L
L. A symbol used by certain scholars to
designate the hypothetical source of
much of the material peculiar to Luke,
besides the infancy narrative and
passion story. The source is believed to have originated
around 60 A.D.,
perhaps in Caesarea , and is composed mainly of stories and parables
which
breathe a spirit of sympathy for the poor.
In more recent biblical scholarship, “L”
is used to designate frag-
ments once attributed to the Jahwistic source of the
Bible’s 1st 5 books,
which demonstrate how Jacob’s oldest
sons—Reuben, Simeon , Levi, and
Judah—lost their birthright. These fragments may be designated as the
“lay
source” or “L” out of consideration for its outspokenness for the “pro-
fane” or
“lay” world. See Genesis and Exodus tables for examples.
LAADAH (לעדה, order) A descendant of Judah
LABAN
(MAN) (לבן, white) Although the
various sources are not consistent
concerning Laban’s family relationships, it's best to see him as Rebekah’s
brother. He is clearly father of Leah and Rachel.
As the grandson of
Nahor, Laban lived in the “city of Nahor
with the strategic
metropolis Haran
When
Abraham sent his major-domo back “to my country and kin-
dred” to obtain Isaac’s wife,
Laban was chiefly responsible for Rebekah’s
betrothal. Laban is introduced as a man whose curiosity
took him out to
meet a stranger and whose hospitality prompted him to bring the
traveler
home. It is to Laban’s credit
that he recognized God’s activity in the ste-
ward’s mission. The 1st word about Laban leaves
the inescapable impres-
sion that his hospitality was motivated by
self-interest, for the visitor
gave Rebekah’s family lavish gifts.
Jacob
fled to his uncle Laban, who received him, agreed to give him
Rachel in
payment, but deceived him into taking Leah first. When Jacob
wished to return to his “own home
and country,” Laban agreed with him
on a satisfactory division of the flock,
but then tried to defraud him. Upon
learning that Jacob had outwitted him, and that someone had stolen the
“household gods,” Laban pursued them. In
Transjordan , the 2 kinsmen
entered into a mutual nonaggression
covenant. This Mizpah pact repre-
sents an
actual agreement between Israelites and Arameans concerning
the border between
them.
LABAN
(PLACE). A place in the Sinai region, mentioned with Tophel,
Hazeroth,
and Dizahab (Deuteronomy 1); the location is unknown.
LABOR
(עמל (‘aw mawl), toil; יגיע (yeg ee ah), toil; kopiaw (kop ee ay oh),
weary from labor) Physical or mental toil;
the physical exertion neces-
sary to work the land and supply the wants of the
individual and society.
Probably all
labor can be classified as: the independent or self-employed
labor; labor of
craftsmen; labor of the hired worker; and that of the native
and foreign-born
slaves.
God
labored at the Creation and continues to labor.
Humans have
work to perform in this creation. Sin did not make labor necessary, but
rather
less rewarding. In the ancient Near East
women were sometimes
the beasts of burden.
Manual labor was honored among the Hebrews,
whereas the Greeks and
Romans emphasized mental and spiritual activity.
Both six days of labor and one day of rest
were a part of the covenant.
Laborers
were protected by law. Freeborn laborers
were often asso-
ciated in guilds, especially those engaged in crafts. Forced labor was prac-
ticed by the Egyptians
and imitated by Solomon. Objection to
this type of
labor is already indicated by the prophet Samuel. The corvee was used
largely on special projects such as road building and the making of monu-
mental palaces. The citizens may
have been forced into labor only for the
duration of the project. The Romans likewise could force the citizens
of
occupied countries into special duty. But with the end in sight such peo-
ple were to be patient.
L-1
LACE (פתיל ( paw teel)) A twisted thread or cord,
such as the one used to
fasten the breastpiece to the rings of the ephod, and
the golden plate to
Aaron’s turban (Exodus 28).
minently in the Akkadian correspondence of the Pharaoh
Akh-en-Aton
(1300s B.C.) recovered from Tell el-Amarna. These letters contain 5 re-
ferences to a
city spelled alternatively Lakisu or
Lakishu. The first of
these names is given to a town
depicted in the Assyrian wall reliefs of
Sennacherib’s palace at Nineveh Lachish
stood on the site known as Tell ed-Duweir, an
imposing mound between
between the Iron Age ruins at Tell ed-Duweir
and the pictures of Lachish
at Nineveh
Tell ed-Duweir lies toward the lower western slopes of the Judean
hill
country. The surrounding ridges have
yielded finds of worked flints
giving evidence of human habitation as early as
Upper Paleolithic times.
Natural caves
in the limestone slopes of the valley sheltered an open set-
tlement in Upper Chalcolithic times (before 3000 B.C.); this has been
traced over
an area of nearly 80 hectares. Many of
the caves were en-
larged by their occupants, using stone adzes. In the Early Bronze II peri-
od, around 2800
B.C., the settlement contracted and moved to the site of
the present
tell.
The city on its growing mound was first
protected around 1700
B.C. by a shallow moat and a plaster-covered, steep slope
with a brick
wall around the top of the mound. These defenses belonged to the peri-
od of Hyksos domination. A small temple was built at the bottom of the
moat around 1550 B.C. There is evidence
of Egyptian influence in La-
mentioned earlier reveal a confused situation and
indicate that the city’s
power. The moat
temple was destroyed by fire simultaneously with a
general fire within the town
around 1200 B.C., which may be linked
prosperity was always closely linked with the maintenance of Egyptian Around 1000 B.C., the city was
reconstructed. A massive stone
platform
was raised at the center of the mound to form the podium of a
brickwork
palace. The same podium served to
support a citadel or go-
vernor’s residence.
II Chronicles 11 tells us that Rehoboam fortified
there for his life and died there.
The defenses of the city then consisted of an
upper wall and a
lower wall halfway down the slope. Outside the walls near the south-
west corner
there stood a square construction defending a roadway
which led up the slope
toward the gate of the city. There is also a shaft
that was found driven into
the rock within the southeast corner of the in-
ner wall. The shaft forms a hollow cube about 16 meters
on a side; the
work was never finished.
Around 700 B.C., Sennacherib captured Lachish
there. Archaeology has revealed marks of
a vast fire within the town.
After
Sennacherib’s withdrawal reconstruction within the city was slow;
but the
defenses were restored and improved, possibly by Manasseh.
The entrance to the city was such that one
had to pass through 2 gates,
the outer one facing south, and the inner one
facing west at the end of a
courtyard.
Nebuchadrezzar captured Lachish
fire on the road leading up to the gate show that the
attackers relied large-
ly on fire; between 586 and 450 B.C., Lachish
of the old citadel, a new residence was built in northern
Syrian style with
a central courtyard.
Here, a Persian governor lived and worked. To the
northeast a smaller building was built
which was perhaps a solar temple.
The moat temple of 1550 B.C. mentioned
earlier is one of the most
informative relics of the Canaanite religion
recovered in Palestine
built
of unhewn stones set in mud mortar, and consisted of a large cult
room with
smaller rooms of varying size attached to it. The cult room
was initially a rectangle measuring 10 meters from north
to south and 5
meters from east to west. Small square rooms adjoined the north and
wall. The roof of the cult room was carried by 2 wooden posts. The cult
was west focused on a
low bench or offering table of clay. Before it a
large pottery jar was found sunk into the floor of the
shrine.
This earliest temple was demolished and
replaced around 1450 B.C.
The width of
the cult room doubled, the northern room was enlarged, and
a new room was
attached to the southern wall. The roof
of the new cult
room was carried by four posts.
In this second stage of the temple the of-
fering table was enlarged & remade of rough stones. The west end of
the
table had a small concealed cupboard which contained lamps. In front of
the
offering table, a small hearth was sunk into the floor and surrounded
by a curb
of clay and plaster.
L-2
Around 1350 B.C. or later the temple’s
floor level was raised and its
columns and roof rebuilt. A second room was added to the temple’s south
end. At this stage of the temple the
offering table was rebuilt and trans-
formed into a spacious white-plastered
platform. At a late stage a mud-
brick altar
had been built against the platform’s front. A new lamp cup-
board was built
against the south wall; there was still a hearth before the
platform. Three small cupboards or niches were built
into the cult room’s
east wall. Vast
quantities of pottery and animal remains were recovered
from the rooms. Before the cult platform among other pottery
fragments
was found a footbath. No cult
statue was found in the temple, but an ivory
hand was recovered.
2 inscribed pottery vessels were found
in rubbish outside, a large,
wide-mouthed jug and a bowl. The jug had an inscription of 11 letters and
was attributed to the third stage of the temple, sometime after 1250 B.C.
Most agree that the first word of the
inscription is “gift” & the last word is
“goddess.” The exact nature of the cult can't be
known. The cult shrine,
in its enlarged
final stage, has been explained as a sacred marriage bed.
This much we know: the cult room was open to
all; they brought many pot-
tery bowls with offerings in them; young
animals were sacrificed; the cult
table received precious objects; & fire
burned in the hearth before the table,
lamps were lit, libations were
poured. The debris of holy days was
perio-
dically removed and dumped in pits outside the temple.
chronologically as follows:
a) A bronze
dagger inscribed vertically with 4 signs (1600 B.C.
or before).
b) 4-sided
paste seal with the names of Amenophis and Ptah (1450-
1425).
c) 5 pieces
of pottery inscribed with alphabetic signs (ranging from
1350-1200).
d) Egyptian fragments
of pottery and a coffin painted with red hiero-
glyphic signs (1200 or later).
e) Scratched on
a limestone step, the first five letters of the Hebrew
alphabet (about 800).
f) Fragment of a
jar incised with 6 early Hebrew characters (700s)
g) 7 seals
or seal impression with names inscribed in early Hebrew
characters (700s-500s).
h) Stamped jar
handles, 48 with names of private persons, 300 be-
longing to the king (700s-500s).
i) Early 500s
pottery pieces, letters of correspondence, 21 inscribed
with texts in black
ink.
j) 6 ¾ -spherical stone weights engraved with the
words nsp, pym,
or bq (600s-500s).
k) A stone altar
incised with a 3-line votive texts in Aramaic script
(400s-300s).
18 of the texts mentioned in i above lay on the floor of a room fill
with ashes from the fire which destroyed Lachish
contributions of these Lachish Letters to understanding ancient
writing
and language are surpassed only by their unique historical
character.
The most interesting
historically are the letters numbered 3, 4, and 6:
Letter 3 gives the names of both writer and
recipient, Hoshaiah &
Ya’osh respectively, and consists of Hoshaiah
protesting his
innocence.
Letter 4
acknowledges orders, reports certain facts and actions,
and ends: “We are
looking for the signals of Lachish
Letter 6 comments on a letter from the king
and on the demorali-
zing contents of letters received from princes in Jerusalem
In sum, the
Lachish Letters are a unique example of cursive script
and epistolary style in
the time of Jeremiah; and they are firsthand docu-
ments from the time right
before Nebuchadrezzar’s destruction of Jeru-
LADAN
(לעדן, put in order) 1. An ancestor of Joshua (I Chronicles
7).
2.
A Gershonite Levite; the ancestor and origin of a group of families,
“the
families of Ladan.”
LADDER
(סלם (sul lawm)) A series of steps made for ascent and
descent. In
its one occurrence in the
Bible the word symbolizes God’s present care &
a person’s ascending prayer. The rock strata exposed near Bethel
gests “flight of stairs.” Egyptian friezes show
ladders being used in war
for scaling walls before 2000 B.C.
LAEL (לאל, dedicated to God)
A Gershonite Levite; the father of Eliasaph
(Numbers 3).
LAHAD (להד, perhaps slow, lazy) A
descendant of Judah
LAHMAM (להמם, flesh, body) A village of Judah
L-3
LAHMI (להמי, bread) Brother of Goliath the
Gittite. He was slain by Elhanan
the son
of Jair (I Chronicles 20). Because of II
Samuel 21, there is dis-
agreement as to whether Elahanan slew Lahmi or Goliath.
LAISH (ליש, lion) 1. The father of Paltiel,
to whom Saul gave his daughter
Michal.
Ishbaal took her from Paltiel and returned her to David (I Samuel
25; II
Samuel 3).
2. A Canaanite city in
northern Palestine
as Leshem and Dan.
LAISHAH (לישה, lion) A village of Benjamin,
northeast of Jerusalem, listed be-
tween Gallim and Anathoth in Isaiah’s
visionary and poetic portrayal of a
hostile army’s village-by-village advance
on Jerusalem.
LAKKUM
(לקום)
A border town in Naphtali,
about 5 km southwest of Khirbet
Kerak (Joshua 19).
LAMB (שה (say), one of the flock; כבש (keh bes),
ewe-lamb; amnoV (am
nos); arnion (ar nee on)) In
addition to its literal usage, the lamb is a
frequent symbol in both the Old
Testament (OT) and New Testament (NT).
The
lamb is a dominant sacrificial victim.
It was from the point of
our earliest knowledge of the institution, the
central symbol and sacrifice
in the Passover.
Morning and evening burnt offerings; the first day of each
lunar month;
the Feast of Weeks; the Day of Atonement; the Feast of Ta-
bernacles, called for
the sacrifice of lambs. For the
Israelites, the lamb
symbolized innocence and gentleness. As used figuratively of persons,
the term could be calculated to summon the sympathetic emotions of con-
cern and pity and
compassion.
The
prophet Jeremiah refers to himself as a “gentle lamb.” Israelite
prophets describes the era of the
consummation of Yahweh’s purpose and
reign with: “The wolf shall dwell with the lamb . .
. and a little child shall
lead them.
(Isaiah 11).” The lamb was also applied
to the Suffering Ser-
vant: “He was
oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his
mouth; like a lamb that
is led to the slaughter . . .”
In
the NT, the term is used only figuratively.
In Luke the 70 are sent
forth as “lambs in the midst of wolves”; in John
21, Jesus admonishes Pe-
ter: “Feed my lambs”; in Revelation 13 the Antichrist is
seen as having “2
horns like a lamb.”
Although the exact significance of the term in Revela-
tion has been a
point of debate among scholars and interpreters, the Lamb
here appears as
Savior and as world Ruler.
In John 1,
John the Baptist sees Jesus approaching and cries: “Be-
hold, the Lamb of God,
who takes away the world’s sin!” Acts 8
and I Pe-
ter 1 use the sacrificial lamb as a symbol. The OT’s innocence and pure
sacrificial lamb
and the lamb’s function in redeeming and restoring the hu-
man relationship with
God are employed in the early church community in
essential interpretation of
Jesus Christ.
LAME,
LAMENESS (צלע (tsaw la’), to lean, limp; cwloV (ko los),
crippled,-
limping) A physical
condition in which a person experiences difficulty in
walking. The lack of orthopedic knowledge in antiquity
made cyllosis
(clubfoot) a far more permanent malformation than at present. Imper-
fectly formed lower limbs, or legs of
unequal length, were apparently
known in early Israelite history; such
deformities were an impediment to
the priesthood. The narrative of II Samuel 5 would seem to
suggest that
during the early monarchy there were numerous lame & crippled
persons
among the inhabitants of the Jebusite stronghold of Jerusalem
To
what extent lameness was due to malnutrition or deficiency
diseases such as
rickets can only be guessed. Egyptian
monuments indi-
cate the existence of such afflictions as tuberculous spondylitis
(inflamma-
tion of one or more of the spinal vertebrae). Another Egyptian monument
has preserved with
remarkable fidelity a picture of a Syrian settler who had
been afflicted with
infantile paralysis.
It
is not unreasonable to expect the lame to include those who suf-
fered from a
dislocation of the hip joint.
Osteoarthritis in elderly persons
would inhibit movement. Different forms of paraplegia could also
result
in paralysis of the lower extremities, and thus fit into the larger
picture of
conditions which could lead to lameness. Probably many persons became
disabled through
bone fractures. While Egyptian
physicians were profi-
cient in treating fractures, there is no indication that
such procedures were
undertaken in Israel
The
healing of the lame formed part of the therapeutic activity of
Jesus. The references to those who were cured do not
give us a proper
indication of the actual ailment with which individuals were
afflicted.
Peter and John were
confronted by a congenitally lame man, whose lame-
ness was apparently due to
weakness of two bones of the foot, perhaps
due to cyllosis. Another congenital cripple was healed by Paul
at Lystra;
he too may have suffered from some form of cyllosis.
L-4
LAMECH (למך) According to the
Yahwistic writer , Lamech was the son of
Methushael, of the line of Cain, the
husband of Adah and Zillah. In line
with
the Yahwist’s interest in explaining the origin of various aspects of
society, this
genealogy accounts for the origin of nomads, musicians,
and smiths.
According
to the Priestly source, Lamech was the son of Methuse-
lah, of the line of
Seth. He was 182 years old when Noah was
born, then
lived 595 years longer. He
died at the age of 777 years. The Song
is an
ancient poem similar in mood to Judges 15. It may originally have been
unrelated to the
genealogy. Regardless of their original
relationship, these
3 traditions are linked together in the present Genesis
story and teach that
although the human family increased in sin, it also
received partial remis-
sion of the curse.
Lamech’s genealogy as given in Luke 3 agrees with the
Priestly
Writer.
See also the entry in the Old Testament
Apocrypha/ Influence Out-
side the Bible section of the Appendix.
LAMED ( ל )
The 12th letter of
Hebrew alphabet as it is placed in the King
James Version at the head of the 12th
section of Psalm 119, where each
verse of this section of the psalm begins with
this letter.
LAMENTATIONS,
BOOK OF (איכה (ay kaw), oh how!; Qrhnoi (threh noy),
dirges) The Old Testament (OT) book
normally third in the Hebrew Bible
among the megilloth or “scrolls.” The
English versions place it after Jeremi-
ah and enlarged the title to read
“Lamentations of Jeremiah.”
Lamentations
consists of 5 poems like those of individual lament and
funeral
celebration. The occasion for the poems
was Jerusalem
tion in 586 B.C. Tradition has regarded Jeremiah as the
author, but with-
out justification. One
hand may be responsible for the first 4 poems.
Events are seen through the eyes of Palestinian Jews who lived in the
eco-
nomically andspiritually depleted homeland between 586 and 538 B.C.
In
spite of the rather artificial form, Lamentations attains a remarka-
ble emotional vitality. While one of the motivations
for the acrostic form
may have been to facilitate memory, another reason was to
express the
completeness of grief and despair and the plenitude of faith and
hope. As
to literary type, the poems are
composite. Chapters 1, 2, and 4 have
traits
of the funeral song; the poet of Lamentations pictures Jerusalem
sorrowing widow. The third poem is in individual lament
style.
The imagery and mood of
individual lament and funeral dirge have
been joined to national catastrophe in
order to show deeply personal and
tragic import. The capture and destruction of Jerusalem
in 586 B.C. is background for all
the poems. While Lamentations offers no
direct historical evidence, it does correlate substantially and convincingly
with the accounts of the last days of Judah
the book of Jeremiah.
The
traditional author is the prophet Jeremiah; he is portrayed as
lamenting by
Michelangelo in the Sistine Chapel. The Primary
Greek Old
Testament places the book after the book of Jeremiah; the source for
the
traditions was II Chronicles 35, where a lament for Josiah is
mentioned.
This was enough to establish
a tradition, even though there is no lament
for Josiah in Lamentations.
Internal
evidence indicates not an iota of support for the tradition.
The poem’s attitude toward foreign help and
trust in the king is not Jere-
miah’s. And
it is unlikely that Jeremiah, who in the whole of his identified
writings
never resorts to extensive poetic formalities, should have construc-
ted acrostic
poems. If the poems are by the prophet,
it is difficult to know
why they were not included in the book of Jeremiah.
With
the surrender of the traditional theory, most scholars have as-
sumed the
activity of two or more poets. Many differences
may be pointed
out among the poems. Yet
the affinities, linguistic and ideological, are con-
siderable, and a single mood
pervades the collection. All the poems
are
rooted in the same historical era (586-538 B.C.). Probably the first 4
poems, and possibly
all five, come from the same poet. The
nostalgia to-
ward the king and nobility points to an origin in court
circles. One diffi
culty with the
hypothesis is that the ranks of the nobility were severely
decimated by
execution and deportation.
L-5
The subtle differences between the poems
suggest that they were
composed one at a time and not as parts of a greater
whole. There is no
dramatic
progress. Any of the poems can stand
alone. Lamentations is
best thought of
as a collection of laments to be sung on the annual fast
days in remembrance of
the fall of Jerusalem. Out of a large
number of
compositions, long years of usage had endeared these to the community
as most expressive of the chastened mood of Israel
compilation was formatted to make everything lead up to the third poem
and
then flow away from it, thereby putting the climax in the middle.
Catharsis of grief and dejection is the
aim of lament liturgies.
The poems' public recital on appropriate memorial days must have been
an effective
outlet for the pent-up emotions of a people who had lost prac-
tically everything
that belonged to their former mode of life.
In orthodox
Jewry, Lamentations has been read in the synagogue since 70 A.D. to
commemorate the city’s fall to the Romans and Israel
The book centers on the conflict between
historical faith and histo-
rical actuality.
The age-old despair of religion took on new urgency with
the sharp
reversal of Israel
stance, Lamentations asks: What is the
meaning of the terrible calamities
that have overtaken us between 608 and 586
B.C. Can these events really
be
understood as expressive of Yahweh’s will?
How are we to react to a
God who has chastened his people without mercy?
There is bitter realism in the book. There is no holding back in por-
traying the
carnage & destruction. The poems throb
with a spiritually de-
solating anguish. And yet almost the whole compilation is
cast in prayer
mold. And alongside
this “priestly” intercessory protest runs a “prophe-
tic” stream of thought. Lamentations vindicates the prophetic doom. Jeru-
counsels passivity. He shows absolute loyalty to Yahwism. The poet be-
rates faithless prophets nd
priests, secure in his faith that Yahweh's religion
could continue without
professional leadership.
Lamentations spans Hebraism death's and Judaism's birth. In the
third
poem are convictions of that faith which was to spring phoenix-like
from the
ashes and rubble of political annihilation: responsibility for sin,
the
disciplinary value of suffering, the absolute justice and abiding love
of
God. God’s further purposes with Israel
& mercy,
unfathomable but dependable.
Lamentations proclaims Israel
incredible faith and writes it indelibly into the
liturgical practice of Judaism.
LAMP
(מנורה (meh nor ah)) Lamps are mentioned many times in the Old
Tes-
tament (OT), referring mostly to the tabernacle lampstand's lamps. The
few passages where the lamp is mentioned
as an object of daily use show
how common it was. Lamps of the OT period were
always made of pot-
tery. In earliest
times a saucer filled with olive oil, on the rim of which res-
ted a wick of twisted thread, was used. Around 2000
B.C., the first real
lamps appeared; the rims were pinched in 4 places to
form lips for holding
the wick.
The first lamps in the temple may have
been similar to the type de-
scribed above, but several lamps were later joined
on a common stem
from which the 7-branched lampstand, the “menorah,”
developed. Under
the impact of Greek models introduced into Palestine
B.C., the open saucer lamp was
replaced by a covered, spouted model.
The covered lamp's ascendancy was interrupted only by archaic
revivals,
but was universally adopted by 100 B.C. The round-bodied Roman lamp
with a nozzle
that projects only slightly was followed by molded lamps.
The King James Version translation
“candle” is, of course, inaccu-
rate. The
small clay oil lamp was a commonplace.
Candles weren't in use
until after the biblical period. The lamp, when taken together with “light”
and “lampstand,” had considerable symbolic power in the biblical period.
The lamp is a place of light, which
universally symbolizes life. Light, and
hence lamp, also stands for the divine presence; the prophetic word is a
lamp
shining in the darkness. From another
point of view, the lamp may
symbolize the eyes of God, and the eye may be
depicted as the lamp of
the body. The
symbolism is sufficiently flexible to be utilized in a wide
range of contexts.
LAMPSTAND
(מנורה (meh nor ah); נברשתא (neh beh rah sheh taw)) A
device for elevating a lamp so that its light will cover a large area. The
simplest method of elevating a lamp for
better illumination is to set it in a
niche in the wall or on a shelf jutting
from a wall. If, however, the lamp is
placed on a stand, it is easier to tend, and the lighting is more
efficient.
Some stands have been
discovered that are made of pottery & are roughly
cylindrical in shape, with
holes along the side. These stands' function are
not always clear; they may be offering stands or supports for incense
ves-
sels. Lamps with high bases were
common in Iron Age Palestine (1000-
300 B.C.).
L-6
Lampstands
in private houses or royal palaces are rarely mentioned
in the Bible. Indeed, the Hebrew word for “lampstand,” menorah, has
been adopted as a technical
term for the 7-branched lamp. The single me-
norah which stood on the south side of tabernacle is described in detail in
Exodus 25. From a tripod a vertical
shaft arose, from either side of which
sprang 3 branches, curving upward to
the same height as the central shaft.
Each branch and the shaft terminated in a cup, made in the form of an
al-
mond flower.
This menorah was made all
in one piece out of about 44 kilograms
of gold (one talent). The 10 lampstands of Solomon’s temple were
placed
before the inner sanctuary, 5 each on the north and south side. In
the se-
cond temple, the practice of having only one menorah was restored, and
this was continued in Herod’s temple.
The
origin and early symbolic value of the 7-fold lamp is obscure.
It may have been connected with the tree of
life. The rounded tripod base
may
represent the world mountain from which the tree grows. 7 is an al-
most universally sacred number,
but why it is connected with the sacred
lamp isn't clear. Apart from a reference to the tabernacle
menorah, lamp-
stands in the New Testament are confined to the book of Revelation,
where they have a symbolic function. The
7 churches of Asia are repre-
sented by 7 lampstands.
Since
the description of the menorah in Exodus probably dates from
post-exilic times,
the actual appearance of the menorahs of the tabernacle
and temple can only be
reconstructed tentatively from archaeological data.
In Zechariah 4, the lampstand consisted of a
large bowl, elevated on a
stand, with 7 lamps, each having 7 spouts,
ranged about its rim. The
stand itself
was either a metal tripod, or it was chalice-like. By the time of
the second
temple the more familiar 7-branched form had been adopted,
but the menorah
wasn't a common symbol until after the destruction of
the temple in 70
A.D. After that it became one of the
most common of all
Jewish symbols. The
basic form of the menorah in these representations
remains the same as that
described in the Exodus passage.
LANCE
AND LANCETS. See Weapons and Implements of War.
LAND
CROCODILE (כה (kho ha), strength, power) An old name for any
large, carnivorous lizards ranging from 1.2-2 meters
in length. The He-
brew word doubtless
indicates that it was the largest and strongest lizard
known in Israel
LAND
LAWS. Those laws in the Pentateuch pertaining to the allotment of land
by
tribes and it protection. See also Law in the Old Testament.
LANDMARK (גבול (geh bowl), border) In
the ancient Near East stones were
erected to mark boundaries between
fields. In Mesopotamia and Egypt
these were often elaborately inscribed. Naturally the removal of land-
marks was a
serious offense in Babylon Egypt
warns against the removal of landmarks, which is also used as a symbol
of overturning ancient customs.
LANGUAGES
OF THE ANCIENT NEAR EAST. Interest in the linguistic diver-
sity of the ancient
world appears in such biblical stories as the tower of
were
spoken in the ancient world. Modern
exploration has uncovered
texts in the languages of peoples not identifiable in
the Bible. The art of
writing arose in
the Near East only around 3500 B.C., so that is where
our knowledge
begins. Records in some languages of the
ancient Near
East are almost completely intelligible; others only partly
intelligible,
while others are still undeciphered.
The art of writing would seem to originate in southern Mesopo-
signs known as cuneiform script. Sumerian
is a non-Semitic, non-Indo-
European language.
Early in the 2000s B.C. incoming Semitic speakers
had become an
important element in northern and central Meso potamia .
They used the cuneiform script
in which they wrote their own language.
Akkadian’s main dialects are Babylonian and Assyrian. Between the
1400s-1200s, Akkadian became a
lingua franca in much of the Near
East .
Akkadian is known from inscriptions and
tablets from around 2800 B.C.
to 50 A.D. Neighboring peoples adopted cuneiform script to write their
own
languages.
From
early times Mesopotamia had been subject to invasion by the
hill people
northeast of them. The Guti from this
region established a
dynasty of Gutium between the Uruk's 4th and 5th dynasties. The names
of the Gutian kings
are non-Semitic and seem unrelated to any known lan-
guage family. The Kassites came later and the names of
their overlords
are Indo-European, but the common Kassite spoke a language that
was
something like one coming from east of Babylon.
L-7
Also from the northeast came the
Hurrians, the Old Testament
Horites, who from the 1400s-1200s B.C. exercised
considerable influ-
ence in the Near
East . The Mittani overlords of these Hurrians were
of
Indo-European speech, but the Hurrian language is unrelated to any
known
linguistic family. To this group should
be attached the Elamite
languages. The
earliest inscriptions from Susa Elam
are in a pictographic script.
The earliest cuneiform texts, from around
2500 B.C., may be called Old Susian;
from the 1500s to the 700s Neo-
Susian was used.
After 700s B.C., in the Achaemenid period a still later
form of the
language is used both for inscriptions on rock & clay tablets.
The cuneiform script spread also westward
into Anatolia , where it
was used to write Akkadian and also local
languages. Through the Hur-
rians it came
to the Hittites, who had entered Asia
Minor from the West.
Their own language is Indo-Eurpoean, but the
language of the older peo-
ple, now known as Proto-Khatti, appears to be unrelated
to any known
linguistic family. The
Hittites also developed a hieroglyphic Hittite.
A much later invasion of Indo-Europeans
brought speakers of
Phrygian into central Anatolia . Old Phrygian was written in
the 600s and
500s B.C., and Neo-Phyrgian in the Roman period. Phrygian seems to
have been spoken in that
area till the 400s A.D. A warrior group
moved
& conquered farther east. Their
Indo-European speech, spoken by their
Urartean subjects, developed into
Armenian. The original Urarteans
wrote
their language, which is a non-Semitic, non-Indo-European language
in Vannic
script from 840-640 B.C.
