Peter's Mission

PETER'S MISSION

INTRODUCTION

            One of the most colorful characters in the Bible is Simon Peter, the famed apostle of Christ. As many people know, Peter's occupation was not one of fame and fortune; he was not considered well educated, nor did anyone perceive him to be among the religious elite. No, there was no mistaking the fact that Peter was not considered among the prestigious Jewish social hierarchy; Peter never debated with the great scholars and theologians; he didn't write best-selling biblical study books. Peter was a tradesman-a fisherman from Galilee. Indeed, Peter was a common man, but God will take common and make them uncommon to reach the communities of the world. Peter's calling is a great case in study for the true Christian today.

IDENTIFYING WITH PETER

 Peter is first mentioned in the New Testament as his brother Andrew told him that they had found the Messiah, Jesus Christ (John 1:40-43). In the lists of the twelve disciples, Peter is always mentioned first; it was probably written this way to place prominence on Peter because he was one of the closest disciples to Christ (Matt. 10:1-6; Mark 3:16-19; Luke 6:12-16; Acts 1:12-14).  Some have stated that Peter was the spokesperson for the disciples as he was the one who spoke more often than anyone else-also, Christ spoke to him more than any other disciple.[1] 

Simon Peter is actually a compound name.  The name Simon means "a reed." The name Peter comes from the Greek word, petros and means "a small stone or pebble." The fact that Simon Peter had two distinct names fits very well into his nature when he first began to follow Christ.  At some points Peter's faith was as solid as a stone (Matt. 10:27; Matt. 16:17) and at others he could be swayed by the slightest wind-even the pressures of a then socially unimportant girl made Peter deny Christ (Matt. 26:69-74). 

 Many people may best identify with Peter, as he was a rash, outspoken and impulsive man bent on doing things as he saw fit.  He had a definite rebellious streak that posed hard to tame, but that is probably why Christ chose him in the first place.  In fact, I once recommended a book about Peter to an older woman who later came back and told me that she wept all throughout it; she said that she could now serve Christ with more passion and liberty because she read all of Peter's failures and saw how Jesus loved him in spite of them all.  It was this same Peter who showed a sliver of faith as he walked on the raging waters for a millisecond, and who also thrice denied Christ just before His crucifixion.  During my own personal study of the life of Simon Peter, I came to realize that he had a great assignment for the Lord and that it is often shrouded in obscurity.  There are some interesting scriptures about Peter and his true mission that should be examined to complete the intimate portrait of this genuine follower of Christ.  

  When the life of Simon Peter is observed there will be moments of laughter, moments of crying and many moments of identifying with our own faults and lack of faith. It is important to understand the character of the apostles of Christ to learn our similarities in weakness and strengths that will draw us closer to the Lord.  

JESUS' CORE GROUP

As was previously mentioned, Peter was one of the closest friends to Christ during His short ministry on the earth. He was among what many call the "inner circle" of Christ; this consisted of Peter, James and John. Although I have mentioned this several times before, it is important to note that Jesus always had three witnesses present during important events; events that would need clear explanation and eyewitness collaboration. This is precisely why Peter, James and John were among the closest of Jesus' followers.  It had nothing to do with partiality or favoritism; it did, however, have everything to do with the establishment of a perfect witness.

In Jewish law three individuals were always required to collaborate a true and unembellished testimony.  A credible story may have been established with only two individuals (minimum), but their testimony left room for doubt. A third person solidified the case.

 This concept could be compared to a man that began the construction of a new farm fence.  A few minutes after he began construction on the fence he decided to stop working and left it uncompleted for his neighbor to do.  When his neighbor arrived and saw only one fence post in the ground he had no clue as to what way the fence was to proceed. The neighbor did not leave instructions so it was impossible for him to understand his intentions. However, if two poles had been placed in the ground there would have been slightly more evidence as to the intended direction of the fence.  Finally, if three poles were in the ground there would have been no question as to which way the neighbor intended the fence to proceed.

