Mark 15:33-38: The Last Three Hours of the Execution of Jesus

August 14, 2012

During the first three hours of his execution, Jesus was beaten and then despoiled by Roman soldiers as they cast lots for his clothes, mocked by Jewish bystanders and the Temple authorities for his apparent inability to destroy the Temple or save himself, and scorned by those crucified with him as a naive pretender to political revolution. The public humiliation was complete.

The last three hours, however, are apocalyptic and triumphal. The distinction between the first three hours (which began at 9:00 AM–the third hour) and the last three hours (which began at 12:00 PM–the sixth hour) is significant. The storyline swings like a hinge from public humiliation to a triumphal death. In this moment the “strong man” (Mark 3:27), whose triumph within the narrative seems so complete at noon, is bound when Jesus breathed his last. The death of Jesus is a judgment against the powers (both imperial and Temple); it is the defeat of the “strong man.”

One way to see this is to note the apocalyptic language that begins and ends this section: darkness covers the land and the curtain of the Temple is rent asunder. This darkness has been variously understood. Many think it pictures divine sorrow as in Amos 8:9-10. However, given the Passover context, it seems more likely that the darkness mimics the darkness that covered Egypt. In that moment, Yahweh was doing battle with the gods of Egypt (and Pharoah). The war would determine which G(g)od reigned. Yahweh was triumphant. The darkness of the cross is an apocalyptic judgment against the powers just as the plague of darkness over Egypt (cf. Isaiah 60:2; Jeremiah 13:16; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:20; Zephaniah 1:15). It is a moment when God creates calamity for the powers (cf. Isaiah 45:7).

This apocalyptic judgment is also pictured in the ripping of the veil in the temple. Most probably, though uncertain, this is the veil which covered the entrance to the Holy Place (rather than the Holy of Holies) as this would have been visible to the public. The mockers had taunted Jesus with his predictions about the destruction of the Temple at the cross and in the moment of his death the Temple is symbolically destroyed. This anticipates the total destruction of the Temple (as predicted in Mark 13:2). The death of Jesus is a triumph; it effects, in principle, the destruction of the Temple. The Temple authorities, as are all powers, are judged by the execution of Jesus.

Between these two apocalyptic judgments, Jesus cries out twice. Mark quotes the first and merely notes the second. The first quotes Psalm 22, the great lament Psalm to which Mark has alluded several times in this crucifixion narrative. The second cry reminds us of the opening verses of Mark’s Gospel as Jesus and John the Baptist are described as “criers.”

The first cy is the most well-known (and well-worn) of the two cries. Many see a crisis within the Trinity at this moment as if the unity of the Triune God is disrupted as the Son becomes “sin” (literally) for the sake of humanity. It is sometimes pictured as if the Father has turned his back on the Son. This Godforsakenness goes to the depths of the Triune relationship and separates the Father from the Son.

I find this unconvincing in several ways. First, there is nothing in the text of Mark that indicates that this is its meaning. Interpreters must draw on some language in Paul make this case, and that language is often misunderstood. Second, the unity of the Trinity is inviolable and nothing in this text implies that that unity was destroyed. Third, exegetically, Mark has interpreted the humiliation of the Son through the lens of Psalm 22–the whole Psalm and not just the first verse.     When Jesus quotes Psalm 22:1 he invokes the whole Psalm and not simply a single verse. He is testifying that he identifies with the Psalmist. While Psalm 22 begins with the cries of lament and rehearses the humiliation of the sufferer, it also ends triumphantly. The Psalmist praises God, entrusts himself to Yahweh, and anticipates deliverance.  Psalm 22 moves from lament to a cry of triumph. Jesus, on the cross, does the same.

What, then, does the quotation of Psalm 22:1 mean?  Did the Father abandon the Son? Did the Son feel abandoned? I think the answer is yes–the Father did abandon the Son and the Son felt it. But it was not a spiritual or relational abandonment. Rather, the Father abandoned the Son to death though he did not abandon him in death. The Father did not save the Son from death; the Son was crucified. But, as we will learn in the Markan narrative, the Father did not abandon the Son in the grave. And the Father, ever present, judged the powers through darkness and ripping the veil of the Temple.

