Fuller Seminary

NE 502 Exegetical Method and Practice

Professor Peter Hintzoglou, Ph.D.

Exegesis on Luke 9:28-38

“Jesus’ Transfiguration”

September 8, 2003

By: Co Ho

Dedicated to Paul Byer, the inventor of manuscript bible study method, (exegesis for layman)

ExegesisLuke 9:28-36

INTRODUCTION

The narrative on the Transfiguration of Christ had always been a fascinating passage for

me. Certainly from this passage the Christians came up with the jargon “mountaintop

experience”. But did the Gospel writers have the “mountaintop experience” in mind for their

intended audience? What was the purpose for that “mountaintop experience”? Why did Moses

and Elijah decide to drop in for a cameo appearance? And then why did God the Father himself

join them at the end? Was it all just a dream?

2

The last question was the easiest to answer. My spiritual conviction is that the sacred

scripture contains historical encounters with the Almighty God, and not just mythical religious

fictional accounts. My presupposition was that Luke wrote his Gospel in the early 60s AD for

his Greco-Roman Christians in Rome, with Mark and Q as his textual sources1 as well as his own

material, proto-Luke.

But to obtain some further satisfactory answers on this Transfiguration passage, I

undertook a thorough exegesis of the text to find out the original meaning of the text for its

intended audience. First, I examined the passage in its original language and determined the best

translation of the text, and then I studied its structure by outlining it and examining it in relation

to the overall structure of the book and the surrounding text. I then would prayerfully copy key

sentences and make initial observations alongside of them. For the next step, I would go back

through the text, making detailed examination of each sentence for factual matters, referencing

dictionaries, comparing parallel passages and manuscripts, performing word studies and

grammatical studies as necessary. I made additional critical textual comments as I went along.

Then I combed through the text a few more times, each time with a different set of commentary

and added notes accordingly. Finally, with more meditation, I would come to conclusions and

start writing down application notes from the passage to myself first, and then to my audience. If

I were to prepare for a talk, I would take a few additional steps to make the message more

relevant to the audience and to improve the delivery of the message.

3

FORM / STRUCTURE / SETTING

This particular passage should be viewed in the overall structure and purpose of Luke’s

gospel. In the prologue of the book, Luke explicitly stated his intention for the work: “to present

the story of Jesus in such a way as to bring out its significance and its reliability for those who

believed in him.”2 Luke presented his gospel as a journey of Jesus toward Jerusalem. This

passage was the pivotal point to conclude Jesus’ Galilean Ministry, and to shift His direction

toward the final destination.

The passage follows the gospel narrative genre, with a sub-genre of miraculous-

revelation, similar to the Jesus Baptism passage earlier in the book. The transfiguration has a

tight coupling with the previous passage about Peter’s Confession of Christ and this event could

be seen as a direct result of it. In the given context, the probable intended theological meaning of

the text would be the confirmation from God about Jesus (as His Chosen Son to be suffered at

Jerusalem), and God’s imperative to the disciples (to listen to Jesus). The next passage (about

Healing the Boy) is coupled more loosely with the Transfiguration, since the only connecting

point was Jesus’ prediction of his upcoming suffering, in which he demanded his disciples to

“listen carefully to him” (Luke 9:44a).

Compared to the other two gospels in the Synoptic, the structure of the text follows the

Markan source very closely. Except for a few minor clarifications (which are noted under the

Textual Comments section later on), Luke was completely adhering to the Markan text during

these passages.

4

TRANSLATION (with Gordon Fee’s style exegetical indentation):

Luke 9:28-363

28 Now about eight days after these sayings he took with him Peter and John and James and went up on the mountain to pray. 29 And as he was praying, the appearance of his face was altered, and his clothing became dazzling white. 30 And behold, two men were talking with him, Moses and Elijah, 31 who appeared in glory and spoke of his departure, which he was about to accomplish at Jerusalem.32 Now Peter and those who were with him were heavy with sleep, but when they became fully awake they saw his glory and the two men who stood with him. 33 And as the men were parting from him, Peter said to Jesus, “Master, it is good that we are here. Let us make three tents, one for you and one for Moses and one for Elijah” —not knowing what he said. 34 As he was saying these things, a cloud came and overshadowed them, and they were afraid as they entered the cloud. 35 And a voice came out of the cloud, saying, “This is my Son, my Chosen One; listen to him!” 36 And when the voice had spoken, Jesus was found alone.And they kept silent and told no one in those days anything of what they had seen.