 Actually, this concept is plain common sense. Many times it is overlooked because of its simplicity.  In fact, I'm sure heretical writings and movies like the "Da Vinci" theories would not have been funded if people would think reasonably with this concept in mind.  The claims of one individual with the motivation of monetary gain should never be trusted for even one second.  Think about this illustration: Suppose for a moment that one afternoon your child came running in the house telling you that they had found a huge chunk of gold in your backyard?  You probably would not believe him or her, right?  Now, assume that in addition to your child your neighbor also came running to your front porch talking about some shiny material in his backyard that resembled gold.  You might at least check the story out-but you are probably still a little leery since your neighbor has played practical jokes on you before.  What would seal the legitimacy of your child's original story?  Let me help you out.  Five minutes after your neighbor comes running to you talking about gold, another neighbor that you have only met one time, comes running down the street with a huge pickaxe screaming that he had "struck it rich."  If this scenario were ever to happen, please go and check out your own backyard.   In this case, the "third" person reference sealed the deal-no other proof was necessary.

 This is true with the law of two and three witnesses as well. No Jewish court, no individual Israelite even, would accept a credible testimony without two or three witnesses to back up a statement.  This is precisely why Jesus always had His core group (Peter, James and John) with Him to establish truth.  Undoubtedly, this is why there are three synoptic[2] gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) in the New Testament to solidify the teachings and ministry of Christ.  One example of the utilization of three witnesses is when Jesus took Peter, James and John to the Mount of Transfiguration; there He brought a new revelation of who He was and what He came to do (Matt. 17). 

By the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. Matthew 18:16

Again I say to you that if two of you agree on earth concerning anything that they ask, it will be done for them by My Father in heaven.  Matthew 18:19

Whoever is deserving of death shall be put to death on the testimony of two or three witnesses; he shall not be put to death on the testimony of one witness. Deuteronomy 17:6

PETER'S CALL

...Peter went up on the housetop to pray, about the sixth hour.  Then he became very hungry and wanted to eat; but while they made ready, he fell into a trance and saw heaven opened and an object like a great sheet bound at the four corners, descending to him and let down to earth.  In it were all kinds of four-footed animals of the earth, wild beasts, creeping things, and birds of the air. And a voice came to him, "Rise, Peter; kill and eat."  But Peter said, "Not so, Lord!  For I have never eaten anything common or unclean." And a voice spoke to him again the second time, "What God has cleansed you must not call common." This was done three times. And the object was taken up into heaven again.  ...Peter wondered within himself what this vision which he had seen meant... then he [Peter] said to them, "You know how unlawful it is for a Jewish man to keep company with or go to one of another nation. But God has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean...Then Peter opened his mouth and said: "In truth I perceive that God shows no partiality. But in every nation whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him...While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word. And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God.  Acts 10:9-17, 27-28, 34, 44. NKJV

            This vision was given to Peter early on in his ministry.  God was reminding Peter of the mission that was before him. Peter was to minister not only to Jews but to Gentiles (non-Jews) as well-this was God's plan from the beginning (Gen. 12:3).

 Israel was chosen to lead all nations to the Lord; sadly, they did not understand the desires of God's heart.  God had given them the great privilege of bearing the Law, and through this they were to shine forth a beacon to those in darkness. God's laws were meant to separate Israel from every other nation (Lev. 11; Deut. 4); the Gentiles were to look at Israel and see the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Many times, however, it was Israel that walked away from God without a concern for anyone other than themselves (i.e. Cycle of disobedience in the Judges, Etc.).

Listen to Me, My people; and give ear to Me, O My nation; for law will proceed from Me, and I will make My justice rest as a light of the peoples. Isa. 51:4

            According to Jewish customs and laws no one was to associate or even touch a Gentile person, for they were considered unclean. In fact, the Jews had a very harsh word that they used to describe the Gentiles-dogs (Matt. 15:26). Even though God intended to separate His people from the Gentiles, He did not mean to restrict them to the degree that had been embraced during the time of Christ; traditions that prohibited even speaking or touching a Gentile.  In fact, the Old Testament Law actually provided specific provisions for Gentile strangers that were to be administered by the Jews for their care. Even a tithe of agriculture was set aside every third and sixth year in compassion for the Gentile stranger (Deut. 14:28,29).  There are also several Old Testament stories that illustrate this principle very well: Ruth the Moabitess was brought into a covenant relationship with Jehovah God being an ancestor of King David; she is also among the ancestry of Jesus Christ, the Messiah.  Naaman the Syrian, a Gentile military commander, came to the Lord without any mention of him being circumcised into Judaism (2 Kings 5). Then there is the most notorious example of Jonah and the Ninevites, which will be covered in detail later in this article.