The second cry is a cry of triumph.  This is evidenced in two ways. First,  in the next verse the Temple curtain rips apart. The death of the Son symbolically judges the Temple complex. Second, the narrative link with the beginning of Mark’s Gospel is crucial.  Jesus’ life ends as John the Baptist’s began (Mark 1:3). They shout out the reality of the coming of God. They both declare the kingdom of God and shout in the wilderness the triumphal truth of God’s victory.  Third, another narrative link is the “great voice” (or, loud cry) is exactly the language that describes the conquest of the demons in Mark 1:26 and 5:7. Fourth, it is the “voice” of triumph and delight that Jesus heard at his baptism (1:11) and Transfiguration (9:7). These are the only occurrences of “voice” (phone; Mark 1:3, 11, 26; 5:7; 9:7; 15:34, 37). This “voice” proclaims the identity and reality of the kingdom of God. That kingdom triumphs through the death of Jesus. His death is no failure, no lack of power. On the contrary, it arises out of his obedience to the will of the Father and it is the triumph of his kingdom.

At the center of these rings of judgments and cries is the invocation of Elijah. In what is perhaps another allusion to Psalm 22, one of the bystanders (or soldiers?) offered Jesus a sedative drink. It appears that this is a hostile act intended either to prolong the crucifixion to extend the suffering so that they might see if Elijah shows up to help Jesus.

The allusions to Elijah are further mockings–daring in the light of the apocalyptic darkness. Elijah invokes Messianic images of the coming Kingdom.  Will God finally deliver this suffering one? Will God triumph in this moment? Will the kingdom come to help this suffering one?

The reader knows that their mockery is a mockery. Elijah has already come, and he suffered the same fate that his cousin now suffers. The powers executed both Elijah (John the Baptist) and Jesus. There is no last-minute rescue. The heavenly hosts do not show up. God’s prophets–Elijah and Jesus–die.

Jesus is abandoned to his death but this death is his triumph. His death is the triumph of the kingdom of God. His death judges the powers and binds the “strong man.”

Disciples don’t expect “last-minute” rescues in kingdom ministry. They, too, are often abandoned to death but in that death they are triumphant!  Anyone ever read Revelation?

6 Comments | Biblical Texts | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by John Mark Hicks

Mark 15:21-32 – The First Three Hours of the Cross

August 1, 2012

The movement of Jesus from Praetorium to the cross is known as the Via Dolorosa among the pious. But for the Romans, and in Mark’s story, it is something quite different. It is not only the depths of Christ’s sorrow and humiliation, but it is also imperial triumphalism and an imperial assertion of power.

Crucifixion was reserved for rebellious slaves, insurrectionists and crimes against the state. Crucifixion was a symbol of imperial power. The Empire imposed its will and maintained order through crucifixion. Crucifixion was as much a political testament as it was a criminal punishment. The Romans maintained their imperial power, at least in part, through the use of crucifixion as a deterrent against would-be liberators and, in the case of Palestine, would-be Messiahs.

Jesus was crucified with two “robbers” (lestas). While this term can have a broad meaning such as the “robbers” who assaulted the man on the road to Jericho in the parable of the Good Samaritan, in the context of crucifixion this does not refer to two burglars. Jesus used the term in Mark 14:48 when he questioned why the arrest party came in force with “swords and clubs” as against a “robber.” In the context of the passion story the term probably refers to a well-known feature of Palestinian banditry where a local leader basically lead a small group of armed men for his own purposes. They preyed on the rich and prepared the ground for insurrection. When the revolt came in 66 CE, two well-known social bandits came with their “armies” to defend Jerusalem. The two that hung on the right and left of Jesus were probably more like Pancho Villa than they were two jewel thieves.

The procession that led from Pilate to the cross was a display of imperial triumph. It as a different kind of triumphal procession than what Jesus had experienced earlier the week (Mark 11:1-9). This time Jesus is paraded before Jerusalem as a defeated, humiliated and tortured would-be liberator, a “king of the Jews.” This “king” was mocked by a whole battalion of imperial soldiers as a would-be “Caesar” (Mark 15:1-20) as they dressed him in purple, put a wreath crown on this head, hailed him as king and “worshipped” (paid homage) to him. The path to the cross was paved by imperial mockery and power. It was a demonstration of who was actually king–Caesar is Lord!

