of Scripture, a collection of which is found inPsalm 119.

Theologyof the Word

Fromthe perspective of many systematic theologians, the word of God isdefined with several essential labels. The word is the specialrevelation of God to humans—specifically, truth communicatedfrom God to his human creatures by supernatural intervention,including a disclosure of his mind and will, his attributes, and hisredemptive plans. This revealed word is inspired. Inspiration is anact of the Holy Spirit of God whereby he superintended the biblicalauthors so that they composed the canonical books of Scripture.Inspiration is verbal and plenary in that it extends to every part ofthe Bible and includes the choice of words used by the authors.

Theword of God is inerrant, free from error in every matter addressed,and infallible, true in every matter addressed. The locus ofinspiration, inerrancy, and infallibility is the original manuscriptsand not the translations. A translation is reliable when itaccurately reflects the meaning of the inspired originals (Matt.5:18; cf. John 10:35; 17:17; 2Tim. 3:16; 2Pet. 1:21). Andfinally, the word is authoritative. Because the Bible is the divinelyinspired word of God reliably composed in the originals withouterror, it is binding upon people in their relationship with their Godas well as their relationships with their fellow human beings.Biblical authority derives from the eternal character of the divineauthor and the revelatory content of the Scriptures.

Psalm119

Akey OT text extolling the word is Psalm 119 (cf. Pss. 1; 19). Thewriter glorifies God, his word, and his divine directions to peopleby means of an acrostic format that covers the subject of Torahmeditation. Eight synonyms are used for the “word” in thepsalm. The eight are translated in the NIV as “words”(v.57), “promise” (v.58), “statutes”(v.59), “commands” (v.60), “law”(v.61), “laws” (v.62), “precepts”(v.63), and “decrees” (v.64).

ThePs. 119 word vocabulary informs us that God has pierced the darknessof our existence with the light of his word to make himself known tous. The word is his word spoken to us and preserved for us. The psalmalso instructs us that the word is the will of God. When God piercedour darkness, he lit the path of freedom for us with his word. Hedescribed himself, defined righteousness, declared his love,announced his promises, and issued his warnings. Finally, thevocabulary establishes the authority of his word in our lives.Directions, commandments, laws, charges, and divine will ring withthe sound of authority. The word of God is an authoritativeproclamation from God to us that must be obeyed, that must be sought,that cannot be ignored.

Finally,Ps. 119 makes an intimate connection between the content of the word,things spoken, and the author of the things spoken. This connectionbetter enables us to understand the “Word” as the personof Jesus Christ in John 1. The progressive development of verses 1–2of Ps. 119 intimately connects the law of God, his statutes, and him,the one sought with all the heart. Verses 89–96 emphasize thedurability and eternality of the word in keeping with the eternalcharacter of God. In verse 114 the writer parallels God as refugewith putting hope in his word. Here the writer intimately connectsGod as a refuge with his word. In the Hebrew text “you”and “your word” stand side by side. In verses 137–44the writer aligns the righteous God with a righteous word. Accordingto verses 105, 130, 135, God and God’s word give light. Thelife-giving quality of the word and the Lord are proclaimed in verse93. Just as God is to be feared, so is his word (vv. 63, 120).

TheWord of God

Thetheme of the word in Ps. 119 is continued and clarified in the NT,accentuating the intimate connection between the word of God and Godhimself. The “Word” of God is the eternal Lord JesusChrist (John 1:1; 1John 1:1–4), who took on flesh andblood so that we might see the glory of the eternal God. Thesovereign glory of Christ as the Word of God is depicted in thevision of John in Rev. 19:13. As the Word of God, Jesus Christultimately gives us our lives (John 1:4; 6:33; 10:10), sustains ourlives (John 5:24; 6:51, 54; 8:51), and ultimately renders a justjudgment regarding our lives (John 5:30; 8:16, 26; 9:39; cf. Matt.25:31–33; Heb. 4:12).

Bible Texts and VersionsThe NT and the OT have considerably different but partiallyoverlapping textual histories. For clarity, it is best to begin witha survey of the NT manuscripts and versions.

Greektexts.Although no autographs of the NT books survive, there exist more thanfive thousand Greek texts covering anywhere from a portion of a fewverses up to the complete NT. Traditionally, these texts have beenclassified into five groups: papyri, uncials, minuscules,lectionaries, and quotations in patristic texts. The most importantmanuscripts are listed below.

Theearliest texts of the NT are those written on papyrus. Ninety-eightof these manuscripts have been identified, and they are representedby a “P” with a numerical superscript. The earliest ofthese papyri is P52, which contains parts of four verses in John 18and dates to the early second century. For substantial portions ofthe NT text, the most important papyri are found in the ChesterBeatty and Bodmer collections. P45, P46, and P47, all from theChester Beatty collection, are from the third century and containlarge sections of the four Gospels, eight of the Pauline Epistles,Hebrews, and Revelation. Within the Bodmer collection in Geneva arefour very important codices. P66 dates to around AD 200 and preservesmost of the Gospel of John. P72 dates to the third century andcontains the earliest copies of 1–2 Peter and Jude, which arepreserved in their entirety, as well as Greek translations of Pss.33–34. P74 dates to the seventh century and contains portionsof Acts, James, 1–2 Peter, 1–3 John, and Jude. Finally,P75, which dates to the early third century, contains most of Lukeand John 1–15. It is the oldest extant copy of Luke. Among theremaining papyri, forty-three have been dated to the early fourthcentury or before.

Thesecond category of manuscripts is the uncials, which usually werewritten on parchment and span the fourth through the tenth centuries.About 270 uncials are known, and they range from a few verses up tocomplete copies of the NT or even the entire Bible. Uncialsoriginally were denoted by capital letters, but when the number ofmanuscripts grew beyond these limits, a new system was employedwhereby each manuscript was given a number always beginning withzero. However, the most important uncials are still usually known bytheir letter. Among the most important uncials are the following fivemanuscripts. Codex Sinaiticus (designated by the Hebrew letter à)dates to the fourth century and is the only uncial that contains theentire NT. It also has almost all of the OT as well as the earlyChristian writings the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd ofHermas. Dating from the fifth century, Codex Alexandrinus (designatedas A) contains the OT, most of the NT—lacking only portions ofMatthew, John, and 2 Corinthians—and 1–2 Clement.Along with Sinaiticus, the most important uncial is Codex Vaticanus(designated as B), which dates to the fourth century. It containsalmost all of the OT and the complete NT, except for substantialportions between Hebrews and Revelation. It has been in the Vatican’slibrary for over five hundred years. The fourth important uncial isCodex Bezae Cantabrigiensis (designated as D), which contains Greekand Latin copies of the four Gospels, most of Acts, and a few versesfrom 3 John. It dates from the late fourth or early fifthcentury. The fifth important uncial is Codex Washingtonianus(designated as W), which dates to the early fifth century andcontains virtually all of the four Gospels.

Thethird category of NT manuscripts is minuscules. These texts date fromthe ninth century and later and comprise approximately 2,800manuscripts, which are denoted by a number not beginning with zero.Among the more important minuscules are Codex 1, Codex 13, and Codex33, which, along with their relatives, are considered reliablewitnesses to early families of texts such as the Caesarean (1) or theAlexandrian (33). Codex 13 and its relatives are noteworthy forhaving the story of the adulterous woman at the end of Luke 21instead of in John 8. The final two groups of NT manuscripts, thelectionaries and quotations in patristic sources, are not manuscriptsin the strict sense of the term, but their use of portions of the NTpresents important witnesses for the practice of textual criticism.

Versions.With the spread of Christianity during the time of the Roman Empire,the NT was translated into the language of the native peoples. Theseversions of the NT are important both for textual criticism of the NTand for the interpretive decisions that are reflected in how the textwas rendered into a new language. Among the most important earlyversions of the NT are the following.

AsLatin began to displace Greek as the dominant language of the empire,there was a need for a Latin version of the Bible. The earliesttranslation, known as the Old Latin or Itala, was made probably inthe late second century, though the oldest manuscript (CodexVercellensis) is from the fourth century. With the proliferation ofLatin texts a standardized Latin translation became desirable, and inAD 382 Jerome was commissioned by Pope Damasus to provide a newtranslation known as the Vulgate.

Anotherfamily of NT versions is the Syriac texts. Around the late secondcentury the four Gospels were translated into a version known as theOld Syriac. It is extant in two incomplete manuscripts that areprobably fifth century. The translation that became the standardSyriac text is the Pesh*tta, which was produced in the early fifthcentury. It does not contain 2 Peter, 2–3 John, Jude, orRevelation because these were not considered canonical among theSyriac churches.

Otherimportant versions of the NT from antiquity are the Coptic, Armenian,Georgian, and Ethiopic translations.

OldTestament

Hebrewtexts.The text that has served as the basis for most modern editions andtranslations of the Hebrew OT is the Masoretic Text (MT), named afterthe Masoretes, the Jewish scribes who transmitted the text and addedvocalization, accentuation, and notes to the consonantal text. Themost important Masoretic manuscripts date from the end of the ninthcentury to the early eleventh century. Notable among these is theLeningrad Codex (AD 1008), denoted as L, which is the earliestMasoretic manuscript of the entire OT. Also important are the AleppoCodex (c. AD 925), denoted as A, which preserves all of the OT exceptfor most of the Pentateuch; the British Museum MS Or. 4445 (c. AD925), denoted as B, which contains most of the Pentateuch; and theCairo Codex (c. AD 896), denoted C, which contains Joshua throughKings and also the Prophets.

