In evangelical circles, the word “anoint” often raises eyebrows and is met with varied thoughts, experiences, and perhaps even controversy. Hyper cessationists often act as if it is some kind of Star Wars-type force power (only the mature Jedi masters can do certain things) that some have and some don’t. There is possibly a small element of truth to that concept though.  Many others in mainstream Christianity discount acts of anointing to only the physical acts and feel that anointing itself has little if any place in the modern church today. Still, others talk about the “anointed” as if they have some kind of branded stamp of approval from God that makes them “special” or potentially even “higher” than others. I can’t tell you how many times I have heard “don’t touch God’s anointed one” to indicate the idea that a minister is untouchable or needs no reproof or accountability. Most of these instances are perpetuated by the ministers themselves creating a type of “limited hangout” of self-protecting theology.

I believe everyone has received or is given the same anointing at spiritual rebirth. The Holy Spirit Himself IS the anointing of God. What we, in partnership with God, do with that anointing varies greatly based on the receiver, their revelation, and their discipline. Our Father through a covenant within the church intends to bring us through discipleship in Christ and lead us to spiritual maturity in our New Life. Anointing is a sign of the invitation of God to work in us and through us. Additionally, the grace that comes with the anointing will empower us to lay down our own will and desire calling on the indwelling of the spirit. Less of me more of Him.

This article will serve as a theological launchpad to help you understand how to recognize what anointing means and represents in the Bible but will by no means be exhaustive. There have been many books written on this subject and my goal is simply to get readers aligned with a more biblical approach to understanding anointing and greater discernment of what they hear and read. I cannot make a better introduction than my friends have done at the Bible project so start with this short video.

What does the Bible say about anointing?

Anointing is the ritual act of pouring aromatic oil over a person’s head or entire body.^[1] There are 44 occurrences of anointings in the Bible (how divinely ironic…). There are at least 7 Hebrew words and 5 Greek words that describe anointing in varied ways. As you have heard me (us) say before, everything begins and ends in a picture of Eden, God’s ideals. As per the video above, “its meaning is rooted in the story of the garden of Eden, where God provided water for the dry land and formed the human, filling him with his Spirit”. This is the first Biblical allusion to anointing. The oil is a liquid symbol. It’s the water of life and God’s Spirit combined, used to mark a person or a place as a bridge between Heaven and Earth.” ^[2]

ANOINT: (Eng. tr. of several Heb. words— דָּשֵׁנ֒, H2014, to make fat, Ps 23:5 only, Gr. λιπαίνειν, to oil or anoint; סוּכְ֮, H6057, to pour, Gr. tr. nearly always by ἀλείφειν, to anoint, cf. Micah 6:15; מָשַׁח, H5417, to smear, Gr. tr. χριειν, to anoint, Exod 29:36, or ἀλείφειν, to anoint). 

In antiquity, the use of holy anointing oil was significant in the Hebrews’ consecration of kings, priests (specifically the Kohen Gadol – High Priest), and sacred tabernacle/temple vessels.^[3] Contrary to what some have claimed, Judaism is the only place in Ancient Near Eastern culture where we see anointing. The only definite case in which an Egyptian king anointed one of his officials is that of EA 51 (much later than the Biblical accounts). In this instance, Thutmosis III was probably engaging in a custom common among Asiatics, rather than that he was introducing an Egyptian custom into Syria-Palestine” ^[4]  Gordon asserted that the practice of anointing was “well attested in Babylonian and Egyptian customs well before Biblical times citing the anointing of a king mentioned in the 14th cent. b.c., Amarna Letter # 37. One text from Ras Shamra refers to anointing Baal (Gordon, # 76; ANET. p. 142a; Baal & Anat, Syria, XVII [1936] pp. 150-173). However, this has been largely contested and I would agree that calling the aforementioned “an anointing” is a stretch. It was common practice in Ancient Near Eastern cultures to adopt language and practices from each other, especially in a religious context. It is always important to follow through with in-depth research to determine the oldest references to help determine their origins.

We see by Biblical account, that Prophets and the Israelite kings were anointed as well, in most (or all) cases, the kings were anointed from a horn. Anointment by the ‘chrism’ (a consecrated mixture of oil and balsam) prepared according to the ceremony described in Exodus 30:22–25 was considered to impart the “Spirit of the Lord”. It was performed by Samuel in place of a coronation of both Saul and David, although perhaps the anointings varied slightly by “horn” vs “flask” but that is arguable, and I will come back to this point. The practice of anointing was not consistently observed in royal coronations in Israel and scholars have scratched their heads trying to figure out why. The scriptural inconsistencies have created a theological problem to be debated among serious Bible academics. Some scholars believe anointing was only essential at the consecration of a new line or dynasty.^[5] Some believe it is simply just not mentioned, while still others believe the lack of anointing in later biblical narratives suggests how far away Israel had wandered from doing things God’s way.

1 Kings 19:16, 1 Chronicles 16:22, Psalms 105:15, Exodus 40:15, and Numbers 3:3 all display kingly anointings; but after these instances, anointing seems to have been specially reserved for the High Priest. Exodus 29:29 and Leviticus 16:32 are examples as well and “the priest that is anointed” in Leviticus 4:3 are all generally thought to mean the High Priest. Adding even more facets of polemic discussion, we read David was thrice anointed. 

“Then Samuel took the horn of oil and anointed him in the midst of his brothers. And the Spirit of the Lord rushed upon David from that day forward.” – 1 Samuel 16:13

“And the men of Judah came, and there they anointed David king over the house of Judah.” – 2 Samuel 2:4

“So all the elders of Israel came to the king at Hebron, and King David made a covenant with them at Hebron before the Lord, and they anointed David king over Israel.” – 2 Samuel 5:3

Additionally, Inanimate objects were also anointed with oil, in token of their being ‘set apart’ for religious service. Thus, Jacob anointed a pillar at Bethel (Genesis 31:13; Exodus 30:26-28). As there are several theological views, I lean toward believing that we are simply reading the narrative of Israel’s slow decline or walking away from God and the lack of continued anointings is just another, of many, examples implying this. Because it was customary to anoint kings, the phrase “the Lord’s anointed” became a synonym for “king” (1 Sam 12:3; 24:6, 10; 26:9, 11, 16, 23; 2 Sam 1:14, 16; 19:21; Ps 20:6; Lam 4:20).

The High Priest and the king were both sometimes called “the Anointed One”. The term—מָשִׁיחַ, Mashiaẖ—gave rise to the prophesied figure of the Messiah and various foreshadows of Christ whose name meant ‘the anointed one’.^[6] The Hebrew word Messiah and the Greek word Christ both mean “the anointed.” 

“And it shall come to pass in that day, that his burden shall be taken away from off thy shoulder, and his yoke from off thy neck, and the yoke shall be destroyed because of the anointing” (Isaiah 10:27).

The Bible spiritually defines the anointing as “God on flesh doing those things that flesh cannot do.” There was more being implied than just a position or title being confirmed with a shot of lubrication. In other words, it is God doing something Himself through people like us that we couldn’t do on our own (2 Corinthians 4:7). There is a divine empowerment and/or a divine appointment that is unattainable without the Spirit. 

It is the pre-eminent calling of the Bible, the core of a disciple – to be used completely God.

Like a combustion engine requires the fuel of petroleum-based energy to run, so the authentic Christian is baptized in the oil of the Holy Spirit to be burned up by the ‘all-consuming’ fire of God in service to the Kingdom.

In the Old Testament, the anointing was a ‘commissioning’ or calling for Yahweh to work through you. It was usually reserved for priests and kings but there are a few other cases. Under the New Covenant according to many scriptures such as 1 Peter 1:9, we are all commissioned as a royal priesthood, and therefore all have the anointing in us. We are the temple of the Holy Spirit, now. When we receive Christ, it means more than just becoming followers of Jesus. It means “the anointings” of Christ are in us. The diversity of that radical thought mostly dispels the current ideology of someone “having an anointing” to do some small ministry function or gift. If Christ Himself has anointed us with His anointing, then there is an infinite amount of possibility within each of us.

If you are “in Christ,” there is an anointing for everything you are called to do, no matter how small or how great the task. That’s why the Apostle Paul could say, “I can do all things through Christ (the Anointed and His Anointing) who strengthens me” (Philippians 4:13). Notice the personification of the anointing being a “who” and not a “what”.

“And as for you, the anointing you received from Him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But just as His TRUE and genuine anointing teaches you about all things, so remain in Him as you have been taught.” (1 John 2:27).

In the New Testament author/audience context, the “anointing” would likely have referred to another way of saying that a person was filled by, baptized by, endued by, or appointed by the person of The Holy Spirit. Look at the commentary here from the IVP (InterVarsity Press) Bible Background Commentary.

1 John 2:24-27. 

• Many commentators hold that the “anointing” (v. 27) is the *Spirit (cf. In 1417, 26; Acts 10:38); others suggest that it refers in context to the word, the message of the *gospel; in either case it alludes to the Old Testament practice of God setting particular people apart for his calling, which here applies to all believers. The Old Testament used anointing oil symbolically to consecrate or separate people (such as kings) or objects (such as the tabernacle) for sacred use. The ultimate consecration for such use arose when the Spirit came on people (Is 61:1; cf. 1 Sam 101, 9; 16:13). (Page 710, Second Edition 2014)

In the Gospels, we see a rebirth of ‘anointings’ happening in Jesus and His ministry. Anointing with oil had culturally become a tradition among the Hebrews and later the Christians alike as a practice of welcoming someone to their home. This was a way of declaring everything and everyone to be sanctified and made holy (person, ground, and space being sacred – all that we are and have are signified to be in Jesus). It also was common for early Christians to anoint themselves as a way to revive or energize their bodies a tradition similar to how taking communion was a reminder of the atonement and life of Jesus being active within the believer. A common use of anointing oils would be to honor someone as an act of hospitality or commissioning for a sacred function (apostolic mission). This is also where the idea of an ‘ordination service’ (laying on of hands, anointing with oil, sending forth [set apart]) was likely birthed.

In ancient Near Eastern culture, and particularly during the 2nd temple period, oil was used for the sick as well as applied to injuries. High-quality anointing oils, medicines, and fragrances that were created with pure ingredients had calming and therapeutic properties from the medicinal attributes of the natural plant extracts in them. This practice has seen a resurgence in recent times, so much so, that you can likely find someone in your church who will sell you some ‘essential oils’ to provide medicinal relief or benefit. The traditional practice would be to anoint those who are sick and pray (appeal) for healing in conjunction with the faith action of anointing them. In intertestamental and NT times actual anointing for medicinal (healing) purposes is attested in Judith 10:3; 16:10; James 5:14; and Revelation 3:18. 

As a mark of hospitality or special honor, guests were anointed (Luke 7:37-46; John 11:2). We see this when the Magi from the East (likely descendants of Daniel’s wise men) brought oils (the best and most expensive) to the birth of Jesus which would have a connection to His royal inauguration as a king or priest but also strangely carry an application for His honored burial as a king and priest. The oils presented at the birth of Christ should be considered as an expression by which Jesus would bring healing to the world through His birth, life, death, resurrection, and ascension after which He would send His Spirit to offer the same anointing to all who place their allegiant faith in Him and join His Kingdom.

The word “Christ” is a form of the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew title. He was not anointed by the High Priest following the ceremony described in Exodus. This was likely because the priesthood had become defiled before the Lord and had turned into a political office and was entangled in the ways of the world. This is why Hebrews informs us that Jesus was a Priest after the ‘order of Melchizedek’ and specifically NOT after the order of the Levitical lineage. Jesus didn’t join or align with any systems of the world but represented His sole Kingdom. Jesus was considered to have been anointed by the Holy Spirit during his baptism. A literal anointing of Jesus also occurs when He is lavishly oiled by Mary of Bethany.^[7] Performed out of affection, the anointment is said by Jesus to have been preparation for his burial. In I John 2:20 John describes “anointing from the Holy One” and “from Him abides in you”. From dust to dust. we are given back to God.

The practice of “chrismation” (baptism with oil) appears to have developed in the early church during the later 2nd century as a symbol of Christ, rebirth, and inspiration.^[8] The earliest surviving account of such an act seems to be the letter written “To Autolycus” by Theophilus, bishop of Antioch. In it, he calls the act “sweet and useful”, punning on khristós (Greek: χριστóς, “anointed”) and khrēstós (χρηστóς, “useful”). The practice is also defended by Hippolytus in his “Commentary on the Song of Songs”^[9] and by Origen in his “Commentary on Romans”. Origen opines that “all of us may be baptized in those visible waters and in a visible anointing, in accordance with the form handed down to the churches”.^[10]

In I John 2 the Greek, xrísma (from xríō, “anoint with oil” where we get the English word charisma) refers to the teaching ministry of the Holy Spirit, guiding the receptive believer into the fullness of God’s preferred will. This anointing functions through faith (pístis), i.e. God inwardly enabling the believer of His divine preferences (cf. also Hab 2:1-4; 1 Jn 5:4). Although this use is ONLY found in 1 John, it has become a common and regularly understood dynamic of anointing; by this text we regard anointing connected to a believers spiritual gifting (1 Samuel 16:13; Isaiah 61:1). Many have made the connection including Josephus. He links 1 John 2:20 (where ἀπό τοῦ ἁγίου is so used as to imply that this χρῖσμα renders them ἁγίους and τό χρῖσμα is used of the gift of the Holy Spirit, as the efficient aid in getting a knowledge of the truth; see χιω. (Xenophon, Theophrastus, Diodorus, Philo, others; for מִשְׁחָה, Exodus 29:7; Exodus 30:25; Exodus 35:14; Exodus 40:7.)^[11] I also need to note that within the better-understood textures of biblical interpretation and hermeneutics, we should be careful in over-emphasizing something found in one passage with what seems to be some serious theological gymnastics (at least as displayed by Josephus in this case), yet at the same time recognize and understand that the Bible does teach this even if it is only in one place with a stretched possible connection to a singular Old Testament text.

One of the most noted instances in the New Testament for the usage of ‘anointing’ is found in Luke 4:18. This is the famous inaugural message of Jesus just after the infilling of the Holy Spirit associated with John’s baptism in the Jordan and then a forty-day showdown with the Adversary who intended to capture the man Jesus like he had done with every other mortal before Him. But, as we all know and rejoice over, Jesus would not be snared by the devil. This victory led Him shortly back to His hometown, at His home church, with His neighbors, family, and friends in attendance on that Sabbath day.

The scriptures say that the Scroll of Isaiah was handed to Him by the leader of the synagogue and then Jesus FOUND the place where it was written… This world ‘found’ is important for the context of our conversation and for what was happening that day of His ministerial launch. It was important that Jesus tied in His ministry with that of the Jewish ‘messiah’ (anointed one) and publically show and declare that He was being anointed by God for this calling, and not by man. We see here that the ‘proof’ of this was the person of the Holy Spirit being the anointing, instead of some human with naturally produced oil. This was God, all God, and nothing but God.

