Datasets:

vericudebuget

/

Bible-responses-dataset-gotquestions

like 0

Who were the Nabateans?

Answer The Nabateans were an ancient Semitic people whose presence and influence are indirectly mentioned in Scripture. Renowned for their control over critical trade routes and their impressive architectural designs, particularly in [Petra](Petra.html), their history and interactions with neighboring nations offer valuable insights into the biblio\-historical context of their time. The Nabateans were an Arabian tribe who, by the fourth century BC, had established themselves in the region of southeast Israel, where they had frequent encounters with the [Edomites](Edomites.html). In Malachi 1:1–5, the prophet references the Edomites, hinting at the Nabatean presence in the area previously occupied by Edom. [Josephus](Flavius-Josephus.html), a Roman\-Jewish historian, noted that the Nabateans had become so numerous that the territory between the Red Sea and the Euphrates was simply referred to as Nabatene (*Antiquities*, I, xii, 4\). Early Nabatene history is somewhat obscure, but the Nabateans are believed to have joined forces with the [Assyrians](Assyrians.html) in their invasion of Edom, as inferred from Malachi 1:1\. Later, the Nabateans were conquered by the Assyrian king [Sennacherib](Sennacherib-in-the-Bible.html) but eventually regained their independence by resisting Ashurbanipal. According to Alexander Polyhistor, a Greek scholar who was enslaved by the Romans, the Nabateans were included among the nomadic tribes subdued by King David. The Nabateans are not prominent in historical records until around 312 BC, when Antigonus I sent his general, Athenaeus, to Petra. Although Athenaeus was initially successful, his army was eventually annihilated. A few years later, Demetrius, the son of Antigonus, arranged a friendship with them after a failed campaign. Aretas I was one of the earliest Nabatean rulers, providing refuge to the Jewish high priest, Jason, in 169 BC. The Nabateans even supported the early [Maccabees](Maccabean-Revolt.html) in their struggle against [Antiochus IV](Antiochus-Epiphanes.html), aligning with Judas Maccabeus in 164 BC and Jonathan Maccabeus in 160 BC. The alliance between the Nabateans and Maccabees highlights their political significance during this period. By the end of the second century BC, the Nabateans had established a powerful kingdom under King Erotimus, extending their influence east of the Jordan River. Their capital, Petra, became a key center for trade, culture, and politics. The Nabateans controlled critical trade routes, facilitating the transport of spices, incense, and other goods from Arabia to the Mediterranean. The commercial skills of the Nabateans are indirectly acknowledged in the Bible, where references to the trade of spices and incense hint at broader trade networks. For instance, the caravan of Ishmaelites in Genesis 37:25, which carried spices, balm, and myrrh, traveled the trade routes that the Nabateans would later control. The Nabatean pantheon included deities like Dushara, their chief god. The religious practices of the Nabateans included rituals and offerings, influencing and being influenced by neighboring cultures. Although the Bible does not detail the Nabateans’ religious practices, its general warnings against idolatry reflect the polytheism of cultures surrounding Israel. The Nabateans are best known for their stunning architectural designs in Petra, which are carved into rose\-red cliffs. The city boasts elaborate tombs, temples, and an advanced water management system. Petra, often identified as Sela, is mentioned in 2 Kings 14:7, which says, “He was the one who defeated ten thousand Edomites in the Valley of Salt and captured Sela in battle, calling it Joktheel, the name it has to this day.” During the New Testament period, the Nabatean kingdom had reached its zenith. Paul, in Galatians 1:17, mentions going to Arabia, likely referring to Nabatean territory. This suggests interactions between Paul and the Nabateans. Additionally, 2 Corinthians 11:32–33 recounts Paul’s escape from Damascus, where the governor under King Aretas IV tried to arrest him, indicating the political reach of the Nabateans. The Nabatean kingdom saw its decline in the first century AD. Aretas IV was recognized by Augustus and aligned with the Romans against the Jews, gaining a victory over Herod Antipas. However, the power of the Nabateans waned under Roman pressure. In AD 106, the Nabatean kingdom was annexed by the Roman Empire under Trajan, and Arabia Petraea became a Roman province, marking the end of the Nabatean kingdom. While the Nabateans are not frequently mentioned in Scripture, they played a critical role in the historical, religious, and cultural development of the Near East. Their interactions with biblical figures and their control over significant territories and trades routes further support their importance.

What was the average life expectancy in the Bible?

Answer The average life expectancy in the Bible is a fascinating topic. Right away, we see that people of ancient times lived [much longer](Genesis-long-lives.html)—by hundreds of years—than people do today. According to the CDC, the average lifespan today in the US for both sexes is 77\.5 years (www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/life\-expectancy.htm, accessed 7/25/24\). This is markedly different from what’s presented in the early chapters of Genesis. Adam, the first man, lived for 930 years (Genesis 5:5\). Adam’s descendants also lived for a very long time: Seth lived for 912 years (Genesis 5:8\), Enosh lived for 905 years (Genesis 5:11\), and Methuselah, with the longest life on record, reached 969 years (Genesis 5:27\). These lengthy lifespans have intrigued scholars for centuries. Some read these long lifespans symbolically, believing they represent the idealization of a bygone golden age or represent the righteousness of these people. Others propose that these lengthy lifespans reflect a different method of counting years or are based on Near Eastern traditions of ascribing long lives to legendary figures. But there is no good reason for dismissing the figures given. Moses, who wrote the [book of Genesis](Book-of-Genesis.html), knew what a year was. Life was different in the time of Adam, Seth, and Methuselah. A significant turning point in the length of lifespans occurs with the story of [Noah](life-Noah.html) and the flood. Noah lived to be 950 years old (Genesis 9:29\). But after the flood there is a sharp decline in human longevity. Life expectancy drops dramatically. Shem, Noah’s son, lived 600 years (Genesis 11:10–11\), and his descendants continued the trend of declining lifespans for generations. It seems evident that the flood changed things, and a decline in life expectancy was a direct result. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had extraordinarily long lives, too, by modern standards. Abraham lived 175 years (Genesis 25:7\), Isaac 180 years (Genesis 35:28\), and Jacob 147 years (Genesis 47:28\). Although they lived much longer than people do today, their lives were shorter than those of their ancestors, reflecting the continued shortening of human lifespans. Moses, a central figure in the Old Testament, lived 120 years (Deuteronomy 34:7\). His successor, Joshua, lived to 110 years (Judges 2:8\). By the time we get to David, who “died at a good old age, having enjoyed long life” (1 Chronicles 29:28\), we see a further drop in life expectancy. David died when he was about 70 years old, a “long life” for that time. The book of Psalms provides a sobering perspective on human life. Psalm 90:10 states, “The years of our life are seventy, or even by reason of strength eighty; yet their spans is but toil and trouble; they are soon gone, and we fly away” (ESV). How short life is! How important it is to seek the Author of life and the Savior of our souls! The New Testament contains few references to people’s age, so life expectancy cannot be calculated from the biblical text. The Old Testament numbers can be grouped according to era as follows: Antediluvian life expectancy (from Adam to Noah): **857\.5 years**. If we omit Enoch as an anomaly—he only lived 365 years before being translated to heaven (Genesis 5:23–24\)—the average lifespan for this group is **912\.2 years**. Postdiluvian life expectancy from Shem to Nahor: **306\.3 years**. Patriarchal life expectancy from Terah to Jacob: **176\.8 years**. As these averages show, life expectancy fell considerably from Adam’s day to Shem’s, and then fell even more after that. The global flood is the line of demarcation. Concerning the extremely long lifespans of the first few generations of humanity, Dr. John Piper comments, “God granted those long lives so that we, looking back, could see from which we have fallen. In other words, those long lives testify that death was not part of the perfect creation. . . . Life, not death, was his design and our portion in creation at the beginning. So, the long lives of those first humans stand as a testimony of how utterly short our lives are and how God’s design at the beginning and his design in the future is life—indeed, eternal life” (*Ask Pastor John*, Episode 1620, 4/30/21\). Praise the Lord for His salvation. He has delivered us from the curse of death brought about by sin. “Now Christ Jesus has come to offer us God’s gift of undeserved grace. Christ our Savior defeated death and brought us the good news. It shines like a light and offers life that never ends” (2 Timothy 1:10, CEV).

What is conservative theology?

Answer *Conservative theology* is an expansive term that covers various Christian denominations and movements, such as [evangelicalism](evangelicalism.html) and [fundamentalism](fundamentalism.html). For conservative theologians, the Bible is authoritative, the ultimate source of truth. It is the inspired, inerrant, and infallible Word of God: “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16–17, ESV). Conservative theologians therefore maintain a “high view” of Scripture. There are several other non\-negotiable doctrines for conservative theologians: • Original sin — “Just as sin came into the world through ne man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned” (Romans 5:12, ESV). • The virgin birth of Christ — “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel” (Isaiah 7:14; cf. Matthew 1:23\). • The Trinity — “The Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form, like a dove; and a voice came from heaven, ‘You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased’” (Luke 3:22, ESV). • The deity of Christ — “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. . . . The Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth” (John 1:1, 14, ESV). • The bodily resurrection of Christ — “Look at my hands and my feet. It is I myself! Touch me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have” (Luke 24:39\). • The literal return of Christ — “This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11, ESV). • A literal heaven and hell — “‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame.’ But Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner bad things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in anguish. And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, in order that those who would pass from here to you may not be able, and none may cross from there to us’” (Luke 16:24–26, ESV). • Salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone — “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast” (Ephesians 2:8–9, ESV). Conservative theology views salvation as a personal conversion from sin to new life in Christ. Conservative theologians also uphold traditional Christian values. They believe that marriage is between one man and one woman (Genesis 2:24; Mark 10:7\), that sex should be limited to the confines of marriage (Matthew 19:6\), and that there are only two genders (Genesis 1:27\). Conservative theology has had an impact on politics, but it should not be confused with the “Christian right,” a political movement that champions moral, social, and cultural conservatism. Though many conservative theologians constitute the core of the Christian right (or the religious right), not all conservative theologians fall into that camp. A Christian can therefore be theologically conservative and not be economically or politically conservative.

What is the significance of Paul saying, “I press on” (Philippians 3:12)?