To the north and east of Elam
Persians. The earliest inscriptions are those of
Darius, Cyrus, Xerxes, Ar-
taxerxes, etc., written in an alphabetized form of
cuneiform script known
as Old Persian. Median is known only from person- and place-names; it
gave rise to
Middle Iranian. Avestan, the language of
the older Zoroastrian
scriptures, represents the old Bactrian tongue of the
northeast, from which
area came also the Soghdian language. The tongue of the Scythians be-
longs to this
Iranian group.
Both the Egyptian hieroglyphic script and
the Mesopotamian cunei-
form were used in Syria Palestine
writing the
local language. The excavations of Ugarit
written in alphabetic script
from 1500-1300 B.C., and based on a selection
of cuneiform signs. Phoenician is also a Semitic language. Its inscriptions
range from the 1100s B.C. to
the 500s A.D. and were adapted from Egyp-
tian hieroglyphics. Phoenician colonies in North Africa developed a lan-
guage called Punic; it was still in
use in Augustine’s lifetime. Excavations
at Byblos
tongues, Hebrew, Aramaic,
Samaritan, Moabite, Edomite, and Ammonite
were all Semitic.
Numerous inscriptions from the South
Arabian Kingdoms and from
their northern trade outposts reveal the
Minaeo-Sabaean language from
the 800s B.C.
The Arabians present at Pentecost were doubtless Naba-
teans,
whose language, written in a modification of the Aramaic script con-
tinued in
use up to Islamic times. All the Arabian
dialects are Semitic.
In historical times Greek was spoken in
the Aegean , but it was Greek
imposed upon people of other speech
habits. The Minoan language of the
Cretan hieroglyphic inscription is still undeciphered. The Cypriotes used
a purely syllabic
script which remains undeciphered. Other
languages of
glosses which tell little about the language’s nature. Carian is known from
proper names of a certain
form. Lydian is represented in
inscriptions reco-
vered from the Sardis
tion of these coastal languages.
A language almost as ancient as Sumerian
is the old Egyptian lan-
guage, which underwent great changes. Old Egyptian (3000-2155 B.C.);
Middle
Egyptian (2155-1350 B.C.); and Late Egyptian (1350-720). After
the Christianization of Egypt the
documents in a new alphabet based on
Greek script are called Coptic. Far up the Nile
the Ethiopian rulers of
as the 700s
B.C. In the century before Christ, at
Meroe's capital city , a
system of signs for writing the local Meroitic
language was developed.
Though this
script can be read, the inscriptions are still undeciphered.
LANGUAGES
OF THE BIBLE. The Bible, as every other scripture, reflects the
language
and culture in which its documents were written. Although the
Old Testament is in Hebrew and
New Testament (NT) is in Greek, there
are names, words, phrases, from other
languages. After the Exile, Nehe-
miah found
that where the Jews had taken wives from Ashdod
and Moab Judah
tell that the inscription above the cross was in Greek,
Latin, and Hebrew.
L-8
Whole
chapters in Daniel and Ezra are in the Aramaic of the chan-
celleries, while in
the NT such expressions as “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabach
thani" are in Aramaic. The names that the Pharaoh gave Joseph were
Egyptian
names. Daniel is given the Babylonian
name Belteshazzar. In
the NT “centurion,”
“legion,” and “denarii” are Latin words. Place names
in the Bible are from a variety of languages.
LANTERN
(fanoV (fa nos), torch) John 18 refers to some means of giving
light,
but it has never been discovered in a context clear enough to enable us
to
gain an exact picture of it. It may
have been a torch.
Lycus, a tributary of the Maeander. The
site occupied by Laodicea
an almost square plateau some 30 meters above the
river. To the south
lie the mountains
Sabacus and Cadmus. The city was located
on the an-
cient highway leading up from Ephesus through the Maeander and Lycus
valleys to the east and ultimately to Syria Colossae
See also the entry in the Old Testament
Apocrypha/ Influence Out-
side the Bible section of the Appendix.
The
early history of Christianity at Laodicea
evidence. Nowadays the ruins of Laodicea
with architectural
fragments. The lines of the ancient city
walls can still
be traced. Some of the
buildings are relatively well preserved:
A Roman stadium lies in the southwestern part of the site, about 300
meters in length, dedicated to Vespasian (79 A.D.). Gladiatorial
combats are
known to have been staged in Laodicea
years before Christ.
A large building near the stadium may represent
a gymnasium or
baths; there are also 2 theaters.
The remains of an aqueduct and water tower
have attracted the spe-
cial attention of early travelers.
The “city of the dead” is on the northern
side, near the river.
The general date
of the ruins is Roman, presumably representing the state
after the earthquake
of 60 A.D.
LAPIS
LAZULI. A stone of rich azure blue frequently showing spangles
of iron
pyrites. A few specimens of this
stone have been discovered in Palestine
LAPPIDOTH (לפידות, lamps) The husband of Deborah the
prophetess,
whose home appears to have been in the vicinity between Ramah and
LAPWING (דוכיפת (doe kay phat), hoopoe) While
the lapwing is known in
hoopoe.
LASEA (h Lasaia) A city on
the south coast of Crete . The variant
spel-
lings suggest that the place was not well known, and it is not mentioned
by
ancient geographers. In 1853 Captain
Spratt found ancient ruins on
the shore near Fair Havens that could be Lasea.
LASHA
(לשע) One of the boundary points for the land of the
Canaanites; the
location is unknown.
Jerome places it at a ravine east of the Dead Sea .
LASHARON
(לשרון) A city whose king was defeated by Joshua. Probably the
word is not the name of a city,
but part of the phrase “Aphek belonging
to Sharon
LASHES,
FORTY LESS ONE. See Crimes and Punishments
LAST
DAY(S), LATTER DAYS. See Judgment Day.
LAST
SUPPER, THE. The last meal of Jesus
with his disciples, on the eve of
his passion, as related by Matthew 26,
Mark 14, Luke 22 and I Corinthian
11.
The meal is mentioned also in the Gospel of John without reference
to
the sacrament.
Critical
problems for the interpreter of the Last Supper accounts con-
cern the occasion
of the meal, the textual tradition of Jesus’ words and
their authenticity, and
the meaning of his words and actions. The pro-
blems have been so complicated by doctrinal controversy in the
church
that it is difficult for any interpreter to approach them without some de-
gree of subjective or ecclesiastical bias.
L-9
The
problem of the occasion of the Last Supper is involved in the
broader question
of the chronology of the Passion. The
Last Supper
took place on Thursday evening before the Crucifixion. The Synop-
tics gospels relate that the Supper
and the Crucifixion occurred on the
festival of the Passover. By this reckoning, the Last Supper was a
Passover meal.
The Gospel of John,
however, states that the Crucifixion oc-
curred on the “preparation day” or eve
of the Passover meal. Biblical
critics
have been sharply divided in their preferences for the Synoptic
or the
Johnannine chronology. The Latin church
supports the Synop-
tic version; the Greek church adheres to the Johannine
position.
Numerous theories have been
offered to reconcile this discre-
pancy and harmonize the gospel traditions. To some, Mark’s identifi-
cation of the Last
Supper with the Passover is a later and less authentic
interpretation. Others consider the text of Mark to be the
result of igno-
rance or a faulty translation from Aramaic to Greek.
Several Jewish scholars have put forward the
view that in the year
of Jesus’ death the Passover was observed on 2 consecutive days, be-
cause of different reckonings by the Sadduccees and the Pharisees. We
cannot reproduce their calculations
because of our ignorance of the pre-
cise method use by the Jews at that time in
observing and calculating the
date of the new moon.
Opponents
of the Passover interpretation of the Last Supper have
marshaled a formidable
series of objections to the Synoptic theory from
the Passover regulations in
the time of Jesus, such as the absence of any
reference to the Passover lamb,
the use of the Greek word for ordinary
bread instead of the term for unleavened
bread, and the mention of only
one or two cups of wine, as opposed to four
cups. If the Passover meal
had been the
occasion of the institution, one would have expected the rite
to have been an
annual observance rather than a more frequent one.
None of these objections to the Synoptic
interpretation is decisive.
There
are suggestions of other occasions for the Supper by those
who oppose the
Passover interpretation. The words of
Jesus at the Supper
have been compared to the Jewish Kiddush, a special form of
blessing, or
sanctification, said over a wine cup at the beginning of special
holy days
like the Sabbath and Passover.
Another explanation has been the sugges-
tion that Jesus and his
disciples formed a Chaburah, or
fellowship group.
There is no proof that
Chaburah were religious associations
of more regu-
lar communal life and discipline.
Actually, all meals of Jews were religious, because formal benedic-
tions were
offered to God over bread. If the Last
Supper was not a Pass-
over, it was probably an ordinary meal of Jesus with his
disciples. The use
of a special wine
“cup of blessing” at the end of the meal testifies to the
more solemn character
of the meal. The question whether the
Last Supper
was a Passover meal or not may never be settled. At the very least, the
thoughts of the
Passover season were in the mind and heart of Jesus and
his disciples at the
time.
It
is generally agreed that the accounts of Mark and Paul are equally
primitive
and independent of each other. Matthew's narrative is largely
dependent upon Mark. The Lukan version presents greater difficulties
for
the text has come down to us in several versions. Luke 22 is based in part
on his special
source and partly on the Pauline tradition. The longer ver-
sion is supported by such ancient witnesses as Marcion,
Justin, and Tatian,
while the shorter text of Luke provides no justification
for theories concer-
ning a variant form of celebration of the Supper, whether by
Jesus or by the
early church.
More
difficult is the problem posed by Jesus saying, “Do this in re-
membrance of me.”
A decision for or against the authenticity of the com-
mand can't be made on
grounds of the textual evidence. If
Jesus thought
that the kingdom was coming very soon, the command would not have
any
purpose. If he expected a long wait
for the kingdom, the repetition of the
Supper would be a bond uniting his
disciples “until he come.”
There
can be no question the Supper was in Jesus’ mind an anti-
cipation of the
messianic banquet that he would share with his disciples in
the coming
kingdom. Jesus had appropriated this
banquet in his own tea-
ching about the kingdom; the feeding of the multitude was
a messianic
sign. All the gospel
accounts of the miracle show a close, textual assimila-
tion of the narrative
with the Last Supper account. Moreover,
the Pass-
over celebrations in Jesus’ day were vividly linked with expectations
of the
final deliverance.
It
is also clear that Jesus’ words, identifying the bread and the cup at
the
Supper with his own flesh and blood, linked the elements in the most in
timate
way with his death. The words
unmistakably interpret the signifi-
cance of his death as a vicarious sacrifice
“for many.” It should be noted
that the
separation of flesh and blood of sacrificial victims was essential in
the Old
Testament cult. We are most likely
confronted here with a crea-
tive association of sacrificial types that both redeemed
and reconciled the
sinner with God.
L-10
Both
the “end of this age” and the sacrificial connotations of Jesus’
words are
linked in further creative unity by his reference to the “cove-
nant.” Jesus offered his disciples in the Supper
participation in the atone-
ment achieved by offering himself on the cross. Jesus’s words and actions
at the Last Supper is
the gospel’s clearest testimony to the consciousness
of Jesus of the uniqueness
of his person and mission. Celebrating
the Last
Supper “in remembrance of me” is far more than just a memorial of a past
event. It looks forward to a future
coming as a sort of prayer of the messi-
anic community. The Supper expresses the paradoxical
character of the
gospel witness in two dimensions: to a kingdom that is both
here and now
and also is yet to come.
LATCHET
(שרוך (ser oke), sandal-thong)
An obsolete term for a leather strap
or thong by which sandals are tied.
LATIN
(RwmaikoV (Ro mah ee kos)) The language spoken by the Romans; the
title on the cross was in Latin, Greek and Hebrew. In Italy
Roman used Greek as well as
Latin. In Palestine
those who were involved in
legal, military, and official duties.
LATTER
RAIN (מלקוש (ma leh kose))
Alternate translation for “spring rains”
(March-April).
LATTICE (אשנב (‘eh sheh nab); חרבים (kha ra beem); שבכים (sheh ba
keem)) A
window covering through which one could look (Judges 5;
II Kings 1; Proverbs 7). See House;
Window.
LAVER (ﬤﬤיור (ka keh
yore), wash basin; loutron
(loot ron), bath) A fairly
large vessel in
the Old Testament; the Hebrew word usually refers to a
metal basin or bowl used
in rites of purification.
The tabernacle laver was a copper-bronze
basin for water which
stood on a “foot” or base and was located between the
altar and the door
of the tabernacle. In
Solomon’s temple, the lavers included the molten
sea and ten smaller
lavers. These ten bronze bowls held 20
baths (about
460 liters or 120 gallons of water), which weighed 280 kg or 625
lbs. If
the lavers were hemispherical,
the diameters would have been 1.5 meters.
The stands for the lavers were “4 cubits long, 4 cubits wide, and 3
cubits high (1.8 x 1.8 x 1.4
meters).” The lower part consisted of
panels
decorated with lions, oxen, and cherubim. The upper round-bowl support
was within a
“crown” which began .45 meters above the stand and was 4
cubits (1.8 meters) in
diameter and had corner supports. The
wheels were
.7 meters high. It is
difficult to see how stands of cast bronze and small
wheels could carry the
weight involved. The sacrificial
offerings were puri-
fied by water from the ten bowls. In the New Testament, loutron is used
solely in metaphorical connection with baptism.
LAW
IN THE OLD TESTAMENT (OT) (תורה (tor ah),
instruction; משפט
(mish pat), sentence, judgment) Law has as its object the
maintenance of
life in community. One
aspect of it is the policies or general statements
which provide the legal
understandings of how life in community is to be
maintained. The other aspect is the procedures by which
these policies
are to be put into effect and applied in specific
instances. The OT doesn't
have different
terms for these two aspects of law. The
policies are closely
related to the self understanding of Israel
God.
The
time-honored distinction between the OT as a book of law and
the New Testament (NT)
as a book of divine grace is without grounds or
justification. Divine grace and mercy are the basis of law
in the OT; and
God’s grace and love displayed in the NT events result in the New
Cove-
nant’s legal obligations. The OT has
a history of legal developments
which must be assessed before law’s place is
adequately understood.
Paul’s polemics
against the law are directed against an understanding of
law which is not the
same as that of the OT.
List of Topics—1. Law in the Pre-Mosaic Period; 2. Mosaic Law: 10 Commandments; 3. Mosaic Law: Covenant Code;
4. Mosaic Law: Tribes, Kings and Prophets; 5. Mosaic Law: Deuteronomy; 6. Exilic Law: Leviticus; 7. Exilic Law: Numbers, Prophets and Psalms; 8. Postexilic Law
1. Law in the Pre-Mosaic Period—Since all
the materials in the
first 5 books of the OT date, in their present form,
from the period after the
exodus from Egypt
als from the Pre-Mosaic period.
Legal and social customs reflected in the
book of Genesis have appeared in
a new light as a result of materials from
the 2000s B.C. found in northwest Mesopotamia .
There are indications of a common legal
and social tradition between
the Israelites and the peoples of northwest Mesopotamia . The ancestors of
the
Israelites aren't to be understood as wandering nomads without any le-
gal tradition apart from that which is suited to tribal life among such no-
mads. One of the Israelite law's most basic features
in this period is the
notion of tribal wholeness & the necessity for vengeance. Blood
revenge
is one of the most fundamental aspects of tribal law. It is concerned with
the restoration of
health (shalom) when the tribal
solidarity had been da-
maged by the loss of one of its members. The Song of Lamech (Genesis
4) probably
represents the brutal & excessive aspects of blood vengeance.
L-11
It is highly probable that in the
pre-Mosaic era the tribal groups
from which Israel's community was to be
formed had a fairly well-deve-
loped system of legal procedures based on customs
widely prevalent in
the ancient Near East.
Treaties or covenants were made between tribes
regulating boundaries and
grazing rights. Such arrangements were
sanc-
tioned by an oath ceremony in which the parties to the covenant each
pledged to uphold the agreement and invoked the curse of God if they
should not
remain faithful to the agreement.
In addition to these occasional
connections between the laws and
customs of the ancient world and those of
early Israel
collections which have been
recovered must be mentioned. The 1st is
that of the Sumerian king Ur-Nammu, dated to around 2050 B.C. 2nd
is that ascribed
to the Amorite king Bilalama, sometime after 2025. The
3rd collection is from Lipit-ishtar,
ruler of the Sumero-Akkadian Dynas-
ty sometime from 1900-1850 B.C. The most famous law collection is
that of
Hammurabi of Babylon, most likely from 1775-1750. A group
of Assyrian laws from the Middle
Assyrian Empire are as-signed to the
1400s or 1300s B.C., although the law
tablets themselves belong to the
period of Tiglath-pileser.
The connections between Israelite and
ancient Near Eastern law
are undeniable.
The form of the collections consists of a prologue, the
laws, and an
epilogue. In the prologue the laws are
traced to the action
of the gods, who had appointed the king to rule over the
land wisely and
justly through these laws.
The contents of the laws reveal that the affairs
of highly complex
societies are being regulated. The
difference is that
Near Eastern law emphasizes property over personal law,
while those of
the kings in upholding these divine laws and curses
anyone who violates
them. In the
subsequent period, however, these regulations are set in a
new context by the
exodus.
2. Mosaic
Law: 10 Commandments—The
testimony of all bib-
lical writers is unanimous in assigning to Moses a unique
place in the pro-
mulgation of the divine law. The “law of Moses” became a regular de-
signation for the first 5
books of the OT. Laws which actually developed
centuries later were traced back
to the events at Mount Sinai . Although
this
judgment is historically erroneous its theological meaning is clear.
The divine redemption which brought forth
slaves from Egypt
decisive moment in Israelite history. God’s covenant with Israel
holy mountain provided the foundation for all
law. Yahweh made this
people his own,
and the people acknowledged that Yahweh was their God.
Israelite law is, accordingly, covenant
law. The covenant relation-
ship thus
issues in a distinctive type of Israelite law which is of fundamen-
tal
importance. The effect of the Exodus
upon Israelite law was that the
legal tradition of the tribes was itself
transformed. The Ten Command-
ments
represent this distinctive type and the Covenant Code represents
the older
legal tradition.
The 10 Commandments are found in the OT
in 2 places; the slight
differences make clear that the 10 Commandments had
changed with time.
The 10 Commandments
open with, “I, Yahweh, am your God, who
brought you out of the land of Egypt
commandments are the stipulations of the
covenant relationship.
In its original
form, the 10 Commandments probably consisted of
very short sentences preceded
by the strong negative particle lo.
These sti-
pulations indicate that the covenant God is in a position to specify
unquali-
fiedly what the covenant conditions are.
It is naturally understood that the
keeping of the commandments means
life and blessing. But Israel
commanded to keep these commandments only in order
to prosper; she is
called to obedience without qualification.
The 10 Commandments are the policy
statement on law which must
then be made effective in procedure. These commandments intend to de-
fine
negatively the very heart of the covenant relationship. Such policy law
is remarkably restricted in
its content. The aim is certainly not to
constrict
the freedom of Israel
freedom within the covenant
relationship. The 10 Commandments are
often pointed to as the foundation of Western society, but they are only be-
cause they are a categorical sort which leaves open how they will be en-
forced through the development of legal procedures.
3. Mosaic Law: Covenant Code—Immediately following upon the
10 Commandments in Exodus is a body of law of mixed character general-
ly designated as the Covenant Code. The
Covenant Code may be out-
lined as follows:
I. Historical-theological
prologue
II. Law on true Yahweh worship
III. Laws dealing with persons
IV. Property laws
V. Laws: covenant maintenance (Yahweh’s claim; neighbors
and strangers; covenant holiness)
VI. Epilogue containing warnings and promises
L-12
These laws have some
of the formal characteristics of the 10 Com-
mandments—categorical prohibitions
which do not specify how they are
to be implemented. Another form of law opens with an active
participle
and closes with, “he shall surely be put to death.” Such laws probably be-
long to the same
understanding of the relationship between God and Isra-
Another form of law predominates in
the Covenant Code. This is
procedural
law, consisting of precise specifications of how particular legal
issues are to
be dealt with. Such laws are introduced
by the Hebrew parti-
cle ke, “When,” or
“When it should happen that . . .,” followed by a subordi-
nate clause. The distinction between this type of law and
those dealt with
before are obvious. The
2 types are often referred to as apodictic (catego-
rical) and casuistic
(procedural). The casuistic or case-law
type is the do-
minant form of law known from the ancient Near East, as evidenced
by law
collections such as the Code of Hammurabi.
The use of the term “code” may,
however, be misleading. These law
collections are better understood as having
resulted from a body of law de-
veloped as a general standard and precedents to
guide the judges and not
as precise stipulations. Thus, the Covenant Code is remarkably similar
in
content and form to the laws of ancient Mesopotamia . Numerous exam-
ples of near
parallels leave no doubt that the laws of the OT have been in-
fluenced by these
non-Israelite laws, directly or indirectly.
But this Near Eastern tradition of
law has been modified at many
points in light of the Israelite covenant
relationship. The existence of other
gods is probably not doubted, but Israel
Yahweh alone is the
God who has authority in her life and destiny.
In the law on female slavery, the expression “since he has dealt
faith-
lessly with her” is the basis of a covenant relationship which specifies
the
relationships between an Israelite and his neighbor. Further, the require-
ment that a disliked
slave-wife still be treated as a wife points to an under-
standing of the
relationship between man and woman. It has no counter-
part in the other laws
of the ancient world. The Israelite
requirement that a
goring ox be stoned rests on the view that life belongs to
God; even beasts
must not take human life, which would be acting in God’s place.
The laws on slavery are quite
different from those of the neighboring
peoples. A man may have to sell his daughter, yet the
daughter must be
treated as a wife. It
may be that an Israelite, a full member of the cove-
nant community, may be sold
or sell himself. Yet all classes of slaves are to
be given their freedom after
a 6-year period. Such legislation
would seem
to presuppose the experience of Israel
strated his graciousness
to a band of slaves in a foreign land.
The Covenant Code is generally dated
to the period after the en-
trance of the Israelites into Canaan
(after 1200 B.C.). Yet it should be
re-
membered that the ancestors of the Israelites had their own laws and cus-
toms
prior to the Exodus. Certainly not all
of the legislation contained in
the code was a part of the Pre-Mosaic legal
tradition. There is no reason
to deny
that some of it may have been.
4. Mosaic
Law: Tribes, Kings and Prophets—The books of Ge-
nesis and
Exodus indicate that already in pre-Mosaic times the Israelites
consisted of 12
tribes. This 12-tribes confederacy is
much more a pro-
duct of the period following upon the Exodus. The entrance of the Israe-
lites into Canaan
under Joshua was accomplished without opposition in
the central hill
country. The valley beside Shechem
became the gathering
place for the Israelite tribes. It highly probable that in that region other
Hebrew tribes and peoples not involved in Egyptian slavery entered the
covenant community under Joshua.
This 12-tribe system actually provides the basic
communal and in-
stitutional structure for Israelite law. This covenant relationship was regu-
larly
reaffirmed at the tribal center in a great tribal gathering. It is note-
worthy that the laws of Israel
test of Israel
has often been considered
to be the law given by Joshua to the people at
Shechem. Should this be true, then the 10 Commandments may have pro-
vided the covenant stipulation while the Covenant Code
provided the pro-
cedural law materials.
Distinction is often made between
cultic, moral and juridical types
of law. Such a distinction may be useful in the present, but it is not one
which ancient people knew or would recognize.
The aim of all law was
the maintenance of the wholeness and health of
the covenant community.
Cult, ethics,
and jurisprudence were all involved in the health and holiness
of the
community, so they were all a part of the Covenant Code.
L-13
The introduction of the kingship
into the life of Israel
siderable change in the legal practices of Israel
tion was replaced by a monarchical system with a capital city, Jerusalem
The king soon
exercised supreme court functions, but the king wasn't him-
self beyond the law
or a law to himself. More noteworthy is
the fact that
at no time in the life of Israel Is-
closed to Moses on Sinai.
During the kingship period, many
pressures were at work to bring
about a centralization of the legal traditions. The present form of the Cove-
nant Code may
stem from the close of David’s reign. Counter-pressures
were operative at the same time to preserve the law’s force
and efficacy
within the family, village, and town. The kingship was instituted by Yahweh,
but only
because of the failure of Israel
The attitude toward kingship is
reflected in the attitude of the Israe-
lite toward Jerusalem
vid, it was still considered to be a separate
entity, distinct from the genu-
inely Israelite territory. The result of this attitude toward Jerusalem
the law was never fully entrusted to a
special class of interpreters under the
authority of the king. In the towns and villages, moreover, there
was deter-
mined resistance to any kinds of innovations.
The prophets exercised many
functions related to the law. Chief
among these was directing attention to those breaches of the covenant
sti-
pulations which would bring judgment upon Israel
said that the great prophets presuppose the existence of a legal
tradition by
which the covenant of Yahweh with his people of Israel
They attack the people for violation of the covenant and its legal
require-
ments. They call the people to repentance and to a re-consecration to the
covenant stipulations.
5. Mosaic Law: Deuteronomy—The book of Deuteronomy is
repre-
sented as a long speech given by Moses to the people shortly before they
are to cross over into the Land of Promise
to Moses a body of law, much of which developed long
after the death of
Moses. The great
reform of Josiah of the southern kingdom of Judah
621 B.C.) followed the discovery of a Book of the Law in the temple. The
reform included the destruction of the
places of worship outside the city of
The contents of this Book of the Law
embodied much of what is now
found in chapters 12-26 of Deuteronomy. It isn't possible, however, to con-
sider the
Book of the Law as the text of Deuteronomy; the legislation there
had a very
long and complex history. The materials
in Deuteronomy of par-
ticular importance for the history and understanding of
Israelite law are
found in chapter 5 (a second set of 10 Commandments),
chapters 12-26
(Book of the Law), and chapter 27 (curse ritual).
The entire book is cast in the form
of a series of sermons or homi-
lies by Moses to the people and expresses in the
strongest way possible
the significance of the divine law for the life of Israel
materials represent a body of teaching in sermonic style which had devel-
oped through the centuries, particularly in the towns and villages. Of parti-
cular importance is the way in which
the wilderness generation is linked
with subsequent generations. Through the law, each generation stands in
the same relation to God as did that generation with whom God made his
covenant
at the holy mountain.
The various forms of law noted in
the Covenant Code and in the 10
Commandments appear again and again; but they are usually underscored
through appeals to historical precedent. Prohibitions against idolatry are
especially
prominent in the entire book. Yet the
legislation discloses the
remarkable adaptability of the teaching priests and
Levites as social, eco-
nomic, and political conditions have changed. The Deuteronomic law
shows how the older
policy legislation of the covenant community could
be made applicable to
changing circumstances without losing its force as
direct commands of the
covenant God.
The strongly humanitarian tone and
flavor of this legislation are
unmistakable.
There are to be no poor within Israel
sing is upon all his people,
and pollution of the land is considered a repu-
diation of its character as the Promised
Land. Corruption of the people
would
mean that God’s holy people had profaned his covenant. Neglect of
the poor would mean that she had
turned her back upon God’s purpose to
make of her an example to all the
nations, so that God’s blessing would go
to all people.
Legislation concerning the holy war
is found in chapter 20. Under
the
Assyrian overlordship, no Israelite standing army could be maintained.
Such provisions as those in chapter 20 may
have enabled the Israelites to
call together a volunteer army, ready to
overthrow the despot’s authority at
the first sign of weakness.
L-14
Deuteronomy 12 states that all
Israelite worship is to be in one
place.
In Josiah’s reform, this place is clearly understood to be Jerusalem
From the
period of the Conquest and the time of the judges, Israel
maintained a central gathering place for the 12
tribes, which was Jerusa-
lem under David.
It continued to have its rivals, such as Bethel
in northern Israel
that certain cases were to be settled
“before God.” With the development
of
the Jerusalem
dwell was understood as the Holy of Holies of the Jerusalem
6. Exilic
Law: Leviticus—The high hopes attached to the reform
of Josiah very quickly were
crushed. Josiah died in battle at Megiddo
609/608. It
is probable that Jeremiah had already sought to make clear to
the Judeans that they
should not pin too great hopes upon this reform.
With the destruction of the city of Jerusalem
drezzar in 587 B.C., this
safeguard to Israelite law and religion was swept
away.
One of the most remarkable features of Israelite life
and faith is that
the temple’s destruction and exile did not destroy Israelite
law or Israelite
faith. On the contrary,
it was during the Exile that the great bodies of
priestly legislation were
gathered together and elaborated. In the
period
before the Exile, the priests had been the primary interpreters of the
law.
The priests were the custodians of
the sacred traditions, and particularly of
those associated with the acts of
worship, the festivals, and the sacrificial
rites. During and following upon the Babylonian
exile, the priestly laws
took the shape which they have now in the OT.
One of the more ancient collections
of priestly law is found in 17-
26, which has been designated as the
Holiness Code. The collection in its
present form dates from 587 B.C., although the legal materials in it belong
to
a much earlier period. The laws are
concerned primarily with the main-
tenance of Israelite holiness and purity. Sacrifices are to be offered only
before the
tabernacle. Family purity is to be
maintained through strict ob-
servance of the restrictions against marriage with
near relatives. In the
strongest terms
the laws prohibit religious and social practices like those
of the foreign
peoples.
Chapter 19 contains a collection of
laws similar in content and form
to earlier laws, in particular the 10 Commandments and the Covenant
Code. The
priestly point of view is expressed in: “You shall be holy to
me; for I Yahweh
am holy, and have separated you from the peoples.”
The consequences of God’s election of Israel
discernibly different
from the other peoples.
