As Easy as X-Y-Z: A Review of William Webb’s "Slaves, Women and Homosexuals"
Related MediaDelivered at the Southwest Regional Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society
Criswell College, Dallas, TX
Editor’s note: Clay Daniel was one of my interns during the 2001-2002 school year. This paper, as well as Bill Webb’s book, are well worth reading.
If an alien from outer space were teleported to the United States, given a copy of the Christian Scriptures, and asked to assess the sanity of our faith’s adherents, he would no doubt conclude that American Christians are a rather schizophrenic lot. Walking into one of our evangelical churches, he would probably observe men, some of them long-haired, greeting women, many of them short-haired and almost none of them wearing any kind of head covering, with both men and women stubbornly refusing to kiss each other (in a “holy” manner, of course) at all! In Gen-X churches, at least, our intrepid extraterrestrial would be astonished to see young men and women in their 20’s and 30’s failing to rise in the presence of any elders entering their worship service. Our stupefied spaceman would be baffled to discover Pentecostals dancing within the church walls but not outside of them, Presbyterians dancing outside the church walls but not within them, and Southern Baptists not dancing anywhere! Further, all of these bodies would rarely, if ever, be seen using tambourines and cymbals (unless, of course, the cymbals were part of drum set). And even if certain members of these churches might be found to occasionally take wine for medicinal reasons, probably none of them, to the utter confusion of our befuddled bystander, would even think of administering beer to the poor, downtrodden, and dying of their congregations. In the end, our marveling Martian would probably throw up his hands in resignation and blast away in a trail of stardust, desperately seeking a group of people who actually do what their Holy Book tells them to do.
Our friendly foreigner, of course, has just dealt firsthand with the challenges of cultural hermeneutics and contemporary application. He seems to have assumed (quite naturally) that any command found in the Christian Scriptures would be binding upon Christians of all times, and that cultural differences would have little effect upon the application of an ancient text to a modern setting. Although most of us would probably claim to be at least somewhat more hermeneutically savvy than our vexed visitor, no doubt all of us could identify with the frustration of trying to understand why ancient commands may sometimes be applied differently in our modern context—or sometimes not at all. The issue of cultural relativity versus transcultural application is bedeviling to scholar, pastor, missionary, and layperson alike. Any kind of rigid standard for determining how and when a modern Christian should apply an ancient text to himself (or his family, his church, etc.) will undoubtedly fall short of accounting for the dizzying diversity of teachings found in the Old and New Testaments. Perhaps the daunting nature of the task is the reason why relatively few works in cultural hermeneutics have become widespread, even in evangelical circles.1 However, I find William Webb’s Slaves, Women and Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis to be a noteworthy attempt to address this vacuum. The following is an effort to acquaint the hearer with some of the issues raised in Webb’s work, along with some questions to provide for further evaluation and discussion, hopefully well beyond this particular forum.
Summary of the Argument
Slaves, Women and Homosexuals addresses the dilemma of the modern (and especially postmodern) reader of the Bible, namely, that, when read with the lenses of our own culture, many of Scripture’s texts seem anachronistic, if not downright cruel. As one of many examples one might take Exodus 21, where provisions are laid down for the acquisition and management of Hebrew slaves. Not only does the apparent sanctioning of slavery make the modern person uncomfortable, but certainly the following provision must do so also: “If a man sells his daughter as a female servant, she will not go [free] as the men servants do” (Exod 21:7).2 These texts are problematic, of course, because with respect to our culture they seem regressive. At the same time, however, evangelical scholars would certainly acknowledge that from the perspective of the original audience these texts would have been considered redemptive; in other words, they represented liberating advances over other practices commonplace to that day. With this kind of “redemptive movement” in mind, and considering that such movement continues in the New Testament (for example, Paul’s implication to Philemon that Onesimus the slave be set free), one can argue that slavery in our modern day would be far from the spirit of the biblical text. Furthermore, when one applies new covenant principles such as that found in Gal 3:28 (“There is…neither slave nor free…for you are all one in Christ Jesus”), the case against slavery in our culture is strengthened. In other words, the “redemptive movement” of the text, combined with a gospel that proclaims freedom to the captive, demands that Christians constantly push the boundaries of their culture toward an “ultimate ethic” with regard to the treatment of those oppressed by slavery as well as other means. This is an argument familiar to and embraced by evangelicals in large measure.
The terms used above—“redemptive movement” and “ultimate ethic”—make up the crux of Webb’s argument; indeed, Slaves, Women and Homosexuals is largely an apology for a “redemptive movement hermeneutic” in which the above principles are applied. After a preliminary discussion of the Christian’s relationship to culture in Chapter 1, Webb begins Chapter 2 with the following articulation of the “redemptive movement hermeneutic”:
The term “redemptive-movement hermeneutic” captures the most crucial component of the application process as it relates to cultural analysis, namely, the need to engage the redemptive spirit of the text beyond its original-application framing. A sense of the biblical or redemptive spirit can be obtained by listening to how texts compare to the broader cultural milieu and how they sound within the development of the canon. When taking the ancient text into our modern world, the redemptive spirit of Scripture is the most significant dimension with which a Christian can wrestle. Sometimes, by simply “doing” the words of the text we automatically fulfill its spirit today, particularly where the horizons of the ancient and modern worlds continue to overlap and where the biblical text has already moved the ancient-world standards in a particular direction as far as one could possibly go. At other times, however, living out the Bible’s literal words in our modern context fails to fulfill its redemptive spirit.3
As to how the cumulative effect of this “redemptive spirit” (thus creating the “redemptive movement”) may be diagrammed and understood, Webb pictures a kind of “X-Y-Z” movement, in which “X” represents the original culture, “Y” represents the biblical text, and “Z” represents the “ultimate ethic” toward which the commands and principles of Scripture are pointing.4 The reason that slavery is discussed is that it constitutes what Webb calls a “neutral example,” that is, a hermeneutical issue on which evangelicals will generally agree. In the case of slavery, as noted above, the biblical text (“Y”) shows “redemptive movement” with respect to the original culture (“X”) in both Old and New Testaments. As for as the “ultimate ethic” (“Z”), evangelicals would probably agree that it would go well beyond emancipation to the elimination of racism and the provision of equal opportunities for all people. Webb pictures modern North American culture as standing somewhere between “Y” and “Z”, with slavery abolished and much progress made in civil rights, but with racism still a specter and equal opportunity for minorities not always a reality.5
The issue of slavery, however, is not the only “neutral example” that Webb discusses. On the other end of the spectrum from slavery we find the issue of homosexuality. In this case Webb refers to the original culture (“X”) as having “mixed acceptance and no restrictions of homosexual activity”6 (in this case Webb is referring primarily to Greco-Roman, rather than to Ancient Near Eastern, culture), while the biblical text (“Y”), as evangelicals would no doubt agree, offers a consistently negative assessment of homosexuality with “complete restriction of homosexual activity”.7 In this case, then, there is no progressive “movement” in the Scriptures as the writers interact with culture; rather, there is consistent condemnation of what culture sometimes condones, sometimes opposes. The ultimate ethic (“Z”), then, must include this prohibition; Webb also suggests that it includes greater compassion and a more nuanced understanding of homosexual behavior than currently exists in evangelicalism.8 Another interesting note here is that modern North American culture, far from standing somewhere between “Y” (the biblical text) and “Z” (the ultimate ethic), rather locates itself far on the other side of “X” (the original culture); Webb suggests that we might even call it “W”.9 That is to say, our culture is even more permissive with regard to homosexuality than was the Greco-Roman culture, and even less inclined to embrace a prohibition of homosexual activity.
Webb introduces these two examples—slavery and homosexuality—to put in context the way Scripture, and the way modern interpreters, treat the role of women in the home and the church.10 His central argument is that Scripture most emphatically manifests “redemptive movement” with regard to women’s worth and position, relative to the Ancient Near Eastern and Greco-Roman cultures in which the text is set. Webb then proceeds to demonstrate this “movement” through an examination of various criteria by which the text’s treatment of women may be considered. In Chapter 3, an introduction of these criteria, the reader discovers that they break down into three types: persuasive, moderately persuasive, and inconclusive criteria.
Among those criteria deemed by Webb as “persuasive” (Chapter 4) we find such categories as “seed ideas” and “breakouts.” An example of a seed idea would be that found in 1 Cor 11:11-12: “In any case, in the Lord woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For just as woman came from man, so man comes through woman. But all things come from God.” Webb’s contention is that this text contains the beginnings (“seeds”) of certain social implications which could not be fully worked out in the culture of the day but which have, and should continue to, grow and bear fuller fruit as culture allows for women to realize the implications of the text.11 “Breakouts,” meanwhile, are those biblical examples, such as that of Deborah in the Old Testament or Priscilla in the New, in which individuals or concepts are seen to “break out” of norms stated or suggested in other biblical texts.12 It is important to note here that Webb is not suggesting that the rather egalitarian substance of 1 Cor 11:11-12 nullifies the seemingly hierarchical implications of what comes before, or that the presence of a Deborah or a Priscilla in the history of God’s people overrules a text such as 1 Tim 2:12 (“I do not allow a woman to teach or have authority over a man. She must remain quiet”). What he is saying, however, is that these “seed ideas” and “breakouts” should suggest to us that other texts such as 1 Tim 2:12 may have a cultural component that is not necessarily binding for all time. In other words, before we as modern interpreters affirm that Paul’s prohibition of women teaching men is a rule that transcends particular cultures and exists for all time, we ought to take careful note of biblical principles and specific biblical examples that might seem to suggest otherwise.