 When Peter received his vision from the Lord (Notice that it was given three times) it was to show that God's plan of salvation was to include the Gentile nations as well.   Not only was it God's plan to include the Gentiles, He also had a particular person chosen for the job-just like He chose Israel to be the lighthouse of hope, He had chosen Peter to be a representative to the Gentiles.  When God gave Peter this vision He was impressing upon him that the prophecy that Jesus gave to him was now being fulfilled. If you're asking yourself "What Prophecy?" you are not alone.  Many people skip over this huge clue in the book of Matthew:

"Who do men say that I [Jesus], the Son of Man, am?"...Simon Peter answered and said, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." Jesus answered and said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. "And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it..."  Matthew 16:13, 16-18 NKJV

            Many people are going to have trouble seeing this seemingly hidden prophecy in Jesus' address to Peter. It is not spelled out in black and white-or should I say "red." A slight amount of research and meditation will be necessary to see the message that was given to Peter. Jesus prophesied through the name Bar-Jonah that Peter had a mission similar to Jonah's.  He would be a minister to the Gentiles.  Before I clarify this position, I want to draw attention to one vital piece of information in the above passage.  When Jesus said, "upon this rock I will build My church," He was not saying that the "rock" was Peter; the Greek word for rock in this scripture is petra, which means a cliff or ledge of rock.  If you will recall, Peter's name comes from the Greek word, petros-a small stone or pebble.  No commentary should be necessary, but there is a vast difference between a cliff and a pebble. Jesus was not referring to a particular individual upon whom His church would be built; He was speaking of the revelation of the Father given to Peter and his mission to go to the Gentiles. The next part of this article will examine the evidence of Jesus' prophecy to Peter.

SIMON BAR-JONAH?

            What exactly is meant by the phrase "bar-Jonah" that was prophesied over Peter? Was this Jesus simply calling Peter by a name that reflected his natural father, or was there something special about this title that is not understood at a first reading?

First, it must be understood that names held great meaning in the Bible. Names often conveyed the nature or intended nature of a person given by relatives or even God Himself. For example, the Hebrew name "Abraham" was given to him by God to reveal his future nature-a father to a multitude-yet he didn't have any children when God changed his name.  Indeed, biblical names hold great significance, from Adam ("From the ground") to Zurishaddai ("the Almighty is a rock") and every name in between.

 Peter was addressed as Simon, Bar-Jonah; and although there is a name involved, in this case it is actually a title.  The Hebrew prefix bar means "son."  There are several instances where bar is mentioned in Scripture as part of a name: Barabbas, the notorious criminal set free by Pilate (Matt. 27:17), name means "son of the father."  Barnabas, a traveling companion with Paul mentioned in Acts 4:36 means "son of consolation."  There are other instances in Scripture as well.  In Matthew 16 (and others) the term bar-Jonah is a particular title that links Peter to the prophet Jonah-for their missions are the same. Even the first part of Peter's name, Simon, which means "reed," is associated with water-and therefore further connects him to Jonah; for Jonah is known for his intriguing encounters with a large fish in the treacherous "waters" of the sea. When Jesus prophesied to Peter by calling him, Simon "Bar-Jonah" or as some modern versions translate it, "son of Jonah," He was not referring to a physical connection to a man named Jonah, his supposed father; He was, however, referring to a spiritual connection. 

All throughout the Bible there are idioms, figures of speech and modes of expression that are unique to the Hebrew and Greek languages respectively.  The Hebrew colloquialisms are called Hebraisms. Hebraisms are words that were common expressions or idioms that do not translate literally into English.  For example, an English figure of speech is the word "cool."  The definition of this English word actually means that something is certifiably, by scientific measurement in degree, colder than air temperature.  But the common figure of speech expression has nothing to do with coldness by degree; it in fact, means that something is very admirable or excellent. One such Hebraism, or Hebrew idiom, is the partial phrase, "son of [something]" or "child of [something]."

