Search Results

Evidence for the Resurrection For two thousand years, Christians have insisted that Jesus rose physically from the dead on the Sunday after his crucifixion. The historicity of the resurrection is central to Christian theology because Jesus’s death and resurrection are both tied to our salvation. While most religions teach that we are saved on the basis of the good things we do, Christianity teaches that we are saved on the basis of what Jesus did for us. The Bible insists that while we were still far from God, ignoring him, rejecting him, and rebelling against him, God drew near to us in Christ to bear our sin, to take our punishment, and to die on the cross in our place. The resurrection was God’s confirmation that Jesus was who he claimed to be, and it is God’s assurance to Christians that they have been forgiven. Because of its theological significance, many people assume that the resurrection is merely an article of religious faith, not an event for which there could be any historical evidence. But that is not the case. In fact, I would argue that even from a purely secular standpoint, the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus is quite strong. For instance, skeptic Jeffery Lowder, a cofounder of Internet Infidels, writes that “strong historical arguments” can be made for the resurrection. Although he thinks that such arguments are insufficient, he agrees that “for theists [people who believe in God’s existence] . . . the resurrection is a plausible explanation.” Similarly, renowned atheist-turned-deist philosopher Antony Flew affirms that “the evidence for the resurrection is better than for claimed miracles in any other religion. It’s outstandingly different in quality and quantity.” Jewish scholar Pinchas Lapide even states, “I accept the resurrection of Easter Sunday not as an invention of the community of disciples, but as a historical event.” What historical evidence was sufficient to convince these non-Christians that the resurrection should be taken seriously and not carelessly dismissed? Although there are other lines of evidence, I’ll sketch an argument for the historicity of the resurrection that rests on four main points: the death and burial of Jesus, the empty tomb, the belief of the apostles, and the conversion of Paul. 1. Jesus’s Death and Burial Contemporary historians are virtually unanimous in their acceptance of Jesus’s death on the cross. His death by crucifixion is the single fact most mentioned in all the historical records of his life, both Christian and non-Christian. It is recorded in numerous books of the New Testament, including all four Gospels, Acts, Paul’s letters, Hebrews, 1 Peter, and Revelation. It is mentioned by non-Christians like Josephus and Tacitus. It is discussed in apocryphal gospels such as the Gospel of Peter and the Gospel of Truth. And it is referenced by numerous early Christian writings, including 1 Clement and the epistles of Barnabas and Polycarp. Moreover, it is extremely unlikely that the early Christians would have invented the story that their Savior was an executed criminal. Agnostic Bart Ehrman writes: It is hard today to understand just how offensive the idea of a crucified messiah would have been to most first-century Jews. . . . Since no one would have made up the idea of a crucified messiah, Jesus must really have existed, must really have raised messianic expectations, and must really have been crucified. New Testament scholar Gerd Lüdemann captures the scholarly consensus when he writes, “The fact of the death of Jesus as a consequence of crucifixion is indisputable.” Similarly, there is strong evidence for the historicity of Jesus’s burial. Most importantly, Jesus’s burial is recorded in all four Gospels. The burial of Jesus is also explicitly mentioned in Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians, written in the late AD 50s, around thirty years after Jesus’s death, and it probably reflects a much earlier creed. Given that multiple attestation is one of the major criteria by which New Testament scholars adjudicate the historicity of an event, the fact that several independent sources reference the same event strongly suggests that it is historical. Second, the Gospels all claim that Jesus was buried by Joseph of Arimathea, a member of the Sanhedrin, the Jewish religious court that condemned Jesus to death. It seems unlikely that early Christians would have invented this detail involving such a prominent figure, one who was a member of a group opposed to the early Christian movement. If we accept the position that Jesus did actually die on the cross and was actually buried, we must then ask, What happened to Jesus after his death and burial? 2. The Empty Tomb Second, the New Testament Gospels claim that the tomb of Jesus was found empty on the Sunday following his crucifixion. While this claim is not universally affirmed, a recent survey of three decades’ worth of academic literature shows that it was accepted by the majority of scholars who wrote on that subject. The strongest piece of evidence in favor of the historicity of the empty tomb is the report that it was discovered by women. This detail may not strike us as odd, but it is surprising, given the low status of women in the first century. For example, the first-century Jewish historian Josephus claimed that Jewish law expressed the following sentiment regarding the reliability of women: “Let not the testimony of women be admitted, on account of the levity and boldness of their sex.” If the early Christians were inventing narratives to support their own version of events, why not ascribe the discovery of the tomb to witnesses who would have been received as more credible? Reflecting on this piece of evidence, Jewish New Testament scholar Geza Vermes concludes: In the end, when every argument has been considered and weighed, the only conclusion acceptable to the historian must be that the opinions of the orthodox, the liberal sympathizer and the critical agnostic alike—and even perhaps of the disciples themselves—are simply interpretations of the one disconcerting fact: namely that the women who set out to pay their last respects to Jesus found to their consternation, not a body, but an empty tomb. Notice that Vermes is not defending the resurrection; he suggests that it may have been an “interpretation” of the disciples. Nevertheless, he recognizes the strength of the women’s testimony as evidence that the tomb was really found empty. A second factor supporting the historicity of the empty tomb is the fact that just seven weeks after Jesus’s death, the apostles began preaching the resurrection in Jerusalem itself, the very city in which Jesus had been crucified. Had he been lying in a tomb even for this length of time, his features such as hair, teeth, stature, and the wounds of crucifixion would have still been identifiable. It is difficult to see how the fledgling Christian movement could have survived despite the opposition of the ruling authorities if the corpse of Jesus had been interred within walking distance of the temple. Any skeptic who wanted to refute the claims of the apostles could have silenced them by taking a short stroll to the burial place of Jesus. Yet we have no record of anyone claiming that the disciples lied about the empty tomb. How did Christianity grow so rapidly in the very place where Jesus was buried if it could have been falsified so easily? Finally, at the end of his Gospel, Matthew provides what amounts to a dialogue between Christians and Jews regarding the body of Jesus. He states that the Jewish leaders of his day insisted that Jesus’s body had been stolen by the disciples, a claim that apparently was still circulating in the second century, since it is referenced in Justin Martyr’s Dialogue with Trypho. But this accusation implies that the Jewish leaders believed that the tomb was actually empty; obviously, they would not have accused the disciples of grave robbery if they believed that Jesus’s body was still in the tomb. For these reasons, most skeptical responses to the resurrection do not simply dismiss the empty tomb as a legend, but try to provide some alternative explanation for it. 3. The Belief of the Apostles Third, the followers of Jesus claimed to have seen him alive after he had been executed. They did not claim to have seen him only once or for a short time; they claimed to have seen him repeatedly over an extended period of several weeks. They also did not merely claim to have had a vision of him but said that they touched him, talked to him, and ate with him. These experiences were not limited to one or two individuals but included large groups of people, including five hundred at one time. What are we to make of these claims? It is nearly universally accepted by historians that the disciples genuinely believed they had encountered the resurrected Jesus, even if they were mistaken in their belief. For instance, Gerd Lüdemann, who denies the historicity of the resurrection, nonetheless states, “It may be taken as historically certain that Peter and the disciples had experiences after Jesus’ death in which Jesus appeared to them as the risen Christ.” The reason for this consensus is the persecution endured by the apostles for their belief in the resurrection. The apostles were repeatedly beaten and imprisoned. We have good historical evidence that James, Peter, and Paul were all executed for their faith, and church tradition maintains that as many as eleven of the twelve apostles were eventually martyred. Given the suffering that the apostles faced, it is difficult to maintain that they knew the resurrection to be a hoax. What would their motivation have been if they knew for certain that they had invented the resurrection stories? As a parallel, it’s reasonable to infer that the terrorists who destroyed the Twin Towers on 9/11 were sincere. If they were certain that Islam was false, why were they willing to kill themselves and thousands of others? What would they have had to gain? Likewise, we can infer that the apostles were sincere. Like the terrorists on 9/11, they would have had little to gain and a great deal to lose by acting upon a known falsehood. But unlike the terrorists, the apostles were in a position to know with complete certainty whether their claims were true. They were claiming to have seen, touched, and conversed with a man who had been executed just days earlier. If they had intentionally invented that claim, they would have known for certain that it was not worth dying for. Muslim author Reza Aslan, who argues that it’s “impossible to know” exactly what happened after Jesus’s death, nonetheless recognizes the significance of these considerations. He writes: One could simply . . . dismiss the resurrection as a lie, and declare belief in the risen Jesus to be the product of a deludable mind. However, there is this nagging fact to consider: one after another of those who claimed to have witnessed the risen Jesus went to their own gruesome deaths refusing to recant their testimony. That is not, in itself, unusual. Many zealous Jews died horribly for refusing to deny their beliefs. But these first followers of Jesus were not being asked to reject matters of faith based on events that took place centuries, if not millennia, before. They were being asked to deny something they themselves personally, directly encountered. When they began to face persecution and even death, why would they continue to affirm what they knew to be a lie? The best explanation is that they truly believed they had seen Jesus risen from the dead, whether or not their belief was correct. 4. The Conversion of Paul Fourth, the conversion of Paul is an important datum reported in the book of Acts and by Paul himself in several of his New Testament letters. He had originally been a vehement opponent of the church and had even consented to the stoning of the first Christian martyr, Stephen. While traveling to Damascus to continue his persecution of the early church, Paul suddenly became a Christian, claiming he had encountered Jesus on the road. Unlike the other apostles, Paul had not been a follower of Jesus during his ministry and was clearly no friend to the early church. Thus, his testimony can be regarded as that of a “hostile witness,” someone who had no incentive to accept Christian testimony about the resurrection unless he himself had an experience that he could unambiguously interpret as confirmation that Jesus was alive. The weight of this piece of evidence is significant. First, Paul’s conversion put him at immediate odds with the Jewish religious leaders in every city to which he traveled. In his second letter to the Corinthians, Paul recounts how he was whipped, beaten, stoned, and shipwrecked as a result of his faith (2 Cor. 11:24–25). Moreover, the physical consequences of his conversion are perhaps even less significant than its spiritual implications. Like many Pharisees, Paul regarded the claims of Jesus’s followers—that their Master was the divine Messiah—to be not only false but utterly blasphemous (see Acts 22:2–5; 1 Tim. 1:13). However, Paul underwent a complete religious transformation in a matter of days. He went from regarding Jesus as a false prophet to believing that Jesus was the unique Son of God, who alone offered salvation to all humanity. This event is psychologically surprising. It would have been as unexpected as Richard Dawkins, the vocal Oxford atheist, suddenly announcing that Jesus appeared to him in his study and that he was now a Christian. While we might think he was crazy, it would be hard to deny that something extraordinary had taken place to bring about such a complete reversal. In fact, the conversion of Paul is even more surprising than the hypothetical conversion of Dawkins, given that Paul embraced not a world religion with billions of followers but a despised, persecuted religious sect with no power and few adherents. Therefore, anyone who doubts the resurrection must provide a plausible account of why Paul underwent such a dramatic conversion in such a short period of time. This article is adapted from Why Believe?: A Reasoned Approach to Christianity by Neil Shenvi.