Outlines:

From the text above, we can construct this simple outline:

A. Introduction about the time line, setting, location, and the people in the events (v.28)B. The transfiguration (v.29-31)

- Appearance Jesus- Appearance of two men, Moses and Elijah- The contents of their conversation

C. Reactions from Peter and those were with him (v.32-33)- Were sleeping heavily but now fully awake- What Peter suggested as the two men were parting

D. The overshadowing cloud came and God spoke to them (v.34-35)E. The aftermath (v.36)

5

TEXTUAL COMMENTS

A. Introduction about the time line, setting, location, and the people in the events (v.28)

“about eight days”: Both Mark 9:2 and Matthew 17:1 recorded the interval as six day,

Luke alone estimated “about eight days” with the Greek ὡσεὶ to give an approximate reference.

Perhaps because after a careful fact check (typical Lukan’s historian approach), he could not

come up with a definite time line; or perhaps because Mark counted only the days in between the

event while Luke included the days of Jesus speaking4; or perhaps because the event happened at

night5.

“after these sayings”: What were those sayings? A quick glance back to the previous

passages in the immediate context can give us the certainty that these sayings referred to Peter’s

Confession of Christ. In particular, the preceding verse 27 contains a very important backdrop to

this event, when Jesus promised: “But I tell you truly, there are some standing here who will

not taste death until they see the kingdom of God.” From this bit of introduction, one can

conclude that, in Luke’s perspective, seeing the transfiguration is seeing the kingdom of God6.

“he ...went up...to pray. And as he was praying” (ἀνέβη εἰς τὸ ὄρος

προσεύξασθαι. καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ προσεύχεσθαι): Did Jesus intentionally takes

Peter, John and James up to the mountain to witness his transfiguration? From what we see in

the text here, Jesus’ original intention was to pray. The first προσεύξασθαι (to pray) is an

aorist middle infinitive verb and could be elaborated as “to pray himself (as he has always been

6

doing).” The second προσεύξασθαι was prefixed with ἐν plus the dative aorist infinitive

article τῷ carried the temporal sense of “as he was praying”. This particular emphasis about the

prayer life of Jesus had been frequently mentioned by Luke (see 3:21; 5:16; 6:12; 9:18)7. The

transfiguration was not His intent. Jesus was just going about his routines, seeking God and

prayerfully depending on the Father, and that’s when God chose to glorify him.

“he took with him Peter and John and James and went up to the mountain to pray”:

Apparently Jesus wanted to train/teach his top disciples to have deeper communion with God

through prayer. Here we note three things: 1) The people – the core leadership team needs to

catch on first; 2) the place – temporary isolation from the chaotic world in order to focus on God;

and 3) the purpose – communion with God and our dependence on Him must be at the heart of

our ministry; otherwise, we may be busy doing many things, but not what the Father wants.

B. The transfiguration (v.29-31)

“the appearance of his face was altered, and his clothing became dazzling white”: Note

that Luke did not use the word “transfigured” (μετεμορφωθη [metemorphōthē]) as Mark 9:2 and

Matt. 17:2 did. He may have avoided this word because of his Greek readers may have pagan

associations with this word8 as Ovid’s Μεταμορφοσες [Metamorphoses]9. The participle

“dazzling” ἐξαστραπτων is from the compound verb meaning to flash (ἀστραπτω) out or

forth (ἐξ). Luke’s audience could certainly be reminded of the scene at mount Sinai when God’s

presence was made known to the Israelites and was shone on the face of Moses (Ex. 34:29-35)10.