Althoughthese manuscripts are much later than the biblical period, theirreliability was largely confirmed with the discovery of the DSSbeginning in 1947. Among the Qumran library are many manuscripts ofbiblical books as well as biblical commentaries, apocrphyal andpseudepigraphal works, and sectarian literature. All the OT books arerepresented among the scrolls that were found except Esther andNehemiah, though the latter is usually presumed to have been at theend of Ezra but has not survived. The books with the most manuscriptsare, in order, Psalms, Deuteronomy, and Isaiah. One of the strikingcharacteristics of these scrolls is that they reflect a diversity oftext types. For example, there is a copy of Jeremiah that is close tothe Masoretic version, but also a manuscript of Jeremiah similar tothe much shorter version found in the Septuagint (the Greektranslation of the OT).

AnotherHebrew text of the OT is that of the Samaritan Pentateuch, which isthe text transmitted by the Samaritans. It is similar to the MT insome respects but also has differences that reflect theologicalinterests. The main manuscripts for the Samaritan Pentateuch are fromthe twelfth century.

Versions.Between the third and first centuries BC, the entire OT wastranslated into Greek. This version, known as the Septuagint(designated by the abbreviation LXX), became the main version of theOT used by the early church. Due to its adoption by the church, theLXX has been preserved in numerous manuscripts, including Sinaiticus,Alexandrinus, and Vaticanus. By the late first century BC or earlyfirst century AD, there were two revisions of the Greek text: theProto-Lucianic version and the Kaige recension. The latter aimed torevise the Greek toward closer conformity with the Hebrew text andderives its name from its peculiar tendency to translate the Hebrewword gam (“also”) with the Greek work kaige. In thesecond century AD three other Greek translations were made by Aquila,Theodotion, and Symmachus, all of which revised the Kaige recensionback toward the MT.

Anotherimportant early version of the OT consists of the Targumim, which areAramaic translations or paraphrases (and sometimes extensiveelaborations) of OT books. The official Targumim for Judaism areTargum Onqelos for the Pentateuch (c. second century AD), which isquite literal, and Targum Pseudo-Jonathan for the Prophets (sometimebefore the fourth century AD), which ranges from being quite literalto somewhat paraphrastic. Unofficial Targumim for the Pentateuchinclude Targum Neofiti and Targum Pseudo-Jonathan. There are alsovarious unofficial Targumim for the Writings section of the OT,except for Daniel and Ezra-Nehemiah (which are already written partlyin Aramaic).

Besidesthe Greek and Aramaic translations, there are other importantversions of the OT. Sometime in either the third or fourth centuryAD, the Pesh*tta of the OT was produced, though there is evidencethat there were earlier Syriac translations of some books alreadycirculating. Also important is a group of Latin translations knowncollectively as the Old Latin. These versions were produced sometimeduring the second century AD and were primarily made from alreadyexisting Greek translations rather than Hebrew texts. As with the NT,a later Latin translation was made by Jerome for the Vulgate.

Bible Texts and VersionsThe NT and the OT have considerably different but partiallyoverlapping textual histories. For clarity, it is best to begin witha survey of the NT manuscripts and versions.

Greektexts.Although no autographs of the NT books survive, there exist more thanfive thousand Greek texts covering anywhere from a portion of a fewverses up to the complete NT. Traditionally, these texts have beenclassified into five groups: papyri, uncials, minuscules,lectionaries, and quotations in patristic texts. The most importantmanuscripts are listed below.

Theearliest texts of the NT are those written on papyrus. Ninety-eightof these manuscripts have been identified, and they are representedby a “P” with a numerical superscript. The earliest ofthese papyri is P52, which contains parts of four verses in John 18and dates to the early second century. For substantial portions ofthe NT text, the most important papyri are found in the ChesterBeatty and Bodmer collections. P45, P46, and P47, all from theChester Beatty collection, are from the third century and containlarge sections of the four Gospels, eight of the Pauline Epistles,Hebrews, and Revelation. Within the Bodmer collection in Geneva arefour very important codices. P66 dates to around AD 200 and preservesmost of the Gospel of John. P72 dates to the third century andcontains the earliest copies of 1–2 Peter and Jude, which arepreserved in their entirety, as well as Greek translations of Pss.33–34. P74 dates to the seventh century and contains portionsof Acts, James, 1–2 Peter, 1–3 John, and Jude. Finally,P75, which dates to the early third century, contains most of Lukeand John 1–15. It is the oldest extant copy of Luke. Among theremaining papyri, forty-three have been dated to the early fourthcentury or before.

Thesecond category of manuscripts is the uncials, which usually werewritten on parchment and span the fourth through the tenth centuries.About 270 uncials are known, and they range from a few verses up tocomplete copies of the NT or even the entire Bible. Uncialsoriginally were denoted by capital letters, but when the number ofmanuscripts grew beyond these limits, a new system was employedwhereby each manuscript was given a number always beginning withzero. However, the most important uncials are still usually known bytheir letter. Among the most important uncials are the following fivemanuscripts. Codex Sinaiticus (designated by the Hebrew letter à)dates to the fourth century and is the only uncial that contains theentire NT. It also has almost all of the OT as well as the earlyChristian writings the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd ofHermas. Dating from the fifth century, Codex Alexandrinus (designatedas A) contains the OT, most of the NT—lacking only portions ofMatthew, John, and 2 Corinthians—and 1–2 Clement.Along with Sinaiticus, the most important uncial is Codex Vaticanus(designated as B), which dates to the fourth century. It containsalmost all of the OT and the complete NT, except for substantialportions between Hebrews and Revelation. It has been in the Vatican’slibrary for over five hundred years. The fourth important uncial isCodex Bezae Cantabrigiensis (designated as D), which contains Greekand Latin copies of the four Gospels, most of Acts, and a few versesfrom 3 John. It dates from the late fourth or early fifthcentury. The fifth important uncial is Codex Washingtonianus(designated as W), which dates to the early fifth century andcontains virtually all of the four Gospels.

Thethird category of NT manuscripts is minuscules. These texts date fromthe ninth century and later and comprise approximately 2,800manuscripts, which are denoted by a number not beginning with zero.Among the more important minuscules are Codex 1, Codex 13, and Codex33, which, along with their relatives, are considered reliablewitnesses to early families of texts such as the Caesarean (1) or theAlexandrian (33). Codex 13 and its relatives are noteworthy forhaving the story of the adulterous woman at the end of Luke 21instead of in John 8. The final two groups of NT manuscripts, thelectionaries and quotations in patristic sources, are not manuscriptsin the strict sense of the term, but their use of portions of the NTpresents important witnesses for the practice of textual criticism.

Versions.With the spread of Christianity during the time of the Roman Empire,the NT was translated into the language of the native peoples. Theseversions of the NT are important both for textual criticism of the NTand for the interpretive decisions that are reflected in how the textwas rendered into a new language. Among the most important earlyversions of the NT are the following.

AsLatin began to displace Greek as the dominant language of the empire,there was a need for a Latin version of the Bible. The earliesttranslation, known as the Old Latin or Itala, was made probably inthe late second century, though the oldest manuscript (CodexVercellensis) is from the fourth century. With the proliferation ofLatin texts a standardized Latin translation became desirable, and inAD 382 Jerome was commissioned by Pope Damasus to provide a newtranslation known as the Vulgate.

Anotherfamily of NT versions is the Syriac texts. Around the late secondcentury the four Gospels were translated into a version known as theOld Syriac. It is extant in two incomplete manuscripts that areprobably fifth century. The translation that became the standardSyriac text is the Pesh*tta, which was produced in the early fifthcentury. It does not contain 2 Peter, 2–3 John, Jude, orRevelation because these were not considered canonical among theSyriac churches.

Otherimportant versions of the NT from antiquity are the Coptic, Armenian,Georgian, and Ethiopic translations.

OldTestament

Hebrewtexts.The text that has served as the basis for most modern editions andtranslations of the Hebrew OT is the Masoretic Text (MT), named afterthe Masoretes, the Jewish scribes who transmitted the text and addedvocalization, accentuation, and notes to the consonantal text. Themost important Masoretic manuscripts date from the end of the ninthcentury to the early eleventh century. Notable among these is theLeningrad Codex (AD 1008), denoted as L, which is the earliestMasoretic manuscript of the entire OT. Also important are the AleppoCodex (c. AD 925), denoted as A, which preserves all of the OT exceptfor most of the Pentateuch; the British Museum MS Or. 4445 (c. AD925), denoted as B, which contains most of the Pentateuch; and theCairo Codex (c. AD 896), denoted C, which contains Joshua throughKings and also the Prophets.

Althoughthese manuscripts are much later than the biblical period, theirreliability was largely confirmed with the discovery of the DSSbeginning in 1947. Among the Qumran library are many manuscripts ofbiblical books as well as biblical commentaries, apocrphyal andpseudepigraphal works, and sectarian literature. All the OT books arerepresented among the scrolls that were found except Esther andNehemiah, though the latter is usually presumed to have been at theend of Ezra but has not survived. The books with the most manuscriptsare, in order, Psalms, Deuteronomy, and Isaiah. One of the strikingcharacteristics of these scrolls is that they reflect a diversity oftext types. For example, there is a copy of Jeremiah that is close tothe Masoretic version, but also a manuscript of Jeremiah similar tothe much shorter version found in the Septuagint (the Greektranslation of the OT).

