|
|
FULL BACKGROUND
GARDENS — mentioned in Scripture, of Eden (Gen. 2:8, 9); Ahab’s garden of herbs (1 Kings 21:2); the royal garden (2 Kings 21:18); the royal
garden at Susa (Esther 1:5); the garden of Joseph of Arimathea (John 19:41); of Gethsemane (John 18:1).
The “king’s garden†mentioned 2 Kings 25:4, Neh. 3:15, was near the Pool of Siloam.
Gardens were surrounded by hedges of thorns (Isa. 5:5) or by walls of stone (Prov. 24:31).
“Watch-towers†or “lodges†were also built in them
(Isa. 1:8; Mark 12:1), in which their keepers sat.
On account of their retirement they were frequently used as places for secret prayer and
communion with God (Gen. 24:63; Matt. 26:30–36; John 1:48; 18:1, 2).
The dead were sometimes buried in gardens (Gen. 23:19, 20; 2 Kings 21:18, 26; 1 Sam. 25:1; Mark 15:46; John 19:41). (See PARADISE.) 1
GARDEN. It was promised that the lives of God’s redeemed people would be like a watered garden, ordered and fruitful (Is. 58:11; Je. 31:12; cf. Nu.24:6).
In Egypt the Hebrews had known richly productive vegetable-gardens (Dt. 11:10; cf. Nu 11:5; *Food). Fed from an irrigation-ditch, or from vessels by hand, a network of little earth channels criss-crossed the vegetable-beds like a chessboard. By merely breaching and resealing the
wall of such a channel with the foot, water could be released on to the beds as needed.
In Palestine people cultivated gardens for vegetables (‘garden of *herbs‘, 1 Ki. 21:2; ‘what is sown’, Is. 61:11), and fruit (Am. 9:14; Je.
29:5, 28; Ct. 4:16). Gardens might be associated with, or even part of, vineyards, olive-groves or orchards (Ec. 2:5; Am. 4:9; cf. 1 Ki. 21:2).
Spices and choice plants featured in the gardens of royalty and of the nobility (Ct. 5:1; 6:2, 11 (walnuts); cf. 4:12-16 generally; Ec. 2:5). These
and other gardens were walled round (cf. Ct. 4:12) and had to be kept watered, e.g. from a spring or pool (Ct. 4:15; cf. ‘ Ec. 2:5-6; contrast Is.
1:30). They may also have sometimes contained a summerhouse (2 Ki. 9:27). The ‘king’s garden’ at Jerusalem was a well-known landmark (2 Ki. 25:4; Je. 39:4; 52:7; Ne. 3:15); and the Persian royal palace is mentioned as having a pleasure-garden (Est. 1:5; 7:7-8). Similarly, Egyptian and
Mesopotamian kings kept fine gardens; and a garden once occupied a large court inside the sumptuous palace of the kings of Canaanite Ugarit (14th-
13th century BC). For full references to gardens in Assyria and Babylonia and the many trees and plants they contained, see in Ebeling, Meissner and Weidner, Reallexikon der Assyriologie, 3, 1959, pp. 147-150.
Tombs were sometimes situated in gardens. (2 Ki. 21:18, 26; Jn. 18:1, 26; 19:41; *Gethsemane). A less happy use of gardens was for pagan rites,
perhaps linked with the fertility cults of Canaan (Is. 1:29; 65:3; 66:17).
The Garden of *Eden was a symbol of God-created fertility (Gn. 13:10; Is. 51:3, etc.). K.A.K 2
PARADISE — a Persian word (pardes), properly meaning a “pleasureground†or “park†or “king’s garden.†(See EDEN.) It came in course of time to be used as a name for the world of happiness and rest hereafter (Luke 23:43; 2 Cor. 12:4; Rev. 2:7). For “garden†in Gen. 2:8 the LXX.
has “paradise.†1
PARADISE. Paradise is a loan-word from ancient Iranian (SDLULGDH.]D-) and means a garden with a wall. The Gk. word SDUDGHLVRV is used for the first time by Xenophon for the gardens of the Persian kings. LXX translates JDQµH.GHQ of Gn. 2:8 by SDUDGHLVRV_
a. In the Old Testament
The word paradise (Heb. SDUGH.V) appears in Ne. 2:8; Ec. 2:5; Ct. 4:13. RSV renders it by ‘king’s forest’ in Ne., ‘park’ in Ec. and ‘orchard’ in Ct.