7

“behold, two men were talking with him, Moses and Elijah, who appeared in glory” How

would they know that these two men were Moses and Elijah? Some could raise an objection on

this point and conclude that the author fabricated this event into a miracle. However, the

identification of Moses and Elijah may not be immediate (at the site), but it could be a later

explanation from Jesus; or it could be their own deduction according to their Jewish hermeneutic

for the Law and the Prophets (see Luke 24:27 for possible internal evidence). Many people had

also discussed “Why Moses and Elijah were present?” One explanation is that Moses represents

the Law, and Elijah the Prophets; but another would be that Moses represents the first prophetic

office (Acts 3:18-22) while Elijah represents the final prophet for the last days (Mal. 4:5-6).

“and spoke of his departure, which he was about to accomplish at Jerusalem”: The content

of their conversation seems to fit the prediction Jesus stated a few verses earlier in 9:22 “The Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and

be killed, and on the third day be raised” with the additional indication about the location of His

death11. The term “departure” (ἔξοδος - exodus) is a rare word, occurring only three times.

One occurrence refers to the actual Exodus (Heb. 11:22), and the other two refers to the end of

life (Luke 9:31; 2 Peter 1:15). Is there a double meaning in which a spiritual exodus could be

referred to here? Conservative exegetes prefer the simple “end of life” meaning12 but it would

not be too farfetched to interpret it as “depart to the promised land”. If we study 2 Peter 1:15 in

its context, we will see the sense of death and it interestingly immediately followed by a brief

description of this same Transfiguration experience in verses 16-18. The term “to accomplish”

(πληροῦν) here means, “to complete/perform a certain divinely task” according to Kittel13.

Should our “departure” be viewed as something “to accomplish” also? Peter and Paul certainly

had that view for their deaths and so should we.

8

But why these two men, and why was this topic? Perhaps these are “two witnesses” as

required to authenticate someone’s testimony. In this case, the testimony is Jesus’ death on the

cross, which is a “stumbling block” in both Jewish and Greco-Roman cultures. Or alternatively,

these two men and their conversation were the supportive factors for God the Father to conclude:

“This is my Son, my Chosen One; listen to him!” Robertson thinks that, “The purpose of the

Transfiguration was to strengthen the heart of Jesus as he was praying long about his

approaching death and to give these chosen three disciples a glimpse of his glory for the hour of

darkness coming. No one on earth understood the heart of Jesus and so Moses and Elijah came.

The poor disciples utterly failed to grasp the significance of it all.”14

C. Reactions from Peter and those were with him (v.32-33)

“Peter and those who were with him were heavy with sleep”: It is interesting to note how

Jesus’ top disciples were responding to his initiative of teaching/training them in prayer by

sleeping heavily. Perhaps just like us, they started with prayer, but failed to keep up, dozing off

in heavy15 sleep. It is also interesting to see how Jesus responded to their failure. Apparently, he

let them sleep (perhaps, due to his intense focus on his own prayer session). The lesson here for

us in ministry training is that we train/teach our apprentices by focusing on God, not focusing on

people’s inability. We model by our devotion to God. We invite people to be with us, and

provide an environment for them to observe how we seek after God. But we should not try to

perform for the apprentices to see and we shall never punish them for failing to keep up with our

pace.

9

“when they became fully awake (διαγρηγορήσαντες) they saw”: The δια in this compound

verb conveys a sense that they were thoroughly awaken. However, the active verb tense conveys

the sense that neither Jesus, Moses nor Elijah, nor the environment awoke them. They woke up,

found the glorious scene before their eyes and become fully awaken. Luke emphasized here that

this event was not a dream.

“as the men were parting from him, Peter said to Jesus, “Master, it is good that we are here. Let us make three tents, one for you and one for Moses and one for Elijah”—not knowing what

he said”: Apparently Peter didn’t want the two men to leave, but his proposal may sound a bit

strange to modern readers. Why did he propose the tents? Robertson suggested that, “It was

near the time of the feast of the tabernacles. So Peter proposed that they celebrate it up there

instead of going to Jerusalem for the feast as they did a bit later (John 7)”16. Some other

commentators17 think Peter also made the mistake of treating Jesus as equal with Moses and

Elijah too. In any case, Peter impulsively spoke up even he didn’t know what to say.