AnotherHebrew text of the OT is that of the Samaritan Pentateuch, which isthe text transmitted by the Samaritans. It is similar to the MT insome respects but also has differences that reflect theologicalinterests. The main manuscripts for the Samaritan Pentateuch are fromthe twelfth century.

Versions.Between the third and first centuries BC, the entire OT wastranslated into Greek. This version, known as the Septuagint(designated by the abbreviation LXX), became the main version of theOT used by the early church. Due to its adoption by the church, theLXX has been preserved in numerous manuscripts, including Sinaiticus,Alexandrinus, and Vaticanus. By the late first century BC or earlyfirst century AD, there were two revisions of the Greek text: theProto-Lucianic version and the Kaige recension. The latter aimed torevise the Greek toward closer conformity with the Hebrew text andderives its name from its peculiar tendency to translate the Hebrewword gam (“also”) with the Greek work kaige. In thesecond century AD three other Greek translations were made by Aquila,Theodotion, and Symmachus, all of which revised the Kaige recensionback toward the MT.

Anotherimportant early version of the OT consists of the Targumim, which areAramaic translations or paraphrases (and sometimes extensiveelaborations) of OT books. The official Targumim for Judaism areTargum Onqelos for the Pentateuch (c. second century AD), which isquite literal, and Targum Pseudo-Jonathan for the Prophets (sometimebefore the fourth century AD), which ranges from being quite literalto somewhat paraphrastic. Unofficial Targumim for the Pentateuchinclude Targum Neofiti and Targum Pseudo-Jonathan. There are alsovarious unofficial Targumim for the Writings section of the OT,except for Daniel and Ezra-Nehemiah (which are already written partlyin Aramaic).

Besidesthe Greek and Aramaic translations, there are other importantversions of the OT. Sometime in either the third or fourth centuryAD, the Pesh*tta of the OT was produced, though there is evidencethat there were earlier Syriac translations of some books alreadycirculating. Also important is a group of Latin translations knowncollectively as the Old Latin. These versions were produced sometimeduring the second century AD and were primarily made from alreadyexisting Greek translations rather than Hebrew texts. As with the NT,a later Latin translation was made by Jerome for the Vulgate.

OldTestament

Studentsof biblical history must work with several overlapping systems ofchronology. This section defines several approaches and describes howthey are interconnected.

Absoluteand relative dates.Absolute dates consist of a numerical value falling in one of twoeras, BC (“Before Christ”; also referred to as BCE,“Before the Common Era”) or AD (Anno Domini, “inthe year of our Lord”; also referred to as CE, “CommonEra”). For example, Samaria fell to the Assyrians in 722 BC.This system of absolute dating, a commonplace of modern life, wasdevised only in the sixth century AD, so it is unknown in biblicaland other ancient sources. Instead of absolute dates, the Bible andother ancient historiographic sources give relative dates; that is,events are dated in relation to other recorded events, as in 1 Kings15:1: “In the eighteenth year of the reign of Jeroboam son ofNebat, Abijah became king of Judah.” The system of relativedates in the OT can be collated to form a single relative chronology.

Usingroyal histories.For the purposes of constructing a unified chronology, the royalhistory in Samuel-Kings and Chronicles is of central importance, withits tabulations of the ages of the kings at accession and the lengthsof their reigns. The biblical chronology can then be assigned toabsolute dates by establishing synchronisms with other historicalchronicles (most usefully, from Mesopotamia), which in turn can befixed to a handful of absolute dates. Of particular importance arerecords (all nonbiblical cuneiform texts) of observed astronomicalphenomena, the appearance of which in history can now be calculatedwith a high degree of mathematical certainty. Annalistic sources(documents that record an entry for each passing year, such as thecuneiform eponym chronicles) are particularly valuable. The Biblecontains no annalistic sources, but rather is made up of chronisticsources—that is, texts that record and quantify the passage oftime, but without a separate accounting of each year. Whenmiscalculations or textual corruptions affect chronistic records,they are difficult to correct (see 1 Sam. 13:1). The biblicaldata, consisting of summary figures, probably go back to annalisticsources that were compiled from year to year (perhaps the recordsmentioned in, e.g., 1 Kings 11:41; 14:19).

Theassembly of a unified biblical chronology on the basis of the royalhistories is further complicated by the fact that severalcalendars—royal, agricultural, cultic—were insimultaneous use. There may also have been a discrepancy betweenIsrael and Judah with regard to the reckoning of the cultic New Year.Added to this, in several cases the biblical data imply a period ofcoregency, during which the reigns of the outgoing king and hisappointed successor overlapped, creating the potential for the yearsof the coregency to be counted twice. In biblical times there weretwo systems of reckoning dates based on royal succession: the“accession-year” system, which omitted from the length ofa king’s reign any partial year from his accession to the firstNew Year, and the “nonaccession-year” system, which begancounting the years of a king’s reign as soon as he acceded. Innonaccession-year dating, any year in which there are two kings getscounted twice: once as the last year of the former king, and once asthe first year of the new king. The biblical chronologies appear touse both systems, with a movement from the nonaccession-year systemto the accession-year system in later centuries. Obviously, thechoice of systems dictates the significance of the figures presentedin the Bible and must be taken into account in the collation of data.

Combiningroyal regnal data and various genealogical tables (based on, e.g.,Gen. 5; 11; the summary figures in Exod. 12:41; 1 Kings 6:1), itis possible to reconstruct a putative world chronology from thecreation of Adam to the exile. Famously, in 1650 James Ussherfollowed this procedure, working backward from absolute dates knownfrom classical sources, to determine that the world was created onthe night before October 23, 4004 BC. In its day, this was a work ofimpressive scholarship, but Ussher’s chronology is too short toencompass not only archaeological findings (from the land of Israelitself, there are Neolithic and Chalcolithic artifacts going back tenthousand years), but also findings in all branches of the sciencesthat corroborate the age of the earth at about 4.5 billion years andthe appearance of modern humans approximately two hundred thousandyears before the present. Beginning in the first millennium BC,however, the Bible provides chronological data that, with modestadjustments, agree with other historical and archaeological findings.

Weighingthe sources.Because of the variety of materials in the OT, it is crucial todetermine which sources are of historical value, weighing each interms of internal and external coherence. As noted above, thebackbone of OT chronology is the series of regnal data for the kingsof Israel and Judah found in Samuel-Kings and Chronicles. These dataare useful because they provide a continuous chronology of severalhundred years that can be anchored at several points to datableevents in external historical sources. In addition, the history ofthe kings of Judah and Israel contains references to historicalfigures known from extrabiblical records. In contrast, the chronologyof the OT prior to the period of judges, while internally coherent,cannot be correlated to known absolute dates. Where non-Israelitefigures are mentioned, they are often unnamed (e.g., the pharaohs ofthe eras of Abraham and Moses), anachronistically described (e.g.,Abraham’s contacts with the Philistines [Gen. 21:34], a groupthat did not appear in Palestine until long after the ostensibleMiddle Bronze Age date of Abraham), or do not correspond to knownhistorical figures (e.g., Abimelek, Nimrod). Althoughcultural-historical investigation may shed light on the patriarchalnarratives and their historical setting, such an approach yieldsnothing more than vague chronological findings. In some cases, thelate date of the biblical texts has obscured chronologicalindicators, interfering with the project of cultural history. Settingaside questions of the historicity of the patriarchal narratives,apart from the reports of their ages, there is little data to workwith when it comes to constructing a chronology of the patriarchs.

Thestory of the exodus from Egypt presents an event that, in principle,should be datable on the basis of external data. The mass migrationof millions of persons, the destruction of the army of a geopoliticalsuperpower, and the subsequent conquest of a small but powerfulcountry are events that promise to provide a chronological anchor forthe beginning of Israel’s history. Unfortunately, the eventrecorded in the Bible has not left a clear mark, either in thehistoriography of Egypt or in the archaeology of Palestine. On closerinspection, the biblical text contains a number of features thatfrustrate any attempt to date the events on their basis. Unlike inthe histories of the biblical monarchs, the pharaoh of the Exodus, afigure of international stature in his own day, is never named in theBible. Some have attempted to fix a date to the exodus on the basisof the occurrence of the name “Rameses” in Exod. 1:11;12:37. This name was not current in Egypt before the thirteenthcentury BC. If it provides a clue as to the date of the exodus, itdoes so only at the expense of broader biblical chronology, accordingto which the exodus occurred in the fifteenth century BC (inparticular, based on the figures given in Exod. 12:41; 1 Kings6:1). It is not until we get into the monarchic period, when thehistory of Israel is intertwined with that of named internationalfigures, that absolute dates can be established with certainty.