Jesus, perhaps due to two previous beatings (14:65; 15:15), was apparently unable to carry the crossbeam through the streets of Jerusalem to the place of execution. Simon of Cyrene was forced “to carry his cross.” From Cyrene in modern Libya, North Africa, he was probably a Jewish pilgrim to the Passover who happened to be present as Jesus passed by.

Why does Mark note this incidental detail? It is not incidental to Mark as he makes a significant theological point by including it. It seems clear that Alexander and Rufus were well-known to the community for whom Mark was written. They were disciples whose father carried the cross of Jesus. And there is the theological rub. Mark uses the same language here, “carry his cross” as he used in Mark 8:34. This Simon, rather than the Simon who denied Jesus three times, carried the cross of Jesus. Mark’s narrative book ends its story with the Simon who was the first discipled called (Mark 1:16) and the Simon who actually played the role of a disciple in the passion narrative (Mark 15:21). Discipleship entails cross-bearing.

Mark, without identifying it, follows a theological script. It is one of lament. The one described here shares the fate of the sufferer in Psalm 22. Three times Mark alludes to Psalm 22: (1) they cast lots for his garments (Psalm 22:18 /Mark 15:24); (2) Jesus is mocked by those who witness his humiliation (Psalm 22:7-8 / Mark 15:29-32); and Jesus quotes the opening line of the lament Psalm (Psalm 22:1 / Mark 15:34). Reading Mark 15 through the lens of Psalm 22 locates the mood of this section–it is one of rejection, humiliation, and abandonment. Mark does not describe the physical suffering of Jesus as much as he concentrates on public degradation of Jesus.

After describing how the imperial power has lifted Jesus upon a cross, Mark turns to his emphasis on degradation by paralleling the previous mocking by Rome (Mark 15:15-2o) with the mocking he receives at the hands of his own nation through the social bandits, the bystanders and the temple authorities. Mark uses the same word for “mocking” in 15:20 (Romans) that he uses in 15:31 (temple authorities).

Almost deliciously and yet ominously, Mark utilizes language that reminds readers of what it means to be a disciple of Jesus. The very status that James and John had requested, that is, “to be on the right and left hand” of Jesus (Mark 10:40) is the exactly the position the “robbers” take (Mark 15:28). Disciples not only take up their cross (like Simon did for Jesus) but they go to the cross with Jesus. But instead of disciples dying with him–in Mark’s narrative–mockers die with him. These mockers had pursued a different sort of kingdom than Jesus proclaimed; they used violent means. They mocked a king who refused their agenda even as they died the same death.

Just as Jesus died with those who pursued a kingdom for Israel through violence, so he was also mocked by those who maintained their kingdom for Israel through institutional and “temple” power. It is the voice of the temple authorities (chief priests) who name the language:  ”Christ, King of Israel.” They know his claim but reject it because the empire has defeated him. They had collaborated with that empire in order to maintain their own secure position. Even the bystanders recall the judicial witness against Jesus–he said he would build a temple. The chief priests and the bystanders (who were privy in some way to the court’s judgment and the testimony given) identify why Jesus is executed–it is about temple, messianic pretensions, and the power structure of the present Jewish authority.

Jesus announced salvation but what he now received was condemnation. He was condemned by the empire and he was condemned by his own nation. Rome executed him because he rivaled Caesar. The temple authorities executed him because he threatened the status quo. The “robbers” mocked him because he was a naive prophet who thought the power of Rome could be toppled through non-violence.

The first three hours of the cross are dark in mood though the sun shines in the sky. There is no hope. There is no comfort. There are no friends. All is lost. Nothing remains.

But….what happens next turns the tables…on the Romans, on the principalities and powers….it turns the cosmos right side up.  More next week.

2 Comments | Biblical Texts | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by John Mark Hicks

Haggai 2:10-19 — You Better Think About This!

June 28, 2012

Haggai’s third oracle, like the previous two, is precisely dated. The first oracle was delivered on a new moon festival and the second was delivered during the Feast of Tabernacles. This third oracle, however, has no clear canonical link to a Jewish festival. Nevertheless, the day is significant.