Under “Moderately Persuasive Criteria” (Chapter 5) Webb lists some issues commonly embraced as decisive by complementarian writers, most notably the question of primogeniture and its basis in original creation. Primogeniture, the cultural practice dealing with the unique rights of the firstborn son, is understood by many who hold a patriarchal view to be in view in Adam’s creation before Eve, as well of his naming of her subsequent to the naming of the animals. Such a conclusion is later explicitly drawn by Paul in 1 Tim 2:13, in which he justifies his prohibition of a woman’s teaching a man with the following statement: “For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve.” The prior “birth” of the first man, then, if not also his naming of the woman, is pointed to as a transcultural basis for continuing functional subordination of women to men in the church and the home.
Webb begins his discussion of 1 Tim 2:13 by quoting several leading complementarians13 to show that primogeniture is by far the most commonly understood referent of Paul’s statement in verse 13. He grants that Paul is in fact using this logic in verse 13, but then contends that modern interpreters should not necessarily follow the same logic in light of cultural differences. His argument is twofold:14 First, Scripture often “breaks out” of the primogeniture tradition (he lists over 20 examples, including Jacob over Esau, Ephraim over Manasseh, and Solomon over Adonijah). Therefore, the practice is not necessarily binding or transcultural. Second, primogeniture is more of an ancient than a modern concept. Since Christians do not, as a rule, continue the practice, then not only the practice itself but also principles derived from it are likely culturally bound. Thus is the crux of Webb’s dealings with primogeniture; I will analyze this argument a little later.
The most notable category listed under Webb’s “Inconclusive Criteria” (Chapter 6)15 is the question of continuity between Old and New Testaments. That is to say, Christian interpreters will often insist on the transcultural nature of a practice because it is practiced and/or commanded in both Testaments. The fallacy in this reasoning, however, is readily apparent when one considers the issue of slavery. The practice of slavery was clearly condoned in the Old Testament and at least tolerated in the New, and yet few today would therefore argue that slavery should be a transcultural institution. The problem, suggests Webb, lies with the rigidity of this particular hermeneutic; it does not allow for the kind of “redemptive movement” vis--vis slavery that Scripture clearly demonstrates, or at least does not consider the implications of such movement.16 Webb points out that, in terms of this approach to interpretation, the Bible’s treatment of women and of homosexuality mirrors that of slavery: both Testaments seem to suggest functional subordination of women to men, and both Testaments staunchly oppose homosexual practice. In other words, there is significant continuity. The natural conclusion of this matter, Webb argues, is that continuity between the Testaments does not tell the interpreter as much as many might claim it does.17 This is not to say, of course, that it says nothing, but rather that its significance can only be determined in light of other criteria. As for the issue of women’s roles in the church and home, then, Webb insists that the continuity between Old and New Testaments (both suggesting their functional subordination to men) has little to say about the transcultural nature of the text’s message. We must, says Webb, look at other factors to make our determination.
Webb concludes his argument with an interesting final chapter entitled “What If I Am Wrong?” Temporarily granting the assumption that he is wrong about the culturally bound nature of 1 Tim 2:13, he provides seven other reasons why the application of his hermeneutic should still lead the interpreter to one of two final views: either “ultra-soft patriarchy” or “complementary egalitarianism.”18
In summary, Webb uses the two “neutral issues” of slavery and homosexuality for two primary purposes: 1) to show that traditional evangelical perspectives on both slavery and homosexual practice are consistent with a “redemptive movement hermeneutic”; and 2) to use these two issues as “guardrails” between which the issue of women’s roles may be considered. This second purpose of Webb’s work will be the primary focus of the evaluation to follow.
Critique and Evaluation
The following critique will take the form of a series of questions; some answered partially, and some perhaps not much at all. My purpose here is more to leave the hearer with avenues of further exploration than it is to make final judgments about the quality and validity of Webb’s arguments.
Question #1: What is the relationship between the ‘redemptive spirit’ of a text and the principle(s) underlying that text?
Webb’s answer to this question is excellent. He compares, first, the principle(s) underlying a text to the sails on a boat, which may be raised and lowered. A Bible reader will unconsciously perform the process of “raising the sail” to find a more abstract principle when s/he recognizes the differences between a commandment such as “You must love the Lord your God with your whole mind, your whole being, and your whole strength” (Deut 6:5) and, say, the command to farmers to leave a certain amount of their produce in their fields for poor people to glean. The first of these two commandments is sufficiently abstract, so that no more abstract principle needs to be drawn. The second, on the other hand, is both concretely stated and based in a primarily agrarian culture. Most interpreters, then, will “raise the sail” in order to find a principle such as God’s people must take care of the poor—a principle whose validity is confirmed by its reiteration in one form or another throughout both Old and New Testaments.
The redemptive spirit, according to Webb, resembles more the wind that blows the sails than the sails themselves. Using the text on masters and slaves in the household codes of Ephesians as an example, Webb points out that simply “raising the sails” to a higher level of abstraction results only in a principle such as “submit to those in authority in the workplace.” But this application fails to recognize that employers do not own employees in the same way masters used to own slaves. There needs to be enough “wind in the sails” here to push the application out of the ownership-based ethic of the ancient culture to the contract-based ethic of modern corporate culture. A better application, then? Webb suggests something like “Fulfill the terms of your contract … in a manner that brings glory to God.”19 This kind of directive regarding application is helpful, not to mention, it seems to me, rather uncontroversial. Other examples of Webb’s application, as we will see below, will no doubt create more debate.
Question #2: Is one’s view of primogeniture the single greatest determinant in one’s ultimate endpoint regarding women in the church and home?
Webb’s research leads him to conclude that primogeniture, especially as applied in 1 Tim 2:13, is the single greatest factor underlying the traditional complementarian argument. He devotes an appendix to a historical survey of patriarchalists who have used primogeniture as a fundamental argument.20 Further, in recommending a final position of either “ultra-soft patriarchy” or “complementary egalitarianism,” Webb understands one’s view of creative order prominence to be the deciding factor between the two.21 Clearly, Webb considers one’s view on primogeniture to the primary determining factor in the ultimate endpoint one’s view takes on the issue, since he believes that traditional complementarians depend on this argument more than any other.
Is this characterization fair? There is little doubt that 1 Timothy 2:13 is a traditional starting point for many complementarian arguments, and yet such arguments rely on a wide diversity of texts and principles to make their case.22 In particular, Piper and Grudem’s Recovering Biblical Manhood & Womanhood23 (probably the most thorough and diversely argued complementarian treatise) uses 1 Tim 2:13 and primogeniture as only one of many exegetical and theological arguments. In short, the case for traditional complementarianism seems largely reliant on creation order priority, but not uniquely dependent on it. Here, Webb seems guilty of some oversimplification.
Question #3: What are the implications of Webb’s approach to 1 Tim 2 (for example) for biblical authority?
In what I consider an extremely important section of his conclusion, Webb makes the concession that many readers have no doubt been anticipating: “Obviously there exists a crucial difference between slavery and patriarchy. The former is not found in the creation story, while the latter, perhaps in implicit ways, is.”24 This is, of course, the argument that a complementarian will be eager to make. A very common reason that a patriarchalist of any stripe will continue to insist on some form of biblical hierarchy in our modern culture is the apparent patriarchy present in the Garden and the insistence with which Paul refers to that patriarchy to ground his teachings on women’s roles, especially in 1 Tim 2. Webb grants this linkage but contests the commonly assumed implications with four primary arguments: 1) the patriarchal elements of Genesis 2 are rooted in cultural conditions that no longer exist (e.g., the hegemony of dominantly patriarchal cultures at the time); 2) the patriarchy in Genesis 2 is largely implicit and only explicitly drawn out elsewhere;25 3) “Paul’s use of the Genesis text … is an application of the principle, not the principle itself”;26 and 4) Paul’s argument is based on two important assumptions, namely, “the assumption of primogeniture customs for establishing honor (2:13) … [and] the assumption that women are more easily deceived than men.”27
The first three of these arguments all beg the following question: Whether or not the patriarchal elements of Gen 2 are culturally determined, does not Paul’s appeal to said patriarchy lend validity to their continuing application, at least into Paul’s own day? This question will be dealt with indirectly in what follows.
Webb’s fourth argument, regarding Paul’s assumptions in 1 Tim 2:13-14, raises many questions, but the one I want to deal with concerns the implications of such an argument for biblical authority. The issue for us as modern interpreters is the weight we ascribe to that which Paul assumes (e. g., the validity of primogeniture). Webb spends several pages, as noted in the above summary of his work, contending that since primogeniture was primarily an ancient practice, and since it is not normative in modern North American culture, then Paul’s prohibition of women teaching men in 1 Tim 2 is not likely to be transcultural. In other words, since the practice on which the apostle bases his argument is culturally bound, then the argument itself is also culturally bound.
