PASSION (πάσχω, G4248, to suffer mental anguish, to suffer death. In the former sense both the verb and the nominal form, Gr. παθείς and παθών, are used in the NT). The NT style seems to have been derived from the LXX, which frequently renders several Heb. terms by the Gr. word (Acts 14:15 KJV “passions,” RSV “nature”; James 5:17 KJV “passions,” RSV “nature”). A further extension of the term to “strong emotion” appears in other texts of the NT (Rom 1:26 KJV “affections,” RSV “passions”; 7:5 KJV “motions,” RSV “passions”; Gal 5:24 KJV “affections,” RSV “passions”; Col 3:5 “inordinate affection” according to the KJV whereas the RSV consistently reads “passion.”) A more obvious allusion to sexual passion is found in 1 Thess 4:5 (KJV) “lust of concupiscence” (RSV), “passion of lust.” In all these references it is the unquenchable, insatiable desire that causes further discomfort.

The most important and far-reaching occurrence of the term is the phrase in the prologue to Acts, ζῶντα μετὰ̀ τὸ̀ παθεῖν αὐτὸ̀ν, “alive after his passion.” This phrase was tr. by St. Jerome (c. a.d. 400) as Lat. “vivum post passionem suam,” which follows the koine syntax exactly, even the term rendering Gr. pathein is cognate, namely Lat. patior. This same style was followed by John Wycliffe (1320-1384) and by subsequent Eng. VSS that retained the term “passion” in this special sense of the death and burial of Christ. It is evident from the Lucan use in Acts 1:3 that this term summarizes the major portion and intent of Luke’s gospel.

An analysis of the contents of any or all of the four gospels will demonstrate that the broadest coverage is given to the events of the last week of Jesus’ life and public ministry. It is the last few days of this—the betrayal, arrest, trial, scourging, journey to Golgotha, and crucifixion—that is meant by “passion.” The fact that the Passion is mentioned in the opening of the Acts shows that it was the central core of the message taught throughout the apostolic period. The often repeated notion that the Early Church in the 2nd and 3rd centuries a.d. concocted the substitutionary character of Jesus’ death is specious in the light of this early statement. It is clear in the gospel narratives that Jesus taught that His suffering was to be the Messianic suffering, although it is equally clear that this insight was not understood by the disciples when they heard it (Matt 16:21; 17:22, 23; 20:17-19; Mark 8:31, 32; 9:31, 32; 10:32-34; Luke 9:22, 43-45; 18:31-34). It is at the time of the Passion that Jesus’ words carry the fullest import concerning the atonement being accomplished (Matt 20:28; 26:28; Mark 10:45; 14:24). It must be asserted, however, that without the principle of God’s gratuitous substitution of Christ’s atonement for the sins of the believers, a concept that is repeated over and over in Scripture, the Passion is meaningless. Recent attempts at explaining the Crucifixion in terms of dialectic philosophy or as an act of sublime sympathy to be imitated in society, utterly disregard the text of the NT. Through the Epistle to the Hebrews, the ancient cult practices of the Jewish sacrifices are disclosed in terms of their completion and satisfaction in the Passion (Heb 2). The suffering of the Christian for his faith is nowhere imitative, but is a sign of keeping faith with Christ (1 Pet 2:21-23). In the patristic writers the concept of the Passion became a central theme, and throughout the Middle Ages the art from the Passion, the Passion plays, and the Passionist Fathers expanded the importance of the concept as annunciated in Acts.