The actual word is thus nowhere used in the OT in an eschatological sense, which meaning developed in the later Jewish world. The following trends
can be discerned. The word paradise (Aram. SDUGH.VD.) was used to give expression to the meaning of primeval times (German Urzeit) and then
expanded to include fantastic speculations on the glory and bliss of those times. This was connected with the expectations of a wonderful Messianic
time in the future. This coming age of glory would be identical with the garden of Eden of ancient times. The Jews believed also that paradise was
present in their own time, but concealed. This concealed paradise was the place to which the souls of the Patriarchs, the chosen and the righteous people, were taken. The ancient, future and present paradise were regarded as being identical.
b. In the New Testament The word paradise (Gk. SDUDGHLVRV) occurs in only three instances in the NT (Lk. 23:43; 2 Cor. 12:3; Rev. 2:7). The
context shows that the predominating sense is that of the later development of the word. In Lk. 23:43 the word ‘paradise’ is used by Jesus for the place
where souls go immediately after death, cf. the concealed paradise in later Jewish thought. The same idea is also present in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk. 16:19-31).
In 2 Cor. 12:2-4 Paul wrote in the third person of his experience of being caught up into paradise where he heard unspeakable words (Gk. DUUKH.WD_UKH.PDWD). In this case paradise is the ‘third *heaven‘ with its glory, perhaps the same as in Lk. 23. The only place where paradise is used in an eschatological sense is in Rev. 2:7. The promise is made by Christ that he will give paradise as a gift to the one who overcomes. The present paradise will come in its full glory with the final consummation. The idea of a garden of God in the world to come is strongly emphasized in the last chapters of Revelation. The symbols of the tree of life, of life-giving water, and of the twelve kinds of fruit are all witnesses to the glory of the coming paradise (Rev. 22). F.C.F. 2
EDEN — delight.
(1.) The garden in which our first parents dwelled (Gen. 2:8–17). No geographical question has been so much discussed as that bearing on its site. It has been placed in Armenia, in the region west of the Caspian Sea, in Media, near Damascus, in Palestine, in Southern Arabia, and in Babylonia. The site must undoubtedly be sought for somewhere along the course of the great streams the Tigris and the Euphrates of Western Asia, in “the land of Shinar†or Babylonia. The region from about lat. 33 degrees 30’ to lat. 31 degrees, which is a very
rich and fertile tract, has been by the most competent authorities agreed on as the probable site of Eden. “It is a region where streams abound, where they divide and re-unite, where alone in the Mesopotamian tract can be found the phenomenon of a single river parting into four arms, each of which is or has been a river of consequence.â€
Among almost all nations there are traditions of the primitive innocence of our race in the garden of Eden. This was the “golden age†to which the
Greeks looked back. Men then lived a “life free from care, and without labour and sorrow. Old age was unknown; the body never lost its vigour;
existence was a perpetual feast without a taint of evil. The earth brought forth spontaneously all things that were good in profuse abundance.â€
(2.) One of the markets whence the merchants of Tyre obtained richly embroidered stuffs (Ezek. 27:23); the same, probably, as that mentioned in
2 Kings 19:12, and Isa. 37:12, as the name of a region conquered by the Assyrians.
(3.) Son of Joah, and one of the Levites who assisted in reforming the public worship of the sanctuary in the time of Hezekiah (2 Chr. 29:12). 1
EDEN, GARDEN OF. The place which God made for Adam to live in, and from which Adam and Eve were driven after the Fall.
I. The name
The MT states that God planted a garden in Eden JDQ_E_ ´H.GBHQ; Gn. 2:8), which indicates that the garden was not co-extensive with Eden, but must have been an enclosed area within it. The LXX and Vulg. and subsequent commentators have noted that to a Hebrew-speaker the name ´H.GBHQ would suggest the homophonous root meaning ‘delight’; but many scholars now hold that Eden is not a proper name, but a common noun from the Sumerian HGLQ, ‘plain, steppe’, borrowed either direct from Sumerian, or via Akkadian (HGLQX), the garden thus being
situated in a plain, or flat region. From its situation in Eden the garden came to be called the ‘garden of Eden’ ( JDQ_´H.GBHQ; Gn. 2:15; 3:23-24;
Ezk. 36:35; Joel 2:3), but it ‘ was also referred to as the ‘garden of God’ ( JDQ__ OR.KɦP, Ezk. 28:13; 31:9) and the ‘garden of the Lord’
(JDQ_<+:+, Is. 51:3). In Gn. 2:8ff. the word JDQ, ‘garden’, and in Is. 51:3 ´H.GBHQ itself, is rendered SDUDGHLVRV by the LXX, this being a loanword from Old Persian (Avestan) SDLULGDH.]D, ‘enclosure’, which came to mean ‘park, pleasure ground’, and from this usage came English
*’paradise’ for the garden of Eden.