Answer In Philippians 3:12–14, the apostle Paul portrays himself (a follower of Christ) as a determined athlete [running a race](run-the-race-set-before-us.html) (the Christian life). In that race, Paul is resolutely reaching toward the goal of “knowing Christ Jesus” so fully and experientially (Philippians 3:8–11\) that one day he will cross the finish line of perfect spiritual maturity: “I don’t mean to say that I have already achieved these things or that I have already reached perfection. But I press on to possess that perfection for which Christ Jesus first possessed me. No, dear brothers and sisters, I have not achieved it, but I focus on this one thing: Forgetting the past and looking forward to what lies ahead, I press on to reach the end of the race and receive the heavenly prize for which God, through Christ Jesus, is calling us” (Philippians 3:12–14, NLT). Twice in the passage, Paul uses the expression *I press on*. In the original language, the verb translated as “press on” in verses 12 and 13 means “to carry out or participate in an activity, to pursue or follow after, to strive energetically for some purpose.” The apostle was actively participating in the process of knowing Christ in every facet of his life—in power and weakness (Philippians 3:10\), in joy and suffering (Philippians 4:4; 2 Corinthians 4:10\), in plenty or want (Philippians 4:12\). The race he was running was not a passive, apathetic, or careless Christian walk. He was running to win. He urged the Corinthian believers, “Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one gets the prize? Run in such a way as to get the prize” (1 Corinthians 9:24\). Paul wasn’t running aimlessly but with purpose in every step. He explained, “I am not just shadowboxing. I discipline my body like an athlete, training it to do what it should. Otherwise, I fear that after preaching to others I myself might be disqualified” (1 Corinthians 9:26–27, NLT). Paul was bound and determined to live for Christ with every fiber of his being (Philippians 1:21; Galatians 2:20; Acts 20:24\). He was pursuing Jesus in an all\-out effort to reach the culminating moment when he would stand before Him face to face and hear Him say: “Well done, good and faithful servant. . . . Enter into the joy of your master” (Matthew 25:23, ESV). The goal of pressing on is not salvation. Jesus Christ secures our salvation for us (John 3:16; Hebrews 9:12; 1 Peter 1:18–19\). If we are saved, our citizenship is in heaven, where our Savior awaits us (Philippians 3:20; 1 Corinthians 3:11–15\). But we still have miles to go in working out our salvation while on earth (Philippians 2:12–13\). “A sanctified dissatisfaction,” writes Warren Wiersbe, “is the first essential to progress in the Christian race” (*The Bible Exposition Commentary*, vol. 2, Victor Books, 1996, p. 88\). Paul knew he had not arrived yet. Mature believers can honestly evaluate their spiritual condition and recognize their need to press on. Peter describes the process of spiritual growth in 2 Peter 1:3–11\. We come to know Jesus and become more like Him as we allow the Holy Spirit to work in our lives. We “make every effort to respond to God’s promises. Supplement \[our] faith with a generous provision of moral excellence, and moral excellence with knowledge, and knowledge with self\-control, and self\-control with patient endurance, and patient endurance with godliness, and godliness with brotherly affection, and brotherly affection with love for everyone. The more \[we] grow like this, the more productive and useful \[we] will be in \[our] knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ” (verses 5–8, NLT). The goal we press on to receive is the [heavenly reward](rewards-in-heaven.html) God has planned for us (see 1 Corinthians 3:11–15; Romans 8:17–18; Colossians 3:23–24\). With the words, “I press on,” Paul declares, “I will never give up.” He knows the Christian journey is best understood as a marathon, not a sprint. As determined followers of Jesus, we too must persevere in faith to grow toward spiritual maturity (Colossians 2:6–7; Colossians 1:23; Hebrews 6:1; 10:36–38\). We long for the perfection that Christ died to provide for us, but we realize we won’t attain it until the future resurrection. In the meantime, like soldiers, we “don’t get tied up in the affairs of civilian life,” and like athletes, we run to “win the prize,” pleasing our heavenly Father and staying on course to receive our reward (2 Timothy 2:4–5, NLT).

What does it mean that “honor your father and mother” is the first commandment with a promise (Ephesians 6:2)?

Answer Ephesians 6:2–3 reads, “Honor your father and mother” (this is the first commandment with a promise), that it may go well with you and that you may live long in the land” (ESV). In this instruction, there is a reference to the fifth of the [Ten Commandments](Ten-Commandments.html). The reason we should honor our parents is that God commanded us to do so. But there is an additional motivation: when God gave the law, He promised to lengthen the days of obedient children. So, there is a promise attached to the commandment. In Ephesians 4—6, Paul addresses a range of behaviors that are appropriate for believers. Ephesians 6:1–4 specifically focuses on family dynamics, particularly the relationship between children and parents. Paul’s instruction to “honor your mother and father” (verse 2\) not only reinforces an Old Testament principle but also recontextualizes it within Christian households. The commandment to “[honor your father and mother](honor-father-mother.html)” is found in Exodus 20:12 and in the repetition of the law in Deuteronomy 5:16\. Paul distinguishes this command as “the first commandment with a promise.” This promise that “your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your God is giving you” (Exodus 20:12, NKJV) implies earthly blessings and well\-being, conditional upon the respectful treatment of one’s parents. Not only is the fifth commandment the first one of the Ten with a promise attached, but it is the only one of the Decalogue to include a direct promise. In the rest of the Mosaic Law, there are many similar promises. As the Ten Commandments serve as a summarized introduction to the law, the command to obey one’s parents is indeed the first of many commandments to have a promise. Also, the fifth commandment is “first” in the second tablet of the law, which deals with human relationships. This placement indicates a transition from our duties toward God (the first tablet) to our duties toward others (the second tablet). The family, then, is our primary social unit. Paul’s reiteration of this “first commandment with promise” (Ephesians 6:2, NKJV) is important for several reasons. First, it highlights the continuity between Old and New Covenant ethics. While believers are not under the Mosaic Law, the moral and ethical teachings of the law are still operative. Second, by mentioning the promise associated with this commandment, Paul elevates the importance of the Christian family and its impact in society. Furthermore, Paul combines moral obligation with God’s blessing. The promise attached to the commandment communicates the idea that love, respect, and care within the family are foundational to a flourishing society. It is also foundational to our relationship with God, a principle reflected in Leviticus 19:3: “Every one of you shall revere his mother and his father, and you shall keep my Sabbaths: I am the Lord your God” (ESV). In Mark 7:10, Jesus reaffirms the first commandment with promise: “Moses said, ‘Honor your father and mother,’ and, ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’” God’s will involves honoring one’s parents, a truth found throughout Scripture. Genuine faith honors God and family. The original promise of the commandment referred to prolonged life “in the land,” that is, in the Promised Land. The New Testament understanding interprets this promise in light of Christ’s coming kingdom. For Paul, obeying this commandment has benefits in this life, but those blessings are merely a shadow of the new creation, in which all relationships are perfectly restored (Revelation 21:1–4\).

Who is the god of this age (2 Corinthians 4:4)?

Answer In 2 Corinthians 2:17—7:4, the apostle Paul sets forth a defense of his apostolic ministry. In verses 4:1–6, he focuses on the transparency of his ministry. Paul renounces secret and underhanded methods, stating that he does not “try to trick anyone or distort the word of God. We tell the truth before God, and all who are honest know this” (2 Corinthians 4:2, NLT). Paul contends that, if the message of the gospel seems hidden, it is not because he has tried to hide anything. Rather, it is obscured to those who are perishing (verse 3\) because “the god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God” (2 Corinthians 4:4\). Who is the “god of this age”? We can eliminate the possibility that Paul is referring to the one true God here. This “god” is blinding minds and keeping people from Christ and His gospel. So, the god of this age must be an evil being. One clue as to the identity of the god of this age is that his rule is temporary. The exact phrase *god of this age* is found nowhere else in the New Testament. The original Greek word (*aiōn*) in 2 Corinthians 4:4, translated as “age” (NIV, CSB, NKJV) or “world” (ESV, NLT, NASB, KJV), means “an era of time or an epoch.” This god’s reign has a limited span. Another clue on the identity of the god of this age is the use of similar titles in the Bible. Ephesians 2:2 speaks of “the ruler of the kingdom of the air” and “the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient.” In John 14:20, Jesus refers to “the prince of this world.” If all these appellations point to the same being, we have a ruler who wields temporary authority over the ungodly and blinds their minds to God’s plan of salvation. The obvious identity of the god of this age is the devil, or [Satan](who-Satan.html). As the god of this age, Satan maintains a significant influence on the values, thoughts, beliefs, and objectives of the unsaved people of the world. Satan himself claimed to rule the world in one of his temptations of Jesus (Matthew 4:8–9\). But Satan does not control this present world completely. He is not the ultimate authority. God is still the sovereign Lord of the universe. Satan is only a “god” in the sense that he controls the lives of unbelievers and blinds their minds to truth. The unredeemed serve and worship Satan (even if they don’t realize it) as if he is their divine master. As the god of this age, Satan possesses a powerful dominion over this present, fallen, dark world of sin and death (Ephesians 6:12; Colossians 1:13; 1 John 5:19\). From a biblical perspective, this evil age began with [Adam’s fall](fall-of-man.html), not with the creation of the world. Humanity’s rebellion against God was initiated by Satan (1 John 3:8; John 8:44\), and people got “caught up in the cosmic and supernatural uprising of Satan against the one true and living God” (Barnett, P., *The Message of 2 Corinthians: Power in Weakness, the Bible Speaks Today*, InterVarsity Press, 1988, p. 82\). The Bible teaches that, before salvation, we “were dead in \[our] transgressions and sins, in which \[we] used to live when \[we] followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our flesh and following its desires and thoughts” (Ephesians 2:1–3\). Blinded as unbelievers, we served and followed Satan, the god of this age. But through God’s mercy and grace, we received the gift of salvation in Jesus Christ. Our Lord died on the cross “for our sins to rescue us from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father” (Galatians 1:4\). The redeemed become partakers of God’s heavenly kingdom (Hebrews 6:5\). In the age to come, God’s kingdom will be fully revealed, and every wrong of this present age will be made right (Luke 18:30\). In predicting His death, Jesus said, “Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this world will be driven out” (John 12:31\), and He assured His disciples that “the prince of this world now stands condemned” (John 16:11\). Jesus is the King of kings, and He came into this world “to destroy the devil’s work” (1 John 3:8\). Until the final judgment, Satan has been allotted an “hour—when darkness reigns” (Luke 22:53\). But his time is limited. As the god of this age, Satan’s greatest superpower is deceit (Revelation 12:9\). He blinds people’s minds to spiritual truth (John 3:19–20; 2 Corinthians 4:4; Ephesians 4:17–19; 2 Thessalonians 2:9–10\). Jesus stated that Satan “has always hated the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, it is consistent with his character; for he is a liar and the father of lies” (John 8:44, NLT). Thankfully, God has made His light shine in the hearts of believers so that they are no longer blind to His truth (2 Corinthians 4:6\). Nevertheless, Christians must stay firmly rooted in the Word of God (John 17:17; Psalm 119:11; 2 Timothy 3:15; 1 Peter 1:23\) and put on all of God’s armor so that they can stand firm against Satan’s deceptive strategies (Ephesians 6:11\).