1. Matthew 6:5–8 And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you. And when you pray, do not heap up empty phrases as the Gentiles do, for they think that they will be heard for their many words. Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him. Prayer was a pillar of Jewish piety. Public prayer, said aloud in the morning, afternoon, and evening, was common. stand and pray in the synagogues. At the set time of prayer, pious Jews would stop what they were doing and pray, some discreetly, but others with pretentious display. Jesus did not condemn all public prayer, as indicated by his own prayers in public (e.g., Matt. 14:19; 15:36). One’s internal motivation is the central concern. shut the door. Though public prayer has value, prayer completely away from public view allows a person (or group) to focus more exclusively on God. heap up empty phrases. Pagans repeated the names of their gods or the same words over and over without thinking (cf. 1 Kings 18:26; Acts 19:34). Jesus is prohibiting mindless, mechanical repetition, not the earnest repetition that flows from the imploring heart (Mark 14:39; 2 Cor. 12:8; cf. Ps. 136; Isa. 6:3). 2. Hebrews 4:16 Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need. Read More Draw near (Gk. proserchomai, “approach, go to, draw near to”) is used consistently in Hebrews to represent a person approaching God (Heb. 7:25; Heb. 10:1, 22; Heb. 11:6; Heb. 12:18, 22; cf. Ex. 16:9; 34:32; Lev. 9:5; Deut. 4:11), which is possible only when one’s sins are forgiven through the sacrificial and intercessory ministry of a high priest (Heb. 7:25; Heb. 10:22). The encouragement to “draw near” to God’s throne implies that Christians have the privilege of a personal relationship with God. Confidence translates Greek parrēsia (“boldness,” “confidence,” “courage,” especially with reference to speaking before someone of great rank or power; cf. Heb. 3:6; Heb. 10:19, 35). It indicates that Christians may come before God and speak plainly and honestly (yet still with appropriate reverence), without fear that they will incur shame or punishment by doing so. throne of grace. God the Father, with Jesus at his right hand (Heb. 8:1; Heb. 12:2; cf. Heb. 1:8), graciously dispenses help from heaven to those who need forgiveness and strength in temptation. 3. 1 Thessalonians 5:16–18 Rejoice always, pray without ceasing, give thanks in all circumstances; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you. Read More Rejoice always. Joy in Paul’s letters is a basic mark of the Christian (Rom. 14:17) and a fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22). It is often associated with the firm hope of the Christian (e.g., Rom. 5:2–5; 12:12). Pray without ceasing suggests a mental attitude of prayerfulness, continual personal fellowship with God, and consciousness of being in his presence throughout each day. Christians are to be marked by thanksgiving (Eph. 5:4, 20; Col. 2:7; Col. 3:15, 17; Col. 4:2). This probably refers to all of 1 Thessalonians 5:16–18. 4. Philippians 4:6–7 Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus. Read More Paul echoes Jesus’ teaching in the Sermon on the Mount (see Matt. 6:25–34) that believers are not to be anxious but are to entrust themselves into the hands of their loving heavenly Father, whose peace will guard them in Christ Jesus. Paul’s use of guard may reflect his own imprisonment or the status of Philippi as a Roman colony with a military garrison. In either case, it is not Roman soldiers who guard believers—it is the peace of God Almighty. Because God is sovereign and in control, Christians can entrust all their difficulties to him, who rules over all creation and who is wise and loving in all his ways (Rom. 8:31–39). An attitude of thanksgiving contributes directly to this inward peace. 5. 1 John 5:14–15 And this is the confidence that we have toward him, that if we ask anything according to his will he hears us. And if we know that he hears us in whatever we ask, we know that we have the requests that we have asked of him.Read More To ask God according to his will does not mean that, before Christians can pray effectively, they need somehow to discover God’s secret plans for the future (sometimes called his “hidden will” or “will of decree”; cf. Deut. 29:29). Rather, it means they should ask according to what the Bible teaches about God’s will for his people (sometimes called God’s “revealed will” or “will of precept”). If Christians are praying in accordance with what pleases God as found in the teaching of Scripture, then they are praying according to his will (cf. Matt. 6:10; Eph. 5:17). To know that he hears us in whatever we ask is enough, because communion with God is the goal of prayer. we have the requests. Human experience testifies that Christians do not always receive all the things they ask from God, even things that seemingly accord with his revealed will (see note above). This verse must be understood in light of other passages of Scripture which show that praying according to God’s will includes the need to pray in faith (Matt. 21:22; James 1:6), with patience (Luke 18:1–8), in obedience (Ps. 66:18; 1 Pet. 3:12), and in submission to God’s greater wisdom (Luke 22:42; Rom. 8:28; 1 Pet. 4:19). 6. Matthew 6:9–13 Pray then like this: “Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name. Your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread, and forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. Read More Jesus gives his disciples an example to follow when praying. The prayer has a beginning invocation and six petitions that give proper priorities. The first three petitions focus on the preeminence of God while the final three focus on personal needs in a community context. Father (Gk. patēr, “father”) would have been “Abba” in Aramaic, the everyday language spoken by Jesus (cf. Mark 14:36; Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6). It was the word used by Jewish children for their earthly fathers. However, since the term in both Aramaic and Greek was also used by adults to address their fathers, the claim that “Abba” meant “Daddy” is misleading and runs the risk of irreverence. Nevertheless, the idea of praying to God as “Our Father” conveys the authority, warmth, and intimacy of a loving father’s care, while in heaven reminds believers of God’s sovereign rule over all things. The theme of “heavenly Father” is found throughout the Old Testament (Deut. 14:1; 32:6; Ps. 103:13; Jer. 3:4; 31:9; Hos. 11:1). Jesus’ disciples are invited into the intimacy of God the Son with his Father. The concern of this first petition is that God’s name would be hallowed—that God would be treated with the highest honor and set apart as holy. Christians are called to pray and work for the continual advance of God’s kingdom on earth (the second petition; see note on Matt. 6:9–13). The presence of God’s kingdom in this age refers to the reign of Christ in the hearts and lives of believers, and to the reigning presence of Christ in his body, the church—so that they increasingly reflect his love, obey his laws, honor him, do good for all people, and proclaim the good news of the kingdom. The third petition speaks of God’s will. This means God’s “revealed will” (see note on Eph. 5:17), which involves conduct that is pleasing to him as revealed in Scripture. Just as God’s will is perfectly experienced in heaven, Jesus prays that it will be experienced on earth. The will of God will be expressed in its fullness only when God’s kingdom comes in its final form, when Christ returns in power and great glory (see Matt. 24:30; cf. Rom. 8:18–25; Rev. 20:1–10), but it will increasingly be seen in this age as well (Matt. 13:31–33). The fourth petition focuses on the disciples’ daily bread, a necessity of life which by implication includes all of the believer’s daily physical needs. Forgive us our debts (the fifth petition) does not mean that believers need to ask daily for justification, since believers are justified forever from the moment of initial saving faith (Rom. 5:1, 9; 8:1; 10:10). Rather, this is a prayer for the restoration of personal fellowship with God when fellowship has been hindered by sin (cf. Eph. 4:30). Those who have received such forgiveness are so moved with gratitude toward God that they also eagerly forgive those who are debtors to them. On sin as a “debt” owed to God, see note on Colossians 2:14. This final (sixth) petition addresses the disciples’ battle with sin and evil. Lead us not into temptation. The word translated “temptation” (Gk. peirasmos) can indicate either temptation or testing. The meaning here most likely carries the sense, Allow us to be spared from difficult circumstances that would tempt us to sin (cf. Matt. 26:41). Although God never directly tempts believers (James 1:13), he does sometimes lead them into situations that “test” them (cf. Matt. 4:1; also Job 1; 1 Pet. 1:6; 4:12). In fact, trials and hardships will inevitably come to believers’ lives, and believers should “count it all joy” (James 1:2) when trials come, for they are strengthened by them (James 1:3–4). Nonetheless, believers should never pray to be brought into such situations but should pray to be delivered from them, for hardship and temptation make obedience more difficult and will sometimes result in sin. Believers should pray to be delivered from temptation (cf. Matt. 26:41; Luke 22:40, 46; 2 Pet. 2:9; Rev. 3:10) and led in "paths of righteousness" (Ps. 23:3). deliver us from evil. The phrase translated “evil” (Gk. tou ponērou) can mean either “evil” or “the evil one,” namely, Satan. The best protection from sin and temptation is to turn to God and to depend on his direction. “For yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory, forever. Amen” is evidently a later scribal addition, since the most reliable and oldest Greek manuscripts all lack these words, which is the reason why these words are omitted from most modern translations. However, there is nothing theologically incorrect about the wording (cf. 1 Chron. 