Certain legal features are
discernible in the framework with which
the first five books of the OT has been
set by the priestly community du-
ring and following the Exile. God appears as
lawgiver in the creation
story. God’s
blessing upon humans includes: “Be fruitful and multiply,
and fill the earth
and subdue it.” This command is
repeated in connection
with the law against the taking of human life. These laws apply to all
men, although they were
understood to have particular force for the peo-
ple of God.
With the law on circumcision the priests
introduce into their treat-
ment of the early narratives the first commandment
concerned specifically
with Israel
ping of the
tabernacle. The book of Leviticus
consists entirely of priestly
legislation. Following the Code of Holiness (17-26) is a concluding chap-
ter (27)
dealing with the making and fulfillment of vows to Yahweh.
7. Exilic Law: Numbers, Prophets and Psalms—The book of
Numbers consists
primarily of priestly materials, only a part of which are
of a specifically
legal character. Major legal
stipulations are found in chap-
ters 4, 5, 6, 8, 19, 27, 28-29, 31, and 35. In this legislation it is once again
clear
that the priests are employing older legal materials set in the context
of that
priestly understanding of the law referred to above.
has set her apart to Yahweh’s service. All the priestly legislation is as-
signed to
Moses. During the Exile the priestly
community has devoted
itself to the study of divine law with almost
single-minded purpose. The
Israelite
view of the “latter days”, when God would bring God’s work
among humans to fulfillment, was of profound influence upon the develop-
ment and understanding
of law.
The Israelite’s Yahweh was a God
actively involved in the course of
world history; this is of decisive importance
for understanding OT faith.
OT
theologians were led to develop a view of God as heaven & earth's cre-
ator and to ponder the purpose of God’s actions among humans. In the
past, God’s purpose couldn't be
fulfilled. Israel
had delayed fulfillment
of God’s promise.
In the century before
the Exile, and during exile, Israel
and poets arose to sketch the features of
the “latter days.” These pictures
of
fulfillment at the “end of history” are referred to by the term
“eschato-
logy.” In these “latter days,”
the law occupies a prominent place. The Day
of the Lord is one of divine wrath
upon those who have not been faithful to
covenant or God’s law. Of greater prominence is the hope that God
will
see to God’s promise. The various
depictions of this Last Day don't consti-
tute a unified view of this age’s end.
L-15
One way of describing God’s action
at the Last Day is provided by
the prophet Jeremiah. The day is to come in which Yahweh will make
a
new covenant with Israel Judah
forefathers,
which they broke. While a new Covenant
is promised, no new
law is to be given.
The law of the Old Covenant finds expression in the
very being of the
people of the New Covenant. The law will
be within
them, so that simply to live will be to live in communion with God
and in
obedience to his law.
While the prophet Ezekiel seems to
have shared this view of the Last
Day with Jeremiah, he has also provided a
sketch of the restored common-
details of the temple worship, new
boundaries of the 12 tribes, and certain
legal matters, some of which do
not agree with earlier law. As a visionary
description of the restored commonwealth of Israel
way in which a prophet has related law and the Latter
Days. In a new Jeru-
salem, a new temple,
and a newly distributed land, Israel
people, recognizable by all as his
people.
Already in the early period of
Israelite history, the worship of Israel
and the law of God are seen to be intimately
related. Priestly custodian-
ship of the
legal traditions guaranteed that in acts of worship the people
should be
presented with the significance of God’s law.
Psalm 19 consists
of 2 parts: praise of the God of nature; and praise
of God’s law. In medita-
tion upon God’s
law the worshiper participates in that end time, in which
the purpose and
promise of God find their fulfillment. Israelite worship as
anticipation of God's final victory provides
another connection between law
and the Latter Days.
8. Postexilic
Law—It is possible that during the Exile the site of the
ruined temple had
not been entirely abandoned. It wasn't
until some of the
exiles returned that the temple was rebuilt. Upon the resumption of wor-
ship, provision was
made for many of the legal practices of the earlier peri-
ods to be put into
effect. The conditions of life in the
Exile had led not only
to elaboration and development of the laws of the
earlier periods. Gathe-
rings of the
Israelites for the study of the law were probably a regular fea-
ture of the
exile period. Thus the way was prepared
for the emergence of
the synagogue.
A further development occurred in connection
with the law. Israel
had to exist without king, temple, or tribal
organization. Thus the structure
within
which the law had developed had disappeared.
The law came to be
regarded as an independent reality, loosed from its
moorings in the tribal
system, temple worship, and kingship. It may be that only by this means
was the
community of Israel
What resulted from this development
was an understanding of the
law of Israel
mans. Israel
befallen them. It was then imperative
that the law be strictly observed.
Worship had to be in rigid accord with the legal specifications. Torah had
become the basic reality for the
life of the Jews.
The Torah included the whole sweep
of God’s dealings with human-
kind from the beginning up to the death of
Moses. Israel
by God and then had been given the
Torah. In postexilic Judaism the law
and
obedience to it outweighed other religious realities and obligations.
Obedience to the law would guarantee God’s
blessing. Those who kept
the law were
the pious ones; those who spurned law were evildoers.
The wisdom tradition in Israel Israel
wise men
of Israel
They were concerned primarily
with practical matters. The teachers of
wisdom in postexilic Judaism developed as a group devoted to the law.
In the books of Job and Ecclesiastes,
however, strong attacks are leveled
against the more popular understanding of
the wisdom school.
It has been noted that in Israelite
beliefs about this age’s end, the
law occupies a very significant place. Foreign influences led to the deve-
lopment
within Judaism of a picture of the “latter days” significantly dif-
ferent from
that represented in earlier texts. The
present age is viewed as
being under an evil power’s domination. The struggle between good and
evil is cosmic;
it also has its counterpart in everyone’s heart. The OT con-
tains few documents which reflect
this struggle. Israel
rest in unswerving obedience to the
law. In later Judaism, obedience to the
law was considered the prerequisite to the Messiah’s coming.
In the OT, then, law is understood
to rest upon God’s initiative.
God’s love
and grace constitute the setting for the giving of the law. Re-
sponsive love, gratitude, and faith provide
the motivation for obedience.
In the postexilic period the law tends to be seen
as an independent reality,
less integrally related to God’s saving action;
obeyed less from gratitude to
God and more as an ordinance decreed at the
creation.
L-16
LAW IN FIRST –CENTURY JUDAISM (See also the entry in the Old Testament
(OT)/Influence Outside the Bible section of the Appendix)—The
term torah
in Judaism is usually translated as “law,” but actually it ranges in meaning
from teaching or
instruction to all divine revelation.
The nature and content
of this revelation cannot be determined for 3
reasons.
1st, the period was one of rapid change; 2nd, the law was so vari-
ously interpreted by Pharisees, Sadducees,
and the Essenes that no inte-
grated description of it can be given. 3rd, rabbinic sources directly dea-
ling with the law are later than the 1st century, and represent only the Phari-
saism of Rabbi Johanan ben Zakkai. By very careful sifting of these sour-
ces, which contain traditional material going back to the first century and
earlier, certain positions can be safely be suggested.
The
Written Law—Judaism in the first century, as always, postula-
ted that God exists and that God has revealed God’s nature, character, &
purpose, and will
as to what humans should be and do. This
law was partly
enshrined in the documents now called the OT. The acts of the prophecy,
through which God declared God’s will, had come to be particularly asso-
ciated with the Holy
Spirit’s activity. The law of the prophet Moses, the
books of the prophets, and all the other books now contained
in the OT,
came to be conceived as written by persons moved by the Holy Spirit,
which gave them an inspired character.
After 70 A.D. there was still
discussion in Judaism on the authority
of certain books. The following books
were still in dispute: Ecclesiastes
and
Proverbs contradicted themselves; the Song of Songs [Solomon], Pro-
verbs, and
Ecclesiastes were regarded by some as too profane; and Es-
ther was in conflict
with the fundamental principle that the law was com-
plete and that no new
institution was to be introduced.
Eventually, at the school at Jamnia,
Ecclesiastes and the Song of
Songs were accepted. The apocrypha were rejected because its
authors
lived comparatively recent times, when the Holy Spirit had departed
from
Israel, the same would apply to documents similarly dated, including the
gospels and other Christian books. By
the end of the first century, we can
be sure that the OT, as we know it, was
regarded as canonical, although
discussion of certain of its books continued to
a later date.
The rolls on which the OT was
written were treated with extraordi-
nary respect. Rules concerning their form and the mode of
their composi-
tion were multiplied. The
question was discussed as to the languages into
which the law could be
translated; only Greek was allowed. In
the first
century it had become an important part of the liturgy of the
synagogue
and the chief object of study.
Were there distinctions made between
the OT's different parts?
While the
translation of “Torah” as law is not strictly correct, the use of
“Law” for the
whole Torah is significant. Torah, as a
whole, constituted
Mosaic law: it was called Torah, even in its non-legal
aspects. The autho-
rity of the Mosaic law
was indicated variously. Its derivation
direct from
God distinguished it from the Prophets, and the other OT writings.
Moses was the first and greatest prophet;
all that was communica-
ted to the following prophets, he had already
received. The writings out-
side the OT’s
1st 5 books are designated “tradition,” and derive their au-
thority
from their “exposition” of the Mosaic law.
So, all writings in the
OT outside of the 1st 5 books, broken
down into the Prophets, and the
Writing were of second rank; they confirmed or
reiterated what was in
the Law.
The basic laws essential to humans
had been given to Adam. In
addition,
Noah had been given seven laws. Some
scholars consider them
to show the recognition on the part of Judaism of the
extreme improbabi-
lity that all nations would ever come to obey the whole law;
it resigned
itself to this fact by insisting only on a minimum of decency for
Gentiles.
The
Oral Law: Its Rise, Authority, Codification, and Interpre-
tation—The term
“torah” had reference not only to scriptures, but also to
an unwritten
tradition, also known as the oral law.
The development of
such an oral law was natural on several grounds. No written law can
cover all the
contingencies of life. The ritual,
ceremonial, civil, and cri-
minal law of the first five books of the OT implies a
great deal of custom
or usage, which was law, although it was not written.
Similarly “custom” was followed in matters
such as divorce, the
payment of taxes to priests, & the Sabbath's observance. The OT gives
no definition of
work that was prohibited, but custom gradually esta-
blished certain patterns of
rest. It is likely that during the Exile
written
codes or collections of laws were lost but their contents were orally
preserved.
L-17
More specifically, it may be said
that while the Scriptures them-
selves recognize the need for the interpretation
and adaptation of the
law, the biggest impetus to this arose twice during
Biblical times and
once in between the Old and New Testament. The first time was during
Ezra’s life, when
the returned exiles had to resettle in Israel
the law the ground of their life. There can be little doubt that in the
Roman
period, economic tensions within the nation contributed to the
same development. As the needs of the commercial elements
became
more complex, the Pharisees saw a need to expand the oral law. At the
same time, the interests of the
patrician Sadducees in maintaining the
status quo, made the law more
conservative in nature.
In the time of Jesus, the rabbinic
house of Hillel and the house of
Shammai were submitting the oral law to
intense discussion. The dis-
cussion
between them could have produced grave religious uncertainty
and possibly even
2 sets of laws. At the Council of
Jamnia, the deci-
sions of the school of Hillel
tice
authority was often given to the school of Shammai
before and after 70 A.D., the need for codification among scholars was
probably
“in the air.”
Along with activity of a Mishnaic or
codifying went the develop-
ment of “exegesis” to connect the oral law with the
written law. In the
time of Jesus rules of
exegesis had been developed, though it must be
understood that the aim of this
exegesis was the convincing imposition
of particular laws upon it. Rabbis developed catalogues of rules; Rabbi
Hillel’s contained 7 rules; Rabbi Ishmael’s had 13.
If we now analyze the oral law, as
it was in process in the 1st cen-
tury, the following 3 components emerge. 1st, it contained long-esta-
blished custom.
2nd, it incorporated regulations or decrees of a prohibi-
tive
kind. But many oral laws could not be
connected with the written
law and much in the oral law was in direct
contradiction to the written
law.
Authorities, when necessary, did not hesitate to modify and even to
suspend the written law without justifying their procedure. 3rd, the oral
law grew from the very study
of the written law; new laws were found to
be implicit in the latter. As a result, principles were discovered in
the
written law to meet the new conditions that were continually being faced.
It was over the validity of this
growing oral law that the Pharisees
and Sadducees were divided. The Jewish historian Josephus explains that
“Pharisees have delivered a great many observances from their fathers,
which are not written in the law of Moses; and for that reason it is that the
Sadducees reject them.” It is over
against a background of intense discus-
sion on the relative claims of the
written law and the oral, that the ministry
of Jesus is to be placed. While Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, and
other groups would have been occupied with the law, they constituted only
a small portion of the total population.
The
Law as the Agent of Salvation—The scope of the Torah was
exceptionally
wide, including canon, civil, criminal, and even international
law, all in
one. A 3rd-century rabbi computed that
there were 613 com-
mandments placed upon Israel
the first century. Because law was regarded as the gracious
gift of God
to human, the yoke of the law was accepted by the pious,
and there was
joy in submission to it.
It was obedience to the law that secured merit
before God. Every Israelite thus had to give a reckoning
before God and
his destiny was determined according to his deeds.
At first sight such a view implied
that humans can fulfill the law, and
that salvation is their own achievement. But Judaism was aware of the
dangers and
difficulties of its attitude toward the Torah.
The Pharisees and
Sadducees had their differences as to the ability of
humankind to achieve
their own destiny.
The rabbis recognized that the nature of humans is such
that they cannot
escape sin, so that repentance is a condition of their
existence.
The law ordained the sacrificial system as a
means of repentance of,
or atonement for sin, but sin without confession didn't avail. Judaism re-
cognized the danger
of a merely formal obedience to the law by insisting
on the need for pure
intention (konah) behind all
obedience. It is over
against these
considerations that criticisms of Pharisaism in the gospels
must be
assessed. The potency of repentance is
such that a single day of
it would bring Israel
The
Law as the Agent of Creation—We have been concerned
with the law mainly as
the demand of God. But, so profound was
the de-
votion of Judaism to the law, that it was not content merely to regard it
as
God’s agent for human redemption. Law was conceived of as an entity, a
living, unified reality. It was given also a cosmic significance. The oral
law was traced back to Sinai, but the
whole law, was given still greater an-
tiquity—in fact, a pre-cosmic
existence. The way was prepared for
this,
long before the first century, through the identification of wisdom with
law.
In the first century, the law, like wisdom in Proverbs
8, was regar-
ded as older than the world.
The law was connected with the very act of
creation. The Torah was thus one of the pillars of the
universe. It followed
that in a real
sense God was bound by and to the law.
It was corollary to
this that the law was perfect and eternal. The idea of the law as the instru-
ment of
creation gives expression to one of the most fundamental convic-
tions of
Judaism: that the universe conforms to the law, that nature itself is
after the
pattern of it. It was to give cosmic significance
to morality. Thus
the law had a kind of
celestial existence before it came into being on Sinai.
The law was regarded as existing in two
places: the realm of ideas; and in
time.
L-18
The Jewish historian Josephus
remained a Jew in his attitude to-
ward the law, but he reveals a Greek
coloring. His praise of Moses, as a
pious, wise man, probably stems from his desire to commend him to the
Greek
world. Greek motifs are still more
marked in Philo, although he re-
mained a practicing Jew. He identified the law of Judaism with the
law of
nature; God is both creator and revealer. This attempt to equate revelation
and nature,
philosophy and law, led Philo to the use of the literal meaning
to find an
altogether different meaning, but his analysis never led him to
neglect the
observance of the law.
Conclusion—Finally,
we have to ask what role the law was expec-
ted to play in the messianic age or
in the age to come. It was regarded as
perfect and eternal: no prophet would change it, and no new Moses would
be
introducing another law. But there are a
few passages which suggest
that in the messianic age certain enactments
concerning sacrifices and the
festivals would end. At the end of this age difficulties in understanding
the
law will finally be adequately explained.
The expectation of a new, messianic law was not incompatible with
first-century Judaism. In the age to come, beyond the messianic age,
commandments were to cease. On the whole, however, the picture that
emerges is that of a future, when God or God’s Messiah would study the
laws, reveal their “grounds,” return backsliders, and give the law to the
Gentiles.
LAW IN THE NEW TESTAMENT (NT) (nomoV (no mos), rule,
standard)
The
Earliest Christians & the Law—The ambiguity which marked
the attitude of
Jesus toward the law, reappears in the attitude of the earli-
est Christians. In the very earliest days,
Christians continued to “practice
Judaism,” and were occupied more with saying
that Jesus was the Mes-
siah than with the law. Although in fact there is no attack on the law as
such by Stephen, but
only on the temple and on the history of the Jews,
his attitude implies a
detachment from the tradition of Judaism.
Stephen’s
wholesale dismissal of the temple, and the law, and his
condemnation of
But it is not justifiable to ascribe his radicalism to liberal, Greek
influences.
To judge from Galatians 2 and Acts 15, there was
agreement among
the leaders of the church that salvation was by faith in Jesus
Christ & not
by works of the law. The
early church asked the questions: Should Jews
now forswear the observance of
the law in order to make it possible for
them to enjoy table fellowship? Should Gentile Christians be circumcised
and
submit to the observance of the law? In
Jewish Christian churches, it
was acknowledged that Jewish Christians might
obey the law; in Gentile
churches obedience to the law wasn't observed. This approach to the law
was virtually
ratified in the Council of Jerusalem, and the conditions on
which there could
be actual intermingling of Gentile and Jewish Christians
were laid.
While
most Christians were aware that salvation was only in Jesus'
name, they
also had to recognize that, if there was to be any effective ap-
proach to Jewry,
the law had to be honored. Naturally,
Jews feared moral
laxity should the law be abandoned & justification by faith
alone be enough
for salvation.
In Galatians,
however, Paul ascribes dishonorable motives to cham-
pions of the law; they
favored the law in order to make a good showing in
the flesh. It was these Judaizers who invaded Pauline churches to undo
the work of Paul.
While it is possible to overemphasize the significance of the Judai-
zing
movement, it is also possible to minimize, if not deny the differences
of
emphasis between him and Peter and James.
The Judaizing elements
eventually led to Jewish Christianity, which
demanded the observance of
the law from all Christians, and to the Nazoreans,
who held fast to the law
for Jewish Christians only.
The Law in the Synoptic Gospels—By
“law” or “the law,” the NT
usually means God’s law revealed in the Old
Testament (OT). The term
“law” (nomos) doesn't occur in Mark at all; in
Matthew and Luke it occurs
8 and 10 times respectively. Usually the term is used in reference to the
first 5 books of the OT.
The meager incidence of the term itself is no measure
of the deep
significance of the problem of “the law” in the Synoptics. The words and
works of the Jesus have been
colored by the experience and needs of the
churches. It is exceedingly difficult to distinguish
the attitude of Jesus him-
self from the early church. According to the Synoptics Jesus’ ministry
im-
plied that the law no longer regulated the ways of God with men, and that
Jesus himself had taken over the place previously held by the law. The
coming of Jesus has inaugurated a new
order in which the law is super-
seded. This is most marked in the parables and in the Jesus' relationship
with sinners, the “people of the land”; he ignored legal limitations placed
on contact
with them.
L-19
An examination reveals that: Jesus rejected the oral tradition, like
the
Sadducees; he set one passage over against another, not to harmo-
nize them, but
to invalidate the one by means of the other; and he eleva-
ted moral above
ceremonial commandments. Moreover, Jesus
appealed
to people to judge of themselves that which was good and what the will
of
God was.
Jesus himself followed immediate
deliverances of his own consci-
ence, and his attitude toward the law implies his
messianic awareness or
consciousness.
The messianic age was to inaugurate a new creation com-
parable to the
first. He appeals to the order of
creation as supplying a
truer clue to the intention of God than the law. It is not surprising that
Mark sets Jesus in
opposition to the scribes and Pharisees from the begin-
ning. Henceforth, it is the human relationship to
Jesus, not to the law, that
is decisive.
On the other hand, the Synoptics
recognize that Jesus was not con-
cerned to annul the law; his personal
conservatism in observance of the
law is noteworthy. Even where he, or his disciples do break the
law, this
is justified. This breaking of
the law happens in the interests of the emer-
ging messianic community, or Jesus
is reacting to certain situations in im-
mediate response to the will of God,
there by recognizing the supreme
claims of that will without considering the
effect of his action on the law.
Similarly, Jesus’ inability even against himself, to resist the priority
of hu-
man need, or the claims of the rule of God, governs his action in
Luke.
And many interpret Mark 7 as an
assertion of the priority of the moral over
the ritual.
Jesus had a 2-fold attitude toward
the law: he seemed to annul it,
at least by implication, and at the same time
to affirm it. There are 6 possi-
ble
explanations. 1st, Jesus' attitude toward the law changed during his
ministry. He well understood how natural it was for
them to suspect his
position, and sought to conciliate them. 2nd, the conservatism of Jesus
on the law,
it has been claimed, is the result of Jewish Christian influences
on the
tradition. Matthew 23 has him attack
merely scribal and Pharisaic
abuse of it. And the passage upholding the law in every
iota and dot oc-
curs in two sources of the NT.
3rd, the contradiction under
discussion may be due to the fact that
Jesus attacked, not the law itself, but
the oral tradition. 4th, it may be
that
Jesus makes a distinction between the time before his death & the period
which comes through his death. Only
after his death has sealed the new
covenant, & fully begun the new order,
does the law cease to govern God/
humans relations. This view has been little discussed and is
highly tenta-
tive; but it might explain why Paul connects the death of Christ so
closely
with the end of the law.
5th, the reference to the death of
Jesus may supply us with a clue
that we need.
Jesus went to his death in obedience to God’s will, and thus
fulfilled
the law as the demand of God, as he understood it. We can be
sure that Jesus never annulled the
moral demand of the law as the expres-
sion of the will of God. The concept of “law” as God's demand wouldn't
have repelled Jesus. But it
wasn't in terms of the kingdom of God
freed the call to repentance from mere
moralism and utterly radicalized it.
Jesus’ criticism of the scribal and Pharisaic tradition was that it
assumed
being moral was enough to establish a right relation with God under the
law, whereas to stand under God’s will as love was to know ourselves as
unworthy servants.
6th, Matthew 5 possibly shows
Jesus to be a new Moses proclai-
ming new, radical commandments. The total obedience to God's will,
which
is one of love, could not be reduced to written code in a prescrip-
tive sense. This obedience has to discover its own means
of expression
in any given situation.
Precisely because the law could hide the imme-
diate demands of love and
could lead to external observance without the
true intent, Jesus opposed
scribes and Pharisees. His statements of
the
demand of God are, therefore, to be interpreted, not as a “new law,” but
as pointers to the nature of God’s demand of love.
Paul
and the Law—By the term “law” or
nomos Paul usually
means the law of God as contained in the OT. There is no essential diffe-
rence in Paul
between the Decalogue and the rest of the law.
He uses
“the law and the prophets” for the whole of the OT. The term is also used
without reference to
the OT. Paul never uses the plural
“laws,” probably
because he regards all “law,” in and outside Judaism, as a
unified whole.
In both cases “the law”
is a living demand of God.
As a Pharisee, Paul would have regarded the law as the
perfect ex-
pression of God’s will. But
his conversion compelled him to reassess Ju-
daism and, particularly the
law. It was Paul’s very zeal for the law
of God
that had blinded him to the Son of God and led him to persecute God’s
church—the law had proved a veil to hide Christ. This discovery was
reinforced by the
difference which Paul found between his life under the
law and “in
Christ.” The yoke of the law was
bondage; the service of
Christ was freedom.
L-20
Paul’s analysis and interpretation
of the function of the law is that
it expresses the will of God, and is holy,
just, good, and spiritual. The law
cannot give life, but that doesn't mean that its demands are evil. It is sim-
ply that no one can keep them; no
one can be justified under the law.
First, the law usually confronts us as
prohibition, expressing the
negative aspect of God’s will. The law actually incites to sin. This is not
merely because prohibition
promotes desire, but because, by confronting
humans with God’s demand, it
excites what lies behind all sin—namely,
the rejection of God’s claims, the
refusal to recognize dependence on
God.
Thus, the law, intrinsically good, serves the ends of sin, which is
intrinsically evil. While sin is in
humans before they encounter the law, it
is the latter that brings it to life
by presenting the possibility for transgres-
sion.
Nevertheless, the law condemns
sin. The powerlessness of the law
is due
to its relation to the flesh. More
important, Paul regards the law as
related to the “elemental spirits of the
universe.” Under the influence of
these
powers, the law had itself come to serve an evil purpose. But if so,
has the law any positive role in
history? Yes; but only in a relative and
transitory sense. It came into being as a result of God’s
reaction to human
sinfulness.
God first made a covenant based on a gracious
promise to Abra
ham. The next covenant God
made was based on the law. Thus the law
slipped in between the promise and its fulfillment in Christ. The recogni-
tion of sin as sin, through the
advent of the law, was an advance preparing
the way for Christ. The law was a custodian; it had quickened the
recogni-
tion of the need for deliverance by deepening the sense of sin. It was me-
diated from God indirectly, not
directly, as was the promise to Abraham.
With the coming of Christ the law’s
dispensation is at an end. But it
has
ceased only for those who have died and risen with Christ. The ces-
sation of the law was associated with
the Cross, but the Cross is also the
most complete obedience to God, which is
precisely the demand of the law.
The
demand of the law, in its essence, is not violated by the Christian, be-
cause it
can be gathered up in love. Thus he
allowed Jewish Christians to
observe and did so himself. Certain practical considerations would
incline
Paul to this; any deviation from orthodoxy would inevitably close the
doors
of Judaism against him.
It became clear to Paul early in his
ministry that obedience to the law
of Christ sometimes demanded obedience to
the old law. Rather than un-
derstanding
Christ in terms of the law, scholars see Paul as understanding
the law in
terms of Christ (i.e. Christ is the central focus). Much in Paul’s
understanding of his Lord may
be due to seeing in Christ the attributes
which Judaism sees in the law. His criticism of the law is a consequence of
his faith in Christ, but not its center.
The center of Paul’s beliefs lies, not in
the gospel's relation to law, but in Paul’s awareness that with the coming of
Christ the age to come was
becoming present fact, the proof of which was
the advent of the Spirit.
The
Letter to the Hebrews—The term “law” in this letter refers to
OT law. The plural “laws” occurs only in OT quotations. Hebrews was
concerned with the worship problem,
of access to the Holy God’s presence,
which the priesthood and sacrifices were
designed to achieve. The law
was, on the
one hand, the foundation on which the priesthood and sacrifi-
ces were built,
because it had ordained them. Because
the law was bro-
ken, the priesthood and sacrifices became necessary for
continued life un-
der the law.
First, like the rest of the OT, the law was the valid
word of God.
There is nothing in Hebrews
comparable to the radical dismissal of the
temple, and no suggestion that the
law should not be obeyed. The temple,
the priesthood, the sacrifices, the covenant, all are copies of the real and
foreshadowings of better things to come. Thus the old covenant was im-
perfect. The critical attitude of Hebrews toward the
law is noteworthy. The
dispensation of
the law had been ineffective, because: the OT ordinances
were only outward
arrangement, which could not effectively deal with sin
and guilt; the priests
were themselves mortal and sinful; and the very repe-
titive nature of the
sacrificial system showed its ineffectiveness.
Thus, though Paul and Hebrews aren't concerned with the same as-
pects of the law, they agree in much of their understanding
of it. In He-
brews the law is especially
connected with the priesthood. Christ is
a new
kind of priest, after the order of Melchizedek, which was announced to
Ab-
raham before the Levitical priesthood existed. When the high priesthood
of Christ took the
place of Jerusalem
place of the
law. For both Paul and Hebrews, the
Christian moral system
is a higher order than that of Judaism, but whereas Paul
found in Christ
what Judaism could not give, Hebrews found in Judaism what
pointed for-
ward to Christ.
L-21
The
Letter of James—This letter is concerned with the relation of
faith and
works, and the term “law,” which refers not primarily to the OT
law as such,
with the “perfect law of liberty,” which is a summary descrip-
tion of the
Christian message. The “Word” demands
obedience, but “in
freedom.” The law of
freedom is further defined as the “royal law,” or
Golden Rule.
Each is free to decide what he should, under
the constraint of love
or of Christ; to judge another’s action is to presume
to know the meaning
of that constraint for him, to judge the law of love
itself. James takes seri-
ously the
principle of freedom from specific enactments and in this is like
Paul, as he is
also like Paul in his ethical seriousness.
The possibility is
that he may be attacking certain misunderstandings of
Paul which were
current in his circles.
The
Fourth Gospel—In John’s Gospel, “law” is used in 4 ways: a
specific commandment; the system governing
the administration of justice
among Jews; the first 5 books of the OT; and all
of the OT. Although the
evangelist shows
an intimate knowledge of rabbinic interpretation of the
law, the evangelist
looks at the law from the outside also. Grace and truth
and the quest for eternal life
are to be in Christ, not in the law. Finding
these things in Christ point to the revelation of God’s given in
Christ supe-
rior to that given in the law.
It is this point of view that largely governs the
symbolic forms under
which Christ is presented. Christ is the living water, the true bread in
con-
trast to the obsolete manna (the law), the Light, the Way, the Truth, & the
Life. Christ introduces us to the
world of realities, for the law dealt only
with shadows. The Prologue of John, thus proclaims the
reality of the reve-
lation in Christ as superseding that given in the law.
We have seen the parallelism between
John and Hebrews. The con-
cept of the law
as a shadow is implicit rather than explicit in John. In 1:45
the law has borne witness to Christ. To
deny Christ is to deny the Scrip-
tures.
For the Fourth Gospel, as for Paul, even though it is not concerned
as
was he with the law as a rule for life and commandment, loyalty to Christ
has
replaced obedience to the law as the demand of God.