“The Spirit of the Lord is on Me, because He has anointed Me…” (Luke 4:18a)

Notice how the language describes that the reason that the Holy Spirit is empowering Jesus to do all the works listed in the later part of the verse is that Jesus “has” been anointed. In Greek, this verb is Aorist Indicative Active. Aorist means it is a simple past tense usage, Indicative means it is a verb type that describes the action, and the Active is the ‘voice’ that means the action is still ongoing. So, Jesus was anointed or appointed by God previously (we know this because Jesus was the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world as noted in Rev. 13: 8) but was empowered for that specific function or calling by the Holy Spirit when He (Holy Spirit) anointed Him (Jesus) with His power and presence. Simply stated, the Holy Spirit was the anointing.

In Chapter 7 of the Didache, (also known as The Lord’s Teaching Through the Twelve Apostles to the Nations is a brief anonymous early Christian treatise (ancient church order) written in Koine Greek, dated by modern scholars to the first or second century) it describes the process of baptism. While it does not explicitly state anointing, some interpretations suggest a potential anointing with oil following the baptismal meal. This interpretation stems from a variant reading of verse 10:8, which mentions the outpouring of the Holy Spirit “after this.” Some scholars believe this “after this” refers to an anointing with oil. We can glean that in very early Christianity the church embraced the idea that an anointing of oil was symbolically connected to the actual anointing of the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit. It’s important to note that the Didache doesn’t provide detailed instructions or explanations regarding anointing. The text doesn’t specify the purpose, method, or frequency of the practice. This would seem to mean that the early church did not accentuate any heirachial interpretation or application to being ‘anointed’ but mostly looked at it as something done by God that they were collectively acknowledging. This would have made all believers humbly equal in ‘the brotherhood’ because the ‘anointing’ was from God and was God.

CONNECTING THE TEXT AND APPLICATIONS

Recently our friend Frank Viola give a discourse on anointing and it was very good, I highly recommend it . You can listen here. He brings out the difference that Saul was anointed by a man-made flask and David by a horn made by God. I agree mostly with Frank or at least on his conclusive thoughts regarding anointing, but as theologians, we need to address the basic premise of his message. He would allude that the flask was man-made, yet we don’t know that for sure, the Bible doesn’t tell us this, it is an assumption. The Hebrew word used for flask is פַּךְ (pak) and is only found in three places in the Bible and is translated with the words flask, box, or vial. It is used as a noun but is derived from the verb פָכָה (pakah) which is more common and simply means ‘to pour, trickle, or run out’. We usually read that anointings were done by a horn. The idea was that each anointed person should be anointed by the same “amount” as others were, it was a unit of measurement. This way no one could claim that one received a greater portion than the other and make a spiritual argument for one person having more power than another because of the anointings. 

Are you following this important thought? 

We aren’t supposed to think that one person has been given a greater portion than another, this is one place where the Bible addresses spiritual equality and there are many others, there is no hierarchy in and under Christ and His church. What God does in you isn’t you, it’s Him.

This carries over into the New Covenant where we all start with the same anointing. In other words, the Hebrew usage functions as a noun that describes something that pours out and implies it to be a standard device of measurement. Could Saul’s “flask” have been a horn? Maybe. We don’t have the answer one way or another, but I would lean towards the “flask” actually being a horn because that is what we see in the rest of scripture. Other kings seem to be equally as “worldly” as Saul and were anointed by the horn including Jehu (2 Kings 9:1-13), Joash (11:12), and Jehoahaz (23:30). In Zechariah 4:14 the postexilic successor to David’s claim to the throne, Zerubbabel, is also called the “anointed.” In Isaiah 45:1 the Persian king, Cyrus, (a gentile ruler outside of the covenant) is called the Lord’s anointed. ^[12] 

The implication seems to be that all of these kings started with an equal portion of God’s merit to serve Him, but most fell short of that calling and ended up serving themselves or perhaps the popularity of Israel’s finicky people rather than giving complete devotion to Yahweh. Yet at the same time, David seems to keep his “anointing” despite displaying the actions of someone living in continual sin. To that, we don’t know how God viewed David towards the end of His life. What we know was that he “had” a heart after God’s own and that is usually written in past tense which should cause you some further consideration on that point. Was that heart eventually lost as we typically interpret to be the case for the rest of the kings that were also anointed? We typically view David as a “man of God” but I would challenge you to consider the fact that he led Israel further from God rather than closer. Consider the eighteen women, multiple sons, palace intrigue, rebellion, hints of vindictive revenge, adultery (more than once since Ahinaom was Saul’s wife), conspiracy, and of course premeditated murder (certainly more than once). On the other hand, he was submissive, displayed a keen appreciation for God’s instruction, and was a brilliant narrator of God’s glory. He was obviously repentant and possibly even humble and of course loyal to One God to the very end. He gives hope to all of us yet was a person I would not have encouraged my (our) sons (children) to be friends with or would have described as someone that was “anointed” in the way that we use the term today. 

The implication seems to be that all of these kings started with an equal portion of God’s merit to serve Him, but most fell short of that calling and ended up serving themselves or perhaps the popularity of Israel’s finicky people rather than giving complete devotion to Yahweh. Yet at the same time, David seems to keep his “anointing” despite displaying the actions of someone living in continual sin. To that, we don’t know how God viewed David towards the end of His life. What we know was that he “had” a heart after God’s own and that is usually written in past tense which should cause you some further consideration on that point. Was that heart eventually lost as we typically interpret to be the case for the rest of the kings that were also anointed? We typically view David as a “man of God” but I would challenge you to consider the fact that he led Israel further from God rather than closer. Consider the eighteen women, multiple sons, palace intrigue, rebellion, hints of vindictive revenge, adultery (more than once since Ahinaom was Saul’s wife), conspiracy, and of course premeditated murder (certainly more than once). On the other hand, he was submissive, displayed a keen appreciation for God’s instruction, and was a brilliant narrator of God’s glory. He was obviously repentant and possibly even humble and of course loyal to One God to the very end. He gives hope to all of us yet was a person I would not have encouraged my (our) sons (children) to be friends with or would have described as someone that was “anointed” in the way that we use the term today. 

David is the story of one who was anointed but still led Israel way from God rather than to God. David was clearly anointed and seems to have an intimate relationship with God… which means our thoughts of the modern or evangelical current definition of “anointing” as some clearly defined stamp of approval from God doesn’t seem to line up with the biblical definition. As I began saying at the beginning of this article, anointing has never been a stamp of God’s unending approval and certainly does not represent any kind exemption from biblical accountability and ongoing discipleship or shepherding. In I Samuel 26:9 David said to Abishai, “Don’t destroy him! Who can lay a hand on the LORD’s anointed and be guiltless?” you have to remember that we are simply interpreting a statement that David makes. David (and every other Biblical author or character in the narrative) may display theology that is correct or incorrect. In this case we aren’t given the assertion as to whether this is How God would view David’s thoughts. This narrative of wondering if the character’s perspective is “of God” or not is similar to what we see in the Job story. Job’s friends seem to be giving “good” counsel and if we aren’t careful we would even read into it a theology or think that God would “agree” with them. Yet at the end of the book God makes it clear that He was not in agreement with their counsel. Unfortunately we don’t always get that clear direction in the Biblical authorship and stories and are left to determine some of this for ourselves.

In the case of David, we are simply being told David’s thoughts. In fact, some scholars believe that David was not in alignment with God’ s purpose or direction in this part of his story. God apparently delivered Saul to him more than once and David may not have been in alignment to carry out God’s fulfillment. ^[13] I do not typically agree with this theological interpretation, but it is a viable view worth noting. Was Abishai is alignment with the Lord and had the eyes to see (when David was not, but still submitted to him?) This ideology fits with other texts that we are told sometimes when we can’t see God’s intentions for us others around us do. The term “seer” is often used in this way and particularly with kings of Israel. So as I do not personally subscribe to the view that in this story that David was intended by God to take Saul’s life, it is worth consideration. If anyone would need counseling (a friend’s spiritual counsel) at a specific time or place in History, it would have been David at this time in his life. But we also don’t get God’s perspective on this story like we did in Job, so we are left to figure this out for ourselves. The beautiful mystery of the Bible!

---

My final point is that we, similar to the coronation of priests and kings in the Old Testament, all function as New Testament priests and kings and receive equal anointing. Christ is the ‘Anointed One’ and through His Spirit, we all have HIS anointing.

John 1:16 “And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace.”

1 Corinthians 6:17 “But he who unites himself with the Lord is one with Him in spirit.”

Romans 8:9b “And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ.”

We all start with the same thing. From there it comes down to the circular relationship of the gifts and our reception to God’s plan in each of our lives. This is easily illustrated by the level of devotion to which we all live for Him. I have spoken about the reciprocal circle many times. God gives us the vessel and we choose our response to that gift. Will we be devout and submit to God in us or believe that we can operate in it ourselves by our own power? 

Frank points out that there is a difference between operating on our own accord in the name of God and actually letting God operate in and out of us. This is the key to anointing.

I do not believe that anyone has simply “won the lottery” of chance from God in terms of a special force of anointing. It is also not something you can ‘lose’ (like you lose your car keys) either. If you are in Christ you have it… you might just not be operating in it or using it very well. I do believe that there is an order or perhaps algorithm to the way that the Kingdom of God aligns with the perfect will of the Father that can be influenced by us through devotion and spiritual maturity in Christ. As we develop (conform to the Image of Christ, renew our mind) we are given greater privileges and responsibilities for sure. This is the transformational ‘way’ (This Is The Way) that we should all be committed to.

Many claim to represent God or say they are for God, but they are likely operating in and of themselves. They are not fully submitted and living in devotion moving towards a complete indwelling of God in them. In one sense being ‘for’ God is a great thing, but it can also actually be a sign of infant spirituality; when we arrive at a place of being the vessel (horn) where God outpours from, we begin to understand spiritual maturity. Our actions become the hands and feet of God himself when we take on the submission and humility of simply being the vessel of the Almighty God. We are not just ‘for’ God, but God is literally IN us accomplishing His will His way. 

We are dead to ourselves and made alive in Christ.

To be clear, anointing can bring about healing, it can signify a missional endeavor or calling, it can refer to the using of a gift given, but in all these things the central definition of anointing is to recognize and assert that the power is God Himself looks like taking on the attitude of Christ in you and not anything of yourself. 

This is shepherded by devotion, practice, accountability, humility, and application towards spiritual maturity calling on the name and power of the Lord in you.

The presence of God at work.

-written by Dr. Will Ryan in collaboration of authorship with Dr. Steve Cassell

WORKS CITED:

1. Baynes, T. S., ed. (1878), “Anointing” , Encyclopædia Britannica, vol. 2 (9th ed.), New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, p. 90
2. https://bibleproject.com/explore/video/anointing/
3. “Anoint” , Illustrated Bible Dictionary, 3d ed., London: T. Nelson & Sons, 1897
4. Thompson, Stephen E. (1994). “The Anointing of Officials in Ancient Egypt”. Journal of Near Eastern Studies. 53 
5. Baynes, T. S., ed. (1878), “Anointing” , Encyclopædia Britannica, vol. 2 (9th ed.), New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons
6. Oxford English Dictionary, 1st ed. “chrism, n.” Oxford University Press (Oxford), 1889.
7. Fleming, Daniel (1998). “The Biblical Tradition of Anointing Priests”. Journal of Biblical Literature. 117 (3): 401–414. doi:10.2307/3266438.
8. Ferguson, Everett (2009). Baptism in the Early Church: History, Theology, and Liturgy in the First Five Centuries.
9. Smith, Yancy (2013). The Mystery of Anointing. Gorgias. p. 30. ISBN 978-1463202187.
10.  Origen, “Commentary on Romans”, 5.8.3.
11. Josephus, Antiquities 6, 8, 2 πρός τόν Δαυιδην
12. J. Pedersen, Israel, III/IV (1940, 1959), passim; P. deVaux, AIs (1961), 103-106; W. LaSor, “The Messianic Idea in Qumran,” Studies and Essays in Honor of Abraham A. Neuman (1962), 343, 364.
13. Kent, Charles Foster; Ginzberg, Louis (1901–1906). “Abishai or Abshai”. In Singer, Isidore; et al. (eds.). The Jewish Encyclopedia. New York: Funk & Wagnalls.

we are of good courage, I say, and prefer rather to be absent from the body and to be at home with the Lord.  2 Corinthians 5:8 

Many readers are familiar with the phrase stand and fight, perhaps because of James Taylor’s song, the popularity and adoption as an NRA phrase, or likely the multiple times in history the phrase has been used as a rally anthem. As I have never been very political, over the years I have become friends with and have grown to greatly love and respect the Johnson family. Mostly Barry, but also his brother, the Wisconsin Senator, Ron Johnson. I sent Barry a box with some expedition 44 gear in it and he returned the gift of grace reciprocally by sending me a box with some things in it. One of the gifts was a “stand and fight” hat signed by Ron with the message handwritten to me, “stay in the fight”. You might remember this hat as I wore it in the expedition 44 video episode 11 in the church series with Dr. Matt Mouzakis and Dr. Steve Cassell where I switched hats back and forth as we discussed nationalism in contrast with citizenship in the kingdom of God. Part of my DNA (right or wrong) has always been that there is a time to stand and fight and there is a time or season to simply be quiet and be at peace, very much in the spirit of Ecclesiastes 3.

Unfortunately, many of the times in life we find ourselves fighting, it is often with the ones we love the most. Mr. Rogers once said, 1.

“It’s the people we love the most who can make us feel the gladdest … and the maddest! Love and anger are such a puzzle!”

It has always been sad to me how many people simply part ways because they can’t work through something, yet at the same time I think we can all relate. I dream of a community in Jesus where that isn’t the case.

We have all loved something that wasn’t easy and had to decide whether to fight or walk away, to most this is perhaps the ongoing struggle of life. I have never been the slightest bit suicidal but earlier this year something took place in our close family circle that made me start devoting thought and prayer to this illness of the world. I took on very much a mentality of prayerful “intercessory fighting” against the spirits of this stronghold as I “stood in the gap.” In 2020 Christian artist, TobyMac wrote a song titled “21 Years” to honor Truett Foster McKeehan, his 21-year-old. In an Interview with People Magazine he said,

“Writing this song felt like an honest confession of the questions, pain, anger, doubt, mercy and promise that describes the journey I’m probably only beginning. One thing I know is that I am not alone. God didn’t promise us a life of no pain or even tragic death, but He did promise He would never leave us or forsake us. And I’m holding dearly to that promise for my son as well as myself.”

2. https://people.com/music/tobymac-pays-tribute-to-late-son-in-heartbreaking-song-music-video/

I love the transparency Toby has in this song (as a father of 4 boys it is very difficult for me to listen to though), but I have found that being utterly transparent with people is unfortunately often met with a lack of people’s desire to understand the true intentions of your heart and meet you with a spirit of edification seeing your desire to move towards a greater love. When we fail as the body of Christ in this way it leaves a feeling of emptiness and desire to want to escape rather than invest.