Let me illustrate the logic here with a colloquial example. Let’s say your son approached you and demanded an allowance double that of his younger brother, pointing out to you that the firstborn son in the Old Testament always got a double portion of his father’s goods. You would probably reply, “This isn’t the Old Testament!” At least, this would be a common way of arguing. Any of us has used the “invalid assumption makes invalid conclusion” argument many times.
This is the kind of argument that Webb would have us use in 1 Tim 2. He would grant that Paul certainly had a forceful point in his own day, since primogeniture was still a normative practice. But since such is not the case in our day, then Paul’s command has little more enduring validity today than your son’s request for a double portion of allowance. According to our common logic above, the argument is tight. But the question is, are we justified in applying this argumentation to inspired apostolic writers? In asking this question I mean to highlight the doctrine of inspiration by the Holy Spirit and this doctrine’s implications for Webb’s argument. Now, first of all, it must be acknowledged that Webb’s interpretation of 1 Tim 2:13 is not tantamount to saying, “Paul was wrong”—in other words, that Paul’s view of women was so primitive and chauvinistic that a more “enlightened” age must reject it. But I would question whether a strong doctrine of inspiration by the Holy Spirit allows the interpreter to encounter a text in which an inspired, apostolic writer makes a command with clear intent to ground that command in an aspect of creation, and then for that interpreter to consider that text culturally bound.
To be fair, Webb would certainly acknowledge the criterion of inspiration, but would apply it differently. In his mind, inspiration is not abused by his own approach but by the “static hermeneutic” against which he so vehemently argues. In other words, because the static hermeneutic does not typically take into account the “redemptive movement” inherent in Scripture, it therefore applies many texts much too rigidly, according to Webb. If this charge can be validated, then the static hermeneutic may indeed may indeed be damaging to a proper interpretation of Scripture and a proper view of inspiration. One can see, then, that considering one’s hermeneutic in light of its implications for a doctrine of inspiration can in fact cut both ways.
Question #4: Was primogeniture a normative and widespread practice in first century Greco-Roman culture, as Webb claims?
I have not personally done enough research to answer this question directly. Let me simply suggest, though, that if primogeniture was no longer widespread in first-century Greco-Roman culture, then Paul’s use of creation order in 1 Tim 2:13 is very likely to be transcultural, because he would then be not simply referring to a commonly accepted practice but rather appealing to a practice somewhat alien to the his culture. If this is so, then the fact that primogeniture is alien to our own culture would have little to say about the timelessness of Paul’s prohibition.
Question #5: Is “women are generally more easily deceived than men” the only plausible inference from 1 Tim 2:14?
Webb goes to great lengths (in an appendix28 and elsewhere) to show that the inference above has been the church’s traditional interpretation of 1 Tim 2:14. In this he is convincing. However, both Piper/Grudem29 and Thomas Schreiner30 suggest that 1 Tim 2:14 refers not to Eve’s gullibility to but the serpent’s flouting of the relationship between man and woman when he approaches the woman rather than the man (the one designated by God as having primary leadership responsibility). I will not argue for this interpretation here, but will simply suggest that if the interpretation is true it not only buttresses the transcultural nature of verse 14, but verse 13 as well, since the two verses would now form a unit both of which refer to the Edenic priority as a justification for male headship.
Question #6: If the modern interpreter strives to both “raise the sail” and “feel the wind” (that is, to account for both underlying principles and “redemptive movement”) with regard to texts on women’s roles, will the interpretive “sailboat” be blown out of the seas of patriarchy altogether?
This is, of course, the ultimate practical question. I would suggest at the very least that other texts need to be more fully addressed in light of Webb’s hermeneutic before the “seas of patriarchy” should be abandoned. By “other texts” I am thinking of texts such as “I want you to know that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ” (1 Cor 11:3) and “the husband is the head of the wife as also Christ is the head of the church” (Eph 5:23), to name just two. These are texts that do not depend on primogeniture (or, apparently, on anything inherently cultural in nature) for their validity. Further discussion of the effect of the “redemptive movement hermeneutic” on texts such as these would certainly be welcome.
Conclusion
Finally, in view of Webb’s laudably humble final chapter, entitled “What If I Am Wrong?”, I would like to pose one final question: What if he is right? If you decide that Webb’s arguments are cogent and unassailable, then your next question is whether or not he is correct to argue for an endpoint in which all functional subordination of a woman to a man is abolished.31 If my critiques above are ultimately without merit in your mind, then you should seriously consider adopting such a position. But wherever each of our consciences may lead us, I believe one thing is clear. Slaves, Women & Homosexuals should make anyone think long and hard before advocating any kind of patriarchy in the church or the home. It is a sophisticated, consistent, highly nuanced treatment of issues that anyone involved in the discussion must consider; in short, it is by far the best argument for egalitarianism I have ever read.
1 A list of those who have given particular attention to the area of cultural hermeneutics would include William J. Larkin, Culture and Biblical Hermeneutics (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1988) and the works of M. Daniel Carroll R. There are, of course, scores of more specific studies on culture as it relates to hermeneutics (such as those on slavery and the role of women in Greco-Roman culture). In addition, works in cross-cultural studies with a missionary bent are also helpful in this area.
2 All scriptural citations are from the NET Bible.
3 William J. Webb, Slaves, Women & Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2001), 30.
4 Ibid., 32.
5 Ibid., 37.
6 Ibid., 40.
7 Ibid., 40.
8 Ibid., 40.
9 Ibid., 39.
10 Webb also treats homosexuality at length with regard to each of his criteria, but the focus of this review is on women’s roles, since such will certainly be the more controversial topic among evangelicals.
11 Webb, Slaves, Women, and Homosexuals, 87.
12 Ibid., 95-102.
13 Ibid., 134-5.
14 Ibid., 136-42.
15 Webb also considers two “persuasive extrascriptural criteria” in Chapter 7: “Pragmatic Basis Between Two Cultures” and “Scientific and Social-Scientific Evidence.”
16 Webb, Slaves, Women & Homosexuals, 202.
17 Ibid., 204.
18 These positions are explained on pp. 241-243. They are essentially mediating positions between traditional egalitarianism and complementarianism. What is noteworthy for traditional complementarians is that both positions involve a repudiation of essential functional subordination of women to men in the church and home.
19 Webb, Slaves, Women & Homosexuals, 54.
20 Ibid., 257-62.
21 Ibid., 241-2.
22 See, for example, the work of Douglas Moo (in Trinity Journal in 1980 and 1981) and Bruce Waltke (in Crux in 1992 and 1995), who both begin with 1 Tim 2 but use that text as a jumping-off point for broader exegetical and theological generalizations.
23 John Piper and Wayne Grudem, eds. Recovering Biblical Manhood & Womanhood: A Response to Evangelical Feminism (The Council and Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, 1991).
24 Webb, Slaves, Women & Homosexuals, 248.
25 This position is argued in detail elsewhere in the book.
26 Webb, Slaves, Women and Homosexuals, 237.
27 Ibid., 249.
28 Webb, Slaves, Women & Homosexuals, 263-268.
29 Piper and Grudem, Recovering Biblical Manhood & Womanhood, 73.
30 Thomas R. Schreiner, “An Interpretation of 1 Timothy 2:9-15: A Dialogue With Scholarship,” in Andreas J. Kstenberger, Thomas R. Schreiner, and H. Scott Baldwin, eds., Women in the Church: A Fresh Analysis of 1 Timothy 2:9-15 (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995).
31 If one chooses “ultra-soft patriarchy,” then any honor or headship given to the man is no longer functional but only “symbolic” (Webb, 241).
Related Topics: Cultural Issues
Repentance and Salvation
Related MediaFacility Checklist: Preschool Classroom, 3-5 Years Old
Related Media
Room organized with appropriate furniture, tables, and chairs.
Wall mounted telephone
Child size bathroom between classrooms
Rooms organized with appropriate storage cabinets/units for toys.
Outlet plug covers for all outlets.
Rooms organized with age appropriate decorations.
Age appropriate posters on walls.
Attendance sheets attached to a clip board.
Supplies for children (disposable gloves, antibacterial wipes, large crayons, markers, glue sticks, large pencils, paper, round nosed scissors appropriate for preschool children) in classrooms.
Security identification labels for children and parents. (can be purchased online)
Snacks, small cups, crackers, napkins in classrooms. (locked in a storage cabinet)
Small storage containers for supplies in classrooms. (locked in a storage cabinet)
Supplies for teacher (pencils, pens, scotch tape, stapler, hole punch, masking tape, glue) in classrooms.
Hand Puppets (optional)
Bean bag chairs or soft large pillows in classrooms. (optional)
Age appropriate musical instruments for children age 3 - 5 years old. (optional)
Age appropriate toys for children ages 3 - 5 years old.
Play house, play kitchen, play dishes, and play food for children 3 - 5 years old. (optional)
Age appropriate books and book stand for children 3 - 5 years old.
CD players and Christian music CD’s for children 3 - 5 years old in classrooms.
Disinfectant spray (safe to use to sterilize furniture and toys) and paper towels in classrooms. (locked in a storage cabinet)
Bulletin Boards decorated with age appropriate materials.
Trash Containers with trash bags in classrooms.
Clocks in the classrooms.
Curriculum, student handbooks, coloring sheets for children 3 - 5 years old.
All items on this list are recommended for a preschool classroom within a children’s ministry. Some of these items listed are optional and can be included when funds allow or when the need arises. Age appropriate materials need to be implemented into these classrooms for the safety and security of the children. Toys need to stay in the appropriate rooms and should not be shared with younger children.