II. The rivers
A river came from Eden, or the plain, and watered the garden, and from thence it was parted and became four heads (UD.µVÛɦP, Gn. 2:10). The word
UR.µVÛ, ‘head, top, beginning’, is interpreted variously by scholars to mean either the beginning of a branch, as in a delta, going downstream, or the beginning or junction of a tributary, going upstream. Either interpretation is possible, though the latter is perhaps the more probable. The names of the four tributaries or mouths, which were evidently outside the garden, are given as SɦVÛR¦Q (Gn. 2:11), JɦK?R¦Q (2:13), K?LGGHTHO (2:14) and S_ UD.WB (2:14).
The last two are identified, without dissent, with the *Tigris and *Euphrates respectively, but the identifications for the Pishon and Gihon are almost as diverse as they are numerous, ranging from the Nile and Indus to tributaries of the Tigris in Mesopotamia. Sufficient data are not
available to make it possible to identify either of these two rivers with certainty.
Gn. 2:6 states that ‘a mist (µH.GB went up from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground’. It is possible that µH.GB corresponds to Akkad. HGX¦, itself a loan-word from Sumerian LG, ‘river’, indicating that a river went up or overflowed upon the ground and provided natural irrigation. It seems reasonable to understand this as relating to the inside of the garden.
III. The contents of the garden
If the statement in Gn. 2:5-6 may be taken to indicate what did subsequently take place within the garden, an area of arable land (VnD.GBHK,
AV ‘field’) to be tilled by Adam may be postulated. On this were to grow plants (Vnɦ_ K?) and herbs (H.VnHEB), perhaps to be understood as shrubs and cereals respectively. There were also trees of every kind, both beautiful and
fruit-bearing (Gn. 2:9), and two in particular in the middle of the garden, the tree of life, to eat from which would make a man live for ever (Gn.
3:22), and the tree of knowledge of good and evil, from which man was specifically forbidden to eat (Gn. 2:17; 3:3). Many views of the meaning of
‘the knowledge of good and evil’ in this context have been put forward.
One of the most common would see it as the knowledge of right and wrong, but it is difficult to suppose that Adam did not already possess this,
and that, if he did not, he was forbidden to acquire it. Others would connect it with the worldly knowledge that comes to man with maturity,
and which can be put to either a good or bad use. Another view would take the expression ‘good and evil’ as an example of a figure of speech whereby
an autonymic pair signifies totality, meaning therefore ‘everything’ and in the context universal knowledge. Against this is the fact that Adam, having eaten of the tree, did not gain universal knowledge. Yet another view would see this as a quite ordinary tree, which was selected by God to provide an ethical test for the man, who ‘would acquire an experiential knowledge of good or evil according as he was stedfast in obedience or fell away into disobedience’ (NBC, pp. 78f.). (*Fall, *Temptation.) There were also animals in the garden, cattle (E_ KH.PD¦, *Beast), and beasts of the field (Gn. 2:19-20), by which may perhaps be understood those animals which were suitable for domestication. There were also birds.
IV. The neighbouring territories
Three territories are named in connection with the rivers. The Tigris is said to have gone ‘east of Assyria’ ( TLGBPDWB_µDVÛVÛX¦U, literally ‘in front of µDVÛVÛX¦U‘; Gn. 2:14), an expression which could also mean ‘between µDVÛVÛX¦U and the spectator’. The name µDVÛVÛX¦U could refer either to the state of Assyria, which first began to emerge in the early 2nd millennium BC, or the
city of Assur, mod. 4DO´DW_6KDUTD¦W on the W bank of the Tigris, the earliest capital of Assyria, which was flourishing, as excavations have shown, in the early 3rd millennium BC. Since even at its smallest extent Assyria probably lay on both sides of the Tigris, it is probable that the city is meant and that the phrase correctly states that the Tigris ran to the. E of Assur.
Secondly, the river Gihon is described as winding through (VD.EBDEB) ‘the whole land of Cush’ ( NX¦VÛ, Gn. 2:13). *Cush in the Bible usually signifies Ethiopia, and has commonly been taken in this passage (e.g. AV) to have that meaning; but there was also a region to the E of the Tigris, from which the Kassites descended in the 2nd millennium, which had this name, and this may be the meaning in this passage.