D. The overshadowing cloud came and God spoke to them (v.34-35)

“a cloud came and overshadowed them, and they were afraid”: Notice that at this point the

disciples were afraid, while they were not afraid before. In all encounter with the Mighty God

ever recorded in the Bible, the natural reaction from us is fear; yet there is certain mystical

attraction to it, for we see the disciples remained there and not running away. “as they entered

the cloud”: We are uncertain if all six entered the cloud, or if the three disciples still remained

outside of the cloud18. If all six were surrounded by the cloud, then that would also explained

10

why the disciples didn’t run away. Luke’s readers may also be reminded of Exodus 20:21 where

God descended at mount Sinai in a cloud, and Moses “approached the thick dark cloud where God

was”.

“a voice came out of the cloud, saying, “This is my Son, my Chosen One; listen to him!””:

The most reliable documents (Aleph, B, L, Syriac, Sinaitic) read “my Chosen One” while the other

manuscripts make it “my Beloved”19 or “my Beloved, whom I pleased”20 instead. Perhaps the later

was redaction effort to make the text more uniform with the parallel sentences in Mark 9:7 and

Matt. 17:5. The participle ὁ ἐκλελεγμένος (“My Chosen One”) should be understood as a title

rather than a descriptive phrase, probably deriving from Isa. 42:1 (in the LXX) which uses the

similar ὁ ἐκλεκτός (“The Chosen One”) which also appears in Luke 23:3521. Certainly this

saying from heaven will remind the readers of the voice from heaven at His Baptism “You are my

beloved Son; with you I am well pleased” in Luke 3:22. One difference here is the mention of the

Chosen One, a reference to the unique messianic role of the Son. The emphasis here is the

linkage between the messianic title and the suffering, which Jesus predicted earlier, and which

both Moses and Elijah had just affirmed. Also, the first endorsement was a confirmation from

the Father to the Son, while this time the Father directly addressed the disciples.

“Listen to him!” (αὐτοῦ ἀκούετε) is in the imperative, a command. Perhaps this

referred directly to “these sayings” of Jesus in the previous passage: "If anyone would come after

me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me. For whoever would save his

life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will save it. For what does it profit a man if

he gains the whole world and loses or forfeits himself?" In addition, D. A. Carson stressed the

11

fact that the Father’s statement perhaps also were in response to Peter’s Confession that Jesus is

the Messiah. Here, the Father emphasized that the Messiah was indeed the Son of God, and they

ought to listen to Him.22 John A. Martin and Craig S. Kenner associated the words “Listen to

him!”) to Deuteronomy 18:15 with its messianic prediction of a Prophet greater than Moses23.

Warren Wiersbe applied this command “Listen to him!” as an exhortation for us to live

according to the Word and not based on “mountaintop experiences”.24

“And when the voice had spoken, Jesus was found alone”: Even though many modern

translations make this sentence as the conclusion for the event, the Greek ἐν τοι γενεσθαι

την φωνην, with the aorist middle infinitive γενεσθαι (to become) conveys the sense that

“Jesus was found alone as the voice was still coming.” So, this is still a part of the cloudy

introduction from God. This is a thorough introduction indeed. There is no mistaking that the

person of Jesus is the centrality of God’s plan, not the Law nor Prophecy.

E. The aftermath (v.36)

“they kept silent and told no one in those days”: Why did they keep silent? Mark 9:9

and Matt. 17:9 recorded that Jesus commanded them not to tell anyone until after his

Resurrection. Apparently they had no problem obeying His command this time. After all, God

had just told them personally. “Told no one in those days” also implied that they told people

afterward. In the light of post-resurrection, this will be another great affirmation to their faith

that Jesus was indeed the Messiah, the Son of God. Without events like this as the strong

foundation, high Christology would not be developed fully in the early church.

12

CONCLUSION

Years later, reflecting on this event, Peter wrote in 2 Peter 1:16-18: “We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ,

but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received honor and glory from God the Father

when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, ‘This is my Son, whom I love; with

him I am well pleased.’ We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him

on the sacred mountain.” This experience was such a defining moment for Peter, which he held

on through out his life as he labored and hoped for the fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy of

establishing his Kingdom in the last days.