Biblicalevents that can be assigned absolute dates based on cuneiformhistorical records include the following. Ahab was king of Israel atthe time of the battle of Qarqar in 853 BC. The Kurkh monolith ofShalmaneser III records his participation in the coalition ofHadadezer, though the event is not mentioned in the Bible. Jehu wason the throne of Judah in 841 BC, when Shalmaneser III recordedthat he gave tribute to Assyria. Joash was king of Israel in 796 BC,when he rendered tribute to Adad-nirari III. Menahem was king in740 and 738 BC (see 2 Kings 15:19), when he paid tribute toTiglath-pileser III (the biblical Pul). Ahaz paid tribute toTiglath-pileser in 734 BC, and Manasseh to Esarhaddon around 674 BC.These synchronisms provide in each case upper and lower limits forfixing the reign of the kings of Israel and Judah. In some cases, thechronology of the book of Kings must be adjusted to fit these dates,on the assumption that the Deuteronomistic Historian lacked firsthandknowledge about the history of the northern kingdom, was attemptingto work with conflicting sources, or made errors in calculation.Other important synchronisms include Hoshea’s coup againstPekah (2 Kings 15:30), dated based on an inscription ofTiglath-pileser III to 732 BC; the fall of Samaria (2 Kings17:6), dated based on the Babylonian Chronicle to 722 BC;Sennacherib’s Judean campaign in 701 BC (2 Kings18:13–19:36); the Battle of Carchemish in 605 BC (Jer. 46:2);the capture of Jerusalem in 597 BC (2 Kings 24:12); and therelease of Jehoiachin from captivity in 561 BC, coinciding with theaccession of Amel-Marduk (2 Kings 25:27).

Periodizationof history.In addition to relative and absolute chronologies, biblical scholarsrefer to several schemes of periodization defined by technologicaland political developments.

Themost ancient scheme of periodization is implied in the Bible itself,which conceives of periods of judges (Judg. 17:6), united monarchy,divided monarchy, and exile. The transitions between phases in thisscheme are defined by dramatic social and political discontinuities.Another approach to the periodization of Israelite history involvesdefining the major transitions in terms of the material culture.Prior to the fall of Jerusalem, modern biblical scholars andarchaeologists divide Syro-Palestinian history into several periods,named for developments in metallurgical technology. While there issome variety of opinion among scholars regarding the exact datesused, the following scheme is widely used (given with roughcorrelations to the biblical periods):

EarlyBronze Age – 3300 to 2200 BC (Primeval period?)

MiddleBronze Age – 2200 to 1550 BC (Patriarch)

LateBronze Age – 1550 to 1200 BC (Period in Egypt, exodus)

IronAge – 1200 to 586 BC (Judges monarchy)

TheIron Age is further subdivided as follows:

IronAge – 1200 to 1000 BC (Judges)

IronAge IIA – 1000 to 900 BC (United monarchy)

IronAge IIB – 900 to 700 BC (Divided monarchy)

IronAge IIC – 700 to 586 BC (Fall of Samaria to fall of Jerusalem

Thedivisions between these periods are heuristic and do not correspondto precisely dated developments in metallurgy. For instance, someiron artifacts may be dated to the Bronze Age, though not widespreadiron metalworking on an industrial scale. Especially in the varioussubdivisions of the Iron Age, transitions begin to be defined bypolitical events rather than the metal sequence: Iron IAcorresponds to the biblical period of the judges, Iron IIA tothe united monarchy, Iron IIB to the divided monarchy, andIron IIC to the period between the falls of Samaria andJerusalem, when the southern kingdom alone had political autonomy.Some scholars round off the dates to avoid a periodization based onshort-term political events and to emphasize the gradual rate ofchange in material culture and technology (e.g., using the rounddates 900, 700, 600).

Forevents and dates after the fall of Jerusalem, historians employ ascheme of periodization based heavily on political factors. Theseries of periods are named for the dominant geopolitical powers inSyria-Palestine:

Neo-Babylonianperiod – 622 to 539 BC (Late Judean monarchy, exile)

Persianperiod – 539 to 330 BC (Return from exile)

Hellenisticperiod – 330 to 63 BC (Intertestamental)

Romanperiod – 63 BC to AD 324 (New Testament events

Althoughthere was significant redaction (and, according to some, composition)of biblical texts in the Hellenistic period, no biblical narrativesare ostensibly set in the period. Thus, the internal periodization ofhistory in the Hebrew Bible ends with the return from exile (thePersian period).

NewTestament

Thebirth of Jesus.According to Matt. 2:1 (see also Luke 1:5), Jesus was born during thelifetime of Herod the Great, who, as we know from Josephus, died in 4BC (see Matt. 2:15–19). In his attempt to kill Jesus, Herodordered the slaughter of male children up to the age of two, based oninformation that he obtained from the magi concerning the appearanceof the star heralding Jesus’ birth (Matt. 2:16). Thus,Matthew’s account implies a date no later than 4 BC, butpossibly several years earlier. Some scholars have attempted tocorrelate the magi’s observance of a star with one of severalstriking celestial phenomena, including a conjunction of Jupiter,Saturn, and Mars in 7 BC (so Johannes Kepler). Such attempts,however, are weakened by the fact that Matthew’s description ofthe star is vague, unnaturalistic, and difficult to identifycertainly with a planetary alignment or any other known phenomenon(in particular, the star is said to move and then come to rest overJesus’ location). Another line of investigation involves Luke’scorrelation of Jesus’ birth with a Roman census that he datesto the time of Quirinius (Luke 2:1–2). This report, however,contradicts the testimony of Josephus, according to whom Quiriniusbecame governor in AD 6 (a decade after the death of Herod). Mostlikely, Jesus was born shortly before 4 BC, during the reign ofHerod.

Thebeginning and duration of Jesus’ public ministry.According to Luke 3:23, Jesus was “about thirty years old”at the time of his baptism and the beginning of his public ministry.In John 8:57, Jesus is challenged: “You are not yet fifty yearsold.” These two round numbers provide reasonable limits for theage of Jesus during his ministry. Owing to a paucity of chronologicalindicators in the Synoptic Gospels, the ministry of Jesus as depictedin Matthew, Mark, and Luke could have taken place within the space ofa single year. In contrast, John narrates postbaptism events duringthree occurrences of the annual Passover festival (John 2:13; 6:4;11:55), suggesting that Jesus’ ministry lasted for three yearsor longer. Unfortunately, the chronology of John appears in someinstances to be at odds with the other Gospels. Most significantly,he places Jesus’ cleansing of the temple at the beginning,rather than the end, of his ministry (John 2:13–22; cf. Mark11:15–19 pars.). It is unclear to what degree strict chronologyhas been modified in the interest of other concerns in each of theGospels. According to John’s account, the cleansing of thetemple occurred forty-six years after the beginning of itsconstruction, an event that Josephus dates to either the eighteenthor the fifteenth year of Herod’s reign (John 2:20), placing theincident in the year AD 28 or 31. Ultimately, there are two sourcesof uncertainty pertaining to the chronology of Jesus’ ministry:the imprecise (and possibly symbolic) report of his age in Luke 3:23and the indeterminate length of his ministry.

Thedeath of Jesus.All four Gospels agree that Pontius Pilate, the Roman procurator ofJudea, was instrumental in the trial and execution of Jesus. Pilategoverned from AD 26 to 36; this provides a latest possible date forthe death of Jesus. To refine the chronology beyond this, scholarshave attempted to date the end of Jesus’ life based on itsoccurrence during the Feast of Passover (15 Nisan in the Jewishcalendar) and by trying to determine in which year the feast wouldhave coincided with his crucifixion on a Friday. This approach iscomplicated by the discrepancy between John, according to whom thePassover meal was eaten in the evening following the crucifixion(John 19:14), and Mark, who appears to have an imperfect knowledge ofPassover customs (Mark 14:12–16) and thus describes Jesus’final supper with his disciples as a Passover meal (i.e., on 14Nisan). Following John’s chronology yields a date for thecrucifixion of Friday, April 7 (Nisan 14), AD 30, or Friday, April 3(Nisan 14), AD 33.

Ofthese two options, the AD 30 date conforms more closely to Luke 3:23,and it suggests that following a ministry of about three years, Jesuswas in his mid- to late thirties at the time of his crucifixion.

Paul’scareer.Thechronology of Paul’s career remains a difficult question inbiblical studies. There are two major sources for this chronology:the letters of Paul (esp. Galatians) and the book of Acts. Whenindependent chronologies are constructed from each of these sources,several difficulties arise, including the absence of absolute anchorsin Paul’s letters, lack of clear agreement between Acts and theletters regarding the number of visits to Jerusalem, and, byimplication, the periodization of Paul’s career into distinctphases of concerted activity or “missionary journeys.”These data must in turn be synchronized, sometimes requiring someingenuity, with other historically documented events such as thedating of Claudius’s edict (Acts 18:2), the dates of Aretas’scontrol of Damascus (2 Cor. 11:32–33), the death of HerodAgrippa in AD 44 (mentioned in Acts 12:23), the presence of SergiusPaulus in Cyprus during Paul’s first missionary journey (Acts13:7 [this figure is known from inscriptions, but none of themclearly bears on the question]), and Festus’s succession ofFelix as the procurator of Palestine (Acts 23–26), whichJosephus puts in AD 53.

Ifwe grant a fair measure of historical reliability to the outline ofActs, Paul experienced his conversion around AD 33, visited Jerusalemin AD 36 (Gal. 1:18), completed his first missionary journey and thenvisited Jerusalem to confer with the other apostles (Acts 15:1–29;Gal. 2:1) in the late 40s, conducted his second and third missionaryjourneys in the first half of the 50s before being finally arrestedin Jerusalem around AD 57, and was taken to Rome in AD 59–60.