Thirdly, the Pishon is described as winding through the whole land of *Havilah (Gn. 2:11). Various products of this place are named: gold, *bdellium and VÛR.KDP-stone (Gn. 2:11-12),
the latter being translated ‘onyx’ in the EVV, but being of uncertain meaning. Since bdellium is usually taken to indicate an aromatic gum, a
characteristic product of Arabia, and the two other biblical usages of the name Havilah also refer to parts of Arabia, it is most often taken in this context to refer to some part of that peninsula.
V. The location of the garden of Eden
Theories as to the location of the garden of Eden are numerous. That most commonly held, by Calvin, for instance, and in more recent times by F. Delitzsch and others, is the view that the garden lay somewhere in Mesopotamia, the Pishon and Gihon being either canals connecting the Tigris and Euphrates, tributaries joining these, or in one theory the Pishon being the body of water from the Persian Gulf to the Red Sea, compassing the Arabian peninsula. These theories assume that the four ‘heads’ ( AV) of Gn. 2:10 are tributaries which unite in one main stream, which then joins
the Persian Gulf; but another group of theories takes ‘heads’ to refer to branches spreading out from a supposed original common source, and
seeks to locate the garden in the region of Armenia, where both the Tigris and Euphrates take their rise. The Pishon and Gihon are then identified with various smaller rivers of Armenia and Trans-Caucasia, and in some theories by extension, assuming an ignorance of true geography in the author, with such other rivers as the Indus and even Ganges.
The expression ‘in Eden, in the east’ (Gn. 2:8), literally ‘in Eden from in front’, could mean either that the garden was in the E part of Eden or that Eden was in the E from the narrator’s point of view, and some commentators have taken it as ‘in Eden in old times’, but in either case, in
the absence of certainty as to the meaning of the other indications of locality, this information cannot narrow it down further.
In view of the possibility that, if the Deluge was universal (*Flood), the geographical features which would assist in an identification of the site of Eden have been altered, the site of Eden remains unknown.
VI. Dilmun
Among the Sumerian literary texts discovered early this century at Nippur in S Babylonia, one was discovered which described a place called Dilmun, a pleasant place, in which neither sickness nor death were known. At first it had no fresh water, but Enki the water-god ordered the sun-god to remedy this, and, this being done, various other events took place, in the course of which the goddess Ninti (*Eve) is mentioned. In later times the Babylonians adopted the name and idea of Dilmun and called it the ‘land of the living’, the home of their immortals. Certain similarities between this Sumerian notion of an earthly paradise and the biblical Eden emerge, and some scholars therefore conclude that the Genesis account is dependent upon the Sumerian. But an equally possible explanation is that both accounts refer to a real place, the Sumerian version having collected mythological accretions in the course of transmission.
BIBLIOGRAPHY. S. R. Driver, The Book of Genesis8, 1911, pp. 57-60; J. Skinner, Genesis2, ICC, 1930, pp. 62-66; W. F. Albright, ‘The Location of
the Garden of Eden’, AJSL 39, 1922, pp. 15-31; E. A. Speiser, ‘The Rivers of Paradise’, Festschrift Johannes Friedrich, 1959, pp. 473-485; M. G. Kline, ‘Because It Had Not Rained’, WTJ 20, 1957-8, pp. 146ff. On VI, S. N. Kramer, History Begins at Sumer, 1956, pp. 193-199; N. M. Sarna,
Understanding Genesis, 1966, pp. 23 28. T.C.M. 2
GETHSEMANE — oil-press, the name of an olive-yard at the foot of the Mount of Olives, to which Jesus was wont to retire (Luke 22:39) with
his disciples, and which is specially memorable as being the scene of his agony (Mark 14:32; John 18:1; Luke 22:44). The plot of ground pointed
out as Gethsemane is now surrounded by a wall, and is laid out as a modern European flower-garden. It contains eight venerable olive-trees, the age of which cannot, however, be determined. The exact site of Gethsemane is still in question. Dr. Thomson (The Land and the Book) says: “When I first came to Jerusalem, and for many years afterward, this plot of ground was open to all whenever they chose to come and meditate