What does it mean that God is not unjust to forget (Hebrews 6:10)?

Answer After issuing a warning against [apostasy](apostasy.html) or rejecting the truth of the gospel (Hebrews 5:11—6:8\), the author of Hebrews delivers this encouragement to readers, acknowledging their faithfulness: “But, beloved, we are confident of better things concerning you, yes, things that accompany salvation, though we speak in this manner. For God is not unjust to forget your work and labor of love which you have shown toward His name, in that you have ministered to the saints, and do minister” (Hebrews 6:9–10, NKJV). Understanding the language and the context of the teaching is necessary in this passage to discern the meaning of *God is not unjust to forget*. Beginning with context, it’s crucial to consider the serious admonition against apostasy issued in the previous verses. This warning is aimed at people who claim to have faith in Christ yet continue to pursue a life of sin. Genuine saving faith, as the Bible reveals, is not a passive belief but an active, ongoing obedience to the will of God (Philippians 2:12; Jude 1:21; James 2:20, 26\). The person who is truly born again will be transformed by the gospel of Jesus Christ and the inner workings of the Holy Spirit (Romans 6:4; Galatians 2:20; 5:22–26; 6:14–15\). This profound transformation will lead to spiritual maturity, enabling one to overcome sin and become more like Christ (1 John 3:9; Romans 12:2; 2 Corinthians 3:18; 1 Peter 2:24\). The writer of Hebrews observes some people in the church who have been exposed to the reality of God’s existence. They know what God expects of them, but they have never experienced authentic inner transformation leading to saving faith and obedience (see Hebrews 6:4–8\). The author of Hebrews addresses others in the church whom he recognizes as “dear friends” (NIV, NLT) or “beloved” (ESV, NKJV). These are genuine, born\-again Christians, to whom he writes, “Dear friends, even though we are talking this way \[warning against apostasy], we really don’t believe it applies to you. We are confident that you are meant for better things, things that come with salvation. For God is not unjust. He will not forget how hard you have worked for him and how you have shown your love to him by caring for other believers, as you still do” (Hebrews 6:9–10, NLT). These are true believers because they have demonstrated their love for God and faith in Him “by caring for other believers.” They have actively obeyed God’s Word. The warning against apostasy does not apply to them because they are recipients of God’s salvation. God is not “unjust,” which means God is not unfair. On the contrary, God is just, fair, and faithful (Deuteronomy 32:4; Isaiah 45:21; Psalm 145:17\). He will not “forget,” meaning God will not ignore or overlook the evidence of their salvation. He will never forget that these people have proven through hard work, endurance, and demonstrations of love that they are devoted to serving Him. The meaning of the statement *God is not unjust to forget* is further illustrated in this immediately preceding parable: “Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned” (Hebrews 6:7–8\). Land proves its worth by bearing fruitful crops, and a true believer proves his salvation by growing into maturity and bearing spiritual fruit for God’s glory (see also Matthew 7:15–20; 13:1–9\). The [severe warning](apostasy-salvation.html) followed by the encouragement, “God is not unjust to forget,” reflects opposite sides of the same biblical truth. If God’s righteous justice demands that a person’s spiritual rebellion not be overlooked, then it is equally valid that God’s righteous justice requires that a person’s faithful service not be forgotten (1 Samuel 12:14–15; Numbers 14:9; Psalm 2:10–12\).

Broad is the road that leads to destruction—why?

Answer Jesus Christ used a metaphor of two roads to illustrate the choice between living a godly life and a worldly life: “Enter through the [narrow gate](narrow-gate.html). For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it” (Matthew 7:13–14\). Jesus calls godly living that leads to life a narrow road for two reasons. There is only one way to heaven—through Jesus (John 14:6; Acts 4:12\)—and the ethical demands of God’s kingdom are explicit and uncompromising. Jesus refers to worldly living that leads to destruction as a broad road because godlessness and unrighteousness have countless manifestations. The context of Jesus’ teaching about the broad road that leads to destruction is the [Sermon on the Mount](sermon-on-the-mount.html), recorded in Matthew 5—7\. In this sermon Jesus describes what righteous living entails for those in the kingdom of God (Matthew 4:17, 23\). After teaching about internal virtue (Matthew 6:1–18\), He provides instruction on external virtue. For example, followers of Jesus are to treat others as they want to be treated (Matthew 7:12–14\). Jesus then encourages His followers to commit to this way of life even though it’s more demanding than the unrighteous worldly alternative. Encouraging people to live for God instead of the world is an important biblical theme rooted in the Old Testament. Although Deuteronomy 30:19 doesn’t use the imagery of roads, it clearly presents two choices: “This day I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live.” Psalm 1:6 makes a similar point using the imagery of two paths: “For the Lord watches over the way of the righteous, but the way of the wicked leads to destruction” (also see Proverbs 28:6 and Jeremiah 21:8\). Describing an individual’s choice as between living for God and living for the world highlights that there is no third option. In His use of the metaphor, Jesus added that the road of godly living is narrow, while the road of worldly living is broad (Matthew 7:14\). To understand the broad road, it’s helpful to understand the narrow road. The godly way is narrow, not only because there is only one way to heaven, but because its ethical demands are harder. For example, Jesus not only affirmed that adultery is sin but added that looking at another person with lust is just as wrong (Matthew 5:27–30\). Similarly, murdering someone is sin, but so is harboring improper anger (Matthew 5:21–22\). Moreover, the narrow road is smaller because it contains fewer travelers. As Jesus said, many are invited, but few are chosen (Matthew 22:14; Luke 13:23–24\). Meanwhile, the worldly road that leads to destruction is broad because unrighteousness has innumerable expressions. When people reject Jesus and the ethics of His kingdom, they replace His morals with their own self\-made virtues. The implication of Jesus saying “only a few find” the narrow road is that most people choose the broad road of worldliness that is marked by self\-righteous living. The result of this choice is stated in Proverbs 14:12, “There is a way that appears to be right, but in the end it leads to death.” The righteous living that Jesus calls His followers to often means choosing what is difficult over what is easy, thus living contrary to the norms of a world permeated by sin (Mark 10:30; John 16:33\). Paul emphasized this principle on his [first missionary journey](Paul-first-missionary-journey.html) when he was stoned and left for dead for preaching the gospel in Lystra. After his miraculous healing, with great transparency, Paul encouraged the converts to remain faithful: “We must go through many hardships to enter the kingdom of God” (Acts 14:22\). The cost of choosing the narrow road and rejecting the broad one is worthwhile, for the narrow road is the only one that leads to eternal life with God (John 14:6; Acts 4:12\).

What did Jesus mean by, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (John 2:19)?

Answer John 2:18–22 marks a transitional moment in Jesus’ ministry, illustrating both the hard\-nosed skepticism of the Jewish leaders and the spiritual truths Jesus imparted to His disciples. In context, the leaders question Jesus about His authority to cleanse the temple (John 2:13–18\). Their request for a sign reveals a desire for validation of Jesus’ divine authority. In response, Jesus says, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (verse 19, ESV). This statement confused His opponents, but John informs his readers that Jesus was “speaking about the temple of his body” (verse 21, ESV). When Jesus says, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up,” He is making a prophetic statement about His crucifixion and resurrection (see Matthew 17:22–23; Mark 9:30–32\). This prediction is misconstrued by the leaders, for they believed that Jesus was referring to the physical temple where they stood: “It has taken forty\-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?” (John 2:20, ESV). The irony of their misunderstanding is furthered by the fact that the Jewish leaders played a role in the destruction of Jesus’ body. During Jesus’ trial, one of the charges levied against Him is that He promised to destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days (Matthew 26:60–61; Mark 14:57–59\). As He hung on the cross, Jesus’ enemies again brought up His words and mocked Him for being unable to fulfill His promise (or so they believed): “Those who passed by hurled insults at him, shaking their heads and saying, ‘So! You who are going to destroy the temple and build it in three days, come down from the cross and save yourself!’” (Mark 15:29–30\). They were unaware that they were helping fulfill Jesus’ promise of John 2:19, even as they derided Him for not keeping it. In the New Testament, Jesus’ body is used as a [metaphor for the church](body-of-Christ.html). Both the apostle Paul (Ephesians 2:19–22\) and the apostle Peter (1 Peter 2:5\) draw parallels between the church (the body of Christ) and a holy temple built by Jesus. This emphasizes the transformative nature of Jesus’ redemptive work, not just in His own resurrection but in the unity of all believers. Jesus’ claim that He could and would raise Himself from the dead is a remarkable testament to His divinity (see John 10:18\). The Father and Holy Spirit, too, were involved in the resurrection (John 11:25; Acts 2:24; Romans 6:4; Galatians 1:1\). The disciples only fully understood the significance of Jesus’ prediction after His crucifixion and resurrection: “When therefore he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the Scripture and the word that Jesus had spoken” (John 2:22, ESV). The “Scripture” they believed is likely Psalm 16:10, where the psalmist writes, “You will not abandon my soul to Sheol, or let your holy one see corruption” (ESV). Jesus’ reference to destroying the temple in John 2:19 was about the temple of His body, not the physical temple built by Zerubbabel and modified by Herod the Great. The enemies of God destroyed Jesus’ body, but, as the Life, He rose again. Jesus directs our attention away from worshiping God at specific locations (like the temple in Jerusalem) that we may “worship in the Spirit and in truth” (John 4:24\).

What does “born of the flesh” mean (John 3:6)?