The Hebrews would call someone who had a certain characteristic, feature or destiny, a son of that thing.[3]  This is evident in several scriptures:

1.      Son of Perdition;[4] 2 Thessalonians 2:3; John 17:12

2.      Children of transgression; Isaiah 57:4

3.      Sons of the kingdom; Matthew 8:12

4.      Sons of the wicked one; Matthew 13:38

5.      Sons of the bridechamber; Matthew 9:15

6.      Son of hell; Matthew 23:15

7.      Children of wrath; Ephesians 2:3

8.      Sons of disobedience; Ephesians 2:2

9.      Sons of Belial; 1 Samuel 2:12

I want to delve into the last entry, the sons of Belial, as it gives biblical evidence and support for Hebraisms. This is the entire scripture reference:

Now the sons of Eli were sons of Belial, they knew not the Lord. 1 Samuel 2:12 KJV

            Here there is a marked contrast and supposed contradiction; how can the sons of Eli be the sons of Belial also?  Eli was a real person, a priest in fact, and he had natural sons, but the term "sons of Belial" is an idiom-a figure of speech used to indicate that Eli's sons were wicked.  The New King James Version translates it as such:

Now the sons of Eli were corrupt; they did not know the Lord. NKJV

            Richard's Complete Bible Dictionary gives an accurate interpretation of the term Belial:

As a proper noun, a name for Satan. In common use, a Hebrew word for "worthless." The phrase "sons of Belial" appears several times in the OT (Deut. 13:13; 1 Sam. 2:12; 2 Chr. 13:7). Modern versions usually simply translate this "worthless persons," since belia'al means "worthless" or "lawless." However, the proper name is retained in 2 Cor. 6:15, where Paul asks rhetorically, "What harmony is there between Christ and Belial?" In Jewish literature from the second century on, Belial (or Beliar) was a name for Satan. In the 2 Corinthians passage Paul urges Christians not to compromise with the ways, practices, or the people of Satan.[5]

            After reviewing the many "sons" and "children" Hebraisms in the Scriptures it is apparent that Jesus was identifying Peter as "a" person with an assignment similar to Jonah's, not "the" literal son of Jonah-his supposed father. With this considered the scripture might be written like this:

Blessed are you, Simon, [with an assignment like Jonah's-to the Gentiles], for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. Matthew 16:17

AN ASSIGNMENT LIKE JONAH

If Simon Peter had a mission like Jonah, it would probably help to have a background on what his call was and why he ran from it.  The intention here will not be to examine the historicity or legitimacy of the Old Testament, minor prophetic, book of Jonah, although there is immense evidence for it being a factual story; what I want to convey is the divine assignment that God had given to Jonah. [6]

As many people know, Jonah is the only Old Testament prophet that was sent to a Gentile nation or people.  When God came to him, He told him that he was to go and preach to the people of Nineveh to warn them of His impending judgment against them (Jon. 1:2).  Jonah's assignment was simple; he, a Jew, was to preach repentance to the Gentile people of Nineveh.  As many know, Jonah did not immediately heed the call of God that was on his life for this mission.  In fact, God allowed Jonah to be swallowed by a huge fish and remain there until he realized the importance of what he was to do. Jonah probably viewed the Gentiles like most Jews; they were unclean savages that worshipped idols and pagan gods-to many Jews they were unworthy of salvation in the lightest degree. This is confirmed when Jonah was furious with God because He relented from destroying Nineveh, even though they repented from their wrongdoings and insurrection against God. Because of Jonah's misplaced anger, God sent him a live illustration-a plant to protect him from the sun, which withered and died the next day (Jon. 4).  Jonah was proved to have more compassion on this plant (actually more compassion on himself-the plant protected Jonah from the intense sun) than he did on a city that had more than one hundred thousand people.  God's message was clear:  He desired a relationship with all mankind, not just those He had chosen (the Jews) to bring His loving kindness to the world.