Definition of Absent – 3. “The fantasy of escape from the struggle of existence must be deeply addressed if one is to find the vital center of one’s being.”

This year, perhaps for the first time in life, I “understood” why someone might make such a tragic decision as suicide. I don’t agree with it or think it is what God wants in any way, but I understood the conviction. You often hear things like, “I just want it to be over,” or “I’m so tired.”  These words convey the idea of deep exhaustion. That dreadful feeling of running out of options, or simply longing to end the never-ending fight.

As you likely know, I have learned a great deal studying Ancient Near East (ANE) culture and specifically Hebraic life and thought. In Hebrew one of the words for walk is “halak” (connected to the primary root of being created to praise which is halal) and has become metaphoric or idiomatic for walking with the Lord. One of my best friends has this tattoo on his arm which embodies the idiom of taking every step, heart, mind, and intellect in devotion to the Lord. In traditional Judaism, -4 “halakhic man prefers the real world to a transcendental existence because here, in this world, man is given the opportunity to create, act, accomplish, while there, in the world to come, he is powerless to change anything at all.”

Escapism has never been my thing. I don’t see Christ coming back in a grand disappearing act of rapture, and I believe most of scripture was primarily written in application to people to live out the here and now. Of course, there may be a secondary message in some texts with an “already not yet” sense to it, but the primary message to the original audience that can in most cases be somewhat adapted for us (as a recipient of reading the narrative) should be theologically considered a mere aspect of hope eschatologically. We were created first and foremost for this life. To be honest, the great majority of unbiased theologians and I can’t for sure say what the eschatological recreated Heaven and Earth will look like. We just weren’t given those cards in the playbook we have, just mere glimpses of what it could be.

However, I do know one thing. The Exodus motif is strong in the story. We are all on, or at least should be on a road of great redemption. Our hope, or trust, or driving force should be one of freedom, healing, and peace on our personal path of sanctification. God desires that we walk as redeemed sons and daughters in Joy. How do you know when to hang on and when to just simply let go?

Remember the famous line from M. Scott Peck, “Life is difficult,” perhaps he was just quoting John 16:33. If we are walking well, we are guaranteed tribulation, but also joy. Sometimes we wonder if we will ever get to the joy part. What does God have for me? Am I living my best life, or did I miss that bus? What has gotten in the way, perhaps pride, the world, intentions not recognized, a lack of edification of the body, or just simply the enemy seeking to destroy.

There is no doubt if you are doing it well, you are an alien to and in the situation you are in. Sometimes this is in the company of those you thought were “your people.” In Hebrew there is a phrase, that says our role is to bring about tikkun ‘olam, healing here—little by little, that become ripples across the galaxy, perhaps a spec of sand on a beach. Maybe before the Lord we shouldn’t have expectations for any more than this. And my friend Skip would say, “when heaven arrives on earth, we’ll still be here, enjoying the reality of the ideal, having never left to find peace someplace else.” 

There may be a time to stand and fight, I haven’t got the answer for you on that one. But I do know that Jesus embodied peace, self-sacrifice, grace, and reconciliation of all things taking on the power under not over. It’s an upside down kingdom.

How do we walk well before and with the Lord?

– 1. Fred Rogers, The World According to Mister Rogers: Important Things to Remember

– 2. https://people.com/music/tobymac-pays-tribute-to-late-son-in-heartbreaking-song-music-video/

– 3. Avivah Gottlieb Zornberg, The Hidden Order of Intimacy: Reflections on the Book of Leviticus 

I typically lean towards the views that have been held the longest, but more so want to go after total truth. I am not particularly tied into any system within the world or theology. I’m not into denominations or camps. I simply want to follow what the Bible says. My goal is and always has been to determine the best Biblical view according to the whole lens of the Bible. I am seeking to lead people to the truth. I care little for anything other than what the Bible says, although a well-built firearm also puts a smile on my face!

GOALS OF THIS ARTICLE:

• To consider a better “Jesus” perspective considering the war-torn conflicts of the world.
• To be more educated about Biblical Israel vs Modern Israel.
• To understand and Identify Zionism and Dispensational Theology.
• To begin to construct a better theology concerning the Kingdom of Jesus and how you pray about and interact with others in regard to these issues.

OUTLINE OF THIS ARTICLE:

• INTRODUCTORY THOUGHTS
• DISPENSATIONALISM AND HOW IT RELATES TO ISRAEL
• BIBLICAL ISRAEL
• TIMELINE OF ISRAEL
• MODERN ISRAEL
• CONCLUSIVE THOUGHTS

This article is a 30-minute read.

INTRODUCTION

Before I dive into this article, I want to give a basic context to the direction and why I have decided to devote a good deal of my time here. In my opinion, Steve Gregg of the Narrow Path is one of the leading Christian voices on Israel and dispensationalism. Most of what he says is very difficult to give credit to because it is in audio format primarily. That is one of the reasons why I have decided to keep this article on the less scholarly side. But that being said, I want to give credit where credit is due and consider him to personally be the best Christian voice on this subject matter.

I am in no way anti-Israel or anti-Palestine (for that matter) as I am not anti-American in any way. (For the record, I have both American and Israeli flags in my workshop, but don’t read too much into that.) There is good and bad in every nation, Christian and non-Christian, everywhere you look. Just because something started off wrong doesn’t mean it can’t be reconciled. Isn’t that what we are doing as Christians? You can’t judge everyone by the acts of a few good or bad people or even likely by the history of that nation or entity. To be clear, I have no tolerance for evil on any side and it seems like there are a lot of atrocities happening in our world right now that are pure evil, but most of the people involved are victims and that breaks my heart. I am for the kingdom of Jesus in every way with an unwavering sole conviction to that state of living. My faithful pledge isn’t to any of the worldly systems or nations, just Jesus. I am thankful that the political landscape of America allows me to worship Jesus.

Many talk about Israel and the end times as if we have been given a map in the Bible. As if in this road map we should be looking for directional signs that point to rapture, tribulation, and an earthly return to Israel. These point us to the culmination, where God reunites with the nation of Israel to rule the world. Most of us grew up indoctrinated into this kind of thinking. With the recent war in the Ukraine and now Israel, many have asked me for my thoughts. There are several conservative scholars who think similarly to what follows and if you are part of the Expedition 44 community you likely already know this. The good majority of evangelical theologians would hold to or support the sum of what I will present here. These thoughts and the theology represented aren’t specific to me and are not original to me.

I don’t know if we are living in the last days, or the end times; no one really does except the Lord. My theology doesn’t fear any kind of great tribulation. I live each day simply seeking to honor the King and live in joy and peace here and now contributing to the Kingdom through the gifts endowed to me, with some expectation for the return of the King and the ensuing kingdom to come whether it be in my lifetime or not.

No one knows the time or the hour of Jesus’ return. If I look at history, I would have thought everything was lined up in 70 AD for the return of Jesus and it didn’t happen. The biblical signs lined up much closer to that time than I would say they do now or any other time in history and that is why full preterism (which I do not subscribe to) wonders if Christ might have actually returned at that time and the rest of the world missed it (perhaps at Massada). This may surprise some of the readers here, but I don’t think any of the current events of our day biblically point to the end times in any way, and certainly not any more than we have witnessed in past history at multiple times already. Nearly every generation since Jesus walked this earth have thought that they were living in the last days. Christ may come back tomorrow or in another 2000 years or more. We simply don’t know the time or the hour and to try to continually figure this out is most accurately described in the Bible as divination, which we are regularly warned against. Expedition 44 has a 13-part series on eschatology if you want to dive in deeper on this subject.

In 586 BC Yahweh (the best name for the God of Israel) handed over Israel to their own desires which resulted in judgment and brought exile and the diaspora (spreading of the people of Israel) which continued through 70 AD when Rome destroyed Jerusalem and continued to spread Jews all over the world into modern history. Since 136 AD the land around what we refer to as modern-day Israel was simply called Palestine. It was a melting pot for those that originally came from the nations we read about in the Bible, not just Israel but many of the peoples that became intermixed. It was ruled or “owned” by several different entities for hundreds of years at a time. Today the people we refer to as Israeli are intermixed. There likely isn’t such a person as a pure covenant keeping Israelite since the generation of King Salomon. That was a result of the Israelites continually intermarrying against God’s command to not do that. Today you would be hard pressed, or I might even say, “it is impossible” to find a “Jew” that has not intermarried in their family heritage somewhere during the past 2000 years. In this “biological” sense there actually aren’t any pure Yahweh Covenant Israelites left. This gets even more complicated when you consider Jews under Yahweh were tied to Him by keeping the covenant and if they no longer kept the covenant than technically, they weren’t considered one of God’s chosen people anymore, although that notion is quite controversial. Historical-Biblical Israel represents the original nation that God called under His law that was supposed to be His primary “pure and undefiled” agents of regathering the world but is now extinct as a nation of God because of their sin. God handed them over to their desires and of their own choices they are no longer recognizable as the people of God. By this description they weren’t divorced or annihilated or anything else like that, they essentially just made decisions that eventually removed themselves from the idea of the original covenant of Yahweh with Israel. That however was not God’s intended plan for them. I will touch more on this later.

Modern Israel is a secular nation far from the nation of Israel that was established roughly 1500 years before Christ. The modern nation isn’t religious, and it certainly isn’t built on the law of Moses, nor does it take on any intrinsic commissioning from the Lord. Israel is a pluralistic society far from the nation of Biblical Israel of 3000 years ago. In fact, in the 1980’s there was a law in Israel that said anyone can join Israel unless you’re a Christian. In this sense Israel actually seems like a political anti-Jesus nation. The roughly 15,000 Christians in Jerusalem today, the majority of them Palestinians, were once 27,000 – before hardships that followed the 1967 war spurred many in the traditionally prosperous group to emigrate. Perhaps there is a Jesus fearing Jew in the land of modern Israel but as I will go on to show, they are theologically considered as “all of Israel” grafted into a family of new covenant Jesus followers and part of a redefined kingdom, the old Israel in a Biblical sense of land and calling is no longer what it once was by Biblical definition, A nation, they left that covenant generations ago. Much of God’s covenant was Israel was established in a communal (tribal) sense rather than a personal sense. Under the New Covenant there is still a sense of community with other believers but not necessarily in the same way that God’s chosen people Israel were charged under the law.

The Biblical mandate to Israel in Deuteronomy 7 that was a major part of the overall covenant said don’t intermarry (with people that worship other gods) or you will no longer be my people and the covenant will be broken; in the first few generations of Israel nearly all of them intermarried. Of course there were other parts of the covenant that were also broken. Today we are 50 generations later and there aren’t any, likely not one Jew, whose generational family hasn’t violated this very basic Hebraic law given by God to Moses in covenant to His chosen people, not to mention the other laws. In this sense there is no longer a covenant keeping Old Testament Israel by Biblical definition.

Israelites were always saved by covenant keeping devotion, not simply by their ethnic roots.

Even if there was a 3500+ generational covenant keeping family, their salvation is through the fact that they have kept the covenant, not that they are ethnic Israel. In this same sense, there is a new covenant or New Testament calling to “all Israel” as those that have chosen to walk in covenant with Jesus as the King of a sole kingdom. No one is automatically grafted in; you have to make an allegiant decision to be part of the Jesus kingdom and the new covenant. This has actually been the case in both the Old Testament and the New Testament alike. Some say that God’s blessings are perpetual for the Jews, and I might agree, but if you are going to hold to that reasoning, you also have to hold to generational curses. You can’t select one without the other.

The problem of Dispensationalism

I grew up hearing that everything is about Israel. The last days will come, and God’s people will be Israel so we better be aligned with them. There are two views that have influenced this way of thinking. One is called Zionism and the other is called Dispensationalism. Both are “theologies” of man. Unfortunately, nearly all of us grew up thinking that Zionist or dispensationalist ideologies were biblical without thinking much about it.

The term “Zionism” is derived from the word Zion a hill in Jerusalem, widely symbolizing the Land of Israel. Throughout eastern Europe in the late 19th century, numerous grassroots groups promoted the national resettlement of the Jews in their ancient homeland, as well as the revitalization and cultivation of the Hebrew language. These groups were collectively called the “Lovers of Zion” and were seen as countering a growing Jewish movement toward assimilation. The first use of the term is attributed to the Austrian Nathan Birnbaum, founder of the Kadimah nationalist Jewish students’ movement; he used the term in 1890 in his journal Selbst-Emancipation (Self-Emancipation), itself named almost identically to Leon Pinsker’s 1882 book Auto-Emancipation.

Dispensationalism is a theological framework of interpreting the Bible which maintains that history is divided into multiple ages or “dispensations” in which God acts with his people in different ways. The term “dispensationalism” is attributed to Philip Mauro, a critic of the system’s teachings in his 1928 book The Gospel of the Kingdom. Dispensationalists believe that there is a distinction between Israel and the rest of the Church. They maintain beliefs in premillennialism, a future restoration of national Israel, and a rapture of the Church that will happen before the Second Coming of Christ, generally seen as happening before a period of tribulation. Dispensationalism was systematized and promoted by John Nelson Darby and the Plymouth Brethren in the mid-19th century. Dispensationalism began its spread in the United States during the late 19th century through the efforts of evangelists like James Inglis, James Hall Brookes, Dwight L. Moody, the efforts of the Niagara Bible Conference, and the establishment of Bible Institutes. With the dawn of the 20th century, C. I. Scofield introduced the Scofield Reference Bible, which solidified dispensationalism in the United States. Dispensationalism is commonly found in nondenominational Bible churches, Baptists, Pentecostal, and charismatic groups.

You are likely not familiar with these definitions or names and have also just assumed much of what you hear about Israel and the end times to be true or Biblical. You probably don’t realize that if you believe some of these things (or tenets of their theology) that you are falling into a newer (1830’s Darby) view of theology. William Blackwell who was the father of Zionism was a dispensational preacher. They would tell you that God is always on the side of Israel as a nation but gave very little exegetical evidence to think this way.

You are probably familiar with the terms pre tribulation, mid tribulation, and post tribulation. Whether you realize it or not, these are tenets of dispensationalism. They aren’t really in the Bible; they are definitions that men made up in the last 200 years to describe the end times and a bunch of other presuppositions based on a “loose” interpretation of Scripture. All of this is a biblical presupposition, no one thought these ways of thinking were theologically sound or a valid theological option of good exegesis before the last 200 years. Out of the various differing and confusing options within dispensationalism, pre tribulation has been the most common view, and I grew up hearing that the great disappearing act (otherwise known as the rapture) would happen and there is then seven years after that of great tribulation and Israel will work exclusively with God as a nation again and that will give way to a 1000-year millennium period where God works again through a reinstated nation of Israel. The temple will be rebuilt, animal sacrifices in the temple will begin again, and the Levitical priesthood will be re-established. But just stop for a moment and consider that. Aren’t those messages actually anti Jesus?* We are the temple of the Holy Spirit, to wish another temple to be built would be working against what God has already established. We don’t need any more sacrifices. Hebrews makes it very clear Jesus was the final and complete sacrifice. Anyone who believes is part of the new covenant priesthood. All those things are anti, or against what the Bible says the new covenant is, and that is just naming a few of the tenets of dispensationalism.