Similarly, this text was intended to strengthen the faith of the original audience, help

them to understand who the Lord Jesus was (not only the Suffering Messiah but also the Son of

God), and challenge them to obey him.

That same meaning of the text is still applicable to us today. A sermon faithful to the

original intention of the text may expound on the following points:

1. Jesus’ own statement about the Suffering Christ (v.28 and background on the previous text)

2. The confirmation of the Law and Prophecy (v. 29-33 on the transfiguration)3. The confirmation of the Father (v. 34-35 on the cloud)4. Our responsibility in continually confirming this truth (v. 35-36 and possibly v. 44)

An alternate (and more practical) outline, could be:

1. Listen to Him through prayer (as Jesus modeled his prayer life, v. 28-29)2. Listen to Him through scripture (as represented by the Law and Prophets, v. 30-32)3. Listen to Him in life (as the Father commanded them at the end, v. 33-36, 44)

13

Going off tangent a bit, we could use this passage to address issues on prayer, on

leadership training, and of course on “mountaintop experiences”. The exegesis of the text above

provided rich materials for these sermons as well.25

1 Carson, D. A., Douglas J. Moo, and Leon Morris. An Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA: Zondervan, 1992; page 116. Also see I. H. Marshall’s entry on “Luke, Gospel of”; Wood, D. R. W., and I. Howard Marshall editor. New Bible Dictionary. 3rd ed. /. Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1996; page 704.

2 I. H. Marshall, ibid.3 This translation was based on The Holy Bible: English Standard Version. Electronic ed. Wheaton: Good

News Publishers, 2001.4 John A. Martin wrote in his Luke portion of the Dallas Theological Seminary’s The Bible Knowledge

Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures that, “The two accounts are not contradictory if one understands Mark as speaking of the intervening days and Luke as including the days of Jesus’ teaching as well as the day on which the transfiguration took place. Walvoord, John F., Roy B. Zuck, and Dallas Theological Seminary. The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures. Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1983-c1985.

5 Matthew Henry resolved this discrepancy by having the event at night, he wrote, “Some think that it was in the night that Christ was transfigured, because the disciples were sleepy, as in his agony, and in the night his appearance in splendour would be the more illustrious; if in the night, the computation of the time would be the more doubtful and uncertain; probably, in the night, between the seventh and eighth day, and so about eight days.” Henry, Matthew. Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible: Complete and Unabridged in One Volume. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1996, c1991.

6 There are scholars who insisted that Jesus prophecy concerning “some standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God” either refer to the returning of Christ, or the establishment of Messianic Kingdom during the lifetime of the apostles. But none of these events had happened yet; therefore the most logical explanation (which has Lukan support from the immediate context here) is that Jesus was speaking about the transfiguration.

7 Robertson, A. T. Word Pictures in the New Testament. Vol.V c1932, Vol.VI c1933 by Sunday School Board of the Southern Baptist Convention. Logos Research Systems: Oak Harbor, 1997.

8 Craig S. Kenner wrote, “Luke omits Mark’s “transfigured” because of the pagan connotations this term could have to his readers (Greek gods and magicians transformed themselves into other forms).” Keener, Craig S., and InterVarsity Press. The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1993.

9 Robertson, A. T. ibid.10 Since there was the belief that the righteous get new, glorified bodies in order to enter heaven (I Cor.

15:42-49; II Cor. 5:1-10) in 1st century Judaism and in the NT, some liberal scholars may suggested that Luke was fitting the details to draw parallel to the Old Testament. However, my presupposition is that God orchestrated the His events paralleling to the His previous revelation in order for His seekers could comprehend.

11 Interestingly, John A. Martin pointed out in the Luke portion of the Dallas Theological Seminary’s The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures that, “from this point on, Jesus indicated several times that He was headed toward Jerusalem (Luke 9:51, 53; 13:33; 17:11; 18:31).”