29:11–13), nor is it inappropriate to include these words in public prayers. 7. Mark 11:24 Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours. Read More whatever you ask. God delights to “give good things to those who ask him” (Matt. 7:11) and is capable of granting any prayer, though we must ask with godly motives (James 4:3) and according to God’s will (1 John 5:14). believe that you have received it, and it will be yours. Those who trust God for the right things in the right way can have confidence that God will “supply every need. . . according to his riches in glory in Christ Jesus” (Phil. 4:19), knowing that he will work “all things together for good” and will “graciously give us all things” (Rom. 8:28, 32). Some have misused this verse by telling people that if they pray for physical healing (or for some other specific request) and if they just have enough faith, then they can have confidence that God has already done (or will do) whatever they ask. But we must always have the same perspective that Jesus had—that is, confidence in God’s power but also submission to his will: “Father, all things are possible for you. . . Yet not what I will, but what you will” (Mark 14:36). 8. Ephesians 6:17–18 And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God, praying at all times in the Spirit, with all prayer and supplication. To that end, keep alert with all perseverance, making supplication for all the saints. Read More praying. The weapons for warfare are spiritual because they are rooted in prayer, which is the Christian’s most powerful resource. Prayer is to permeate believers’ lives as a universal practice, as seen by the use of “all” four times in this verse: at all times. . . with all prayer. . . with all perseverance. . . for all the saints. Prayer in the Spirit is a form of worship (John 4:23–24) enabled by the Spirit of God, who intercedes on behalf of the person who prays (Rom. 8:26–27). 9. 1 Timothy 2:1 First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people. Read More supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings. Paul turns to expounding in specific terms what true gospel living (1 Tim. 1:5) should look like. He calls for prayer and he addresses hindrances to prayer (1 Tim. 2:1–15). In describing life that properly emerges from the gospel, Paul first mentions prayer for the salvation of all people. This also leads to a discussion of godly living and appropriate behavior in corporate worship, particularly unity, modesty, and proper submission. Paul’s point is not to list all the ways to pray but to pile up various terms in reference to prayer for their cumulative impact. This is a call for all sorts of prayer for all sorts of people. 10. James 5:16 Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person has great power as it is working. Read More confess your sins to one another. Sometimes confession in the community is needed before healing can take place, since sin may be the cause of the illness (cf. 1 Cor. 11:29–30). Pray for one another is directed to all the readers of James’s letter and indicates that he did not expect prayer for healing to be limited to the elders (James 5:14). The righteous will have great power in prayer, as God grants their requests. This article is part of the Key Bible Verses series.

It’s a biblical truth that habits shape your life. Perhaps you’re wondering, “where does God tell us that in the Bible?” That idea comes from Galatians 6. But God doesn’t use the word “habits.” He uses the metaphor of seeds. Why? In biblical times, people lived in an agrarian society. Nothing was manufactured or cranked out in fast-food joints. Food had to be grown one ingredient at a time. People’s lives and economy were based largely on farming. People back then would understand the concept of planting seeds and harvesting crops, so here’s what God inspired Paul to write: “Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. Whoever sows to please their flesh, from the flesh will reap destruction; whoever sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life. Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up” (Galatians 6:7–9). For us non-agrarians, let’s establish some definitions. ▪ To “sow” means to plant—to put seed in the ground. ▪ To “reap” means to gather the fruit—the result of the seed planted. So the passage starts, “Do not be deceived.” The idea for us readers is, don’t be led astray. Don’t be fooled; don’t be stupid. It continues, “God cannot be mocked.” The Greek word translated “mocked” means to snub or thumb your nose at someone. You can do that to a person, but not to God. Don’t be deceived, God can’t be mocked. You might fool a lot of people, but you’re not going to fool God. The next words are, “A man reaps what he sows.” That’s what we need to understand and not be foolish about. But what does that mean? ▪ You will harvest what you plant. ▪ You will get out what you put in. ▪ Your outcomes will be determined by your inputs. ▪ The results of your life will be based on the decisions you make, the habits you stake, and the habits you break. Paul gives us a spiritual example when he talks about the differences between sowing to the flesh and sowing to the Spirit. The flesh refers to our sinful nature. Some sow (or plant seeds) to the flesh, meaning they do what’s wrong, ungodly, and sinful. The result? They reap (or harvest) destruction. Bad decisions lead to bad consequences. Others sow (or plant seeds) to the Spirit, meaning they allow themselves to be led and empowered by the Holy Spirit, so they do what honors God. The result? They reap (or harvest) eternal life. So if you live your life with and for God, that’s what you’re going to get out of it. Not just now but (especially) eternally. If you live your life for yourself, ignoring God and apart from him, that’s what you’re going to get out of it. Not just now but (especially) eternally. But it’s not just true spiritually and eternally. This is the way all of life works. We reap what we sow. There’s a natural law at work in this idea of planting and harvesting. It’s similar to, say, the concept of gravity. It’s just how the world works. You don’t have to like it. You don’t have to agree with it. Gravity will work for you, and on you, the same way it works with everyone. If you jump, you will go up. Then gravity will bring you down. We say people get “tripped up,” but that’s not true. People always trip down. Gravity is a natural law. In the same way, God tells us there is a natural law of sowing and reaping. If you plant apple seeds, you get apple trees. If you plant orange seeds, don’t be deceived and expect apples. You can picture a farmer out in his fields: Wait. What’s this? I wanted apples. Why did I get oranges? It’s because you planted orange seeds! If you plant corn, you’re going to reap corn. Don’t plant corn if you want pineapples. That would be stupid. When you put a certain type of seed in the ground, you get a harvest that corresponds with the seed you planted. Every. Single. Time. You reap what you sow. True in agriculture. True in life. If you plant good habits, you’ll get good outcomes. If you plant bad habits, don’t be deceived and expect good outcomes. If you find yourself asking, Wait. What’s this? I didn’t want this. Why is this happening? Understand that what you’re getting is because that’s what you planted. You fooled yourself into thinking you could plant one thing and reap another. It sounds crazy that someone might do that, but it happens all the time. A guy sows seeds of lust. He checks out girls at the gym, girls at his office, girls online. But he still expects to have a good marriage. Then, when his marriage struggles, he’s confused. Wait. What’s this? It’s what you planted. A woman sows seeds of criticism and negativity but expects good friends. As a result, people avoid her. She’s lonely. She thinks, Wait. What’s this? I guess I have bad friends. No. It’s what you planted. A recent college graduate sows seeds of showing up late for work and giving a halfhearted effort but expects a promotion. When someone else is given the promotion, the young adult thinks, Wait. What’s this? Man, my boss isn’t fair! No. It’s what you planted. Some dude eats anything he wants. Praise the Lord and pass the Doritos! He doesn’t exercise. He drinks a six-pack on Friday to celebrate that it’s Friday. He drinks another on Saturday because, hey, it’s Saturday. And he drinks another six-pack on Sunday because it’s the last day of the weekend. He ends up thirty-five pounds overweight in his forties and with cirrhosis in his fifties. Hey! What’s this? This isn’t fair! Is God punishing me for something I did when I was a kid? No; it’s not a punishment, it’s a harvest. You are reaping what you’ve sown. When people mess up their marriages, friendships, or careers, they get upset and often blame God. Ummm, no. God didn’t do this to you. You did this to you. If you plant good habits, you’ll get good outcomes. If you plant bad habits, don’t expect good outcomes. You reap what you sow. If you don’t like what you’re reaping, change what you’re sowing. If you don’t like the harvest, change the seed. Here’s a divine assignment: Take an honest, prayerful look at the disappointing parts of your life. Ask God to help you search your heart. Then pinpoint the habits that have led to each aspect of your life that isn’t what you want. Avoid having a victim mentality or blaming others. That will not help. Take responsibility by identifying the habits you’ve sown that have led to your harvest. Then decide on a type of seed you will consistently plant to get a better harvest. If you don’t like what you’re reaping, change what you’re sowing. Because you reap what you sow. Adapted from The Power to Change: Mastering the Habits That Matter Most by Craig Groeschel.