In conclusion, The NT documents
reveal the same ambiguity in the
evaluation of the law that we found in
Jesus. They find in the law both the
passing shadow of the gospel to come and that which is completed or ful-
filled
“in Christ.” They all affirm that the law,
insofar as it is the expression
of the holy will of God, remains valid,
radicalized, & at the same time rela-
tivized, by the absolute claim of love.
LAWYER (nomikoV (no me kos), interpreter and teacher of the law) One
lear-
ned in the law, specifically in the law of Moses. The Greek term occurs 6
times in Luke,
twice in Titus, once in Matthew, but nowhere else in the New
Testament. In Matthew 22 & Mark 12, the term is
equivalent to “scribes.”
Luke may have
preferred “lawyer to “scribe” as being more familiar to Gen-
tile readers. Except at Luke 10, the word always has a bad
sense, for they
have rejected John the Baptist.
They neglect justice, place unbearable bur-
dens on others, and then
refuse to help them.
LAYING ON OF HANDS.
See Hands, Laying on of.
LAZARUS AND DIVES.
The Latin Vulgate translates
the adjective “rich” by
dives, which
has often incorrectly been taken to be the rich man's name.
The poor man is distinguished by the only
proper name reported in Jesus’
parables.
Lazarus of the parable (Luke 16) and Lazarus of Bethany are 2
different persons.
The parable has two parts: an
earthly scene; and a scene in the after-
world.
Poor ulcerated Lazarus was at the gate of the rich man's palace.
Lazarus longed to eat whatever fell from the
rich man’s table. Even the
street dogs,
unclean animals, licked the helpless beggar.
Death called
both men and reversed their situations. Lazarus had a place of honor nea-
rest Abraham. The rich man was tormented in
flames in the underworld.
In Jewish belief such good and evil
people could see one another,
but their places were separated by a great
chasm. The rich man called to
Father
Abraham to send Lazarus with water to cool his tongue. Abraham
rejected the request, because
justice required his suffering. The rich
man
wanted Lazarus sent to his 5 brethren to warn them. Again Abraham de-
nied his request, because the
brothers had ample teaching from Moses
and the prophets. This parable emphasizes 3 points: warnings to the sel-
fish rich; an eventual
evening-up of fate for rich and poor; and that a mira-
cle like resurrection will
not bring repentance if the teachings of God are
not heeded.
L-22
LAZARUS OF BETHANY
Jesus and was
at the supper in their house 6 days before Passover (John
11, 12). He had been dead for 4 days, whereas the
other recorded rai-
sings had been of persons only recently dead. A more serious objection
is the silence of
the other evangelists on what must have been the most
astounding of Jesus’
miracles. Moreover, while John
attributes the deci-
sion of the high priests and Pharisees to kill Jesus to the
consternation
caused them by this miracle, the other evangelists attribute it
to their an-
ger at Jesus’ in cleansing the temple of the merchants & moneychangers.
Some scholars find an explanation
for the origin of this story in the
parable of Luke 16. It is argued that it originated as an
illustration or rein-
forcement of the lesson of the parable: “if they do not hear Moses and the
prophets,
neither will they be convinced if some one should rise from the
dead.” While the raising of Lazarus is admittedly
the most spectacular of
Jesus’ miracles, it isn't absolutely unique. One theory is that Jesus named
the Lazarus of
the parable for the risen Lazarus as a deliberate irony.
The silence of the other evangelists
on the raising of Lazarus re-
mains to be explained. It could be due either to ignorance on the
part of
Mark’s principal informant, or to deliberate suppression on the part of
Pale-
stinian tradition in view of the threats made on Lazarus’ life. The remark
of the evangelist, “Jesus loved
Martha and her sister and Lazarus may be a
clue to the Beloved Disciple (see article). If Lazarus was this disciple, it
would
explain how Jesus’ saying, “If it is my will that he remain until I come,
what
is that to you?”
LETUSHIM
(לטושים, sharpened) A people descended from Dedan, (Genesis
35). The meaning of the name is
uncertain and the region in which they
lived may have been the Sinai Peninsula .
LEUMMIM
(לאמים, people, nation) A
people reported to be descended from
Dedan (Genesis 25).
LEVI (לוי, a joining to) 1. The ancestor and origin of the Levi
tribe’s name.
He is Jacob’s and Leah’s 3rd
son. Levi’s most ancient reputation is
that of
predatory and merciless adversary.
He cruelly avenges his sister Dinah on
Shechem for having assaulted
her. It is Levi’s sons who at Moses’
urging
slaughter 3,000 apostate Hebrews in the wilderness and thus ordain
them-
selves for Yahweh’s service. Levi’s
3 original sons were Gershon, Kohath,
and Merari. (For more on this tribe’s role in Israel
Levites article).
2. An ancestor
of Jesus Christ; son of Melchi, and father of Matthat
(Luke 3).
3. An ancestor
of Jesus Christ; son of Simeon, and father of Matthat
(Luke 3).
4. A local tax collector in Capernaum
Jesus; Jesus was also a
guest in his house.
The name Levi
appears in none of the list of apostles and cannot with any
certainty be
identified with the Matthew who is among the Twelve.
LEVIATHAN (לויתן, sea-monster, mythical serpent) One of the names of the
primeval
dragons subdued by Yahweh at creation’s dawn. Leviathan is
represented as destined to break his bonds at the present era's end, only
to suffer a second defeat (Psalm 74; Isaiah 27). There are similar stories
in Canaanite myths.
LEVIRATE LAW. The legal provision that if brothers live together and
one of
them dies leaving no son, the other brother shall marry the widow. See
Marriage.
LEVITICAL CITIES.
According to Joshua 21 and I
Chronicles 6, 48 cities are to
be set apart in Palestine
Aaron are to receive 13 of these
cities for their exclusive use. The 6 cities
of refuge for accidental killings are included in the Levitical
cities.
Priestly Family City Tribal Region Geographical Region
Aaron Hebron Holon Judah Central Palestine
Aaron Juttah,
Bethshemesh
Aaron LibnahJudah Central Palestine
Aaron Libnah
Aaron Jattir Judah Southern Palestine
Aaron Debir,
Ain Judah
Aaron Gibeon ,
Geba, Benjamin Central Palestine
Anathoth, Almon
L-23
Priestly Family City Tribal Region Geographical Region
Kohathite Shechem Ephraim N. Central Palestine
(not Aaron)
KohathiteGezer Central Palestine
Kohathite
(not Aaron)
Kohathite Kibzaim, Ephraim Central Palestine
Kohathite Kibzaim, Ephraim Central Palestine
(not Aaron) Beth-horon
Kohathite Elteke, Gibbethon, DanCentral Palestine
Kohathite Elteke, Gibbethon, Dan
(not Aaron) Gath-rimmon
Kohathite Aijalon DanCentral Palestine
Kohathite Aijalon Dan
(not Aaron)
Kohathite Taanach, Manasseh Central Palestine
Kohathite Taanach, Manasseh Central Palestine
(not Aaron) Gath-rimmon
Gershonite Golon,
Beeshterah Manasseh Northern Palestine
(Beth-ashtoreth) (E. of Jordan River )
Gershonite Kishion,
Daberath Issachar Northern Palestine
Gershonite Jarmuth,
En-gannim Issachar Northern
Palestine
Gershonite Mishal, Abdon, Asher NE Palestine
Helkath, Rehob
Gershonite Kedesh, Naphtali Northern Palestine
Gershonite Kedesh, Naphtali Northern Palestine
Hammoth-dor, Kartan
Merarite Jokneam,
Kartah, Zebulun Northern Palestine
Dimnah, Nahalal
Merarite Bezer, Jahzah, ReubenCentral Palestine
Merarite Bezer, Jahzah, Reuben
Kedemoth, Mephaath (E of Dead Sea )
Merarite Ramoth,
Mahanaim, Gad N. Central Palestine
Heshbon, Jazer (East of Jordan
Other passages presuppose a different situation. According to Num-
bers 18, 26, and Deuteronomy
10, the priests are to have no inheritance.
Accordingly the priests are classed with other needy members of Israel
deserving of charity. This contradiction has led many scholars to
reject the
regulations about Levitical cities as unhistorical. These writers explained
Levitical cities as
the adoption of Canaan's ancient holy cities into Israel
religious system.
The Levitical cities are seen as part of the doctrine that
all property
belongs to God.
There has been an increasing tendency to recognize that
the priestly
editors were editors of material of varying dates. Various scholars attribute
both the cities of
refuge and the Levitical cities to the time of David. Many
of the cities didn't belong to Israel
cities were
lost to Israel Northern
Kingdom ) after the monarchy's division.
David’s plan may only
have existed on paper, but the laws prohibiting Levi-
tical inheritance cited
above suggest that a beginning was made with the
plan, but that the possession
of Levitical property was abused, & so gave
rise to the prohibitions of priestly
inheritance. The Davidic origin of the
plan is preferable to the post-exilic dating of the list.
LEVITICUS (ויקרא (vay ek aw
raw) and he called) The 3rd book of the Bible,
dealing mainly
with the Levitical priests. The present
name comes from
the Primary Greek Old Testament (OT); the book’s Hebrew title
is its
first Hebrew word, vayeqara’,
“And he called.” There are 4 legislative
narratives in the book: Aaron’s
priesthood; Nadab’s and Abihu’s punish-
ment; Eleazar and Ithamar’s ritual error;
the stoning of a blasphemer.
Sources—Perhaps the least difficult of all the tasks of
finding the
sources for the first five books of the OT has been the
identification & iso-
lation of the material now commonly ascribed to the
Priestly document.
Law is the domain of
the priest, and the priestly origin and character of
parts of Exodus and
Numbers and all Leviticus are clearly recognized.
The book contains a number of smaller units
of law dealing mainly
with cultic matters.
These smaller units of law may be detected by means
of their introductory
formulas. The end of such groups of laws
or indivi-
dual laws is also indicated by a closing formula. Both introductory and
closing formulas are
the work of an editor or compiler who was classifying
and ordering his
material. Besides these group of laws
intended for the
priests for use in their ministry to the people, there were
other laws and
groups of laws which were intended directly as manuals or
“agendas” for
the laity.
L-24
The next stage in the development of law was clearly the
combina-
tion of laws of like character or similar theme into larger units or
collec-
tions of laws. It is the recovery of these intermediate collections of
laws
which offers the greatest opportunity for understanding the process of
wri-
ting Leviticus. Though chapters 1-3
are thus said to be separate, they may
be very old, whereas chapter 4 belongs
to a late strand of Priestly writing.
The arguments which prompt such division may be countered
by
other considerations and this suggests that precise grouping of these laws
into intermediary sections is unwise. It
is best to regard these intermediary
sections as missing links in the growth
of the major law codes as they exist
in the OT.
The analysis of Leviticus’ contents will show the presence of
several
bodies of law, including that code which is usually called the Holi-
ness
Law. The dating of such laws is very
difficult. Many of the laws go
back to
very old times. A stream of law came
from the Mosaic side, and
another stream was taken from Canaanite sources. The Day of Atonement
in Leviticus 16 would
stand largely at the end of the Priestly Writer’s laws.
Contents—The
contents of the book may be summarized as follows:
Chapters 1-6
(Sacrificial worship): The law of the burnt offering
(1); The meal or cereal offering law (2); The law of the peace of-
fering (3); The law of the
sin offering (4-6).
Chapters
6-7 (Offering Laws): burnt, cereal,
priestly, and sin offe-
rings (6); trespass and peace offering; the prohibition
to eat fat or
blood (7).
Chapters 8-9 (Aaron’s Ordination and Sacrifices):
Chapter
10 (Legislative Narratives): Nadab
and Abihu; prohibi-
tions; Eleazar and Ithamar.
Chapters
11-15 (Laws of Purification): clean
and unclean animals;
childbirth; leprosy; bodily excretions and discharges.
Chapter
16 (Day of Atonement)
Chapters
17-26 (Law of Holiness): Sacrifice,
no eating blood with
meat (17); Sexual laws (18); Moral / ceremonial laws (19);
Miscel-
laneous laws (20); Priesthood / sacrifice (21-22); Sacred calendar
(23);
Miscellaneous laws (24); Sabbatical year / Year of Jubilee
(25); Conclusion
(26); Vows and tithes.
Chapter
27 (Vows and tithes)
It should be noted that
the regulations in 1-7 correspond to the di-
rections in Exodus 29. The author of Exodus 25-29 knows of no altar of
incense or of its ritual. Of the
manuals in Leviticus 1-7 it may be said
that the first deals with the
sacrificial method and materials, whereas the
second also deals with a great
variety of more incidental detail. Chap-
ters 12 and 15 probably belong together. There has been a long investi-
gation of
Chapter 16’s place in the Priestly code.
The different topics
within the chapter must be accepted as evidence of
a long development,
but there are no agreed criteria for the analysis of their
development.
Some passages in the Law
of Holiness (H) are paralleled else-
where in the Priestly Writings; but when
these are subtracted, what re-
mains is unlike the Priestly Writings. The analysis reveals that the code
contains a
lot of material encouraging obedience and so is more closely
akin to Deuteronomy. The biblical scholar Von Rad is justified in
his
claim that the H contains sermonic instruction for the community. The
connections of H with Ezekiel shows that
H and Ezekiel are roughly con-
temporary and possibly that H originated among the
exiles in Babylon
rather than in Jerusalem
Character of the Book—The character and function of Leviticus
is summed up
in the idea of Heilsgesetz or “sacred
and saving law.” It not
only records and is the revelation of a divine order of
society but also seeks
to establish such a society in the commonwealth of Israel
emphasizes are worship and
sacrifice. As revelation is the
approach of
God to his people, so worship and sacrifice are the approach of Israel
God.
Sacrifice is one of the bonds of Israel
Through the various offerings,
the Israelites according to their need
and condition came near to their
God. Yet their approach is not of their
making, for they come to fulfill divinely revealed requirements. There are
two principles which throw further
light on the meaning of this sacrificial
system. The altar is essentially the place of
slaughter, and there the blood
of slain sacrifices is made over to God. The blood is the life, and sacrifice
is
surrendered life, and so involves surrendered time, surrendered property,
and
surrendered self. God gives this shed
blood upon the altar to make
atonement. God chooses to provide and to regard such blood as the
and the
method of Israel
L-25
hereditary
priesthood. The priest is the permanent
religious official in an-
cient Israel
is supposed to be
the means for passing on God’s revelations to the peo-
ple, but he tended to
neglect his teaching functions and to concentrate
more on his sacrificial
duties and function. The priest offered
a 3-fold
sacrifice upon ordination. There was first the sin offering, which was a
sign of the forgiveness of
sins; second, the whole burnt offering declared
the totality of his
consecration; and third, the ram of ordination, an elabo-
rate peace offering,
expressed the fellowship of God and Israel
diating priesthood.
It is remarkable that following upon
Aaron’s consecration and his
first ministry is the story of the first priestly
transgression and the punish-
ment that resulted. The priestly fault so soon after ordination must be
seen in the light of
similar stories, such as the Garden of Eden, Noah’s
release from the ark, and
the Ten Commandments at Sinai. Even
priests
can go wrong, and they can go wrong in the very aftermath of ordination.
The story then, is designed to warn and thus
to save the ministry in Israel
The laws of purification (Chapter 11-15) are very
unattractive and
in part decidedly repulsive.
However meaningless and irrelevant, these
laws meant for the Israelite
the fulfillment of a divinely appointed way of
life. In Leviticus 16 is the order of service for
the annual service of atone-
ment. First,
there are various minor ideas which must be noted. Aaron,
here representative of all high priests
to come, must wash and dress in his
linen garments, coat, breeches, girdle, and
turban. At the conclusion of
the
ceremonies, he switches back to the beautiful and holy garments of
his office:
breast-piece, ephod, robe, checker, coat, turban and girdle.
The ideas, then, which the Day represents are those of
affliction,
purity, propitiation, substitution and transference, of guilt, and
death as
the due reward for sin. The Day
seeks to achieve the spiritual health and
wholeness, the blessedness of all the
community in all its parts for the
succeeding year. The Day of Atonement became the supreme
Jewish fes-
tival, but there is no evidence for its observance in pre-exilic
days, even
though there must be a prehistory to the Day. The obvious solution is, of
course, the Day
was in some way connected with a possible New Year
Festival.
In the Code of Holiness (Chapters 17-26) there are all
the usual
features of a ceremonial and moral law code and the theological ideas
appropriate thereto. A prominent feature
of the Code is the appearance of
the divine first-person statements (e.g. “I am
Yahweh, your God”) which
testify to the theocentric art of the Levitical
preacher. The Code of Holi-
ness does not
close without bearing witness to that most characteristic fea-
ture of Israel
. . . And I
will walk among you.”
Leviticus and the
Scriptures—In order to view Leviticus in the
context of worship, it must be
studied side by side with the Psalms.
Such
comparative study dispels the notion that the rituals were
conducted in
silence. By such means
Leviticus takes its place among both the codes of
law and the manuals of
worship in the OT. Leviticus describes
the perfor-
mance of much ritual action.
Ritual is thus expressive of religion and the revealed word, just as
morality often is the fruit of religion.
It is also necessary to read Leviticus
side by side with certain
passages from the New Testament, most notably
the Letter to the Hebrews. The tabernacle is the shadow of the temple-
hood
of Christ and of the Christian believer.
By his choice of Leviticus
cus once for
all.
LIBATION. See Sacrifice and Offerings.
LIBERTINES. See Freedmen.
LIBERTY
(דרור (deh rore); חפשה (khuh peh shaw), freedom; eleuqeria
(el yoo ther ee ah), freedom)
Primarily, the
state of those who aren't slaves; secondarily, the qua-
lity of personal and
social life, here and hereafter, which is the given pos-
session of those whom
Christ has set free from human bondage. Liberty
in the Old Testament is almost always the condition of
those free from
slavery. Jesus took the
metaphor to its final stage when, preaching at Na-
L-26
Humans,
fallen creatures in a fallen world, are in bondage to sin.
Humans are in bondage to the law, whether he
knows it as divine revela-
tion, as the work of conscience, or as positive human
law; for while law
was intended to enable humans to achieve righteousness as a
basis of
community between humans and God, it proves incapable of freeing
hu-
mans from sin. What the law couldn't
achieve because of human nature,
God has done in a human nature. God’s son became man, yet in remai-
ning
sinless, “condemned sin in the flesh.”
Such an achievement is the proclamation of liberty to
those cap-
tives of sin. They are free
from bondage to law because their life is no
longer a vain attempt to keep
perfect obedience to ordinances, but an ac-
ceptance of the given guidance of the
Spirit. But Christian liberty is not
simply freedom from, or as Paul wrote, “You were called to freedom,
brethren;
only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh
(Romans 6).” Transition to the life of liberty is made at
baptism where
the believer is crucified with Christ and raised to new life in
him. The
transition is made in time, but
the end is in eternity, and what the full
liberty of the sons of God is like
passes our poor imagination.
LIBNAH (לבנה, whiteness)
1. An Israelite wilderness
camp. The site is un-
known; perhaps the
same as Laban.
2. An
important town in the Shephelah probably on the border be-
tween Judah Philistia in the district of Eleutheropolis. The important
tell within this district is
Tell es-Safi Valley of Elah's western end.
French
name. Excavations at Tell es-Safi have
uncovered pottery, from
pre-Israelite times to the period of the Seleucids;
several of them were im-
printed with Hebrew royal stamps.
The absence of significant signs of the Greek
and Roman settle-
ment of Lobna may be due to the fact that only a small portion
of the tell
was available for excavation.
The chief objection to identifying Libnah
with Tell es-Safi is that it
places this town farther north than any of the
others in the same province. Some have sought location of Libnah in the
more southerly Tell Bornat.
Libnah first appears in the
Old Testament as one of the Palestinian
cities captured by Joshua. Libnah seems to have served the southern
kingdom as a fortified border station, and appears to have been under
forts on Judah
name Libnah is found in the
Judahite province list of Joshua 15.
LIBNI (לבני, white) 1. A family of levite priests of the town
Libna; one of 4
or 5 families of Levite priests located around Hebron
2. In Priestly Writing, and Chronicles, Gershon’s eldest son and the origin
of the name of the Libnites. 3. A
name in a list of Levites descended
from Merari (I Chronicles 6).
ay))
A large territory in North
Africa , bordered by Egypt Sudan
the east, by Tunisia Algeria
less specific application throughout most of
biblical and classical antiquity.
For
our knowledge of Libyan history before the classical period we
are dependent
almost entirely on Egyptian sources. From the end of the
southwest by a light-skinned, blond
blue-eyed people identified by the
Egyptians as the Temehu. That Egypt was not able to subdue completely
these tribes, which constantly threatened her western border, is evidenced
by
the fact that around 950 B.C. the Libyan prince Shishak mounted the
royal
throne of Egypt as pharaoh and ushered in the 22nd or Libyan Dy-
nasty. In the process, he ended the 21st
Dynasty with the reign of the
weak, quasi-priestly rule of his predecessor,
Psusennes II.
Shishak adopted a policy of aggression; he
invaded Palestine
attempt to restore Egyptian dominion there. From the list at Karnak of
Palestinian towns
and cities taken by Shishak, it is clear that the Egyptian
ruler conquered not
only Judah Israel
he began ruled from the Delta city of Bubastis
years. It was followed by 3 dynasties in quick
succession.
LICE. See Gnat; Animals
LICENTIOUSNESS
(aselgeia (as el gie ah), lasciviousness) Debauchery; sensual or
sexual excesses. Sexual excess is
especially referred to in Paul’s use of the word (Romans 13; II Corinthians 12;
Galatians 5).
LIDEBIR (לדבר) The first Hebrew letter may have been repeated in
error from the preceding word, so Debir may be the town name in the original
text. It may also correspond to Lodebar,
a place in Gilead .
L-27
LIFE (נפש (neh fesh), soul as the
principle of life; zwh
(zo eh), health; bioV
by os), conduct of life; yuch (psy keh),
breath, soul) The biblical religion
represents a common
concept of life which differs conspicuously from all
non-biblical views. Over against the naturalistic-monistic view,
which in-
terprets all the manifestations of man’s life as rooted in physiology,
physi-
cal, and mental life, the Bible teaches the oneness of a person’s life,
yet
differentiates its functions according to the goals served. The biblical view
is beyond both individualism
and collectivism. While Israel, like
other na-
tions, is regarded as a collective agent, its true life depends on the
sponta-
neous and responsible participation of its individual members.
The
idealistic view, according to which the value of life depends on
what an
individual or a group makes of its faculties, is rejected in favor of
the
belief that life’s meaning depends primarily on the purpose God has in
mind for
it. No one is passive or the slave of
deities. Rather, the Bible
emphasizes
that one is free to make of one’s life what one pleases.
The Old Testament (OT) View—“Life” in
the OT designates the
sum total of spontaneous activities and experiences of an
individual or
group capable of preserving its identity. The nephesh
is lost in death, and
what remains of the body disintegrates. “Life” designates the concrete ex-
istence of someone. Nephesh
indicates that each life is a distinct indivi-
dual urge, not just the
individuation of a species. Life is
described as co-
existence with other individuals in co-operation and mutual
dependence,
yet not equality. Superior power and authority, on the one hand,
and sub-
jection, on the other, are essential features of human life.
Life is experienced as something that essentially
transcends purely
material existence. God’s very nature is life, and thus God is able to im-
part it to the
creatures. This does not mean, however,
that with the gift of
life creatures partake of the divine nature, but rather
that by God’s grace
they are enabled to communicate with their Creator. Life is entirely, both
in its origin and in
its manifestations, in God’s hand.
Accordingly, idols,
with whom God has nothing in common, are
“dead.” The procreative abi-
lity is not
to be regarded as a matter of course; rather it is a divine blessing.
Consequently, individual features and special
abilities do not originate in
heredity or physiological particularities, but
rather are rooted in the divine
Spirit’s creativity.
The individual’s life is God’s property. Hence the individual has no
right to destroy
his own life or wantonly to kill other life. The death penal-
ty for certain crimes is therefore an indication of the
degree to which God
abhors them, and the wholesale destruction of sinful
humankind by the
Flood was a sign of its complete corruption. The value of life can be seen
in God’s care
for the preservation of the animal realm. Life is valued as
the supreme earthly good, surpassed only by God’s
grace or mercy.
Life’s seat is the lab
(heart), so life has to do with choices, desires,
willing, and doing
things. Having received one’s life from
God, however,
one is not free in the choice of one’s goals and actions; humans
are de-
stined to live for God. The Mount
Sinai legislation was not a tyrannical act
of Yahweh, but rather the way in
which God made the Israelites aware of
their ultimate role as human
beings. The true nature of life
consists in do-
ing God’s will. Thus the
divine gift of life and human responsibility are cor-
relative terms in the
OT.
The outright positive evaluation of life in the OT seems
at first sight
strange, since the ancient Hebrews took a very sober, realistic
view of life,
and also considered the hardships of it, as well as pain and
mortality, the
result of God’s curse pronounced over sinners. Some scholars deny that
in Genesis 3 death is
interpreted in this way. The truth is
that humans, like
all the other earthly creatures, are described as having
their life from God.
Being able to do God's will, they had the opportunity to acquire unending
life.
The curse of death has not deprived life completely of
its value. To
those who keep God’s
commandments, long life and happiness are pro-
mised. While humans are tripped up by life, God is
humankind’s refuge
from danger. Death,
which is the result of old age, is accepted without sen-
timentality as the end
willed by God.
The idea of an afterlife
was originally unknown in ancient Israel.
People were interested only in the continuation of the nation. Originally it
is often emphasized that the
dead are cut off from the cultic community.
When Sheol is used, it often refers not to the afterlife, but is a
metaphor for
the affliction in which the individual finds himself, and the
return from
Sheol means deliverance from the present ills.
When in the 500s B.C. the idea of human
responsibility and of the
divine curse were coupled with that of personal life,
the outcome was a dif-
ferentiation between true life and actual life. Only life in obedience to
God’s law deserves
to be called life. Thus the life of
obedience carries with
it full satisfaction.
See also The entry in the OT Apocrypha / Influences Outside the Bible
See also The entry in the OT Apocrypha / Influences Outside the Bible
section of the
Appendix.
L-28
The
Overall New Testament (NT) View—In
the English Bible the
picture is affected by the fact that all 3 of the
Greek words listed at the be-
ginning of this article are translated “life.” Psyche
is the one which corre-
sponds to the Hebrew word nephesh. The NT differs from
the OT in that
Jesus has brought the true life to light; “natural” life is
considered as the
perversion of the divine gift. The responsibility for this condition rests,
in
the first place, with the individual. It is on account of the Fall and our
sins
that death reigns in the world.
Unlike the Greek mystery religion, the NT does not consider morta-
lity
the worst of evils, rather sin. The NT
proclaims that only by a divine
act of redemption embracing the whole human
race can true life in the indi-
vidual be set free. Life is not only mutual dependence and
co-existence,
but is also destined to be lived for mutual help. In living this life of love,
Jesus didn't
simply comply with a moral commandment.
Since he had this
life in himself—he was thereby able effectively to transform
the life of hu-
mankind.
Through Jesus’ redemptive life, the perverted life of people
can be
renewed and regenerated. This
change is not merely one of conduct to be
hoped for, but rather a present
experience. By the work of Christ humans
are freed from the inhibitions which had made it impossible for them to
practice love in an unrestricted fashion.
Thus the true life is still a person’s
daily life, but he is no longer
restlessly seeking to find his satisfaction there-
in, but rests in God or
Christ.
This new or true life is not the
result of human effort. In Christ this
gift of true life is offered to the whole of humankind, but it is not
distributed
mechanically or to just anyone.
Someone is worthy when they believe in
Jesus. A believer doesn't only look at Jesus’ life
as the highest type of life,
but also is eager to follow him in order to be
transformed into the likeness
of his life.
The new life is still lived in this body
and requires food and care.
The
sustenance of the body is not enough to keep the new life alive. It is
the service of God, which furnishes the
food that sustains and strengthens
the new life. Someone who feeds on it can be sure that God
will take care
of their physical life, too.
Life thus understood is therefore quite the oppo-
site of modern
subjectivism and existentialism. Rather
than being “simple
openness to God,” it is a voluntary subjection of one’s
existence to God’s
plans. Yet far from
being mere passivity, such commitment implies sponta-
neity; otherwise it could
not reach its climax in love.
Thus
the new life is the individual’s personal life, or the life of his “spi-
rit,”
& its newness is due to his willingness to accept the love Christ shows
for
him. This offer of Christ’s love is the
NT coupled with the Holy Spirit.
This is
the same Spirit who according to the OT conveys life; but by the
death and
resurrection of Jesus, life has reached a new level. Just as by
receptivity Christ’s life is
enabled to engender the new life in us, so in turn
our new life is capable of
bearing fruit.
For NT writers, the growth of the new
life is a growing awareness of
the value and significance of the gift of
Christ. The new life is compatible
with
sins and spiritual weakness. The sins of
the believer differ essentially,
nevertheless, from the unbeliever’s
sinfulness. Despite their sins the
disci-
ples of Jesus continue to cooperate with him in his work of transforming
this world. No matter how great the
outward changes may be which they
bring about, such actions do not alter the
nature of this universe.
The new life is an indestructible
one. However, this life is con-
stantly
threatened by 3 enemies—the devil, the law, and death. While no
earthly power is capable of annihilating
the new life, the latter is not pre-
served automatically. The devil is anxious to destroy it. The new life is
endangered by the law. The service of God as the Pharisees
interpreted it
meant that by one’s own moral effort one provides life for one’s
self. Yet
believing so, one denies the
given-ness of the new life. Those who
have
tasted the new life realize that it must be unending, if it is to be more
than
an imagination.
The answer to the human quest for life-everlasting
is the NT belief
in personal resurrection.
