the Third Week of Advent
Click here to join the effort!
Bible Dictionaries
Sign (2)
Hastings' Dictionary of the New Testament
or SIGN (σημεῖον, signum).—The Gospels contain many references to signs in connexion with the anticipations of Messiah’s advent and with the life and work of Jesus Christ. But the various shades and degrees of significance attached to the word ‘sign’ by speakers, writers, and the people generally, must be carefully discriminated by a close regard to the particular occasion on which it is employed. Most of all must distinction be made between the value placed upon the word by the people of our Lord’s time and by our Lord Himself.
1. The fixed expectation of the generation into which Jesus was born, that signs would be associated with every true prophet and reformer and supremely with the Messiah, that marvellous events, largely of a material character, would occur in connexion with every authoritative teacher, and with every manifestation of the will of God, was part of the mental fabric of the Jewish people. The depth to which this expectation penetrated into the general consciousness may be judged by the traces of it in the Apostolic writers and in those trained under their influence. The Apostles generally did not easily throw aside Jewish prepossessions in regard to the kind of phenomena which might be expected to accompany a Messianic advent or a Divine revelation. Although they lay the main emphasis on the ethical and spiritual elements of Christian authority, the lower conceptions persist, and often no clear distinction is made between the σημεῖον and the τέρας (cf. Matthew 24:29 f., Mark 13:24 f., Luke 21:11; Luke 21:25, Acts 2:22, Hebrews 2:4, 2 Corinthians 12:12, Revelation 12:1; Revelation 13:13; Revelation 15:1; Revelation 16:14; Revelation 19:20, 2 Thessalonians 2:8 f.).
It is abundantly clear that the general assumption was made that credentials of a striking and material character must be demanded of the Messiah as a proof of the authority of His teaching and Person. Repeatedly the Jews, and especially the scribes, Pharisees, and Sadducees (see below), pressed this demand upon Jesus. They wanted a clear convincing proof of His authority. The signs they had seen were possible by collusion with the powers that rule the lower world, by a compact with Beelzebub (Mark 3:22). Only a sign in the heavens would satisfy them. Clearly what they sought was of the nature of a prodigy, properly to be classed with the τέρατα, with which our Lord stedfastly refused to have any part or lot. Similarly, Herod’s desire to see Jesus was animated by his wish to see a miracle (σημεῖον) performed by Him. We can be sure that what Herod desired had more relation to prodigies, as most in harmony with his nature and suited to his capacity, and the word used is due to the Evangelist, who himself drew no clear line between the σημεῖον and the τέρας (Luke 23:8).
2. Our Lord’s attitude towards signs.—Indications are given that the common expectation of signs on the part of His generation was not without its solicitation to Jesus. One temptation in the wilderness was an urgent pressure on the noblest side of His nature to give a sign of this character with the view of gaining a more speedy influence over the people (Matthew 4:5-7, Luke 4:9-12). The temptation was resisted and overcome. Our Lord would put no trust in external and magical signs for the furtherance of His work or the emphasizing and enforcing of His teaching. He knew their futility for the purpose of bringing real conviction to men (Luke 16:31). And the strenuous effort of His life was to resist these unspiritual conceptions of truth and reality.
The request for a sign in confirmation of His teaching He uniformly refused. The apparent response in John 2:18 is no exception. The sign He would give would be granted only in its due place as His career was consummated by His own resurrection. John 6:26 contains an apparent commendation of those who accepted Him because of His wonder-working, but it was only a relative commendation in comparison with the far lower spirit which was unconcerned about any spiritual authority so long as their physical wants were easily and bountifully provided. Luke 7:21-22 on the surface appears to be a sign given for the sake of convincing John the Baptist, and if ever our Lord could have departed from His habitual way, it was to help that lone prisoner, suffering mental and spiritual anguish because the work Messiah was doing was so unlike what he had expected—deeds of quiet beneficence instead of sharp vengeance against iniquity. But the action sprang out of the Divine impulse as our Lord, deeply moved by John’s doubt, realized afresh that to bless and heal men was the truest mark of One sent of God.
Jesus resolutely and persistently refused to give any external sign for the sake of evidencing His claims, and only in the most chary manner spoke of His miracles as signs. He chose rather to call them ἔργα (‘works’) arising out of the need of man and prompted by His own inner life in response to that need (see art. Miracles). His works were ‘signs’ because they were part of His whole revelation of God, and elsewhere He regards opportunities for His miracles as occasions for the manifestation of the works of God (John 9:3), or for the glorifying of Himself (John 11:4). Self-manifestation and Divine revelation were identical in the mind of Jesus (John 14:13). Clearly our Lord only refrained from applying the word σημεῖα to His miracles because of the general associations of the word. To Him they were vital parts of the revelation of Divine power which He came to give.
A very particular and urgently-pressed demand for a sign ‘in the heavens’ is recorded in Matthew 12:38-41; Matthew 16:1-4, Mark 8:11-12, and Luke 11:16; Luke 11:29-32. The various accounts give a full idea of the occasion, or occasions. Mk. records the astonishment and bewilderment of Jesus at such a claim made by those who professed to be religious leaders. In an age which was full of signs, in which He Himself had been the most signal manifestation of the Divine presence and power, these religious teachers were still asking for signs. ‘Why doth this generation seek after a sign? No sign shall be given.’ Mt. and Lk. record our Lord’s answer that no sign should be given but that of Jonah. Lk. gives the explanation of that sign to the Ninevites as consisting in the man and his message, not in his deliverance from the sea-monster, which they could only have believed on the strength of their faith in the man himself. Matthew 16:1-4 gives the same interpretation, as also does Matthew 12:38-39; Matthew 12:41, which forms a consistent whole and regards Jonah’s preaching as the sign. Matthew 12:40, with its parallel to the Resurrection of Jesus, must be regarded as an after thought incorporated incongruously into the narrative. And the chief point is that our Lord declares that the one Divine sign to that generation was Himself, the Son of Man, His Person and His teaching. Simeon, under the exaltation of the Spirit, gives expression to the same essential truth (Luke 2:34). Jesus entirely severs Himself from the common conception of a sign. A mere sign was the prodigy desired by an evil generation; His ‘works’ were signs in the truer and higher sense of having in them a spiritual and Divine significance, and as pointing to greater possibilities of soul and higher regions of reality. They were signs of the Divine power and life which dwelt in Himself.
John 10:41, declaring the embarrassment felt by those who were conscious of the truth of the Baptist’s message regarding Christ, together with the fact that he ‘wrought no sign,’ is witness that more spiritual conceptions were breaking through the ancient crust of superstition. And the Fourth Gospel is evidence that one Evangelist was able to disentangle the spiritual and ethical from the material and catastrophic. The conceptions of Christ’s power set forth in this Gospel are of a distinctly more spiritual order. The word used by the writer is invariably σημεῖον (John 2:11; John 3:2; John 4:54, etc.), and there are plain indications that the truer and higher significance was attached to it. The value of the sign is seen to be its revealing quality. The miracle of the Cana-marriage is described as the beginning of His signs, in which He manifested forth His glory (ἐφανέρωσε τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ), showing that the disciple had truly apprehended the Master’s teaching.
T. H. Wright.
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Hastings, James. Entry for 'Sign (2)'. Hastings' Dictionary of the New Testament. https://www.studylight.org/dictionaries/eng/hdn/s/sign-2.html. 1906-1918.