This Is Our Father’s World God is committed to the earth and has given humans the responsibility to care for it. This biblical truth is foundational from the opening chapter of the Bible. But what does this look like and how do we express it? Our relationship with the environment is an issue of growing concern, especially among the young, and a Christian voice, informed more by theology than by politics and secular ideologies, needs to be heard. Until we have a clearly articulated theology of the earth, our confusions will reverberate within our siloed echo chambers, and the wider world will not hear that we have something of great relevance and importance to say. Traps abound as we seek to articulate our biblical commitments. We do not want to end up worshipping the environment and falling into pantheism. We do not want to say that only spiritual realities matter and fall into dualism. We do not want to view the earth as transient and of fleeting importance—the Bible talks of its renewal. We do not want to be pragmatic and self-serving with the world’s resources. Like everyone else, we want to protect the planet for our grandchildren, but even this is not our primary motivation. As Christians, we recognize that the world was created neither for us nor for our grandchildren—it was created to bring glory to its creator. Anything less is idolatry. We are confused. We affirm that this world is our home for which we were created. We appreciate its beauty and utility, yet we also see unfathomable misery and pain. We are not home yet. We live with a now/not yet tension as we await the renewal of all things. The Bible affirms the redemption of all that is under the curse of the effects of sin. This includes the redemption of individual humans, but it goes beyond us. Just as Adam, the firstborn of creation, brought enslavement to all of creation through his fall into sin, so too the final Adam, the firstborn from among the dead, brings liberation and reconciliation to the breadth of creation, whether on earth or in heaven (Col. 1:18–20). God’s scope for redemption is cosmic. Sin’s Impact We need to be careful here. The impact of sin on the natural order is different from that on humans. Trees are marred by the fall. They succumb to diseases and to deforestation, and their days are finite. But they are not culpable for rebellion against their creator. There is a significant difference between the redemption of trees and of humans. There is no call for the trees to repent and believe in the gospel. Yet their liberation from the curse is part of God’s plan, and to a degree, part of our redemption. Bodies need the environment to survive. It’s true now and it will be true when we have received our resurrected bodies. It’s all integrated. God declares all of creation to be very good (Gen. 1:31), including trees. The return of Jesus will usher in a new heaven and a new earth (Rev. 21:1), which means the renewal of the cosmos (not its replacement), and this includes trees. I for one hope there will be fruit at the marriage supper of the lamb. We need to get on board with this and to live in the light of what is coming. Christian cries for ecological awareness need to be informed by theological convictions that are firmly grounded in the Bible, which has much to say on the issue. Land is an important character in the Bible. It nourishes (Lev. 26:4), devours its inhabitants (Num. 13:32), and mourns (Jer. 23:10). It can be remembered (Lev. 26:42), abandoned (Lev. 26:43), defiled (Lev. 18:25, 27; Deut. 21:23), cleansed (Deut. 32:43), subdued (Josh. 18:10), cursed (Deut. 29:27; Jer. 44:22) and polluted (Jer. 3:1). It groans, awaiting its renewal (Rom. 8:22). In the Old Testament, God’s relationship with his people is within the context of a promised land. Adam and Eve are given a garden, a land, where they are to exercise dominion over all that God has made (Gen. 1:28). They are warned against disobedience, for it is not their garden, they are but stewards of it. Disobedience will result in expulsion from the garden (Gen. 3:24). As the Old Testament continues, the Promised Land of Israel is likened to the Garden of Eden (Ezek. 36:35; Joel 2:3), and as in Eden, disobedience continues. In response to this, God chooses one man, Abram, that his descendants might be a corporate Adam. Abram’s descendants are given the promise of a land (Gen. 12:1–3). In the same way that Eden was a microcosm of God’s blessings to the whole earth, so too will be the case for Israel. They will be God’s people in God’s place from which blessings will flow to the whole earth. If they are obedient to God, he will make them a nation of priests through whom blessings will flow to the whole earth (Ex. 19:5–6). The requirement for Israel is the same as it was in Eden: obedience. Blessing in the land (and from the land) is contingent on the stewards of the land being obedient to the owner of land. The story of Israel, however, is a story of disobedience, that results in expulsion from the land (e.g. Deut. 4:25–27; Lev. 18:24–30; 20:22). It is the story of Adam and the garden revisited which finds a climax in the exile to Babylon where the people of God lay down and wept for Zion (Ps. 137:1–4). Expulsion was not the cause of this weeping; disobedience was. The conditions of the covenant are clear. Obedience. As the pages of the Old Testament come to a close, the question resounds, Can an obedient remnant be found that God’s people might find blessing in God’s land and through this be a blessing to all the earth? As the New Testament opens, we meet an enigmatic figure whose name is John. He stands in the prophetic tradition of the denunciation of Israel for its disobedience. His language is dramatic. He declares judgment upon Israel as a baptism of fire (Matt. 3:11). The axe is poised at the root of the tree (Matt. 3:10). But this judgment is not without hope, for within the narrative we finally meet the perfectly faithful remnant of Israel: Jesus Christ. As the story unfolds, we see that Jesus’s obedience leads to a substitutionary atonement that brings satisfaction for the sins of Israel’s disobedience. He takes the curse of the fall upon himself. In so doing, Israel is reborn in the resurrection. No longer does this new Israel have geographical limitations. God is true to his word, and obedience results in blessings flowing to the nations. The idea of a Holy Land is replaced by a Holy Earth. God sends the gift of his Spirit who fills the earth, starting from Jerusalem (Acts 1:8). The effects of the curse of the fall are reversed. The hope of the renewal of all things (yes, even the trees) is grounded in the obedience of this faithful Israelite. We’re not home yet, but our future is assured as we await the new heavens and new earth (Isa. 65:17 cf. Rev. 21:1). Redemption and Renewal If we are Christians, Jesus’s story is our story. We have union with him in his work of redemption and renewal. It is not our job to redeem creation. That is beyond our competence, whether through legislation or activism or even in writing this article. The world already has a messiah. But it is our responsibility to live in the light of what Jesus has done and to recognize God’s commitment to the earth. We need great wisdom when we think about a theology of the land. We are not pantheists or pragmatists. We remember that “the Earth is the Lord’s and the fulness thereof” (Ps. 24:1). God is committed to the earth. This is not surprising for not only did he create its beauty, but he has also redeemed its ugliness. He continues to entrust us, the sons of Adam and the daughters of Eve, with the responsibility of being stewards of that which does not belong to us. The future hope of the heavens and the earth is assured, and we await the final consummation. But in the meantime, as those around us are also very concerned about the future of the planet upon which we live, we have a message to declare. Our story does not end in annihilation and destruction but in restoration grounded in resurrection. We are singing from a different song sheet, not in a minor key, but in a triumphant key that points with certain hope to the one who is both the creator and the redeemer of all. If we are Christians, Jesus’s story is our story. We have union with him in his work of redemption and renewal. Ian K. Smith is the author of Not Home Yet: How the Renewal of the Earth Fits into God's Plan for the World

Bad Consequences I once watched a Ken Burns documentary series on World War II. After half a dozen episodes, I realized I was getting more and more depressed at the death and destruction I was watching. I was tempted to stop watching altogether, but decided instead that I would simply space the episodes out more so that I could preserve my mental health. Why not permanently remove it from my watch list? Though difficult to watch, witnessing the horrors of war (even if just on a screen) can be a good thing. I believe we need to see the full consequences of war now if we are to avoid unnecessary wars in the future. Although not intended, the pictures and sounds of the suffering at Kabul airport have helped answer the question many have asked through the centuries: “How do we stop war?” Answer? “Show the catastrophic consequences.” Similarly, in Philippians 2:14–16, the apostle Paul uses the horrendous results of war as well as the happy results of peace to answer the question, How do we stop church fights? Anticipate the Blessings of Peace “Fight the good fight of the faith,” Paul commanded Timothy (1 Tim. 6:12). Paul never flinched from a “good” fight. But some fights are bad fights. Such were the fights at First Church of Philippi. The Christians were fighting over minor matters, causing unnecessary division among them. Paul does not tell them to fight the good fight of faith but to stop fighting bad fights of faithlessness. “Do all things without grumbling or disputing” (Phil. 2:14). Minimize your minor league squabbles. To motivate them, Paul connects happy consequences with a cease-fire. Notice particularly his “that you may be.” “Do all things without grumbling or disputing, that you may be blameless and innocent, children of God without blemish in the midst of a crooked and twisted generation, among whom you shine as lights in the world, holding fast to the word of life, so that in the day of Christ I may be proud that I did not run in vain or labor in vain” (Phil. 2:14–16). Spiritually peaceful times are spiritually productive times. To paraphrase Paul, peace between Christians stops sin between Christians, builds assurance of our sonship, protects us from worldliness, brightens our witness, tightens our grip on the word of God, and encourages hardworking pastors. Isn’t that vision of peace and productivity appealing? Let’s imagine the blessings of peace to make us long and work for a cease-fire. Christian peace is worth fighting for. And what if I don’t? Anticipate the Curses of Fighting Although Paul doesn’t spell it out explicitly, he clearly implies that if we do all things with grumbling and disputing, we’ll see the opposite effects to peace and harmony. Christians who fight unnecessary fights will be blameworthy and guilty, they will lack assurance, they will be polluted by the world, they will deepen the darkness of our already dark world, they will lose their grip of the word, and they will discourage hardworking pastors. Paul shows the catastrophic consequences of unnecessary war to make them long for necessary peace. Let’s fight the good fight of faith but surrender bad fights of faith. If we fight over nothing, we’ll lose everything. Spiritually peaceful times are spiritually productive times. This article is adapted from Philippians and Colossians: Stories of Joy and Identity by David Murra