The Christian resurrection is not as in Judaism, a
compensation for the
miseries of life, but rather the continuation of a true
life which the
disciples of Jesus enjoy already. There
is no contradiction
between the new life being a present possession and a future
good at the
same time. As a result, all
the obstacles which presently beset the mani-
festation of the true life will
then be removed. The resurrection is
coupled
with the Final Judgment, in which it will appear whether or not those
who
thought they had new life had actually attained it.
John’s
View—John’s message is rooted in the
OT idea that God is
life. The people who
by faith had identified themselves with him would
share in his life. John is particularly anxious to stress the
presence of the
new life, and thus our ability to do God’s commandments. Jesus’ existence
is an everlasting one
because it is not lived in self-chosen freedom but ra-
ther in God’s
service. It is only in Jesus’ life that
God’s purpose is fully
disclosed. Though
the new life appears only occasionally in the believer,
it is a seed which will
grow into a full plant. Having the Son’s
power in
themselves, believers are then capable of influencing the course of
this
world. However, the resurrection is
definitely regarded as a future event by
John.
L-29
The undeserved divine gift of Christ’s coming
shows that the new
life is not destined to be for a few people only. Knowledge of the true life
does not so much
depend on written information as on belief in Jesus.
Against this background John states very
powerfully that what is com-
monly called life is but frustration and, in the
last analysis, death. John
also
emphasizes the faithfulness of Christ, who will keep his followers
alive.
Paul’s
View—Paul’s teaching on life
resembles in many respects
that of John, yet is couched in a different
language. Paul starts from the
prerequisite that true life is righteousness—i.e. agreement with God’s
will.
Other people may share in it by
believing in that gracious act of God.
The
common life of humans is worthless and futile, whereas the life in
Christ
is a priceless good. The fleshly
life is not understood in a Greek sense as
designating the passions and desires
of the body, but rather it is human life
as adjusted to the demands which the
earthly conditions make upon him.
True
life is lived in Christ. Paul holds that
it is the heavenly life of the
risen Christ which gives the believer a new
brilliance and vitality in their
life.
This change implies closest personal
contact of Jesus' disciples with
their risen head. Significantly, “Lord” is the principal title
given by Paul to
Jesus. Baptism brings
the brilliance and vitality to believers, and puts them
under obligation to
live in the historical movement initiated by Jesus and to
serve it. Since the life of the risen Lord in
interpreted as the conquest of
the universe for God, the new life of the
believer has both present and also
futuristic features. The believers are destined to share in Christ's glory, but
that glorious life is still “hid with Christ.” On account of the saving acti-
vity of the
risen Christ, Paul notices how the believer’s body of sin is gradu-
ally made
subservient to the Lord’s redemptive goal.
Paul usually describes the manifestation
of the life of the risen Lord
as the work of the Holy Spirit. Whereas the Spirit’s power shows itself in
general in the lives of all the mortal creatures in Christ, it is realized in
a
way which is in accordance with the Spirit’s own unlimited duration, as a
never-ending life. Over against mortal
Adam the “person in Christ” is a new
creation, which bears fruits of new
life. The person’s life is therefore one
of
living for Christ; the believer is enabled to know God and to realize that
earthly goods yield no real satisfaction. This Spirit's effective operation is
in turn taken by Paul as a
guarantee that the believer has been made new.
The work of the Spirit is a sign that Christ’s love surrounds & protects us.
LIFE,
BOOK OF (To Biblion thV zwhV (toe bib lee
on zoe ase)) A hea-
venly book in which
the names of the righteous are inscribed.
There is a
corresponding book of destruction for the wicked. They could be changed
through apostasy or
repentance. There are also books of
destiny which
predicted future events. These
deterministic heavenly books remind one
of the Babylonian concept that the
zodiac with its constellations was a hea-
venly tablet controlling the destinies
of humankind. Heavenly books in
which the deeds of men are recorded after they have occurred are obvious-
ly somewhat different.
LIGHT,
LIGHT AND DARKNESS (אור (ore), light, cheer; חשך (kho shek),
darkness, calamity,
misery; אפל (oh fel), thick darkness,
misfortune;
ערפל (eh raw pel), darkness, thick clouds; fwV (fose), light, radiance,
blaze of light; skotoV (sko tos), darkness, gloom)
For
the ancient Hebrews, light is one of this world's primal pheno-
mena. Created prior to and independent of the sun,
moon, and stars, light
is the most general and most adequate display of divine
operation. The an-
cient Hebrews did not
differentiate between natural and supranatural light.
The phenomenon of dawn prior to sunrise was
to them evidence that God
pursued a special goal in creating this world.
This view implies that light is a substance
or an energy which brings
about certain effects. It is only in exilic times that we have clear
evidence
that light and the sun are seen in a causal connection. Though light and
darkness are opposites, the
latter is as real as the former.
Darkness is not
merely the absence of light. The religious interest the Bible takes in
light
concerns the benefits which it imparts, rather than its nature.
Light’s
effects are many; it is above all, the source of life. More ge-
nerally, light in the Old Testament (OT)
designates “salvation” or rescue
from danger.
Light brings order to the world; the dawn appears regularly,
so light’s
coming is the prototype of order. Order
must manifest itself as
underlying all Creation if people are to walk
accordingly. Light and truth
are thus
coupled in Ps. 43; light symbolizes God’s law in Ps. 19.
L-30
As
a result of the reciprocal relationship between light and humans,
the recipients
of light becomes a light themselves. The
peculiar character
of the OT view lies in the fact that the wholesome effects
of light are con-
tingent on righteousness.
The “light of God’s face” shines upon his peo-
ple. This personalization of the work of light
explains the hope that even-
tually darkness and light will give way to an
eternal day.
Strictly
parallel with the view of “light” runs that of “darkness,” or
“night.” Being originally related to chaos, darkness
shows itself as bad
luck. Since light is
the manifestation of God’s nature, darkness also desig-
nates ignorance of God’s
saving and demanding will. By its
superior
power, light is enabled to disclose the true nature of darkness.
New
Testament (NT) usage follows, on the whole, that of the OT.
Unlike Greek mysticism, there is no divine
spark residing in human nature.
Whatever
light a person has comes from God. As
the “Father of lights,”
God is the fountain of all good gifts. The term “light” is particularly used
to
designate the fact that it is through a divine revelation that people have
been
aware of Christ’s redemptive work. Conversion is described as illu-
mination; for practical guidance the
life of faith relies on the heavenly light.
More
frequently than the OT, the NT emphasizes that the believers,
or the whole
people of God are “sons of Light.” They were
cleansed and
transformed by the heavenly light’s power so that they are the
“light of the
world.” Whereas the OT
lays the emphasis upon the value it has for peo-
ple, the NT stresses that the
gift may be lost because of inactivity or indiffe-
rence. Christ’s coming announced the New Age’s dawn,
where the light is
permanently present in Christ, as opposed to the alternating
of light and
darkness in the Present Age.
As
a result of this Christocentric and personalized view of light, dark-
ness
appears in 2 different ways. It may be
the natural condition of some-
one who has not yet been “enlightened,” or it may
be the result of one’s tur-
ning away from the light. By their self-inflicted darkness people are
ren-
dered spiritually blind. The
designation “outer” and “extreme” darkness,
used for the state of the doomed in
the New Age, indicates that darkness,
though it is not destined ever to vanish
from this world, yet will be perma-
nently curbed.
John’s
rather elaborate theology probably reflects his Jewish-Greek
background. He emphasizes that God “is light,” i.e. the
source or creator
of light. Though the
operation of the eternal Logos implies the shedding of
light, full salvation
can only be found where God is present as the Incar-
nate One. In turn, since the coming of the light shows
God’s love, true life
in the light consists in keeping Jesus’ commandments.
LIGHTNING
AND THUNDER (ברק (baw rawk), glitter of a sword; רעם (rah
‘am), tumult, rage; קול (kole), voice; astraph (as trah pay), bright,
shining; bronth (bron tay)) A
familiar but awe-inspiring and dangerous
natural phenomenon, often interpreted
in the Bible as a visible manifesta-
tion of divine power.
Electrical storms occur in Palestine and the adjacent deserts, especi-
ally in the spring and autumn months. A cumulo-nimbus or thunder cloud
is, in effect, an atmospheric explosion in slow motion. Strong electrical
charges are built up by
friction of raindrops, carried by the violent updrafts
of warm air and down
drafts of cold air. Objects which are
struck are shat-
tered or set on fire, unless they are good conductors of
electricity. Thunder
is the noise of air
exploding in the intense heat of the lightning’s path.
Deuteronomy 32; Job 36; Psalm 29, 144;
Ezekiel 21; Nahum 2; Ha-
bakkuk 3; Matthew 24; and Luke 10 all show that
lightning has left a vivid
impression on biblical writers. The awful majesty and power of the thunder-
storms suggest God's appearance (Exodus 19; Psalm 18; Habakkuk 3);
it
is the instrument of his power (Psalm 104), especially in the chastisement
of his enemies (Deuteronomy 32; Revelation 16).
LIGNALOES
(אהלים (ah haw leem), perfumed, aloe wood)) King James Ver-
sion translation of Hebrew word.
LIGURE
(לשם (law shawm), precious stone; Revised Standard Version uses
“jacinth”) King James Version
translation of Hebrew word.
LIKHI
(לקחי, captivating) A Manassite.
The name may be from an error in
copying the text. Helek appears in the related lists of Numbers
26 and
Joshua 17.
LILITH (לילית, King James Version uses
“screech owl”; Revised Standard
Version uses “night hag”) A female demon who was
believed to haunt de-
solate places. She
is identified in a Canaanite charm, and in post-biblical
Jewish literature,
with the child-stealing witch Lilith of world-wide folklore.
L-31
LILY
(שושן (shu shawn); krinon (kree non)) A
particular flower, or perhaps
any showy flower with the general appearance of
the lily. There is little
agreement
concerning the original meaning of the above Hebrew word; it
may have referred
to the Egyptian lotus water lily. Although the lotus
may have once grown along the Jordan River, there is
no evidence of it in
the Holy Land today.
The form of the capitals of the pillars of Jachin and
Boaz and the rim
of the “molten sea” in Solomon’s temple may have been
inspired by the lotus.
The
“lily of the valleys” in the Song of Solomon isn’t the flower
which we normally
think of today, but would indicate a general reference
to springtime
flowers. In a figure of Israel’s restoration
(Hosea 14), “…
shall blossom as the lily” implies beauty and abundance. “Consider the
lilies of the field” is the most widely discussed allusion to the
lily. The
Greek krinon is more
specific, usually referring to the white Madonna lily.
The white lily has played an important
part in Christian symbolism
through the centuries. Although many scholars think that Jesus intended
specific flowers, the tendency today is to consider it a reference to the
many
prominent flowers so well known to Jesus’ listeners: brilliant red
anemones;
ranunculi (buttercups); and poppies. Their
similarity, abun-
dance, delicate structure, and brilliance, appearing over such
a long period
of each year, would argue in favor of their having been in Jesus' mind as
he spoke. Although
yellow flowers seem to dominate the Galilean hill-
sides today, the scarlet
flowers make a vivid impression. Susa,
the winter
residence of Persian kings, received its name from the lily.
LILY-WORK
(מעשה שושן (mah eh seh shu shawn)) Decoration
on the bowl-
shaped capitals of the columns, Jachin and Boaz, at the vestibule
of Solo-
mon’s temple. The lily motif was
most likely suggested by the resem-
blance of the bowl-like capital to the
flower. The first of 2 incense altars
from Megiddo have stylized petals or leaves around the rim of the bowl;
the
other bowl is decorated with lotus buds and open flowers.
LIME
(שיד (seed)) A caustic
potash or alkali powder used as soap and made
by baking out the impurities in
limestone, shells, etc. Palestine
limestone
is a carbonate of lime, which, when heated, becomes quicklime, a
mortar
ingredient. Lime was used in
plastering walls, floors, cisterns by burning
crushed limestone in kilns.
LINEN
(פשת (pish teh), flax, cotton; בד (bad); בוץ (boots), white, shining;
ש ש (shaysh), white,
Egyptian linen; bussinoV
(bus sin nos), fine cotton;
sindwn (sin done); oqonion (oth on ee
on))
Flax growing wasn't limited
to Egypt, though that country was
doubtless the most productive area in
the ancient world. In Talmudic times it was grown around
Beth-shan
and Arbela. Egyptian linen was
celebrated in antiquity; even ordinary
linen was of excellent quality.
Flax culture requires fertile soil for good production and quality.
When dried, the
seed pods were removed and the stalks placed in a stee-
ping pond. They remained there until they
were soft enough so that the
fibers could easily be separated. Then they were wrung out, dried in an
oven,
bleached, and cleaned. Finally they were
pounded to loosen the
fibers, which were spun into thread.
While
there is no indication of colored linen in the Bible, we do
know that there was
such in Egypt; ordinarily garments were of bleached
linen. Linen was commonly used for all kinds of
clothing, for the swa-
thing of the dead, bed sheets, curtains, and in the varied
colored patterns
of weaving. It was especially desirable for summer wear
because of cool-
ness. The Egyptian
mummies were bandaged exclusively with linen.
The
priestly garments and vestments were all made of this product of
flax.
LINEN
GARMENT (סדין (saw deen), undergarment) A large rectangular sheet of linen, used as a
garment or as a cover. It was used for
sails, curtains, bedspreads, and runners to protect carpets or rugs from dirt.
LINTEL
(איל (ah yil); משקוף (mash kofe))
A wooden beam above the door. The
meaning may be that the lintel in this case, instead of a horizontal beam, was
two beams meeting at an angle. In the
Passover the lintel and the doorposts were sprinkled with blood.
L-32
LINUS (LinoV) A
Christian man who sent greetings to Timothy.
The tradition
first found in Irenaeus, says that Peter and Paul made
Linus bishop of the
Roman church. Many
questions have been raised about Linus which are
difficult or impossible to
answer. Did Linus assume office before Peter's
death? Was he bishop jointly with Clement or did each of them rule
over
part of the Roman church? Eusebius
says that Linus was bishop 12
years, most likely 64-76 A.D.
LION
(אריה (ar yay)) A large, tawny
colored, carnivorous quadruped with a -
tufted tail; the male usually had a
mane. The Palestinian lion belonged
to the Asiatic or Persian lions. Lions were
common in Palestine in bib-
lical times; they decreased until the 1300s A.D. Mesopotamian lions
died out toward the end of the 1800s.
The
Assyrian sources indicate that lion-hunting was the sport of
kings. Israel’s literature has numerous references
to these animals inclu-
ding lionesses and cubs. David and Benaiah are credited with killing
lions. Generally speaking lion appears in the Bible
as a bold, destructive
creatures, the bane of the flock. It is represented in forecasts of the fu-
ture
age of blessedness as being altogether absent.
The
lion serves as a common biblical metaphor for power and
ferocity. In Revelation 5 the Messiah is termed the
“Lion of the tribe of
Judah.” The lion
played a limited role in the religious symbolism of the
ancient Near East. In Egypt it was associated with Horus and Re,
while
a number of goddesses used the image of a lioness. 1 scholar suggests
that in early
Mesopotamia “the lion wasn't the emblem of any one god.”
Later, when the natural lion was felt to be
inadequate to cope with
evil spirits, wings were added, and it became a semi-divine
cherub. It
was Phoenician craftsmen who
were responsible for the lions which
graced Solomon’s temple. A seal depicting a lion was found at Megiddo.
Ezekiel’s cherubim have as one of their 4 faces that of a lion. The figure
of the
lion is used in Daniel 7 and Revelation 7 and 13.
LISTS,
ETHICAL. Two main types of ethical lists occur in the New
Testament
(NT) letters: catalogs enumerating moral obligations of individuals; and
catalogs with more general ethical content.
Respect
for parents occupies a prominent place in the Holiness
Code. Honor due to God is deduced from that
accorded a father by his
son and a master by his slave. A Hebrew household frequently included
daughters-in-law, or mother-in-law, slaves, and their children. A woman
was subject to her father’s authority
until she married, then the husband
assumed authority. There were also Jewish codes outside the
Bible (e.g.
Ecclesiasticus and Philo).
Among
familial obligations stressed by Greek and Latin moralists,
respect for parents
is often joined with reverence for the deities.
By rule
of patria potestas a
father had absolute authority over his children, and a
wife was transferred
from parental authority to that of her husband.
Plu-
tarch says: “One must reverence deities, honor parents, respect
elders,
obey laws, submit to rulers, love friends, be discreet with women,
affec-
tionate toward children and not mistreat slaves.”
The
primitive church’s fervid expectations had the effect of weake-
ning family ties,
as concerns grew of an age soon to end. On
those
grounds, Paul could counsel everyone to remain in the state in which one
was called. Probably the earliest
attempt to draw up a comprehensive
table of domestic relations is that in Colossians
3. Some scholars believe
that these and
other such catalogs reflect current catechetical instruction
given in
preparation of converts for baptism, and their beginnings are to
be sought in
Judaism.
Other investigators see
similarities between these lists and those of
Stoic moralists, and maintain
that early Christian teachers took over those
lists with slight
modifications. While some Greek
terminology of the NT
“household tables” (Ephesian 5-6; Colossians
3) coincides with that of
Stoic teachers, certain phrases used in them are
Jewish. The bishop re-
quirements in I
Timothy 3 include Greek lists of qualifications for other
roles.
The
Pastoral letters illustrate how tables of purely domestic duties
could be
adapted to the needs of church order.
Bishops were required to
manage the “household of God” with the same
skill that they managed
their own. Older
men and women are to receive the respect due to father
and mother. Yet ties of kinship are not broken, and
filial responsibilities
should not be shifted to the church. Such community rules also urge the
maintenance of good relations between church members and outsiders.
Christians are not only to pray for pagan
rulers, but to submit to their law-
ful authority. Thus governmental authority might even be
invoked to rein-
force the moral code of the community.
L-33
Catalogs
of pagan vices to be avoided sometimes accompany lists
of household or
community duties. Some scholars hold
that all such lists
go back to the teaching of Stoic moralists. A rabbinic catalog of the
heart’s activities
and the Manual of Discipline from the Dead Sea Scrolls
included sins and terms
listed in Mark 7. While the Dead Sea
Scroll writer
might have come under Greek influence, evidence of this is
lacking from
his catalogs.
Even the
reliability of the tradition attributing such a list to Jesus
can scarcely be
disproved by any objective means. The
teaching of Mark 7
harmonizes with another saying of Jesus which emphasizes the
human
heart. The net result of the
catalog method was a reintroduction of lega-
lism. This limitation of formal ethical lists may
help explain their scarcity
in the gospels.
LITERATURE. For
the purpose of this article, only the artistic compositions of
literature will
be considered. Biblical literature
includes various genres or
types which are similar in many respects to the
literary pieces produced by
Near Eastern and Greco-Roman antiquities.
Behind practically all literary types in the Old Testament lies the
oral
stage transmitted by tradition. A
written literature came into existence with
the kingdom. For his political relations with the
neighboring powers the
king needed scribes.
The historical kernel which may be found in the idea
of Solomon as the
patron of “wisdom,” is in all probability that he organized
a school for scribes. Israel simply stepped into inter-oriental
literary tradi-
tion with fixed types and styles.
Wisdom
Literature—Wisdom was the
international word that also
included the art of the scribes, who had laid down
the ideals of their class
as to education, morals, life-style, & literary
forms, in “wisdom textbooks.”
Among the
older, minor collections (Proverbs 25) which are assembled in
the book of
Proverbs is also one that drew directly on the Egyptian “Wis-
dom of
Amen-em-ope.” The older wisdom is of a
merely practical and utili-
tarian kind, originated within the circle of the
royal officials. The younger
collection,
Proverbs 1-9, reveals influence from foreign speculations on the
metaphysical
nature of wisdom. The influence from
Greek popular philoso-
phy is apparent in the apocryphal Wisdom of Solomon.
Laws—The palace scribes had to deal with the affairs of the
royal
chapel and the temple. The scribes
became the “traditionists” of a sacral
literature. The origin of the Israelite law is a double
one: the orally transmit-
ted separate decisions and “instructions,” and the more
“civil” rights, ex-
pressed in “if . . . then
. . .” judgments. The common
person was first and
foremost interested in the latter, and even the scribes
might wish to have
written the norms according to which they had to deal in
public affairs or as
judges at court.
There are also laws of such nature and
purpose that it was early felt
necessary to inscribe them on tables and set
them up publicly. These laws
set the
condition for entering the place and taking part in its blessings. In
Jerusalem the idea of such conditions of
entrance was connected with the
idea of the fundamental commandments of the
Covenant. The greater law
books have
gradually been built up of smaller oral and written collections.
Somewhat younger are probably the
codification of the “Law of Holiness.”
Historical—Israel’s literature distinguishes itself from the rest
of the
ancient Near East. The scribes
knew the stories told at court, & their close
connection with the temple also
made them acquainted with the traditions
and legends told at the
festivals. The historical foundation of
Israel’s exis-
tence as Yahweh’s elected people gave to its religion a feeling of
history.
The beginning was the court’s living
tradition and its oral connection
with greater pragmatic complexes. How early they were written, one can't
tell. The opus magnum of Old Testament historiography is the national
saga
of the Yahwistic Writer (J). Using all
existing myths and sagas, J
wrote the history of the Davidic “Great Israel”
from the Creation to the con-
quest of Canaan, from a religious point of
view. The Deuteronomistic saga
has
drawn on these sources. It gives only a
short résumé of the events
from Exodus to the Jordan. The people’s fate is determined by their
right
or wrong relation to the Law. The
book was written after the consolidation
of the Jewish congregation that it
might learn from history to walk on the
path of life.
Nehemiah’s “memorial” follows the oriental
royal inscriptions’ lite-
rary line, with their “I” style. This record of the governor’s pious works is
written to be laid down “before God’s face.” A later author, representing
priestly traditions, rewrote the history
from the Creation to the Conquest.
The
greatest place is taken up by the ritual laws. Later on, P was braided
together with the expanded J. The Chronicles drew on the consequences
of the predecessor’s philosophy of history.
“Israel” is here Judah only,
from David to Ezra; the older times are
only given in tribal genealogies.
The original Chronicles had no room for Nehemiah.
L-34
Poetic
Literature—The Bible’s poetry was originally
in oral form.
Because of this poems may have
been “modernized,” unconsciously or on
purpose.
In the old Israelite conception of life no sharp distinction can be
drawn between profane and sacral poetry.
One of the oldest types is the
power-filled rhythmical word of
blessing—used both at solemn occasions
and at cultic assemblies. This type has often been combined with the
tri-
bal anthem, characterizations of the tribe’s nature and fate, and mostly put
in the dying ancestor’s mouth. The tribe’s
fate and situation are explained
as the result of a blessing or an ancestor’s curse.
Among folk songs may be mentioned the short
workers’ songs, both
at vintage and harvest at mandatory labor for the
state. At the burials con-
ventional
funeral songs were sung by professional mourners (II Samuel 3;
Jeremiah 9,
22). They gave impetus to passionate
personal poems such
as II Samuel 1. Poetry had its place at weddings, poems like the Song of
Songs [Solomon]. From the short war songs, improvisations on
the battle-
field or at the return of the victorious warriors sprang higher
poetry, like
the Song of Deborah (Judges 5).
The Song of Miriam (Exodus 15) is no
popular poem, but a regular cultic
festival hymn.
There also seems to have existed an epic
poetry. The book of Ja-
shar and the Wars
of the Lord, both mentioned in the Bible, are probably
identical, a sort of
national epic. The strictly sacral
poetry includes the
cultic poetry of Psalms, with their different types:
general hymns of praise;
hymns to the definite feasts; national psalms of
lamentation; general
prayer psalms; national thanksgiving psalms; individual
psalms of lamenta-
tion and thanksgiving; and festal liturgies.
To the sacral poetry must also be added the
oracles of the cult pro-
phets, the priest’s formulas of blessing and curse, and
the king’s promise,
his “charter.” Wisdom
poetry is also religious in its outlook and motivation.
The fixation in script took place gradually. Most of the postexilic poetry
seems to have
been written at once. The same must be
said of the post-
canonical psalmody. It
is partly found as poems made ad hoc
and put into
the mouth of the heroes of the legendary literature.
Prophetic
Literature—This type represents the
second point that
demonstrates the spiritual originality of the prophets and
the uniqueness of
the religion of Israel
from the more or less ecstatic
inspiration of the moment, were indepen-
dent short units. They are connected with the exclamations of
the religious
ecstatics and with the visions of the old seers. This is true even in later
times, as the
normal form of the oracle became the “message,” which be-
gan with: “Thus saith Yahweh: Go and say unto So and
So.” The form of
blessing and curse has
lived on in the prophetic words, giving occasion to
a more or less detailed
description of the coming fortune or destruction.
The classic prophetic style was fully
developed before Amos’ time.
Amos and
the prophets after not only tell what Yahweh will do; he also says
why Yahweh
acts as he does, in oracles of doom or “salvation. In the pro-
mises, which were in exilic and
post-exilic times the predominant form of
prophecy, Yahweh’s remembering of
the covenant, his “trustiness” and
“loving-kindness” became the usual
motivation.
The oldest sayings were
very short, as can be seen in the prophetic
legends. The original units often comprise only 2 or 3
up to 8 or even 10
biblical verses. The
longer compositions reveal the original independence
of the smaller units; even
here the logical and formal connection is very
loose. The prophetic oracle was in itself a poem,
often a perfect one, in the
usual metrical forms. The influence of the psalm style is very
prominent.
Probably under the influence
of the “wise scribes” as the tutors of the laws
there came up prophetic
“sermons” in prose.
The prophetic books are composed of
smaller collections, arranged
as doom prophecies followed by salvation and
re-establishment prophe-
cies. Often
separate oracles have been attached to one another without a
connecting
link. Both collection and redaction
sprang from the congrega-
tion’s religious needs.
The prophetic literature’s last offshoot is that made
up of apocalyptic
images. Apocalyptic is learned, not
popular, literature,
but imbued with the author’s consciousness of
inspiration. Hebrew poe-
try’s normal form
is the double line, with the two lines most often being
either synonymous or
antithetical and making a “thought-rhyme.” The
thought-rhyme is no metrical phenomenon, but a stylistic one; it
became
fundamental in Hebrew poetry.
LITTER
(מטה (mit tah), bed, funeral
bier; צב
(tsab), covered wagon) Cur-
tained
couch borne on men’s shoulders.
LIVER
(כבד (kaw bade), heavy, numerous) The liver is rarely mentioned in the
Bible,
and then usually in its literal, physiological sense. In the ordinary
sacrifice offering the caul
of the liver is set apart to be burned upon the
altar as a special gift to
Yahweh. In the ancient Orient, cultures
besides
the Hebrews studied the markings on the liver for the purpose of
Divina-
tion. The liver was regarded as a
seat of the psychic life, especially in its
emotional aspects; only one passage
uses the word this way (the King
James Version of Lamentation 2).
L-35
LIVING
CREATURE (חיות (khah yooth), animal)
In his inaugural vision Eze-
kiel beheld 4 living creatures, like men
in form but each having 4 faces:
man;
lion; ox; and eagle. The exact meaning
of this mysterious vision
will not be easily unraveled. The rabbinic interpretation is that the 4 faces
represent God’s dominion over man, who was created to rule over the
earth. Always the living God is
surrounded by living creatures, which
suggests that God is universal ruler over and source of all life.
LIZARD
(לטאה (leh taw ah); שממית (seh maw
mith), poisonous lizard) Any
small reptiles having a scaly body and
generally four legs and a long tail.
In
the 18th century, Tristram, who noted the abundance of lizards in
Pale-
stine, collected 22 species. If samamith means “poison,” it reflects a
popu-
lar superstition in the Near East, for the only poisonous lizards are in
the
Western Hemisphere.
LO-AMMI (לא־עמי, not my people)
A symbolic name given by the prophet
Hosea to his third child, to
indicate God’s decisive repudiation of Israel
(Hosea 1).
LOCK
(ציצית (tsee tseeth), fringe; מחלפות (makh law fah oth), braided locks;
קוצות (kev oots soth) locks of hair; נעל (naw al), bolt; מנעול (man ool),
bolt).
LOCUST (ארבה (ah reh beh); חגב (khaw gawb);
גבי (gab ah
ee); סלעם (saw
leh ‘awm); צלצל (tseh law tsal), cricket; akrideV (ak ree des)) An insect
species which is capable at times
of multiplying in appalling masses, and
of causing frightful destruction of
cultivated vegetation. The locust
plague
was the eighth of the ten Egyptian plagues.
The rendering of the
Hebrew names for “locust” is not always consistent
or certain in either
the King James or the Revised Standard Versions.
The locust plague, one of humankind’s severest evils, left indelible
impressions in the Bible and in other ancient documents. It served as a
sign of the coming of the Day
of Lord. According to Talmudic
regula-
tions, the locust plague was counteracted by general trumpet-blowing. In
the Bible and other oriental literatures
the locust symbolizes powerful and
large enemy armies completely destroying the
earnings of human labor.
Locusts
were eaten, and they were esteemed as a dainty item to
adorn the king’s
table. In Leviticus 11 the kinds
permitted for food are
designated; in the Talmud this matter is discussed in
detail. They are pre-
served by drying and
threading; they are also crushed, ground, and added
to dishes or eaten with
bread. Locusts contained a lot of
protein, as well
as vitamins and minerals.
Only 3 of the hundreds of locust species com-
mon in Bible lands are
capable of increasing from time to time to im-
mense multitudes. Only one of these three, namely the desert
locust can
be considered as the widespread plague in all Bible lands.
The
native region of the desert locust is the spacious Sudan. Each
locust species appears in 2 distinct
phases: a solitary phase; and a grega-
rious or group stage. The differences in the phases are indicated
by color,
form, proportion differences, metabolism, mobility, and behavior. The
transition to the group phase occurs in years in which the quantity and
temporal distribution of rains afford adequate conditions for reproduction,
because
the locusts deposit their eggs and these develop only in moist soil.