12 Kittel concluded that, “ἔξοδος is also to be taken here in the sense of “end” of life rather than “departure” from it. Thus, when it is said in Lk. 9:31 that on the Mount of Transfiguration Moses and Elijah ἔλεγον τὴν ἔξοδον αὐτοῦ, ἔξοδος does not mean His going out of life or the world, nor is there any reference to the destination of Jesus after His death, but ἔξοδος simply means the “end,” “conclusion,” of His life and work. It is quite erroneous to see any reference to the resurrection as a coming out of the grave. Certainly the reference to the resurrection immediately before in 9:22 suggests that this is in view as well as death as the end of

14

However, the biggest challenge is not just in selecting and delivering the message, but in

applying the message in ordinary daily setting: first in my own life, then in the lives of our

leaders, and subsequently in the lives of other believers in the congregation. May we truly

“listen to him” in everything we do.

life. The only point is that the resurrection is not regarded as part of the conclusion of the earthly life of Jesus.” Theological dictionary of the New Testament. 1964-c1976. Vols. 5-9 edited by Gerhard Friedrich. Vol. 10 compiled by Ronald Pitkin. (G. Kittel, G. W. Bromiley & G. Friedrich, Ed.) . Eerdmans: Grand Rapids, MI

13 Kittel, G., Friedrich, G., & Bromiley, G. W. Theological dictionary of the New Testament. W.B. Eerdmans: Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1995, c1985, page 869.

14 Robertson, A. T. ibid.15 The Greek here is βεβαρημένοι, “they were weighted down with sleep” – apparently a Greek idiom; the

same word is used of the eyes of these three disciples in the Garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:43).16 Robertson, A. T. ibid.17 Footnotes from [sn] on NET Bible project (New English Translation Bible) on Luke 9:28-36, Biblical

Studies Foundation., available from http://www.netbible.com; Internet; accessed 23 August 2003.18 Robertson wrote that, “If ἐκεινους be accepted in 9:35 instead of αὐτους, then the three disciples

would be outside of the cloud.” ibid.19 (A C* W Ë13 33 Byz it), note from [tc], NET Bible20 (C3 D Y et pauci), note from [tc], NET Bible21 Note from [tn], NET Bible22 Carson, D. A. New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition. 4th ed. Leicester, England; Downers Grove,

Ill., USA: Inter-Varsity Press, 1994.23 John A. Martin, ibid., Craig S. Kenner, ibid.24 W. W. Wiersbe wrote, “As wonderful as these experiences are, they are not the basis for a consistent

Christian life. That can come only through the Word of God. Experiences come and go, but the Word remains. Our recollection of past experiences will fade, but God’s Word never changes. The farther we get from these events, the less impact they make on our lives. That was why the Father said, “Hear Him!” and why Peter made this same emphasis on the Word in his report (2 Peter 1:12–21).” Wiersbe, Warren W. The Bible Exposition Commentary. Wheaton, Ill.: Victor Books, 1996, c1989.

25 Would it be acceptable to deliver sermon off tangents from the original intended meaning of the text? My own position and practice would allow for it as long as I am not going against the theological flow of the text. However, I would love to have your comments on this.

15

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Carson, D. A., Douglas J. Moo, and Leon Morris. An Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA: Zondervan, 1992.

Carson, D. A. New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition. 4th ed. Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill., USA: Inter-Varsity Press, 1994.

Henry, Matthew. Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible: Complete and Unabridged in One Volume. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1996, c1991.

Keener, Craig S., and InterVarsity Press. The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1993.

Kittel, Gerhard, Gerhard Friedrich, and Geoffrey William Bromiley. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans, 1995, c1985.

Robertson, A.T. Word Pictures in the New Testament. Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, 1997.

Walvoord, John F., Roy B. Zuck, and Dallas Theological Seminary. The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures. Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1983-c1985.

Wiersbe, Warren W. The Bible Exposition Commentary. Wheaton, Ill.: Victor Books, 1996, c1989.

Wood, D. R. W., and I. Howard Marshall. New Bible Dictionary. 3rd ed. /. Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1996.

ELECTRONIC RESOURCES

Biblical Studies Foundation. The Bible: New English Translation. http://www.bible.org, 2001-2003.

Libronix Corporation. Libronix DLS Logos Library System X, Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, 2003.

16

ENDNOTES

17