*NOTE: 1 Cor 3:16-17, 1 Cor 6:15-20, 2 Cor 6:14-18, Eph 2:19-22, 1 Pet 2:5, Jesus Himself in John 2:19 (quoted by the Jews, His enemies, in Mark 14:58 when they were trying to legally prosecute Him). It is further verified that in Rev 21:22 John specifically said there was NO TEMPLE)

But you can see why a dispensationalist would be pushing for Israel to be a nation again as they believe all these things are a checklist to happen before Jesus returns. Where did they get these ideas from? To be honest I don’t know. When you try to find them anywhere in the Bible, especially in Revelation it requires a pretty vivid imagination and a complete departure from sound exegesis and hermeneutics.

Dispensationalists believe that Daniel talked about 490 years to deal with Israel (which I agree with). 483 years gets you to the triumphal entry. If you are a dispensational, you believe that the clock stopped for some reason right then, and the last seven years will restart at the rapture. Now I will say, that doesn’t seem to fit any hermeneutic I am familiar with. Thinking this way seems very much like trying to bend Scripture to say what you want it to say. I don’t see any merit exegetically for just deciding that the clock is going to miraculously stop and restart when the church is raptured. I also might add here that I graduated from Moody Bible Institute which (as mentioned above) is the leading dispensational school in the world. I spent four years studying under the best dispensational teachers and left scratching my head in confusion upon graduation.

I don’t believe the 490-year clock stopped. That doesn’t really make any sense. If you want to see what the Bible says in regard to the 490 years here is a video explaining everything from a more Biblical perspective.

(163) Eschatology Series part 7 490 Years & Numerology Daniel 7 9 AD70 Expedition 44 -Doc Ryan – YouTube

I won’t deny that there has been a fascination in the church with all things Israel. Most Christians I know think that we should support Israel as if they are currently still a nation ruled directly by God.

Every verse that is quoted that describes the nation of Israel as God’s people is an Old Testament verse.  Romans 9-11 uses a term “all Israel” which is talking about the new covenant of all believers, the Olive Tree of Jeremiah 11 and Romans 11. The context of all of Romans for salvation is to those that believe in Jesus. Those under the new covenant and the kingdom of Jesus will be saved. That’s it, and the Bible makes this very clear. No one is going to be saved that doesn’t profess a complete trust and/or display allegiance to Jesus. Salvation comes to those that place their obedient faith and live a life dedicated to the following of Jesus.

What about prophecy? There are a lot of predictions in the Old Testament that say things like God will re-establish Israel as a nation. That is true, but this happened after the Babylonian Exile. In 586 BC Nebuchadnezzar destroyed their temple and dispersed the Jews and years later in 439 BC the Jews returned to their land fulfilling all of these prophetic scriptures and this continued through Ezra and Nehemiah with the returning of exiles. That is when all of these scriptures were fulfilled CLEARLY. That is all the prediction we get in the Bible. There isn’t anything anywhere about a later return of Israel to their physical land.

Now I can see why you might be confused, because Israel does return to the land promised to them as you know. In 1948 Israel returns to their ancient land to re-establish itself as a nation. Is that a foreshadow or double fulfillment? Well, the Bible doesn’t ever say this. You would have to generate or make this up to get there. It is only a foreshadow if the New Testament identifies this. There isn’t anywhere in the New Testament that does this with a nation re-forming of Israel. The Bible never gives us that. This may surprise you, but I challenge you to find any verses that say that. You think it says this because dispensationalism in our generation has been so grafted into most church theology (or lack of), but the Bible doesn’t say this. It is all based on man’s elaborate imagination of what they want the Bible to say, it’s a man-made narrative with a Zionist national agenda. I usually refer to this kind of theology as a sign of man engineering what we want the Bible to communicate.

This article really isn’t on the problems of Dispensationalism but many of them tie into the conversation of how we view Israel today. There are lots of Expedition 44 articles that deal with the problems of dispensationalism but not necessarily a dedicated article, yet. In the meantime, this is one of the best recent videos on the subject by Steve Gregg.

HISTORICAL – BIBLICAL ISRAEL:

The first hint of a nation dedicated to God is in the Abrahamic promise to bless all nations which eventually comes to fruition by the seed of his family in several turns of events in and through Christ (Galatians 3:16). But when you think of Israel you usually think about the story several generations later of Moses rescuing this melting pot of people who were slaves in Egypt and establishing a nation in them as a Theocratic kingdom under God.

When I say melting pot, I mean that it started as a mixed group of people. This is also likely different than what you have always thought of Israel. We often think of the Israelites as pure descendants of Abraham, but we get the hint that this is less ethnic than covenant related. For example, Exodus 12:38 states that when Israel left Egypt that, “a mixed multitude went up with them.” Yahweh selected the Hebrews to be His representatives on earth, but He was never to be the God of only the descendants of Abraham. The plan was to reclaim the mixed peoples of the earth through Abraham’s descendants and those that joined the covenant. He wanted all peoples to know Him through Israel. This mixed multitude crossed the Red Sea, heard the voice of God at Sinai and sojourned in the wilderness for 40 years with Israel. In God’s covenant with Abraham He told Him that through Abraham that “all the nations of the earth will be blessed” (Genesis 18:18). The Exodus is the beginning of that fulfillment. God teaches that when gentiles believe in Him and obey Him that they “shall be like a native of the land” (Exodus 12:48). This principle repeated in Leviticus 19:34 and Ezekiel 47:22 and throughout the Old Testament we see a few pictures of gentiles entering into Covenant through the nation of Israel to Yahweh. What made you part of the Israelite family was your allegiant agreement to follow the precepts of Yahweh in covenant faithfulness. A sign of covenant faithfulness in the Old Testament was circumcision. Likewise, when Jesus instituted the New Covenant there was a similar sign of faithfulness indicated by baptism. Neither physical action necessarily saved you.

As you may be figuring out, in the end, as so much of the New Testament would say, there is no difference between Jew and gentile. What makes us part of the body is the same as it was in the Old Testament, which is covenant faithfulness. The law was needed as a stop gap until the Messiah could offer what was needed once and for all in the atonement offering a complete covenant with eternal promise.

In Exodus 19 God says to these people:

⁵ “Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. ‘Although the whole earth is mine, ⁶ you will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words you are to speak to the Israelites.”

I often hear people talk about covenants. I have spent a lot of time and written books on covenant promises and although some theologians divide these promises into what they describe as conditional or unconditional covenants (and I agree with the basic reasoning), I am going to say that all covenants have some element of mutual understanding and agreement. In the verse above you see the first phrase being “IF YOU OBEY ME FULLY.” Does this sound reciprocal to you? Does this sound like it describes a relationship of circular expectation? Why would you read this any other way? God says to Israel if you keep my law, you will be my people – and how long did it take for them to fail at this? About 2 weeks. Within 2 weeks they didn’t do their part and what was God’s reaction with Moses? He says the people are unfaithful and he wants to destroy them and start over with Moses in Exodus 32. Yet what follows is one of the most amazing passages in the Bible of God listening to and acting on a prayerful plea. Yahweh is actually swayed by the heart of Moses as Moses pleas with Yahweh and changes God’s mind. Yahweh doesn’t destroy them, but eventually (hundreds of years later) will hand them over to their own desires. They choose to replace God with human rulers called kings. They continually break covenant with God by intermarrying, worshipping other gods, and not living according to the law given to them. They are described as an adulterous nation before the Lord. Eventually the Jews (Israel) are the ones that put His son Jesus on the cross as a final picture of completely rejecting God,

When Jesus is raised from the dead, ascended and sits at the right hand of the father sending His spirit back to the church, the New Covenant is established for all who believe, both Jews and gentiles. Which, as your probably realizing, was the plan from the beginning. The plan from the start with Abraham was to reclaim all who would believe to be saved and join a kingdom of God separate from the kingdoms of the world. The plan to reclaim the world would start with God working through Israel as His reclaiming ambassadors but when they so visibly failed God, the plan turned from Israel as part of the reclaiming plan to simply anyone who believed in Jesus as the Messiah to be the primary representatives of this reclaiming nation. This is described as ALL OF ISRAEL in Romans 9-11 and is simply all who allegiantly live by the name Jesus. This is described as the faithful remnant of those who follow Jesus. There is nothing in my Bible in the New Testament about any worldly nation that God is going to use. The only nation is the spiritual sense of the Jesus Kingdom. America will never be God’s kingdom and modern Israel will not be that nation, or at least the Bible doesn’t give us that (it could happen, anything could happen – but we aren’t told that it will in scripture.). Perhaps you may share a notion of dual citizenship, but as a Christ follower your primary allegiance should be to the Kingdom of Jesus and not the systems of the world.

I should also mention that there is merit to the consideration of unconditional covenants. As you have already sensed, I am hesitant here because I believe all covenants are circular in some way. But it is worth noting that in the case of land the promise was fulfilled to Israel. The land was given to them regardless of whether they were obedient in driving out the Canaanites or obeying the rest of God’s commands in regard to it. God still gave them the land; they simply went on to lose it. There is no other prophecy for the land to be given back to them after it was lost.

There is no promise that says God will continue to win back the physical land for the nation of Israel in generations to come as so many people seem to think God will do. The land was given once and then lost. God doesn’t promise to win and back and keep giving it to Israel over and over again for thousands of years. The promise was that if they were covenant keepers, they would remain His nation. The main verse that someone might cite to argue this statement would be Genesis 17:8, “I will give to you and to your descendants after you, the land of your sojourning, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.” The intent was that God’s people would keep the covenant and become the greatest physical nation on earth. But due to their unfaithfulness that never happened. But I admit, there are a couple of options for interpretation here. At first the plainly read consideration is to think that physical land of Canaan will be promised to Abraham’s descendants in a literal sense of the term forever. Well, you can do that, and I am fine with this interpretation in a human literal sense, but you have to keep it literal. I can give you ownership of something that is intended to be forever, but you might still lose it. We see this with generational inheritance all the time. Wills are written that the family farm might be passed on to the family “forever”, but we all know eventually someone sells it. But perhaps the intention of the text is more eternal. In Hebrew the word eternal (olam) natively describes God or what He enables in an eschatological sense. In this way nothing is truly eternal except God. This statement is an “eternal land promise” which ties in with the New Testament Kingdom in verses such as Heb 11:10, 13, 16, 38-40 and not a physical territory next to the Mediterranean Sea.

The eternal aspect of God’s promised land designates a place where He and His people would meet forever. Perhaps, God birthed this promise from the ashes of His original hopes for the Garden of Eden. When the Psalmist retold the statement, “Oh let Israel say, “His lovingkindness is everlasting,” (Psalm 118:2), was he thinking of a place where God would forever dwell with His people? It seems rather clear that we are to relate the everlasting possession with the New Testament promises of eternal life; the two forged into one thought and future. Jesus spoke clearly of the eternal state. The Jewish believers no doubt attached this promise of eternal life with God’s promise to Abraham’s descendants. Jesus often used Abrahamic language to speak of eternal things: “There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth there when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but yourselves being cast out” (Luke 13:28).

While I am on the subject of the land it is also worth noting that people were invited to the promised land after they declared their allegiance to Yahweh. It was connected to that covenant. Currently, in the land we refer to as national Israel, less than 2% (some statistics indicate far less than this) of the population confesses an allegiant belief in Jesus as the Messiah. In both percentage and overall numbers, there are more confessing Christians residing in Palestine than in Israel. By the end of this article, you may find that these truths will expand, or change, your prayers about who you think God is supporting in this war.

This is going to start to sound like a broken record, but it is a crucial point, there is never a time when Israel was an ethnic designation. They started as a mixed multitude out of Egypt. The ability to be part of God’s plan was always given to those that were willing to live by covenant. The nation was defined then and today by those who keep the covenant. The Jew who rejects the covenant is cut off from the kingdom.

Hebrews 8:13 clearly establishes the new covenant to be those that hold to a new covenant. If you don’t keep the covenant you aren’t part of the Kingdom of God. If you aren’t faithful to Jesus, you aren’t faithful to God. It has nothing to do with a physical race or even the physical land anymore. The new covenant didn’t re-establish land. Quite the opposite. Our bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirit. The new Kingdom of Jesus is promised land only in an eschatological sense of the recreated heavens and earth. We may reclaim “land” (such as something we own rededicated to the Lord) to some extent declaring it is holy, but we don’t get any idea of this in the Bible directed towards any kind of political entity or kingdom of land. It may happen, and I pray that perhaps it will, but the Bible doesn’t say this will happen. This is because Israel defiled the land that was given to them and because God is holy, He no longer desired the land that was defiled. The plan needed to be adapted and it was adapted by God and called the New Covenant. The old land became an atrocity to the Lord and a new Earth is being created.

TIMELINE CONCERNING ISRAEL:

In order to truly understand modern Israel, it is important to first consider their history. Here is a brief timeline of the nation and lands of Israel and Palestine.

1600 BCE Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob –settle in the Land that God had given them but eventually the tribes of Israel go down to Egypt because of a severe famine in the Land of Israel and become enslaved by Egypt.

1200 BCE The Exodus of a mixed peoples from Egypt that return to the land of their father Abraham under a theocracy of Yahweh. Unfortunately, they immediately turn from Yahweh and worship other gods which begins their covenant unfaithfulness.

1020 BCE The Kingdom of Israel is established under Yahweh; but then Israel chooses an earthly King instead of Theocracy. They choose to be ruled by an earthly king in place of direct rule by God.

1000 BCE Jerusalem becomes the capital of the Kingdom of Israel under King David in effort to return the nation to Yahweh.

960 BCE The First Temple is built, a spiritual center of the people in an attempt to return rule to God, but the people continue to deny Yahweh and follow other God’s and nations.

722-720 BCE God begins to hand over the people of Israel to their own desires which results in judgment and the Kingdom of Israel that is located in the northern Land of Israel is conquered by Assyria; ten tribes go into exile.

586 BCE God hands over the rest of Israel as the Kingdom of Judah is conquered by Babylonia; Jerusalem and the Temple are laid waste; the Jews are exiled to Babylonia starting the Diaspora.

538-515 BCE Yahweh gives Israel another chance by sending the remnant and initializing the return to Zion after the proclamation of Cyrus – some Jews return from Babylon; the Temple is rebuilt but only a remnant seems to desire to return to Yahweh and live in covenant faithfulness. This fulfills nearly every scriptural prophecy of restoration to Israel.

332 BCE The Land of Israel is conquered by Alexander the Great turning towards Hellenistic rule.

166-160 BCE The Hasmonean Revolt against the Greek Empire in reaction to the constraints imposed on Jewish religious practice.