The names of God given in the Bible are an important means ofrevelation about his character and works. The names come from threesources: God himself, those who encounter him in the biblical record,and the biblical writers. This article is concerned mainly with thenames that occur in the OT, though the NT will be referenced whenhelpful.

Inthe Bible the meaning of names is often significant and points to thecharacter of the person so named. As might be expected, this isespecially true for God. The names that he gives to himself alwaysare a form of revelation; the names that humans give to God often area form of testimony.

Yahweh:The Lord

Pronunciation.Unquestionably, for OT revelation the most important name is “(the)Lord.” In English Bibles this represents the name declared byGod to Moses at the burning bush (“I am who I am” [Exod.3:13–15]) and the related term used elsewhere in the OT; inHebrew this term consists of the four consonants YHWH and istherefore known as the Tetragrammaton (“four letters”).Hebrew does not count vowels as part of its alphabet; in biblicaltimes one simply wrote the consonants of a word and the readersupplied the correct vowels by knowing the vocabulary, grammar, andcontext. However, to avoid violating the commandment in the Decaloguethat prohibits the misuse of God’s name (Exod. 20:7; Deut.5:11), the Jews stopped pronouncing it. Consequently, no one todayknows its correct original pronunciation, but the best evidenceavailable suggests “Yahweh,” which has become theconventional pronunciation (consider the Hebrew word “hallelujah,”which actually is “hallelu-Yah,” hence “praise theLord”). In ancient Jewish tradition, “Adonai” (“myLord”) was substituted for “Yahweh.” In fact, whenHebrew eventually developed a vowel notation system, instead of thevowels for “Yahweh,” the vowels for “Adonai”were indicated whenever YHWH appeared in the biblical text, as areminder. Combining the consonants YHWH with the vowels of “Adonai”yields something like “Yehowah,” which is the origin ofthe familiar (but mistaken and nonexistent) “Jehovah.”English Bibles typically use “Lord” (small capitalletters) for “Yahweh,” and “Lord” (regularletters) for “Adonai,” which distinguishes thetwo.

Meaning.More vital than the matter of the pronunciation of YHWH is thequestion of its meaning. There seem to be two main opinions. One seesYHWH as denoting eternal self-existence, partly because it issuggested by the grammar of Exod. 3:14 (the words “I am”use a form of the Hebrew verb that suggests being without beginningor end) and partly because that is the meaning Jesus apparentlyascribes to it in John 8:58. The other opinion, suggested by usage,is that YHWH indicates dynamic, active, divine presence: God’sbeing present in a special way to act on someone’s behalf(e.g., Gen. 26:28; 39:2–3; Josh. 6:27; 1Sam. 18:12–14).This idea also appears in the episode of the burning bush (Exod.3:12): when Moses protests his inadequacy to confront Pharaoh, Godassures him of his presence, a reality noted with other prophets(1Sam. 3:19; Jer. 1:8).

Perhapsthe best points of reference for understanding the meaning of YHWHare God’s own proclamations. In addition to Exod. 3:13–15,at least two other passages in Exodus give God’s commentary (asit were) about the meaning of his name. An important one is Exod.34:5–7. A key passage in the theology proper of ancient Israel,its themes echo in later OT Scripture (Num. 14:18–19; Ps.103:7–12; Jon. 4:2). What is noteworthy about the texts citedis that all of them say something remarkable about the grace of God.This fits, for the revelation of Exod. 34:5–7 is given in thecontext of covenant renewal after the incident of the golden calf.Moses invokes God’s name in the Numbers text to avoidcatastrophic judgment when the Israelites refuse to enter thepromised land. The psalm text picks up this theme and connects itwith God’s revelation of his ways to the chosen people. Jonah,remarkably, affirms that the same grace extends even toward a wickedGentile city such as Nineveh.

Anothersuch passage is Exod. 6:2–8.Here God reaffirms hisredemptive purpose for captive Israel, despite the fact that Moses’first encounter with Pharaoh has not gone well. God assures theprophet that he has remembered his covenant with the patriarchs, whomhe says did not know him as “Yahweh,” which probablymeans that the patriarchs did not experience him in the way orcharacter that their descendants would in the exodus event (though itis possible to translate the Hebrew here as a rhetorical questionwith an affirmative idea: “And indeed, by my name Yahweh did Inot make myself known to them?”). God then proceeds to outlinethe redemptive experience in its fullness: deliverance from bondage,reception into a covenant relationship, and possession of the landpromised to their ancestors (vv. 6–8). The statement isbracketed with this declaration: “I am the Lord” (vv. 2,8). One stated purpose of this redemptive work is that Israel mightcome to understand this (v.7). This is important to notebecause a central theme of Exodus as a book is the identity of theGod of Israel. This concern prompts Moses to ask for God’s nameat the burning bush (3:13), and this contempt for the God of theenslaved Hebrews causes Pharaoh to be dismissive at his first meetingwith Moses and Aaron (5:2). Moses asks with the concern of a seekerand receives one of the most profound declarations of God’sidentity in the Bible. Pharaoh asks with the contempt of a scornerand receives one of the most powerful displays of God’sidentity in the Bible (the plagues). The contrast is both strikingand instructive. The meaning of God’s name, then, is revealedin works as well as words, and his purpose is that not just hispeople but all peoples may come to understand who he is. Yet anothermajestic statement in the book of Exodus (9:13–16) makes thisabundantly clear.

Basedon this pattern of usage, the name “Yahweh” seems tosignify especially the active presence of God to bless, deliver, orotherwise aid his people. Where this presence is absent, there is nosuccess, victory, protection, or peace (Num. 14:39–45; Josh.7:10–12; Judg. 16:20; 1Sam. 16:13–14). The messagethat God not only is but also is present to save and deliver may wellbe the most important truth communicated in the OT, and it is onlynatural to see its ultimate embodiment in the person and work ofChrist (Isa. 7:14; cf. Matt. 1:21–23).

Nameused in combination.The name “Yahweh” also is used in combination with otherterms. After God grants a military victory to Israel over theAmalekites, Moses names a commemorative altar “Yahweh Nissi,”meaning “the Lord is my Banner” (Exod. 17:15). InEzekiel’s temple vision Jerusalem is called “YahwehShammah,” meaning “the Lord is there” (Ezek.48:35). A familiar expression is “the Lord of hosts,”which is generally comparable to the expression “commander inchief” used in American culture (cf. 1Kings 22:19–23).

Elohim

Thisis the first term for God encountered in the Bible, right in theopening verse. It is a more generic term, denoting deity in contrastto humans or angels. “Elohim” is a plural form; thesingular terms “El” and “Eloah” are usedoccasionally, particularly in poetic texts. “El” is acommon term in the biblical world; in fact, it is the name for thefather of Baal in the Canaanite religion. This may explain why theBible commonly uses the plural form, to distinguish the one true God,the God of Israel, from his pagan rivals. Others explain the pluralform as a “plural of majesty” or “plural ofintensity,” though it is uncertain just what this would mean.Some see the foundation for NT revelation of the Trinity (Gen.1:26–27; 11:6–7; cf. John 17:20–22), but this isunlikely. The plural form also can serve simply as a common noun,referring to pagan deities (Exod. 12:12), angels (Ps. 97:7,arguably), or even human authorities (Exod. 22:28, possibly).

“El”also occurs in combination with other descriptive terms. The bestknown is “El Shaddai,” meaning “God Almighty”(Gen. 17:1). The precise meaning of “Shaddai” isuncertain, but it seems to have the notion of “great/powerfulone.” The distressed Hagar, caught, comforted, and counseled bythe mysterious personage at a well, calls God “El Roi,”which means “the God who sees me” (Gen. 16:13). One ofthe most exalted expressions to describe God is “El Elyon,”meaning “God Most High.” This title seems to haveparticular reference to God as the owner and master of creation (Gen.14:18–20).

Adonai

Asnoted above, this common word meaning simply “(my) lord/master”is used regularly in place of the personal name of God revealed toMoses in Exod. 3:14. And in the OT of most English Bibles this isindicated by printing “Lord” as opposed to “Lord”(using small capital letters). However, “Adonai” is usedof God in some noteworthy instances, such as Isaiah’s loftyvision of God exalted in Isa. 6 and the prophecy of Immanuel in Isa.7:14. In time, this became the preferred term for referring to God,and the LXX reflected this by using the Greek word kyrios (“lord”)for Yahweh. This makes the ease with which NT writers transfer theuse of the term to Jesus (e.g., 1Cor. 12:3) a strong indicationof their Christology.

Known as the Tetragrammaton (“four letters”),these four consonants comprise the personal name of God. Most Englishversions gloss this name in small capital letters as “Lord”(see Gen. 15:1) or “God” (see Gen. 15:2 KJV, RSV, NRSV,NASB). “Lord” without the small-capital format signifiesa title, not a personal name, in Hebrew: ’adonay.In the intertestamental period, reverent Jews became reluctant tospeak the divine name, and so they substituted ’adonay or sometitle for “YHWH.” In the Middle Ages, when vowels wereintroduced to the Hebrew text, those belonging to ’adonay wereinserted into “YHWH,” reminding readers to speak thetitle rather than the name. English speakers, however, substituting Jfor the Y, vocalizing W with a V sound (both under the influence ofGerman), and reading the consonants and vowels together, inventedfrom this an artificial word that no ancient had ever pronounced:“Jehovah” (see Gen. 15:2 ASV).