But he was pierced for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his wounds we are healed.—Isaiah 53:5 Understanding Context To understand this great verse, we must first look at its context in the book of Isaiah, and two things can be said. The first is that it deals with the problem at the heart of Isaiah 1 where the nation is summoned to God’s court because of its sin, which is leading to exile and judgment. Their condition is also described as dangerous; indeed, mortally ill (Isa. 1:5-6). How can the covenant God redeem and restore his people, and can even grace save them when they seem to have sinned away their blessings? As the book develops, we realize that salvation is not going to be cheap or easy but will involve exile in Babylon with healing and restoration beyond that. In particular, in Isaiah 42 we are introduced to the figure of the Servant through whom Yahweh’s purposes will be carried out. Four ‘Servant Songs’ have been identified: Isaiah 42:1–4 (some add Isa. 42:5–9); Isaiah 49:1–6; Isaiah 50:49, and the present one, Isaiah 52:13–53:12. But that should not be overemphasized, and it probably is better to see the servant theme as dominating these chapters and, indeed, introduced much earlier in Isaiah 6:8: “Here am I, send me.” So who is the Servant? First of all, Israel herself, but she failed and needed to be saved herself (see Isa. 49:8ff). Yet the true Son of Israel, the Lord Jesus Christ, is to fulfill the Servant role which Israel failed to carry out. Just as he is the true vine (John 15:1–17) which replaces the spoiled vine (see Isa. 5 and Isa. 27). Thus, Philip the evangelist has no difficulty in answering the Ethiopian’s question, ”about whom does the prophet say this?” (Acts 8:34). As we turn now to the detail of the verse, we see that these blessings are rich and varied and answer exactly to the needs which the prophet has identified. The language here is precise but also richly evocative, as is characteristic of Isaiah. “He” is emphatic—“it was he” or “he was the one”—there was no one else through whom all God’s blessings were to come. These blessings were to flow far beyond Israel and come to the whole world. “He was pierced.” His wounds were necessary for our salvation. The word “pierced” interestingly occurs in Isaiah 51:9 of God’s smiting of the dragon and thus shows that the destruction of the powers of darkness was at the heart of the cross as God not only smites the devil but smites himself and removes the curse of sin. Thus, he took the “chastisement”, or “punishment”, which our transgressions deserved. We’ll come back to that in a moment. “Crushed” is used in Lamentations 3:41 of the bitterness of exile which was the consequence of the people’s sin. “Iniquities” is our twisted nature which results in sinful attitudes and actions, once again identified in Isaiah 1:4. So peace is secured by the Servant undergoing the punishment for us. This is not only substitution but penal substitution because before we can be forgiven, God’s just anger against sin must be propitiated so that we can have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. But there is more than forgiveness; there is healing. Isaiah 1 showed that the whole nation was a wounded, dying corpse (Isa. 1:5b-6). Isaiah is going on to talk of the new creation, especially in Isaiah 65 (anticipated in such chapters as Isaiah 11, Isaiah 12, and Isaiah 35). The salvation the Servant brings is not just of souls but of bodies in a new and glorious world. Bodies like Jesus’s “glorious body” (Phil. 3:21) are the full result of the suffering of the Servant. Only the manifold grace of God can heal the manifold sicknesses of the human heart. We cannot leave this verse without thinking of its application, for Bible study is never simply a theoretical exercise. First, truths like these lead to repentance and humility. When we were helpless and, indeed, unaware of our plight, God intervened to provide a way back to himself. Second, we are in the face of a great mystery. Charles Wesley gives us words to express this: ‘Tis mystery all, the immortal dies, Who can explore his strange design? In vain, the firstborn seraph tries To sound the depths of love divine! These lead to praise and worship, for, ultimately, theology must end in doxology. Only the manifold grace of God can heal the manifold sicknesses of the human heart. Bob Fyall is a contributor to the ESV Expository Commentary: Isaiah–Ezekiel (Volume 6).

1. Covenants are the backbone of the biblical story. Peter Gentry and Stephen Wellum have argued that the covenants advance the storyline of the Bible in their book Kingdom through Covenant: A Biblical-Theological Understanding of the Covenants, and they are on target. If one understands how the covenants function in the Bible, one will have a good grasp of how the Bible fits together. If we see the big picture in Scripture, we will do a better job of interpreting the details, and the covenant plays a fundamental role in seeing the big picture. 2. Covenant can be defined as follows: a covenant is a chosen relationship in which two parties make binding promises to each other. A covenant should be distinguished from a contract because it is a personal relationship which people voluntarily enter. The definition of covenant here is rather broad, but that is because there are many different kinds of covenants in Scripture. Marriage is a good illustration of a covenant, for a man and woman choose to enter into a relationship with one another and make promises to one another. Not all covenants were alike in the ancient world. In some covenants a person with more authority made a covenant with those having less authority and power. Such was the case when a king made a relationship with his subjects. 3. Some definitions of covenant are too narrow and don’t fit every covenant in Scripture. Some scholars have said that covenants always presuppose an already existing relationship. The Gibeonite story shows that this is not the case, for Israel didn’t have any relations with the Gibeonites before entering into a covenant with them (Josh. 9:3–27). Also, some say that all covenants are enacted with blood, but this isn’t true of the marriage covenant or the covenant between Jonathan and David (1 Sam. 18:1–4). Nor is there evidence of a sacrifice at the inauguration of the Lord’s covenant with David (2 Samuel 7). We need to distinguish, when talking about covenants, about what is often true and what is always the case. 4. Virtually all the covenants have both conditional and unconditional elements. Since covenant partners obligate themselves to one another with promises and call curses upon themselves if they disobey, we are not surprised to learn that virtually all covenants have both conditional and unconditional elements. There are clearly conditions in the covenant with Israel made at Sinai. Some scholars say that the covenant with Abraham and David are unconditional, but when we look at the text carefully, conditions are clearly present (e.g., Gen. 17; 2 Sam. 7:14). What needs to be investigated is how the conditional and unconditional elements relate to one another. The principle enunciated here, however, also has exceptions. The covenant with Noah, for instance, seems to be unconditional. 5. There are good reasons to believe there is a covenant at creation. Some scholars doubt whether there was a covenant with Adam, but we have good reasons for seeing a covenant at creation. Even though the word covenant is lacking, the elements of a covenant relationship are present. The word covenant doesn’t need to be present for a covenant to exist since the term covenant isn’t found in the inauguration of the Davidic covenant. The claim that all covenants are redemptive isn’t borne out by the use of the term in the Scriptures. The elements of a covenant were present at creation, for blessing was promised for obedience and cursing for disobedience. 6. The covenant with Noah isn’t redemptive, but it is necessary for God’s redemptive plan to be carried out. The covenant with Noah is a covenant of preservation, signifying a new beginning for human beings and the continuance of life on earth until the time of the end. In many ways it repristinates the creation covenant. Despite the depth of human wickedness, human beings are still made in God’s image, and God continues to bless them as they are fruitful and multiply on the earth. The flood testifies to what human beings deserve on account of wickedness, and it is a type of the final judgment to come (Matt. 24:36–41; 2 Pet. 2:5). The bow in the clouds, the sign of the covenant, testifies that God has withdrawn his weapons of war, that he will preserve the world until redemption is accomplished. 7. The covenant with Abraham plays a central role in the biblical storyline. God promised Abraham offspring, land, and universal blessing. The promise to Abraham finds its culmination in Jesus Christ as the true son of Abraham (Gal. 3:16). All those who belong to Jesus Christ by faith are children of Abraham. The promise of land was fulfilled when Israel possessed Canaan under the leadership of Joshua and Solomon, yet Israel lost the land and went into exile because of sin. The promise of land was realized proleptically in the resurrection of Jesus Christ, for his resurrection represents the arrival of the new creation, and it will find its final fulfillment in the new creation—the new temple over which God and the Lamb will reign (Rev. 21:1–22:5). The promise of universal blessing is fully and finally fulfilled in Jesus Christ through whom people from every tongue, tribe, people, and nation are included in Abraham’s family. 8. The covenant with Israel, the covenant at Mount Sinai, is a temporary covenant. The covenant with Israel was gracious, for the Lord freed his people from Egyptian slavery. The covenant was also patterned after suzerain-vassal treaties in the ancient Near East. Blessings were promised for obedience and curses for disobedience. Israel failed to abide by the covenant stipulations, summarized in the Ten Commandments and as a result was sent into exile. The prophets declared in covenant lawsuits, which detailed Israel’s violation of the covenant, that judgment was coming. The covenant with Israel had a built-in obsolescence and focused on Israel as a nation; it did not transform the heart of those who heard the covenant demands. 9. The covenant with David fulfills previous covenants. The covenant with David stands in continuity with previous covenants. The rule over the world originally given to Adam would be realized through a Davidic king. The promises of offspring, land, and blessing given to Abraham would be secured through the Davidic ruler. In a similar way the blessings promised in the Mosaic covenant would come to fruition under faithful Davidic kings, but if they strayed from the Lord, then the curses would come. Despite the conditional elements, the covenant with David was ultimately unconditional. God guaranteed a Davidic king on the throne but the covenant promise would only be fulfilled by an obedient king, and the New Testament claims that this person is Jesus of Nazareth. As David’s Son, he now reigns at God’s right hand and will come again to consummate his reign. 10. The new covenant is the climax of all of God’s covenants. The new covenant represents the culmination of God’s saving work among his people. God regenerates his people by his Spirit and renews their hearts so that they obey him. The basis for such renewal is the cross and resurrection of Jesus Christ, for by his atoning death and resurrection,Him complete forgiveness of sins is achieved. Hence, a new and bold access to God that wasn’t available in the old covenant is obtained. The covenant with Israel has passed away, and now the promise is fulfilled in the restored Israel, which consists of both Jews and Gentiles. All the promises made to Abraham and David are fulfilled in the new covenant. The promise of universal blessing is fully and finally fulfilled in Jesus Christ. by: Thomas R. Schreiner