Then said the LORD, Thou hast had pity on the gourd, for the which thou hast not laboured, neither madest it grow; which came up in a night, and perished in a night: And should not I spare Nineveh, that great city, wherein are more than sixscore thousand persons that cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand; and also much cattle? Jonah 4:10-11 KJV

 Conversely, Peter also exhibited resentment and reluctance to preach to the Gentiles (Acts 10:14).  God actually had to show Peter a vision three times to get the message across to him (10:16).  Even then, Peter wondered what the vision meant and even argued with the Lord about what he was to do (10:14, 17).  Doesn't this sound similar to the description of Jonah? Amazingly, Peter even received his vision and call to the Gentiles in Joppa (Acts 10:8-9).  Bible readers will immediately identify that this is the same city where Jonah boarded a ship to flee from the presence of the Lord (Jonah 1:3). 

Although the circumstances surrounding the call of Simon Peter and Jonah are not exactly the same, the essential ingredients are; both were reluctant to preach a message of repentance to the Gentile people; both hesitated to have compassion on those who God had desired to save.  When Jesus gave Peter the prophecy, He probably intended to cultivate his heart through it, although Peter may not have understood what it was all about at that time. 

            Jesus did not give Peter this seemingly shrouded prophecy only one time, He came to him again just before He ascended to heaven to sit at the right hand of God and make intercession for the saints (Heb. 1:13; 7:25):

...Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me more than these?" He said to Him, "Yes, Lord; You know I love you." He said to him, "Feed My lambs."

He said to him again a second time, "Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me?" He said to Him, "Yes, Lord; You know that I love You." He said to him, "Tend My sheep."

He said to him the third time,  "Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me?" Peter was grieved because H said to him the third time, "Do you love Me?" And he said to Him, "Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You." Jesus said to him, "Feed My sheep." John 21:15-17 (emphasis mine.)

            There are some interesting components to this passage of scripture (again, notice the usage of "three" emphatic statements of son of Jonah).  First, Peter knew that Jesus had foretold of "other" sheep coming into the kingdom that were not of the traditional fold:

And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd. John 10:16 NKJV

            When Jesus came to Peter and told him to feed His flock, He used two separate terms to indicate two different types of people.  He used the term lambs (John 21:15) and the word sheep (John 21:16; 17).  In fact, He repeated the word sheep twice to draw emphasis to it; this is known as Hebrew Parallelism.[7]  Parallelism is a characteristic usually found in Hebrew poetry to draw emphasis to a particular word, phrase or thought. The phrase, word or thought is repeated on a second line, thus being parallel to the original line, to draw the reader or hearers attention. This is exactly what Jesus was doing when He repeated the same thought three times using slightly different terminology.  He wanted to emphasize that Peter, with a destiny like Jonah's, would evangelize those who were to come into the fold, but would be of different stock. First, Jesus tells Peter to feed the lambs; this probably did not pose any problems for Peter. He knew Jesus was referring to the flock of the Jews. But then Jesus tells Peter to "tend" His sheep.  The word tend means to "be inclined toward." Peter probably wondered why Jesus would have made a distinction between a lamb and sheep.  It was simple, Jesus wanted Peter to give attention to the fact that he would be reaching out to those who many (even Peter) would deem unclean and unworthy of salvation-although this was never God's position concerning the Gentiles. Some may wonder why Jesus used a clean animal to get the point across to Peter, but I think that is easy to remedy.  In using a clean animal, Jesus stressed that the Gentiles were mistakenly understood to be unclean; and Jesus had already told Peter that others would come into the flock that were not of the usual fold (John 10:16); this is undoubtedly a reference to sheep.

Secondly, Jesus tells Peter that he will not want or accept this mission at first.

Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not. John 21:18 KJV

            Jesus tells Peter that when he is old he will die on a cross-his hands stretched out and carried where he will not wish to go; and it is confirmed in extra-biblical literature that Peter died on a cross upside down after he begged his torturers not to crucify him in the same manner as his Lord.  Jesus' intentions may have been to infer that there will be many things that Peter will not want to do, but He gave him a simple command:

"Follow Me." John 21:19

            This same command should resonate in every believer's ears even today.  The Christian walk will not be easy-contrary to popular preaching; it does not consist of abundant riches, pleasures and lack of trials and tribulations. If you desire to "take up the cross and follow Jesus" (Mk 8:34) there will be times you will want to quit, but the same promise rests on those who decide to "follow" Jesus as was given during the times of the disciples-that in the end it will be more than worth the troubles that we faced in this life.

Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor have entered into the heart of man the things which God has prepared for those who love Him. 1 Corinthians 2:9

CONCLUSION

            Today, many people find themselves glued to the seat of their pew not doing anything for the Lord.  They are content to be where they are. After all, they give 10% of their income to the church and pass out groceries to the less-fortunate every Thanksgiving. Isn't that enough?  No. God has not called any Christian to sit on a pew and do partial work for Him one day a year.  He has given every Christian a general call to preach the Gospel to all men.  Others have been given a more specific call to reach a certain people, tribe or nation.  We must stop being content with sitting behind the closed doors of our church thinking that God is somehow pleased. I have come across so many people that have a mindset just like Peter: as long as you're apart of their religious affiliation or church things will be just fine; but the second you tell them that God is not pleased with their "intramural-fellowship" be prepared for a battle.  Satan hates unity (Gen. 4:8).

Behold, how good and pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity! Psalm 133:1

Many of us have a mission that God has set-aside just for us, and if we knew the full details we would probably run for our very lives just like Jonah. Some people have been called to go to Communist China to preach the gospel where former missionaries have had their very heads cut off for the sake of the gospel; some people have been called to preach to Death Row inmates, where prisoners throw feces, urine and other bodily fluids on people they don't like. On the other hand, very few have been called to construct thousand seat churches with plush padded pews and air conditioning to preach to people with hundreds of thousands of dollars in their bank account.  But God has a way of bringing us to do what HE has planned for us to do. 

If you will open your spiritual ears to hear God's still small voice, you will hear Him calling your name.  Yes, you _______ -son of Jonah, I love you and have a very important assignment for you. Will you heed My voice and drop everything you are doing to follow Me? Peter did. Jonah finally did, but I had to prod him ever so slightly. Will you come after Me?  Will you fulfill My great commission? 

And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. Mark 16:15 KJV

            My interpretation may be wrong, but I think this scripture says to "GO" into all the world, not "let them come" into your church, Bible study, cell group or singles outing. Letting them come in is a good thing, but to be the most effective for God's kingdom we must go out and get them. Then, our primary focus should be to train those coming in to "GO OUT" and get others.  How is the church doing at fulfilling that mission?  How are you doing?  I'd rather be like Peter than I would the sea-tossed, fish swallowed, Jonah the son of Amittai!  Lord, help us to go when You say go!

[1] Sumrall, Lester. Life of Simon Peter (South Bend, IN. Sumrall Publishing Ó2000) p. 10-11.

[2] Synoptic simply means similar in content.

[3] Dake, Finis. Dake's Annotate Reference Bible (Lawrenceville, GA. Dake Pub. Ó1999) p. 201, Note D.

[4] Both Judas Escariot (John 17:12) and the Antichrist (2 Thess. 2:3) are referred to as sons of perditions.  They, however, share nothing in common except for their nature, disposition and final destiny in the lake of fire.  Their natural ancestry is not linked in any way. 

[5] Richards, Lawrence. Richard's Complete Bible Dict (Nashville, TN. Thomas Nelson Pub. Ó2002) p. 143.

[6] Even the Jewish historian, Josephus backs up the biblical account of Jonah. Note: the term minor prophet has nothing to do with the importance of the book, but simply indicates the overall length of the book. The minor prophets are smaller in length than the major prophets.

[7] According to Robert Lowth (Eighteenth century) there are three forms of Parallelism: synonymous, when the second line repeats the first; antithetical, when the second line contains a contrasted antonym to the word, or thought in the first line; and synthetic, when the second line brings the thought conveyed in the introductory line forward. (From Arthur Patzia's Pocket Dictionary of Biblical Studies. Downers Grove, IL. IVP Ó2002. p. 89.)