Answer In John 3:6, Jesus says, “That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit” (ESV). This statement is part of Jesus’ response to Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews, who had come to Jesus by night to converse with Him. John records that [Nicodemus](Nicodemus-in-the-Bible.html) started the conversation by saying, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the signs you are doing if God were not with him” (John 3:2\). Nicodemus probably came at night because he feared being rejected and ostracized by his own religious community. Nicodemus is also coming in spiritual darkness. Such is the case with everyone who has not been illumined by the radiant light of the Holy Spirit. Nicodemus recognized that God is “with” Jesus, but he does not know that Jesus is God (John 1:1, 14\). This is disappointing because Nicodemus mentioned the signs Jesus was performing (see John 2:23; 3:2\). These signs should have revealed who Jesus is. Jesus wastes no time getting to the heart of Nicodemus’s need. Jesus told Nicodemus, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again” (John 3:3\). The Greek phrase for [*born again*](born-again.html) can also be translated as “born from above” (as the NRSV renders the phrase). Both translations are sufficient. The idea is that sinners, including Nicodemus, need to be regenerated—or spiritually reborn—by the Holy Spirit (see Titus 3:5\). Notice that the imperative to be born again is given to Nicodemus, a religious teacher of Israel (John 3:10\). If he needs to be born again, how much greater is our need? Nicodemus seemingly misunderstood Jesus’ words: “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?” he asks (John 3:4, ESV). It is doubtful that Nicodemus believed that Jesus wanted him to reenter his mother’s womb. It is much more likely that Nicodemus asked Jesus an asinine question to flesh out the true meaning of the phrase *born again*. Nevertheless, Nicodemus continued to misunderstand Jesus (verse 9\). In response, Jesus restates Himself: “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit” (John 3:5–6, NKJV). Here, the words *born of water and the Spirit* displace *born again*. Many interpreters use verse 6 to interpret verse 5, so that *born of water* refers to physical birth. This interpretation, however, does not fit the immediate context since there is a parallel between verses 3 and 5\. So, if verse 3 refers to one birth, then verse 5 must also refer to one birth—a spiritual birth (cf. Ezekiel 36:25–27\). The word *flesh* in John 3:6 refers to the human body and human nature, as it does in John 1:14\. The idea is that like produces like. In other words, human birth produces people who belong to an earthly family, but not to the family of God (John 1:12\). It is the Holy Spirit who produces a new birth that makes us children of God (cf. John 6:63; Romans 8:16\). Because of his role as a teacher of Israel, Nicodemus should have understood the need for a new birth and God’s promise that He would give His people a new heart and a new nature. He should have understood spiritual matters, but as long as his thinking was mired in the physical level, he could not understand the spiritual truth Jesus expressed. That is why, in John 3:7, Jesus says, “Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again’” (ESV).

What does the Bible say about tolerance?

Answer Understanding what the Bible says about tolerance is crucial for Christians today. Tolerance, as presented in Scripture, is a fundamentally different concept from the tolerance promoted in our society today. While the world advocates for a form of tolerance that demands, without judgment, the acceptance of all lifestyles and opinions as valid, the biblical perspective on tolerance is distinct. The Bible teaches that tolerance is not about accepting all behaviors or positions as valid but about extending patience, love, respect, and [compassion](Bible-compassion.html) toward those we may disagree with. The Bible teaches tolerance as a virtue (Romans 15:5\). Jesus Christ modeled the kind of tolerance He desired His followers to adopt and practice (Mark 9:38–40\). Tolerance, from a biblical viewpoint, is the quality of forbearance. It means putting up with a person or a point of view even if we disagree (Ephesians 4:2\). The verb *tolerate* means “to allow without opposing; to acknowledge the right of another to hold contrary opinions” (Grenz, S. J. and Smith, J, T., *Pocket Dictionary of Ethics*, InterVarsity Press, 2003, p. 120\). Christians should seek to be as tolerant as possible so that the loving character of Christ will “shine out for all to see” (Matthew 5:16, NLT). As Christ’s followers, we cultivate tolerance when we are prepared to love and accept people despite their different viewpoints. However, tolerance does not require Christians to defend or embrace ungodly or unbiblical viewpoints as valid or morally correct. Scripture plainly reveals that some lifestyles and behaviors are sinful and dishonoring to God. A faithful believer who desires to please the Lord and obey His Word will prioritize, maintain, and defend the truth, even when his or her convictions conflict with society’s expectations of tolerance (Acts 5:29\). Jesus did not condemn the [woman caught in adultery](woman-caught-in-adultery.html) but accepted her with grace and mercy (see John 7:53—8:11\). At the same time, He did not ignore the fact that she was a sinner, nor did He encourage her to continue living in sin. Instead, Christ truthfully addressed her need, offering forgiveness and cleansing. Jesus told the woman to leave her life of sin and walk in a new life of holiness. A Christian can interact peacefully and gently with sinners and be as tolerant of them as possible. Still, he must never stop calling sinful behavior “sin,” nor should he encourage anyone to walk in a lifestyle of sin. Tolerance is commended within the body of Christ. The apostle Paul wrote, “Accept other believers who are weak in faith, and don’t argue with them about what they think is right or wrong” (Romans 14:1, NLT). Tolerance should be exercised when dealing with immature believers whose faith is weak (Romans 14:2–6; 13\-22; 1 Corinthians 8:8–13\). Rather than passing judgment on them and condemning them for their weakness, we should come alongside weaker brothers and sisters to help them (Romans 15:1; 1 Thessalonians 5:14; 1 Peter 4:8\). We ought to live in such a way that we never cause a fellow believer to stumble or fall. Jesus demonstrated to His disciples the need for tolerance with children (Matthew 19:13–14\) and while serving one another (Mark 9:33–36\). Paul encouraged ministers to tolerate other Christian workers, even when their motives might be wrong (Philippians 1:17–18\). The Bible places clear limits on tolerance. Evil and wickedness must never be tolerated (Habakkuk 1:13\). There is no room in the church for false teachers or unsound, ungodly teachings (2 John 1:10–11; 2 Thessalonians 2:1–3; 1 Timothy 6:3–5, 20–21; 2 Peter 2:1\). Sexual immorality and idolatry should not be tolerated in the body of Christ (1 John 5:21; 1 Corinthians 5:1–5, 11; 6:18–20; 10:7; Revelation 2:14\). Scripture instructs us to practice tolerance while never compromising the truth or relaxing God’s standard of holiness. This balance allows us to see people through the eyes of Jesus and perceive that they are lost, helpless sinners in want of His great compassion, mercy, grace, and forgiveness (Matthew 9:36; Mark 6:34\). When we love people like Jesus does, selflessly, we can hear and see their unspoken needs, even if we don’t agree with them.

What did Jesus mean when He said, “if you abide in my word” in John 8:31?

Answer In John 8:31, Jesus identifies the mark of genuine [disciples](Christian-discipleship.html): “If you *abide* in My word, you are My disciples indeed” (NKJV, emphasis added). This suggests that everyone who calls himself a disciple is not truly a disciple. A true disciple is someone who abides in the word of Jesus. In John 8:31, Jesus directs His words to a group of Jews “who had believed in Him” (ESV). He challenges them, however, with the statement, “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples,” and He immediately follows that with, “And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” (verse 32, ESV). The Jews to whom He spoke “believed” in Him on some level—they had made a profession of faith. Jesus gives them encouragement along with a warning against making a superficial commitment. An impulsive moment will not lead to true discipleship. A steady, dedicated obedience to Jesus’ commands will be the proof of discipleship. A tree is known by its fruit (see Matthew 12:33\). The word *abide* (Gk. *menō*) frequently appears in the Gospel of John. To “abide” in the word of Jesus is to have the kind of faith that perseveres and clings to the His teachings. A genuine disciple will remain in the Word, meditate on it day and night (Joshua 1:8\), obey it (John 15:14\), and share it with others (Matthew 28:18–20\). Discipleship, then, is more than intellectual assent to Jesus’ teachings. It involves continuance. On the night of His arrest, Jesus likened Himself to the [True Vine](true-vine.html) and His followers to the branches attached to the vine. In that context, He said, “If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you” (John 15:7\). Earlier, Jesus had spoken of those who did not abide in God’s Word. To the Pharisees who desired to kill Him, Jesus said, “And the Father who sent me has himself testified concerning me. You have never heard his voice nor seen his form, nor does his word dwell in you, for you do not believe the one he sent” (John 5:37–38\). In John 8:31, the call to “abide in my word” refers to the entirety of His teachings. Disciples must internalize the word, allowing it to take root within their hearts: “Therefore, get rid of all moral filth and the evil that is so prevalent and humbly accept the word planted in you, which can save you” (James 1:21\). The Gospel writers repeatedly stress the connection between discipleship and obedience. In John 14:23, for example, Jesus says, “Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them.” Total obedience, then, is the natural outflow of genuine love and faith. When we abide in the word of Jesus, the Holy Spirit reshapes our character, values, and priorities: “Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect” (Romans 12:2, ESV). There is nothing temporary about true discipleship. Those who abide in the word of Jesus will persevere to the end, and they will find spiritual freedom (John 8:32\). True disciples will bear the [Spirit’s fruit](fruit-of-the-Holy-Spirit.html) of love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self\-control (Galatians 5:22–23\).

Who wrote the book of 2 Samuel? Who was the author of 2 Samuel?

Answer The [book of 2 Samuel](Book-of-2-Samuel.html) is the sequel to the first book of Samuel in modern Bibles. In the Tanakh, the two books were considered one volume. The first book of Samuel begins with the childhood of Samuel, who became a key figure in Israel and guided the transition into monarchy. It also recounts the coronation of Saul, his downfall, the choice of David, and subsequent events that culminate with the death of Saul. Second Samuel picks up the history from there, chronicling David’s 40\-year rule with its ups and downs. David’s story serves as inspiration and a testament of redemption and restoration, foreshadowing the coming reign of the Perfect King, Jesus. The [prophet Samuel](life-Samuel.html) is credited with writing most, if not all of 1 Samuel. But Samuel died during the time period covered by 2 Samuel. For this reason, 2 Samuel is often attributed to the prophets [Nathan](Nathan-in-the-Bible.html) and [Gad](Gad-the-seer.html). It’s quite possible, too, that the writings of all three prophets—Samuel, Nathan, and Gad—served as sources for 2 Samuel. Numerous clues suggest 2 Samuel was written during the period of the divided kingdoms of Israel and Judah (see 2 Samuel 5:5; 11:11; 12:8; 19:42–43; 24:1\) after the reign of King Solomon. Thus, it is difficult to attribute the text directly to Samuel, Gad, and Nathan, but their work certainly contributed to the finished book. In medieval times, the Jewish commentator Isaac Abarbanel proposed Ezra or Jeremiah as a later editor of the text. Whoever did the compiling and editing of the book of Samuel, they were guided by God’s Holy Spirit through the process (see 2 Peter 1:21\). Absolute certainty about the authorship of 2 Samuel eludes us, but the plausible conclusion is that 2 Samuel was compiled from source material provided by the prophets Samuel, Nathan, and Gad. Regardless of the names of the historians who contributed to 2 Samuel, we can be grateful to have the text preserved and passed down to us for our learning and edification.