Related Topics: Children - Nuts & Bolts
Facility Checklist: Toddler Classroom, 13-24 Months Old
Related Media Room organized with appropriate furniture, rocking chairs, changing tables, area rugs, table and chairs
Wall Mounted Telephone
Rooms organized with appropriate storage cabinets/units for toys
Rooms organized with age appropriate decorations
Age appropriate posters on walls
Security identification labels for children and parents
Supplies for toddlers (non latex gloves, baby wipes, diapers, large crayons, paper)
Snacks, small cups, graham crackers, napkins
Small storage containers for supplies
Supplies for teachers (pencils, pens, scotch tape, stapler, hole punch, masking tape)
Outlet covers (one used for every outlet in the room)
Supplies for the children (construction paper, drawing paper, stickers, large crayons)
Puppets
Toys for toddlers ages 13 - 24 months old
Plastic storage containers for toys if needed instead of wooden storage units
Age appropriate books
Attendance sheets on clip boards
Pager System and pagers for parents
CD players and Christian music CD’s for toddlers in classrooms
Disinfectant spray (safe to use to sterilize furniture and toys) and paper towels in classrooms
Bulletin Boards decorated with age appropriate materials
Trash Container with trash bags in classroom
Clock in the classroom
Curriculum for the teachers
Within any classroom all materials, furniture, toys and supplies must be age appropriate. All toys used in this classroom should be labeled for children ages 13 months to 24 months old. Those supplies used for art projects should be closely supervised by the teacher when used by the children.
Related Topics: Children - Nuts & Bolts
Children’s Ministry Facility Materials For A Preschool Classroom
Related MediaEach classroom should be supplied with the necessary items that are used each week. All additional supplies can be found in a general location such as a resource room, resource closet, supply cabinet, or supply containers that are easily accessible to teachers and volunteers. If space is a factor then supplies and materials need to be purchased weekly and made available to all volunteers at a designated location within the children’s department. It is helpful to label this area or room so that volunteers can find additional supplies easily.
Each classroom should have clean floors and walls without sharp edges, doors with windows, and adequate size classrooms with enough space to accommodate the amount of children for each age group. Consideration in choosing the right ventilation, lighting, classroom size, furniture, equipment, and supplies should be a priority for the safety and well being of every child within the ministry.
When setting up a children’s ministry strong emphasis should be placed on the safety of every child. Exits should be marked with signs and evacuation routes should be visible in case of an emergency. A copy of an evacuation plan with exit routes should be posted in every classroom next to or close to an exit door.
Below is a list of classroom furniture, equipment, and supply recommendations for a preschool classroom within a children’s ministry. Furniture must meet standard recommendations for each age group and must be sturdy and in good repair without missing pieces or rough edges. Furniture, equipment, and supplies can be bought through a children’s school supply company or local store. When selecting furniture, equipment, and supplies consider the age, size of the classroom, and standard recommendations for each age of children within the ministry.
All other ministries who use the preschool rooms during the week should be responsible to help maintain and keep the rooms clean and neat for the children.
Recommendations for classroom size, maximum ratios, and maximum group size have been taken from the state of Texas Minimum Standards for Child Care Facilities.
Some states may vary with standards and regulations, therefore it is best to refer to individual states where the church resides and use these standards and regulations as a guide to follow.
3 Year Olds Classroom Size |
35 square feet per child |
Maximum Ratio Child:Teacher |
7 Children to 1 Teacher |
Maximum Group Size |
14 Children |
Furniture/Classroom Equipment |
Supplies |
Bean Bag Chairs or Large Pillows |
Age appropriate wall posters and wall decorations |
Metal Cabinet with lock Plastic Container to hold adult supplies (Stapler, pens, markers, pencils, adult scissors) |
Small disposable cups Graham Crackers or Crackers Napkins |
CD Player Clip Board with Attendance Sheet |
Christian CD’s for children Sing a longs and movement CD’s |
TV and DVD Player Ceiling or Wall Mount |
Age appropriate DVD’s Age appropriate books |
3 Preschool size tables Each table should seat 8 children 14 - 18 Preschool Chairs per room 2 Large Adult Chairs for Teachers |
Age appropriate toys, floor and table toys Blocks, Cars, Trucks, Dolls, Puzzles Hand Puppets Curriculum, Student Handbooks, Coloring Pages |
Wood Book Stand |
Security Labels for children |
Bulletin Board 6 feet long 1 - 2 per classroom Wall Mounted Working Phone Play Kitchen with Play Food and Dishes 1 - 2 Area Rugs |
Construction Paper White Paper Large Crayons Washable Markers Glue Sticks Stickers Child size scissors rounded end |
Storage Shelves for toys 1 - 2 Units Play House Lego Table with Legos |
Felt Board Felt Pieces Large Picture Books Large Posters |
1 Trash Can per room |
Trash Bags |
Metal Cabinet with lock Plastic Container to hold adult supplies (Stapler, pens, markers, pencils) |
Paper Towels & Kleenex Wet Wipes Disposable Gloves |
Cubby Coat unit for 14 children attached to a wall. Unit should have hooks for coats and diaper bags |
Disinfectant Spray safe for children Antibacterial hand Soap |
Child size bathroom between classrooms |
Outlet Covers (one for every outlet) Locks on Cabinets |
Related Topics: Children - Nuts & Bolts
Children’s Ministry Facility Materials for a Toddler Classroom
Related MediaEach classroom should be supplied with the necessary items that are used each week. All additional supplies can be found in a general location such as a resource room, resource closet, supply cabinet, or supply containers that are easily accessible to teachers and volunteers. If space is a factor, supplies and materials will need to be purchased weekly and made available to all volunteers at a designated location within the children’s department. It is helpful to label this area or room so that volunteers can find additional supplies easily.
Each classroom should have clean floors and walls without sharp edges, doors with windows, and adequate size classrooms with enough space to accommodate the amount of children for each age group. Consideration in choosing the right ventilation, lighting, classroom size, furniture, equipment, and supplies should be a priority for the safety and well being of every child within the ministry.
When setting up a children’s ministry strong emphasis should be placed on the safety of every child. Exits should be marked with signs and evacuation routes should be visible in case of an emergency. A copy of an evacuation plan with exit routes should be posted in every classroom next to or close to an exit door.
Below is a list of classroom furniture, equipment, and supply recommendations for a nursery within a children’s ministry. Furniture must meet standard recommendations for each age group and must be sturdy and in good repair without missing pieces or rough edges. Furniture, equipment, and supplies can be bought through a children’s school supply company or local store. When selecting furniture, equipment, and supplies consider the age, size of the classroom, and standard recommendations for each age of children within the ministry.
The nursery and toddler rooms should be locked when not in use so that the furniture, equipment, and toys will remain clean until the following Sunday. All other ministries who use the nursery or toddler rooms during the week should be responsible to help maintain and keep these rooms clean, sterile, and safe for the children.
Recommendations for classroom size, maximum ratios, and maximum group size have been taken from the state of Texas Minimum Standards for Child Care Facilities.
Some states may vary with standards and regulations, therefore it is best to refer to individual states where the church resides and use these standards and regulations as a guide to follow.
Toddlers 13 months - 24 months Classroom Size |
35 square feet per one child More space if possible |
Maximum Ratio Child:Teacher |
5 Children to 1 Teacher |
Maximum Group Size |
10 Children per room |
Furniture/Classroom Equipment |
Supplies |
2 Small Tables (seats 6 children) 10 -12 Small Toddler Chairs |
Age appropriate wall posters and wall decorations Age appropriate pictures |
Metal Cabinet with lock Plastic Container to hold adult supplies (stapler, pens, markers, pencils) |
Graham Crackers Napkins Small Disposable Cups Disposable Gloves (latex free, size medium) |
1 Changing Table per room |
Extra Diapers (size large) |
TV and DVD Player |
Age Appropriate DVD’s |
Wood Book Stand 1-2 Wooden Storage Units/Shelves for Toys 1 -2 Area Rugs |
Age appropriate books and puzzles Age appropriate toys, floor and table toys Blocks, cars, trucks, dolls |
1 Metal Trash Can Stationary Telephone (Wall unit recommended) |
Trash Bags Scotch Tape Masking Tape Stapler Adult Scissors Pens & Pencils |
Age Appropriate Play House Age Appropriate Riding Toys |
Baby Wipes Paper Towels Disinfectant Spray (safe to clean furniture and toys) Kleenex |
1-2 Bulletin Boards 4 - 8 feet long |
Construction Paper Stickers White Paper Large Crayons (supervision required) |
Cubby Coat Unit (wall unit or stationary) (Hooks for 12 children to hold coats, diaper bags and children’s belongings) |
Outlet Covers (one for every outlet in the nursery, toddler, or preschool classrooms) |
Age appropriate area rugs Wall Clock and Batteries |
Antibacterial Hand Soap |
Pager System with Pagers |
Attendance Sheets on a Clip Board Teachers/Volunteer Schedule posted Security Labels for Children |
Related Topics: Children - Nuts & Bolts
Имена Бога
Related Media
Эта статья была переведена с помощью компьютера
Великая цель человека, особенно верующего во Христа, является прославление Бога. "Независимо от того, то, вы едите или пьете, или иное что делаете, все делайте в славу Божию» (1 Кор 10:31). Существенное значение для нашей способности, чтобы прославить Бога есть познание Бога и знать Его лично с учетом этого знания.