129-63 BCE Jewish political independence under the Hasmonean Kingdom.

63 BCE to 4 CE King Herod rules in the Land of Israel; the temple is expanded but becomes very political and some would say the Spirit of Yahweh never returns to the temple.

33 Jesus is crucified and risen establishing the New Covenant and kingdom under the risen Saviour.

66 The Jews rebel against the Romans.

70 The destruction of Jerusalem and the second temple.

73 The Romans’ battle to conquer Masada,

136 The Romans change the name of Judea to Syria Palaestina and the name of Jerusalem to Aelia Capitolina. “Palestine” is adapted as a melting pot of people that are deemed lesser than Romans occupying land that once was claimed by Israel.

638 -1517 The liberation of Jerusalem by a combined force of different peoples, Persians and Jews. The Dome of the Rock is built on the Temple Mount on the presumed location of the first and second temples. The land switches hands from Crusader, Mamluk, and Ottoman rule.

1897 The First Zionist Congress in Basel under the aegis of Binyamin Ze’ev Herzl.

May 16, 1916 The Sykes-Picot Agreement between France and Britain over the Palestine area gives way to the November 2, 1917 The Balfour Declaration – a document signed by British foreign minister Lord Arthur James Balfour (dispensational Christian), which espouses a national home for the Jewish people in the Land of Israel.

January 3, 1919 The Faisal-Weizmann agreement between Chaim Weizmann and Emir Faisal – an agreement that establishes both Arabs and the Jews in the Land of Israel.  In reaction, the April 25, 1920 San Remo Agreement gave Britain rule over the land of Israel and controversially ratified former agreement.

May 1-7, 1921-1929 Arab riots in Jaffa, Petah Tikva, Rehovot, Hadera, and elsewhere, in which 43 people were killed. The riots were spurred by the Arab national awakening and the demand to annul the Balfour Declaration. August 23, 1929 Riots in Hebron, Jerusalem, and Safed. Arabs murder 133 Jews.

July 7, 1937 The Peel Commission – the partition resolution is accepted by the British administration, en-Gurion, and the Zionist institutions, and is rejected by the Arabs.

March 22, 1945 The establishment of the Arab League with Cairo as its hub.

November 29, 1947 Approval of the partition plan by the General Assembly of the United Nations – Resolution 181.

November 29, 1947 to July 20, 1949 The War of Independence; from May 15 to June 11 – the regular Arab armies’ invasion of the Land of Israel. 6000 Jews were killed during the war.

February 24, 1949 to July  20, 1949 Armistice agreements (Rhodes agreements).

March 23 – Lebanon, April 3 – Jordan, July 20 – Syria 1948 (until 1967) Jerusalem is divided between Israel and Jordan along the armistice lines: Jordan holds the eastern part of the city, Israel the western and southern parts. Jews are denied access to the Old City and the holy places in contravention of the armistice agreement.

1949 Massive aliyah to Israel from Arab states and North Africa, and of displaced Jews from Europe. The Jewish population doubles from 650,000 to 1,300,000.

May 11, 1949 Israel is accepted as the 59th member of the United Nations.

December 5, 1949 Jerusalem is declared the capital of Israel by David Ben-Gurion.

June 5, 1967 to June 10, 1967 The Six-Day War between Israel and Arab states: Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq.

September 1, 1967 Meeting of the Arab League in Khartoum, which laid down the “three no’s”: no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with Israel.

November 22, 1967 UN Security Council Resolution 242 calls for a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, Israeli withdrawal from lands it conquered in the Six-Day War, a solution to the refugee problem, and the guaranteeing of free passage for ships through international lanes.

November 10, 1975 UN General Assembly Resolution 3379, which equates Zionism with racism.

1988 Yasser Arafat declares Palestinian independence.

December 16, 1991 The UN General Assembly revokes Resolution 3379 (that equates Zionism with racism).

October 26, 1994 The signing of the Israeli-Jordanian Peace Treaty.

September 28, 1995 The Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

May 2, 2002 Establishment of the Middle East Quartet (the Quartet) – the European Union (EU), United States, United Nations, and Russia

April 14, 2004 Letter from President George W. Bush to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon stating that it is unrealistic to expect “a full and complete withdrawal to the armistice lines of 1949” – the letter reiterates U.S. commitment to “defensible borders” for Israel.

August 20, 2010 The invitation of Israel and the Palestinians to face-to-face negotiations by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

May 4, 2011 A reconciliation agreement between Fatah and Hamas in Cairo.

May 24, 2011 Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appears before both houses of the U.S. Congress, explaining that “Israel will not return to the indefensible lines of 1967.”

September 23, 2011 The submission to the UN secretary-general of a request by the Palestinian Authority that Palestine be recognized as a UN member state.

The International recognition of the State of Palestine has been the objective of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) since the Palestinian Declaration of Independence on 15 November. By the end of the year, the proclaimed Palestinian state was recognized by over 78 countries. As of 31 July 2019, 138 of the 193 United Nations (UN) member states and two non-member states have recognized it (Israel is recognized by 165). Palestine also has been a non-member observer state of the UN General Assembly since the passing of United Nations General Assembly resolution 67/19 in November 2012.

Adapted from: (jcpa.org)

THE MODERN PROBLEM OF MODERN ISRAEL & LAND

As a Christian how do you view the control of land through war? For instance, the majority of those reading this article are Americans. The United States has acquired new territories through war, cession, purchase, and occupation. Most of land throughout history has been acquired by nations through war. How do you view land dominion and ownership from a worldly sense of justice based on what the Bible says? Let’s specifically consider the geography that God once gave to Israel as the promised land.

The region of Palestine has been controlled by a mixed group of Arabs (for lack of better word) for at least 1300 years and perhaps even the last 2000 years since 70AD. The Jews actually haven’t had singular rule of the land referred to as Palestine and/or Israel for thousands of years. They lost the land. Lands are inhabited or conquered and even though a country may have roots from hundreds or even thousands of years before, the land wouldn’t any longer be considered “theirs” by any modern measure.

For Instance, Great Britain once clearly owned the land the US inhabits now. A war was waged and what resulted was the claim that a new country would be born, the United States. But even now, England technically has owned it longer than the US has, would that mean they still have some kind of rightful claim to it? After the war for Independence and establishing of a new nation in 1776 the US wanted more land and in the name of westward expansion, (amongst other purchases and deals) they fought Mexico and the Indians and took the land they wanted through war. In the French and Indian War (1754–63), America fought between France and Great Britain primarily to gain land. It determined control of the vast colonial territory of North America. American imperialism is the expansion of American political, economic, cultural, media and military influencing the boundaries of the United States. Depending on the commentator, it may include imperialism through outright military conquest; gunboat diplomacy; unequal treaties; subsidization of preferred factions; regime change; or economic penetration through private companies, potentially followed by diplomatic or forceful intervention when those interests are threatened. As a Christian looking back on American History, this notion can be surprising or even upsetting, but these decisions weren’t specifically ours, rather they have been handed down to us. Today the US clearly says that it has claim to or owns this land, yet many will say that it wasn’t really ours to take. Much of the rest of the world doesn’t view American Imperialism much different than the rest of the empirical pursuits of the world history that were usually fueled by war and bloodshed. What if the Mexicans and the Indians want their land back, they owned it longer than we have and may have a legitimate claim to it. Can they establish a rightful claim to it? You have to think this way to justify Israel’s claim on the land in Palestine.

In this case Britain told the Jews they could have the land that was occupied by the Arab Palestinians and Jews. How would you feel if someone else said you no longer owned your home or land and told you that it has been given to someone else? You and I as Americans thinks this sounds preposterous yet that is what happened to those that occupied the land of Israel and Palestine and to an extent what we have done in America. There are peoples whose land was simply taken or given away.

In the late 19th and early 20th century, an organized religious and political movement known as Zionism (that I described at the beginning of this article) emerged among Jews. Zionists wanted to reestablish a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Massive numbers of Jews immigrated to the ancient holy land and built settlements. Between 1882 and 1903, about 35,000 Jews relocated to Palestine. Another 40,000 settled in the area between 1904 and 1914. The problem was they were moving into a land that they wanted to claim, yet it hadn’t been theirs for at least 1300 years.

Many Jews living in Europe and elsewhere, fearing persecution during the Nazi reign, found refuge in Palestine and embraced Zionism. After the Holocaust and World War II ended, members of the Zionist movement primarily focused on creating an independent Jewish state. As you can imagine after the WWI and WWII there were a lot of Jewish sympathizers and perhaps there should have been! The problem became that Arabs in Palestine who had lived there for hundreds of years naturally resisted the Zionism movement, and tensions between the two groups continued. An Arab nationalist movement developed as a result.

In 1917 Balfour who was a British Christian Dispensationalist sought to begin establishing Israel as a nation which was part the Zionist movement. The Balfour Declaration and the British mandate over Palestine were approved by the League of Nations in 1922. Arabs vehemently opposed the Balfour Declaration, concerned that a Jewish homeland would mean the subjugation of Arab Palestinians. It didn’t seem “fair.” As I mentioned earlier; it doesn’t seem “just” that some would simply be told that their land and homes are no longer theirs.

The question a Christian needs to address is what does justice look like from the eyes of God? America went to war to win land, why would you view the Israel or the Palestinians trying to win land any differently? What about when women and children are killed? Is Israel any better in the eyes of God than their rivals?

According to USA TODAY, “The Hamas are the Islamic Resistance Movement political and military organization governing the Gaza Strip of the Palestinian territories. Headquartered in Gaza City, it also has a presence in the West Bank (the larger of the two Palestinian territories), in which its secular rival Fatah exercises control. Hamas is widely considered to be the “dominant political force” within the Palestinian territories. Hamas’ political wing has controlled the Gaza Strip for over a decade, but the group is most known for its many suicide bombings and other attacks on Israel amid the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict that has lasted decades. It’s considered a terrorist group by the United States and other nations. Hamas – an acronym for Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiya, or Islamic resistance movement – was founded in 1987 during the first Palestinian uprising against Israeli occupation of Gaza and the West Bank by a Palestinian activist connected to the Muslim Brotherhood.” You might also consider how, as a Christian, you might view this group.

The British controlled Palestine until Israel became an independent state in 1947 after World War II. The United Nations approved a plan to partition Palestine into a Jewish and Arab state in 1947, but the Arabs rejected it (right or wrong.)

In May 1948, Israel was officially declared an independent state with David Ben-Gurion, the head of the Jewish Agency, as the prime minister. While this historic event seemed to be a victory for Jews, it also marked the beginning of more violence with the Arabs.

Following the announcement of an independent Israel, five Arab nations—Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon—immediately invaded the region in what became known as the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. This resulted in 7 months of war where Israel gained 77% of the land, not the 52% of the land they were supposed to have according to previous agreement. This resulted in 750,000 Palestinians becoming homeless refugees. As you can imagine, the Palestinians felt that Israel was acting against the armistice agreement and had stolen their land. Israel invited Jews from all over the world to move back to the newly acquired land and doubled their population (and army size) over the next three years. From an Israeli perspective, they were unlawfully invaded by Arab aggressors and rightfully gained land by military conquest, so their claims were justified based on modern definitions of land acquisition. But, as you can imagine, the Palestinians would see this differently.

Civil war broke out throughout all of Israel, but a cease-fire agreement was reached in 1949. As part of the temporary armistice agreement, the West Bank became part of Jordan, and the Gaza Strip became Egyptian territory. Numerous wars and acts of violence between Arabs and Jews have ensued since the 1948 Arab-Israeli War such as the Suez Canal, Six Day War, Yom Kippur War, the Lebanon War, First Palestinian Intifada, the Second Lebanon War, and Hamas Wars. Israel has been involved in repeated violence with Hamas, a Sunni Islamist militant group that assumed Palestinian power in 2006. Some of the more significant conflicts took place beginning in 2008, 2012, 2014, 2021 and 2023. Israel has basically been in and out of wars since they were recognized as a nation.

Clashes between Israelis and Arabs and/or Palestinians are commonplace. (As you can imagine it is difficult to identify all of the middle east groups and I am reluctant to group them or identify them together.) Key territories of land are divided, but some are claimed by several groups. For instance, both Palestine and Israel cite Jerusalem as their capital. Both groups blame each other for terror attacks that kill civilians. While Israel doesn’t officially recognize Palestine as a state, more than 135 UN member nations do. In October 2023, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu formally declared war on Hamas following a surprise deadly assault launched from Gaza by Hamas militants.

You also might consider a morality/moral equivalency conversation here. After Hamas’s attack, is Israel obligated to agree to a cease-fire. Are they obligated to be certain that no civilians are killed and if civilians are killed, are they no better than Hamas? Is Israel’s occupation of the land the ultimate cause of all the killing? This article doesn’t necessarily warrant a conversation on biblical kingdom morality concerning defense but if you are considering all things in this war it needs to be considered.

When considering how a Jesus follower might view all of this conflict you may consider the religious affiliation of the Israeli population as of 2022 was 73.6% Jewish, 18.1% Muslim, 1.9% Christian, and 1.6% Druze. The remaining 4.8% included faiths such as Samaritanism and Baháʼí, as well as “religiously unclassified.”

OVERALL THOUGHTS & CONCLUSION:

As I started this article, I feel the need to re-emphasize my position. I am in no way anti-Israel or anti-Palestine (for that matter) as I am not anti-American in any way. I am anti-Hamas. There is good and bad in every nation, Christian and non, everywhere you look. Just because something started wrong, or off or grey, doesn’t mean it can’t be reconciled. Isn’t that what we are doing as Christians? You can’t judge everyone represented by the acts of a few people. To be clear I have no tolerance for evil on any side and it seems like there are a lot of atrocities going on that are pure evil, but most of the people involved are victims and that breaks my heart.

I certainly don’t agree with everything America (or any other nation) has done in their past (or make any concession to justify their current actions) but as a citizen of the nation of the United States I seek to do what I can to influence a broken system of peoples as I take on my kingdom role of representing or being an ambassador of the Kingdom of God (my primary consideration) and offer the healing power of Jesus. I will continue to model the beauty of this kingdom and offer consideration to anyone to join me in this obedient pursuit of Jesus and His beautiful plan that is captivated by loving God and others giving way to joy and healing even in the midst of tribulation both here and now which will eventually result in a recreated heaven and earth where all things are reconciled to Jesus.

As you probably know, I am for the kingdom of Jesus in every way with unwavering sole conviction to that state of living. My faithful pledge isn’t to any of the worldly systems or nations, just Jesus. I am glad that my political state of America allows me to worship Jesus but recognize that it isn’t promoting the kingdom of Jesus, but rather allows it. I have freedom to be a Jesus follower as well as be loyal to any other religion. As Christ followers we need to make sure that we are on Jesus’ side, not on the side of the rival nations of the world. We need to represent Biblical values, love, grace, peace, mercy, and justice, but understand it is God who ultimately rules and controls those powers throughout our world and the next. We represent the image of Jesus and invite others to join in a different kind of kingdom. We are the hands and feet of Jesus but ultimately all things will be reconciled by and to Him, perhaps much of this is out of our hands and we are simply asked to live within the New Covenant precepts the best we can wherever and however we can.