Who wrote the book of 2 Kings? Who was the author of 2 Kings?

Answer In our modern Bibles, the [book of 2 Kings](Book-of-2-Kings.html) is a sequel to 1 Kings, but they were originally written as one book in the Hebrew Bible. The [book of 1 Kings](Book-of-1-Kings.html) recounts the rise and fall of Solomon, the division of Israel into two kingdoms, and the series of kings that came after that, through Ahab and Jehoshaphat. Second Kings pick up the baton and carries the history forward from there. Despite its title, the book of 2 Kings also features prominent prophets, notably Elijah and Elisha. After a series of warnings fell on deaf ears and hardened hearts, the kingdoms of Israel and Judah fall to the hands of Assyria and Babylon, respectively. Although Judah had notable good kings like Hezekiah and Josiah, the overall trajectory leaned toward rebellion against God. The concluding chapters of 2 Kings are tragic, but they offer a glimmer of hope as the Babylonian king releases Jehoiachin, a descendant of David who could have rightfully been king (2 Kings 25:27–30\). Authorship of 2 Kings isn’t explicitly stated in the text, and there isn’t much external evidence to reach a certain verdict, but Jewish tradition attributes the book to [Jeremiah](life-Jeremiah.html). Other plausible options include Ezra and Ezekiel. All three men lived during the period when 2 Kings was likely written. However, reaching a conclusive verdict is challenging due to the absence of biblical attestation. Even if Jeremiah played a role in the writing, it’s likely that someone else wrote at least the final parts of the book. Covering over 400 years of history, the author of 2 Kings likely compiled information from older sources during the exile. Many Bible commentators suggest that the book aims to explain the reason behind the exile and prepare the way for the return of the Jews to their land. This aligns with motives consistent with Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Ezra. Modern scholars often assert that the book of Kings was initially written during the reform of King Josiah, with a second edition appearing later. In this view, the book is considered a conclusion to the so\-called [Deuteronomistic History](Deuteronomistic-History.html), an overarching history of Israel that encompasses the books of Joshua, Judges, and Samuel. The book of 2 Kings remains anonymous, though the traditional identification of Jeremiah is feasible, along with other possibilities such as Ezra and Ezekiel. As is the case with many ancient texts, the content holds more significance than the authorship. In 2 Kings we observe the moral decline of Israel and Judah through their kings, witness God’s patience in warning through the prophets, and ultimately see His judgment. Amid the struggles of the nation, hope emerges in the person of Jehoiachin, an ancestor of Jesus, the Messiah who will fulfill the Davidic Covenant (Matthew 1:11; cf. 2 Samuel 7:8–17\).

Who wrote the book of 1 Chronicles? Who was the author of 1 Chronicles?

Answer Like the books of Samuel and Kings, the book of Chronicles was initially a single work before its division in the Greek Septuagint. In modern Bibles, Chronicles is split into two books, and 1 Chronicles is placed after 2 Kings. In the Hebrew Tanakh, the book of Chronicles concludes the Jewish Scripture. No one knows for sure who wrote [1 Chronicles](Book-of-1-Chronicles.html). First Chronicles starts with a genealogy from Adam through King Saul. From there, the book of 1 Chronicles records events of Israel’s history beginning with Saul’s death and tracing David’s reign as king. The book ends with King David’s death. The author of 1 Chronicles, often called the Chronicler, is anonymous. Jewish tradition attributes the book to [Ezra](life-Ezra.html), and this is indeed a likely candidate. The text suggests a single author in the post\-exilic period. The author drew from diverse sources—including other books of the Old Testament—and was both knowledgeable and meticulous. Scholars agree that the author of 1 Chronicles was a skilled, theologically solid scribe. Ezra answers to all the above and remains the most plausible choice of author (see Ezra 7:6, 10; Nehemiah 8:1–2\). Furthering the idea that Ezra is the Chronicler are the language similarities between Chronicles and Ezra and Nehemiah. Is there absolute certainty that Ezra wrote and compiled 1 Chronicles? No. The Chronicler did not deem it essential to reveal his identity, and some questions linger. Regardless of who the author of 1 Chronicles was, we can appreciate the skill, competence, and meticulous nature of the Chronicler, used by God to convey His Word to us. As the author recorded the history of God’s people, we see God’s faithfulness to His promises to the family of David, and we are reminded of the ultimate fulfillment of those promises in Jesus.

Who wrote the book of 2 Chronicles? Who was the author of 2 Chronicles?

Answer The book of 2 Chronicles serves as a “sequel” to 1 Chronicles in our modern Old Testament. In the Tanakh both 1 and 2 Chronicles were a unified entity concluding the [Ketuvim](Writings-Ketuvim.html) (“Writings”) section and the Hebrew Bible as a whole. The author of 2 Chronicles is unknown, but tradition identifies [Ezra](life-Ezra.html) as the scribe who penned the history. First Chronicles focuses on the life of David, and [2 Chronicles](Book-of-2-Chronicles.html) delves into Solomon’s reign, the divided kingdom, and Judah’s history. Collectively, they offer a comprehensive chronicle of Israel from Adam to King Cyrus’s edict releasing the Jews from captivity. Likely written after the exile, 2 Chronicles served as an encouragement during the nation’s rebuilding, providing the historical background of all that had led to the Jews’ current situation. Although the authorship of 2 Chronicles isn’t explicit, Jewish tradition attributes it to Ezra based on several clues. Ezra was a priest and a scribe who lived during the Babylonian exile and accompanied the second wave of Jews returning to Jerusalem. Also, the author of 2 Chronicles obviously had an eye for meticulous detail, and he was theologically astute and a skilled editor. Ezra the scribe would have possessed all these traits, as evidenced in his book of Ezra. Similarities in language between Chronicles and Ezra and Nehemiah further suggest a single author. Perhaps the clearest evidence of single authorship is the repetition of the edict of King Cyrus at the end of Chronicles and the beginning of Ezra (2 Chronicles 36:22–23; Ezra 1:1–4\). These clues make it probable, even likely, that Ezra wrote the book of 2 Chronicles. Still, absolute certainty is not possible without additional biblical affirmation. Some contemporary scholars express skepticism regarding the traditional authorship of the book of 2 Chronicles, preferring to keep the authorship anonymous and referring to him simply as “the Chronicler.” So, who wrote the book of 2 Chronicles? Ezra is the most likely author, but even if he’s not the author, we can have confidence that the Chronicler wrote under divine inspiration. Through his work, we have a renewed perspective on the history of Judah, evidence of God’s active involvement in human affairs, His faithfulness to His promise to David, and the role of Israel in God’s overall plan of redemption.

Who wrote the book of Song of Solomon? Who was the author of Song of Solomon?

Answer The title of [Song of Songs](Song-of-Solomon.html) is a translation of the Hebrew phrase *shiyr hashiyrim*. In English Bibles, it is alternatively titled Song of Solomon, drawn from the opening line: “The Song of Songs, which is Solomon’s” (Song of Solomon 1:1\). The beautiful, lyrical poetry paints an enduring picture of godly marriage. In graceful lines and vivid imagery, Song of Solomon celebrates a union between a man and a woman marked by passion, love, commitment, and physical desire. No one knows for sure who wrote the book Song of Songs. [Solomon](life-Solomon.html) is traditionally attributed as the author, as suggested by the opening line and references to his name throughout the book (Song of Solomon 1:5; 3:7, 9, 11; 8:11–12\). In 1 Kings 4:32, King Solomon’s body of writing is mentioned: “He composed some 3,000 proverbs and wrote 1,005 songs.” If the Song of Songs is among the 1,005 Solomon wrote, it would likely be his finest work. The author references Lebanon several times, possibly reflecting the peaceful relationship between Israel and other nations during King Solomon’s reign (see 1 Chronicles 22:9\). If the wives and concubines of Song of Solomon 6:8 belong to Solomon, then the book was written fairly early in his reign (compare1 Kings 11:3\). Some contemporary scholars question the traditional authorship of Song of Songs, arguing for a date of writing later than Solomon’s time. In this view, the opening sentence doesn’t necessarily mean that the book was written *by* Solomon but it could have been written *for* Solomon. Dissent also exists on whether the book is a single poem or an anthology. Proponents of the anthology theory point to abrupt shifts in scenes, subjects, speakers and moods, suggesting a composite work. Those who reject this notion argue for a seamless composition without clear divisions. While conclusive evidence that Solomon wrote the Song of Songs is lacking, the internal data leads us to conclude that he’s the likeliest author. There is no problem in subscribing to the traditional authorship based on the available information.

Who wrote the book of 1 Peter? Who was the author of 1 Peter?

Answer The apostle Peter is the author of [1 Peter](Book-of-1-Peter.html), one of the books bearing his name. The opening introduces Peter as “an apostle of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 1:1\). In the Gospels, [Peter](life-Peter.html) comes across as being the most expressive of the Twelve, and he is arguably the most famous. Peter, James, and John comprised Jesus’ inner circle. Peter delivered the first sermon after the Holy Spirit’s descent (Acts 2:14–26\). Peter remained a significant figure in the early church until his death. In writing 1 Peter, the apostle addressed “God’s elect” and “exiles” (1 Peter 1:1–2\). These believers were a community of Christians who were scattered across Asia Minor due to persecution. Peter, who was with Silas when he wrote 1 Peter, aimed to encourage the suffering Christians (1 Peter 5:12\). Major themes of 1 Peter include holiness, enduring unjust suffering, love, and honorable conduct among unbelievers. Critics often challenge Peter’s authorship of 1 Peter due to his background as a Galilean fisherman. They argue that the author writes in a sophisticated manner and seems well\-versed in rhetoric and philosophy. However, Peter explicitly mentions Silas’ assistance: “With the help of Silas, whom I regard as a faithful brother, I have written to you briefly” (1 Peter 5:12\). Also, Peter was more than a simple fisherman. As a Christian leader, he was devoted to learning. His speech on the day of Pentecost reveals a learned man, filled with the Spirit. Another objection to Peter’s authorship of 1 Peter concerns the timing of widespread persecution of Christians. Some critics argue that it began during the reign of Emperor Domitian, after Peter’s death. However, lesser persecution was evident right from the church’s infancy, as recorded in the book of Acts (for example, Acts 4:1–3\). Further debate surrounds the use of the word *Babylon* (1 Peter 5:13\), possibly as a code word for “Rome,” but the precise meaning of Peter’s reference remains ambiguous. There is positive evidence for the authenticity of Petrine authorship of 1 Peter. First is the explicit mention of Peter in the salutation. Scholars who support the traditional authorship have also highlighted similarities between the epistle and Peter’s speech in Acts. Second, several church fathers express support for the traditional authorship. These include [Irenaeus](Irenaeus-of-Lyons.html), [Clement](Clement-of-Rome.html), [Origen](Origen-of-Alexandria.html), and [Tertullian](Tertullian.html). Unjust suffering leaves us perplexed, especially when we face persecution for our faith. Casual interactions on social media today can escalate into anti\-Christian tirades. As biblical Christianity becomes the minority in the West, challenges will increase. Peter’s epistle encourages us to push through the troubles, recognizing the temporary nature of suffering and the hope that comes in eternity.