Великая цель человека, особенно верующего во Христа, является прославление Бога. "Независимо от того, то, вы едите или пьете, или иное что делаете, все делайте в славу Божию» (1 Кор 10:31). Существенное значение для нашей способности, чтобы прославить Бога есть познание Бога и знать Его лично с учетом этого знания.
Слово "слава" в греческом тексте Нового Завета доксы что означает мнения, оценки, или репутации, в котором проводится. Она относится к тому, что должно нарастать к Богу, как славословие, благодарение, послушание, почитание и служение, потому что от того, кто есть Бог, и что Бог делает (в прошлом, настоящем и будущем). Иными словами, воздав славу Богу увязаны с познанием Бога (Откровение Бога), и, зная Бога лично (ответ на Бога).
Господь Иисус сказал в Иоанна 17:3: "И это есть жизнь вечная, да знают Тебя, единого истинного Бога, и Иисуса Христа, посланного Тобою". Многие имена в Писании, представляют собой дополнительные откровения характер Бога, Его работ, и Его отношения к нам основана на его характер и работ. Имена, которые Бог избрал для Себя, и которые приписывали ему в Слове Божьем дополнительные откровения, кто и что Божия, чтобы мы могли знать и относиться к Богу.
Обратите внимание, заявления Давида об имени Бога, и слово в Псалме 138:1-2. Божье имя заявляет многое о его личности, но это Слово Божье, который показывает Бог и Его имя.
Мы знаем, каков Бог, и не только Его совершенства и работает, но и Его имена. Они говорят нам многое о Божьей заботы и беспокойство за свои собственные. Это один из интереснейших исследований Писания. Различные обстоятельства, которые приносят каждый из имен Бога important.1
Значение
Имена Бога в Священном Писании
В нашем двадцатом веке западная культура, личные имена являются не более чем этикетки, чтобы отличить одного человека от другого. Иногда прозвища выбрали, которые говорят что-то о человеке, но даже это слабо отражает значение имен в Библии.
К сожалению, многие имена Бога или Господа передать немного больше, чем обозначения высшего существа. Он мало говорит с ними о характере Бога, Его пути, и то, что Бог означает для каждого из нас как человеческих существ. Но в Писании, имена Бога как миниатюрные портреты и обещаний. В Писании имя человека идентифицировали их и стоял за что-то конкретное. Это особенно верно для Бога. Именование осуществляется особое значение. Это был знак власти и силы. Это проявляется в том, что Бог открыл Его имена своему народу, а не позволяя им выбирать свои имена для Него. Это проявляется также в том, что Бог часто менял имена своих людей: Аврама на Авраам, Сара Сара, Иаков Израиль. Отметим также, как эта концепция власти и силы наблюдается, когда Навуходоносор изменил имена Даниил и трое его друзей.
Имя Бога в Генеральной
Есть целый ряд случаев, когда не имя Бога используется, но где просто термин "имя" по отношению к Богу используется в качестве точки фокуса:
(1) Авраам призвал имя Господа (Быт. 12:8; 13:4).
(2) Господь провозгласил, что Его собственное имя до Моисея (Исх. 33:19; 34:5).
(3) Израиль предостерег против осквернения имени Господа (Лев. 13:21; 22:2, 32).
(4) имя Господа не должно было быть принято напрасно (Исх. 20:7;. Втор 5:11).
(5) священники Израиля должны были служить во имя Господа (Втор. 18:05; 21:5).
(6) имя Бога называют "замечательный" в книге Судей 13:18.
(7) Для призовет имя Господне, чтобы поклоняться Ему как Богу (Быт. 21:33; 26:25).
Следовательно, из этого можно сделать вывод, что такие фразы, как "имя Господне" или "имя Бога" относится к весь характер Бога. Это была сводная ведомость, отражающих весь лица God.2
Если мы обратимся к Новому Завету мы находим то же самое. Имя Иисус используется таким же образом, чтобы имя Бога в Ветхом Завете:
(1) Спасение во имя Его (Ин. 1:12).
(2) Верующие должны собраться во имя Его (Мф. 18:20).
(3) Молитва должна быть сделана во имя Его (Ин. 14:13-14).
(4) слуга Господа, кто носит имя Христа будут ненавидеть (Мф. 10:22).
(5) В книге Деяний делает частые упоминания о поклонении, обслуживание, и страдания во имя Иисуса Христа (Деян. 4:18; 5:28, 41; 10:43; 19:17).
(6) Это на имя Иисуса, что всякое колено в один прекрасный день лук и всякий язык исповедал, что Господь Иисус Христос (Фил. 2:10-11).
Так же, как имя Бога в Ветхом Завете говорил святой характера Бога Отца, так и о имени Иисуса в Новом Завете говорится о святости Бога Son.3
Обзор
Имена Бога в Священном Писании
(1) Элохим: форма множественного числа EL, что означает "сильный". Он используется ложных богов, но при использовании истинного Бога, это множественное число от величия и близких троицы. Это особенно используется суверенитет Бога, творчество, могучий работу в Израиле и в связи с его суверенитетом (Ис. 54:5, Иер 32:27; Быт. 1:1; Исаия 45:18; Втор 5...: 23; 8:15; Пс 68:7)..
Соединения Эл:
Эль-Шаддай ". Всемогущий Бог" вывод является неопределенным. Некоторые думают, что подчеркивает любящего Бога питания и комфорт, другие Его власть, как Всемогущий одного стоящего на горе, и кто исправляет и наказывает (Быт. 17:1; 28:3; 35:11;. Ex 6:1; Пс 91. : 1, 2).
Эль-Элион ". Всевышнего Бога" подчеркивает силу Божью, суверенитета и верховенства (Быт. 14:19; Пс 9:2; Дан 7:18, 22, 25..).
Эль-Олам ". Вечный Бог» подчеркивает неизменность Бога и связано с его неисчерпаемость (Быт. 16:13).
(2) Яхве (Иегова): Происходит от глагола, который означает Это, а также его использования, показывает, что это название подчеркивает Бога, как независимого и самостоятельного существует Бог откровения и искупления (Быт. 4 "существовать, быть".: 3; Ex 6:3 (ср. 3:14);. 3:12).
Соединения Бог: Строго говоря, эти соединения являются обозначения или названия, раскрывающие дополнительные сведения о характере Бога.
Яхве-ире (Yireh): ". Господь усмотрит" подчеркивает Божье обеспечение для Своего народа (Быт. 22:14).
Яхве Нисси: "Господь знамя мое". Подчеркивает, что Бог является нашим сборным пунктом и наши средства победу, тот, кто борется за свой народ (Исх. 17:15).
Господь Шалом: "Господь мира". Указывает на Господа, как средство наш мир и покой (Суд 6:24).
Господь Саваоф: "Господь Саваоф". Военный деятель изображением Господа, как командующий армиями небес (1 Цар 1:3; 17:45.).
Господь Maccaddeshcem: ". Господь, Бог ваш Святителя» изображает Господа, как наши средства освящение или как тот, кто задает верующих отдельно для Своих целей (Исх. 31:13).
Господь Рои: ". Господь мой пастырь» изображает Господа, как пастырь, который заботится о своем народе, как пастух заботится о овцы паствы Его (Пс. 23:1).
Господь Tsidkenu: ". Господь оправдание наше" изображает Господа, как средство наша праведность (Иер. 23:6).
Господь Шамма: "Господь там". Играет личного присутствия Господа в тысячелетнем царстве (Иез. 48:35).
Яхве Элохим Израиля: "Господь, Бог Израилев". Определяет Яхве, Бог Израилев в отличие от ложных богов народов (Суд 5:3; Исаия 17:6..).
(3) Адонаи: Как Элохим, это тоже множественное число от величия. Особая форма означает "хозяин, владелец". Подчеркивает отношения человека к Богу, как его хозяин, власть, и поставщик (Быт. 18:02; 40:1; 1 Цар 1:15;. Ex 21:1-6;. Josh . 5:14).
(4) Теос: греческое слово переводится как "Бог". Первичное имя Бога в Новом Завете. Его использование учит: (1) Он является единственным истинным Богом (Мф. 23:09; Рим 3:30.); (2) Он является уникальным (1 Тим 1:17; Иоанна 17:3; Откр 15.: 4; 16:7), (3) Он является трансцендентным (Деян. 17:24; Евр 3:4; Откр 10:6); (4) Он есть Спаситель (Ин. 3:16; 1 Тим 1..: 1; 2:3; 4:10). Это имя используется в Христа как Бога в Иоанна 1:1, 18; 20:28; 1-е Иоанна 5:20; Тит. 2:13; Рим. 9:5; Евр. 1:8; 2 Пет. 1:1.
(5) Kurios: ". Господь" Греческое слово, переведенное подчеркивает власть и господство. Хотя это может означать, сэр (Ин. 4:11), владелец (Лк. 19:33), мастер (Кол. 3:22), или даже обратиться к идолам (1 Кор 8:5.) Или мужей (1 Пет 3.: 6), он используется в основном в качестве эквивалента Яхве Ветхого Завета. Это тоже используется в значении Иисуса Христа (1) раввин или Сэр (Мф. 8:6), (2) Бога или божество (Ин. 20:28; Деяния 2:36;. Rom 10:9; Фил 2:11. ).