Manyderive “YHWH” from the Hebrew verb “to be”(hayah)and understand the meaning of the name to be “He Is,”though this is debated. Such an etymology is found in Exod. 3:13–14,where Moses asked God his name, and God replied, “I am who Iam. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I am hassent me to you.’ ” Passing by Moses on MountSinai, God declared the meaning of this name, revealing God’snature as being compassionate, gracious, patient, loving, forgiving,and just (Exod. 34:5–7). Jesus claims this name for himself inJohn 8:58: “Before Abraham was born, I am.” Christiansbaptize in the singular name of the Father, the Son, and the HolySpirit (Matt. 28:19). See also Lord.

The names of God given in the Bible are an important means ofrevelation about his character and works. The names come from threesources: God himself, those who encounter him in the biblical record,and the biblical writers. This article is concerned mainly with thenames that occur in the OT, though the NT will be referenced whenhelpful.

Inthe Bible the meaning of names is often significant and points to thecharacter of the person so named. As might be expected, this isespecially true for God. The names that he gives to himself alwaysare a form of revelation; the names that humans give to God often area form of testimony.

Yahweh:The Lord

Pronunciation.Unquestionably, for OT revelation the most important name is “(the)Lord.” In English Bibles this represents the name declared byGod to Moses at the burning bush (“I am who I am” [Exod.3:13–15]) and the related term used elsewhere in the OT; inHebrew this term consists of the four consonants YHWH and istherefore known as the Tetragrammaton (“four letters”).Hebrew does not count vowels as part of its alphabet; in biblicaltimes one simply wrote the consonants of a word and the readersupplied the correct vowels by knowing the vocabulary, grammar, andcontext. However, to avoid violating the commandment in the Decaloguethat prohibits the misuse of God’s name (Exod. 20:7; Deut.5:11), the Jews stopped pronouncing it. Consequently, no one todayknows its correct original pronunciation, but the best evidenceavailable suggests “Yahweh,” which has become theconventional pronunciation (consider the Hebrew word “hallelujah,”which actually is “hallelu-Yah,” hence “praise theLord”). In ancient Jewish tradition, “Adonai” (“myLord”) was substituted for “Yahweh.” In fact, whenHebrew eventually developed a vowel notation system, instead of thevowels for “Yahweh,” the vowels for “Adonai”were indicated whenever YHWH appeared in the biblical text, as areminder. Combining the consonants YHWH with the vowels of “Adonai”yields something like “Yehowah,” which is the origin ofthe familiar (but mistaken and nonexistent) “Jehovah.”English Bibles typically use “Lord” (small capitalletters) for “Yahweh,” and “Lord” (regularletters) for “Adonai,” which distinguishes thetwo.

Meaning.More vital than the matter of the pronunciation of YHWH is thequestion of its meaning. There seem to be two main opinions. One seesYHWH as denoting eternal self-existence, partly because it issuggested by the grammar of Exod. 3:14 (the words “I am”use a form of the Hebrew verb that suggests being without beginningor end) and partly because that is the meaning Jesus apparentlyascribes to it in John 8:58. The other opinion, suggested by usage,is that YHWH indicates dynamic, active, divine presence: God’sbeing present in a special way to act on someone’s behalf(e.g., Gen. 26:28; 39:2–3; Josh. 6:27; 1Sam. 18:12–14).This idea also appears in the episode of the burning bush (Exod.3:12): when Moses protests his inadequacy to confront Pharaoh, Godassures him of his presence, a reality noted with other prophets(1Sam. 3:19; Jer. 1:8).

Perhapsthe best points of reference for understanding the meaning of YHWHare God’s own proclamations. In addition to Exod. 3:13–15,at least two other passages in Exodus give God’s commentary (asit were) about the meaning of his name. An important one is Exod.34:5–7. A key passage in the theology proper of ancient Israel,its themes echo in later OT Scripture (Num. 14:18–19; Ps.103:7–12; Jon. 4:2). What is noteworthy about the texts citedis that all of them say something remarkable about the grace of God.This fits, for the revelation of Exod. 34:5–7 is given in thecontext of covenant renewal after the incident of the golden calf.Moses invokes God’s name in the Numbers text to avoidcatastrophic judgment when the Israelites refuse to enter thepromised land. The psalm text picks up this theme and connects itwith God’s revelation of his ways to the chosen people. Jonah,remarkably, affirms that the same grace extends even toward a wickedGentile city such as Nineveh.

Anothersuch passage is Exod. 6:2–8.Here God reaffirms hisredemptive purpose for captive Israel, despite the fact that Moses’first encounter with Pharaoh has not gone well. God assures theprophet that he has remembered his covenant with the patriarchs, whomhe says did not know him as “Yahweh,” which probablymeans that the patriarchs did not experience him in the way orcharacter that their descendants would in the exodus event (though itis possible to translate the Hebrew here as a rhetorical questionwith an affirmative idea: “And indeed, by my name Yahweh did Inot make myself known to them?”). God then proceeds to outlinethe redemptive experience in its fullness: deliverance from bondage,reception into a covenant relationship, and possession of the landpromised to their ancestors (vv. 6–8). The statement isbracketed with this declaration: “I am the Lord” (vv. 2,8). One stated purpose of this redemptive work is that Israel mightcome to understand this (v.7). This is important to notebecause a central theme of Exodus as a book is the identity of theGod of Israel. This concern prompts Moses to ask for God’s nameat the burning bush (3:13), and this contempt for the God of theenslaved Hebrews causes Pharaoh to be dismissive at his first meetingwith Moses and Aaron (5:2). Moses asks with the concern of a seekerand receives one of the most profound declarations of God’sidentity in the Bible. Pharaoh asks with the contempt of a scornerand receives one of the most powerful displays of God’sidentity in the Bible (the plagues). The contrast is both strikingand instructive. The meaning of God’s name, then, is revealedin works as well as words, and his purpose is that not just hispeople but all peoples may come to understand who he is. Yet anothermajestic statement in the book of Exodus (9:13–16) makes thisabundantly clear.

Basedon this pattern of usage, the name “Yahweh” seems tosignify especially the active presence of God to bless, deliver, orotherwise aid his people. Where this presence is absent, there is nosuccess, victory, protection, or peace (Num. 14:39–45; Josh.7:10–12; Judg. 16:20; 1Sam. 16:13–14). The messagethat God not only is but also is present to save and deliver may wellbe the most important truth communicated in the OT, and it is onlynatural to see its ultimate embodiment in the person and work ofChrist (Isa. 7:14; cf. Matt. 1:21–23).

Nameused in combination.The name “Yahweh” also is used in combination with otherterms. After God grants a military victory to Israel over theAmalekites, Moses names a commemorative altar “Yahweh Nissi,”meaning “the Lord is my Banner” (Exod. 17:15). InEzekiel’s temple vision Jerusalem is called “YahwehShammah,” meaning “the Lord is there” (Ezek.48:35). A familiar expression is “the Lord of hosts,”which is generally comparable to the expression “commander inchief” used in American culture (cf. 1Kings 22:19–23).

Elohim

Thisis the first term for God encountered in the Bible, right in theopening verse. It is a more generic term, denoting deity in contrastto humans or angels. “Elohim” is a plural form; thesingular terms “El” and “Eloah” are usedoccasionally, particularly in poetic texts. “El” is acommon term in the biblical world; in fact, it is the name for thefather of Baal in the Canaanite religion. This may explain why theBible commonly uses the plural form, to distinguish the one true God,the God of Israel, from his pagan rivals. Others explain the pluralform as a “plural of majesty” or “plural ofintensity,” though it is uncertain just what this would mean.Some see the foundation for NT revelation of the Trinity (Gen.1:26–27; 11:6–7; cf. John 17:20–22), but this isunlikely. The plural form also can serve simply as a common noun,referring to pagan deities (Exod. 12:12), angels (Ps. 97:7,arguably), or even human authorities (Exod. 22:28, possibly).

“El”also occurs in combination with other descriptive terms. The bestknown is “El Shaddai,” meaning “God Almighty”(Gen. 17:1). The precise meaning of “Shaddai” isuncertain, but it seems to have the notion of “great/powerfulone.” The distressed Hagar, caught, comforted, and counseled bythe mysterious personage at a well, calls God “El Roi,”which means “the God who sees me” (Gen. 16:13). One ofthe most exalted expressions to describe God is “El Elyon,”meaning “God Most High.” This title seems to haveparticular reference to God as the owner and master of creation (Gen.14:18–20).

Adonai

Asnoted above, this common word meaning simply “(my) lord/master”is used regularly in place of the personal name of God revealed toMoses in Exod. 3:14. And in the OT of most English Bibles this isindicated by printing “Lord” as opposed to “Lord”(using small capital letters). However, “Adonai” is usedof God in some noteworthy instances, such as Isaiah’s loftyvision of God exalted in Isa. 6 and the prophecy of Immanuel in Isa.7:14. In time, this became the preferred term for referring to God,and the LXX reflected this by using the Greek word kyrios (“lord”)for Yahweh. This makes the ease with which NT writers transfer theuse of the term to Jesus (e.g., 1Cor. 12:3) a strong indicationof their Christology.