Thomas Doubts, Keeps the Faith The patriarch of the Judeo-Christian faith had trouble at times telling the truth, yet nobody calls him Lying Abraham. Israel’s great lawgiver once beat a man to death, but he isn’t remembered as Murdering Moses. The message of the Bible is that we’re not defined by our worst moments. The gospel says that, in Christ, God expunges our failures. Grace, not sin, gets the last word. Aren’t you thankful for such good news? Why then do we persist in speaking of Doubting Thomas? Thomas was one of Jesus’ most loyal followers. The Gospels portray him as reflective, not talkative. On the three occasions where his words are recorded, it’s clear Thomas thought long and hard before speaking. Once, in the wake of a friend’s death, Thomas broke the silence, saying that he was willing to die for Jesus if it came to that (see John 11:16). On the night before the crucifixion, when Jesus talked cryptically about going away, Thomas let it be known he wasn’t keen on the idea of being separated from Jesus (see John 14:5). So when everything came crashing down the following day, Thomas was devastated. They all were, of course, but Thomas seemed to take it especially hard. While the rest huddled together in fear, Thomas was not with them. On Resurrection Sunday, when Jesus appeared to his disciples, Thomas was nowhere to be found. He emerged from hiding to find his buddies beside themselves with joy. “We have seen the Lord!” they exclaimed. Thomas wasn’t buying it: “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe” (John 20:25). This may sound like hard-heartedness, but it wasn’t. We know this because a few days later when Jesus graciously appeared to Thomas, he fell to his knees and confessed, “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:28). A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!” Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.” Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:26-28) Stubborn unbelief says, “I’m happy where I am, and no amount of evidence will change my mind.” Honest doubt says, “I want to believe but I’m struggling. I just need a little help.” Doubting Thomas? One week of weakness doesn’t tell the whole story of his—or anyone else’s—life. Tradition claims Thomas sailed to India to preach the gospel, eventually dying for the risen One who’d resurrected his flagging faith. Sounds more like Trusting Thomas. For Reflection Are you a person who tends to doubt before you believe? If your doubt leads to questions that lead to answers, it has served a good purpose. Let your doubt deepen your faith as you search and seek the answers you need. Drawn from the NIV Lucado Encouraging Word Bible.

Likewise, husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life, so that your prayers may not be hindered. —1 Peter 3:7 Weakness in Today’s World We live at a time that does not really know how to deal with weakness. This is a dog-eat-dog world. What time do we really have for those who are weak? Because we think only the fittest survive, some people try to bury their own weakness, hiding or denying their limitations or frailties. We see this in dysfunctional marriages. Other people try to defend the weak by denying reality; they paper over the facts and assure us that women and men are the same in all their strengths. We see this in our culture’s gender wars. Some among us hide or deny weakness. Others take advantage of it. Sadly, we’ve all seen men who intimidate, humiliate, neglect, control, and criticize their wives because of what they see as weakness. Peter calls husbands in particular to honor their wives in their weakness. So let us comment on what that weakness might be, how a husband should treat his wife, and why. What Is Meant by “Weaker Vessel”? Scholars offer more than one option of what this weakness in 1 Peter 3:7 could be. One perspective studies the word that Peter uses when he refers to “the woman,” which is plausibly translated “the one who is feminine.” According to this perspective, the feminine one is a weaker vessel because she shows a wider range of emotions and consistently loses in arm-wrestling contests. A husband is not to take advantage of her feminine characteristics, not least when it comes to his businesslike approach to problems or his physical power. Alternatively, Peter may have in mind a perception of weakness arising from the wife’s position as one who is not the higher authority in the home. She is weaker in that he is the head and she is not. Of course, whatever the definition of weakness we might use, we are not denying that women have many different important strengths where men have profound weaknesses. Nor should we pass over the reality that women are called to great strength of character in the previous verses. And to speak of a woman’s comparative strength is to say nothing about her physical endurance. To choose only the most obvious example, women endure pain in childbirth that makes a man shudder even to contemplate. Giving birth is still the gold standard for human toughness as well as human love. And yet let us own Scripture’s message here: a wife has weaknesses unique to who she is, and eventually even the thickest husband will catch on to this. When he does, he is to prize her for everything that she is and not despise her for anything she is not. Whatever the precise definition of weakness, a husband’s responsibility is clear. Husbands are to prize, to treasure, to value our wives, not just because they are people but because they are women. And there is a public aspect to honor, for it is very important how she is presented and discussed before others. A friend of ours took this fact about homelife into his workplace and made it clear to his male colleagues that there would be no negative comments about their wives. He insisted that they honor their spouses or not talk about them at all. A woman is a wonderful gift to a man. This is obvious for those with eyes to see, and yet a husband can sometimes find it hard to value his wife as a woman if she slows him down, processes problems differently, or offers distinct perspectives. So what are men tempted to do? They are tempted to push, to put down, to ignore. They are tempted to dishonor their wives, taking advantage of the ways in which they are weaker vessels, or simply different. Consider how often men are critical because they think they could have done something better than their wives. The truth, Chad says, is that we men are often wrong, and we’d botch the job entirely. But even if we are right, we’re behaving wrongly. Elsewhere men are called to love their wives. Here men are told to actually honor them. Peter very deliberately shuts off men’s usual escape routes when he calls them to honorable living. How Does a Husband Honor His Wife? So how is a husband to deal with any perceived weakness in a wife? The first thing that Peter calls men to do is to live with their wives “with understanding” or “in an understanding way” (1 Pet. 3:7). This could mean that he is to live with an understanding of all that God calls him to be and do; in this context, he would be called to understand, among other things, what God requires of him with respect to his wife. Alternatively, Peter could mean that a husband is to live with understanding of his wife in particular; husbands are to live with real consideration, a considerate life that is characterized by knowledge. Either way, for the purpose of better honoring her and making her duties easier, a husband is to learn his wife’s strengths and weaknesses, her likes and dislikes, her fears and insecurities. His privileged information about his God-given responsibilities and his knowledge of his wife is not to be used against her but for her. Although husbands sometimes forget, living with a woman is not like rooming with a man. It takes minimal effort for men to understand each other. Television plus food offers a fairly predictable formula for male happiness. Experience tells most of us that it is possible to live with a roommate for a long time and acquire very little wisdom about relationships, in part because buddies can be replaced in ways that wives cannot. Living with a wife requires real thoughtfulness, some of which comes only from on-the-job training. For those who have tried to understand their wives, many can testify that they found the learning curve steep, almost vertical, and devoid of plateaus. Learning the other sex is complicated, and it takes honest work. It doesn’t help that both men and women think that their needs are fairly obvious and that their communications are usually clear. But the main challenge is not only with the lines of communication in a marriage, but with the kind of content, or lack thereof, being communicated. A subset of the times that Chad sins against Emily, he has a sense that there is much more to the problem than he even realizes. On some of these occasions he has had to say, “Emily, I’m sure that this should be obvious, and I’m sorry that I have to ask, but I am so lost that I’m not really sure what I should say here. Tell me what I should say, not so that I can avoid thinking for myself, but so that I can learn to understand you and what I should be seeing in this situation.” Thankfully, she is graciously committed to making his job as a husband easier. She sees that this kind of exchange is a win in marriage, much better than trading defensive comments or offensive evaluations—something we also sometimes do. Peter calls husbands to live with their wives in an understanding way. This is closely tied to his second how comment in verse 7: he needs to live with her in such a way that he is showing her honor. A man honors his wife by respecting her, listening to her, maintaining her authority before others in the home, protecting her from harm, upholding her good name, supporting her financially, and placing a proper trust and confidence in her. A man honors his wife as he prizes her counsel and seeks her correction. Perhaps there are better ways to communicate the idea of honor, but the real surprise is that husbands are called to honor their partners at all. Peter earlier summed up the duty of Christian citizens by telling them to honor the emperor. Here he sums up the duty of Christian husbands by telling them to honor their wives. Now there is surely a difference in the way in which a man honors the emperor and the way in which a man honors his wife. But there is a sense in which a man is to roll out the red carpet for the woman in his life. If a man’s home is his castle, his wife should be its queen. Peter’s word choice, honor, can hardly have been more elevated—which is a good thing to remember after what he said in verses 1–6. If anyone complains that in her calling as a wife, she is reduced to a servant by verses 1–6, we also need to complain that she is elevated to a princess by verse 7. Scripture is not privileging one party in the marriage over another. Chad did not always get this emphasis on honor, and it was only in writing the final draft of Gospel-Shaped Marriage that he admitted to Emily that he went to two different friends to complain about her, once in the first year of their marriage and again five years later. These men proved true friends to both of us. They said no. Willing to embarrass Chad by shutting him down—firmly—they explained that they were not going to listen to him vent about Emily, and they gave reasons why. One of these brothers was married, the other not, but both of them understood more clearly than Chad in that moment that it was his calling to uphold and honor his wonderful, even if imperfect, wife. Husbands are to prize, to treasure, to value our wives, not just because they are people but because they are women. This article is adapted from Gospel-Shaped Marriage: Grace for Sinners to Love Like Saints by Chad Van Dixhoorn and Emily Van Dixhoorn.