What is the key to learning how to pray?

Answer In seeking the key to learning how to [pray](why-pray.html), we must value the word *learn*. Coincidentally, the key to prayer is the same as the key to discipleship. The word *disciple* literally means “learner,” and if you’re going to be a student of prayer, your posture requires two things: humility and a teacher. Prayer acquaints you with both. To begin with, the key to learning anything involves admitting your limitations. That’s humility. If you are struggling with prayer, you are fundamentally losing the war against your own pride because, to pray, you have to acknowledge God’s greatness above your own. He’s your teacher. And where does God teach us? In His Word. The key to learning how to pray—discipleship—won’t happen if you tune in to the latest self\-help guru, celebrity pastor, or elderly woman down the street; even though wise servants of Jesus can help you in prayer. God invented prayer, so He can teach you what it is and how to do it. One of the ways God teaches all believers is by giving us an example. The [Lord’s Prayer](Lords-prayer.html) is the most famous example (Matthew 6:9–13\). In reading the Lord’s Prayer, note two things: 1\) What “keys to praying” do you observe in the text? 2\) What *don’t* you see in Jesus’ prayer that you expected would be there? Once you answer those questions, you’re off to a great start in learning how to approach God in prayer. Scripture also records many other prayers that can help provide the key to learning how to pray. For example, here are the references to all the prayers of Paul: Romans 8:1–10; 10:1; 12:12; 15:5–6, 13, 30–33 1 Corinthians 1:4–9; 16:23 2 Corinthians 1:3–7; 2:14–16; 9:12–15; 13:7–9 Galatians 6:18 Ephesians 1:3–5, 15–23; 3:14–21; 6:19–20 Philippians 1:3–6, 9–11; 4:6–7, 23 Colossians 1:3–14; 4:2–4 1 Thessalonians 1:2–3, 13–16; 3:9–13; 5:23–24, 28 2 Thessalonians 1:3–5, 11–12; 2:16–17; 3:2–5–16 1 Timothy 1:12; 2:1–3 2 Timothy 1:3–7, 16–18; 4:22 Titus 3:15 Philemon 1:4–7, 25 As you read through Paul’s prayers, humble yourself before the Word of God. Let Paul’s prayers teach you. Write down your thoughts as you read, and you will have unlocked more tools in your prayer toolbox. And below are all the different “singing prayers” recorded in the Psalms. They are listed by genre: • **Laments** Singing prayers that express sorrow, questioning, and doubt and move you from protest to praise. *Community:* Psalms 12, 44, 58, 60, 74, 79—80, 83, 85, 89—90, 94, 123, 126, 129\. *Individual:* Psalms 3, 4, 5, 7, 9—10, 13—14, 17, 22, 25—28, 31, 36, 39, 40:12–17, 41, 42–43, 52—57, 59, 61, 64, 70—71, 77, 86, 89, 120, 139, 141—142\. • **Penitential** Singing prayers that move you away from concealing sin to confessing it. Psalms 6, 32, 38, 51, 102, 130, 143\. • **Imprecatory** Singing prayers that move you from fear to faith regarding your enemies. Psalms 35, 69, 83, 88, 109, 137, 140\. • **Thanksgiving (Todah) Psalms** Singing prayers that rejoice in God’s works and character over and above your own. *Community:* Psalms 65, 67, 75, 107, 124, 136\. *Individual:* Psalms 18, 21, 30, 32, 34, 40:1–11, 66:13–20, 92, 108, 116, 118, 138\. • **Salvation History** Singing prayers that remember God’s redemptive story, while simultaneously putting into perspective your own. Psalms 8, 105—106, 135—136\. • **Songs of Trust** Singing prayers that move you forward in faith. Psalms 11, 16, 23, 27, 62—63, 91, 121, 125, 131\. • **Hymns and Doxology** Singing prayers that help you emotionally respond to timeless truth instead of being swayed by timely circumstances. Psalms 8, 19:1–6, 33, 66:1–12, 67, 95, 100, 103—104, 111—114, 117, 145—150\. • **Liturgical Covenant \& Temple Liturgies** Singing prayers that move you toward God\-centered worship rather than man\-centered. Psalms 15, 24, 50, 68, 78, 81—82, 89, 95, 115, 132, 134\. • **Royal (Kingly) Enthronement** Singing prayers that remind you pf God’s sovereignty and reign amidst your glory and pain. Psalms 2, 18, 20—21, 29, 45, 47, 72, 93, 95—99, 101, 110, 144\. • **Songs of Zion (Kingdom)** Singing prayers that move you toward God’s Kingdom over and above the world’s kingdoms. Psalms 46, 48, 76, 84, 87, 122\. • **Wisdom and Torah Psalms** Singing prayers that help you remember the truth within the lying world. Psalms 1, 19:7–14, 36—37, 49, 73, 112, 119, 127—128, 133\. Prayer’s purpose is to move you toward God’s character. Prayer is not meant to conform God to your will, wants, and desires; it is to move you to become more like Jesus. The above prayers can teach you God’s will, wants, and desires. If you’re humble before God as your teacher, He will lovingly instruct you to pray differently, desire different things, and to live in different ways.

What physical infirmity is Galatians 4:13 referring to?

Answer In the apostle Paul’s [letter to the Galatians](Book-of-Galatians.html), he mentions having a bodily affliction: “You know that because of physical infirmity I preached the gospel to you at the first” (Galatians 4:13, NKJV). Other translations describe his malady as a “bodily illness” (NASB) and a “bodily ailment” (ESV). Moreover, Paul refers to his affliction as “my trial” in Galatians 4:14 (NKJV), which other translations render as “my illness” (NIV) and “my condition” (ESV). Neither Galatians nor any other book of the Bible clearly identifies Paul’s infirmity. However, many scholars find reasons to believe that it may have been poor eyesight. Those who believe Paul’s infirmity was poor eyesight find supporting evidence elsewhere in Galatians, though the connections are rather tenuous. First, Paul mentions the Galatians giving him their eyes as an act of kindness: “What then was the blessing you enjoyed? For I bear you witness that, if possible, you would have plucked out your own eyes and given them to me” (Galatians 4:15\). Though advocates of the poor\-eyesight interpretation acknowledge that Paul’s description in this verse isn’t literal, they suggest he may be figuratively alluding to his bodily ailment. Those who disagree with this view argue that he is merely using a vivid word picture (e.g., Matthew 18:29\) to highlight the Galatians’ affection for him. A second piece of evidence that advocates for the poor\-eyesight theory comes at the conclusion of the letter when Paul mentions writing in large letters, possibly indicative of vision problems: “See with what large letters I am writing to you with my own hand” (Galatians 6:11\). Those who disagree with this interpretation suggest that Paul may be writing in large letters for emphasis, or possibly drawing attention to when he stopped using an amanuensis (i.e., a writing secretary) to whom he often dictated his letters (also see 1 Corinthians 16:21; Colossians 4:18\). Some advocates of the poor\-eyesight interpretation cite the blindness Paul experienced at his conversion as support: “Saul rose from the ground, and although his eyes were opened, he saw nothing. So they led him by the hand and brought him into Damascus” (Acts 9:8\). However, the context in Acts suggests that his blindness had a supernatural origin and purpose and was only temporary (Acts 9:18\). Thus, it’s unlikely that Paul’s physical infirmity was an ongoing problem related to his conversion experience. There are numerous minority views of Paul’s infirmity. A few early church fathers thought it was migraine headaches. Some modern scholars have suggested epilepsy, a neurological disorder that causes recurrent seizures. Such a condition would have significantly challenged caretakers in the first century. To some, that may explain Paul’s acknowledgment that the Galatians “did not scorn or despise” him because of his condition (Galatians 4:14\). Another minority view is that Paul’s ailment was malaria, a mosquito\-borne illness that can cause fever and even death in some cases. This explanation is based on the details of Acts 13, which relates how Paul came to Galatia in the [first missionary journey](Paul-first-missionary-journey.html). Paul, traveling with Barnabas and Mark, came to the city of Perga, situated in a marshy area in Pamphylia, where malaria seems to have been endemic. It was from Perga that Mark abandoned the team (Acts 13:13\), and an illness they encountered there may have prompted his departure. If Paul had indeed contracted malaria in the lowlands of Perga, his move to Pisidian Antioch in Galatia was sensible, since Antioch sat about 3,600 feet higher than Perga, and mosquitos would have been less active there. However, there is no evidence that the elevation of Galatia was a factor in Paul’s stay there. Presumably, any sickness could have caused him to have a layover in the region. Yet another view is that Paul’s mention of his infirmity was a metaphorical reference to persecution in general. This interpretation is consistent with how some understand his description of having a [thorn in the flesh](Paul-thorn-flesh.html) (2 Corinthians 12:7\) as referring to scars, the residual effect of persecution. However, the Greek word Paul uses, translated as “infirmity” in Galatians 4:13, clearly refers to a physical affliction in the only other verse where he uses it (1 Timothy 5:23\). Furthermore, the Gospels and Acts use the word exclusively in reference to physical ailments (e.g., Matthew 8:17; John 5:5; Acts 28:9\). In summary, the majority view that Paul’s infirmity in Galatians 4:13 was poor eyesight has more supporting evidence than other explanations. Furthermore, Paul testified that God worked through his condition to preach the gospel to the Galatians. His infirmity couldn’t thwart God’s plan to use him to make disciples of all nations (Matthew 28:19–20\), illustrating the truth that God works all things together for good (Romans 8:28\).