The oracle is delivered on December 20, 520 B.C.E. exactly three months after construction on the temple began. Further, the oracle itself roots the significance of its message in the importance of that day—it is the day when the foundation of the temple was laid (2:18; also noted as a significant day in Ezra 3:10-13 and Zechariah 4:6-10). Further, there is evidence that in the Ancient Near EAst the initial rebuilding phase (removing the old stones) was a time of lament while the laying of the new foundation stone was a time of celebration and anticipation. Ceremonies often focused on the royal and priestly functions as the royal personage laid the foundation stone and the priests purified the site. This is exactly what we see in Haggai as his two oracles on this day concern both the priestly (2:11-19) and royal offices (2:20-23; cf. Boda, NIV Application Commentary: Haggai and Zechariah, 141). This is a grand moment in the history of Judah and Judah celebrates it as a new beginning. On this occasion, Judah turns from lament to celebration. The new edifice has begun.

The oracle, then, is future-oriented as its last line announces: “I will bless you” (2:19). But it also moves its hearers from the past to the present to the future; it moves them from lament to hope. That movement, however, is focused by their attention to the significance of this day, that is, the day when the foundation of the temple was laid. This day means that something has changed and consequently the people recognize their future hope.

Three times Haggai advises that the people “give careful thought…from this day on.” This day is a turning point; it is a moment of conversion. It is when Judah moves from a “templeless” people to a “templed” people. The theological significance of that move demands “careful thought” or attention. Without temple, Judah is deprived of land, divine presence and a future. With a temple, Judah is blessed with land, presence and hope. Laying the foundation of the temple was the hinge which swings Judah from despair to hope because the temple embodies and symbolizes divine presence, forgiveness and power. This is reason for celebration.

Haggai uses the Fall harvest to illustrate the significant change Judah is about to experience. Their Fall crops (grapes, figs, pomegranates and olives) had failed. There was little or no fruit. This is devastating for Judah’s economy and lifestyle. Haggai specifics the reason for this want—God struck “all the work of [their] hands.” The divine motive was to produce repentance among the people. Just as there was no fruit of repentance, so there was no fruit on the trees and in the fields.

This is the point of the first half of Haggai’s oracle. The people were defiled and so everything they offered to Yahweh was defiled. The faithlessness of the people—indicated by their own priorities as noted in Haggai’s first oracle—defiled whatever worship they offered Yahweh. God was not listening because the people were not seeking. They worshipped but their offerings were defiled by their own lives.

Haggai’s first example, however, recognizes that holiness (consecration) cannot be passed from one party to another though defilement can. Meat is consecrated by its sacrificial offering to God and not because it touches something else as it is taken home. Haggai’s scenario recalls the practice of the fellowship (peace) offering where worshippers would offer sacrifices at the altar and then take the meat home to eat with family and/or friends. The holiness derives from its relation to God, but defilement comes from its relation to human faithlessness and sin. This defilement is the reason the harvest has not yet yielded its fruit.

Haggai’s oracle, then, is an exhortation. On the day that the foundation of the temple is laid and the people gather to celebrate, Haggai calls them to “consider” just as he had done in the first oracle (1:5, 7). This moment is not only a call to repentance—which God had sought to effect through his discipline, but it is also a call to renewed hope. The oracle encourages the people to continue the task of rebuilding the temple because such rebuilding is pregnant with the promise of God who says, “I will bless you.”

Judah has a new temple which bears a new promise. Will they, in response, become a new people consecrated to Yahweh?

Leave a Comment » | Biblical Texts | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by John Mark Hicks

Haggai 2:1-9 — Be Strong and Do Not Fear

June 12, 2012

Haggai’s second oracle comes to Judah on the seventh day of the Feast of Tabernacles, the next to the last day, on October 17, 520 B.C.E. The seventh month is a particularly busy one in Israel’s calendar. Besides the New Moon festival which began every month, the seventh month included both the Day of Atonement and the Feast of Tabernacles. The temple, if rebuilt, would have been the focus of each of those festivals. The timing of Haggai’s oracle may have reflected some disappointment or discouragement on the part of Judah as they struggled to rebuild the temple anew. Perhaps they remembered or longed for the days of temple-based festivals.

Nevertheless, Ezra 3:1-6 indicates that Judah had already begun to celebrate the festivals on the newly rebuilt altar even though the temple had only just begun. It had been less than a month since they had renewed the building project. Perhaps they had only cleared away the rubble, if that. The experience may have been discouraging to many, especially those who remembered the first temple. Perhaps it is at one of the assemblies of the Feast of Tabernacles that Haggai rose up before the people and delivered his message.