». Master": (6) Despotes Греческое слово, переведенное несет в себе идею собственности при Kurios подчеркнул верховной власти (Луки 2:29; Деяния 4:24; Откр 6:10; 2 Пет 2:1; Иуды 4.).
(7) Отец: отличительные новозаветное откровение, что через веру во Христа, Бог становится нашим личным Отца. Отец использовал Бога в Ветхом Завете только 15 раз, а это Бог использовал 245 раз в Новом Завете. В качестве имени Бога, он подчеркивает, любовью и заботой Бога, положение, дисциплина, и как мы должны обращаться к Богу в молитве (Мф. 7:11; Jam 1:17; Евр 12:5-11; Иоанна 15..: 16; 16:23;. Еф 2:18; 3:15; 1 Фес 3:11)..
1 Роберт Lightner, Бог Библии, Введение в учение о Боге (Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, 1973), стр. 107.
2 Там же., С. 108.
3 Там же., С. 109.
Curriculum Evaluation Guide
Related MediaThis form can be used with your Children’s Ministry Curriculum Team when you are ready to evaluate new curriculum. The form below is just a reference to use and can be modified to meet the needs of your church and children’s ministry.
Name: ______________________________________________
Name of Curriculum: __________________________________
Date: _________________
Curriculum Evaluation
a. Graphic Design |
1 2 3 4 5 NA |
b. Lesson plan |
1 2 3 4 5 NA |
c. Appropriate lesson components |
1 2 3 4 5 NA |
d. Engaging lessons |
1 2 3 4 5 NA |
e. Ease of use |
1 2 3 4 5 NA |
f. Age-level appropriateness |
1 2 3 4 5 NA |
g. Teacher resources (e.g. Bible Study Aids, background |
1 2 3 4 5 NA |
h. Student participation activities |
1 2 3 4 5 NA |
i. Teaching aids |
1 2 3 4 5 NA |
j. Evangelism and Missions |
1 2 3 4 5 NA |
k. Reflects theological position of our church |
1 2 3 4 5 NA |
l. Parent Resources |
1 2 3 4 5 NA |
m. Bible lesson application encouraged |
1 2 3 4 5 NA |
n. Different methods for different learning styles |
1 2 3 4 5 NA |
o. Teacher reflection and personal Bible study |
1 2 3 4 5 NA |
p. Bible Content |
1 2 3 4 5 NA |
q. Appropriate for all levels of teaching abilities |
1 2 3 4 5 NA |
r. Bible study approaches and life issues |
1 2 3 4 5 NA |
s. Encourages ongoing Bible study |
1 2 3 4 5 NA |
t. Diverse demographically |
1 2 3 4 5 NA |
Comments:
Prioritize (1, 2, 3, etc.) and grade (A, B, C, +/-, etc.) your curricula choice according to anticipated and /or actual effectiveness for your church.
Related Topics: Children's Curriculum
Ezekiel 25
PARAGRAPH DIVISIONS OF MODERN TRANSLATIONS
NASB | NKJV | NRSV | TEV | NJB |
Judgment On Gentile Nations, Ammon | Proclamation Against Ammon |
Oracles Against the Nations (25:1-32:32) |
Prophecy Against Ammon | Against Ammonites |
Oracles Against Ammon | ||||
25:1-7 | 25:1-7 | 25:1-7 | 25:1-5 | 25:1-3a |
25:3b-5 | ||||
25:6-7 | 25:6-7 | |||
Moab | Proclamation Against Moab | Oracles Against Moab | Prophecy Against Moab | Against Moab |
25:8-11 | 25:8-11 | 25:8-11 | 25:8-11 | 25:8-11 |
Edom | Proclamation Against Edom | Oracles Against Edom | Prophecy Against Edom | Against Edom |
25:12-14 | 25:12-14 | 25:12-14 | 25:12-14 | 25:12-14 |
Philistia | Proclamation Against Philistia | Oracles Against Philistia | Prophecy Against Philistia | Against Philistines |
25:15-17 | 25:15-17 | 25:15-17 | 25:15-17 | 25:15-17 |
READING CYCLE THREE (see "Guide to Good Bible Reading")
FOLLOWING THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR'S INTENT AT PARAGRAPH LEVEL
This is a study guide commentary which means that you are responsible for your own interpretation of the Bible. Each of us must walk in the light we have. You, the Bible, and the Holy Spirit are priority in interpretation. You must not relinquish this to a commentator.
Read the chapter in one sitting. Identify the subjects (reading cycle #3). Compare your subject divisions with the four modern translations above. Paragraphing is not inspired, but it is the key to following the original author's intent, which is the heart of interpretation. Every paragraph has one and only one subject.
1. First paragraph
2. Second paragraph
3. Third paragraph
4. Etc.
CONTEXTUAL INSIGHTS TO CHAPTERS 25-32
A. There is a subject unity (judgment on these nations) to these chapters, but not a genre uniformity. Also note the different dates.
1. 9th year, 10 month, 10th day, 24:1 (may cover chapter 25)
2. 11th year, 1st month , 1st day , 26:1
3. 10 year, 10th month, 12th day, 29:1
4. 27th year, 1st month, 1st day, 29:17
5. 11th year, 1st month, 7th day, 30:20
6. 11th year, 3rd month, 1st day, 31:1
7. 12th year, 12th month, 1st day, 32:1
8. 12th year, 12th month, 15th day, 32:17
This clearly demonstrates that the literary unit (25-32) was an edited collection. By whom and when is uncertain.
B. The oracles against the nations (see D.) are characteristic of Hebrew Prophetic Literature.
1. Isaiah 13-21, 23, 24
2. Jeremiah 46-51
3. Ezekiel 25-32, 35, 38-39
4. Amos 1-2
5. Joel 3:1-16
6. Zephaniah 2:1-3:5
C. Nations to Be Judged by YHWH
Isaiah 13-21, 23, 24 | Jeremiah 46-51 | Ezekiel 25-32, 35, 38-39 | Amos 1-2 |
Babylon Philistia Moab Syria Ethiopia Egypt Edom Arabia Phoenicia the nations |
Egypt Philistia Moab Edom Syria Hazor Elam Babylon
|
Ammon Moab Edom Philistia Phoenicia Egypt Babylon Assyria Elam Meshech Tubal (Turkey) |
Syria Philistia Phoenicia Ammon Moab Judah Israel
|
D. The nations listed in chapter 25 tried to get Judah to rebel against Babylon (cf. Jeremiah 27), but in the end, they benefitted, even participated in, Judah's fall (cf. II Kgs. 24:1-2).
E. It is surprising that Babylon is not mentioned in the list of condemned nations. This is because Babylon was YHWH's instrument of judgment on Judah, as Assyria was for Israel (cf. Isa. 10:5). She will surely be judged, but for now she is YHWH's instrument (as Cyrus will be, cf. Isa. 44:28; 45:1) to destroy Babylon.
F. Theological Issues
1. The judgment oracles on surrounding nations and world powers of the Ancient Near East accentuate the power, glory, and uniqueness of Israel's God (i.e., monotheism).
2. They show that YHWH has a larger purpose for a repentant Israel (they are given no chance to repent). Ezekiel's prophesies of a restored, glorified temple was a way of asserting a future hope and purpose for Israel (i.e., the Messiah). The first temple became corrupt (cf. chapts. 8-10) and YHWH left, but a future temple is promised (chapts. 40-48).
3. The messages of doom on the pagan nations were Ezekiel's first message of hope for God's exiled people after the exiles heard of Jerusalem's demise (cf. 24:25-27).
4. The book of Jonah is also a condemnation of a foreign oppressor nation (i.e., Assyria). Yet, it functioned theologically as YHWH's willingness to accept the repentance of the pagan nations (i.e., Isa. 19:23,24-25). The reality of Gen. 12:3 is being fulfilled!
WORD AND PHRASE STUDY
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT:25:1-7
1And the word of the Lord came to me saying, 2"Son of man, set your face toward the sons of Ammon and prophesy against them, 3and say to the sons of Ammon, 'Hear the word of the Lord God! Thus says the Lord God, "Because you said, 'Aha!' against My sanctuary when it was profaned, and against the land of Israel when it was made desolate, and against the house of Judah when they went into exile, 4therefore, behold, I am going to give you to the sons of the east for a possession, and they will set their encampments among you and make their dwellings among you; they will eat your fruit and drink your milk. 5I will make Rabbah a pasture for camels and the sons of Ammon a resting place for flocks. Thus you will know that I am the Lord." 6For thus says the Lord God, "Because you have clapped your hands and stamped your feet and rejoiced with all the scorn of your soul against the land of Israel, 7therefore, behold, I have stretched out My hand against you and I will give you for spoil to the nations. And I will cut you off from the peoples and make you perish from the lands; I will destroy you. Thus you will know that I am the Lord."
25:1 This is the characteristic literary marker that a new oracle is beginning. It is surprising that a date does not appear here, as it does in 26:1 and 24:1. This causes the interpreter to ask if chapters 24-25 form a literary unit. From content it seems that these chapters form a unit of pronouncements regarding YHWH's coming judgment on the surrounding nations.