What does the Bible say about self-justification?

Answer The Merriam Webster Dictionary defines *self\-justification* as “the act or an instance of making excuses for oneself.” Generally, it involves attempts to make ourselves appear good or approved in the eyes of others. We engage in self\-justification when we minimize our faults, exaggerate our successes, or rationalize our wrong actions. Everyone seeks approval, and we are tempted to pursue this approval through our image, reputation, success, intelligence, marriage, etc. In Scripture, self\-justification covers our attempt to be in right standing with humans and with God. Often, we can succeed in convincing others that we are just, but self\-justification fails in the sight of a perfect God. God’s moral standards are such that we cannot meet them in the flesh; we cannot earn His approval. Ergo, we tilt to one of two directions in a bid to justify ourselves. One way we pursue self\-justification is to lessen God’s standard. We insert [human traditions](Christian-tradition.html) in the place of God’s commands, or we focus on outward behaviors, neglecting inner transformation. This is the road of the Pharisees, who externally obeyed the law and added human traditions to it. At the same time, they denied their need for reconciliation with God. People heralded the Pharisees as epitomes of righteousness, but Jesus called them “whitewashed tombs” (Matthew 23:27–28\). In His [parable](parable-Pharisee-tax-collector.html) aimed at people who seek self\-justification (Luke 18:9–14\), Jesus highlighted the inevitable consequence of this path. The Pharisee in the parable displayed inner pride and was brimming with superiority as he compared himself to the tax collector. A second way we pursue self\-justification is to rationalize sinful behavior. Adam and Eve sought this form of justification when they rationalized their sin in the Garden (Genesis 3:9–13\). Much later, King Saul attempted to justify himself by presenting “good” reasons for his disobedience to God’s clear command (1 Samuel 13:11–12; 15:20–21\). In the New Testament, Jude critiqued false teachers who “pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality” (Jude 1:3–5\). Such people seek approval by rationalizing their immorality. The pull toward self\-justification is a subtle problem in all our lives. Some seek justification by calling evil good and good evil. Some create a “god” who conveniently affirms all their choices. Fitting Paul’s description, they “exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles” (Romans 1:23\). The sophisticated modern man maybe wouldn’t carve an idol out of wood, but he creates idols in his heart. Others attempt self\-justification in the manner of the Pharisees, emphasizing human traditions of their choosing and outward conformity to a set of rules. This particularly appeals to religious people, including those who wear the Christian label but try to earn salvation by human efforts. The problem of self\-justification is not limited to religious people, however; even secular individuals often seek justification through acts of social justice, humanitarian efforts, or moral living. Scripture provides the best solution to our need for approval and the only path to true [justification](justification.html). That begins with accepting that there is no such thing as self\-justification in the sight of God. We cannot rationalize sin, as God says we are “without excuse” (Romans 1:20\). We cannot hide sin, as He knows our hearts. Creating our own traditions is unhelpful, because the standard we must meet is God’s holiness. And His standard applies to our thoughts, motives, and inner life —not just our outward behavior. Consequently, Scripture attests that “by works of the law no human will be justified” (Romans 3:20\). We cannot earn a right standing with God. Our pursuit of self\-justification is futile. We are only justified in God’s eyes when we are in Christ. Our faith in Jesus is what makes us right with God. Justification comes as we trust in the person and work of Jesus, as revealed in the [gospel](what-is-the-gospel.html). Jesus lived a sinless life, died to pay the penalty for our sins, and rose again to offer eternal life. We must abandon our attempts at self\-justification and seek the Lord. Scripture is plain on this matter: “People are counted as righteous, not because of their work, but because of their faith in God who forgives sinners” (Romans 4:5, NLT).

What was the purpose of Jesus’ miracles?

Answer A [miracle](definition-miracle.html) is an unexpected outpouring of God’s power that defies ordinary explanation and occurs outside the bounds of natural order. Miracles in the Bible demonstrate God’s involvement in humans’ lives. Their purpose is always to advance the kingdom of God in some way. The miracle of Jesus’ incarnation served that very purpose. Nothing Jesus Christ did during His earthly ministry was random. Everything He said and did conformed to the will of God (John 4:34; 5:30; 6:38; 12:49; 14:31; Luke 22:42; Hebrews 10:5–9; cf. Psalm 40:6–8\). Thus, Jesus’ miracles were meant to reveal and advance His heavenly Father’s kingdom. The miracles of Jesus—about 37 are recorded in the Gospels—include physical healings, casting out demons, providing food, controlling or altering elements such as water, wind, and rain, and raising people from the dead. All these supernatural occurrences served a specific purpose in God’s plan of salvation for humanity. The central purpose of Jesus’ miracles was to reveal and advance the kingdom of God (see Matthew 12:28\), but these miracles also served several other peripheral purposes. The first recorded miracle of Jesus was turning water into wine at the wedding feast at Cana (John 2:1–12\). John called this miracle a “miraculous sign” (verse 11\). It accomplished two critical purposes: it proved Christ’s power and revealed His glory. As a result, the disciples put their faith in Jesus. Another purpose of Jesus’ miracles was to reveal His divine identity and authority as the [Messiah](is-Jesus-the-Messiah.html) and Son of God (John 11:41–42\). Jesus said, “The works that the Father has given me to finish—the very works that I am doing—testify that the Father has sent me” (John 5:36\). As Jesus performed various signs and wonders, He proved that He was divinely endowed with power to control physical elements (Matthew 8:27\), spiritual forces (Matthew 12:28; Mark 1:34\), and even life and death (Luke 7:14–15; Matthew 9:25\). Sometimes, Jesus performed miracles in the Father’s authority (John 10:37–38\), and at other times, He acted on His own authority (Matthew 12:9–14\). This revealed both His divine nature and His participation in the Trinity (John 5:17, 19–30\). Jesus’ miracles fulfilled Old Testament [prophecies](prophecies-of-Jesus.html) about Israel’s Messiah. Matthew writes, “That evening many demon\-possessed people were brought to Jesus. He cast out the evil spirits with a simple command, and he healed all the sick. This fulfilled the word of the Lord through the prophet Isaiah, who said, ‘He took our sicknesses and removed our diseases’” (Matthew 8:16–17, NLT). When John the Baptist sent the disciples to Jesus to confirm His identity, Jesus responded, “Go back to John and tell him what you have heard and seen—the blind see, the lame walk, those with leprosy are cured, the deaf hear, the dead are raised to life, and the Good News is being preached to the poor” (Matthew 11:4–5, NLT). Here, Jesus showed He was fulfilling the prophecy in Isaiah 61:1–2\. Another purpose of Jesus’ miracles was to validate who He is. Jesus told a group of His enemies, “Even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father” (John 10:38\). With the healing of a paralytic, Jesus revealed His power to forgive sins; in other words, He is God. Most of those who witnessed the miracle praised God in amazement (Mark 2:1–12\), but some remained opposed to Jesus. Christ’s miracles also had the purpose of opening people’s hearts to receive His message and trust Him as Savior (John 2:23–25; 11:45\). John emphasized this purpose as one of his motives for writing his Gospel: “The disciples saw Jesus do many other miraculous signs in addition to the ones recorded in this book. But these are written so that you may continue to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life by the power of his name” (John 20:30–31, NLT). Jesus’ miracles provide dramatic evidence that He is God’s only Son, sent to be our Savior (John 3:16–17\). They show His great compassion for people (Matthew 14:14\), lifting their burdens (Matthew 11:28\), healing their diseases (Matthew 4:23\), and meeting their deepest needs (Luke 8:35; John 4:10\). So, another purpose of Jesus’ miracles was to show God’s love. Jesus had the power to help people, and He helped. The apostle John asserts that Jesus performed so many miracles that most of them were not even recorded in the Bible (John 21:25\). These countless demonstrations of God’s love and power caused people to flock to Jesus (Mark 1:32, 37, 45\) where they could hear His message, receive it by faith, accept God’s gift of salvation, and enter into His eternal kingdom.

What does the Bible say about matriarchy?

Answer The Bible does not explicitly address the concept of matriarchy, a societal system where women hold primary power and authority. True matriarchies are rare, and they were virtually nonexistent in biblical times. Today, the social climate favors a broad egalitarianism over either patriarchy or matriarchy. While matriarchies have been debated in theory, they are seldom fully realized. Some tribes hold to matrilineal structures, in which lineage is traced through the mothers; and others have matrifocal societies, with women as primary caregivers. However, neither of these equate to true matriarchy. Even countries like England, known for having female rulers, did not reflect true matriarchy, as men still held crucial positions of authority. Despite its rarity as a widespread social system, matriarchal structures exist on a smaller scale, even in modern contexts. Masculinity is often depicted in media as either brute or inept, with movies and sitcoms portraying fathers as childish and inexperienced and mothers depicted as the strong, sensible, saving force. The rise of single motherhood has also increased the potential for matriarchal dynamics. Like other systems, matriarchy should be analyzed and critiqued through the biblical lens. **Biblical Origin** The Bible was composed in a predominantly patriarchal context. The patriarchal system is often linked to Genesis 3:16, where God says to Eve, “I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.” Many commentators view this as the origin of the patriarchal system—and the battle of the sexes. Thus, patriarchy is a result of the fall rather than a God\-ordained system. Does matriarchy have a biblical origin? No, but in the garden, Eve took the lead in eating the fruit and handing it to Adam, and Adam’s rebuke comes “because you listened to your wife” and disobeyed (Genesis 3:17\). This could suggest that both patriarchy and matriarchy are imperfect systems. **Old Testament Perspective** Genesis presents a picture of gender relations based on equal value, unity, and interdependence. Genesis 1:27 affirms that God created mankind “in his own image, in the image of God he created them, male and female he created them.” The same chapter further lays out the cultural mandate, in which both men and women were invited to participate (Genesis 1:28–30\). Neither gender was intended to dominate the other or hold complete authority. This casts doubt on any possible endorsement of matriarchy. Genesis 2 shows the first marriage and the different roles of husband and wife. Adam was placed in the garden to cultivate, and Eve was created to be his *ezer* (“helper”). Masculinity and femininity both have specific purposes and responsibilities, intended for mutuality and complementarity. The fall disrupted this mutuality, but innate gender differences existed before sin. A matriarchal society may not allow for proper expression of God’s intended roles. **New Testament Perspectives** In the New Testament, marriage is presented as a reflection of the union between Christ and the church. Wives are called to voluntarily submit to their husbands’ headship, while husbands are called to sacrificially love, nourish and cherish their wives. The model found in Ephesians 5:22–23 challenges matriarchy and is subversive to patriarchy. Furthermore, Paul instructs against women having authority over men in the church. The Greek word translated as “exercise authority over” in 1 Timothy 2:12 is *authentein*, which can be defined as “domineer” or “govern.” Christians disagree over the application of this text today, but both sides of the debate are against women dominating men. A true matriarchy opens the road for domination, just as patriarchy leaves women vulnerable to male oppression. **Women in the Bible** It is worth noting that the Bible doesn’t forbid women leaders in society. Despite the patriarchal culture of biblical times, formidable women leaders like [Deborah](life-Deborah.html), [Huldah the prophetess](Huldah-the-prophetess.html), [Esther](life-Esther.html), and Miriam emerge. Women were also active in the New Testament, working alongside the apostles in expanding God’s kingdom. [Priscilla](Priscilla-and-Aquila.html), Phoebe, and [Junia](Junia-Junias-apostle.html) are good examples. However, these women served their communities and glorified God without seeking to dominate men. Power\-hungry women, like [Jezebel](life-Jezebel.html) and [Athaliah](Athaliah-in-the-Bible.html), met a terrible end. **Conclusion** When viewed through a biblical lens, matriarchy is incompatible with the New Testament family model. It also leaves room for unhealthy power dynamics and may hinder the exercise of pre\-fall roles of men and women. Further, matriarchy works against the inherent equality and unity of the genders as seen in Genesis. However, the idea of trustworthy women leaders in certain areas is biblical. Matriarchy is also acceptable in the case of widowhood, when the woman chooses not to remarry. Should Christians then uphold patriarchy against matriarchy? Not necessarily, especially since other options align more closely to biblical ideals. A better approach is to affirm the equal dignity and value of both genders, celebrate their differences, and advocate for both men and women to express their abilities within biblical boundaries.