The message comes in two parts: (1) Be strong and do not fear for I am with you (Haggai 2:3-5), and (2) God will shake the nations to glorify his house (Haggai 2:6-9). Both parts function to encourage the people to complete the temple because God is going to do something wondrous. Haggai calls them to persevere because God is present among them and God will yet again shake heaven and earth for the sake of his people.

The first message encourages the leaders and the people to “be strong” (said three times!) No doubt, as the book of Ezra 4 indicates, they experienced some regional opposition to their task. But the primary discouragement seemed to be the meager materials with which they were then rebuilding the temple. The “former glory” of the Solomonic temple far outstripped this present project. So much so, the detractors asserted, that this temple is “nothing.”

In the face of such antagonism, Haggai—by the use of threefold rhetorical device—calls for determined implementation of the rebuilding project. “Be strong!” and “Do not fear!” This (strength and fear) is the language used to encourage Joshua (Joshua 1:6, 7 ,9) among others, but particularly it is what David said to Solomon to prepare him to build the temple (1 Chronicles 28:10, 20). Specifically, the Chronicler tells us that the Lord “strengthened” Solomon and that God was “with him” (2 Chronicles 1:1). Haggai, it appears, again draws on the building of the first temple to encourage its rebuilding. The task before the people is the same that David set before Solomon—build the house of the Lord.

As with David and Solomon, Yahweh is “with” the leaders and people of Judah. This divine presence (“my Spirit”) is covenantal and redemptive. The same God who brought Israel out of Egypt is the same God who will empower Judah to complete their task. The parallel underscores what a significant redemptive-historical moment this is in the history of Judah. God is acting once again. God is not silent and neither is God passive. God is redeeming Judah and giving his presence to his people. Judah will build the temple of “their God” (1:14).

The second message is a divine promise based on that divine presence and God’s redemptive intent. While some detractors complained that the “glory” of this new temple is “nothing” compared to Solomon’s building project, God promises to “shake” heaven and earth once again that this temple’s glory might surpass the glory of Solomon’s temple. That is an astounding hope. Could Judah possibly believe it as they watch this pauper temple rise?

At one level, Haggai promises that he will move heaven and earth to glorify his house. In particular, he will “shake the nations” so that the “desired of all the nations will come.” It appears that Haggai expects that due to God’s powerful movements among the nations that the nations will come and fill the temple with silver and gold. All wealth belongs to God, and he will shake the nations in such a way that they will bring it to the temple for the sake of the glory of this house (Darius, for example, contributed wealth to the temple, Ezra 6:8). This will be a sign that God has given “peace” to his people.

It is important to remember that the nations were moving at this time. Darius had put down a revolt in Babylon in the previous year (521) and in the next year (519) he would put down another revolt in Egypt. The nations are convulsing and the powers are writhing. In the midst of this, God will “shake the nations” so that Judah’s temple will surpass the glory of the Solomonic temple.

One can hear the hopes and expectations of the people in this promise. Nations will honor God’s temple rather than destroy it. Wealth (silver and gold) will decorate the temple once again rather than stripped from it. Judah will experience prosperity and peace as God glorifies his house. And the glory of this house will exceed that of the Solomonic one.

Did Judah ever experience such? Perhaps they did to a certain extent. The Herodian temple exceeded the Solomonic one in size and wealth. Perhaps Haggai simply envisions the renewal of temple activities in a new facility and the glory of redeemed Judah is greater in that sense than the former Israel. Whatever may be the case, Haggai uses this language to encourage Judah to complete their task. They do not labor in vain and their hope is real. God will return to his people, dwell in his temple and Judah will once again enjoy the calendar’s festivals. Judah will again renew the worship of Yahweh in a new temple and experience again the redemptive presence of God. This is not a hollow promise that is only fulfilled 500 years later. Rather, God is with his people even as their land is occupied by imperial powers…whether Persian, Greek or Roman.

But is there more? Does this language lend itself to another horizon beyond what Haggai might himself see or imagine? Some read this as Messianic. The “desired” of the nations may be Jesus and the presence that comes to the temple to bring peace is Jesus himself who himself goes to the temple. When the incarnate God entered the temple, the glory of this second house exceeded the glory of the first house.

But perhaps it is even more than this. Hebrews 12:26-27 quotes Haggai 2:6 in an eschatological context. Though the earth and the nations will be shaken, the kingdom of God cannot be shaken. Perhaps the glory of the temple actually anticipates the final shaking of heaven and earth that will usher in the new heaven and new earth as the fullness of the kingdom of God is realized upon the earth.