In terms of world politics and national strife, neither side, Israeli or Palestinian (Ukrainian or Russian) are nationally Christian. We tend to think of the Hamas as the worst entity involved and maybe they are or aren’t. Some of the acts of all of these groups have been detestable. There are likely Christians on every side as well as terrorists on all sides (they often call themselves freedom fighters because they are fighting for what was taken from them). As a Christian I can’t side with much of any of the violence. Even from a sense of justice it is the Lord’s not mine. I pray that being the hands and feet of Jesus doesn’t call my family into a war situation, but I am well aware that at some points of history this has been a decision by Christians that has had to be made. Perhaps we could decide to side with Israel as an American because America is in political alliance with them as long as the decisions don’t result in fruit that is against the Jesus kingdom. However, that statement seems impossible. This brings some other theological problematic concerns. Are we partnering with others out of the Jesus Kingdom? Many Christians would say that this is being unequally yoked. Should a Christian partner with the world?

Is God on Israels side? Throughout history Israel has denied God and specifically Jesus, far more than they have sided with Him. Statistically, America claims to be 70% Christian and Israel is less than 2% Christian, although I don’t feel as if America is very Christian living here. Perhaps these statistics aren’t comparing apples to apples though. I don’t see God aligning with the governments of America or modern national Israel. Israel seems to continue to be a rival to the kingdom of Jesus and for the most part I think America is heading in that direction as well. As Christians we pray to love our enemies and see them redeemed, so in this sense I urge you to pray for all of them.

Should we give any extra merit to a nation that once was Theocratic (thousands of years ago) but no longer is and clearly isn’t appealing to any sort of Christian following? I don’t think so. As Christians we need to align with those of the Jesus kingdom but at the same time pray to love our enemies and win them over to Jesus. Israel does claim as traditional Jews to worship the same God as Christians but as I have said earlier if you take Jesus out of the equation you’re out of the New Covenant and might even be against God if you can’t accept His Son as the Messiah.

There is no Biblical or “world” mandate for Israel laying claim to modern or ancient land. Nor does the Bible say that it is just for them to wage war to take it back. But the choices of these nations and others within the last century have perhaps made this complicated, just as there is no real rightful claim for land to be “claimed” by a Palestinian state or nation based on modern or ancient history either.

I do know one thing for sure, we can pray for the kingdom of Jesus and the world to be reconciled unto Him.

• WIll Ryan Th.D.

SOURCES & NOTATION:

Special thanks to those that contributed to this article in a thought tank and red team review: Steve Gregg of the Narrow Path, Dr. Matt Mouzakis of X44, Nick Tenhagen, Dr. Steve Cassell, Pastor Steve Thorngate, Steve Bahr, Krista & Will Bensheimer, Jason Lee, and Josh Ruud. Please note that they do not necessarily share the views of the author and represent a very diverse mix of theological backgrounds.

History of Ancient Israel: Oxford Research Encyclopedias.

Creation of Israel, 1948: Office of the Historian, U.S. Department of State.

The Arab-Israeli War of 1948: Office of the Historian, U.S. Department of State.

History of Israel: Key events: BBC.

Israel: The World Factbook: U.S. Central Intelligence Agency.

Immigration to Israel: The Second Aliyah (1904 – 1914): Jewish Virtual Library.

Palestine: Growing Recognition: Al Jazeera.

Mandatory Palestine: What It Was and Why It Matters: TIME.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2023/10/10/what-is-hamas-militant-group/71128206007/

The unity of the church is always on my mind. There seems to be more and more of the spirit of the world seeping into the body of Christ and the ways and attitudes of Babylon are taking root. There has been a movement of those who consider themselves defenders of the faith and discerners of the truth that ostracize and cast out those who don’t fit into their mold. I’ve noticed they have often failed to discern the attitudes and spirit of the world that they have aligned themselves with rather than walking in the Way of Christ by seeking to edify, build up, live in unity with diversity, and grow in Christ-formed maturity.

This week I’ve been reading through 3 John; it is a very small 15-verse letter in the back of our Bible that many of us probably have not given a ton of attention to (me included). It often doesn’t land on people’s favorite lists such as Romans, Philippians, or the Psalms. But this letter packs a punch in talking about unity through addressing attitudes of what John calls “evil” in the church. We have taught a series on the Seven Churches in Revelation and in that we saw that the major message from John there was regarding the ways of Babylon that have taken root in the churches in Asia Minor. Likewise, in 3 John, he writes about “evil”, in terms of worldly attitudes, that have seeped into the church.

John’s epistles were written to the churches in Ephesus. Church history tells us that John the Apostle was an elder here in his old age. In 3 John he is just called “the elder”. He was likely part of shepherding a network of house churches as well as other apostles and itinerant teachers. If you want our x44 take on what an elder is simply type elder into the search box to the right or search our Youtube channel. This sermon might also help.

In this letter there are 3 characters:

• Gaius: Who is the recipient of the letter and likely an elder or leader at the church John is writing to.
• Diotrephes: Who’s attitude is what the letter of 3 John is about. He was likely either an elder, leader, or teacher in this house church.
• Demetrius: Likely a younger person in the church who is an example of walking in truth.  

In this study we are going to look at the character of Diotrephes, specifically because I believe there’s some of his spirit in churches today. First, we need to look at how John contrasts his spirit against what John calls “walking in the truth”.

3 John 1-4

The elder to the beloved Gaius, whom I love in truth. Beloved, I pray that in all respects you may prosper and be in good health, just as your soul prospers. For I was very glad when brethren came and testified to your truth, that is, how you are walking in truth. I have no greater joy than this, to hear of my children walking in the truth.

“Truth” is one of the central images in all of the Johannine writings (Gospel of John, 1-3 John, Revelation). Truth (aletheia) is used 45 times in these letters. The gospel of John begins saying that Jesus came full of “grace and truth” (1:14). Jesus says that John the baptizer testified to the “truth”, which was Jesus (5:33). And Jesus declares he is “the Way, the Truth, and the Life” (14:6). Thus, the truth is more than simply correct facts and interpretations- it is a person (Jesus) and a Way we are called to live. We could believe all the right things and have all the best interpretations of the Bible and still not be in the “truth”.

John describes the truth this way in 1 John 2:4-6:

The one who says, “I have come to know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him;  but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him: the one who says he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the same manner as He walked.

“Truth” in verse 4 is “knowing him” and this is defined by walking as Jesus walked in verse 6. The Greek verb for “walk” is peripateo and it is a Hebrew idiom translated into Greek. In Hebrew, it would be halach, which was used to express a way of life. In the first century this would have been the picture of the relationship of a disciple to their rabbi. In 3 John 3-4 truth is likewise described as more than walking in correct facts and interpretations but in walking in the character, behavior, and deeds of Jesus. John goes on to give some examples of this:

3 John 5-8

Beloved, you are acting faithfully in whatever you accomplish for the brethren, and especially when they are strangers; and they have testified to your love before the church. You will do well to send them on their way in a manner worthy of God. For they went out for the sake of the Name, accepting nothing from the Gentiles. Therefore we ought to support such men, so that we may be fellow workers with the truth.

John shows that walking in the truth is in part about being faithful in your humble service to the brothers and sisters in Christ, living in a testimony/witness of love (1 Cor 13:4-7), and displaying hospitality to those in the church and strangers.

During the first century and following centuries there were prophets, apostles, and teachers who were itinerant and sent to edify and build up the churches in an area. The Didache is an early church writing dating around 100 AD and it is often called the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles. It gives instructions on how to live as lights in the world and not to follow the ways and behaviors of the world in the first half of the writing. In the second half it gives instructions on different sacramental and functional items such as baptism, communion, welcoming these traveling ministers, and the attitude the body of Christ should have for each other in love.

In Didache chapters 11-13 it talks about welcoming traveling prophets and apostles. In this, it says to receive anyone who teaches in the way of increasing justice towards neighbor and knowledge of the Lord (Did. 11:2) and to receive them as the Lord for 1-2 days, but if they want to settle there they must work to support themselves and the community (Did. 11:3-7, 12:1-5). The way to test these teachers is based on deeds that are of the “conduct of the Lord” and teachings that are not of wicked men (Did. 11:1, 9). The whole section is focused on the behavior and attitude of the teachers because a true prophet must “walk out” what he teaches (Did. 11:8-12). The Didache is not part of the scriptural canon but it is well attested as something informative, trustworthy, and useful in the life of the early church.

We don’t have many traveling prophets or apostles today, most of our ministers and teachers are “in house”, but the same can be said in all of this regarding how we treat brothers and sisters in the body of Christ – both leaders (the mature in Christ) and the younger (less mature in Christ). We should display the truth through walking in love, in hospitality, looking at the fruit of faithfulness, and really centering ourselves on character and actions that reflect Jesus. This is really the core message of 3 John.

When we continue in this text we come to Diotrephes, who’s attitude is what this letter is mostly about or at least contrasted with.

3 John 9-11

I wrote something to the church; but Diotrephes, who loves to be first among them, does not accept what we say. For this reason, if I come, I will call attention to his deeds which he does, unjustly accusing us with wicked words; and not satisfied with this, he himself does not receive the brethren, either, and he forbids those who desire to do so and puts them out of the church. Beloved, do not imitate what is evil, but what is good. The one who does good is of God; the one who does evil has not seen God.

As we mentioned above, Diotrephes was possibly a teaching leader, an elder in the house church with Gaius, or at least someone with some influence in the body of Christ in this church.  John describes him as one “who loves to be first among them [and] does not accept what we say [teach]”. John Stott notes that word philoprōteuein (“to be first”) in the region of Asia Minor at this time “denoted two tempers which disturbed the Christian life of Asia Minor—intellectual arrogance and personal aggrandizement.”^[1] It seems that Diotrephes is setting himself up as the guardian of truth in the church, seeing other teachers as rivals, and will only permit teaching that lines up with him, and doesn’t mess with his assumed authority as a teacher.

Now, correct beliefs and teaching are important, but approaching the scripture in humility is also essential. There are many people that believe things just because a pastor “told them so” or because it has been their tradition without without looking at the context of scripture, original languages, social and cultural meanings, historical interpretations, or how scripture interprets scripture, as well as being led by the Spirit in these textures of interpretation. I’m not saying we all need to have doctorate degrees in Biblical interpretation but we need to be humble in our approach to scripture as an ancient text written for us but not to us. We should  use the tools available to us for research and consider the gifts in people who do this for the benefit of the church, as well as prayer and humbly seeking the Spirit to guide us. Humbleness and open mindedness combined with the leading of the Spirit are important when approaching the text. As we pointed out above, our beliefs and interpretations should lead us into Christlike behavior and attitudes. Producing spiritual fruit and attitudes is the proof of our “walking in the truth”.

Notice that John does not call out Diotrephes’ beliefs, teaching, or interpretation, but rather he calls out his deeds- his attitude. First, he says he “unjustly accuses people with wicked words”. The verb phlyarōn (accusing) means to “talk nonsense” in classical Greek. It conveys the idea that the words were not only wicked, but senseless. The noun phlyaroi in 1 Timothy 5:13 is translated “tattlers” in KJV and “gossips” in NIV. The NEB renders the phrase: “He lays baseless and spiteful charges against us”. Essentially this is defined as slander. Slander is “the action of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person’s reputation or to make false and damaging statements about someone” (Oxford). In Proverbs this is one of the things the Lord hates the most:

Proverbs 6:16-19

There are six things which the Lord hates, Yes, seven which are an abomination to Him: Haughty eyes, a lying tongue, And hands that shed innocent blood, A heart that devises wicked plans, Feet that run rapidly to evil, A false witness who utters lies, And one who spreads strife among brothers.

“False witness” here is a liar and slanderer. In Proverbs, and likewise with John, it is connected to evil and spreading strife in the community.

Diotrephes is not content with simply ruining ones reputation or making damaging statements, he has a threefold mission- 1) to not receive someone as a brother (labeling them as non-Christian or someone outside “his” community), 2) forbidding any who want this teacher welcomed in the church, and 3) a desire to cast this person and those who welcome that person out of the church.

In verse 11 John gives a summary on his thoughts on this behavior. He calls the deeds evil. John says that Diotrephes is walking in the way of evil and not the truth. In this he is encouraging Gaius and the rest of the church here to imitate the truth and not the deeds Diotrephes is walking in. A very serious line in scripture comes next in verse 11,  “the one who does evil has not seen God”. Diotrephes is a part of the Christian community but His deeds show an alignment with things opposed to Christ’s Way.

John explains this in John 1:18: No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.

“Explained” (exegeomai) is the Greek word we get “exegesis” from. Jesus has exegeted God- he has explained him through His life. What John is saying is that no one has seen the complete Way (truth) until Jesus’ incarnation. Hebrews’ author says it in this way :

Hebrews 1:1-3a

God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world. And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature

The Hebrews are being encouraged to walk the way of Jesus because Jesus is what God has to say. He is the Word of God and also the exact representation (imprint/mark- charagma) of who God is and what God is like. When you see Jesus you see God. He is the one we are called to imitate, not the world. Jesus teaches us how to truly be human.

Jesus also points this out to Philip saying that his works (deeds) are the Father’s works and those abiding in him will do his works (and greater) too.

John 14:9-15

“Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? “Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on My own initiative, but the Father abiding in Me does His works. “Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me; otherwise believe because of the works themselves. “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do, he will do also; and greater works than these he will do; because I go to the Father. “Whatever you ask in My name, that will I do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. “If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it. “If you love Me, you will keep My commandments.

The one who has not seen Jesus has also not really seen God. The evidence of this is that they don’t walk as Jesus walked (1 John 2:4-6). They are not in the truth because they are not obeying the way (commands) of Christ. To “keep” these commands is not about legalistic box checking but about the transformation that comes out of loving the Lord with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength. It is someone who has not progressed in transformation into the likeness of Christ- it is proof of spiritual immaturity. Paul explains this saying,

2 Corinthians 3:18

But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit.

The thing we look into we are transformed into the likeness of.

Diotrephes’ deeds are proof of the need to grow in the fruit of the Spirit in his life and of the fact he isn’t devotedly walking in the way of the truth. He seems to be walking more in the spirit of the World. Was he looking more into the world or Christ?

Paul speaks of this also to the Galatian church:

Galatians 5:15-26

But if you bite and devour one another, take care that you are not consumed by one another. But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh. For the flesh sets its desire against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are in opposition to one another, so that you may not do the things that you please. But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the Law. Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law. Now those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit. Let us not become boastful, challenging one another, envying one another.

Paul does not just list moral items but also attitudes and behaviors. The text says that when these fruits of the flesh are present we will devour one another (v15) and it flows from not walking and living in step with the Spirit. Instead it is rooted in boasting, challenges for higher honor, and envy (v26)- this is walking in the spirit of the world. If the church lets these attitudes of Babylon in the church it will result in destruction. This is the reason John says that when he comes he will address the “deeds” of Diotrephes, not just beliefs, teachings, and interpretations.