One or two such years may bring into the world
huge locust swarms in the
gregarious phase. Because of the climatic conditions in their immediate
area, the locust
does not reach sexual maturity, and so it tarries here as a
plundering
stranger.
After
copulation, the female deposits eggs in a hole previously ex-
cavated in the
ground by means of her ovipositor. A
female is able to de-
posit 1-6 egg pods containing 28-146 eggs each. The larvae emerge 15 to
43 days after being
laid, depending on the season and weather; they are
already able to leap at
birth. There are 5 regular molts in
the larval stage
of the locust. The
hoppers of stages 4 and 5 already possess well-decided
wing rudiments. After the 5th molt appears a winged, but
not sexually
mature insect. In its gregarious
phase the desert locust has at first a pink
or reddish main coloration & turns glossy lemon-yellow, bearing a brown
network on forewings. The adult locust possesses 6 legs. The hind pair of
legs is longer than the
other 4 and is provided with very large and ample
thighs.
L-36
In the group phase, from the 2nd stage
of development and after-
ward, the locust is overwhelmed by a strong wandering
instinct, causing a
random procession of overflowing masses which ignores any
obstruction;
holes in the ground are filled out by the bodies of the vanguard,
and the
after guard marches over its brethren.
Shortly after winging the locusts set
out from their larval home and fly
in huge numbers straight ahead, without
any alteration of direction.
The desert locust is capable of moving up to
2,000 km. from its na-
tive place. One modifier of the journey’s direction is the
direction of the
wind. Consuming almost
every plant, the locust can cause absolute deva-
station of the fresh vegetation in
the areas invaded by it. The desert locust
doesn't eat the carob, sycamore, castor trees, oleander bushes, olive trees,
and
date trees.
There is only one firm regulator for the locust’s
movement and ac-
tions—temperature. 4-5
degrees centigrade (40-42 Fahrenheit) reduces
the hoppers to cold immobility;
at 20-26 (68-80 F.) they behave normally;
43-44 (109-111 F.) causes maximal
excitation; 49-50 (120-122 F.) leads to
heat paralysis; 51 (124 F.) brings
death. Many natural enemies, parasites
as well as predators, assail the mature locust, the hoppers, and the eggs;
none of these have been sufficient to “remove this death” (Exodus 10) from
humankind.
LOD (לד) LYDDA (Ludda) A town of
Benjamin near the southern border of
the Plain of Sharon, about 18 km southeast
of Joppa and 35 km northwest
of Jerusalem. It was the ancestral homeland of more than 720 exiles who
returned from
the Babylonian exile. Its strategic
location at the intersection
of the great trunk road between Egypt and Babylon
and the main highway
from Joppa to Jerusalem, made it often-contested
territory.
After Old Testament times it was known as Lydda; in New Testa-
ment times
it was the residence of an early Christian community. In 66
A.D., Cestius Gallus burned the vacated
city while the inhabitants were ce-
lebrating the feast of Tabernacles in
Jerusalem. Sometime in the 100s or
200s
Judaism was virtually eradicated from the site. It was the seat of a
bishop in the 300s and
the scene of the trial of Pelagius at the Synod of
415. During the Crusader period the town bore the
name of St. George,
who suffered martyrdom in 303, and over whose reputed tomb
the Crusa-
ders built a church.
LODGE
(מלונה (meh loo nah), hovel, hut; xenia (eksen ee ah),
state of being
a guest) Usually a temporary resting place or
campground. Paul’s “lod-
ging” in Rome
seems to have been more permanent. See
also Booth.
LOFT
(עליה (‘ah lie yah), chamber, upper room) King James Version
transla-
tion of aliyah in I Kings 7.
LOG (עצים (‘ay tseem), wood; קורה (ko rah), roof; dokoV (dok os), beam
or
spar)
1. A Hebrew liquid measure
(Leviticus 14). See Weights and Mea-
sures. 2. A section of a tree trunk. The vivid saying of Jesus in Matthew
7 has a
close parallel in the Babylonian Talmud.
LOGIA (logia)
A term applied especially to
collections of sayings employed by
the gospels writers. This term is of special interest because of
its use in a
remark of Papias in the early 100s A.D., to the effect that
Matthew was re-
sponsible for the arrangement or the writing down of the logia of
Jesus in
the Hebrew (Aramaic) language.
The evidence against this theory is that
Matthew was composed in Greek
from Greek sources.
The most popular hypothesis is that the logia of Papias are to be
identified with a sayings
source, called Quelle or Q. The ground
for iden-
tifying Q and the logia exists in the restricted meaning the word
usually
has in the Primary Greek Old Testament. Such an understanding of the
logia also fits well with the practice in
the early church of bringing toge-
ther sayings of Jesus for teaching
purposes. In this view the emphasis
falls upon the sacred and oracular nature of a grief utterance of universal
significance.
LOGOS (logoV) See Word,
The.
L-37
LOINS (מתנים (mah teh
nah yeem); חלצים (khaw law tseem); osfuV (os fus))
The Hebrew word mathenayim is often used in a purely physical sense as
indicating
the middle of the body. There are a
number of references to the
practice of tying the long lower garments about the
middle of the body in
preparation for running.
The word is also frequently used in a figurative
sense as representing
the seat of man’s physical strength. Also, in this
sense, the loins can be thought of as the place where
disease or misfor-
tune most obviously makes its presence known. The other Hebrew word,
khalatsim, is approximately synonymous with the first word. In the New
Testament, the Greek word osphus covers the various meanings of
the He-
brew words.
LOIS (LwiV ) The mother of Eunice, and grandmother of
Timothy. Lois is com-
mended for her
Christian faith.
LONGERSUFFERING
(ארך אפים (‘aw rake ‘ap paw yeem),
literally “long an-
ger”; makroqumoV
(mak roh thoo mos), patience) The
King James Ver-
sion (KJV) of the Hebrew phrase arak appayim, occurring 4 times.
Else-
where in the KJV, it is translated “slow to anger”; the New Revised
Stan-
dard Version uses this translation for the adjective and “forbearance” for
the noun. The Greek noun is used 14
times in the New Testament. When
the
word is used of God, it has the meaning of “delaying in inflicting a de-
served
punishment of sin.” When it is applied
to men, it is generally one
of a list of Christian virtues.
LOOM (ארג (eh reg),
weaver’s shuttle; דלה (dal law), thread tied to weaver’s
beam)
Things connected with a weaving machine.
See Cloth.
LOOPS (ללאת (loo law
awt)) The holes on the edge of a cloth by which the
2 halves of the inner linen lining and the outer goatskin covering of the
ta-
bernacle were joined. There were 50
matching loops or eyes on each half
for gold clasps on the lining and bronze
clasps for the outer covering.
LORD (אדון (ah don); בעל (bah al),
owner; kurioV (keer ee os)) The English
rendering of various words that
appear in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek to
express the idea of someone who
commands respects or has authority. In
many cases “Lord” is used in addressing God, or as a substitute for “Yah-
weh,”
which traditionally was not spoken. The
word “Baal” was never ap-
proved as a name for Israel’s God, because of its
connection with the Ca-
naanite nature god. The Greek word kyrios was used
in confessing that
Jesus was the Christ.
LORD
(CHRIST) (יהוה (yah weh); אדוני (a doh nie); kurioV (keer ee os)) The
Hebrew word is used in the English versions of the Old Testament to
trans-
late the divine names Yahweh and
Adonai. Traditionally the divine name
“Yahweh” was never spoken; Adonai was used instead. The Greek word
has, however, a very wide
reference, being used of the God of the Old Tes-
tament, of Jesus, of human
masters, or with the force of “Rabbi” or “Sir.”
When characters in the gospels use the word
in addressing Jesus, it often
means only “Sir.”
“The Lord” as a simple designation for Jesus is mostly
confined to the
narratives of Luke-Acts. Acts frequently
uses the phrase
“the Lord Jesus.”
Evidently “Jesus is Lord” was one of the early formulas
of faith.
Paul often uses the fuller phrase “the
Lord Jesus Christ” in conjunc-
tion with the mention of God the Father. For Christians there is but one
God, the
Father, and one Lord, Jesus Christ. Paul
knows of the formula
“Jesus is Lord,” and says that no one can say kyrios Jesous except by the
Holy
Spirit. In Phillipians 2, the “name
which is above every name,” is
probably kyrios.
To an early Christian accustomed to
reading the Old Testament
(OT), the word “Lord,” would suggest his identification
with the God of
the OT. It
expressed Christ’s divinity without explicitly asserting his deity,
an idea startling
to non-Christian Jews. A few Christian
of pagan back-
ground would find the word reminiscent of the god of a cult. This does
lead to the conclusion that
Christians borrowed the title “Lord” from paga-
nism. In the book of Revelation the title “Lord”
has still another connota-
tion. Revelation
implies that Christ, as King of kings and Lord of lords,
is the only emperor
whom Christians can recognize.
LORD
OF HOSTS (צבאות יהוה (a doh nie
tseh baw oth)) A special epithet
for the God of Israel which
was originally associated with the central sanc-
tuary of the tribal confederacy
at Shiloh . It is likely
that adonai tsebaoth is
the original
form and adonai elohi hatsibioth, an
interpretive expansion. It
is possible
that tsebaoth would be a second
divine name. The expanded
forms of the
divine name are probably correct in expressing the grammati-
cal dependence of tsebaoth upon the proper name of
Israel’s God. The
hosts over which Yahweh is sovereign are variously taken to
mean the ar-
mies of Israel or the heavenly host.
L-38
LORD’S
DAY (h kuriakh hmera (hay kee ree ak hay hay mer ah)) The first
day of the week,
celebrated by the early Christians with joyful worship as
the day of Jesus’
resurrection. The actual phrase occurs
only in Revela-
tion 1. This Christian day
is the day of the Christian Lord or Emperor, Je-
sus. The fact that the first day of the week was
given special prominence
in the Christian calendar is clear from Acts 20, I
Corinthians 16, John 20,
& Luke 24.
The day was chosen to celebrate Jesus' resurrection, because
of
the evangelists' emphasis on his rising on the first day of the week.
The Lord’s Day stands in marked contrast to the Jewish sabbath.
Since the New Testament gives no evidence
that Sabbath observance was
a cause of strife in the primitive Jewish Christian
church, we may assume
that the 2 days were at first celebrated together. As Christianity spread in
Gentile circles,
however, the Sabbath observance was soon dropped and
never made binding on
Gentile Christians.
The Sabbath's observance soon set the Jewish Christian groups
apart from the Gentiles; its
celebration was regarded as a feature of “Juda-
izing.” It wasn't until the fourth century that
Saturday became a liturgical
day. The
early Christian attitude toward the 4th Commandment was the
precise opposite
of the later Roman Catholic and Puritan Sabbatarianism.
Early Christianity viewed the Fourth
Commandment as a ceremonial part
of the law now abrogated; it was regarded as
symbolic of a perpetual tur-
ning from sin.
Gentile Christians took over observance of
the Lord’s Day from the
Jewish Christian church; they also used Judaism’s
7-day week, which was
taken in turn from the Babylonians. The Roman calendar was entirely dif-
ferent,
revolving around the calends (first day), nones (9days before ides)
and
ides (13th or 15th day) of the month.
In Mithra, the first day of the week was
observed as the day of the
sun, though the day of Saturn was more generally
celebrated with rest and
banqueting. The
Day of the Sun was made a public holiday in 321 A.D.
by Emperor Constantine,
for whom the sun-god was the family divinity.
The symbolism of Sunday is not that of relating Christ to the sun-god,
but
of suggesting the correspondence between the original creation and the
new
creation in the risen Christ, both of which occurred on the first of the
week.
It is impossible to tell exactly how the
primitive Christians kept the
Lord’s Day.
One thing only is certain. They
held their distinctive service
of worship on that day. In the 100s A.D. we know that around dawn
there
was a celebration of the liturgy which included scripture, prayers,
sermon,
& Eucharist on Sunday morning; for the Gentile church there was no
Sab-
bath observance.
For
the 100s A.D., we have only Acts 20 to go by.
On the first day
of the week the disciples came together to “break
bread,” which then was
a regular evening meal.
The Lord’s Supper was an evening preceded by a
sermon; it is unclear
whether it was on Saturday or Sunday evening.
Gos-
pel patterns seem to indicate that Sunday evening is viewed as the
occa-
sion of Jesus’ revealing himself in Christian worship.
In
Pliny’s account, the actual supper had been separated from the
Christian
service. There is a service “before
dawn,” but in the evening of
the same day there is a supper. The simple Eucharistic supper would
come on
Sunday evening and include a confession of sins. It is also pos-
sible to read the evidence to
refer to events on Saturday evening. In
any
case, the observance comes in the evening with a Eucharistic meal. Tra-
jan’s edict outlawing dinners of
unlicensed clubs forced a change in the
Christian mode of worship. The increasing need that a persecuted group
act secretly led to holding worship in the early hours of the morning.
For
the early Christian, Sunday was a regular day of work, just as
any other
day. There was no question of applying
the Jewish sabbath
rules to the Christian day; the 2 days were distinct. It is not until the
200s that we learn from
Tertullian that some stricter Christians even de-
ferred their business in order
the better to celebrate the joy of the Lord’s
Day. The point is that the festive character of
the day can be best cele-
brated in that way. It was not until Constantine in 321 that Sunday be-
came an official,
public holiday. Rural labor was
permitted so that “the
bounty of heaven might not be neglected.”
The
ecclesiastical legislation which reflects this way of thinking
about the
Sabbath is far from demanding a complete cessation of work.
The Council of Laodicea insists “Christians
must not Judaize by resting
on the sabbath” (Saturday); in order to honor the
Lord’s Day (Sunday),
Christians should rest.
The severest restrictions on work on Sunday be-
long to later medieval
Catholicism and to English Puritanism.
L-39
LORD’S
PRAYER. The brief set of petitions ascribed to Jesus in
Matthew 6 and
Luke 11. The 2 accounts
in Matthew and Luke may be compared in the fol-
lowing columns, using the New
Revised Standard Version.
Matthew 6 Luke 11
9. Pray then in this way: Our Father 2. When you pray, say: Father,
in heaven, Hallowed be your name hallowed be your name
10. Your kingdom come. Your will be
done on earth as it is in heaven.
11. Give us this day our daily bread. 3. Give us each day our
daily bread.
12. And forgive us our debts, as we 4. And forgive us our sins, for
also have forgiven our debtors we ourselves forgive eve-
ryone indebted to us.
13. And do not bring us to the time And do not bring us to
of trial, but rescue us from the the time of trial.
evil one.
It's most
likely that the 2 forms reach us from independent sources as part
the
church’s liturgy. Matthew has put the
story into the Sermon on the
Mount where it interrupts a section on religious
practices. Luke has also
attached it to
a section on prayer. It was not unusual
to use a brief sum-
mary prayer, and if Jesus did so, its liturgical history
would begin with
the earliest Christian gatherings. We cannot point with confidence to
Luke’s
brief version being the original from the source of material com-
mon to Matthew
and Luke, but not in Mark. Actually, a
considerable his-
tory stands behind the forms which finally entered the gospels.
The claim
of the 2 passages both to be a guide to prayer and to pro-
vide a specific set
piece to be said corporately is about equal. While it
served a liturgical purpose when the gospels were compiled, to
take it as
only a liturgical piece would be to misread the intent of the
evangelists,
& of Jesus himself. The
value of the Lord’s Prayer as a plan upon which
to base all prayer is indicated
by Matthew, who establishes in it the prio-
rity of attention upon which to base
all prayer, and by Luke, who presents
it in answer to a plea to be taught how
to pray rather than to be taught a
prayer.
The similarity between the prayer and Jewish forms suggests the
same
thought. Jesus’ prayer was designed to be
both an outline and an
order for prayer.
It is not
unknown for Jewish prayers to address God as Father. The
Lord’s Prayer tells us nothing of Jesus’
mode of addressing God, but the
gospels record 2 cases of Jesus’ use of
“Father.” “Abba” is an Aramaic
word
which may represent the form with a personal suffix or be translated
simply as
“Father.” The absence of “who is in
heaven,” from Luke is not
a sign of more primitive, but of non-Jewish,
usage. The early church fa-
ther Origen
refers to a “boldness of speech” on the part of Jesus in addres-
sing God as
Father which goes beyond Jewish practice.
The 1st
3 petitions have ultimately a similar meaning.
Hallowing
God’s name, praying for the kingdom and for the doing of God’s
will, all
suggest affirmation of God’s sovereignty in the hope for a new age. The
3 petitions all have the passive verb
forms. Use of the passive was an act
of
reverence. To hallow God’s name means to
recognize and accept
God’s nature and its demands, and the full answer to this
petition presup-
poses a new age’s consummation.
It implies the spread of the knowledge
of God’s name until all hold it
sacred.
The 2nd
petition (“your kingdom come) is a completely Jewish
prayer. The tension in Jesus’ teaching about the
kingdom as impending
and yet operative is more obvious in the 3rd
petition. This petition (your
will be
done) is an interpretation of the kingdom’s coming, and is a proper
expansion
of the last. The doing of God’s will is
intended in that the situ-
ation which obtains in heaven may also obtain on
earth.
In the
remaining petitions the verbs become active. The unusual
word epiousion
(daily, sufficient), according to the church father Origen,
was probably
invented by the evangelist. The word is
found only in the
Lord’s Prayer and in discussion of it. It is difficult to understand why so
curious
a word was used if it were not original.
It is best taken as a term
fixed in the tradition and retained by
liturgical conservatism and sanctity.
Epiousion is best read as having no simple, limited meaning.
“Bread of the coming day” could also suggest
a share in the messianic
banquet.
Matthew’s “give us today” interprets the petition to apply to
bread
needed for the day and would form a morning petition. The ver-
sion in Luke uses didou, which suggests “day by day.”
The 2 versions
are best explained as modes by which a term was adapted
to the existen-
tial situation.
There's no
real parallel in Jewish prayers for the 5th petition ( . . .
forgive us our
debts . . .). The conditioning of God’s
forgiveness on hu-
man forgiveness seems strange to Jewish ears. The Greek verb used
may represent an Aramaic
verb that can be read as present or future.
It could refer to a final reckoning being made operative in current
relationships.
The 6th petition (Do
not bring us to the time of trial . . .) has its
parallel in the Jewish Prayer
Book. Peirasmos means primarily a testing,
and not enticement to
sin. Such testing is to be expected and
prayer for
deliverance seems to cause difficulties. It could very likely be that the
petition
referred primarily to the final time of trial.
To limit the petition to
enticement to sin distorts its meaning. The addition in Matthew must be
read: “Deliver us from the evil one.” Whether evil comes from other
men, inner
impulse, circumstances, or the enemy finally disclosed, prayer
for deliverance
is appropriate.
The
doxology is a later addition and develops out of worship prac-
tice. The addition of the doxology makes the Lord’s
Prayer a more com-
plete act of worship. While fulfillment must wait, the kingdom, power,
and glory are already
in God’s hands. We may pray for God’s
kingdom
because the kingdom is God’s; for the hallowing of God’s name, because
the glory is God’s; for doing God’s will because the power is God’s.
L-40
The doxology speaks of an existing
state, promised but not realized,
basic to the faith by which the prayer is
prayed. Each petition makes refe-
rence to
the reality and hope of a New Age and a New Kingdom; they deal
with what God
must finally accomplish. The last
petitions deal with our re-
lation to this final gift of the kingdom. In the text they are already modified
under
the stress of applying the realizable fruits of the kingdom’s “coming
near”. We can pray for forgiveness,
deliverance, and for some anticipation
of it now.
In manifesting this tension the
Lord’s Prayer reflects clearly the prio-
rities which he emphasized and applies
them to practicing prayer. In affir-
ming
where our true treasure is, the petitions determine the proper nature
of our
interest. The Lord’s Prayer provides a
plan upon which to base pri-
vate practice and the priorities which should
operate in public worship or
liturgical order. The use of the prayer in every act of worship serves to
bring that worship to a climax and at the same time reminds each worshi-
per to “pray like
this.”
LORD’S SUPPER (kuriakon deipnon (keer ee ak on
dipe non)) The title
given by Paul to the common
sacred meals of the church, in continuation
of Jesus' table fellowship with his disciples, which was formally instituted
by Jesus at the Last Supper
as a memorial of himself until his Second
Coming.
Names
and Times of the Rite—The term “Lord’s Supper” is used
only by Paul, but
the phrase “marriage supper of the Lamb” in Revelation
19 is probably related
to it. The word “supper” is commonly
used by Greek
writers for cult meals of communion between gods and men. This circum-
stance may explain why the early
church fathers seldom used the term.
The Luke-Acts' author favored the phrase “breaking
of bread,” with-
out distinguishing between its sacramental and social
characteristics. In
one place Paul uses
the word “communion” with specific reference to the
sacramental body and blood
of Christ. Christian writers from the
100s on
preferred the title “Eucharist,” derived from the thanksgiving over the
bread
and wine. The absolute use of the
noun “Eucharist” in this technical sense
is not found in the New Testament.
The primary form and meaning of the
Lord’s Supper were given to
the church by Jesus in his words & actions at the
Last Supper with his
dis-
ciples before his passion. This fits
in with the tradition of the Resurrection
which associates the risen Lord's appearances to his disciples. The inti-
mate association of the resurrection faith with the “breaking of bread” ex-
plains the
festive quality and character of the celebration of the Lord’s Sup-
per from the
very beginning of the church.
A passage from Acts 2 suggests that
the supper-fellowship of the
earliest Jewish Christians was a daily observance. The church, in these
earliest days, was living in a continual Passover
experience of redemption,
reinforced by the sense of participation in the “last
times” by the manifest
outpouring of the Holy Spirit. Before the end of the apostolic period, the
regular time of meeting of Christians was Sunday.
So long as the church’s membership
was predominantly Jewish, we
may suppose that Jewish Christians continue to
worship on the Sabbath in
temple and synagogue.
But at sundown on the Sabbath, which marked for
the Jews the close of
the 7th and the beginning of the first day of the week,
the Christian disciples
would gather for their own observances, including
the “breaking of bread.” Whether the selection of the first day of the
week
for the church’s worship was fortuitous or a deliberate choice, it was
soon
understood as a providential guidance.
Throughout the early centuries of
the church’s history, Sunday was
universally observed by the celebration
of the Lord’s Supper, not only as a
memorial of the Lord’s death, but also
of his resurrection.
Form
of the Rite—The most debated question concerning the
Lord’s Supper was how
it was observed. The celebration as a
whole in-
volved a full supper or meal, but did the early church maintain a clear
dis-
tinction between the Eucharist and the Agape or “love feast?” The 2 types
of observance, Eucharist and
Agape, were certainly distinguished from
each other by the time of Justin
Martyr (150 A.D.). The fuller directives
of
the Didache, the manual of Christian discipline, are themselves involved in
this critical controversy, and are in any case an uncertain guide because of
problems with respect to its date, location, and significance.
41
Among the Jews, even the most
ordinary meals were sanctified by
the benedictions. One of these benedictions was pronounced at
the brea-
king of bread. The special grace
thus shared in common was associated
more especially with participation in the
one blessing rather than with con-
secrated elements of food. The food and drink, however, were hallowed by
the recognition that they were gifts of God’s providence. In a setting such
as this, the earliest
Christian missionaries imparted to the their converts
the tradition of the Last
Supper, translating the older Jewish table benedic-
tions into terms recalling
the redemptive act of Christ.
Gentile converts to the faith were
also familiar with cult meals in
their pagan background. We know little about the sacramental meals in
the
mystery religions, other than that they existed. In addition there were the
feasts following
upon religious sacrifices; and many guilds held common
meals under the
patronage of a particular deity. Such
meals would be for-
mally opened by libations offered to the gods. All too often, pagan cult
meals degenerated
into gluttonous feasting and drinking.
The church in Corinth, founded by
Paul, may not have been typical,
but the problems raised by their behavior at
the Lord’s Supper were no
doubt symptomatic of the difficulty of preserving the
decorous and sacred
atmosphere of the Jewish tradition. The Corinthian church's divisions
were
not only social and economic, but ethnic and religious.
By reminding them once more of the tradition
as to how the Lord
had celebrated the Last Supper, Paul roundly condemned the
Corinthians’
observance as a travesty upon it.
He insisted that they should all begin the
Supper together & share it
together. There's no suggestion in
Paul’s direc-
tives that the Supper was to be reduced to a purely ceremonial meal
upon
the bread and wine. His one concern
is that this meal be done by all toge-
ther, with sobriety and devout remembrance
of the Lord.
There's no record of the time and
place that the meal was detached
from the memorial of the Last Supper. A theory has been propounded that,
in view of
the universal and uniform development of this differentiation, the
arrangement
was made by the apostles' authority.
One of the principle rea-
sons for its taking place was undoubtedly the
need of preserving the most
sacred cult act of the church from the kind of
abuses that happened at Co-
rinth. A
practical consideration may well have been the limitation of space.
The separation of the Eucharist from
the common meal led to an im-
portant modification in the ritual and manner of
its celebration. The older,
separate
thanksgivings over the bread & the cup were combined into a sin-
gle prayer of
thanksgiving over both elements together.
On Sundays, the
lessons and sermon were open to any person. Before the prayers, all non-
Christians and
unbaptized catechumens were required to leave, and the
rest of the rite was
observed by the faithful alone.
Ministers
and Doctrine of the Rite—From the time of Ignatius
(about 110 A.D.), it was
a universal custom that only the bishop presided
over the celebration and
offered the consecrating prayer; he could also
deputize an elder (presbyter) as
a substitute. The deacons assisted the
celebrant in receiving the offerings and in administering communion to the
assembly and to the absent; neither Paul nor the book of Acts gives us any
precise information on this point. After
a precise mention of the Eucha-
rist, the writer of the Didache prescribes the
appointment of bishops and
deacons who “also minister the liturgy of prophets
and teachers.”
The theological meaning of the
Lord’s Supper is obviously based
upon the intention of Jesus in his words and
actions at the Last Supper.
For Jesus,
the Supper was the sign of the New Covenant, sealed in his
death and
resurrection. The Supper is the means
whereby those who be-
long to Jesus join with him in that sacrificial
self-offering to the Father’s
will that alone is the way to eternal life.
Later New Testament teaching is
faithful to this perspective of Jesus.
Paul developed and stressed especially the realistic communion that the
Christian has with Christ. This
communion with Christ has two principal
corollaries: it is of such holiness
and power that profanation of it provokes
the Lord to “jealousy”. It is
such a bond of unity in the church that want
of charity among the members of
the one body brings judgment of damna-
tion.
In Paul’s thought, the sacrament seals the intimate union of Christ
with
his church. The Fourth Evangelist also
employs the typology of the
manna to stress the supernatural receiving of
Christ. The sacrament is
both the
nourishment of the Christian in eternal life now during his life on
earth, and
a pledge of his being raised up “at the last day.” Christ offers
us his risen and ascended life in
Spirit.
L-42
Many modern critics see in the
Pauline and Johannine sacramental
realism the influence of pagan mystery cults,
or at least a transformation
of Jesus’ words into the language used in
Greek-thinking culture. On the
other
hand, it is not fair to include either Paul or “John” with those who
conceived
of sacraments as quasi-magical operations, infusing “immorta-
lity” in their
mortal recipients. Their teaching is
loyal to the “realized
eschatology” of the New Testament outlook as a whole.
The sacrificial character of the
Lord’s Supper is necessarily related
to Jesus’ own association of the bread and
wine with the offering of his
body and blood on the cross. The rite itself may be a sacrifice, but this
doesn't help us to define the precise character of the Eucharistic sacrifice,
especially with all the various kinds of sacrifice current in the ancient
world. No writer of the New Testament
uses the word “sacrifice” to de-
scribe the Eucharist. Paul does draw an analogy between the
Christians’
communion and the meals of the sacrificial offerings of Jewish and
pagan
cults.
Yet Paul does not suggest
that the Eucharistic bread and wine are
offered to God as a sacrifice. Christians only offer sacrifice in that they
offer the totality of their lives in Christian service. It is quite in accord
with New Testament
thought to speak of the Lord’s Supper as a “memo-
rial sacrifice” or as a
“sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving.”
It is not a
mere mental recollection of a past event, but a here-and-now
experience
of the mighty deliverance of God.
The first Christian document to call
the Eucharist a “sacrifice” as
such was the Didache, by considering it a
fulfillment of Malachi 1. The
idea was
to have a rich development in the Christian theology of the 100s
A.D. It fit in to the trend of late Jewish and
pagan philosophical thought,
with its depreciation of material offerings & its emphasis upon true sacri-
fice as an inner offering of the heart and mind of
those fit for communion
with God.
Possibly Paul himself borrowed the phrase from current philo-
sophical
discussion.
LO-RUHAMAH (לא־רהמה, not pitied) A symbolic name given by the prophet
Hosea to his 2nd child,
to indicate God’s anger against Israel
are now found intertwined
with the more dominant Abraham narrative.
Taking Abram, Lot, and Sarai, Terah
left the ancient Sumerian city
of Ur for the land of Canaan. But when he reached Haran, he settled
there
and died. When Abram was called by
Yahweh to leave Haran, he
took with him Lot and all the members of their
families. Abram and Lot
camped first at
Shechem and then near Bethel. The Hebrew patriarchs'
movement from Haran down to the southern border of Palestine
would in-
dicate that Israelites shared in the general migration of Arameans into
the
ancient near East west and southwestern sections (2000-1500 B.C.).
After their sojourn in Egypt, Abram,
and Lot went through the Ne-
geb up into the Benjaminite hill country. When they reached their former
camp between
Bethel and Ai, they parted. The
Jahwistic source gives the
reason as personal strife between Abram and Lot . The later Priestly
writer adds that “the land could not support both of them together.” Not
only must Abram and Lot find enough land
to support their large flocks,
but they must further reckon with the prior
claims undoubtedly being urged
by the native inhabitants.