The names of God given in the Bible are an important means ofrevelation about his character and works. The names come from threesources: God himself, those who encounter him in the biblical record,and the biblical writers. This article is concerned mainly with thenames that occur in the OT, though the NT will be referenced whenhelpful.

Inthe Bible the meaning of names is often significant and points to thecharacter of the person so named. As might be expected, this isespecially true for God. The names that he gives to himself alwaysare a form of revelation; the names that humans give to God often area form of testimony.

Yahweh:The Lord

Pronunciation.Unquestionably, for OT revelation the most important name is “(the)Lord.” In English Bibles this represents the name declared byGod to Moses at the burning bush (“I am who I am” [Exod.3:13–15]) and the related term used elsewhere in the OT; inHebrew this term consists of the four consonants YHWH and istherefore known as the Tetragrammaton (“four letters”).Hebrew does not count vowels as part of its alphabet; in biblicaltimes one simply wrote the consonants of a word and the readersupplied the correct vowels by knowing the vocabulary, grammar, andcontext. However, to avoid violating the commandment in the Decaloguethat prohibits the misuse of God’s name (Exod. 20:7; Deut.5:11), the Jews stopped pronouncing it. Consequently, no one todayknows its correct original pronunciation, but the best evidenceavailable suggests “Yahweh,” which has become theconventional pronunciation (consider the Hebrew word “hallelujah,”which actually is “hallelu-Yah,” hence “praise theLord”). In ancient Jewish tradition, “Adonai” (“myLord”) was substituted for “Yahweh.” In fact, whenHebrew eventually developed a vowel notation system, instead of thevowels for “Yahweh,” the vowels for “Adonai”were indicated whenever YHWH appeared in the biblical text, as areminder. Combining the consonants YHWH with the vowels of “Adonai”yields something like “Yehowah,” which is the origin ofthe familiar (but mistaken and nonexistent) “Jehovah.”English Bibles typically use “Lord” (small capitalletters) for “Yahweh,” and “Lord” (regularletters) for “Adonai,” which distinguishes thetwo.

Meaning.More vital than the matter of the pronunciation of YHWH is thequestion of its meaning. There seem to be two main opinions. One seesYHWH as denoting eternal self-existence, partly because it issuggested by the grammar of Exod. 3:14 (the words “I am”use a form of the Hebrew verb that suggests being without beginningor end) and partly because that is the meaning Jesus apparentlyascribes to it in John 8:58. The other opinion, suggested by usage,is that YHWH indicates dynamic, active, divine presence: God’sbeing present in a special way to act on someone’s behalf(e.g., Gen. 26:28; 39:2–3; Josh. 6:27; 1Sam. 18:12–14).This idea also appears in the episode of the burning bush (Exod.3:12): when Moses protests his inadequacy to confront Pharaoh, Godassures him of his presence, a reality noted with other prophets(1Sam. 3:19; Jer. 1:8).

Perhapsthe best points of reference for understanding the meaning of YHWHare God’s own proclamations. In addition to Exod. 3:13–15,at least two other passages in Exodus give God’s commentary (asit were) about the meaning of his name. An important one is Exod.34:5–7. A key passage in the theology proper of ancient Israel,its themes echo in later OT Scripture (Num. 14:18–19; Ps.103:7–12; Jon. 4:2). What is noteworthy about the texts citedis that all of them say something remarkable about the grace of God.This fits, for the revelation of Exod. 34:5–7 is given in thecontext of covenant renewal after the incident of the golden calf.Moses invokes God’s name in the Numbers text to avoidcatastrophic judgment when the Israelites refuse to enter thepromised land. The psalm text picks up this theme and connects itwith God’s revelation of his ways to the chosen people. Jonah,remarkably, affirms that the same grace extends even toward a wickedGentile city such as Nineveh.

Anothersuch passage is Exod. 6:2–8.Here God reaffirms hisredemptive purpose for captive Israel, despite the fact that Moses’first encounter with Pharaoh has not gone well. God assures theprophet that he has remembered his covenant with the patriarchs, whomhe says did not know him as “Yahweh,” which probablymeans that the patriarchs did not experience him in the way orcharacter that their descendants would in the exodus event (though itis possible to translate the Hebrew here as a rhetorical questionwith an affirmative idea: “And indeed, by my name Yahweh did Inot make myself known to them?”). God then proceeds to outlinethe redemptive experience in its fullness: deliverance from bondage,reception into a covenant relationship, and possession of the landpromised to their ancestors (vv. 6–8). The statement isbracketed with this declaration: “I am the Lord” (vv. 2,8). One stated purpose of this redemptive work is that Israel mightcome to understand this (v.7). This is important to notebecause a central theme of Exodus as a book is the identity of theGod of Israel. This concern prompts Moses to ask for God’s nameat the burning bush (3:13), and this contempt for the God of theenslaved Hebrews causes Pharaoh to be dismissive at his first meetingwith Moses and Aaron (5:2). Moses asks with the concern of a seekerand receives one of the most profound declarations of God’sidentity in the Bible. Pharaoh asks with the contempt of a scornerand receives one of the most powerful displays of God’sidentity in the Bible (the plagues). The contrast is both strikingand instructive. The meaning of God’s name, then, is revealedin works as well as words, and his purpose is that not just hispeople but all peoples may come to understand who he is. Yet anothermajestic statement in the book of Exodus (9:13–16) makes thisabundantly clear.

Basedon this pattern of usage, the name “Yahweh” seems tosignify especially the active presence of God to bless, deliver, orotherwise aid his people. Where this presence is absent, there is nosuccess, victory, protection, or peace (Num. 14:39–45; Josh.7:10–12; Judg. 16:20; 1Sam. 16:13–14). The messagethat God not only is but also is present to save and deliver may wellbe the most important truth communicated in the OT, and it is onlynatural to see its ultimate embodiment in the person and work ofChrist (Isa. 7:14; cf. Matt. 1:21–23).

Nameused in combination.The name “Yahweh” also is used in combination with otherterms. After God grants a military victory to Israel over theAmalekites, Moses names a commemorative altar “Yahweh Nissi,”meaning “the Lord is my Banner” (Exod. 17:15). InEzekiel’s temple vision Jerusalem is called “YahwehShammah,” meaning “the Lord is there” (Ezek.48:35). A familiar expression is “the Lord of hosts,”which is generally comparable to the expression “commander inchief” used in American culture (cf. 1Kings 22:19–23).

Elohim

Thisis the first term for God encountered in the Bible, right in theopening verse. It is a more generic term, denoting deity in contrastto humans or angels. “Elohim” is a plural form; thesingular terms “El” and “Eloah” are usedoccasionally, particularly in poetic texts. “El” is acommon term in the biblical world; in fact, it is the name for thefather of Baal in the Canaanite religion. This may explain why theBible commonly uses the plural form, to distinguish the one true God,the God of Israel, from his pagan rivals. Others explain the pluralform as a “plural of majesty” or “plural ofintensity,” though it is uncertain just what this would mean.Some see the foundation for NT revelation of the Trinity (Gen.1:26–27; 11:6–7; cf. John 17:20–22), but this isunlikely. The plural form also can serve simply as a common noun,referring to pagan deities (Exod. 12:12), angels (Ps. 97:7,arguably), or even human authorities (Exod. 22:28, possibly).

“El”also occurs in combination with other descriptive terms. The bestknown is “El Shaddai,” meaning “God Almighty”(Gen. 17:1). The precise meaning of “Shaddai” isuncertain, but it seems to have the notion of “great/powerfulone.” The distressed Hagar, caught, comforted, and counseled bythe mysterious personage at a well, calls God “El Roi,”which means “the God who sees me” (Gen. 16:13). One ofthe most exalted expressions to describe God is “El Elyon,”meaning “God Most High.” This title seems to haveparticular reference to God as the owner and master of creation (Gen.14:18–20).

Adonai

Asnoted above, this common word meaning simply “(my) lord/master”is used regularly in place of the personal name of God revealed toMoses in Exod. 3:14. And in the OT of most English Bibles this isindicated by printing “Lord” as opposed to “Lord”(using small capital letters). However, “Adonai” is usedof God in some noteworthy instances, such as Isaiah’s loftyvision of God exalted in Isa. 6 and the prophecy of Immanuel in Isa.7:14. In time, this became the preferred term for referring to God,and the LXX reflected this by using the Greek word kyrios (“lord”)for Yahweh. This makes the ease with which NT writers transfer theuse of the term to Jesus (e.g., 1Cor. 12:3) a strong indicationof their Christology.

The names of God given in the Bible are an important means ofrevelation about his character and works. The names come from threesources: God himself, those who encounter him in the biblical record,and the biblical writers. This article is concerned mainly with thenames that occur in the OT, though the NT will be referenced whenhelpful.

Inthe Bible the meaning of names is often significant and points to thecharacter of the person so named. As might be expected, this isespecially true for God. The names that he gives to himself alwaysare a form of revelation; the names that humans give to God often area form of testimony.