Then Joshua son of Nun secretly sent two spies from Shittim. “Go, look over the land,” he said, “especially Jericho.” So they went and entered the house of a prostitute named Rahab and stayed there. – Joshua 2:1 Rahab, like the rest of Jericho’s inhabitants, was deeply frightened. As a pagan prostitute in a doomed city, her prospects seemed bleak. Across the Jordan, on the plains of Moab, an invasion force had gathered. Its numbers were beyond counting, but the menacing army wasn’t the only cause for fear. Word had spread that the Israelite God had roundly defeated the gods and army of Egypt. If the greatest empire in the world couldn’t stop Israel, what hope remained for a Canaanite city like Jericho? Rahab’s Story Rahab inhabited a house in the city wall from which vantage point she prospered in her trade. There were always men hungry for pleasure. Most lived in the city, but the road that passed by Jericho also ensured a steady stream of weary travelers seeking what Rahab could provide. Two strangers, hoping to escape notice, appeared at her door. What was more common than travelers seeking out a harlot? But the two were spotted and identified as Israelite spies. Rahab saw an opportunity, hid the Israelites and then lied to the king’s men, sending them out of the city in pointless pursuit of these enemies of Jericho (Joshua 2:2 – 7). Why not? What did she owe the king or anyone else in Jericho? The Israelites would soon overwhelm the city. Moreover, something new was growing in her heart — an unaccustomed stirring called hope. Her hope was based on what she’d learned about the invisible God of Israel. His name — “I Am” — was unlike any other god. The gods she knew were little deities who were supposed to control weather, crops or fertility. She could bargain with them, just as she was accustomed to haggling with a man over the price of her services. This “I Am” wasn’t in the business of wrangling over terms, so Rahab negotiated instead with the spies in an effort to ensure her family’s survival (Joshua 2:8 – 16). But in doing so, Rahab gained more than safety: She received a new life. The God of Israel enfolded her into the community of his people. She left a life of shame to ultimately become a wife and a mother. Most amazing, from Rahab would come the line of David and his greatest descendant: the Messiah of Israel and the Savior of humankind – Jesus (see Matthew 1:5 – 6). Rahab hoped for mere survival but gained salvation on the basis of her faith All of this began with Rahab’s faith in a God she had come to know secondhand through nearly unbelievable stories of his great works (Joshua 2:8 – 11). She placed her hope in a God greater than those fashioned by human beings. This is the same God who can deliver us. He’s great enough to dry up the “seas” to make our way safe, destroy all the obstacles that threaten to destroy us, and demonstrate that he’s greater than heaven and earth (Joshua 2:10-11). How did Rahab tap into God’s might? She – Formed an accurate understanding of him (Joshua 2:8 – 11) Trusted those who had experienced God’s power and entered his service (Joshua 2:12 – 14) Served him by helping the spies escape (Joshua 2:15 – 16), and Followed the instructions of those who had already learned God’s ways (Joshua 2:17 – 21). Rahab’s faith and service not only saved her but it gave her a home among God’s people (Joshua 6:22 – 23). The symbol of salvation for Rahab and her family was the scarlet cord in her window (Joshua 2:18,21). Today we can cling to another “scarlet cord” — the blood of Jesus, which cleanses us and makes us God’s prized possessions. We’ve been redeemed from the empty way of life that once enslaved us by the precious blood of Christ (1 Peter 1:18 – 19). Drawn from an article in the NIV Celebrate Recovery Study Bible.

Jesus says, “Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid” (John 14:27). When Jesus meets his disciples after the resurrection, he continually says to them, “Peace” (John 20:19,21,26). Under these circumstances, it is obvious that the term “peace” is extraordinarily full of meaning. What is this peace Jesus gives us? In order to understand Jesus’ words, we must reflect on the many facets of the crucial Hebrew term shalom, which lies behind the English word “peace.” Shalom is one of the keywords and images for salvation in the Bible. The Hebrew word refers most commonly to a person being uninjured and safe, whole and sound. In the New Testament, shalom is revealed as the reconciliation of all things to God through the work of Christ: “God was pleased . . . through [Christ] to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through [Christ’s] blood, shed on the cross” (Colossians 1:19–20). Shalom experienced is multidimensional, complete well-being — physical, psychological, social, and spiritual; it flows from all of one’s relationships being put right — with God, with(in) oneself, and with others. Shalom with God Most fundamentally, shalom means reconciliation with God. God can give us peace with himself or remove it (Psalm 85:8; Jeremiah 16:5). Because Phinehas turned away God’s wrath on sin, he and his family are given a “covenant of [shalom]” with God (Numbers 25:12). One of the offerings under the Mosaic covenant is the shelamim offering — the peace, or fellowship, offering — the only one of the Levitical sacrifices in which the offerer receives back some of the meal to eat. Sin disrupts shalom. When anything heals the rupture and closes the gap between us and God, there should be a celebration, a joyful meal in God’s presence. Shalom with Others Shalom also means peace with others, peace between parties. It means the end of hostilities and war (Deuteronomy 20:12; Judges 21:13). The wise woman of Abel Beth Maakah maintained her city’s shalom, its peacefulness, by averting a siege and war (2 Samuel 20:14–22). But shalom does not mean only reconciliation between warring factions or nations (1 Kings 5:12). It also refers to socially just relationships between individuals and classes. Jeremiah insists that unless there is an end to oppression, greed, and violence in social relationships, there can be no shalom, however much the false prophets say the word (Jeremiah 6:1–9,14; compare Jeremiah 8:11). Shalom with (in) Oneself Shalom consists of not only outward peacefulness — peace between parties — but also peace within. Those who trust in the Lord have inner security; therefore, they can sleep well (Psalm 4:8). God gives “perfect peace” (or shalom-shalom) — i.e., profound psychological and emotional peace – to those who steadfastly set their minds on him (Isaiah 26:3).The result of righteousness before God is “peace; its effect will be quietness and confidence forever” (Isaiah 32:17). The Price of Shalom: Jesus Shalom Prophesied Shalom becomes an especially prominent theme in the prophetic literature. The prophets explain the invasions and exile the loss of shalom — as a curse on Israel for breaking the covenant and as punishment for their disobedience (Isaiah 48:18; Jeremiah 14:13–16; Micah 3:4-5, 9–12). But they also point into the future to a coming time of complete shalom, not only for Israel but also for the whole world (Isaiah 11:1–9; Isaiah 45:7). Only God can create shalom (Isaiah 45:7), and this gift will come through the work of the Messiah, the Prince of shalom (Isaiah 9:6–7). Therefore, shalom is perhaps the most basic characteristic of the future kingdom of God, a time when the Lord himself comes to heal all that is wrong with the world. When the angels tell the shepherds about the birth of Christ, they call him the one who will, at last, bring peace on earth (Luke 2:14). Jesus is the Prince of shalom who will bring in God’s kingdom of peace that the prophets foretold (Romans 14:17; 1 Corinthians 14:33). The gospel of Jesus is “the gospel of peace” (Ephesians 6:15; compare Acts 10:36; Ephesians 2:17). Shalom Accomplished Jesus, first of all, reconciles us to God. He is the ultimate Phinehas who turns away the wrath of God and brings his family into a covenant of peace. But he does so by taking on himself the curse of sin so that all who are united to him by faith receive his blessing of peace (Galatians 3:10–13). “The wicked are like the tossing sea, which cannot rest . . . ‘There is no peace . . . for the wicked’ ” (Isaiah 57:20–21). But on the cross, God the Father treats Jesus as the wicked deserve to be treated (2 Corinthians 5:21). Jesus cries out as he loses his fellowship with the Father and experiences unimaginable inner agony (Matthew 27:46). He experiences infinite pain so that we can know endless peace (John 14:27). Shalom Experienced God is reconciling all things to himself through Christ (Colossians 1:20), and although he has not yet put everything right (Romans 8:19–23), those who believe the gospel enter into and experience this reconciliation. This peace is, first of all, peace with God through justification by faith (Romans 5:1–2). There was a barrier between God and humanity, but Jesus paid the debt, and now there is peace. This peace cannot increase or decrease. Though in ourselves we are actually “ungodly,” in Christ, we are justified and accepted (Romans 4:5). Jesus also brings us the peace of God — peace within. The peace of God garrisons our hearts against anxiety, difficulties, and sorrows (Philippians 4:4–7). It is possible to have a peace so deep that we can be content in any circumstance, even in times of great difficulty (Philippians 4:12–13). The peace of Christ is so closely related to joy (John 15:11; Romans 15:13) that we might say that joy is God’s peace and reconciliation lived out. The God of peace sanctifies us, growing us into Christ-like character and maturity (1 Thessalonians 5:23; compare Galatians 5:22). Finally, Jesus brings us peace with other human beings. Our peace with and from God gives us the resources to maintain unity and love with others through continual forgiveness and patience (Colossians 3:13–15). Christ is our peace, and by his death on the cross, he removes even the high racial and cultural barriers that divide us (Ephesians 2:11–22). Drawn from the article Shalom by Timothy Keller in the NIV Biblical Theology Bible.