John concludes his letter with an acknowledgement of Demetrius connected to “what is good” (v11). Coming on the heels of talking about “the evil”, John is reminded of Demetrius when thinking about “the good”.

3 John 12-15

Demetrius has received a good testimony from everyone, and from the truth itself; and we add our testimony, and you know that our testimony is true. I had many things to write to you, but I am not willing to write them to you with pen and ink; but I hope to see you shortly, and we will speak face to face. Peace be to you. The friends greet you. Greet the friends by name.

We don’t know much about Demetrius outside of his character and attitude. Interpreters speculate about him; many think he was a member of this congregation who was younger. This is interesting because John is pointing out that sometimes a “younger” can act more mature in Christ than an “older”. John’s main concern in this letter is concentrated on the attitudes and deeds in the church that reflect Christ.

Rather than being a “false witness” like Diotrephes, Demetrius is displayed as a good witness to the way of Christ. Martureo is the Greek verb for our English word to witness, to testify, and the noun martus is what we get martyr from.[2] This word is about being a representative of Jesus and also about giving a testimony or witness of something that you’ve seen and experienced- a whole life reflecting Him. Demetrius’ life is a good testimony/witness and it is summarized by John in three examples: 1) he is well spoken of and has a good reputation with the church, 2) he is confirmed by the truth itself (Jesus and the Spirit in him), 3) and John and the other leaders speak well of his life and witness. Demetrius lives in unity and harmony with the body of Christ in faithfulness, hospitality, and love- he is walking in the way of Jesus.

This study is not aimed at any one person in particular but rather about the attitude and spirit of the world that we’ve seen in the church that is hindering the witness of the church. The church needs to walk in the truth because if we do not walk in truth people will never believe the truth of the gospel. Notice that John seeks to correct the deeds or the spirit of Diotrephes and not cast him out of the community. He is seeking restoration and unity.

Here are some questions we should humbly ask ourselves and our churches:

What can we do to foster a community that walks as Jesus walked?

What steps do we need to take to stop devouring one another in the church?

How can we listen in order to understand instead of listening to just respond?

How can we build, edify, redeem, and restore instead of tearing down and casting out?

What are the attitudes of Babylon in me that need to be purged?

What are the spirits of Babylon in our church that need to be expunged so that we can walk in unity?

Lord help us live out the desire of our King- to live together in unity and love so that the world may know Him.

“I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word; that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me. “The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, just as We are one; I in them and You in Me, that they may be perfected in unity, so that the world may know that You sent Me, and loved them, even as You have loved Me. “Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world. “O righteous Father, although the world has not known You, yet I have known You; and these have known that You sent Me; and I have made Your name known to them, and will make it known, so that the love with which You loved Me may be in them, and I in them.”  (John 17:20-26)

How will the church of Jesus come to unity?

“There’s unity in the Spirit only in the graveyard of the flesh.”

---

^[1] John R. W. Stott, The Letters of John: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 19, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 235.

[2] Check out the Bible project video on witness: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhcmzjwbvyk

Article written by Matt Mouzakis Th.D. (edited & postscript written by Will Ryan Th.D.)

POSTSCRIPT:

“keep them in Your name; those you gave to Me, that they may be one as We are.” John 17:11

Have you ever wondered why the church is often divided?  Why do we argue over theological details and rather insignificant differences? Jesus used a Hebrew word, ‘ehad. Deuteronomy 6 introduces this word to describe the oneness of God, YHWH is one. Perhaps you have never considered this, but the Hebrew word signifies the constitutional covenant agreement with Israel or those that were given freedom and new life out of the Exodus, a covenant that covered everyone who is aligned in obedience with YHWH regardless of bloodline or their past. Later it would be the same under the teaching of Jesus as it continues to be true today. Everyone has their own journey or expedition, but we are united together under the name of YHWH. In Hebraic thinking, scriptural debate was welcomed and usually celebrated as something that would deepen faith. Later in the first century the church thrived and even became known and unified through these “Mars Hill” type of interactions. It is unfortunate that today (and throughout history) that many have used theology to divide the “oneness” of God rather than build the deeper faith of the church. Stimulate your mind.  Challenge your perception. Grow deeper with Jesus.

“until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ.”  Ephesians 4:13

The Greek word henoteta comes from a root that means “one”.  You may remember that Jesus prayed for and emphasized this kind of unity in the Spirit. Ephesians continues Jesus’ theme as one body, one Spirit, one hope, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father.  In the first century church Paul defines dissensions and schisms as missing the mark. Submission, humility and service, or taking on the mind of Christ is essential to be one in Christ.

I also might suggest following up this read with this X44 article.

Money is the root of all evil… right? That’s a very popular misquote of 1 Timothy 6:10 … or is it?

Some will correct me and say, well it’s actually the “love of money” according to scripture, but is that actually any different?

Perhaps a better verse is Hebrews 13:5

Let your way of life be free from the love of money, being content with what you have, for He Himself has said, “I will never desert you, nor will I ever forsake you.”

Following Jesus is a way of life. If you are a Christian, you are an exile and alien. I have a book called “this is the way” which is a word play off the Disney Star Wars Mandalorian series. it’s a consideration for when you have given your whole life towards something you always thought was right, later to find that maybe you were off a little bit…

How much do you give to the Lord?

In the classic Old Testament Hebraic mindset the answer should be, “all that you have been given.” In other words, everything is the Lord’s and should be given back to Him. You have simply been entrusted to the finances of the kingdom for a short time. This is the circular dance of grace. In our western thinking this is likely where we get the original audience’s interpretation of Biblical giving wrong… thinking that God just requires a tithe (confused with OT passages), or that there are no strings attached to Grace.

Is Grace free? Are there strings attached? I have a feeling some people are going to need to consider some deconstruction of what you might think the Bible says about money and giving and possibly even what the church has told you.

Grace is free but it also might have some strings attached. To be clear, Grace is totally free, but if you’re going to follow the Lord then you should follow the Lord with all that you are and have been given and freely give back all that you are and have been endowed with- which to some sounds like attached strings.

To most Americans the idea that God wants everything doesn’t sit very well.  What would alter calls sound like if we told people the whole story before we asked them to put their hand up! We make it so easy to make a momentary decision to follow Jesus without truly calculating the investment. In a way the simple faith is beautiful and all you need to commit to Jesus; but in other regards, the covenant commitment should be approached with an allegiance that our current evangelical culture likely doesn’t spell out very well as they are rattling off the steps to salvation.

It even becomes more uncomfortable as Christian Americans when you ask somebody if they love money. Nearly every American does. That’s why Christians are so quick to try to explain how this verse means something different emphasizing the “LOVE OF” clause. Christian Americans are in a little bit of a wrestling match because they want to proclaim that they don’t love money; yet the giant mortgages, lifelong debt, and working around the clock every week say otherwise. It sure looks like we all love money, and that’s actually the implication of the scripture.

Is there really much difference to say that money is the root of all evil or the love of money is the root of all evil? In Biblical thinking it was basically the same. The complete cultural thought or mindset is perhaps better than the literal interpretation here. To those living next to me in America it would seem that one is essentially the same. If your life looks like you love money, you probably do and anything that separates you from complete devotion to the Lord is “EVIL” or “SATANIC.”

The word “love of money” is philarguros, literally, “a friend of silver.” This is a Greek verb that was used in the scriptural context to describe brothers and sisters of one body (which we like to call the church in present day language -that’s up for argument though.) I don’t know about you, but I’ve seen more destruction in “the church” than nearly anywhere else towards people. Of course, that doesn’t mean that I’m going to walk away from it either. Could this have been implied in this verse?  But put the church aside and it’s interesting that we see this kind of destruction (tied to money) amongst family members as well. Seems like we have the hardest time getting along with our own family than anyone else, and at some point, your church should become your family. Seems the Biblical authors made this connection. Today, it would seem that money is root of more church problems and family dynamics than anything else I can think of.

So let me speak Greek for a moment. In Greek verb is the object of the action. The New Testament treats philarguros as coveting. Surely most Christians in America don’t covet money? And even worse churches don’t covet money, right?

One of my friends recently posted a picture that essentially said; “if the Bible says money is the root of all evil than why are so many churches asking for it.” Of course what followed was a discussion of how people are miss quoting the Bible… but my interjection is “are they?”

Don’t Christians in America want what everybody else has? Haven’t most of our churches made that a clear point? The church salaries and 401k’s should be equal to salaries and retirement packages within our world; the church building should be as nice as the finest of homes and business’? Was Solomon right in turning the tent tabernacle into a large edifice of gold? Did God smile on that?

Have I gotten under your skin yet? Shouldn’t Christian Americans have what everybody else has? Even though we are aliens in a foreign world, shouldn’t what the foreign world offers be part of our life as well? Can’t we also adapt this way of life as Christians? Can’t the exiles of Babylon have everything the new world has to offer without betraying their “lord?” This mindset is not within the thought of the biblical authors. In fact it’s the tragedy of the American entitlement mentality and Christianity.

-Perhaps the Amish had it right?

-perhaps the Essenes?

-how about those at Masada?

-the crusaders or reformers?

Yep this is messy and complicated. What did it mean in the culture that the Scriptures were written during “to be ruled by the love of money?” The scripture would seem to tell us it simply means to give more of your time, heart, and passion to something other than God… isn’t that every American I know?!

Essentially the Hebraic way of living is that your complete life is a gift. This gift is a reciprocal dance mirroring what God has given you. Total humility, complete giving back of what you have been given, and utter devotion to your Father.

In the hands of the follower of the Way, contentment is a sign of trust in the grace and mercy of God. From the biblical point of view, the only reason a man or woman can entertain contentment is because God is good. His provision is sufficient. Greed leads away from Him and towards the love of things of the world separating us from the Love of Christ.

Is money a necessary evil for a Christian? Is their kingdom money and worldly money? Does God not really care about the money? These are all great questions to this discussion.

You might remember when Moses asked God to enter the promised land God told him to be content with the answer. We typically think about contentment in the present sense, but this is God asking us to think bigger. The Hebrew form reminds us to think in future tense. Contentment is accepting God’s grace in the past, God’s gift today and God’s promise in the future. It’s a reciprocal dance and a way of life. It has very little to do with wealth, money, or entitlement.

Is the love of money or money itself the root of evil? I don’t really think it matters… what matters is that God wants all of us to mirror all of what God has given us. And from the biblical authors mindset money had very little to do with any of that kind of thinking. It is the posture of the heart.

If you have to ask the question, “is money or the joy of money the root of all evil?” Then you’re not thinking correctly (biblically) or probably living the kind of life God is asking you to live.

If you want to consider a better perspective, follow to this link from a Sermon Dr. Matt from X44 gave: https://mtzionchristianchur.subspla.sh/mgzn7xt

I have been into climbing for a long time. When I was in 8th grade (going into HS) our church hired a new youth HS pastor from Colorado named Steve Ledford that asked me and a friend to go to Devils Lake with Him to climb. I was athletic and had done some “bouldering” before but never been climbing on rope. That day my life changed, or was better, “influenced” forever. First Steve (although was later unfortunately let go by our church) went on to be one of my best mentors in life. I also went on to become a certified AMGA guide and climb more mountains than I can count including some of the largest in the world. But more importantly, I decided to dedicate a good part of my life to use the sport of climbing to introduce people to a better understanding of themselves and what God has for them. This last weekend a good friend of mine (Phil Reynolds) and I took our boys on an epic “climb” to learn some mountaineering basics and introduce them to some fundamental considerations of life. We took the time to share how every opportunity has the potential to shape your life and influence the lives of others, and how important it is to recognize and utilize these life moments.

It came about when the priests who carried the ark of the covenant of the Lord had come up from the middle of the Jordan, and the soles of the priests’ feet were lifted up to the dry ground, that the waters of the Jordan returned to their place, and went over all its banks as before. Joshua 4:18 NASB

If you aren’t familiar with Hebrew, let me share something pretty basic about the language that you probably aren’t aware of, Stefan Schorch puts this best, “the Hebrew script is not able to record vowels, with the exception of the so-called vowel letters (matres lectionis), although the distinctiveness of a certain vocalization may carry important semantic information.  As a result, the Hebrew Bible contains in fact a large number of words with different meaning, which had been homographs before the invention of the masoretic pointing.”[1] 

Joshua 4:8 is a great example of the challenges that this has brought us in regard to interpretation. The verb used here means “to go up, climb, ascend” [עָלָה (ʿālâ)].  Notice the description in TWOT:

There are nearly 900 occurrences of the verb ʿālâ in the ot. The most common meanings in the simple tenses are “go up” (over 300 times), “come up” (over 160 times) and “ascend” (17 times). In the causative stems the two predominant meanings are “to bring up” (over 100 times) and “to offer” (77 times). The other 230 uses of the word are translated about 85 different ways in the av.^[2]

To put this plainly, this single word in Hebrew takes on over 100 different English translations. Here is a list of some of the derivatives:

1624c  עֹלָה (ʿōlâ) I, whole burnt offering.

1624d  עֹלָה (ʿōlâ) II, ascent, stairway.

1624e  עִלִּי (ʿillî) upper (Jud 1:15; Josh 15:14).

1624g  עֶלְיוֹן (ʿelyôn) I, high.

1624h  עֶלְיוֹן (ʿelyôn) II, most high.

1624i   מֹעַל (mōʿal) lifting.

1624j   מַעֲלֶה (maʿăleh) ascent.

1624k  מַעַל (maʿal) above, upward.

1624l   מַעֲלָה (maʿălâ) I, what comes up, i.e. thoughts (Ezk 11:5).

1624m מַעֲלָה (maʿălâ) II, step, stair.

1624n  תְּעָלָה (tĕʿālâ) I, conduit, water course.

1624o  תְּעָלָה (tĕʿālâ) II, healing.

1624p  עַל (ʿal) above.^[3]

To many this is very confusing. How can the simple word for “climbing” in the Bible be translated in so many ways that often seem so far apart, possibly not even noticeably related when translated in English. This is why Biblical Hebrew is challenging to say the least. Context helps, but much of the older Hebrew scripture was guarded through oral handing down, that we have to simply take on a certain sense of trust with. In fact, the oldest written scriptures we have are at best from a few hundred years before the time of Christ yet represent “inspired writings” from what we like to think would have been original manuscripts lost many years before this but guarded and carried down (or up to us) by oral tradition. X44 is on a long video series on the church but when we finish, we will be unveiling perhaps the longest anticipated series yet on inspiration and inerrancy. This conversation will start to consider some of the points we will greatly consider in the upcoming X44 Youtube series on inspiration and inerrancy. But I won’t be getting much deeper into that today.