beneath its very old olive trees. The Latins, however, have within the last few years succeeded in gaining sole possession, and have built a high wall around it … The Greeks have invented another site a little to the north of it … My own impression is that both are wrong. The position is too near the city, and so close to what must have always been the great thoroughfare eastward, that our Lord would scarcely have selected it for retirement on that dangerous and dismal night … I am inclined to place the garden in the secluded vale several hundred yards to the north-east of the present Gethsemane.†1
GETHSEMANE (from Aram. JDWB_VÛHPHQ ‘an oil press’). A garden ( NH.SRV, Jn. 18:1), E of Jerusalem beyond the Kidron valley and near the Mount of Olives (Mt. 26:30). It was a favourite retreat frequented by Christ and his disciples, which became the scene of the agony, Judas’ betrayal and the arrest (Mk. 14:32-52). It should probably be contrasted with Eden, as the garden where the second Adam prevailed over temptation. Christ’s action in Gethsemane (Lk. 22:41) gave rise to the Christian custom of kneeling for prayer. The traditional Latin site lies E of the Jericho road-bridge over the Kidron, and contains olive trees said to date back to the 7th century AD. It measures 50 m square, and was enclosed with a wall by the Franciscans in 1848. It corresponds to the position located by Eusebius and Jerome, but is regarded by Thomson, Robinson and Barclay as too small and too near the road. The Greeks enclosed an adjacent site to the N. There is a broad area of land NE of the Church of St Mary where larger, more secluded gardens were put at the disposal of pilgrims, and Thomson locates the
genuine site here. The original trees were cut down by Titus (Jos., BJ 5.523).
BIBLIOGRAPHY. W. M. Thomson, The Land and the Book, 1888, p. 634; G. Dalman, Sacred Sites and Ways, 1935, pp. 321ff. D.H.T. 2
RESURRECTION OF CHRIST — one of the cardinal facts and doctrines of the gospel. If Christ be not risen, our faith is vain (1 Cor.
15:14). The whole of the New Testament revelation rests on this as an historical fact. On the day of Pentecost Peter argued the necessity of Christ’s resurrection from the prediction in Ps. 16 (Acts 2:24–28). In his own discourses, also, our Lord clearly intimates his resurrection (Matt. 20:19; Mark 9:9; 14:28; Luke 18:33; John 2:19–22).
The evangelists give circumstantial accounts of the facts connected with that event, and the apostles, also, in their public teaching largely insist upon it. Ten different appearances of our risen Lord are recorded in the New Testament. They may be arranged as follows:
(1.) To Mary Magdalene at the sepulchre alone. This is recorded at length only by John (20:11–18), and alluded to by Mark (16:9–11).
(2.) To certain women, “the other Mary,†Salome, Joanna, and others, as they returned from the sepulchre. Matthew (28:1–10) alone gives an
account of this. (Comp. Mark 16:1–8, and Luke 24:1–11.)
(3.) To Simon Peter alone on the day of the resurrection. (See Luke 24:34; 1 Cor. 15:5.)
(4.) To the two disciples on the way to Emmaus on the day of the resurrection, recorded fully only by Luke (24:13–35. Comp. Mark 16:12,13).
(5.) To the ten disciples (Thomas being absent) and others “with them,†at Jerusalem on the evening of the resurrection day. One of the evangelists gives an account of this appearance, John (20:19–24).
(6.) To the disciples again (Thomas being present) at Jerusalem (Mark 16:14–18; Luke 24:33–40; John 20:26–28. See also 1 Cor. 15:5).
(7.) To the disciples when fishing at the Sea of Galilee. Of this appearance also John (21:1–23) alone gives an account.
(8.) To the eleven, and above 500 brethren at once, at an appointed place in Galilee (1 Cor. 15:6; comp. Matt. 28:16–20).
(9.) To James, but under what circumstances we are not informed (1 Cor.15:7).
(10.) To the apostles immediately before the ascension. They accompanied him from Jerusalem to Mount Olivet, and there they saw him ascend “till a cloud received him out of their sight†(Mark 16:19; Luke 24:50–52; Acts 1:4–10). It is worthy of note that it is distinctly related that on most of these occasions our Lord afforded his disciples the amplest opportunity of testing
the fact of his resurrection. He conversed with them face to face. They touched him (Matt. 28:9; Luke 24:39; John 20:27), and he ate bread with
them (Luke 24:42, 43; John 21:12, 13).