25:2 "set your face toward" This imperative (BDB 967, KB 1321, Qal imperative) is a standard idiom (cf. 15:7; Lev. 20:5; 26:17; Jer. 21:10; 44:11; Amos 9:4). See note at 6:2; also note 13:17; 20:46; 21:2; 25:2; 28:21; 29:2; 35:2; 38:2.
▣ "Ammon" All three trans-Jordan nations were relatives of Israel, Edom through Esau (cf. Gen. 36:1) and Ammon and Moab through Lot (cf. Gen. 19:37-38).
Ammon was located south of the Jabbok River and another boundary somewhere north of the Arnon River.
▣ "prophesy" This is a second imperative (BDB 612, KB 659, Niphal imperative, cf. 4:7; 6:2; 11:4; 13:2,17; 21:2,7; 25:2; 28:21; 29:2; 34:2; 35:2; 36:6; 38:2; 39:1). After the fall of Jerusalem, Ezekiel now proclaims YHWH's judgment on the surrounding nations who supported or maybe were directly involved in Jerusalem's demise (cf. Jer. 49:1-6; Amos 1:13-15; Zeph. 2:8-9).
Herodutus specifically mentions Nebuchadnezzar's devastation of the trans-jordan area in 582 b.c. Josephus mentions that it occurred five years after the fall of Jerusalem in 586 b.c.
25:3 "Hear" This is the third opening imperative (BDB 1633, KB 1570, Qal imperative) in this section. One wonders if any of these nations ever heard these prophecies. They were addressed to them, but obviously they were directed toward the Israeli exiles. They demonstrate that
1. YHWH is a universal God
2. YHWH is no respecter of persons
3. YHWH will punish sin
4. YHWH's word does come to pass
5. YHWH's ultimate will will be accomplished
▣ "Aha" This interjection expresses joy of the Ammonites (cf. Ps. 35:21,25; 40:15-16; Isa. 44:16; Ezek. 25:3; 26:2; 36:2), which is defined in v. 6. They rejoiced over
1. the sanctuary being profaned
2. the land of Israel made desolate
3. the house of Judah sent into exile
They may have participated in this exile (cf. II Kgs. 24:1-2).
25:4 "I am going to give you" The verb (BDB 678, KB 733, Qal participle, in v. 10 Qal perfect) is used in 11:15 (Niphal perfect) of Canaan being given to God's covenant people, but because of their sin, the land will now be given to "the sons of the east." This is similar to Canaan originally being taken away from the ten nations and given to Israel (cf. Gen. 15:12-21).
▣ "the sons of the east" This phrase occurs several times with several possible meanings.
1. warriors, v. 10; Jdgs. 6:3,33
2. wisemen, I Kgs. 4:30
3. future relatives (i.e., Syria), Gen. 29:1
4. nomadic Arabs from northern Arabia
Here it refers to Babylon, which is beyond Syria. Ezekiel has predicted that YHWH will judge His people with an "east wind" (cf. 17:10; 19:12; note Isa. 27:8).
▣ "they will eat your fruit and drink your milk" This phrase is similar to Deut. 28:33, which describes Israel's fate if she does not keep YHWH's covenant (cf. Isa. 1:7).
These terms are normally a prayer of thanksgiving (i.e., Ps. 120:2; Isa. 3:10), but here it is a curse.
25:5 "Rabbah" This is the capital of Ammon located on the Wadi Amman, which becomes the Jabbok River. This water source was the key to the city's continuity. It is the capital of the nation of Jordan today, Amman.
▣ "a pasture for camel. . .a resting place for flocks" This is a way of predicting the nation's depopulation, only nomadic herdsmen will be there for short periods (cf. Isa. 27:10).
The term "resting place" (BDB 918) is found only here and in Zeph. 2:5 where it is used of wild beasts. This judged place was so dry that it could only be used for grazing at certain brief times of the year.
25:6 The physical gestures of "clapping hands" and "stomping feet" can be understood as a way of expressing joy or approval (cf. 6:11; Nahum 3:19). In this context Ammon rejoiced at Judah's demise (and may have participated in it, cf. II Kgs. 24:1-2).
25:7 "I have stretched out My hand against you" This is another idiom of judgment (cf. Exod. 7:5; 15:6,12; Isa. 5:25; 9:12,17,21; 10:4; 14:27; 23:11; Jer. 6:12; 15:6; 51:25; Ezek. 6:14; 14:13; 20:33,34; 25:7,13; 35:3; Zeph. 1:4; 2:13).
▣ "I shall give you for spoil to the nations" Spoil (BDB 103) refers to the property of conquered nations, including even their own persons (i.e., Num. 31:32-40). This term is found several times in Ezekiel (cf. 25:7; 26:5; 29:19; 36:4; 38:12,13).
The MT has a word that is unknown. This has been emended by changing one consonant.
1. "spoil" בז (BDB 103)
2. from בג (BDB 93)
Notice the things YHWH says He will do to Ammon.
1. stretched out His hand against them
2. gave them for spoil to the nations
3. cut them off from the peoples
4. made them perish from the lands
5. destroyed them (cf. v. 10)
Ammon will be no more! This is surprising in light of Jer. 49:6 (and Moab's restoration in Jer. 48:47). This may have an eschatological orientation.
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT:25:8-11
8'Thus says the Lord God, "Because Moab and Seir say, 'Behold, the house of Judah is like all the nations,' 9therefore, behold, I am going to deprive the flank of Moab of its cities, of its cities which are on its frontiers, the glory of the land, Beth-jeshimoth, Baal-meon and Kiriathaim, 10and I will give it for a possession along with the sons of Ammon to the sons of the east, so that the sons of Ammon will not be remembered among the nations. 11Thus I will execute judgments on Moab, and they will know that I am the Lord."
25:8-11 This chapter addresses
1. Ammon, vv. 1-7
2. Moab, vv. 8-11
3. Edom, vv. 12-14
4. Philistia, vv. 15-17
▣ "Moab" This is another trans-Jordan country from Lot's incestuous children by his own daughters (cf. Genesis 19). There are several prophecies against Moab (cf. Num. 21:27-30; Isaiah 15-16; Jeremiah 48; Amos 2:1-3; Zeph. 2:8-11). Moab's boundaries are from the Arnon River to the Brook Zered.
▣ "Seir" This (BDB 973) refers to a mountain range running parallel to the Arabah (see The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, vol. 5, pp. 329-330). It was originally the homeland of Horite settlers (cf. Gen. 36:20-30), but they were defeated by Esau (cf. Deut. 2:12,22). Therefore, "Seir," "Mount Seir," became ways of referring to Edomites (cf. II Chr. 20:10; 25:11). Edom is located south of the Brook Zered and extends down the eastern side of the Arabah.
25:8 "the house of Judah is like all the nations" This statement, in one sense, was surely true. Judah had taken up the Canaanite religion. In another sense the phrase depreciates Judah's unique relationship with YHWH (i.e., Gen. 12:1-3; Exod. 19:4-5). These trans-jordan relative nations saw nothing different, unique, or respectable in Judah or her God.
It is also possible that Marduk (i.e., chief god of Babylon) was seen as being stronger than the gods of the nations which were conquered. It was Judah's military defeat that precipitated the accusations and slurs.
25:9 "Beth-jeshimoth" This Moabite city was located on the eastern side of the Jordan in the ancient tribal allocation of Reuben (cf. Josh. 12:3; 13:20). The name means "place of the desert" (BDB 111).
▣ "Baal-meon" This Moabite city was also located in the ancient tribal allocation of Reuben (cf. Num. 32:28; Josh. 13:17; also note Jer. 48:23). Note it carries the name of the Canaanite male fertility deity.
▣ "Kiriathaim" This is also a Moabite town in the tribal allocation of Reuben (cf. Num. 32:37; Josh. 13:19), located on the tableland. It is also mentioned in God's judgment on Moab in Jer. 48:1.
25:10 "Ammon may not be remembered among the nations" The verb (BDB 269, KB 269, Niphal imperfect) is also used of Ammon in 21:32. Ammon will exist no more as a nation. Israel will return to its land, but Ammon will not (the same is true of Edom).
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT:25:12-14
12'Thus says the Lord God, "Because Edom has acted against the house of Judah by taking vengeance, and has incurred grievous guilt, and avenged themselves upon them," 13therefore thus says the Lord God, "I will also stretch out My hand against Edom and cut off man and beast from it. And I will lay it waste; from Teman even to Dedan they will fall by the sword. 14I will lay My vengeance on Edom by the hand of My people Israel. Therefore, they will act in Edom according to My anger and according to My wrath; thus they will know My vengeance," declares the Lord God.
25:12 Edom acted against the house of Judah (cf. Ps. 137:7; Lam. 4:21-22; Obad. vv. 10-14) by
1. taking vengeance (BDB 667, KB 721, Qal infinitive construct) plus the related noun, BDB 668). This action caused great guilt (Qal imperfect verb plus infinitive absolute of the same root, BDB 79, KB 95, which is a grammatical way to show intensity).
2. avenging themselves (BDB 667, KB 721, Niphal perfect).
Also they apparently took the opportunity of the collapse of the Judean state to annex part of her land (cf. R. K. Harrison, Introduction to the Old Testament, p. 844).