Abram gave his nephew first choice
of the best of the land. Lot, ha-
ving
surveyed the scene, chose the whole Jordan basin. He journeyed
through it and settled at
Sodom. Lot appears in Genesis 14 as one
of the
captives taken by Chedorlaomer & eastern confederates when they
quelled
the revolt of 5 Canaanite kings; his capture brings Abram out into
the inter-
national scene.
Dwelling in one of the “cities of
the plain,” Lot himself forms a clear
contrast with the perverted Sodomites with
his hospitality to the angelic vi-
sitors. The story implies also a comparison with Abraham’s hospitality
which is
not favorable to Lot, who let the claims of courtesy transcend the
moral
obligations of fatherhood. Lot is
rescued again by divine interven-
tion which takes into consideration his
relative righteousness and accom-
modates itself to his weakness. His future sons-in-law condemned them-
selves by their frivolous disbelief. Even his
wife, brought her own condem-
nation by refusing to give herself totally to the
flight.
As the “cities of the valley” were
being destroyed. Lot and his two
daughters fled from Zoar up into the hills of Moab. Dwelling with their fa-
ther in a cave, Lot’s older
daughter becomes the mother of the Moabites,
and her younger daughter, of the
Ammonites. They preserve a memory of
intermarriage between ancestors of the Israelites & inhabitants of southern
Trans-Jordan. The present form of the
stories leaves no doubt as to Isra-
el’s feeling of superiority. The Lot narrative ends with God’s election of
Israel and God’s providential guidance of the patriarchs, his judgment, and
God’s saving grace.
L-43
LOTAN (לוטן, covering) The first son of Seir;
clan chief of the native Horite in-
habitants of Edom
LOTS (גורל (go rawl), portion, inheritance;
ballein klhron (bal line kleh
ron),
casting lots) The lot’s employment, either by casting it
on the ground
or by drawing it was much in vogue in the ancient world. In the Old Testa-
ment the lot’s use is
reported on many occasions. The same
method was
sometimes employed to solve exceptional political and labor
problems.
The tasks of priest, singers,
and gatekeepers in the temple were assigned
by the same means. In times of emergency certain tasks were also
ac-
complished by the lot’s casting. The lot’s
use wasn't considered a practice
bordering on magic, but as the Lord’s
decision. The term “lot,” as first
used in Joshua as a method to apportion land, acquired later the meaning
of hereditary land property.
Casting lots was a method
ascertaining the divine will, widely em-
ployed in pagan, Jewish, and to some
extent in Christian antiquity. To
know
God’s will for oneself is to know what God has assigned to one. The
emphasis is on the idea that it is
something given by God, not earned or
obtained.
The method of casting lots was to put stones into a vessel to be
shaken
until one jumped out. In Acts 1, Luke
does not mean to say that
the 11 voted Matthias in, but that the Lord Jesus
chose Matthias. The
number of the 12,
the New Israel, could be made full only by Lord Jesus
himself. That the soldiers cast lots for the garments of
Jesus will indicate
the utter humiliation of Jesus before humans.
LOTS, FEAST OF.
See Purim.
LOTUS (צאלים (tseh eh
leem), shady trees) A name which has been used as
a popular name
for many plants. In Job 40 the term is
used for a thorny
shrub or low tree with small, oval leaves, found in dry
places. This fails
to fit the water
context. The sacred water lily of Egypt
lical context better, but not the
linguistic evidence.
LOVE (אהב (aw ha bah); רעיה (rah yah)) Love in the Old Testament (OT)
is the basic character of the relationship between persons, a relationship
with qualities of devotion, loyalty, intimate knowledge, and responsibility.
Love is closely related to the sexual realm,
even when the subject is God’s
love. Love is the force which both initiates and maintains relationships.
The OT idea of the love of God is decisive
for the New Testament (NT)
ideas of love and grace.
Human
Love—Love is a pervasive quality in human relationships
for the OT. It takes many forms: the sexual; quite possibly the romantic;
the
love within families; and the love of friendship. The rightly ordered
human relationship is one
of mutuality in love. The OT has no
prudery
with regard to sexuality. On the
contrary the sexual relationship’s primacy
in human nature is evident in the
creation stories’ Priestly and Jahwistic
sources. In Genesis 1, the implication seems to be
that humans are in
God’s image male and female, and this is further suggested
by the impor-
tance of “knowledge” as a symbol both of the God/human relationship
and
the man/woman sexual relationship.
There is present in several OT
stories a love which is best described
as “romantic,” the love of first
sight. This love includes the sexual
dimen-
sion but is not comprised of it.
The OT understands the danger of concen-
tration on the sexual to the
exclusion of the other aspects of human love,
such as loyalty, mutuality, & responsibility. The Song of Song [Solomon]
is probably a collection of marriage poems, all praising the sexual love but
with emphasis on the mutuality and devotion on which it is founded.
Tribal and familial bonds were very
strong in Israel. It isn't surpri-
sing
that love is a significant element in the relationship of kinsmen. Else-
where we meet this love usually within
the family unit, most frequently of
father and son. Yet when familial love is too selective,
serious difficulties
arise. Isaac loved
Esau, Rebekah loved Jacob. Jacob’s
overbearing love
of Joseph made the other sons of Jacob hate Joseph.
The social life of humans is for the
OT an important area of human
relationship. The quality of life most desirable in a person is that of khe-
sed. Though the word has primary religious connotations, they are exten-
ded
in his responsibility in the whole of society.
When the love of human
friendship is present, rebuke and reproof are
accepted in the spirit of hu-
man oneness.
In the OT, human society is principally a covenantal society, not
only
under the divine covenant, but in many other covenants between peo-
ple. The covenant between David and Jonathan is an
excellent example.
Jonathan loves David
“as his own soul.” David can even say
that his co-
venantal love with Jonathan was a finer thing than the love of
women.
The whole range of human
relationships is therefore viewed in the OT as
directed and determined by love.
L-44
Divine
Love—Consonant with the personal and active character of
human love is the
view of divine love in the OT. God’s
love is God’s re-
deeming activity in human history. There is no doubt that Canaanite ferti-
lity
worship and its effect on the OT, but considering the number of times
where
love is mentioned as an active characteristic of God,” the rarity of
the
husband image is remarkable.
Perhaps
the prime focus of Israel’s self awareness is the notion that
she is the chosen
people. The act of choice is analogous
to someone’s
choice of a spouse. The
event of the Exodus, as the original act of elec-
tion, is frequently referred to
as an act of love. The love of Yahweh
which
elects can also be applied to persons chosen for a particular
purpose. This
electing love is always to
a degree inexplicable. It is Yahweh’s
character
to love and choose as he pleases, so that even the love for the
sojourner in
Israel is rationalized by Yahweh’s love for the sojourner. This may also
be applied to the individual,
where the deliverance from death is seen as
an act of love intended to set the
individual on the right way.
The distinction between love of
election and love of covenant is a
narrow one, but the 2 are closely
related. We may make a distinction for
analytic purposes between that love of God which manifests itself in the
choice
of Israel and in the election of individual and that love which pre-
supposes the
relationship of covenant and operates within it. Covenant
love maintains a relationship
already established. The finality of the
co-
venant also assures continuance of Yahweh’s love. The covenant love of
Yahweh is therefore a
faithful love, a steadfast, unshakable maintenance
of the covenant
relationship; covenant love is also maintained for Israel.
Because Israel knows the
steadfastness of covenantal love, she
looks forward to its continuance, “For
his steadfast love endures for ever.”
Love and its endurance is expressed in many Psalms (33, 52, 62, 85, 100,
103, 106, 107, 117-119, 130, 138, 147). God’s victory in the new age will
be a renewal of Israel in love. The idea that the saving love of God could
be
found in death and a grave was unthinkable in the OT.
Human
Love of God—God’s covenantal love is primary in the di-
vine-human
relationship. Humans are to love God,
but God’s love is de-
rived from God’s establishment of covenantal
relationship. The great
commandment:
“You shall love Yahweh your God with all your heart, and
with all your soul,
and with all your might” (Deuteronomy 6:5), sets forth
the most profound
response to Yahweh’s oneness, his uniqueness, and
his sole claim to human
devotion.
It isn't surprising that Israel is
commanded to love Yahweh. Israel’s
life
in the covenant can properly be only a life of love to Yahweh. The
love commandment is a description of
covenantal life. To love Yahweh is
life
itself. And the faithful love not only
Yahweh but also his promise. At
a time
of great apostasy and stress, Yahweh speaks through Jeremiah of
his remembrance
of Israel’s youthful loyalty, but this covenantal devotion
has been
short-lived, like “a morning cloud, like the dew that goes early
away.”
Israel’s worship is thus undertaken
in love to Yahweh. The pious
love Yahweh
because he answers prayer. By extension,
those who love
Yahweh love also the temple in which Yahweh lives. There is, of course,
that false worship which
is false love. Hosea, Jeremiah, Ezekiel,
and the
author of Lamentation cry out against Israel’s seeking “lovers” among
the
nations, especially in the case of political alliances, which involved the
re-
cognition of foreign deities.
Just as love for humans is a
touchstone of the OT ethical outlook,
so love for Yahweh provides the most
profound impulse to responsible
life. Repentance involves the keeping of steadfast love and justice in hu-
man
relations. It is perhaps notable that
for most of the OT, khesed is the
love Yahweh shows for humans, and ‘abahah
is that of humans for Yah-
weh; in Hosea, the terms are reversed. The fundamental idea is that ethi-
cal life
takes place within the covenant. Those
who love Yahweh are
those who keep his commandments.
Love of God is primary, and humans love both
God and others in
response to God’s love.
But the life of love is a life lived in the covenant
relationship. The law is the gift of God’s love in order
that humans may
have a framework in which they order their obedience. To love Yahweh
is to know Yahweh’s primary
love and to live in responsible devotion to
humans and God. It is to “hear Yahweh’s voice and to cleave
to Yahweh.”
L-45
LOVE IN THE NEW TESTAMENT (NT) (agaph (ah ga pay), unconditional love
filia (fil ee ah), affection, love of a friend; eroV (er os), sexual
desire,
physical longing) Love language is much less common in the
NT than one
would expect; the verb is more frequent than the noun. The total use of
the term in the NT is
distributed as follows: Jesus 10%; Paul
28%; John
(gospel and 3 letters) 33%; other letters 13%; and the remainder
16%.
John, who accounts for one tenth of
the NT, provides 1/3 of the references
to love.
List of Topics—1. Synoptic Teaching of Jesus;
2. Paul’s Teaching: Divine Love; 3. Paul’s Teaching:
Human Love for God; 4. Paul’s Teaching: Human Love for
Others; 5. Acts; Pauline-style Letters; Catholic Letters;
Revelation; 6. John's Letters
1. Synoptic
Teaching of Jesus—While Jesus never says that God
loves, the general
impression of what Jesus had to teach about God must
surely be that of an
infinite love. Jesus presented himself
as heir of the
Old Testament (OT) and he reminded Jewish religious leaders that
God
preferred loving kindness (khesed)
to a sacrificial cult. The intimate
tone
of Abba (“Father”) implies a
deep fellowship of understanding and affec-
tion as well as obedience. The Jews proclaimed their fathers’ God, but
the
way of life demanded by the Father’s incoming reign of righteousness was
far different from the priests' holiness, or the Pharisees' legalism. Jesus’
poetic language was not a pious overstatement so much as a tender
decla-
ration of the universal and intimate character of the divine love as Jesus
knew it.
3 words may describe briefly what this love is: it
is patient, merciful,
and generous. The
parable of the fig tree teaches the divine goodness
that allows another chance,
and at the same time the awful judgment if the
opportunity is rejected. The parables of Luke 15 demonstrate the
wonder
of gracious mercy. Grace elicits
love from us in return. This divine love
is
an active benevolence that will go to any length to do good to the beloved
object. Nevertheless, it would be true to his teaching to affirm that the
divine love is sovereign.
Jesus revealed the meaning of love
by his life; the church proclaimed
that this was because he is the unique Son
of the Father. Jesus also
seems to have claimed this status. The most
significant fact about Jesus’
role is that his mission was thought of in terms
derived from the image of
the Servant of the Lord. Jesus therefore speaks the word of
forgiveness,
and demands the utmost in sacrifice for love’s sake. It was offensive to the
“godly” that Jesus
ate with tax collectors and sinners.
For
his part, Jesus was justly angered by Pharisaic legalism and
hypocrisy. This stern attitude, no less than his
compassion, reflected love
which is the holy righteous love of God. His love understood all people,
and it
exhausted itself in the work of mercy for the sake of the kingdom;
and at last
his love embraced the Cross with all its agony and abandon-
ment. In that full and perfect life of gracious
concern and care for others,
people have seen the revelation of God, and the
name of that God is Love.
The consequent duty of each human as
children of such a God is to
love God with all their heart, soul, mind, and
strength, and never let materi-
alism or self-interest usurp God’s place. Even religion may get in the way
of the
spirit of genuine love; this was the worst condemnation of the Phari-
sees and Jesus’
other opponents. Nothing but
single-minded devotion to
the Kingdom’s cause can enable love to flourish in
the disciple.
Jesus’ primary emphasis was that his
disciples should live as the
“sons of God.”
Because God is what God is, humans are to be sincere,
patient, kind,
merciful, humble, and generous. It is
the Christian concep-
tion of fellowship with God that gives the idea of Agape its meaning.
Jesus never advised that reasonable self-love
be the yardstick for a neigh-
borly love.
Such motives would be a complete misunderstanding of the
mind and spirit
of Jesus. A human heart must be made
clean, so that hu-
mans may be sincere. The whole point is that the disciple acts from obe-
dience to the
Father. “Love your enemies,” doesn't
mean that we are
pleased with them, or that we are to be amiable; it means a
new moral
relationship, for which “love” is a new term.”
L-46
Thus there was always an ethical
“plus” in the teaching of Jesus.
Jesus
demanded a righteousness that exceeded that of the scribes and
Pharisees. Disciples weren't to pass by when they
encountered the “out-
sider” in trouble, for any “outsider” is the neighbor to
be loved. Love was
not merely a matter
of the emotions; on the contrary, it was much more of
the mind and the
will. And love is rewarded.
This does not involve any diminishing of the
quality of love, for the
supreme compensation is membership in the new family
of the kingdom.
Jesus stands alone in
his proclamation that Love made the universe and
watches over the creation, and
that mutual love is the eternal mark of life
in God’s kingdom. The good of the other must be a human
concern. The
favor of the heavenly
Father, said Jesus—that shall be his reward.
2. Paul’s
Teaching: Divine Love—The first
considerable use of
the noun agape
occurs in Paul’s letters, who so fills it with content and
makes it so central
that it virtually becomes a technical term.
Actually,
there is very little dependence on OT teaching. Paul’s primary source was
history rather than
scripture. It was the traditional
message of what God
had done in Jesus Christ that formed the articles of first
importance. This
divine act had ended
the religion based on law, replacing it with the reli-
gion of grace and
faith. It was out of his Christian life
and service, with
all its joys and tribulations that Paul’s teaching on love
emerged.
Love is revealed at the Cross, and in the character of
Jesus Christ.
“God, who is holy,
requires moral integrity and obedience from humans,
both Jew and Gentile, and
he rewards them according to their deeds.
Paul
does not quite say that Christ bore our guilt; the atonement
springs from
the love of God and Christ’s own love, so that there is an
unfathomable
mystery in the sin-bearing.
The confession of guilt and the renunciation
of sin involve a kind of
spiritual death. Rising out of death,
the believer is
clothed with Christ and becomes a person in Christ, a new
creation, a limb
of his spiritual body, the church.
The wonder of the Cross, then, was
the new word it announced con-
cerning the holy God whose wrath people feared;
God had renewed
Adam. Paul’s view rests
on the Semitic notion of solidarity by which
Adam is humanity and the king
symbolizes the nation. He did not want
to evict morality from the redeemed life, nor did he conceive of Christ
as a
mere scapegoat.
He had
discovered that sin is primarily a rebellion against divine
love; the atonement
results from the human life of God’s Son, which
evoked the gratitude and
loyalty of those who perceive God’s glory.
Paul
spoke of having a loving, trustful attitude that involves the total
persona-
lity in the acceptance of a free gift of grace. Because the Cross stands for
victory over sin
and evil, love is almighty. Divine
providence means that
God’s care is constantly exercised for humankind’s good. Believers could
be encouraged by the
assurance that love reigns and that God will never
desert them.
Within the church also, God is
present as a loving Power in the
Holy Spirit. Paul can assume that such love emerges with a newly foun-
ded
congregation. The reason for this is that
the Holy Spirit must now be
identified as the “Spirit of Jesus Christ.” The church is the family of God,
through
faith in his Son and the presence of his Son’s Spirit. Its members
are “beloved by the Lord,” elect,
“holy and beloved.” Grace is love, and
only love can bring genuine communion among men & women of diverse
race,
color, and culture.
This note of love is remarkable in
one who been a Pharisee. Paul
believed
in God as the chief fact of his life, and had a prophetic concep-
tion of the
divine work in history, electing and rejecting.
Love created,
love saved, love sanctifies. The expression “God’s love” does not occur
in
I Thessalonians, I Corinthians, Philippians and Philemon; it is replaced
by
“grace” and “peace.”
L-47
3. Paul’s
Teaching: Human Love for God—If the references to
the divine love for men are
comparatively few, what is one to say of those
to a human’s answering love for
God? There are at most 5 places where
love toward God or Christ is mentioned:
II Thessalonians 3: “May the Lord direct your hearts to the love of
God & the steadfastness of Christ.” God chose Thessalonians, but
Paul wants them to prove their obedience by deeds.
I Corinthians 2: “What God has prepared for those who love God.”
Paul is reminding Corinthian Gnostics that at the approaching end
of this age, their duty is to learn “love’s sweet lesson to obey.”
I Corinthian 16: “If any one has no love for the Lord, let him be
accursed.” The apostle sets Christ before himself & his converts
as an example. The force of this example is much heightened by
the bridal theme. A church is betrothed to Christ so that its apostle
may present it as a pure bride to its one husband. Such a unity is
at once covenantal and contractual & Paul thinks himself as bound
by the law of Christ; love imposes a service. The proper way to
progress in the knowledge of God’s truth is to obey God’s will;
growth in knowledge and discernment is to be desired.
I Corinthians 8: “If one loves God, one is known by God.” In this
chapter, love is contrasted with knowledge or gnosis: love builds
up; knowledge puffs up, is arrogant. Only through love does one
enter into the relation that might be expressed as the knowledge
of God. It may be that the Hebrew sense of knowledge of per-
sons as a love relationship would clarify the meaning; to know
anyone is to be bound up in a love fellowship. If we love God, it
is only because God has loved us in Christ.
Romans 8: “We know that in everything God works for good with
those who love him.” Christians, as the sons and daughters of
God who hope for inheritance in God’s kingdom, are expected to
love God.
Why did Paul speak
so rarely about love of God or Christ? “Beloved,”
with reference to brother
Christians, is never used of the Christ.
Per-
haps he was influenced by local conditions in Corinth, which was the
city of Aphrodite Pandemos, goddess of sexual love. One explanation
is that “love,” agape, is not proper to the human
response to God, be-
cause agape is
unconditional, unmotivated. Human
devotion must
therefore be called “faith.”
God’s free, dynamic love flows from the
believer toward the
neighbor. Christians are to love the
neighbor, not
“God in the neighbor.” Yet
the method of the Cross ceases to impress
us if it is in fact a form of
irresistible grace.
4. Paul’s Teaching: Human Love for Others—Because it is
grounded in a binding obligation to God,
the new life could not be left
at the whim of fluctuating emotion. God remained the holy One, and
humans were
set free to be his servants. A God who
is holy expects
his people to be holy, as those dedicated to him,
“saints.” This holi-
ness must be defined
in terms of the divine graces of love: patience,
tenderness, fatherly
affection, loyalty to promises, and humility.
Such
a life was to be lived “according to the Spirit.” For only so could one
become worthy of the
inheritance that awaited at the end of the age.
The motive to love one another did not, however, arise from thoughts
of
the Judgment so much as from gratitude for divine grace.
In the first
instance such love was applied by Paul to fellow mem-
bers of the church, but he
went far beyond this, and insisted that love
should determine one’s attitude
toward outsiders. Of course, even Paul
fell below the standard of love in his relationships with the churches, and
his
apostolic authority could appear overbearing; but he was conscious of
his
faults and emerges from controversy with the highest reputation.
For those who
entered the church, ancient barriers of nationality,
culture, and sex were
broken down. Marriage is consecrated,
and divorce
is forbidden, except that the Christian spouse may separate from a
pagan
partner. Paul’s principle in
guiding his converts was that love sets bounds
to individual liberty without
destroying individual responsibility. Love, be-
cause it answers to God’s very nature in redemptive action, is
the crown of
every virtue. Love is the Holy Spirit's first fruit. Here is
the source of the
later doctrine that the Spirit is Love. One scholar suggests that Paul’s mea-
ning may
be that agape gives coherence to conduct,
in much the same
way as Christ gives coherence to the universe; and Christ is
the embodi-
ment of agape.
Paul refused to
translate the duty of neighborly love into a policy of
revolution. Families were not told to love one
another. Yet the command-
ment: “Love your
neighbor as yourself,” must be relevant to family life.
Paul seems to have been held by the Jewish
idea that slaves, children, &
wives belonged to the inferior classes, so
that “submission,” “obedience,”
and “reverence” were to be addressed to them
about their duty. It was,
nonetheless, a
tremendous gain that the superiors were encouraged to
love their
inferiors.
Paul’s sensitive
awareness of the dignity and glory of genuine love
came to its magnificent
climax in the love hymn of I Corinthians 13.
“Love” is used absolutely in the poem, and this has led to divergent
defini-
tions of what is strictly in mind. The context would suggest that Paul is
concerned with human
relationships, primarily behavior within the church.
The 1st strophe indicates what is false in
the Christian life, namely glosso-
lalia or
speaking with tongues, wisdom and faith, or self-sacrifice without
love. The 2nd strophe delineates the positive
character of love as patient,
generous, not jealous, not arrogant, or dishonorable.
The 3rd strophe
contrasts love first with prophecy and gnosis, then
with faith and hope, which
all belong to the imperfect, to life here and
now, the life of struggle,
defeat, and growth. Love too is for now,
but love
is for the beatitude of heaven, where God loves us with an
everlasting, ab-
solute love. It is genuine good will that puts first the needs
and interests of
the other; it is the secret of personal unity, and as such is
forever relevant.
5. Acts; Pauline-style Letters; Catholic Letters;
Revelation—
One finds the substance of
Christian love in the early community of goods
(Acts 2), Stephen’s final cry
(Acts 7), and the constant use of “brethren.”
Ephesians, which is thoroughly
Pauline in tone and theology, emphasizes
God’s love in predestination; love is
associated with peace.
Christian love
for one another is stressed in Ephesians 4, and 5.
The absolute uses in 3 and 4 look to
brotherly love, probably, rather than
love for God or Christ. “. . . practicing the truth, we are to grow
up in
love.” In chapter 5 the expansion
of the husband and wife section is nota-
ble. Christ’s union with his church is put in terms of the marriage
relation-
ship in true Old Testament and Pauline style. Husbands should love and
cherish their wives;
wives should revere their husbands, being duly subject
as to the Lord.
L-48
Love’s inclusion
in the lists of virtues in the Pastorals is somewhat
formal. Women must pay the price of Eve’s sin, and
may win salvation by
childbearing. A
large number of nouns and adjectives compounded with
phil- “love of,” suggests the development of a new Christian
vocabulary
(e.g. lover of children, of husbands, of strangers, of God, or the
good.
Genuine believers await Christ’s
epiphany at Judgment Day. On the
whole,
the tone is colder than in Paul, yet grace and love belong together.
It is difficult to evaluate the Pastoral
letters, and the tendency to underrate
them must be resisted. Nevertheless, the final impression is that
the au-
thor does not fully understand love’s meaning as a dynamic power, the
ef-
fect of God’s Spirit.
The Catholic
letters and Revelation come from dark days of perse-
cution and long days of
disappointed hope. Hebrews too, has a
profound
sense of what God has done for sinners in the work of salvation. Chris-
tians, as always are beloved brethren
in all these documents. But the
pro-
fession of love without doing works of love is fatally easy for Christians, so
that James 2 must have rendered valuable service in its warning on that
subject.
Stress on good works of love
appear also in Hebrew 6, 10, and 13;
I Peter 2; II Peter 1; and Revelation
2. Christians who lived in the middle
of
the 100s had to learn to not just pay lip service to brotherly status and
avoid
hypocrisy. Apostasy was not unknown,
rich members despised the
poor, and even the presbyters had to be warned not to
domineer or serve
for petty gain.
Apparently it was thought that love shown to the erring or
to the church
qualified one for the pardon of one’s own sins.
6. John's Letters— John’s
letters, which are to be dated close to
100 A.D., reflect a situation when the
church was threatened by heresy.
John’s
opponents claimed that they had no need for redemption from sin.
They could go beyond mere faith to actual
vision of God. In spite of their
unlovely
temper, and immoral conduct, they said that they loved God, and
that they had
“passed from death into the life eternal.”
The sum of it all was their
assertion that they enjoyed “communion
with God.” Reading between the lines, one can see that
John was dis-
tressed by the gap between profession & practice of those
teachers who
were seeking to corrupt the faithful Christians. He states repeatedly that
he who is “of God,”
is one who acts righteously, and he loves his brethren.
John makes love a primary term in everything
he has to say of religion and
duty.
John’s outstanding
contribution to Christian theology is the sublime
sentence in the First Letter,
“God is love.” His other simple phrases
are,
“God is invisible,” and “God is light.” The proof is found in the historic
life of Jesus. The faithful, who may commit acts of sin in
spite of the fact
that God’s children properly ought to be incapable of sinning, are blessed
with the gift of Spirit.
But the Spirit is not linked to the moral life; it stands here for the
theological confession of the Incarnation, & for the witness to Jesus Christ
as the Son. Believing in God’s final
reality, disclosed in a human life, is to
love the Son of God. For believers, Christ is the norm; as he
defines the
Godhead, so he defines life’s true nature: the faithful are “children of God,”
and will
be like Christ. Those who know that the
Day of Judgment is still to
come can await it without terror.
In “God is love,”
John meant that God is so perfectly loving that one
can understand what love is
only by knowing who God is. “We love,
be-
cause he first loved us.” Divine love
elicits love from the redeemed, which
involves obedience to the divine
will. John’s call for to be a martyr
states
the royal law of neighborly love so as to exclude any casuistic idea of
lo-
ving the other only after we have taken care of loving ourselves.
It may be thought
that the “we love” of I John 4 is absolute and in-
cludes all possible
objects. He doesn't advise love of
heretics, and denies
that it is any use praying for one who has committed
mortal sin. John be-
lieved that he was
at war with those who put the whole cause of apostolic
Christianity in
jeopardy. Believers must not love the
world by practicing
organized paganism. How much warmth is there in the brotherly love of
the letters? The letters’ primary contribution is their
rigorous insistence
that love is not a matter of the lip but of the heart, and
that loving God is
meaningless if it is not expressed in love for one’s fellow
Christians.
In the Gospel of
John there is stress on the duty of obedience.
Disciple & Master share the same fate, because they are under the same
obligation. Cowardly disciples are mentioned
in John 12. Obedient disci-
ples “bear
fruit,” and this involves becoming witnesses. The son has set
them free to be spiritually responsible, and they are
promised guidance
and help of the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, as well as
the joy of commu-
nion; this theme occurs again in the story of Peter’s restoration
and com-
mission. Peter becomes the
disciple who truly loved Jesus, and here he
receives authority to be a shepherd
in the church.
The
duty of obedience may be summarily stated in terms of what is
called the
“11th commandment”: “A new commandment
I give to you,
that you love one another. It's the quality of Christ’s graciously humbling
himself, in showing a sacrificial
love that is to be the model for that of his
disciples in their relations with
each other. The reason is that God is
the
one who has the right to make such demands of men, & that Jesus speaks
in
the name of God. Moreover, Jesus is the
Master and Lord, with autho-
rity to lay down the conditions for discipleship. The moral imperative for
the redeemed is that
they should walk in the way of the Lord Christ, who
is the Truth and the Life,
following him who embodied the goodness that
pleases the heavenly Father.
The world is God’s creation through
God’s Word, and the Word be-
came flesh in that Jesus Christ ascended the cross
in order to save the
“world.” Yet Jesus' sacrifice was in order to gather
into one “God’s chil-
dren who are scattered.” John seems to mean that spiritual realities
de-
mand spiritual insight in order that they may be understood.
Unbelievers like those who caused the death
of Jesus, belong to the
devil, and on them rests the divine wrath. Because of his situation, John
emphasized
God’s caring for the disciples. Almost
nothing is said about
love to God and little about love to Christ. John seems to make more of
love’s rewards and
duties: freedom, joy, life. The
disciples’ church enjoys
communion with the Son as he does with the
Father. It is along this line
that John
develops what Paul understood by life in Christ’s body.
L-49
2 other elements are distinctive to
the 4th Gospel: the mutual love
of the Father and the Son; and the paradox
of the Son’s obedience as the
authentic mark of his divine glory. The glory of Christ is a glory he had
with
the Father before the world began; his supreme glory is that he should
have
died to redeem the sinful, and that he desires for them the love with
which
his Father loved him. One scholar would
define this love of the
Father as the “self-communication of God to the Son.” The incarnation
doctrine of the eternal Word
or Logos is John’s contribution to Christology,
but he failed to proceed to the
concept of the eternal Trinity.
In conclusion, the Father’s
relations to the Spirit and the Spirit to the
Son all belong under the concept
of love. God is love in all God’s works
and purposes. God seeks to win God’s children, patiently, graciously.
God’s will for those who turn to God through
the Son and the Spirit is that
they should live in love, forbearing one
another. Love reached down from
God to
humans that they might rise up to enjoy life in God forever.