(11.) In addition to the above, mention might be made of Christ’s manifestation of himself to Paul at Damascus, who speaks of it as an appearance of the risen Saviour (Acts 9:3–9, 17; 1 Cor. 15:8; 9:1). It is implied in the words of Luke (Acts 1:3) that there may have been other appearances of which we have no record. The resurrection is spoken of as the act (1) of God the Father (Ps. 16:10; Acts 2:24; 3:15; Rom. 8:11; Eph. 1:20; Col. 2:12; Heb. 13:20); (2) of Christ himself (John 2:19; 10:18); and (3) of the Holy Spirit (1 Peter 3:18).
The resurrection is a public testimony of Christ’s release from his undertaking as surety, and an evidence of the Father’s acceptance of his work of redemption. It is a victory over death and the grave for all his followers.
The importance of Christ’s resurrection will be seen when we consider that if he rose the gospel is true, and if he rose not it is false. His
resurrection from the dead makes it manifest that his sacrifice was accepted. Our justification was secured by his obedience to the death, and
therefore he was raised from the dead (Rom. 4:25). His resurrection is a proof that he made a full atonement for our sins, that his sacrifice was
accepted as a satisfaction to divine justice, and his blood a ransom for sinners. It is also a pledge and an earnest of the resurrection of all believers (Rom. 8:11; 1 Cor. 6:14; 15:47–49; Phil. 3:21; 1 John 3:2). As he lives, they shall live also.
It proved him to be the Son of God, inasmuch as it authenticated all his claims (John 2:19; 10:17). “If Christ did not rise, the whole scheme of
redemption is a failure, and all the predictions and anticipations of its glorious results for time and for eternity, for men and for angels of every
rank and order, are proved to be chimeras. ‘But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the first-fruits of them that slept.’ Therefore the
Bible is true from Genesis to Revelation. The kingdom of darkness has been overthrown, Satan has fallen as lightning from heaven, and the triumph of truth over error, of good over evil, of happiness over misery is for ever secured.†Hodge.
With reference to the report which the Roman soldiers were bribed (Matt. 28:12–14) to circulate concerning Christ’s resurrection, “his disciples came by night and stole him away while we slept,†Matthew Henry in his “Commentary,†under John 20:1–10, fittingly remarks, “The grave-clothes
in which Christ had been buried were found in very good order, which serves for an evidence that his body was not ‘stolen away while men slept.’
Robbers of tombs have been known to take away ‘the clothes’ and leave the body; but none ever took away ‘the body’ and left the clothes, especially when they were ‘fine linen’ and new (Mark 15:46). Any one would rather choose to carry a dead body in its clothes than naked. Or if they that were supposed to have stolen it would have left the grave-clothes behind, yet it cannot be supposed they would find leisure to ‘fold up the
linen.’†1
RESURRECTION. The most startling characteristic of the first Christian preaching is its emphasis on the resurrection. The first preachers were sure that Christ had risen, and sure, in consequence, that believers would in due
course rise also. This set them off from all the other teachers of the ancient world. There are resurrections elsewhere, but none of them is like that of Christ. They are mostly mythological tales connected with the change of the season and the annual miracle of spring. The Gospels tell of an
individual who truly died but overcame death by rising again. And if it is true that Christ’s resurrection bears no resemblance to anything in
paganism it is also true that the attitude of believers to their own resurrection, the corollary of their Lord’s, is radically different from
anything in the heathen world. Nothing is more characteristic of even the best thought of the day than its hopelessness in the face of death. Clearly the resurrection is of the very first importance for the Christian faith.
The Christian idea of resurrection is to be distinguished from both Greek and Jewish ideas. The Greeks thought of the body as a hindrance to true life and they looked for the time when the soul would be free from its shackles. They conceived of life after death in terms of the immortality of the soul, but they firmly rejected all ideas of resurrection (cf. the mockery
of Paul’s preaching in Acts 17:32). The Jews were firmly persuaded of the values of the body, and thought these would not be lost. They thus looked
for the body to be raised. But they thought it would be exactly the same body (Apocalypse of Baruch 1:2). The Christians thought of the body as
being raised, but also transformed so as to be a suitable vehicle for the very different life of the age to come (1 Cor. 15:42ff.). The Christian idea is thus distinctive. 2
RIVER OF GOD — (Ps. 65:9), as opposed to earthly streams, denoting that the divine resources are inexhaustible, or the sum of all fertilizing streams that water the earth (Gen. 2:10). 1
1 Easton, M. G., M. A. D. D., Easton’s Bible Dictionary, (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.) 1996.
2 The New Bible Dictionary, (Wheaton, Illinois: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc.) 1962.
|
|