Matthew 21:18–22 : 18In the morning, as he was returning to the city, he became hungry. 19And seeing a fig tree by the wayside, he went to it and found nothing on it but only leaves. And he said to it, “May no fruit ever come from you again!” And the fig tree withered at once. 20When the disciples saw it, they marveled, saying, “How did the fig tree wither at once?” 21And Jesus answered them, “Truly, I say to you, if you have faith and do not doubt, you will not only do what has been done to the fig tree, but even if you say to this mountain, ‘Be taken up and thrown into the sea,’ it will happen. 22And whatever you ask in prayer, you will receive, if you have faith.” Jesus as Lord and Judge Passover is days away, and pilgrims stream into Jerusalem. Many have traveled from Galilee; they spontaneously hail Jesus as prophet and Son of David as they enter Jerusalem with him. After entering, Jesus visits the temple. As so often, Mark offers details that Matthew omits. Mark 11:11 notes how Jesus “looked around at everything” and then left the city with the Twelve, “as it was already late.” Whether “looking around” signifies a quick look or a thorough examination, Mark gives Jesus an evening to meditate before he purges the temple. If Mark suggests contemplation, Matthew describes direct action: Jesus enters, drives out the merchants, overturns their tables, and then explains himself: they have made God’s house into a “den of robbers” or, it could be translated, a “cave of insurrectionists” (Matt. 21:12–13). Explanations are in order. First, currency exchange is not immoral. Travelers would seek to purchase animals for their sacrifices and feasts, and they had to convert their currency into the temple’s. The problem is not commerce per se but commerce in the temple precincts, as Jesus explains by quoting Isaiah and Jeremiah: “It is written, ‘My house shall be called a house of prayer,’ but you make it a den of robbers.” “Prayer” is synecdoche for public worship: the prayers, songs, teachings, and offerings of the temple. It is possible that the merchants overcharge, but Jesus drives out buyers and sellers, so malfeasance cannot be the sole issue. The problem is corruption of the temple’s purpose: the noise of commerce and animals prevents the silence that is the context for prayer, worship, and instruction. If rabbinic comments are accurate, Caiaphas the high priest had recently moved the sale of sacrificial animals from the valley near Jerusalem into the temple court reserved for Gentiles. This might account for the additional phrase in Mark 11:17: the temple is to be a “house of prayer for all the nations.” The context of Jesus’ OT citations is essential. Isaiah 56 declares that no one— neither eunuch nor Gentile—should say, “The Lord will surely separate me from his people” (Isa. 56:3). No, to those who hold to the covenant, the Lord says, “I will . . . make them joyful in my house of prayer; . . . for my house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples” (Isa. 56:7). Whatever the logic of the temple commerce, it makes worship difficult for Gentiles and neglects Isaiah’s word. By citing Isaiah, Jesus implicitly claims that his action brings the messianic blessing predicted by the prophet. Further, Jesus’ “disruptive action” is necessary if the temple is to regain “its God-ordained purpose.” While the temple has ceased to be a house of prayer for the nations, it has become a “den of robbers” (Matt. 21:13). Scholars doubt that the problem is corruption among the money-changers, since (again) Jesus opposes both selling and buying, and there is no record of complaints against them. The merchants, with the priests’ approval, are certainly depriving Gentiles of their right to worship God. The phrase “den of robbers,” from Jeremiah 7, is instructive too. In context, the Lord excoriates Israel: Will you steal, murder, commit adultery, . . . and go after other gods . . . then come and stand before me in this house . . . and say, ‘We are delivered!’— only to go on doing all these abominations? Has this house . . . become a den of robbers in your eyes?” (Jer. 7:9–11) In Jeremiah’s day, people sinned then shouted, “the temple of the Lord,” treating it as a talisman, as if it guaranteed God’s protection and favor (Jer. 7:4–7). Jeremiah and Jesus compare the Israelites to brigands who rob, kill, and follow idols, then retreat to the temple as if it were a safe cave or hideout. This wholly reverses the temple’s purpose. Beyond that, lēstēs (“robber”) normally means insurrectionist, so Matthew’s phrase spēlaion lēstōn could sensibly be rendered “cave of rebels” or “cave of insurrectionists.” Tragically, the temple’s putative guardians rebel against God most of all. By excluding Gentiles from the temple, they show that for them the temple is a symbol of Israel more than it is a place of worship. The temple has become their “nationalist stronghold,” a haunt for nationalistic rebels. Luke understands the issue similarly, which is clear from his addition to the scene. In Luke 19:42–44, Jesus laments that Jerusalem does not know “the things that make for peace” and he predicts a crushing defeat at Rome’s hands. Jesus foresees that Israel’s nationalism, manifest here, will lead it to rebel against Rome and suffer devastation forty years later. Because they learn nothing from Jeremiah or Jesus, Jewish fighters will later choose the temple as their fortress, apparently hoping it will protect them. But that fantasy perverts the temple, and God will not honor it. By driving out the merchants and toppling their tables, Jesus asserts himself as the temple’s Lord and Judge. His denunciation is also prophetic, and the call to restore the temple to its proper role is priestly as well. Jesus’ action reopens the temple to the blind and lame, and he heals them (Matt. 21:14). Leviticus appears to bar blind and lame priests from offering certain sacrifices. Some Jews want to bar the crippled from the temple altogether, but Jesus restores them to it. By driving out the merchants and welcoming the broken, Jesus expels those whom the authorities permit and permits those whom certain authorities expel. The priests, possibly thunderstruck, turn on the children in the temple area who are shouting praise to Jesus. They ask, “Do you hear what these are saying?” (Matt. 21:15–16a). But Jesus defends the children: “Have you never read, ‘Out of the mouth of infants and nursing babies you have prepared praise’?” (Matt. 21:16b). This is a citation of Psalm 8, which begins, “O Lord, our Lord, how majestic is your name in all the earth! . . . Out of the mouth of babies and infants, you have established strength because of your foes” (Ps. 8:1–2). When Jesus asks, “Have you never read . . . ?” he means, “Have you never considered this correctly?” God ordains children to praise him. Since Jesus is Son of God and Son of Man, it is right for children to praise him. Israel’s Fruitfulness The next morning, Jesus returns to Jerusalem. He is hungry, sees a fig tree in leaf, inspects it, finds nothing but leaves, and curses it, saying, “May no fruit ever come from you again!” Surprisingly, the tree withers immediately (Matt. 21:18–19). The OT has many miracles of judgment, but outside of this instance, Jesus’ miracles bring healing and grace. The cursing of the fig tree is symbolic. Matthew assumes his Jewish readers know, as Mark 11:13 points out, that “it was not the season for figs.” Fig trees produce leaves at the time of the Passover, and small fruits do appear, which will ripen later. These fruits are unripe but marginally edible. The leaves promise fruit on the tree, but its barrenness makes it an object lesson. The prophets use the fig as a symbol of Israel in its fruitlessness. In Micah 7:1–2 the prophet laments that he came to glean fruit from vineyard and tree but found no grapes and “no first-ripe fig that my soul desires.” Micah explains the metaphor immediately: “The godly has perished from the earth,” and the land is full of violence, not the justice he craves. As he curses the fig tree, Jesus functions like a prophet who presents symbolic acts of judgment as calls to repentance (cf. Jer. 19:1–11). When Jesus judges the fig tree, he foretells judgment not on all Israelites but on those who, like the luxuriantly leafy but fruitless tree, appear to be alive but are barren (Matt. 13:22). Jesus has just inspected the temple and found it wanting. The spectacle of worship—the priests, the music, the sacrifices, the gleaming buildings—is grand but fruitless. Its leaders bar Gentiles from worship and plot the murder of their king. Truly, it has become a cave of rebels against God, their show of religion notwithstanding. When the tree withers, the disciples ask, “How did the fig tree wither at once?” (Matt. 21:20). We might expect them to ask why, not how, but the Twelve often attend to the wrong element of Jesus’ messages (cf. Matt. 19:27; 20:21). He detects an interest in attaining similar powers and answers them in a way that redirects their focus. He begins emphatically, “Truly, I say to you,” then promotes trust in God both positively, “if you have faith,” and negatively, “and do not doubt.” Faith, a common topic in the NT, is classically a trust in God that receives salvation, but here it is an enabling power. By faith a disciple can “say to this mountain, ‘Be taken up and thrown into the sea,’ [and] it will happen” (Matt. 21:21). Contrary to appearances, Jesus does not shift abruptly from judgment on Jerusalem to the power of prayer. The phrase “this mountain” appears twice outside this text and its parallel in Mark, and it refers to a particular mountain each time. As Jesus speaks, both the Mount of Olives and the Temple Mount are visible. If he is referring to the Temple Mount, he is saying that faith can move the metaphorical mountain of vain religion. Prayer is powerful: “Whatever you ask in prayer, you will receive, if you have faith.” The phrase “if you have faith” prevents abuse; evil prayers have no power. By driving out the merchants and toppling their tables, Jesus asserts himself as the temple’s Lord and Judge. This article is by Dan Doriani and is adapted from the ESV Expository Commentary: Matthew–Luke (Volume 8).