What is the Book of Odes?

Answer The Book of Odes, also known as Biblical Odes, consists of [hymns](what-are-hymns.html), prayers, and poetry. It is used in the liturgy of some Christian traditions, particularly [Eastern Orthodoxy](Eastern-Orthodox-church.html). The standard collection has 14 lyric poems or “odes,” though some editions include additional texts. Worshippers in the Eastern Orthodox tradition commonly sing the texts found in the Book of Odes during their morning prayers, known as “matins”—a Latin word meaning “morning”—but they are also used in other church services. The compilation of the Book of Odes dates to the third century AD, though the biblical texts within it are quoted from the [Septuagint](septuagint.html), a Greek translation of the Old Testament from the third century BC. Thus, the biblical texts in the Book of Odes are based on manuscripts much older than the third century. In addition to select Old and New Testament passages, the book includes texts from [the Apocrypha](apocrypha-deuterocanonical.html)—non\-biblical Jewish writings from 200 to 100 BC that most Protestant traditions don’t consider divinely inspired. The texts in the Book of Odes are not arranged in chronological order based on their historical setting or their date of composition. Nor are they in canonical order—the sequence found in the Old and New Testaments. Some historians speculate that the collection may be arranged according to topical themes used in early church liturgies. Ultimately, the rationale behind the order of the odes is unknown. The first six texts in the Book of Odes are passages from the Old Testament. The opening odes are from the writings of Moses. The first is called the Song of the Sea and consists of Exodus 15:1–19\. The second is called the Song of Moses and consists of Deuteronomy 32:1–43\. The next four odes are prayers from the Bible—one from the historical section of the Old Testament and three from the prophetic literature. These are the Prayer of Hannah, the mother of Samuel (1 Samuel 2:1–10\), the Prayer of Habakkuk (Habakkuk 3:2–19\), the Prayer of Isaiah (Isaiah 26:9–20\), and the Prayer of Jonah (Jonah 2:3–10\). Those who use the Book of Odes in worship sing these biblical passages word for word. The next two texts in the Book of Odes come from the Apocrypha. They are the Prayer of Azariah (Daniel 3:26–45\) and the Song of the Three Young Men (Daniel 3:52–90\). Although Daniel is part of the Old Testament, these two passages were added to the Septuagint’s version of the book hundreds of years after Daniel’s composition. Most Protestants don’t consider these passages divinely inspired as they are part of the Apocrypha. The next odes in the book come from the Gospel of Luke. The first is the Canticle of Mary, traditionally called [*The Magnificat*](Magnificat.html) (Luke 1:46–55\). In the Eastern Orthodox tradition, it is known as the Prayer of Mary the Theotokos—“the Mother of God.” The second is called the Canticle of Zechariah, traditionally known as the *Benedictus*, meaning “a hymn of blessing” (Luke 1:68–79\). The next two texts come from the Book of Isaiah. They are The Song of the Vineyard: A Canticle of Isaiah (Isaiah 5:1–7\) and the Prayer of Hezekiah (Isaiah 38:10–20\). The last three odes come from the Gospel of Luke. The first two texts are prayers: the apocryphal Prayer of Manasseh, king of Judah, when he was held captive in Babylon, and the Prayer of Simeon (Luke 2:29–32\). The last ode is called *Gloria in Excelsis Deo*—i.e., “Glory to God in the Highest.” It is part of a hymn called the Canticle of the Early Morning, which combines text from Luke 2:14 and Psalms 35:10–11, 118:12, and 144:2\. The Book of Odes reflects the desire of some historical and modern Christian traditions to use biblical and Apocryphal texts in worshiping Jesus Christ through song.

What is the “will of man” in John 1:13?

Answer The Gospel of John commences with a prologue (John 1:1–18\) that lays the groundwork for the rest of the book. In verses 12–13, the apostle writes, “To all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God” (ESV). In this article, we will dissect the meaning of *the will of man* and contrast it with the will of God. The prologue of John, spanning eighteen verses, introduces the identity and mission of [the Word](Word-became-flesh.html) made flesh (John 1:1 and 14\). The [incarnation](incarnation-of-Christ.html), then, is foundational to our receiving the new birth that allows us to become children of God (John 1:13; cf. John 3:3, 5; 6:63\). *The will of man* refers to human volition and our ability to make decisions. We are born again *not* by the will of man because no one can choose God on his own. The heart, mind, and will of man have been radically corrupted by sin (what some theologians refer to as “[total depravity](total-depravity.html)”). Because of our sinfulness, we cannot bring ourselves into a right relationship with God. If sinners are to be saved, then God must do it. John contrasts the will of man with the will of God. In John 1:13, the apostle stresses that those who are born of God are not products of human lineage, human effort, or human will. Instead, their [new birth](new-birth.html) is solely attributed to the eternal and sovereign will of God. Paul highlights the will of God with these words: “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love *he predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will*” (Ephesians 1:3–5, ESV, emphasis added). The will of God, not the will of man, is how we become sons and daughters of God. In Ephesians 2:8–9, Paul writes, “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.” The word *this* points to the entire process of salvation by grace through faith: regeneration, justification, adoption as sons and daughters, sanctification, and glorification. As a gift of God, salvation is not something that we can accomplish ourselves. We did not will it to happen; nor could we. If we could save ourselves, then the sacrifice of Christ would have been unnecessary. John 1:13 has significant implications for Christian theology, particularly in discussions about divine sovereignty and human agency. This verse challenges the belief that humans can bring themselves into God’s family. It also challenges the belief that everyone (without exception) is a child of God. No, only those who have been given the right to become children of God are in God’s family. Our new birth did not come about by the will of man. Or, as the NLT puts it, we “are reborn—not with a physical birth resulting from human passion or plan, but a birth that comes from God.” We did not call the Son out of heaven; the Father sent Him. Jesus did not obey our will, but God’s.

What does “whoever comes to me I will never cast out” mean (John 6:37)?

Answer John 6:37 is a comforting verse for Christians. It reads, “All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out” (ESV). The verse hints at the mystery of how divine sovereignty relates to human responsibility. Unfortunately, debates over that mystery can distract us from embracing Jesus’ assurance. What a wonderful promise, that whoever comes to Jesus will never be cast out! The word *whoever* holds the invitation open to everyone, regardless of class, ethnic group, gender, or any other qualification. Even the worst offender who comes to Christ will receive forgiveness of sins and a multitude of spiritual blessings. Jesus will not turn anyone away on account of his or her past actions or any other criteria. Such inclusivity is contrasted with the exclusivity of a preceding verse, where Jesus calls Himself the “bread of life” (John 6:35\). Both aspects of Jesus’ invitation are offensive in our culture. On one hand, pluralism bristles at the idea of Jesus being the only way, the only bread. On the other hand, our natural tendency is to consider ourselves to be deserving of heaven. The gospel’s invitation to even notorious sinners offends the sensibilities of those who consider themselves to be the good guys. Why should the “deserving” share space with the “undeserving”? In Capernaum, “when the teachers of the law who were Pharisees saw \[Jesus] eating with the sinners and tax collectors, they asked his disciples: ‘Why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?’” (Mark 2:16\). The Pharisees did not understand Jesus’ commitment that “whoever comes to me I will never cast out.” Their offence betrayed a heart full of pride and self\-righteousness. The Lord came to seek and to save the lost (Luke 19:10\), not to send repentant sinners away. Who comes to Jesus? “All those the Father gives.” When we come to Christ, we may not recognize that the Father has called us or that we are His gift to the Son. But God is sovereign. We may not fully understand, but Jesus’ words give us [security](eternal-security.html): He will never drive us away. No one who trusts in Jesus will be cast out or driven away. To be cast out is to be rejected. Jesus will not shut the door on anyone who genuinely approaches Him in repentant faith. As the Hebrews writer affirms, God “rewards those who earnestly seek him” (Hebrews 11:6\). Jesus further implores all who are weary to seek rest in Him (Matthew 11:28–30\). John 6:37 attests to our eternal security by revealing Jesus’ willingness to receive anyone who believes in Him. God the Father gave the gift, and Jesus would never cast it away. As Jesus says in the next verse, “I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me” (John 6:38\). God’s will was that Jesus save all those given to Him and lose none of them (see John 6:39\). We can be confident that, regardless of a person’s past, whoever comes to Jesus will never be cast out.

What does it mean to present our members as instruments of righteousness (Romans 6:13)?

Answer .....