Many of our X44 readers know that the Masoretes decided when and where they would add the vowel points and I have to say alot rides on this and reads into our translations. Wikipedia would tell us that the Masoretes “were groups of Jewish scribe-scholars who worked from around the end of the 5th through 10th centuries CE. Each group compiled a system of pronunciation and grammatical guides in the form of diacritical notes (niqqud) on the external form of the Biblical text in an attempt to standardize the pronunciation, paragraph and verse divisions, and cantillation of the Hebrew Bible. The ben Asher family of Masoretes was largely responsible for the preservation and production of the Masoretic Text

So as if Biblical Hebrew isn’t hard enough to translate already, now that you know, you have to consider the fact that your English translation is highly influenced by this group of people that took the liberty to fill in a lot of blanks throughout the text. But this is me taking a second to teach Theology, let me return to my primary observation.

The Hebrew word “ala” in its most basic sense described what it meant to “CLIMB OR ASCEND.” In a Biblical sense the idea means that you are going to allow something to influence you or be the catalyst to influence others. Are you identifying and looking for a climb every day? Nearly every decision we make has the power to influence who we are and want to be before the Lord. We have the power to shape who we want to be or allow ourselves to digress based on the same process of influence.

This last weekend I led my boys and their best friends in life up a 900 foot egress of rock to a pinnacle where we camped on the top and firsthand watched the majestic splendors of the cosmos declared to the Lord. We also were steps from imminent death with one misplaced foot or handhold. This expedition will influence them forever. The Biblical words for climb mean so much. They describe how we learn, how we heal, how we stretch ourselves, and determine our pathway and live in spiritual balance. The words embody the course that is given to the Lord spiritually at nearly every decision and the allegiant obedient faith that characterizes the covenant relationship that we walk in each and every day.

How is your climb going? Are you each and every day considering where Jesus will lead? Are you approaching life as an open ascent to the cosmos that has been given to you? Do you see yourself as a shepherd guide to mentor others in this? If you haven’t figured it out with the over 100 different interpretations, THIS IS THE WAY.

[1] Stefan Schorch, “Dissimilatory reading and the making of Biblical texts: the Jewish Pentateuch and the Samaritan Pentateuch”, in Raymond F. Person, Jr. and Robert Rezetko (eds.), Empirical Models Challenging Biblical Criticism (SBL Press, 2016), p. 113.

^[2] Carr, G. L. (1999). 1624 עָלָה. R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer Jr., & B. K. Waltke (Eds.), Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (electronic ed., p. 666). Chicago: Moody Press.

^[3] Carr, G. L. (1999). 1624 עָלָה. R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer Jr., & B. K. Waltke (Eds.), Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (electronic ed., p. 666). Chicago: Moody Press.

Some guys are into golf, or hunting, or sports… I am into all of those things but my passion for Jesus and discipleship is not only my life mission but the joy of my life that outweighs everything else and that philosophy not only “filters” into everything else in life, but actually drives them.

MY HISTORY WITH SOCCER

I played club soccer when I was young in the 90’s and played at my small Christian High School leading them to small school “state” twice. My nickname was “the beast” which was given to me at the Christian school I attended, and I am sure had some theological undertones as that was when every Christian kid was reading Frank E. Peretti‘s “this present darkness series.” I had several scholarship offers to play at secular colleges but went on to play at Moody Bible Institute instead (as I had a clear spiritual calling on my life that I identified at an early age) and was part of the national championship team in 1993. I only played in college for a year and decided to “go professional.” I had played previously in friendlies with the Milwaukee Wave which opened the door to an invitation to join the Chicago fire during their inaugural year with the MLS in 1998 but turned them down (because I would have been the youngest person on the team and likely wouldn’t have seen any playing time) to go play soccer in Europe for Conway United. I played a few practice matches with the Fire before I left for Wales and was glad to have been a small part of the organization during the year that they went on to win both MLS Cup ’98 and the 1998 U.S. Open Cup Final, both in a five-day timespan. Since those days I continue to be part of the soccer world. I’ve been a licensed soccer referee for over 30 years and am a well credentialed coach at nearly all levels. I still play regularly and plan to play until the day I die. All four of my boys have been raised with a ball at their feet since they could walk and have played in club and with the local Christian schools.

MT ZION AND SOCCER

My wife and I have coached at the small local Christian school (that is connected with Mt Zion, the church we attend) in our town since my oldest son Ty was old enough to play for them. My wife and I have built this program from day one around Jesus. Mt Zion Soccer has a reputation for character development and discipleship. Our (only) goal is to build and impact lives positively for Jesus. I have very little concern if we win or lose but the journey that we will travel together for the kingdom – surprisingly we have won our conference nearly every year and were undefeated last year (funny how kingdom principles work that way). One of the things our program has been known for is teaching encouragement. Each practice we encourage the kids to speak 44 words of encouragement to others as well as other kingdom principles. We will regularly have devotions at practice, but in a sense, the entire practice is devotional. We make it our personal goal as coaches to have at least one strategic or purposeful interaction with each student at every game and practice. We asked a well experienced husband and wife couple named Israel and Ivanna to join us coaching. Their sole job was to individually coach each kid. Israel is a soccer expert and coached skill while Ivanna took it on herself to simply encourage and build up with words and build relationships at every opportunity.

As a sidebar, my good friend Steve Cassell regularly says club sports are “the devil” in his favorite “waterboy” accent and I have to largely agree with him. They regularly remove people from the local church culture community. Keep Jesus first and don’t compromise. Your kids are watching.

BE DILIGENT

Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth. 2 Timothy 2:15  NASB You likely have the verse above memorized, but let’s rethink it. Be diligent –in Greek this word is Spoudazo.  

That’s the word for this soccer season, it is actually where we get the English slang word “Spaz.” In its original language it implied a lot.  Be diligent. Be eager. Be earnest. Be steadfast. Be immovable. Be consistent. Be kind. Be strong. Be loving. Be generous. Be energetic. Be relentless. (And so much more) …but in all of these be devotional & diligent unto the Lord.

We usually think of this verse in terms of academics. I remember growing up in Awana, this was the “STUDY” verse. But today, as I so frequently do on x44, I want to challenge you to deconstruct some of the poor theological presumptions you may have been given over the years about this verse. Paul isn’t telling us to memorize everything (although He may believe that as a Torah observant Jew that likely has the entire law memorized) – but this, in context, is not what this verse is about.

Hermeneutically, he is encouraging “being the person God approves.” Be diligent to present yourself, not your cognitive ability.  

Study is certainly important, but it isn’t the goal.  The goal is the person, completed in Christ. And that is the goal of our soccer season and very much our personal parenting and life coaching season!

We are coaching to focus on the “perfected” work of Jesus. We are focusing on overcoming, seeking victory, building up others, exercising and developing our spiritual giftset, and truly taking on the mind of Christ.

The verb Paul uses that we interpret as “accurately handling” is literally “cut correctly” (orthotomeo). This is sculpting language. The temple was fit and formed together like a puzzle without any fasteners. This image takes on the idea of that sense. Paul wrote in Greek but was thinking in Hebrew & that perspective is about doing, not just thinking, we see that the workman produces nothing if he only thinks about it. That the final result of things fitting so well in the kingdom is very much about the final result. Last year the Mt Zion school theme was to be a doer, the craftsman has to put his skills to work to produce the intended result.  Being well intended or good hearted is great, but the kingdom calling is towards the final result of being fully formed by Jesus. Jesus’ discipleship was about the finished work, and that was a “here and now” statement not an eschatological “someday.” We have to put God’s words to work in our lives to produce the intended result – a finished workman for the work we are made and designed to do TODAY. The temple being fit and formed was just a foundational piece to the work that was supposed to have been done through it for the kingdom.

The objective of our life “expedition” is to become the master craftsman of ourselves through Jesus.  Our goal is to be in continual production of a person approved by God.  The “material” can actually be nearly anything in life. 

This season we are going to get “cut” for Jesus. The goal is to become in peak spiritual condition and along the way we are going to learn the game of soccer, fine tune our skills, get physically fit, find the balance of life and become the best we can be in every measure; all the while well having as much fun as we can! Encouragement is going to “shape” our season! 

I can’t wait!!! 

Ryan (& Krista in Spirit)

X44 has a lot of slogans that we are reclaiming. For instance, “into the storm” has been borrowed by some with far-right political agenda’s but was first coined as a phrase in the first century of complete discipleship. We have an article on this. Another slogan we are taking back is “BURN THE SHIPS.”

Most people recognize the phrase “burn the ships” to be associated with Cortes, the great Spanish explorer who destroyed his entire fleet upon reaching the destination of his “mission”. Landing at present-day Veracruz, Mexico in 1519, he destroyed his ships so that when the going got rough his men would have no means of retreat. It was do or die trying. No going back, only pressing on. It was an act of total devotion to the mission they believed God had called them to.

There are likely a few things about this story that may surprise you. You might have guessed, that like so many Middle Ages pursuits of the day, part of the reason why this story is described as a “mission” was based on the need to evangelize the lost. Whether you’re describing the crusades, or likely any endeavor tied into governmental acquisition it was often done in the name of the Lord, right or wrong. In this sense, Cortes was thought to be on a mission from God. You might also be surprised to know that despite the well-known phrase “burn the ships” which has long been associated with Cortes, He didn’t actually burn the ships, he just “scuttled” or dismantled them beyond use. So why do we say he “burned the ships?” This phrase and action was actually pretty common to his day. It was often ordered and taken figuratively as an “ALL IN” or no turning back statement.

Agathocles of Syracuse in 310 BC, Emperor Julian in 363, William of Normandy in 1066 are likely better examples of people that actually “burned the ships” in the same regard (there are many others who did this, see the list below). Regardless, the idea started, or should have started and came to fruition anyway, with Israel and the Exodus. Not so much with “ships” but the idea of no turning back. It’s a great message and an attitude for which every Christian should strive to emulate. Christ calls us and calls us fully. complete discipleship means we are to die (or live in humble self-sacrifice) to everything else and live fully for the one who has given Himself for us through the giving of His life and asks us to live in the same way.

Some Historians question the motives of Cortes. Was he a man of God and all in for the kingdom? I believe so. I would actually say, perhaps more so than most of us are today. As you consider what it means to be “all in” for discipleship, consider the story of Cortes a bit more closely and what it really meant to “burn the ships.” Would you leave everything in the name of discipleship? Many of us say we will but not nearly to this extent.

Cortés made a special request in his letters to the emperor for special powers to be granted for evangelization and discipleship of his crew. He sought the powers for the Franciscans because his people and the natives were “so far from the proper remedies of our consciences,” but he feared the damage normal clerics may cause. ^[1] Cortés is shown in the writings of Díaz del Castillo, who was with him on the conquest, to have regularly and publicly given speeches and thanks to God to encourage the conversion. One such example is recounted in thorough detail in the Historia Verdadera, Vol. 2, Chapter 77, where Cortés is personally attempting to convert the Tlaxcalans. He is recounted as explaining the mission of the Spaniards to convert the natives and end human sacrifice. He also showed deference to the priest, Father de la Merced, which enabled the Spanish to obtain from the Tlaxcalans a newly constructed temple for Our Lord.^[2]

The spiritual aspect of Cortés’s conquest was far more important than the terrestrial aspect. The gods of the Aztec peoples along with those in the remainder of Mexico demanded cruel and regular sacrifices. The Aztecs diligently provided them in cooperation and in conflict with their neighbors, and they have stood out as one of the most brutal empires in the history of the world. Thousands were offered up to the gods every year, including women and children. Sounds a bit like abortion in the US.

The conversion of the New World started with the order from Cortés to scuttle his ships and take over the nation. His passion for the conversion to Christ led Bartolomé de Las Casas, a Dominican friar, to write: “Through this captain, God opened the door for us to preach his holy gospel, and it was he who caused the Indians to revere the holy sacraments and respect the ministers of the church.”^[3]

The term “burn the ships” adopted by Cortés reminds us that the Jesus’ challenge is to commitment for life. There is no turning back. God calls His disciples to be “all in.”

^[1] Cortés, Hernán. Hernán Cortés: Letters from Mexico. Translated and edited by Anthony   R. Pagden. New York: Grossman Publishers, 1971. Letter IV. Page 333.

^[2] https://www.historians.org/teaching-and-learning/teaching-resources-for-historians/teaching-and-learning-in-the-digital-age/the-history-of-the-americas/the-conquest-of-mexico/historia-verdadera/spaniards-attempt-to-convert-tlaxcalans

^[3] Isaac, Barry L. “The Aztec ‘Flowery War’: A Geopolitical Explanation.” Journal of Anthropological Research 39.4 (1983): 415–432. Web.

RECOMENDED READING:

Winston A. Reynolds, “The Burning Ships of Hernán Cortés,” Hispania, Vol. 42 (1959)

Hugh Thomas, Conquest: Montezuma, Cortez, and the Fall of Old Mexico (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1993)

(1) One account of the Danaan invasion of Ireland has it that upon landing, they burned their ships, causing a great mist to rise up and terrifying the inhabitants who thought the Danaans arrived in a cloud.

(2) In Book V of the Aeneid, the Trojan women attempt to burn the ships after they arrive on Sicily, but a rainstorm thwarts their plans.

(3) In 351 BC, Sidon rebelled against Ochus, the King of Persia. They burned all the ships in the harbor to prevent anyone from fleeing. When it became clear that the city had been betrayed and the Persians were entering, they set fire to their own homes and the entire city was obliterated.

(4) In 296, the Praetorian Prefect, Asclepiodotus, commanded an army belonging to the emperor Constantius Chlorus, and led it against the usurper Allectus. Having arrived in Britain to confront Allectus, Asclepiodotus burned his own ships to prevent his men from retreating.

(5) In 363, Julian the Apostate, Emperor of Rome invaded Persia. After his army crossed the Tigris he had all the pontoons and barges burned so there would be no thought of going back.

(6) In 711, Tariq ibn Ziyad, for whom Gibraltar is named, landed there, burned his ships and embarked on the conquest of Spain.

(7) Some accounts claim that William the Duke of Normandy burnt his ships on arriving in England in 1066.

(8) In 1169, a group of about 250 English freebooters under the bastards Robert Fitz-Stephen, Meiler Fitz-Henry, and Meiler Fitz-David, along with a vassal of king Henry, named Hervey Montmorency, raided Wexford, and having been repulsed they were so ashamed, they burnt their ships and determined to succeed or die trying.

(9) Hernando Cortez supposedly burned his ships in 1519 to prevent anyone returning to Cuba and reporting his mutiny to the Spanish governor there, but most historians would dispute this.

(10) According to a book published in 1689, which purported to be the journal of a pirate named Raveneau de Lussan, he at one point led his men across the isthmus of the Americas through Honduras after first burning their ship to prevent anyone from defecting.

(11) In 1779, during the celebrated battle between John Paul Jones and the English ship of the line, Serapis, rather than flee or surrender Jones desparately kamikazeed his sinking ship into the Serapis and captured it va banque.

(12) In 1789, sailors serving on the HMS Bounty under the notorious Captain Bly mutinied and sailed to Pitcairn Island where they burned the Bounty.