25:13-14 YHWH will respond in vengeance (BDB 668).
1. stretch out His hand against them
2. cut off man and beast
3. lay it waste
4. fall by the sword
This violation of Edom against Judah and her God (cf. v. 8) was taken very personally by YHWH.
1. My vengeance, twice
2. My people
3. My anger
4. My wrath
Note how many prophecies are against Edom (cf. Isa. 34:5-17; 63:1-6; Jer. 49:7-22; Ezek. 25:12-14; 35:1-15; Lam. 4:21-22; Amos 1:11-12; Mal. 1:2-4).
25:13 "Teman" This is the Hebrew word for "south," "south wind" (BDB 412). It originally designated a grandson of Esau (cf. Gen. 36:11). It came to refer to the northern part of the nation of Edom (cf. Obad. v. 9; Hab. 3:3) and a city (cf. Jer. 49:7,20; Amos 1:12).
In this context it represents a region because it is contrasted with Dedam to designate the whole nation (similar to "from Dan to Beersheba").
▣ "Dedan" This refers to a southern region in northwestern Arabia (cf. Gen. 10:7; 25:3). The Arab inhabitants became identified with Edom (cf. Jer. 49:8). As an area it extended down the eastern side of the Gulf of Aqaba.
The exact locations of Teman and Dedan are uncertain and whether they refer to a city or a region in this context is uncertain.
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT:25:15-17
15'Thus says the Lord God, "Because the Philistines have acted in revenge and have taken vengeance with scorn of soul to destroy with everlasting enmity," 16therefore thus says the Lord God, "Behold, I will stretch out My hand against the Philistines, even cut off the Cherethites and destroy the remnant of the seacoast. 17I will execute great vengeance on them with wrathful rebukes; and they will know that I am the Lord when I lay My vengeance on them."'"
25:15 "Philistines" See Special Topic: Pre-Israelite Inhabitants of Palestine at 16:3. The name Palestine comes from the Philistines. They were enemies of the Israelites throughout their history.
▣ "have acted" This verse describes Philistia's actions against God's people.
1. acted in revenge
2. took vengeance
3. displayed scorn of soul
4. destroyed with everlasting enmity (cf. 35:5)
Wow! What strong language!
25:16 "Cherethites" This name is of uncertain origin (BDB 504). Two principles of hermeneutics can help here.
1. In context they are parallel to Philistines. They could be a synonymous name or a specific group who were assimilated. The Philistines were Aegean people. The Cherethites were possibly from Crete (because of [1] Amos 9:7; [2] the similarity of the root consonants; and [3] the LXX translation).
2. Parallel passages link them to the Philistines (i.e., Pelethites, cf. II Sam. 8:18; 15:18; 20:7,23; I Kgs. 1:38,44; I Chr. 18:17; Zeph. 2:5).
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
This is a study guide commentary, which means that you are responsible for your own interpretation of the Bible. Each of us must walk in the light we have. You, the Bible, and the Holy Spirit are priority in interpretation. You must not relinquish this to a commentator.
These discussion questions are provided to help you think through the major issues of this section of the book. They are meant to be thought-provoking, not definitive.
1. What is the theological significance of the literary unit of chapters 25-32?
2. Why does Ezekiel mention the small surrounding nations first?
3. Why is Babylon not included in the list of nations to be judged?
4. Who are the Cherethites of v. 16?
5. What is the significance of the phrase "they will know that I am the Lord," v. 17?
Copyright © 2012 Bible Lessons International
Psalm 15
STROPHE DIVISIONS OF MODERN TRANSLATIONS
NASB | NKJV | NRSV | TEV | NJB |
Description of a Citizen of Zion | The Character of Those Who May Dwell with the Lord | A Liturgy for Admission to the Temple | What God Requires | The Guest of Yahweh |
MT Intro "A Psalm of David" |
||||
15:1-5 | 15:1 | 15:1 | 15:1 | 15:1 |
15:2-5b | 15:2-5b | 15:2-5b | 15:2-3a | |
15:3b-4b | ||||
15:4c-5 | ||||
15:5c | 15:5c | 15:5c |
READING CYCLE THREE (see "Guide to Good Bible Reading")
FOLLOWING THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR'S INTENT AT PARAGRAPH LEVEL
This is a study guide commentary which means that you are responsible for your own interpretation of the Bible. Each of us must walk in the light we have. You, the Bible, and the Holy Spirit are priority in interpretation. You must not relinquish this to a commentator.
Read the chapter in one sitting. Identify the subjects (reading cycle #3). Compare your subject divisions with the five translations above. Paragraphing is not inspired, but it is the key to following the original author's intent, which is the heart of interpretation. Every paragraph has one and only one subject.
1. First paragraph
2. Second paragraph
3. Third paragraph
4. Etc.
WORD AND PHRASE STUDY
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: PSALM 15:1-5
1O Lord, who may abide in Your tent?
Who may dwell on Your holy hill?
2He who walks with integrity, and works righteousness,
And speaks truth in his heart.
3He does not slander with his tongue,
Nor does evil to his neighbor,
Nor takes up a reproach against his friend;
4In whose eyes a reprobate is despised,
But who honors those who fear the Lord;
He swears to his own hurt and does not change;
5He does not put out his money at interest,
Nor does he take a bribe against the innocent.
He who does these things will never be shaken.
15:1 "Lord" This is the covenant name for Deity from the Hebrew verb "to be." See SPECIAL TOPIC: NAMES FOR DEITY at Ps. 1:1.
▣ "who" Verse 1 is a question which may be a textual marker for a type of liturgy used for those who enter the temple on a feast day.
▣ "Your tent. . .Your holy hill" These are parallel which means the verbs ("abide" and "dwell") are also. The concept of being in YHWH's temple permanently (cf. Ps. 23:6b) is eternal fellowship with God that
1. reaches beyond this life
2. involves intimacy
3. has a daily aspect
Psalm 27:4-6 expresses this same thought in a non-hyperbolic way (i.e., "all the days of my life," cf. Ps. 23:6a).
Also note that in Ps. 5:4b "no evil abides/resides with YHWH," but the faithful follower desires to live with God (cf. Ps. 61:4; 84:10).
15:2-5 These verses describe (in balanced positive and negative attributes) the kind of person who will dwell with God (cf. Ps. 24:3-6).
1. walks in integrity ("blameless," BDB 1071, cf. Ps. 18:23,31; 119:80; Pro. 28:18)
2. works righteousness
3. speaks truth (see Special Topic at Ps. 12:1) in his heart
4. does not slander
5. does not do evil to his neighbor
6. does not take up a reproach against his friend
7. despises reprobates
8. honors those who fear the Lord (i.e., covenant partners)
9. swears to truth (i.e., a vow, cf. Leviticus 27)
10. does not change (renege on a vow for self interest)
11. does not charge interest (cf. Exod. 22:25; Lev. 25:36)
12. does not take a bribe against the innocent (cf. Exod. 23:8; Deut. 16:19)
Notice that all of these characterizations describe how a godly person lives and treats others. To know God is to respect people. Faithful followers are meant to live and love so that the world may come to know and emulate the Creator God.
15:4b "those who fear the Lord" This is a recurrent description of faithful followers (cf. Ps. 25:12,14; 103:11,13; 118:4). They are described in several ways.
1. what they do
a. praise, glorify, and stand in awe of YHWH, Ps. 22:23
b. walk in His way, Ps. 128:1
2. what He does for them
a. explains His covenant, Ps. 25:14
b. brings salvation near, Ps. 85:9
c. is their help and shield, Ps. 115:11
d. blesses them, Ps. 115:13; 128:1
e. fulfills their desires, Ps. 145:19 (also "hears their cry and will save them")
15:5c This is the summary statement. Those who live in covenant with God and their brothers/sisters will never be shaken (BDB 556, KB 555, Niphal imperfect, cf. Ps. 17:5; 30:6; Pro. 10:30; 12:3). TEV translates it as "will always be secure." Isaiah 33:15 seems to parallel the glorification of those who can approach and dwell with YHWH. If so, then Isa. 33:16 is parallel to Ps. 15:5c.
The purpose of salvation is not just individual-focused but societal! A love for God should issue in love for each other! We must not separate justification from justice! The Fall of Genesis 3 affected all mankind (cf. Ps. 14:1-3). The image of God (cf. Gen. 1:26-27) in mankind was damaged. Mankind has turned inward. Selfishness and independence now characterize his/her thoughts and actions. A new encounter with God changes this focus (cf. Jer. 31:31-34; Ezek. 36:25-27). The new person again has a sense of dependance. He/she lives for God/for others.
▣ "never" See Special Topic: Forever at Ps. 9:5.
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
This is a study guide commentary, which means that you are responsible for your own interpretation of the Bible. Each of us must walk in the light we have. You, the Bible, and the Holy Spirit are priority in interpretation. You must not relinquish this to a commentator.
These discussion questions are provided to help you think through the major issues of this section of the book. They are meant to be thought-provoking, not definitive.
1. Describe the person who can approach YHWH in the temple.
2. How is "lifestyle faith" related to saving faith?
3. List the five positive and negative characteristics of a faithful follower.
4. Define "usury."
5. Does this Psalm imply a righteous person will never suffer?
Copyright © 2012 Bible Lessons International