Yahweh:The Lord

Pronunciation.Unquestionably, for OT revelation the most important name is “(the)Lord.” In English Bibles this represents the name declared byGod to Moses at the burning bush (“I am who I am” [Exod.3:13–15]) and the related term used elsewhere in the OT; inHebrew this term consists of the four consonants YHWH and istherefore known as the Tetragrammaton (“four letters”).Hebrew does not count vowels as part of its alphabet; in biblicaltimes one simply wrote the consonants of a word and the readersupplied the correct vowels by knowing the vocabulary, grammar, andcontext. However, to avoid violating the commandment in the Decaloguethat prohibits the misuse of God’s name (Exod. 20:7; Deut.5:11), the Jews stopped pronouncing it. Consequently, no one todayknows its correct original pronunciation, but the best evidenceavailable suggests “Yahweh,” which has become theconventional pronunciation (consider the Hebrew word “hallelujah,”which actually is “hallelu-Yah,” hence “praise theLord”). In ancient Jewish tradition, “Adonai” (“myLord”) was substituted for “Yahweh.” In fact, whenHebrew eventually developed a vowel notation system, instead of thevowels for “Yahweh,” the vowels for “Adonai”were indicated whenever YHWH appeared in the biblical text, as areminder. Combining the consonants YHWH with the vowels of “Adonai”yields something like “Yehowah,” which is the origin ofthe familiar (but mistaken and nonexistent) “Jehovah.”English Bibles typically use “Lord” (small capitalletters) for “Yahweh,” and “Lord” (regularletters) for “Adonai,” which distinguishes thetwo.

Meaning.More vital than the matter of the pronunciation of YHWH is thequestion of its meaning. There seem to be two main opinions. One seesYHWH as denoting eternal self-existence, partly because it issuggested by the grammar of Exod. 3:14 (the words “I am”use a form of the Hebrew verb that suggests being without beginningor end) and partly because that is the meaning Jesus apparentlyascribes to it in John 8:58. The other opinion, suggested by usage,is that YHWH indicates dynamic, active, divine presence: God’sbeing present in a special way to act on someone’s behalf(e.g., Gen. 26:28; 39:2–3; Josh. 6:27; 1Sam. 18:12–14).This idea also appears in the episode of the burning bush (Exod.3:12): when Moses protests his inadequacy to confront Pharaoh, Godassures him of his presence, a reality noted with other prophets(1Sam. 3:19; Jer. 1:8).

Perhapsthe best points of reference for understanding the meaning of YHWHare God’s own proclamations. In addition to Exod. 3:13–15,at least two other passages in Exodus give God’s commentary (asit were) about the meaning of his name. An important one is Exod.34:5–7. A key passage in the theology proper of ancient Israel,its themes echo in later OT Scripture (Num. 14:18–19; Ps.103:7–12; Jon. 4:2). What is noteworthy about the texts citedis that all of them say something remarkable about the grace of God.This fits, for the revelation of Exod. 34:5–7 is given in thecontext of covenant renewal after the incident of the golden calf.Moses invokes God’s name in the Numbers text to avoidcatastrophic judgment when the Israelites refuse to enter thepromised land. The psalm text picks up this theme and connects itwith God’s revelation of his ways to the chosen people. Jonah,remarkably, affirms that the same grace extends even toward a wickedGentile city such as Nineveh.

Anothersuch passage is Exod. 6:2–8.Here God reaffirms hisredemptive purpose for captive Israel, despite the fact that Moses’first encounter with Pharaoh has not gone well. God assures theprophet that he has remembered his covenant with the patriarchs, whomhe says did not know him as “Yahweh,” which probablymeans that the patriarchs did not experience him in the way orcharacter that their descendants would in the exodus event (though itis possible to translate the Hebrew here as a rhetorical questionwith an affirmative idea: “And indeed, by my name Yahweh did Inot make myself known to them?”). God then proceeds to outlinethe redemptive experience in its fullness: deliverance from bondage,reception into a covenant relationship, and possession of the landpromised to their ancestors (vv. 6–8). The statement isbracketed with this declaration: “I am the Lord” (vv. 2,8). One stated purpose of this redemptive work is that Israel mightcome to understand this (v.7). This is important to notebecause a central theme of Exodus as a book is the identity of theGod of Israel. This concern prompts Moses to ask for God’s nameat the burning bush (3:13), and this contempt for the God of theenslaved Hebrews causes Pharaoh to be dismissive at his first meetingwith Moses and Aaron (5:2). Moses asks with the concern of a seekerand receives one of the most profound declarations of God’sidentity in the Bible. Pharaoh asks with the contempt of a scornerand receives one of the most powerful displays of God’sidentity in the Bible (the plagues). The contrast is both strikingand instructive. The meaning of God’s name, then, is revealedin works as well as words, and his purpose is that not just hispeople but all peoples may come to understand who he is. Yet anothermajestic statement in the book of Exodus (9:13–16) makes thisabundantly clear.

Basedon this pattern of usage, the name “Yahweh” seems tosignify especially the active presence of God to bless, deliver, orotherwise aid his people. Where this presence is absent, there is nosuccess, victory, protection, or peace (Num. 14:39–45; Josh.7:10–12; Judg. 16:20; 1Sam. 16:13–14). The messagethat God not only is but also is present to save and deliver may wellbe the most important truth communicated in the OT, and it is onlynatural to see its ultimate embodiment in the person and work ofChrist (Isa. 7:14; cf. Matt. 1:21–23).

Nameused in combination.The name “Yahweh” also is used in combination with otherterms. After God grants a military victory to Israel over theAmalekites, Moses names a commemorative altar “Yahweh Nissi,”meaning “the Lord is my Banner” (Exod. 17:15). InEzekiel’s temple vision Jerusalem is called “YahwehShammah,” meaning “the Lord is there” (Ezek.48:35). A familiar expression is “the Lord of hosts,”which is generally comparable to the expression “commander inchief” used in American culture (cf. 1Kings 22:19–23).

Elohim

Thisis the first term for God encountered in the Bible, right in theopening verse. It is a more generic term, denoting deity in contrastto humans or angels. “Elohim” is a plural form; thesingular terms “El” and “Eloah” are usedoccasionally, particularly in poetic texts. “El” is acommon term in the biblical world; in fact, it is the name for thefather of Baal in the Canaanite religion. This may explain why theBible commonly uses the plural form, to distinguish the one true God,the God of Israel, from his pagan rivals. Others explain the pluralform as a “plural of majesty” or “plural ofintensity,” though it is uncertain just what this would mean.Some see the foundation for NT revelation of the Trinity (Gen.1:26–27; 11:6–7; cf. John 17:20–22), but this isunlikely. The plural form also can serve simply as a common noun,referring to pagan deities (Exod. 12:12), angels (Ps. 97:7,arguably), or even human authorities (Exod. 22:28, possibly).

“El”also occurs in combination with other descriptive terms. The bestknown is “El Shaddai,” meaning “God Almighty”(Gen. 17:1). The precise meaning of “Shaddai” isuncertain, but it seems to have the notion of “great/powerfulone.” The distressed Hagar, caught, comforted, and counseled bythe mysterious personage at a well, calls God “El Roi,”which means “the God who sees me” (Gen. 16:13). One ofthe most exalted expressions to describe God is “El Elyon,”meaning “God Most High.” This title seems to haveparticular reference to God as the owner and master of creation (Gen.14:18–20).

Adonai

Asnoted above, this common word meaning simply “(my) lord/master”is used regularly in place of the personal name of God revealed toMoses in Exod. 3:14. And in the OT of most English Bibles this isindicated by printing “Lord” as opposed to “Lord”(using small capital letters). However, “Adonai” is usedof God in some noteworthy instances, such as Isaiah’s loftyvision of God exalted in Isa. 6 and the prophecy of Immanuel in Isa.7:14. In time, this became the preferred term for referring to God,and the LXX reflected this by using the Greek word kyrios (“lord”)for Yahweh. This makes the ease with which NT writers transfer theuse of the term to Jesus (e.g., 1Cor. 12:3) a strong indicationof their Christology.

Known as the Tetragrammaton (“four letters”),these four consonants comprise the personal name of God. Most Englishversions gloss this name in small capital letters as “Lord”(see Gen. 15:1) or “God” (see Gen. 15:2 KJV, RSV, NRSV,NASB). “Lord” without the small-capital format signifiesa title, not a personal name, in Hebrew: ’adonay.In the intertestamental period, reverent Jews became reluctant tospeak the divine name, and so they substituted ’adonay or sometitle for “YHWH.” In the Middle Ages, when vowels wereintroduced to the Hebrew text, those belonging to ’adonay wereinserted into “YHWH,” reminding readers to speak thetitle rather than the name. English speakers, however, substituting Jfor the Y, vocalizing W with a V sound (both under the influence ofGerman), and reading the consonants and vowels together, inventedfrom this an artificial word that no ancient had ever pronounced:“Jehovah” (see Gen. 15:2 ASV).

Manyderive “YHWH” from the Hebrew verb “to be”(hayah)and understand the meaning of the name to be “He Is,”though this is debated. Such an etymology is found in Exod. 3:13–14,where Moses asked God his name, and God replied, “I am who Iam. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I am hassent me to you.’ ” Passing by Moses on MountSinai, God declared the meaning of this name, revealing God’snature as being compassionate, gracious, patient, loving, forgiving,and just (Exod. 34:5–7). Jesus claims this name for himself inJohn 8:58: “Before Abraham was born, I am.” Christiansbaptize in the singular name of the Father, the Son, and the HolySpirit (Matt. 28:19). See also Lord.