LOVINGKINDNESS.
(חסד (khes ed)) Occasional King James Version transla-
tion
of the Hebrew word, which in the Revised Standard Version is regu-
larly rendered
“steadfast love.”
LUCIFER (הילל (hay lale)) The King James Version translation of the Hebrew.
2 different Hebrew root-words are considered
possible; one leads to the
meaning “morning star,” and the other to “Wail!” or
“Lament!”
LUCIUS
(LoukioV (loo ke os)) 1. Lucius of Cyrene, one of the prophets
and
teachers of the Christian church at Antioch (Acts 13). 2. An otherwise
unknown Christian who sent
greetings from Corinth in Romans 16. The
undoubted fact that Luke is an alternate form of Lucius has led to an
iden-
tification of this Lucius with the author of the Third Gospel and Acts. The
great likelihood that Luke was a Gentile
and Lucius a Jew tells heavily
against this identification.
LUD,
LUDIM (לוד, לודים) A people in Asia Minor , presumably. The name can
only
be identified with that of the Lydians. Since the Lydians are an an-
cient population established in Asia Minor,
the biblical genealogies are
somewhat difficult to reconcile with the historical
situation.
In Genesis 10 and I Chronicles 1, Lud appears among the sons of
Shem;
in the same chapters, Ludim appears as a son of Mizraim (Egypt),
second son of
Ham. The Lydians of Asia Minor were
neither Semites nor
Hamites, but the contradictory nature of the two
classifications of Lud and
Ludim would seem to emphasize that the people in
question were only
incidentally known to the Near East.
Historically,
the Lydians came into contact with Assyria and Egypt
in the early 600s
B.C. The Assyrians then didn't know the
language of the
Lydian envoys, but diplomatic contact was established. Better information
about Lydia became
available after the Persian army under Cyrus had con-
quered Lydia in 546 B.C. The listing of Lud among the nation in Isaiah
66
is perfectly consistent with the situation of Lydia in Asia Minor near the
western coast of it. Other references
seem to know of Lydians employed
as mercenaries in foreign armies. The presence of Lydian mercenaries in
Egypt
goes back to the days of Gyges, who sent military aid to Psammeti-
chus of Egypt
(663-609 B.C.). It doesn't seem
probable that Lydians were
important among the mercenaries in other foreign
armies.
LUHITH
(הלוהית, built of boards) A city of Moab
naim. It was apparently at the top of an ascent,
probably near the south
end of the Dead Sea.
LUKE
(EVANGELIST) (LoukoV
(loo kos)) A companion of Paul, a
physician,
and the probable author of our Third Gospel and the book of
Acts. The
Greek name occurs 3 times
in the text of the New Testament (Colos-
sians 4; II Timothy 4; Philemon
24). Luke was a physician beloved by
Paul.
It is possible, though not probable, that “Lucius of Cyrene” at Antioch
(Acts 13) is a reference to Luke. Acts
20 may imply that Luke was with
Paul at Corinth. Against this identification it has been
argued that the Lu-
cius of Romans 16 was a Jew, Luke was a Gentile; that Lucius
was a very
common Roman first name; and that the author who everywhere else
avoi-
ded mentioning himself, would not have done so in Acts 13.
L-50
Luke’s
native country is uncertain. Acts 11, 13,
and church tradition
favor Antioch in Syria as the place he lived; certain
other data in Acts point
toward Philippi. The book’s author seems to have remained in Philippi
while Paul and his
party journeyed to Achaia and rejoined them some years
later when the
missionaries again came through Philippi; it is possible that
Luke and the
Titus of II Corinthians 8 and 12 were brothers.
Luke’s medical training may have been
taken at Tarsus, which was
a famous center of learning. It was believed that the vocabulary of
Luke-
Acts was saturated with medical terminology. But it has been shown that
the writer of
Luke-Acts used no language beyond the competence of the
average, educated, non-medical
Greek of the period. If Luke the
“beloved
physician” and companion of Paul was the author of Luke-Acts, we can
de-
duce something of his character. He
was broad in his sympathies, com-
passionate toward the poor and the outcasts of
society, genuinely pious,
self-effacing, radiantly joyful, and deeply loyal. He
remained with Paul to
the end and earned the great apostle’s gratitude and
admiration.
LUKE, GOSPEL OF (kata Loukon (kat ah loo
kon)) The 3rd book of the
New Testament (NT) canon,
dedicated to the “most excellent Theophilus,”
but intended for use by a Gentile
community. He intended the gospel to be
the first of 2 parts, for the book of
Acts is clearly a sequel to it. In Luke
1
he describes the purpose which he has in view in the words: “that you may
know the truth concerning the things of which you have been informed.”
He closely followed the language and style of
his sources, and had strong
religious interests. This makes his book of inestimable value as
one of the
basic documents of historical Christianity.
List of Topics— 1. Authorship and Purpose;
2. Contents; 3. Distinctive Characteristics; 4. The
Sources of Luke and Proto-Luke; 5. Date and Place of
Writing; 6. Acceptance as Canon and Surviving Ancient
Texts
1. Authorship and Purpose—According to
tradition the gospel was
written by “Luke the beloved physician,” who after
the ascension of Christ,
when Paul had taken Luke with him as companion of his
journey, com-
posed the gospel in his own name on the basis of report.” It is confirmed
by the probability that Luke
is the author of the “we sections”—i.e. the
parts of the Acts which are written
in the first person plural. In these
sec-
tions the writer is manifestly a companion of Paul. The retention of the first
person (“we,”
etc.) is best explained by the view that the writer of these
sections is also
the author of the Acts as a whole; & strong linguistic ar-
guments have been
advanced to show that he's also the author of the
gospels.
The objections to Lukan authorship turn mainly upon the historical
problems which meet us in the Acts, especially the difficulty of reconciling
the Apostolic Council account in Acts 15 with Paul’s personal narrative in
Galatians 2; for the most part the difficulties have been exaggerated. On
the question of authorship we may, with
some confidence, conclude that
the Third Gospel was written by Luke the beloved
physician.
The author’s personal explanation of his purpose is in
the Preface of
Luke 1. He writes to
confirm in the minds of his readers the truth of what
they have been already
taught; basically his interests are historical. He
does not write as a modern historian would write or within the
limitations
of his knowledge. His intention is to record what Jesus had said
and done
in the light of certain definite interests of his own. He is not primarily a
theologian. Like Paul, Luke speaks expressly of sin, of
forgiveness and
reconciliation, and records teaching which reminds us of
Paul. In these
respects he simply hands
down primitive Christian teaching in which both
writers shared. Much of Luke’s coverage of Paul is a pale
reflection of
the kind of teaching we find in Paul.
It
is a fascinating suggestion that one reason which shaped the wri-
ting of
Luke-Acts was the desire to commend Christianity to some of the
Roman court
circle. 1st, the gospel is
related to the history in Luke 3; Ti-
berius and Augustus are mentioned. 2nd, the Roman officials of Acts
are
not unfriendly. 3rd, the
climax of Luke-Acts describes Paul’s preaching
and teaching in Rome as being
carried on “openly and unhindered.”
2. Contents—The gospel may be summarily outlined as follows:
I. The Preface (first four verses) V. The Jerusalem ministry
II. The birth and infancy stories (1-2) (20-21)
III. The Galilean ministry (3-9) VI. Passion and resurrection
IV. Journey to Jerusalem via Samaria story (22-24)
(10-19)
(10-19)
L-51
There are several
important statements in the Preface, the only one
of its kind in the Synoptic
gospels. Luke speaks of many predecessors.
Who the others were we do not know, and it is pointless to guess. Luke
may be referring to those, including
perhaps himself, who had already
strung together groups of narratives and
sayings illustrative of various as-
pects of the ministry of Jesus.
The change from the
excellent Greek of the Preface to the Greek
with heavy Hebrew influences in the
rest of chapter 1 and all of chapter
2 is noted by all commentators. Semitic idioms and the biblical style of
the
stories suggest that the evangelist either is using a Hebrew or Aramaic
document or is deliberately adapting his language to that of the Primary
Greek
Old Testament (OT). A series of
narratives announce John the Bap-
tist’s birth, and a second series sketch
Jesus’ early life, ending with his vi-
sit to Jerusalem and the temple at the age
of 12. These 2 chapters have a
marked
Jewish-Christian character, and contain the great hymns which
have come to be
known as the Benedictus, the Magnificat, the Gloria in
Excelsis, and the Nunc
Dimittis.
The early ministry is introduced
with an account of John’s prea-
ching and Jesus’ baptism Jesus. “Full of the Holy Spirit,” Jesus is led into
the wilderness and “tempted by the devil.”
Luke sets at the ministry’s be-
ginning an independent account of Jesus’ preaching
at Nazareth, a story
which sounds the note of universalism characteristic of
his special inte-
rests. He introduces
material peculiar to his gospel, in the narratives of
the first disciples’ call.
In chapter 6 he introduces the Great Sermon in a
more compact form than that
found in Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount
(Matt. 5-7). Luke also retells Mark’s stories of the lake storm,
the Gera-
sene demoniac, the raising of Jarius’ daughter, the second prophecy of
the
Passion, the child in the midst, etc.
The journey to Jerusalem through
Samaria opens with: “When the
days drew
near for him to be received up, he set his face to go to Jerusa-
lem.” Manifestly, Luke had no detailed
chronological knowledge of the
course of events in this journey. Various reasons have been suggested for
this
want of continuity. The best view is
that Luke has followed the order
of Q, that source of material common to Luke
and Matthew, but absent
from Mark. To
this he added his special tradition at appropriate points.
More important than the origins of this long
section is the distinc-
tively Lukan material which it contains, such as the
parables of the Good
Samaritan, the lost sheep, the rich man and Lazarus, etc.,
and the stories
like that of Martha and Mary. In the Jerusalem ministry section Luke is
again largely dependent on
Mark for his account of the controversies in
Jerusalem and at least part of
the discourse on the Mount of Olives. A
fea-
ture of the Lukan discourse is that it emphasizes the political aspects of
Jesus’ teaching, rather than his views on Judgment Day.
The passion and resurrection stories
of chapters 22-24 presents the
greatest difficulties to the commentator. Is it a re-edited version of Mark’s
account,
with certain Lukan additions, or is it an independent Lukan ac-
count of the Passion
with Markan supplements? The beauty,
pathos, and
religious value of the distinctively Lukan elements in chapters
22-24 are
recognized by all. The passion
narrative, and the gospel as a whole, finds
an impressive climax in the words: “Then he led them out as far as Betha-
ny, and lifting up his hands he blessed
them. While he blessed them, he
parted
from them. And they returned to
Jerusalem with great joy and were
continually in the temple blessing God.”
3. Distinctive
Characteristics—The quality of universalism has al-
ready been noted in the
account of the sermon at Nazareth
out the gospel. There is
a concern for social relationships in the Beati-
tudes addressed to the poor and
woes addressed to the rich (Luke 6), and
to quote the biblical scholar Harnack: “[Jesus] has a boundless love for
sinners,
together with the most confident hope of their forgiveness and
amendment.”
An interest in stories about women is illustrated in
the descriptions
of the Virgin, Elizabeth, Anna, the widow at Nain, the
penitent harlot, the
ministering women from Galilee, Martha and Mary, the bent
woman, and
the women mentioned in the parables of the lost coin and the unjust
judge.
The angelic message to the
shepherds speaks of “good news of a great
joy which will come to all the
people.”
The graciousness of the Lukan Jesus
is universally recognized. It is
not
always recognized that along with this graciousness there is an imperi-
ous note
in the sayings. Complete renunciation of
material goods is re-
quired in the words which follow the parable of the rash
king. The sonship
of Christ is not
emphasized to the degree illustrated in the Pauline letters.
Luke puts more stress upon the lordship of
Christ. The evangelist uses
the title
“the Lord” at least 18 times. Luke’s
interest taken in the Passion
resembles Mark, but there is perhaps a greater
interest in its tragic as-
pects. In Luke,
Christ is the divine Son and Lord who in obedience to his
Father fulfills a
ministry of grace which culminates in suffering, death, and
resurrection.
L-52
4. The
Sources of Luke and Proto-Luke —The sources of Luke
are Mark, Q, L, and the
birth and infancy story. Luke’s use of
Mark is be-
yond question. It is one of
his principal sources, and provides the frame-
work of his gospel. The use of Mark is most obvious in the long
section
of 4:31-22:13. Here the Markan
sections are: Luke 4:31-44; 5:12-6:11;
8:4-9:50; 18:15-43; 19:29-36, 45-46;
20:1-21:11, 21:16-17; 22:1-13. In
these
passages the proportion of words shared with Mark ranges from
52% to 68%. It is important to observe that, while Luke
uses Mark, he
omits nearly half the material in his source.
Q (from the German word Quelle or source) is the sayings source
used independently by
Matthew and Luke. The material Luke
derives from
Q amounts to some 220-230 verses. Some of the longer Q passages in-
clude: 4:1-13; 6:27-49; 7:1-10, 18-28,
1-5; 10:2-16; 11:9-26, 29-35; 12:2-
12, 22-31, 39-46; 13:18-29; 14: 15-24;
17:1-6. Q may have been prece-
ded by
short groups of sayings and parables, but there can be little doubt
that it was
in the form of a document at the time when Matthew and Luke
wrote. There are good grounds for believing that
Luke reproduces Q in its
original order, and that he adheres closely to its
text. An important fact
bearing upon the
composition of the gospel is that material from Mark is
not introduced into Q
contexts and Q sayings are not inserted in Markan
contexts.
The evangelist owes more of his
material to L, a source peculiar to
Luke.
It is best to regard L as a body of oral tradition which Luke first
re-
duced to writing at Caesarea. Some
400-450 verses belong to this source
apart from the 132 verses in Luke
1-2. It is the L material which gives
its
distinctive character to the Third Gospel. A reasonable conjecture is that
this L material was collected by Luke
around 60 A.D. in the house of Phi-
lip the evangelist at Caesarea, who had four
unmarried daughters. It may
well be that
these women were the evangelist’s intermediaries. The proba-
bility that his information reached
him in an oral form is supported by the
fact that his distinctive style is
especially marked in the stories and para-
bles derived from this source.
The biblical style and the Semitic
idioms of the birth and infancy
narratives have already been mentioned. To what extent they are due to
Luke himself
and how much they are distinctive features of a source is
open to
question. Luke may be dependent on oral
tradition and used the
Primary Greek OT’s idioms as being appropriate to these
stories. These
stylistic features are
more strongly marked in the annunciation to Mary.
The intermediaries are probably women,
perhaps those who handed down
the L tradition.
It has often been conjectured that the ultimate authority for
the birth
stories is Mary the Virgin.
This
suggestion must remain conjecture, since it depends for its
force upon the
view taken of the birth and infancy tradition’s historical va-
lue. There's
disagreement as to how Luke has used the 4 sources de-
scribed above. It is generally accepted that Mark forms the
framework into
which Luke introduced matter he drew from Q and L, prefacing
the whole
with the birth and infancy section and inserting his special
tradition in the
passion and resurrection stories.
Although the existence of Proto-Luke is disputed, a
summary state-
ment of the hypothesis must be supplied. Proto-Luke is not a lost gospel,
but a first
draft on which, it is presumed, Luke drew when composing his
gospel. According to the hypothesis, he began with Q
and expanded it with
material from L and an account of the Passion and the
Resurrection. Later
he enlarged it with
extracts from Mark. The Q passages in
the gospel are
constantly combined with material from L, but Q and the Markan
passages
stand apart. The Markan
sections in Luke appear to be inserted in non-
Markan contexts. The non-Markan parts of Luke form a readable
whole
with a continuity of their own.
The passages which belonged to Proto-Luke include:
3:1-4:30;
5:1-11; 6:20-8:3; 9:51-18:14; 19:1-28, 37-44, 47-48;
22:14-24:53. In gene-
ral, one must say
that the hypothesis has suffered from attempts to deter-
mine too precisely the
contents of Proto-Luke. If Q + L had
been com-
piled before the gospel in its present form, then the importance of
Proto-
Luke as a source slightly earlier than Mark and comparable with it, is
great.
5. Date
and Place of Writing—The date is not easy to determine,
but most is to be
said for a date of 80 A.D. A date around
60 A.D. has been
suggested. The
difficulty in accepting this date is that it compels us to as-
sign Luke-Acts to
a period earlier than the contents of these writings would
naturally suggest,
and to date Mark as early as 50-60. Mark
13: 14 sug-
gests that the investment of Jerusalem
Mark was no earlier that 65-67, then Luke
must be later.
Many scholars have held that Luke owes a lot to
Josephus, because
Luke’s language reflects the vocabulary and style of
Josephus. The lingui-
stic argument for
dependence upon the works of Josephus is held by very
many scholars to be “not
proven” or “not quite conclusive.” The common-
ly
accepted view is that in consequence of his use of Mark, Luke’s Gospel
belongs
to the period 70-80. In light of
references to the fate of the city, a
date after the fall of Jerusalem (70)
seems probable.
L-53
Where the gospel was written we don't know. The Achaea tradition
has no
strong arguments in its favor. The
probability is that Luke first read
the Gospel of Mark at Rome, and the
possibility that one of the reasons
Luke-Acts was written was to present the
case for Christianity to Rome.
The most
that can be said is that of all suggestions regarding the place of
writing, it
is that Rome is the most probable location.
6. Acceptance as Canon and Surviving Ancient Texts—The
gos-
pel has been included among the books recognized as authoritative in the
church from the time when the NT writings first began to be collected, but
its
history in the first half of the 100s A.D. is obscure. It is widely agreed
that Marcion (140 A.D.)
abbreviated Luke’s Gospel in forming his canon.
There is general consent that Justin Martyr
drew upon all the Synoptic gos-
pels in writing his Apologies. In 185, Irenaeus
attests the existence of the
4-fold gospel.
At the end of the 100s the gospel occupied an undisputed
place among the
books recognized as scripture by all parts of the Christian
church.
The Codex Bezae (D) is the chief
authority for the text that is pre-
sently used both in the East and the
West. When compared with other sur-
viving
manuscripts there are numerous additions and omissions in D. In
most of the omissions Codex Bezae is
supported by important Old Latin
manuscripts.
2 other passages must be mentioned because they are omit-
ted by a
number of manuscripts. 1st there is
22: 43-44, which describes
the agony and bloody sweat, and 2nd there is
23:34 “And Jesus said, ‘Fa-
ther, forgive them; for they know not what they do.’
” The 1st verse was
omitted because it
was felt that it was derogatory to the full divinity of
Christ. The 2nd was omitted because in the 100s
some found it difficult to
believe that God could, or ought to, forgive the
Jews.
An outstanding feature of the gospel
is its many points of value. Its
use of
sources upon historical problems is one of these. Luke’s version is
always of interest because
he's the earliest commentator on Mark’s gospel.
His special tradition, however, is the theme
of greatest interest on the criti-
cal side, for the artistry of his writing
shouldn't be allowed to conceal from
us the wealth of the early tradition he
records.
The stories have been shortened
& rounded in the course of trans-
mission and developed by Luke’s art, so that
in them there is a combina-
tion of simplicity and directness with a certain
vagueness of outline. Per-
haps the greatest
service of the gospel is its value to the preacher, in its
broad humanity, the
beauty of its parables, and its portraiture of Jesus.
Luke’s Gospel will always stand out as that
of a “scribe of the gentleness
of Christ.”
LUNATICK (selhniazetai (seh lay
nee az eh tahee)) Once a popular term
for “epileptic,” used
by the King James Version to translate the Greek
term. Probably the popular belief was that the
influence of the moon had
caused a demon to enter.
LUST (נפש (neh fesh), breath; תאוה (ta av aw),
desire; עגבה (ag aw baw);
epiqumhthV (ep ee thoo meh tes), ardent desire for) The
biblical terms
that are usually translated by this word carry the meaning
of “passionate
desire,” especially
“sexual desire,” or “desire for worldly pleasures.” In
the Old Testament the root ‘agabah is related largely to the entire
commu-
nity of Israel or to other nations.
Although such usage represents the per-
sonification of the nations
concerned, it undoubtedly reflects the experi-
ence of personal lust also. The New Testament has words for “lusts,”
“pas-
sion,” “burn with sexual desire,” and the like.
LUSTRATION. The cultic act of purification as by propitiatory
sacrifice or ritual
washing.
LUZ (לוז,
almond-tree) 1. The early name of
the Canaanite city renamed Beth-
el by Jacob.
Joshua 16 contains the expression “from Bethel to Luz,” as if
2
different cities existed at the same time on the northern border of Joseph.
With a theory that Luz and Bethel
been located
by some scholars at et-Tell, near Bethel
land of the Hittites built by a man from Bethel (Luz).
LYCAONIA (lukaonia) A region in south central Asia Minor . Its border varied
and often do not appear
clearly defined. The region was, for the
most part,
a high, treeless plateau, not well watered & with a more than
average salt
content in the soil. The
origin of the Lycaonians is uncertain.
Galatia and
Cappadiocia were combined for a time; and in the 100s A.D.,
Lycaonia,
Isauria, and Cilicia were united in one province.
See also the article in the Old Testament Apocrypha/Influences
Outside the Bible Section of the Appendix.
L-54
Lystra and Derbe were leading cities of Lycaonia. The Lycaonian
language did not die out, for
when Paul healed the crippled man, the crowd
fell back into the use of their
native tongue, cried out in Lycaonian that
“the gods have come down to us in
the likeness of men.” The books of
Acts clearly reports the presence of aggressive Jews at Pisidian, Antioch
and Iconium, but gives little evidence of a Jewish
community at Lystra and
Derbe.
Timothy
came from Lystra and his mother was a Jewess. This would
fit with the fact that there were large numbers of Jews in
Asia Minor. Paul
visited cities in
Lycaonia at least 3 times. Paul and Silas passed through
the Cilician
gates to reach the high
tablelands of central Asia
Minor , streng-
thened the churches
of Derbe and Lystra, and took Timothy as a helper on
their further missionary
journeys. Christian inscriptions show
that the
church had made great headway in Lycaonia by the 200s A.D.
fertile
valleys of the Xanthus and other streams support a highly civilized
group of
cities. Lycia was ruled by the Persians,
Alexander the Great, and
the Seleucid and Ptolemaic dynasties. In 43 A.D. Emperor Claudius made
Lycia a
Roman province. After that, Lycia was
free again for a few years.
Later in 74, Vespasian joined it with Pamphylia.
Among the important ports of Lycia were Myra and
Patara. These
Lycian ports were natural stopover
points for ships carrying Jews from
ports in the western Mediterranean to
Jerusalem, and for Alexandrian grain
ships sailing westward using shore winds,
when the prevailing winds were
from the west out on the sea.
The letter the Romans sent to the confederation of Lycian
cities
around 139 B.C. to urge good treatment of the Jews shows that there were
Jews in at least the important cities of Lycia.
A petition against the Chris-
tians was directed by Lycians to the
Emperor Maximin in 312 A.D.
her name occurs only in Acts 16. Lydia sold purple-dyed goods which she
brought
to Philippi from Thyatira. She was apparently well-to-do, for a con-
siderable
amount of capital was needed to trade in such goods. Lydia
heard and conversed with Paul; she & her household were baptized. Her
hospitality relieved the apostle of the necessity of earning his living in Phi-
lippi; Paul also accepted gifts from the Philippian church, thus permitting
the church there to support him as he didn't allow any other church to do.
Paul’s Letter to the Philippians reveals
his special love for their church;
Lydia’s help must have been a chief cause of
this unique relationship.
from an old component in the peninsula’s population. Its territory lies
mostly in river
valleys. The Lydians never seem to have
been interested in
the sea; their own strength lay inland. Their capital, Sardis, was located
deep in
the Hermus Valley.
In prehistoric times the region belonged to a culture which
deve-
loped local traits typical of western Asia Minor. Indications point to a con-
trast between a
conservative inland element and a more active coastal
region where commerce and
warfare had more scope. In the records of
the Hittite Empire no specific references
to the Lydian region can be iden-
tified.
Rock-cut monuments of the Hittite period exist in two Lydian sites:
the
“Niobe,” and the reliefs of a warrior near Karabel. They show that the
Lydian area was exposed to
Hittite cultural penetration.
Our direct historical information begins after the
fall of the Bronze
Age empires and the subsequent dark ages. Lydia then appears in Assy-
rian, Persian, and Greek
texts. Gyges of Lydia was the founder of
the
Mermnad Dynasty. Gyges ruled around
685-652 B.C. Under him, Lydia
gathered
considerable strength as an independent country. His country
was threatened by the Cimmerians,
so Gyges entered into contact with
Ashurbanipal (668 B.C.). The Assyrians may have aided Gyges
indi-
rectly. The Lydian king succeeded in
defeating the Cimmerians. Later he
sought an alliance with Psammetichus I of Egypt. The Cimmerians ran-
sacked Lydia after this,
and Gyges died in these raids.
Gyges’ son Ardys (652-615 B.C.) restored good relations
with Assy-
ria. His successors were
Sadyattes (615-605) and Alyattes
(605-560) who
finally expelled the Cimmerians from Lydia
rose to power as a major adversary of Alyattes. By that time the power of
Lydia had extended
far beyond its original limits. The most
famous of Ly-
dian kings, Croesus appeared to Greek historians as the prototype
of a
wealthy oriental monarch. The
Persians successors to the Median Empire
proved too strong for the Lydian
kingdom. After an undecided battle
be-
tween Cyrus and Croesus, Cyrus pursued the unsuspecting Lydians west
and
captured Sardis in 546 B.C.
See also the
entry in the Old Testament Apocrypha/Influences
Outside the Bible section of
the Appendix.
L-55
The Lydian language is insufficiently known, although
a good num-
ber of inscriptions were found at Sardis. Lydian art is strongly influenced
by eastern
Greek and Persian styles. Croesus' wealth was proverbial. Ly-
dia established
a reputation also for its textile and carpet industries. The
old cults of Lydia were tenaciously
preserved into Roman times, including
worship of the Anatolian mother-goddess
and a youthful male god. There
was a
Jewish element in Lydia, since Antiochus III (223-187 B.C.) proba-
bly settled
2,000 Jewish families from Babylonia in Lydia and Phrygia.
The rise of Christianity in Lydia can be measured
by the presence of three
of the seven churches of Revelation in this country: Thyatira, Sardis, and
Philadelphia.
LYE (בר (bore),
soap; נתר (nie ter), niter soap) A substance used for clean-
sing purposes;
it may have been sodium carbonate. It
may also have re-
ferred to potassium carbonate, made from wood ashes. In Palestine it
was probably the latter.
LYING (כזב (ko zeh bah);
שקר (shaw kar),
deceiving; רמה (ra mah), de-
ceive; yeudoV (psyoo dos); planh (plah neh), deception) The sin of
speaking or
acting falsely, deceitfully, or treacherously.
It may occur with or
without deliberate intent.
In Hebrew thought, lying appears as a spiritual
distortion which does
violence to a man’s true being, to his communal
relations, and to his stan-
ding with God. In the New Testament it is construed more in intellectual
terms; it
retains its religious character as opposition to God’s saving truth.
As truthfulness is admonished in God’s
people, lying and all deceit are for-
bidden. A heinous sin is the bearing of false witness. Diviners and pro-
phets who bring false oracles
are frequently condemned.
LYSANIAS (LusaniaV) The tetrarch of Abilene
15th
year of the Roman emperor Tiberius. No
other reference to any Lysa-
nias in this period has survived. However a Lysanias is known from the
Jewish
historian Josephus, one who succeeded to the throne of Chalcis &
was executed
by Mark Antony in 36 B.C. Many
responsible scholars have
concluded that Luke committed an error. There are two inscriptions which
identifies
Zenodorus as the son of a Lysanias who lived later than the one
mentioned above.
Abilene was added to Agrippa II’s kingdom in Claudius’
time (53
A.D.). If there was actually a
second Lysanias, then conceivably between
40 B.C. and 53 A.D. there could have
been more who had this name.
What
puzzles many scholars is why should Abilene
Luke’s chronological purposes.
LYSIAS, CLAUDIUS
(KlaudioV
Lusias) Commander
of a cohort of Roman
troops in Jerusalem
tower Antonia northwest of the temple
area. He rescued Paul from the
crowd,
discovered his Roman citizenship, had him examined by the San-
hedrin, and sent
him to Caesarea .
LYSTRA (h Lustra) A town in the central part of southern Asia Minor . Lystra
is an ancient site in
the Lycaonia district; Lystra was one of the most pro-
minent regional
centers. Iconium is 32 km to the
northeast.
The Lycaonians were a small Anatolian tribe speaking
their own
idiom; Lycaonian was still spoken in the 500s A.D. The site of Lystra has
been known with
certainty since 1885. The mound is a
prehistoric tell with
accumulations dating back to the 2000s and 1000s B.C.,
but actively inha-
bited in classical times.
The name of Lystra presumably goes back to pre-
historic times, and the
plain around Lystra is fertile.
See also the
entry in the Old Testament Apocrypha/Influences Out-
side the Bible section of
the Appendix.
In New Testament times, Lystra was still a Roman colony,
except for
38-72 A.D., when it and Derbe were ruled by Antiochus IV of
Commagene.
Antoninus Pius made them part
of Cilicia. Paul and Barnabas fled the
hos-
tility of the Jews at Iconium to Lystra and Derbe. In Lystra, Paul healed a
crippled man. At this first visit of Paul, Lystra's local people were friendly
until Jews from Antioch and Iconium created disturbances. Paul and Bar-
nabas left for Derbe, which is
about 96 km to the southeast of Lystra. Paul
also made a second visit to Derbe and Lystra. The coins of Lystra conti-
nued into the rule of
Marcus Aurelius 161-180). The later history of the
site is obscure, although there are some listings of the bishops of Lystra.
L-56
No comments:
Post a Comment