However we might understand a Messianic or eschatological application of this text, Haggai’s message to Judah is itself powerful. God is with you, so be strong and do not fear. God will use the nations to enrich his new temple and the glory of God will reside in it just as it did in the Solomonic temple. God will return to his people. God is “with” Judah, so “be strong” and “do not fear.”

5 Comments | Biblical Texts | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by John Mark Hicks

Haggai 1:12-15 — “I am with You!”

June 7, 2012

Haggai’s first oracle, on August 29, 520 B.C.E., was directed to the governor Zerubbabel and the high priest Joshua as the royal (house of David) and priestly (house of Aaron) representatives of the people. Zerubbabel and Joshua, along with the “whole remnant of the people,” responded to Haggai by beginning work on the temple on September 21, 520 B.C.E. The first oracle began with the date of Haggai’s message and chapter one ends with the date the people resumed work—the two dates function as an inclusio so that reader maintains the intimate connection between the message and the response.

Haggai succinctly summarizes the initial response. The “whole remnant of the people…obeyed the voice of the Lord…and the people feared the Lord.” The remnant obeyed and feared; they “hear” and they “fear.”

Whereas in Haggai’s oracle Yahweh refers to the inhabitants of Judah as “these people,” now Haggai’s narrative describes them as a “remnant” and they embrace Yahweh as “their God.” This is more significant than simply “those who are remaining,” but rather echoes language from earlier prophets who spoke of a “remnant” that would come out of Babylonian exile (Jeremiah 23:3). This is theologically pregnant language for God’s faithfulness to promises of redemption. God always preserves a remnant among the people. Moreover, God promises his presence among the remnant, which is assured in this text.

This remnant is obedient and they feared Yahweh. This language combination is significant in the Hebrew Bible. They “heard” (obeyed; cf. Deuteronomy 12:28) God’s voice through Haggai and “feared” (Deuteronomy 10:12) Yahweh. The term “hear” is used 82x and “fear” 35x in Deuteronomy. The combination has a profound significance in terms of the orientation of the people (used together, for example, in Deuteronomy 13:4, 11; 17:13). While some think that “fear” here may signify that the people were motivated by Haggai’s threats, most think it reflects the larger tradition in the Hebrew Bible of reverence or awe for God. They “feared” Yahweh in the sense that they were now submissive and ordered their lives to God’s wisdom and Torah. As Deuteronomy 4:10 states, “I will make them hear my words, that they may learn to fear me all the days that they shall live.” The remnant is an obedient, God-fearing community in response to Haggai’s message.

God responds to their submissive posture. The central response is another message from Haggai, but it is very brief. It is only two words in Hebrew: “I am with you” (also in Haggai 2:4). Divine presence assures the community that God will commune with his people; it is the redemptive presence of God among them. It reminds the community that just as God was with David and Solomon in the building of the first temple, so God will be with them in its rebuilding. It also reminds the community of their long history with Yahweh:  God was “with” Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and God was “with” Moses and Israel in the Exodus and wilderness. God remains with Israel; Yahweh has not abandoned his people.

This presence, however, is more than communion; it is also empowerment. God “stirred” the spirit of the whole nation—the leaders and the people. This is a divine act which enables Judah to resume the rebuilding of the temple. This is fairly common language in the Hebrew Bible to describe how God ignites and carries through his purposes within the world. For example, God stirred upon Assyrian Emperors (1 Chronicles 5:26), the Philistines (2 Chronicles 21:16), and the Persian king Cyrus (2 Chronicles 36:22; Isaiah 13:17). God moved in the hearts of his people to give them the strength and vision to begin the task.

Submissive people experience God’s presence among them. They commune with God and God empowers them to fulfill their vocation—the mission God has given them. Judah does not rebuild the temple by their own strength or at their own initiative. God begins the good work in their hearts.

In the same way, God begins in our hearts the good work to which God had called us, and God empowers us to complete the mission to which he has called us (cf. Philippians 1:6).

May the people of God today “hear” and “fear.”  Blessed be the name of Yahweh.

Leave a Comment » | Biblical Texts | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by John Mark Hicks

« Previous Entries
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 942 other followers

%d bloggers like this: