We become what we practice

First day of school! My wife is teaching English at Faith Christian School this year. Funny how I couldn’t stand English class in high school, but now I spend the better part of my life translating Hebrew! I think God has a sense of humor!

In Hebrew this reads more literally, “Blessed the man who trusts in the Lord and the Lord his trust.”

The second part of the sentence uses the same verbal root (bāṭaḥ) as a noun (mibṭaḥ). This is very poetic in Hebrew, but we miss it in English.

There is also something to note in the Hebrew verb hāyâ, the verb for “to be, become, exist, happen.” In English we might translate this as “is,” but the action (verb) is converted to a condition (noun) here so unlike the simple word “is” in English, the Hebrew draws us into a deeper consideration of the usage.

Trusting produces trust.

“This hope in God is not a sort of querulous wishing, but a confident expectation. Unlike the pagan religions where unremitted anxiety was the rule, the Hebrew religion knew a God whose chief characteristic was faithfulness and trustworthiness.”[1]

“Perhaps the place where the central issues revolving around bāṭaḥ are seen most clearly in a brief compass is II Kgs 18 and 19 where the Assyrian Rabshakeh challenges the worth of Hezekiah’s trust in God and where that trust is fully vindicated.”[2]

[1] Oswalt, J. N. (1999). 233 בָּטַח. R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer Jr., & B. K. Waltke (Eds.), Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (electronic ed., p. 102). Chicago: Moody Press.

[2] Ibid.

BACK TO SCHOOL

Comments Off on We become what we practice Posted in ADVENTURE

The ongoing results of the fall of the Spiritual beings

When we speak from a Deuteronomy 32 worldview it means that we believe some of those originally created by the hand of God (Spiritual beings – angels – demons – and the first humanity) decided to mirror (image, imagine, worship) themselves rather than God. In doing so, the biblical word that best describes what happens to them and the world is the term fall (or falling away). Here is the prime example of that process as Isaiah references the specific fall of the one we often incorrectly refer to as ‘Lucifer’ [1], the archetype of all the fallen beings (later referred to as Satan in the New Testament.)

This article is a 15 minute read.

Please take note that one of the compelling reasons or causes of this annotated fall was the desire to ‘make myself like the Most High.” If you have heard good messaging from an authentic spiritual leader, then this is exactly what we have all been taught to do. We should passionately crave to be ‘Image Bearers, Imagers’ (Gen 2) and ‘Imitators’ (mimétés in Greek, which is the root of our English word ‘mimic’ in Eph 5:1). So why was this so devastating for Lucifer, and by repercussion, all of humanity yet unborn?

For the cause of brevity, and to give the answer in simplicity… Lucifer did it the wrong way.

Desiring to be ‘like’ God is a Godly (God-like) goal that we are asked repeatedly to embrace. BUT… doing it by His grace and under the leading of His Spirit is a necessary component of the calling. What Satan, the other fallen spiritual beings, and ultimately Adam & Eve did that precipitated their ‘falling away’ was that they all pursued their objective from pride, self-will, and an arrogant belief that they could ascend to that place WITHOUT the Father’s tutelage. Does this not sound familiar to today’s humanistic messaging where everyone is ‘awesome’ and can do/be anything they want with enough self-confidence, self-belief, or self-motivation? (It is also what happens at Babel at a later “fall.”)

The goal of our faith is allowing God’s grace to transform you into the image of God… Good (TOV) and Godly! The opposite (or complete rival) to this dynamic is to desire to promote yourself instead of God. This is the definition of falling away (which some call apostacy.) Trying to conform God into your image version and then working with your own strength towards it is called Idolatry.

Most people are familiar with the term fall to describe the garden serpent tempting Eve and the banishment from Eden, but that isn’t the only fall, it was simply the first fall that was characterized as self-promotion in place of Godly worship (as I believe we are reading the narrative of a dual fall – not simply humankind falling but also the serpent figure likely being the first of the angelic beings that falls or is falling at the same time.) From there, “falling away” becomes a central theme to the entire narrative of the scripture describing the cosmic battle for humankind for either good (TOV) or evil (RA); which is defined by those that are rescued and come to saving faith and those that choose of their own will to remain in the fallen world attempting to elevate themselves. 

The Flood and Babel will immediately be pictures of the perpetual falling away and give specific descriptions of how humanity will be deceived, enslaved, and perhaps destroyed resulting in the consequences of their self-will influenced by giving into the desires of the world and all that dwell within that kingdom (RA). This theme continues with the falling away of Israel (representing the remnant people of God, the Ekklesia of the Old Covenant), and even religion itself by the time of Jesus being described as having become less like the ways of Yahweh instead of more like Him. The religious leaders of the day were the rivals of God’s son Jesus. When Jesus comes and gives revelation to a “new Covenant” through His Kingdom Gospel we are given the power to overcome and triumph over the world and its fallen powers (principalities, rulers, authorities, enslavements). The power to do so comes through His death, resurrection, and ascension as He claims the heavenly throne, regains the keys to life, and sends His Spirit to walk with everyone who allegiantly follows His ways. Returning to this walk is a return to what was established in Eden and will be eschatologically reconciled as “complete” through Jesus in a recreated heaven and earth. In His kingdom, the way to achieve Godliness is through submission, humility, and faithful loyalty. 

In the New Testament narrative outlined by the Epistles, we are told the spiritual beings have been bound but are still present and perhaps are still even falling until the last days of the second coming of Christ. In Revelation 12 we get an implication that 1/3 of the spiritual beings will fall and some consider that to have been a statement taking place from the garden to the tower of Babel; but the context is the incarnation which imply that spiritual beings may continue to be falling away. [2] This would explain certain language: (In fact I usually tell people that are new to a Deuteronomy 32 view, that once you understand the text this way, many of the scriptures that didn’t make sense to you now have clarity.)

As a result of these falls, even though believers know (theologically and eschatologically) they are victorious over the fallen, there is an ongoing struggle (battle) over them in the real-life application. This struggle is characterized by rejecting or ignoring the authority of God in their lives. The result of removing the fear of God is arrogance and pride that leads to the desolation of the world and most things in it. When Jesus came and offered victory, I believe it was to once and for all gain victory over the continual falls and reverse the trajectory for His remnant people; yet 2000 years later we seem to be just as “fallen” or rejecting of God’s ways as those that didn’t have the WORD and the SPIRIT to guide them. 

The world will be renewed, and we are the manifestation of Jesus physically to bring that transformation to the broken fallen world. Even though we live victorious as believers we still contend with the powers of darkness in a real and everyday manner.

Inner spiritual awareness is the true character of a sincere relationship with God and therefore assumes certain epistemological [3] conditions.

1.  Humankind is generally and deliberately unaware of the giant chasm created by their ongoing sins because the church, and culture as a whole, have been deceived by the fallen powers and principalities and/or the evil one and the world.

2.  The great majority of the church has been deceived to believe misguided theology such as but not limited to “Jesus paid the entry fee for Heaven” and perhaps “some won the cosmic lottery, and some didn’t” -that their lives “Here and Now” in Jesus aren’t as important as their escapist theories of Heaven.

3.  We no longer believe that God will hold us accountable for the small things, the everyday falling away of life. This brings on a domino effect that continues to separate us further from the will from God.

4.  The world deceives us – this is the job of the yetzer ha’ra.  Self-deception holds us captive to a theology of feelings rather than a standard of holiness.

5.  The measure of true spirituality has become my inward feelings, not my outward actions.  Shepherding of the 1-3-12-70 along with intimate discipleship to completely leave the world at the beach and walk wholly in the LORD has been completely rejected by the modern evangelical church. In other word, Jesus’ primary message and commission is no longer relevant to the greater modern church. The carnality of the world has won them over.

  • There is a great omission in our Great Commission…

6.  The mainline Jesus communities have nearly removed the external standard of obedience to God’s WORD, and we are largely incapable of measuring our real spiritual condition. We have become blinded.

Abundantly – ‘Perisseuo’, (in this verse ‘perisson’), means ‘to be present overabundantly or to excess,’ censoriously ‘to be superfluous,’ and of persons ‘to be superior or superabounding.’ Transitively the sense is ‘to make overrich,’ ‘to provide superabundantly.’”[4]  Paul doesn’t help us much here either by simply adding hyperbole hyperperisseuo, hyperekperissou, hyperekperissos… the ‘hyper’ adding a superlative to an already over-the-top term.

Has the church also lost the idea of life in Jesus to the abundance? The reason is we have continually, over and over in a habitual manner, given into the yetzer Hara- the ways of the world, our self-will influenced by the fallen and the falling. Jesus didn’t intend for us to continue to live this way. It is even not uncommon to hear in Christian circles the excuses and justification for adopting this broken belief system:

  • “Welp… I’m only human ya know!”
  • “I know I am way short of where I should be but I am better than yesterday… or better than so-and-so…”
  • “We are all just sinners who sin!”
  • “Nobody’s perfect!”
  • “You should give yourself permission to fail…”

“When one does not have a Divine Purpose then any ole’ purpose will do…” -Steve

A common position for many modern believers to adopt is the ‘ I did not know any better” mantra that has become pervasive in the world. And there is a certain level of mercy and even immunity granted by God for genuine ignorance. Yet it is unlikely that those excuses will hold water with the advent of our current ‘information age’ and the near-infinite accessibility of the scriptures. Additionally, there are THOUSANDS of hours of good, solid, spirit-led teaching available for a true seeker to engage with.

There was a time when God ‘winked’ at humanity’s state of blindness and ignorance. In the verse from Hosea above, the stipulation for ‘being destroyed’ by ignorance was tied directly to, “Because you have rejected knowledge”.  A Divine Destiny today is potentially more achievable than in any other era in modern humanity.

Repentance is relegated to the status of something like a cussword in our progressive culture. In the pursuit of endless affirmant and positive feelings, we have forgotten the higher callings of repentance, submission, and pure obedience. This has caused many to adopt a ‘follow your heart’ or ‘just find a good career’ attitude towards the term ‘destiny’. This is to our spiritual detriment, beloved family of God. We were specifically created (Eph 2:10 – workmanship = ‘poiéma’ [where our English ‘poem’ is derived] ‘that which has been made of the hands of God as creator’.) for ‘such a time as this’ for a divine purpose that is of divine importance.

To repent means to turn the center of our ‘yetzer’ (soul, driving force, heart, will, plan, imagination) back around towards God and His will. This is the beginning of the process for a believer to walk out their Divine Destiny. When our ‘hearts’ (nephesh, yetzer) have been properly aligned with the heart of God then what is important to Him becomes our passion, and what is unimportant to Him and His Kingdom becomes reproachable to us.

First means first.

How do you start the process of finding and walking out your Divine Destiny:

  • When your heart has been purified and sanctified by the washing of the water of the Word and the living waters of the Spirit you will find that your priorties become sacred and holy.
  • What does your spirit love… what does it hate? Your purpose is likely engaged with both.
  • If you did not have to ‘worry’ about ‘making a living’ what would you do with God’s grace?

Ways to measure where you are on that Divine path:

  • What are you doing with your time? Be honest with yourself and take good inventory.
  • What are you doing with your affections? If it is about comfort, entertainment, hobbies, wrong people… then something is out of alignment.
  • What are you doing with your money? If it is consumed by bills or selfish goals it is not being used as a Kingdom asset the way God desires.

These are hard truths that many will reject or react negatively to… but Godly heroes will do the hard thing. We would not pen these words to you and for you if we did not confidently believe that you could be victorious and successful in the callings of God. The community that surrounds you now (TOV, Beloved), is part of God’s ordained way of empowering you for this abundant life and high calling. Utilize these Divine assets and see the blessings of God manifest in your life and family. The upward trajectory that reverses the fall of this gravity-infested cosmos is readily and powerfully within our grasp… the Kingdom of God is in your hand!

[1] As a name for the Devil or Satan, the more common name in English, “Lucifer” does not occur in the original languages of the Bible; it is in neither the Hebrew text nor the Greek text. In my opinion, it is an unfortunate translation of the KJV (and of John Wycliffe) here in Isa 14:12 which most modern versions do not have. The Hebrew word in Isa 14:12 is “helel” (הֵילֵל), meaning, “shining one”, from the root word, “halal” meaning, “to shine”. The word was used to describe Venus, the morning (or evening) star (actually a planet!), but which easily outshines Sirius. The complete phrase in the Hebrew is “helel ben-shachar” (הֵילֵ֣ל בֶּן־שָׁ֑חַר) meaning “Venus, son of the morning”, or, “Morning star, son of the morning”. The Septuagint (in Greek) translated the word, “heosphoros” which means, “Morning star”. This translation is correct. The Latin Vulgate (Jerome 400 AD) translated the word, “lucifer” meaning “light bearer”. This translation is arguably correct – for Latin. It is apparent that the KJV translators struggled with the Hebrew and transliterated the Latin word instead of translating it. John Wycliffe (who translated from the Latin and knew no Greek or Hebrew) also appears to have been flummoxed as he left the word untranslated. They appear to ignore the fact that the same word appears elsewhere in the Latin Bible describing other things. (2 Peter 1:19, Job 11:17, 38:32, Ps 110:3) It is only in the later English Christian tradition that “Lucifer” became a proper noun referring to the Devil before his fall, which the Hebrew does not do. The original spiritual beings were considered luminaries in the classical ancient near eastern cultures and to that regard, this passage would have been interpreted as the falling of the cosmic evil leader we refer to as “THE SATAN” figure but the intended audience certainly would not have called that entity by the name of lucifer. We have to be careful with interpreting Satan as “lucifer” because Jesus also is described similarly as the morning star in Revelation 2. To be clear the term is best understood in Hebrew as a luminary or spiritual being; in that context the given name lucifer could actually be applied to Jesus as much as or in the same way as it is applied towards Satan. To be clear perhaps both spiritual beings were seen as “leaders” or the spiritual beings who “shined brighter” than the others. One fell away and one is seated on the heavenly throne. Therefore, Lucifer often referred to as a proper name for Satan as per popular culture in not the best name or title for the one we call Satan in terms of biblical study. Follow this article for more:

[2] “SATAN REBELLED BEFORE THE CREATION OF HUMANKIND AND TOOK A THIRD OF THE ANGELS WITH HIM.”

This is an excellent example of how a Christian tradition can become doctrine. There isn’t a single verse in the entirety of Scripture that tells us (a) the original rebel sinned before the episode of Genesis 3, or (b) a third of the angels also fell either before humanity’s fall or at the time of that fall. There is only one passage that mentions a “third” of the angels (presumably) and Satan/the serpent in tandem (Rev 12:1–9):

1 And a great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. 2 She was pregnant and was crying out in birth pains and the agony of giving birth. 3 And another sign appeared in heaven: behold, a great red dragon, with seven heads and ten horns, and on his heads seven diadems. 4 His tail swept down a third of the stars of heaven and cast them to the earth. And the dragon stood before the woman who was about to give birth, so that when she bore her child he might devour it. 5 She gave birth to a male child, one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron, but her child was caught up to God and to his throne, 6 and the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God, in which she is to be nourished for 1,260 days.

7 Now war arose in heaven, Michael and his angels fighting against the dragon. And the dragon and his angels fought back, 8 but he was defeated, and there was no longer any place for them in heaven. 9 And the great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world—he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.

I say that this passage is “presumably” about one-third of God’s heavenly host being fallen because it is not clear that the “third of the stars” swept down by the dragon (serpent/Satan) refers to the angels who already are assisting the devil. It could well be that the one-third are good angels who have been defeated by the dragon. There are good reasons to take that position, namely, that Revelation 12:4 appears to be the fulfillment of Daniel 8:10. For the purposes of this discussion, though, we will presume that this third refers to evil supernatural agents in league with Satan.

The passage is clear that the timing of this conflict involving a third of the angels occurred in conjunction with the first coming of the Messiah:

And the dragon stood before the woman who was about to give birth, so that when she bore her child he might devour it. She gave birth to a male child, one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron, but her child was caught up to God and to his throne. (Rev 12:4–5) The birth of the Messiah is clearly in view, as Revelation 12:5 points readers to the messianic theme of Psalm 2:8–9:

Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage, and the ends of the earth your possession.

You shall break them with a rod of iron

and dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.

The reference to the child born to rule the nations as being “caught up to God and to his throne” is an explicit reference to the resurrection and ascension—the key events that result in the defeat of Satan and the inauguration of the kingdom of God on earth. Scores of scholars recognize this point. Beale is representative:

The destiny of the Christ-child is described in an allusion to Ps. 2:7–9, which prophesies that God’s Son will defeat all worldly enemies and then be enthroned as ruler over the earth. In fact, Christ is referred to as a “male son” to show that he is the initial fulfillment of the Psalm, which is the decisive event for the successful growth of the church. The last clause, referring to Christ’s ascent, implies that the Ps. 2:7–9 prophecy about God’s messianic Son has begun to be fulfilled.… In context, this initial fulfillment means that, as in ancient times, so again the dragon has been defeated. This time the defeat has occurred through the resurrection and ascent of Christ.

The first advent context continues into Revelation 12:13–17:

13 And when the dragon saw that he had been thrown down to the earth, he pursued the woman who had given birth to the male child. 14 But the woman was given the two wings of the great eagle so that she might fly from the serpent into the wilderness, to the place where she is to be nourished for a time, and times, and half a time. 15 The serpent poured water like a river out of his mouth after the woman, to sweep her away with a flood. 16 But the earth came to the help of the woman, and the earth opened its mouth and swallowed the river that the dragon had poured from his mouth. 17 Then the dragon became furious with the woman and went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus. And he stood on the sand of the sea.

The wording of verse 17 is as clear an association of the vision to the first coming of Jesus as the earlier citation of Psalm 2: “Then the dragon became furious with the woman and went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus.” This simply cannot be construed as describing a primeval rebellion prior to the creation of humanity in Eden. Since there is no other passage in the Bible that uses the “third” language in conjunction with a satanic conflict, the idea that Satan and one-third of the angels rebelled at that time is a traditional myth.

 Michael S. Heiser, Demons: What the Bible Really Says about the Powers of Darkness (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2020), 243–245.

[3] “Epistemological” – Philosophy. Relating to the theory of knowledge, especially with regard to its methods, validity, and scope, and the distinction between justified belief and opinion.

[4] Kittel, G., Friedrich, G., & Bromiley, G. W. (1985). Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (p. 828). Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans.

OUT OF DARKNESS – INTO LIGHT

Last night at TOV Matt and Audrey from “Eden to Eden” led us in an amazing praise and worship set followed by Matt and I talking about Light. My dear friend and pastor Craig Lott then went on to share a testimony. TOV was powerful and life changing last night and I pray that many receive and walk differently today.

The Greek word for light is phos.  We get English words from this such as photograph and photosynthesis.  Spiritually we often talk about salvation experiences in terms of bringing people out of darkness into the light when they receive Jesus. One of my life “gripes” is that this seems to be the thrust of the evangelical church today and we sort of missed the true message of the “light” of the gospel if that is all we are accomplishing. That isn’t a very good image of discipleship.

I have been into photography my entire life. My uncle was a professional photographer and gave me a Nikon F2 when I was in 7th grade. I started shooting a lot of film and spent half my life in the dark room being enamored by the power of light. As a photographer I am simply given light and what I do with the light in terms of the subject is up to me. Great photographers understand how the relationship between the subject and the light. I have spent my life mastering this both behind the camera and behind the word of the Lord; and I don’t believe I am done with either yet. I am a disciple.

The early Greeks saw the divine structure of the world in terms of light and dark. Most of their deductions led them farther away from God than closer to Him, but that is the story of a fallen world. Humankind continually takes something that God intended for good (TOV) and decimates it. In some ways that is what has happened to the idea of bringing people into the light.

When Jesus and the biblical authors talk about bringing people into the light they didn’t mean just barely. They meant lifelong immersion.

There is a good reason why God first creates light. Light has no ontological priority.  It doesn’t exist until God calls it into existence.  All of the ancient cults worshipped some form of distorted light -the sun, moon and stars. In a Deuteronomy 32 worldview that was the primary falling away. All of the luminaries, that is -those created as heavenly beings, “fall” and become worshipped themselves in the place of Yahweh rather than being a light that pointed or mirrored Yahweh. Make no mistake, all the philosophy of “illumination” that doesn’t begin and end with the lifelong journey of completeness that Jesus calls us into, is still in the dark. Light belongs to God.

In Greek, this reads gar pote skotos, nun de phos en Kyrio (literally, “for then darkness, and now light in Lord”).  Even though his words are certainly Greek, the syntax is Hebrew.  You were darkness.  Darkness isn’t merely a description of your state, it was the essence of your being.  Remove the darkness and there would be nothing left.  Before we were rescued, we were black holes in the world, pulling creation into the emptiness within us.

Let me explain this in metaphorical terms of a photograph. I can’t take a photo of a subject in total darkness. It simply doesn’t work. Thats what a “photo” is – the light creating an impression. But even if I introduce the subject I am photographing into a little bit of light, I am now able to “photograph it”, but just adding a small amount of light still makes a muddy yucky image. Yes, it is a “new” or original image, but its gray and murky. Yea the subject might think, “wow, a photo of me in my new light, this is the best I have ever looked!” but they don’t see or know what really good light looks like. There may even be a sense of beauty to that first dimly lit image. It could even win some abstract art contest at your county fair, but it leaves a lot to be desired to those that have a trained photographic eye. Over the years I have learned to be a master of natural light in photography in the same way that I have grown into the light spiritually. People look at some of my photographs on a wedding say and often say, “I have never seen such a beautiful image.” That is what we should desire of our image before the Lord. Yet many of us are very complacent to remain in the murky gray thinking our leaves in the light look really good. In Jesus’s image, they have a way to go! He invites you into a journey to find better beauty. The beauty is intrinsically there, but the revealing process is going to take some mastering.

Matt and Audrey’s song writing endeavors are described as “Eden to Eden.” The infinity symbol symbolizes a never-ending pursuit or journey to walk in the Light of Jesus.

No matter where you turn in the Scriptures, you are never far from Genesis.  The beginning is the end.  The cosmic Garden is the destination.  The original light of creation (ye-hi ‘or) is the same light David wishes to fall on him. The very light that separates order from chaos, long before night and day were regulated by the sun and moon.  “Bring Your light, the light that belongs to the order You established, into my life, O Lord.”

The Hebrew in this text is ha-ee-ra (shine, give light, make light, become light).  It is ongoing theme of the scripture that many Hebrew idioms come from.  Wisdom lights up the face (Ecclesiastes 8:1).  God’s word brings light to the eyes (Ezra 9:8).  The Lord’s face shines on His people (Numbers 6:25).  The presence of the Lord causes the earth to shine (Ezekiel 43:2).

The light of God’s face is the light that saves but more importantly is the light that leads towards the implored road to become masterfully like Jesus. The road back to the upward trajectory of Eden and eventually re renewed heaven and earth. In this Hebrew idiom, to experience God’s light isn’t simply to be rescued and brought into intimate shepherding. Your saved so that you can be shepherded in the light.

Do you know what it means to truly walk in His light day in and day out, to become a master of light?

Last night Craig Lott shared his testimony. It would have been easy to be emotionally moved to compassion and miss his primary message so let me repeat it. He lost his wife three weeks ago today unexpectantly. When something like this happens, you don’t care about things you used to care about. The light focuses you on what really matters and means something. Too many of us are REALLY entangled. Yea we may be in the light but not living a life completely given to Jesus. Hopefully you don’t need to lose your wife to see this message. Craig’s testimony challenged us to walk in what matters. Don’t live in the mucked-up worldliness of this carnal X-ian culture; but truly find and live in the light of Christ as if your world had just been reconciled to the only things that really matter.

The Word of the Lord is light to those who follow it.  Those who are devotional to God dwell in the light.  Light becomes the symbol for openness, harmony, community, freedom, redemption and Hessed Life.

Comments Off on OUT OF DARKNESS – INTO LIGHT Posted in ADVENTURE

More on Cosmic Geography

Cosmic Geography in a Deuteronomy 32 Worldview

By Dr. Will Ryan and Dr. Steve Cassell

“If it’s weird, it’s important“.

Perhaps you have heard the term, “Cosmic Geography”; through excellent works like “The Unseen Realm,” much of Christianity has been impacted and even changed through the restoration of a legitimately or “real” supernatural context for all of scripture. Yet many of these revelations were never translated into an application for modern ministry and spiritual warfare. I was enthralled the first time I learned that Naaman the leper was actually of sound mind when he requested dirt from the prophet as a normal transactional aspect of ancient near eastern culture.

The term cosmography is the protoscience of understanding and organizing the thoughts and general features of the cosmos, heaven and earth and the spiritual and physical universe. [1] Simply put, “Cosmic Geography” means that the dirt on our planet is very important to the spiritual entities and their realm. This is also an ancient worldview that likely all the living people possessed in biblical times. The people of that era would have considered this thinking normative. We have advanced so far in modernity that we have drastically, and detrimentally, drifted from this important premise.

 For the purpose of clarity, let us refresh ourselves to the historic account. I will skip around for brevity.

Naaman the Aramean (Hebrew: נַעֲמָן, lit. ‘pleasantness’) was a commander of the armies of Hadadezer, the king of Aram-Damascus, in the time of Jehoram, King of Northern Israel (Samaria) [2]. He was a military figure for the Arameans who had been successfully raiding the Israelites and on one of these raids, Naaman gained a young Jewish slave girl for his household. With unimaginable virtue, this young slave girl lamented for Naamans sickness affected life and made the comment, “If only my master would go to the prophet who is in Samaria, he would cure him of his leprosy.” (Vs 3b)

Naaman went through all the politically necessary hoops to go to the prophet (Elisha) and pursue his miraculous healing. Elisha told Naaman to dip in the Jordan River seven times (baptism? allegiant declaration?) and the requested miraculous healing would manifest. 

Elisha refused the gift but did allow Naaman a granted request that seemed like a standard practice of the day.

As you dive in, I think you will see the “Cosmic Geography” applicationand connections for much of the Old Testament context. But what about the New Covenant outlined in the Christian part of scripture?

  • In the begenning… the Genesis creation story, am I the only one who ever wondered why God chose our building blocks to be dirt? Adam was created in the most sacred place on earth, the cosmic mountain/garden of Eden. That was the most sacred physical environment that existed, and the dirt there was the most sacred dirt ever. The substance being formed of sacred material from a sacred place was divine wisdom in supernatural action.
  • Our substance could’ve been anything in the hands of the creator, but He chose our cosmology would be based in the foundation, the building blocks of the earth itself. We are earthlings, of planet earth, made from earth, made by the Creator of earth, to be the sacred part (remnant) of the Earth. This would also coincide with the curse that was laid upon the Nahash (serpent).
  • If it’s weird, it’s important. Why was our cosmic enemy cursed to crawl in the dust, and eat dust? I would conjecture that the answer revolves around a cosmic reality that the dust of humanity was meant to be much more than what the old preacher says at the gravesite… “Ashes to ashes dust to dust”

We were created to be a sacred people (royal priesthood) living in sacred space (cosmic paradise mountain of Yahweh) so of course we would be the culmination of that sacred place (dust) and that sacred function (the Ruach breath/Spirit of life making us of the same substance of God) living eternally feeding on the Tree of Life. But the serpent eternally adjusted our trajectory into the first fall of mankind and because our dirt became defiled, we were now required to leave the sacred space, and the sacred dirt of our creation transformed into dirt -dirt. Plain ole’ dirt. 

This makes much more sense when applied to the curse that the Nahash (serpent, cosmic enemy, the satan, the devil) would now be a ‘dirt eater’ for the rest of his miserable life. We were the dirt he was going to live off of like a leech sucking the life of its host, so our enemy was a spiritual parasite consuming our dirt.

Here are a few more to ponder:

  • There was a “rock” that followed the Children of Israel through their wilderness journey… why a rock? Was it a pet rock (in jest)? Of all the illustrations that were possible, this seems weird. But it is not if you consider that rock or stone is a geological type of dirt but it is solidly formed and unchangeable. This is why that ‘rock’ was called Christ (1 Cor 10:4) and they drank from it because it was life-giving (water = life in a desert). The rock was spiritual (life) dirt (stone) making it a type-and-shadow of a New Testament reality.
  • In the Song of Moses in Exodus 15, we see this in verse 12, “You stretched out Your right hand, and the earth swallowed them up.” The actual account contains the Red (Reed) Sea as the swallowing agent, so why the reference to ‘earth’ here? I would submit that it was another example of the Cosmic Geography being alluded to. The dirt (earth) was going to swallow the enemies of God in a great victory on the eschatological ‘Day of the Lord’ that apocalyptic literature infers. 
  • In another astounding example, Moses used this doctrine to ‘prove’ that an act of judgment was direct divine interaction during the rebellion of Korah:
    • But if the LORD brings about something unprecedented, and the earth opens its mouth and swallows them and all that belongs to them so that they go down alive into Sheol, then you will know that these men have treated the LORD with contempt.”(Numbers 16:30)
  • The famous response of God to the passionate prayer of Solomon at the Temple dedication:
    • “I have heard your prayer and have chosen this place for Myself as a house of sacrifice. If I close the sky so there is no rain, or if I command the locust to devour the land, or if I send a plague among My people, and if My people who are called by My name humble themselves and pray and seek My face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, forgive their sin, and heal their land. (2 Chronicles 7:12b-14)
    • In verse 14 the term ‘land’ is ‘erets’ in Hebrew which is the Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 term ‘Earth’. It is Cosmic Geography being referenced again.
  • Abraham, the father of faith and the progenitor of the messianic lineage was specifically told by God that his offspring would be like the ‘sand on the seashore’:
    • I will surely bless you, and I will multiply your descendants like the stars in the sky and the sand on the seashore. Your descendants will possess the gates of their enemies. (Genesis 22:17)

We could go on but let us get to the fun stuff… the New Testament references that I believe are lost to our modern theology.

Here are a few verses that all of you have memorized…

If we look at this first through a Deuteronomy 32 worldview and apply Cosmic Geography, then the rebuke of Nicodemus by Jesus for his lack of understanding makes much more sense. If you were like me, you would have likely wondered why Jesus insulted Nicodemus’ lack of revelation so quickly in this discourse. If we look at that rebuke through the lens of Cosmic Geography then it makes sense that a scholar of Jesus’ day would have known that there would be a redemptive need of the actual cosmology of mankind to fulfill the framework of reclaiming sacred space. The ‘born again’ experience returns humanity to the sacred space, the holy place, of the cosmic geography that we were created to be. We become ‘new dirt’ through the work of the Spirit and thereby become the new sacred space where Yahweh can abide with humanity in holiness and completeness.

Although there is no clear source of information about Nicodemus outside the Gospel of John, Ochser and Kohler, writing in The Jewish Encyclopedia in 1905, [3] identify him with Nicodemus ben Gurion, mentioned in the Talmud as a wealthy and popular holy man reputed to have had miraculous powers. [4] Some 21st-century historians make the same connection. This would connect to a Deuteronomy 32 cosmic view of the spiritual realm. Nicodemus did not grasp that Jesus had come to change the very DNA of humanity to reclaim us as His Cosmic Geography where He would eternally abide. He will never leave nor forsake that sacred space, He will walk in them and live in them forever, He will ‘pitch His tent’ (tabernacle) in that dirt and never pull up stakes.

I would also stipulate that the reality of cosmic, geography, revolving around the new birth, so sarcastically annotated by Jesus to Nicodemus was something that was deeply rooted in all of the New Testament writers. Please take a minute and go on a scriptural journey with me as we look at these verses in this different light of human Cosmic Geography. 

Those Divine hands are still making sacred ground every day in any human dirt-bag that humbly and submissively comes to Him. We offer ourselves as a human sacrifice, He takes that dirt offering and adds His divine life to it in the new creation of a New Creation of Cosmic Geography in sacred space made from a different kind of dirt.

  1. Weinberg, Steven (1972). Gravitation and Cosmology: Principles and Applications of the General Theory of Relativity. Wiley. pp. 407–463. ISBN 978-0-471-92567-5.
  2. “God Loves Naaman”. Word Journey. 29 August 2008. Archived from the original on 8 September 2008. Retrieved 7 September 2008.
  3. Safrai, Zeev (2005). “Nakdimon b. Guryon: A Galilean Aristocrat in Jerusalem”. In Jack Pastor; Menachem Mor (eds.). The Beginnings of Christianity. Jerusalem: Yad Ben-Zvi Press. pp. 297–314. ISBN 978-9652171511.
  4. Bauckham, Richard (1996). “Nicodemus and the Gurion Family”. The Journal of Theological Studies47 (1): 1–37. doi:10.1093/jts/47.1.1. ISSN 0022-5185. JSTOR 23966458.

Comments Off on More on Cosmic Geography Posted in ADVENTURE

Understanding a Deuteronomy 32 Worldview

If you’re into theology at all, you may hear someone use the term “Deuteronomy 32” worldview, this conversation often refers to subjects such as the divine council, the falls, and spiritual beings. The main source for such theology within the last 10 years is The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the Bible written by Michael S. Heiser. I was in the Department of Classical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies Ph.D. program at UW Madison, where Heiser and Tim Mackie from the Bible project also attended a few years before I did. If you google “Deuteronomy 32 worldview,” you will likely find our Expedition 44 videos on the subject. Matt Mouzakis and I (from Expedition 44) have also written a rather scholarly book on the subject which is being published by Wipf and Stock Publishers and is to be released next year.

This article is a 45-minute read.

In the beginning, everything was created by Yahweh, and it was good (Tov), humans being very Tov, but it was not complete.  Humankind was given an opportunity as divine representatives to continue the good work God had begun with Him in a divine partnership. Unfortunately, the covenants established by God with those He loved both in the spiritual and physical cosmos were broken. The Bible is the story of God’s enduring faithfulness to return to “TOV” and the Edenic like plan with his creation despite their rebellion and continual “falling away” from Him. This “falling away” is best explained (IMHO) by what is called a Deuteronomy 32 worldview. Deuteronomy is a book that in many ways shows a structure laying out the plan for God to partner with humanity and return to the order that was lost. God established order that was TOV and was then lost through the falling away. The fallen spiritual beings reinstated chaos or what is RA (the Hebrew word for evil or things contrary to God’s plans), while God’s ways were order through TOV. Chaos is described as the space that existed before God interacted with it at the beginning of creation. It was a space void of his life-breathing presence. When God interacted with it, he brought forth life and order. The opposite of God’s presence is chaos or RA (evil)”. To be clear the term chaos isn’t evil in of itself, it is just wild or out of line; it simply has the ability to be used by the evil (ra) forces. For instance, Job refers to the leviathan as a chaos monster of the world that can bring on destruction but in of itself is not necessarily evil. Humanity could be considered similar; in that they begin or start out as neutral (or if you subscribe to the 5 pillars of Calvinism you would believe they are born completely defiled by total depravity) and must decide whom they will serve. Will they follow Yahweh or the world?

There is a battle between the world’s ways and God’s. RA vs. TOV. Deuteronomy was a plan to return to TOV, but Israel failed, and the plan and pages deepened.

This dual world falling away, sometimes described as a rebellion or apostacy, describes the free will decision that humanity repeatedly makes (and/or perhaps also described as their depravity) and spiritual beings made to position themselves away or separated from God. (One of the reasons I subscribe to free will and each person making decisions away from God rather than total depravity is based on the similarity of the spiritual beings falling away. The spiritual beings seem to make cognitive decisions to fall away and foreshadow that of humanity. I believe both the spiritual beings and humankind choose individually to follow or not follow God. The consistent hermeneutic between the falling away of the spiritual beings and mankind does not seem consistent with a “born or created that way” theology of total depravity. Neither beings were created against God, they both have to make decisions away from Him to fall and for Him to join Him.) Although offered partnership in allegiant covenant relationship, they chose RA over TOV, the world over God. We will see that God therefore disinherited the nations after babel meaning He “allowed” their choice of separateness to be granted to them. Despite the falling away of the spiritual entities, the overall plan of “inheriting” the whole earth still existed and thus gave this opportunity to Israel and humankind.

Chaim Bentorah has regularly pointed out that everything God created He declared that it was good.  But he did not declare man to be good until he created a woman to be his help meet.  Note it says help meet, not help mate.  The word in Hebrew is ‘azar (helper) kenegedo (one before or one who helps to see or understand). In other words, a woman was created to stand before a man to help him see or understand God. The word good in Hebrew is tov which means to be in biblical harmony with something or someone.

We also have another article here: https://expedition44.com/2024/08/31/more-on-cosmic-geography/

I may be the first one to hold or introduce this view, but those created directly by the hand of God are referred to as “Sons of God” throughout the Bible. Sons of God (Biblical Hebrew: בְנֵי־הָאֱלֹהִים,  Bənē hāʾĔlōhīm,[1] literally: “the sons of Elohim”[2]) is a phrase used in the Old Testament and in Christian Apocrypha. However, the Bible doesn’t just come out and say that it is a definition of those created directly by the hand of God, you have to interpolate this concept or backread it. In most Biblical cases the term Sons of God is gender neutral according to the grammar. The Bible grammatically both in the original languages and English presents a masculine point of view throughout, so it can be confusing to determine where women fit or how/when they are included in the intended audience. Historically and grammatically, masculine pronouns have been used as a gender-neutral pronoun option, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that every passage in the Bible that uses a masculine pronoun refers to both men and women. As with any book, the clues to gender inclusivity within the Bible are found within the surrounding context. Good hermeneutics and the wisdom of the Holy Spirit help us to accurately interpret the Bible and the intended audience of specific passages. Being an egalitarian theologically I personally lean toward the great majority of passages being intended for all humankind.

The first mention of “sons of God” in the Hebrew Bible occurs at Genesis 6:1–4.

1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, 2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. 3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. 4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

At first take, upon reading the term in Hebrew, you may think that “sons of God” has a negative connotation and many have made that mistake similar to the way that chaos may be misunderstood as evil. However, we are introduced to entities scripture will later theologically refer to as “sons of God” much earlier in the text. I would argue that the original “angelic” beings created by God, the first humans, Adam and Eve are or would take on this title. Later in the New Testament, as I will get to, those recreated as new beings making a profession of faith to follow Jesus under the new covenant are also recognized within the same terminology to be understood as being “newly created” by the magnificent works and direct hand of God. Two Greek words are translated in the New Testament as “son,” teknon and huios, both words indicating sonship by parentage, one by physical descent, and the latter from the sense of adoption, which was relevant in both cases to the intended audience. Humankind become sons of God in the regenerative and adoptive sense by the acceptance of Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour (John 1:12; Galatians 3:26). (To be clear

All of the earliest textual sources interpret the “sons of God” as spiritual beings (a better term than angelic beings although both terms seem to have a place). References are found in the Enochian literature, the Dead Sea Scrolls (specifically the Genesis Apocryphon, the Damascus Document, 4Q180), Jubilees, the Testament of Reuben, 2 Baruch, Josephus, and the book of Jude (compare with 2 Peter 2). But to be clear, the only two identical occurrences of bene ha elohim in the Hebrew Bible are found in Job 1:6 and 2:1.

Claus Westermann claims that the text of Genesis 6 is based on an Ugaritic urtext. In Ugaritic, a cognate phrase is bn ‘il as referenced in the Ugaritic Baal Cycle.[4] The phrase bn ilm (“sons of the gods”) is also attested in Ugaritic texts as is the phrase phr bn ilm (“assembly of the sons of the gods”).[5] This will be in agreement with our views on the divine council as the article continues.

Some newer translations use the word “angel” in place of the more ancient term “sons of God” such as the Septuagint , the Codex Vaticanus,  Codex Alexandrinus, and many English versions. However, the term “angel” isn’t the best term in my opinion to use interchangeably with “sons of God. Some directly created by the hand of God were not spiritual beings in the Old Testament and we do not usually refer to one that has made a commitment to God and by Christian definition has been reclaimed, as a spiritual being as long as they are on the earth (yet they still biblically assume the title of “sons of God.”) Therefore, to be the most theologically correct, I would suggest the term “Sons of God” simply mean those that are directly created or (in a New Covenant sense) recreated by the hand of God. Spiritual beings would then be the best term for those that are celestial or spirit entities rather than human. Perhaps you could use the term “angel” for a Godly spiritual being and “demon” for a fallen spiritual being.

Getting back to Genesis 6, the first mention of the term “sons of God” in the Bible, early church fathers and Christian writers such as Justin Martyr, Eusebius, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and Commodianus also believed that the “sons of God” in Genesis 6:1–4 were fallen Spiritual beings who engaged in unnatural union with human women, resulting in the begetting of the Nephilim.[6] But in every case, I have seen, they also take on a larger scope of the term to include other definitions ascribed above within the narrative.

Before I move on, I need to address why “sons of Israel” is a poor interpretation in case you’re wondering. “sons of Israel” is used in a fair number of English translations. This mainly comes from the Masoretic Text which does not say “sons of God” but “sons of Israel” however in 4Q37 the term “sons of God” is used.[7] This is probably the root reading for the translation we see in the Septuagint as well. English translations based on the traditional Hebrew text of the Old Testament read “sons of Israel.” The phrase “sons of God” is found in the Dead Sea Scrolls which are much older than the traditional “received” texts. This conversation is going to be important to our upcoming section on the division of the nations at the Tower of Babel (Gen 11:1–9) which is connected to the Table of Nations of Gen 10, which directly precedes it. “The Table of Nations catalogs 70 nations but does not include Israel. Why? Because Israel did not exist at the time of the Babel event. This makes the reference to “sons of Israel” in Deuteronomy 32:8 illogical and unsustainable: “sons of God” was most likely changed to “sons of Israel” sometime after the Jewish community—in response to the new Christian church and its use of the Septuagint—“standardized” the Hebrew text in the second century AD.” [8] 

Most Christians refer to “the Fall” as the Garden of Eden when Adam and Eve give into temptation and is exiled from Eden. However, there are several “falls” in the Biblical Narrative to the extent that “falling” becomes a major theme of the entire Biblical text. In the Biblical account of the Edenic fall we are likely reading a dual fall, the fall of humanity as well as the spiritual being’s initial fall. I say this because had the serpent already “sinned” it most likely would not have been in Eden. “It’s important to note that the garden is described as a pure and undefiled sacred space where God exists with His pure and undefiled, Tov, creation.

The serpent and Humanity thus are dually falling as we read the story. The serpent is likely the one that rises as the leader of the fallen powers and principalities we describe as Satan in the New Testament. This is the act that begins the fall that seemingly results in 1/3 of all the angelic beings as we might arguably deduct from Revelation 12:3–4. This initial falling of spiritual beings is going to influence the choice by Yahweh to destroy the world with a flood and very much come full circle again as part of the story of Babel. The continuing fall of Spiritual beings goes on throughout the Biblical Text to be described as a war in heaven between Yahweh’s forces against those led by Satan and “the dragon”, identified as the devil or Satan, who was thrown down to the earth. Revelation’s war in Heaven is related to the idea of fallen angels, and possible parallels have been proposed in the Dead Sea Scrolls. As I have noted in many other articles, my view on revelation as a partial preterist is that most of it describes the spiritual state as to have already happened or be happening and much less about the end times than some people make it out to be. The first two chapters and the last two chapter of the Bible describe the Edenic plan lost and regained, all of the pages in between show what was lost to be regained. In a thematic sense these “middle pages” of the Bible describe the struggle over God’s treasured people. Exodus 19:4-6a describes this:

“You yourselves have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I carried you on eagles’ wings, and brought you to Myself. Now then, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you shall be My own possession [s’gullah or segullah] among all the peoples, for all the earth is Mine; and you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.”

If the people kept His covenant and obeyed His voice, they would be His own special possession amongst all the people… a holy, set-apart, nation, a royal priesthood described in the Old Testament and later the New Testament as recreated “sons of God.” In the Old Testament this theme is what the fallen spiritual beings are at war for; that they might “win over” humanity rather than Yahweh. Every time Humanity as a whole fail and is given over to “Satan” or the fallen powers and principalities it is described as a “fall” or as people that have “fallen away” from God. In this sense Israel becomes a picture of one that was set apart but fell. Today we are living in a world that is marred by the various rebellions and falls, but as Christians we are also in the upward trajectory of Jesus’ resurrection and ascension which by His atonement gives way to victory for those that accept Him and live in devotion as a New Covenant Set Apart Royal Priesthood. We are the agents of reconciliation. As New Testament priests we present God to the people and the people to God.

This also helps give us some understanding of the theological battle between the nation of Israel today still being considered as God’s “chosen nation;” or the understanding that Israel was, in the same way Adam and Eve were given the opportunity to represent God and his Kingdom, to the world (but failed). Heiser alluded to this in his book I Dare You Not to Bore Me with The Bible in saying “God, of course, doesn’t need to be protected by a zealous scribe or anyone else. Israel’s doctrine was that Yahweh was unique and above all other divine beings (Psa 29:1; 89:5–7). In a severe judgment, the nations at Babel were disinherited by Yahweh and given over to the administration of other gods (Deut 4:19–20; 32:8), whose actions would be judged by the God of Israel (Psa 82:1, 6). This paved the way for God to create a new people, Israel, in the very next chapter of Genesis. And ironically, it was through Abraham’s seed that the disinherited nations would be reclaimed (Gen 12:1–3).

Growing up as a kid, I am sure you read the Old Testament “gods” to be a figurative representation of ancient people’s imaginations. At some point though, you probably wondered, were these “real gods” and where did they come from? At a very basic level, you probably understand those that represent Yahweh to be angels and those that represent the fallen principalities to be demons. There are several books that go into this in detail with varying views but let me share with you a more concise biblical understanding. Starting with Eden, the serpent falls and likely becomes the leader of the fallen, whom we refer to as Satan, but we actually aren’t given that in the text; we have to come up with it by our own deduction. From that moment, many spiritual beings begin to fall. We also don’t have all the details of this. The main narrative of the Bible is to tell of God’s redemption plan for us, and we don’t have all the chronicles of the rest of the story as it is connected. We get bits and pieces of it, but the Bible hasn’t given us all of the side stories that accompany the main narrative.

The Torah uses the Hebrew terms מלאך אלהים (mal’āk̠ ‘ĕlōhîm; “messenger of God”), מלאך יהוה (mal’āk̠ Yahweh; “messenger of the Lord”), בני אלהים (bənē ‘ĕlōhîm; “sons of God”) and הקודשים (haqqôd̠əšîm; “the holy ones”) to refer to beings traditionally interpreted as Yahweh’s principalities. Examples of a supernatural messengers are the “Malak YHWH”, who are either a messenger from God, or possibly an aspect of God himself (such as the logos),[9] or God himself as the “theophanic angel.”[10]

At any rate, we get the idea that some of the Spiritual beings were fallen and in Genesis 6 they perhaps intermarry. Genesis 6 leads into the story of the flood (Genesis 6:9–9:17), as God saw that “the wickedness of man was great” and that “the earth was filled with violence.” God therefore decided to send a flood to wipe out humanity (Genesis 6:5, 11). The earth “being filled with violence” is a direct correlation to the result of God allowing mankind to choose between Tov and Ra. Interestingly, it’s relevant to understand that the waters of the flood were a source of chaos. The people who were creating violent chaos were ultimately given over into the same chaos that existed before the creation of His good order. In the
same way that we understand baptism today as a representation into a new way of life apart from our old chaotic existence, the flood account was a rebirth headed by Noah and his family. There is a connection between water, life and death that holds implication in the physical and spiritual realms.

We don’t know what God was thinking in terms of the flood and your thoughts are going to be influenced by your theology on omnipotence and omniscience. It seems that God used the flood as a reset from the evil that overcame the world due to the fallen spiritual beings. One might think that would take care of the problem but then a few chapters later we get to Babel which is also largely about fallen spiritual beings and the quickly corrupted world. If you follow Expedition 44 closely you will find that there are well respected differences in this area. For instance, Heiser and Walton (whom I hold both in very high regard) have both written great books on the subject and differ significantly. I think both make some great points.

Deuteronomy 4:19–20 and 32:8–9 represent two sides of the same coin. In Deuteronomy 32:8–9, God apportions the nations to the sons of God; here, however, God allots the gods to the nations. We have to wonder what exactly is going on. It seems that spiritual beings (perhaps largely those of the divine council) were put in charge of different nations and the nations began to worship the spiritual beings as or over Yahweh Himself and the beings essentially “fell” accepting that form of idolatrous worship. God then disinherited the nations and the fallen spiritual beings and would make a new nation (Israel) who were to be Yahweh’s chosen ones that would reclaim the earth for Yahweh. Israelites, in other words, believed that Yahweh, their own supreme, unique God, sentenced the nations and their gods to each other. At Babel, God, like a father dismissing and disinheriting his children, judges all the nations for their disobedience (Gen 11:1–9). Then, in the very next chapter, He calls Abraham (Gen 12:1–3), effectively starting over in creating an earthly human family for Himself. These other gods, which Deut 32:8 refers to as “the sons of God,” were members of Yahweh’s heavenly host. Scripture elsewhere condemns both the members of the nations and their gods for disloyalty and corruption (Psa 82).

This section in large part is paraphrased from Dr. Michael Heiser

The concept of cosmic geography is also important as everything under Yahweh was intended to be sacred and holy. The territory of other nations, according to Yahweh’s decree, belonged to other gods. You may consider something along the lines of God endowing each nation to a spiritual being and then we get the sense that all of those spiritual beings end up falling. Everything except Israel is lost. They are seemingly the only hope for the redemption of the fallen world. Israel then also fails but God makes a way through His Son. This lens of falling spiritual beings continues into the New Testament as corrupt gods both populate and control certain geographical regions such as Bashan. You might recall the story within the later named Cesarea-Philippi which was a center of Ba’al & Pan worship. Mt Hermon stood high in the background. Stories within the Israeli literature linked Ba’al with the evil dead, and with the underworld. Calling the place the gates of hell. In the book of Enoch the fallen angels were reputed to have arrived on Earth on Mt Hermon, and the entire region was considered cursed with evil. Mk 5:1-10 Mt 8:28-34 Lk 8:26-39 also tell strange stories of the underworld. If you haven’t read this post you might consider. Jesus basically attacked what were called the gates of hell and the rock mentioned at that time was Mt Hermon not Peter himself. AND the same mountain was the place of Jesus’ transfiguration further facing down those evil forces.

Paul used geographical terminology such as principalities, rulers, thrones, authorities, powers, dominions (Eph 6:12). In Acts 2, God begins to reclaim all the nations for Himself. It is interesting to compare the table of nations from the Old Testament to the new, both show the 70 lost that were to be regained after Pentecost and the sending of the Spirit. This may also convince you to take a closer look at Paul’s statement earlier in Ephesians 3:10 when he states “His intent was that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms,” only to say let’s not underestimate what God wants to or can collectively do through a multifaceted representation of his love and power through his bride, the church.

In many ways, once you take on a Deuteronomy 32 worldview, much of the scriptures you didn’t understand in the New Testament now make sense; you will see them with a new clarity. In the New Covenant our bodies are the sacred cosmic temple that should define set apart space and ground with every step.

This might surprise you, but the idea of Yahweh’s “divine council” is in all of the pages of Ancient Near Eastern History. Sumerian, Akkadian, Old Babylonian, Egyptian, Babylonian, and of course the Bible all share this common view.[11] Psalm 82 states “God stands in the divine assembly; He judges among the gods (אֱלֹהִ֔ים elohim). The Hebrew is “beqerev elohim”, “in the midst of gods”, and the word “qerev” if it were in the plural would mean “internal organs”[12]). In an ancient sense the internal organs were what gave life, they just didn’t understand exactly how they worked. Essentially in the same way they understood the organs of their body to give life but not know exactly how they worked, they felt the same way about this divine council. Later in this Psalm, the word “gods” is used (in the KJV): Psalm 82:6 – “I have said, Ye [are] gods; and all of you [are] children of the most High.” Instead of “gods”, another version has “godlike beings”,[13] but here again, the word is elohim/elohiym (Strong’s H430). This passage is quoted in the New Testament in John 10:34. In this way, the term “gods” seems to imply the understanding of a heavenly host that functions as a council to the MOST HIGH of them.

I Kings 22:19 describes Yahweh seated among “the whole host of heaven.” The first two chapters of the Book of Job describe the “sons of God” assembling in the presence of Yahweh, the “multitudes of heaven.” The Divine council and the challenger in Job should make a serious Bible reader ask some questions and work to reconcile their overall lens regarding how God was thought of within the early days of the Bible. I am sure this will be a new consideration for some readers, but although the book of Job was not penned until many years later, it likely describes a story that took place not long after creation and some may even argue before the fall as to align the challenger figure of Job and the serpent of the first fall as both likely being the same cosmic leader of the fallen world that the New Testament calls Satan. But as I alluded to earlier, fallen spiritual beings would likely have not been welcome in the presence of Yahweh (in a heavenly or Edenic setting) so it creates some interesting things to work through. To take this view (which I will say presumably would then explain some difficulties with more traditional perspectives of early Genesis), you would also have to accept the view that Adam was the first man created in and dwelling in the “upper” garden of Eden while other humans were on “lower” earth (using Tolkien style language). Thus, since Genesis 2:20 tells us that since “no suitable helper was found” Eve was created. This may imply there were other women, but they weren’t suitable for Adam. Most scholars strongly agree Adam was the first man, but the Bible doesn’t directly say that Eve was the first woman which would allow for the story of Job to be inserted into a Biblical timeline while Adam was alive. In both garden and job Narratives it would better explain why a “Satan figure” could have been in holy space. In the same way some see Song of Songs to be in some part a story of Adam and Eve which in a similar way would explain some theological difficulties of that story (namely how they seem to be sexually involved before marriage which later is against Torah law). Many scholars would agree that that Adam and Job lived 56 years contemporaneously which also supports the above minor view. Finally, seeing the divine council starting to fall early in the story also explains why God’s plan with Israel would be to reinstate them as a royal priesthood to partner with him in ruling over the earth after or during the time it is being reclaimed. The divine council would have failed, and God is looking to re-establish a ruling partnership with His newer creation of humankind, Israel.

It is interesting that we do not read the Edenic language from the creation of Adam and Eve again until Israel is recreated and instructed as priests in Leviticus 16. Israel’s temple was the place where the priest experienced God’s unique presence, and Eden was the place where Adam walked and talked with God. The same Hebrew verbal form (stem) mithallek used for God’s ‘walking back and forth’ in the Garden (Gen. 3:8), also describes God’s presence in the tabernacle (Lev. 26:12; Deut. 23:14 [15]; 2 Sam. 7:6-7).[14]  

Genesis 2:15 says God placed Adam in the Garden ‘to cultivate [i.e., work] it and to keep it’. The two Hebrew words for ‘cultivate and keep’ are usually translated ‘serve and guard [or keep]’ elsewhere in the Old Testament. When these two words occur together in the Old Testament (within an approximately 15-word range), they refer either to Israelites ‘serving’ God and ‘guarding [keeping]’ God’s word …or to priests who ‘keep’ the ‘service’ (or ‘charge’) of the tabernacle (see Num. 3:7-8; 8:25-26; 18:5-6; 1 Chr. 23:32; Ezek. 44:14). These are “jobs” that spiritual beings once were entrusted two but now are roles given to humanity.

Although we aren’t given more on the heavenly rebellion, some have wondered if God choosing humanity might have triggered the jealous falling away of the heavenlies or if God created humankind because of the Heavenly falling away. These are questions that the Bible doesn’t give us the answers to but much of theology it to determine what might be the best answers with the information we have been given and I also would asset is one of the dynamics of deeper discipleship to understand the Word of God and His ways.

In Genesis 1:36 we read, “Then God said, Let us make mankind in our image.” Many “back read” this to be the trinity, but perhaps a better hermeneutic would be to understand it as a divine council.

Looking back at the Biblical story, we see two “realms” or “environments.” Initially the Divine council would function in a partnership with God helping Him “rule” the world he creates. When relationship is broken and the council seems to “fall” it is offered to humankind to fulfill this plan in the return to Eden.

I recently wrote an article with John Walton that alludes to some thoughts on the Tower of Babel. As I mentioned earlier, Walton and Heiser have somewhat opposing views on this subject. You will notice that my view holds parts of both of their views. It is a bit of a hybrid. Here is the link to the article with Walton.

The Tower of Babel episode is key to understanding the thematic view of the fallen world and why it needs to be reclaimed in the name of Jesus. The term Babylon has come to have a connotation of those far from God or rival to Him. In Genesis 11 we read that it was at Babylon where people sought to “make a name (shem) for themselves” by building a tower that reached to the heavens, the realm of the “gods.” In verse 7 we see there is a “plural exhortation” similar to that of Genesis 1:26 (mentioned above). The verse has Yahweh proclaiming, “Let us go down and confuse their language.” But you will also notice that the plural announcement is followed by the singular action which denotes authority of Yahweh: “So Yahweh scattered them” (11:8). As I mentioned earlier, we don’t “see,” “get,” or “read” the entire story here either. But later in Deuteronomy 32:8–9 we get another piece of the puzzle.


When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when He divided mankind, he fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God. 9 But the LORD’s portion is his people, Jacob his allotted heritage.

As I imply earlier, the term “most high” in itself also denotes a Deuteronomy 32 Worldview. Elyon or El Elyon (Hebrew: אֵל עֶלְיוֹן‎ ʼĒl ʻElyōn), is an epithet that appears several times throughout the Bible as one of the names of Yahweh.  ʾĒl ʿElyōn is usually rendered in English as “God Most High”, and similarly in the Septuagint as ὁ Θεός ὁ ὕψιστος (“God the highest”). Most evangelical scholar agree that ʽElyōn is simply Yahweh, having given the other nations to other spiritual beings, ʽElyōn now takes Israel for himself under the name of the Tetragrammaton Yahweh.

Deuteronomy 32:8–9 therefore describes how Yahweh’s dispersal of the nations at Babel resulted in his disinheriting those nations as his people. This is the Old Testament equivalent of Romans 1:18–25, a familiar passage wherein God “gave [humankind] over” to their persistent rebellion. The statement in Deuteronomy 32:9 that “the LORD’s [i.e., Yahweh’s] portion is his people, Jacob his allotted heritage” tips us off that a contrast in affection and ownership is intended. Yahweh in effect decided that the people of the world’s nations were no longer going to be in relationship to him. He would begin anew. He would enter into covenant relationship with a new people that did not yet exist: Israel.

The text seems to suggest that what was created as good (TOV) by God had been lost. Since we don’t have that part of the story, we can only make deductions of how and what was lost.

The story of the Old Testament is about Israel versus the disinherited nations, and Yahweh versus the corrupt, rebel, elohim of those nations. Babel is a result of an entire people group believing their way was best, creating the term of what we know of as Imperialism, meaning to implement control over an entire people group or nation what we advocate as believing the right or only way to do something. This is the exact opposite result of holding fast to a covenant commitment to the creator himself.  

Walton leaves us with this thought, “The problem was not that they wanted to make a name for themselves. The problem was that they were exploiting a relationship with God to do so. And that is something with which we might be able to identify. Constructing sacred spaces should be motivated by wanting to make God’s name great, not by wanting to make our name great. How many of our great endeavors in the church—our programs, our building projects, our far-reaching podcasts, our great crowds of people—are focused on our glory and success rather than God’s?”

I would encourage you to read his article here.

Since the beginning of time the Bible tells us we are caught in a spiritual war within the cosmos and we are the central figures of the battle, the segullah. Perhaps spiritual warfare looks different today than during the freeing of the Israelites in Egypt, but perhaps not.

As I allude to earlier, you will gain a different lens when understanding scripture through this worldview. I will venture to say it will give you an understanding to the text you didn’t have. It creates less theological gymnastics and follows a better hermeneutic. It is simply better theology.

Perhaps seeing the plan through this lens changes the picture for you. knowing this information, how then should I live? As believers we now have authority on earth and in the name of Jesus can have power over the fallen spiritual beings as we partner with everything TOV and are supported by the heavenly hosts. The kingdom of Satan has been broken (Colossians 2:14-15) and we have been raised and seated with Christ Jesus (Ephesians 2:6). Now we are co-heirs with Him (Romans 8:17). In this sense, Christ became the ultimate mediator—reconciling every nation to God. Victory has been claimed and we now are the agents to regain the world through the name and power of Jesus. A return to TOV.

We are on an upward trajectory in Jesus! We have everything we need to live completely redeemed, sanctified, set apart lives! You no longer need to be entangled to a fallen chaotic world. Make decisions to break those strongholds in the name of Jesus and put the ways of the world behind you. Don’t look back and pursue the king with every strand of your being; your time, treasure, and talent as a complete living sacrifice for Jesus and those that need Him.

  1. Douglas, Tenney & Silva 2011, p. 1384
  2. The lexical item in Hebrew: אלהים, ĕlōhîm, means “God” but uses the Hebrew plural morpheme -im. Although ʼĕlōhîm is plural in form, it is understood in the singular sense. Therefore, the English translation is “God” rather than “Gods”.
  3. C. Westermann, Genesis, BKAT 1/3. (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1982), 42
  4. Mark S. Smith The Ugaritic Baal cycle 1994 p249 “all the divine sons” (or “all the sons of God”). ESA sources may support this point.”
  5. G. Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren Theological dictionary of the Old Testament 2000 p130
  6. IBID Douglas, Tenney & Silva 2011, p. 1384
  7. “Biblical Dead Sea Scrolls – 4Q37 Deuteronomy”. dssenglishbible.com. Retrieved 2019-03-17.
  8. Heiser, The Unseen Realm
  9. Frederick Copleston, A History of Philosophy, Volume 1, Continuum, 2003, p. 460.
  10. Francis Brown, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs, eds.: A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, p. 521″. Retrieved 30 July 2012.
  11. Sakenfeld, Katharine ed., “The New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible” Volume 2, pg 145, Abingdon Press, Nashville.
  12. HamMilon Hechadash, Avraham Even-Shoshan, copyright 1988.
  13. godlike beings, in JPS 1917″. Retrieved 18 March 2013.
  14. G. K. Beale, The Temple and the Church’s Mission: A biblical theology of the dwelling place of God [Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press; 2004], p. 66
Comments Off on Understanding a Deuteronomy 32 Worldview Posted in ADVENTURE

Renouncing the World for sole allegiance to Jesus and His Kingdom

“So therefore, any one of you who does not renounce all that he has, cannot be my disciple.” – Luke 14:33

If you know me at all, you know that I am an “ALL IN” guy for the Kingdom who believes we shouldn’t be holding anything back for Jesus. Luke 14 calls us to be rival to anything that opposes Jesus, but with the context that even our enemies might be won over to Him.

“RENOUNCE ALL” – Jesus had some “HARD SAYINGS” but this one might take the cake! Today in our American Christianity or churchianity paradigm we seem to just simply ignore this one! This flies in the face of health and wealth prosperity preaching seeming to identify that perhaps Christians should sell everything (Christ’s words to the rich young ruler and the Acts 2 mindset) and live as paupers for the kingdom. And to be clear, I do think it takes on that tone.

But let’s take a closer look, in Greek the phrase is ouk apotassetai, which literally would be to “not place in order from”. What’s very interesting to me is in the New Testament every single time the verb apostasso is used it is in the middle voice. I would venture to say this is the only treatment of a verb this way in the entire text. It is very rare and unusual, so it makes me take special interest and ask why? When we say to “not renounce” something then, it takes a sense of “to place in order away from myself”. Understanding the literal translation of the Greek phrase means that when we read paying attention to the grammar of the Greek language you come out understanding that the mindset is to restructure or reorder, we give up chaos for order to come to proper balance in the kingdom. A life of shalom. So, if I had to translate the middle voice thought into this (as some translations like NT Wright’s have attempted) it might better read, “No one can be my disciple who does not take up the proper priorities in terms of possessions for Godly order over the world’s chaos.” Of course that doesn’t read well! Furthermore, the middle voice almost always implies that Christ is taking the action for us, that it is something out of your control once you come to the posture called for, usually devotion but in this case is actually a step more than that -it leans towards the harder definition of Jesus into discipleship. (What seems to follow the progression of fan > follower > disciple.)

If you don’t take on the posture of Jesus with your worldly things you can’t possibly enter into Jesus’ definition of discipleship. They must be renounced or completely re-ordered. So, the takeaway is what you can’t do is keep the prioritization of the world and still attest to be on the track to discipleship.

Everything is His and if you attest to be “all in”, than nothing should be your own. That’s why tithing in the New Covenant is a hard conversation. Tithing along with the Torah in the Old Testament was to be a stop gap until all things could be reconciled by Jesus. Now that “WE” have Jesus everything is His. If your on track your not thinking Tithe or Torah your thinking everything! (YOUR LIFE) Nothing is your stuff or your time. And the path to sanctification is more of Him and His kingdom ways and less of your world ways. A complete transformation that finishes eschatologically (but in que on this world) with you being made completely into the image of Jesus.

You don’t need to “create time or space” for Jesus if all of your time and space is for Jesus. You no longer have claim to anything of the world, YOU HAVE RENOUNCED THAT NOTION!

If you catch yourself beginning to collect things for your earthly storehouse that has no place for kingdom endeavors your posture for the kingdom is out of balance. You are mis-stepping the path of discipleship. The text says anyone off course can’t be my disciple. Do you want to be a disciple? Are you willing to come to a complete posture before the Lord to enter this covenant? Are you willing to “give up” everything to be a disciple?

One reason generations are disengaging from the church is because of the mixed messages the church has sent for years. Many people have become disillusioned with the division in the American church and one of the reasons is because we’ve exchanged a biblical gospel that exalts Jesus above everything in the world for an American (progressive) gospel that prostitutes Jesus for the sake of comfort, control, power, politics and prosperity in this world. I’m compelled to pray, God, we want to renounce it all. I pray that we don’t settle as disciples of Christ. I pray that we might be in absolute devotion to Jesus’ deeper covenant relationship both in this life and eschatologically in the coming kingdom.

In the last 10 years there have been several books written that speak to this:

  • Will Ryan – This is the Way (Series)
  • Boyd – The Myth of a Christian Nation
  • Zahnd – Postcards from Babylon
  • Bates – Salvation By Allegiance Alone 
  • Sprinkle – Exiles: The Church in the Shadow of Empire (Church in the Shadow of Empire)
  • Wright & Bird – Jesus and the Powers: Christian Political Witness in an Age of Totalitarian Terror and Dysfunctional Democracies
  • Platt – Don’t Hold Back: Leaving Behind the American Gospel to Follow Jesus Fully 
  • But before all of these there was a classic called – Persecution in the Early Church, A Chapter on the History of Renunciation, by Herbert B. Workman, in 1906

The opening pages of the New Covenant declared this same philosophy by Holy Cannon. John the Baptist was the precursory proclaimer of this truth as ‘the voice of one crying in the wilderness, prepare the Way of the Lord’. The explosive scene that his ministry encapsulated could be summarized by the title we all know him by: The Baptiser.

Matthew 3:1-3

In those days John the Baptist came, preaching in the wilderness of Judea and saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near.” This is he who was spoken of through the prophet Isaiah:

This message was approved by Heaven through the institution of baptism as an expression of forsaking all other allegiant positions as a returning to the One True and Living God. His message was demonstrated by a public display of that newfound loyalty through the waters of baptism signifying a washing away of the old for the embracing of the new. This message spread like wildfire among the religious Jews and even impacted the gentile population in their midst.

In keeping with the divine purposes of his message, he adamantly declared that those wishing to embrace this new allegiant life (the path to discipleship) MUST renounce all other places of faith and fully submit to the Kingdom life.

A requirement for John was the ‘produced fruit’ consistent with a changed heart. John was not looking for new FaceBook subscribers, or popularity in his ministry… the purpose was to transform lives. This was accomplished through radical, immediate, and noticeable lifestyle reflections consistent with true, sincere, and authentic repentance. What John was doing, and ultimately what Jesus declared in His Gospel, would find direct and deadly conflict with the hierarchy of Judaism and the control of the Roman system. So deadly in fact, both John and Jesus were martyred for their unified message.

In a life application aspect what John was requiring was real, daily change. The tax collectors were told to stop their extortion. The soldiers were commanded to treat others with respect and to cease being bullies for personal gain. The religious were charged with throwing away their masks of self-righteousness and hypocrisy and embracing a non-legalistic view of worship.

For us today, this message should still resonate as loudly and powerfully. What should we cast aside for the throne of Jesus in our soul to be unchallenged? Where in our hearts, attitudes, finances, relationships, and time are we being prodded by this message of complete allegiance do we find the world challenging the supremacy of Christ?

______________________________________________________________

During the first few centuries a great conflict arose between Rome and those obedient to Yahweh. By Roman theory, the national state was the one sole society that must engross (take up, control) every interest of its residents: religion, social, political and humanitarian. In other words, the state should be the supreme authority in one’s life. Romans wanted Christians to take their part as loyal citizens of the empire, discharging the dues, performing the obligations of a citizen, displaying complete loyalty. The Christian replied, “We worship no other.”

Under Rome, all new “societies” were required to obtain a charter or permission from the emperor or from the senate. If the group was not granted permission under the state, they were considered “rival” to the state. The extreme penalty was treason, punishable by death. Christians were not persecuted because of their creed, but because of the absoluteness of the Christian faith. 



To say that Jesus is Lord was a statement against the empire. “No King but Jesus” became the rallying cry of the true believer and also the last words of many persecuted and martyred Christians.

The Jewish–Roman wars were a series of large-scale revolts by the Jews (and / or Christians) of Judaea and the Eastern Mediterranean against the Roman Empire between 66 and 135 CE. [1] These wars were in large part over the “kingship” of the peoples. Could Rome demand sole authority? Although the Diaspora of the Jews started many years before this, the Jewish–Roman wars had a devastating impact on the Jewish people, transforming them from a major population in the Eastern Mediterranean into a dispersed and persecuted minority. [2] Most scholars would consider this charge of Jews and Christians to not give allegiance to Rome over God and / or Jesus as the major distinguishing feature of what defined an all-in follower of God or Jesus. The First Jewish-Roman War culminated in the destruction of Jerusalem and other towns and villages in Judaea, resulting in significant loss of life and a considerable segment of the population being uprooted or displaced. Those who remained were stripped of any form of political autonomy. Subsequently, the brutal suppression of the Bar Kokhba revolt resulted in even more severe consequences. Judea witnessed a significant depopulation, as many Jews were killed, expelled, or sold into slavery. [4]

Jews were banned from residing in the vicinity of Jerusalem, after the central worship site of Second Temple Judaism, the Second Temple in Jerusalem, was destroyed by Titus’s troops in 70 CE. [5] The destruction of the Temple led to a transformation in Jewish religious practices, emphasizing prayer, Torah study, and communal gatherings in synagogues outside of Jerusalem. This pivotal shift laid the foundation for the emergence of Rabbinic Judaism, which has been the dominant form of Judaism since late antiquity, after the codification of the Babylonian Talmud. [6] But this also gave way to the rise or continuation of Christianity. As Rabbinical Judaism spiraled down, Christianity rose up taking on many of the same “anti-empirical” thoughts towards the ruling over them and their religion by Rome. Perhaps more than before Christians were now vowing allegiance to Jesus over any other form of worldly government. Persecution has always had a purifying effect on the true people of God.

By the third century, emperors were realizing that the Church was not a mere body of anarchists to be rooted out wherever necessary. The Church was fast becoming a rival organization of growing strength and power. The aggressiveness of Christ’s followers was viewed by Rome as a very real threat to their worldwide domination.

By the middle of the third century, the more energetic rulers organized efforts to crush out the Church by the use of all the resources of the state. The police measures taken at Antonines (Roman Emperors who ruled between 138 and 180: Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius) gave place to a civil war without quarter (mercy offered). But, unlike all other civil wars, only one side was armed. Strange to say, this was the side that was ultimately defeated. On the one hand were the immense resources of the Empire, centralized in one supreme will. On the other side was the PASSIVE RESISTANCE OF CHRIST’S FOLLOWERS, making the state’s massive recourses useless. The Christians were a peculiar people, with peculiar views of their own. They wore no distinctive garb (clothing: outward appearance) in the world, yet they were definitely not of the world. “We are supposed to live aloof from crowds,” said Tertullian, an early Church leader. [7] Their opponents phrased the matter differently. They are “a people who separate themselves and break away from the rest of mankind.”

The pacifistic early church Christians seem to have gotten Jesus words a bit “more right” compared to the war mongers of 70 AD. It was hard to find an occupation in which the Christian could engage without compromising with idolatry. Some said that if they did not compromise, they would be cut off from every means of livelihood. Tertullian replied that, “faith must despise starvation as much as it despises death.” [8] But the more the Christians prospered, the more their neighbors “hated them” or perhaps “grew envious of them.” The Christians professed, “nothing was more alien to them than politics.” [9]

In practice, Christianity and the Empire proved fundamentally antagonistic. They were rivals in conception and method. Each claimed to be a kingdom of universal sway; each created a Church of universal obligation, each demanded absolute loyalty to its supreme lord. Between Caesar and Christ there could be no compromise. [10]

BART D. EHRMAN

Persecution was the direct outcome of the Christian doctrine of RENUNCIATION. To renounce meant to disown, reject and disclaim. The early Christians were renouncing their allegiance to the Roman Empire and denying any connection to it. In other words, the Christian ceased to be his own master, ceased to have his old environment, ceased to hold his old connections with the state. In everything, he became the bond-servant to Jesus Christ. In everything he owed his supreme allegiance and fealty (loyalty) to the new empire with Jesus Christ as Head. “We engage in these conflicts as men whose very lives are not our own… We have no master but God,” said Tertullian. [11]

Scriptures for further study and consideration:

_____________________________________________________________________

Written by Dr. Will Ryan and Dr. Steve Cassell

Works Cited:

  1. Bloom, J.J. 2010 The Jewish Revolts Against Rome, A.D. 66–135: A Military Analysis. McFarland.
  2. Hitti, Philip K. (2002). Hitti, P. K. Gorgias Press. ISBN 9781931956604. Archived from the original on 15 April 2021. Retrieved 28 July 2022.
  3. Schwartz, Seth (2014). The ancient Jews from Alexander to Muhammad. Cambridge. pp. 85–86. ISBN 978-1-107-04127-1. OCLC 863044259.
  4. Taylor, J. E. (15 November 2012). The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea. Oxford University Press.
  5. Armstrong (2011). Jerusalem: One City, Three Faiths. p. 163.
  6. Karesh, Sara E. (2006). Encyclopedia of Judaism.
  7.  Harrison, Peter (June 2017). “‘I Believe Because it is Absurd’: The Enlightenment Invention of Tertullian’s Credo”. Church History.
  8. Gonzáles, Justo L. (2010). “The Early Church to the Dawn of the Reformation”. The Story of Christianity. Vol. 1. New York: HarperCollins Publishers. 
  9. This translation was created in conjunction with the Patristics Project at Faulkner University.
  10. Bart D. Ehrman is the author of The Triumph of Christianity and the author or editor of more than 30 books, including the New York Times bestsellers Misquoting Jesus and How Jesus Became God. Ehrman is a professor of religious studies at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, and a leading authority on the New Testament and the history of early Christianity.
  11. Tertullian: Douglas Powell, Tertullianists and Cataphrygians, Vigiliae Christianae 29 (1975)

BAPTISM

Baptism, then, is not what produces salvation. It “saves” in that it reflects a heart decision: a pledge of loyalty to the risen Savior. In effect, baptism in New Testament theology is a loyalty oath, a public avowal of who is on the Lord’s side in the cosmic war between good and evil.

Michael Heiser, The Unseen Realm

Baptism is important. In many ways, I think it is the purest example still intact today of what it meant to make an allegiant statement as they did in Jesus’ day. I am often asked what do you say when you baptize someone? People question as if there is some kind of magical phrase or potion that comes with Baptism. It probably won’t surprise you that I don’t really like the usual repetition of words that often come with baptismal “services”. You have probably heard a pastor proclaim something like, “in obedience to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and upon your profession of faith, I baptize you in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Amen.” It’s not that I have a big problem with these words, but my issue is more that the repetition of liturgy from scripture today probably wasn’t really what the authors had in mind here and in other similar situations such as the Lord’s prayer. But that doesn’t make it wrong to do so either. The words of baptism are important whether you see the act as a sacrament or more of an allegiant profession of faith. Nearly everyone sees baptism as an outward sign of a decision that has happened in the head and the heart. It’s the best picture of Biblical 1st century allegiance still found within our modern western culture.

“Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.” Romans 6:3-4 ESV

We usually think of life at baptism, not death. We want to think joy and often in western thinking death is not joyous, but Paul’s culture (yes, I continue to arguably allude that Paul wrote Romans or at least had it penned) didn’t think like this. Death was often honorably esteemed and eventually everyone would die.

So why does Paul choose to use the phrase baptized into death? We need to consider how first century followers viewed baptism. Within Judaism, but also other religions baptism was a standard practice of renewal or cleansing.

Without venturing too far into this, baptism in the New Testament signifies an allegiant lifelong commitment (purification) similar to what God asked of Abraham in the covenant of circumcision. There are several connections that are important there.

At the time when this was written, the Greek term (which we transliterate “baptism”) was also a verb used to describe violent acts like drowning. We also see this similar usage in Luke 12:50 and several other places in the Bible. The author wants the reader to consider complete (possibly even violent) death of the old life. All that a person was, any influences you may have been under, any oaths of allegiance, and claims to who you were, even to the point of what you might have been completely immersed (water drowning metaphor) into that kind of living (antinomianism). Paul says it is now dead, all of it.

That’s why when Jesus says the centurion in Matthew 8 has more faith than anyone else (I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith) it was likely a death sentence, and the centurion was ready for that. He literally was ready to give up his oath of allegiance and life spiritually, but also physically. (That would have been the natural consequence for a centurion that placed their allegiance to anyone other than the emperor.)

When we choose to bury all that was us, we in turn accept new life in Christ pledging the reciprocal dance of grace. I have used this expression several times in the book. [The Roman writer] Seneca explains the image of three dancing connected by grace: a benefit ‘passing from hand to hand nevertheless returns to the giver; the beauty of the whole is destroyed if the course is anywhere broken’ (Seneca, [De Beneficiis, meaning “On Favors”] 1.3.3-4). The “three graces” picture visually represented how grace was understood to function in the first century Greco-Roman world in which Paul wrote. Grace (charis) originated with a generous giver usually thought of as the Benefactor. Often the Benefector was introduced to one in need by a mediator. The gift was then accepted by the recipient (client) who in his or her thankfulness and gratitude in turn extended the gift (grace) to others, and this in turn benefited the original giver. The recipient in many ways became a representative of the Benefactor to those in the Benefactors society. Coaching or mentoring towards what the Benefactor desired was often nurtured through the mediator to the recipient. It became a continual relationship between the three entities. In this unbroken circle, everyone was understood to benefit. In this sense, God works through Christ in us as we freely receive the gift and continue to give all of it to others as they are then introduced in the same way through the mediator to the father. Everything is freely given.

We often use the word “adopted” when describing our new relationship in Him. In the Greco Roman Empire adopted beings could not be disowned as natural born children could be. When you were “adopted in” you were guaranteed the new life promised to you by those that gave the pledge to adopt. You were an heir that could not be passed over in terms of inheritance. It was a new covenant that was cut for you. It was a free will reciprocal agreement even though it seemed like the party adopting had everything to lose and nothing to gain; but as we all know with children that isn’t the case. The blessing is reciprocal.

Baptism is a confirmation to lifelong allegiant faith, a way of life given to king Jesus. An entrance into a beautiful, joyful, reciprocal dance of grace but starts by putting to death “all” that you were. You are no longer your own but His, a new creation by which your very life is an image of His whom you belong. He is in you and your life is a temple that bears His name. Your very essence is to bear the light of Jesus and extend that gift to others. This is not of yourself but only in the grace of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

In life you are now set apart to serve. The Hebrew word ‘abad (עבד) can be translated as “to work,” “to serve,” or “to worship.” This is the word that is used to describe the original mission for humankind.

In essence, through baptism, we return to our cosmic calling. In faith, we worship as we serve. All that we are, we are in Christ.

This article is an excerpt (Chapter 9) from Dr. Will Ryan’s book, This is the Way to Covenant Community.

Want Even More? Dive in here:

Who do you claim as father?

Luke, I am your father! Every 80’s and 90’s guy knows exactly the implications of this phrase. Today we live in a fatherless world. There are so many implications of this, but one of them is the Christian mainstream claiming things of the Lord, yet in actuality is far from the galaxy of their father. I would urge a return to covenant living.

In Hebrew Av hamon goyim means Abraham would be the father of many, those inside and outside of his immediate family – the regathering of the lost nations (Deuteronomy 32). Today, Christians believe they are faithful to the same God, Yahweh; but if we would have lived during the time this sentiment was expressed to Abraham (the intended audience of the text) I doubt our modern-day actions or fruit would have been recognized as the kind of devotion or allegiance God was asking for. As I write this, Four Southern Baptist theologians and pastors intend to ask messengers to this year’s Southern Baptist Convention annual meeting to adopt the Nicene Creed as part of the denomination’s official faith statement and it begs the question, what does it look like in a modern world to fulfill what Yahweh asked of us?

According to Rabbi Shraga Freedman, “Even when non-Jewish nations recognize the existence of a Supreme Being and the need to serve Him, they advance many distorted notions of what He expects of His creations.  Throughout history, their warped perceptions of religious devotion have caused untold pain and suffering to myriads of innocent human beings.”[1] 

At first contemplation you might realize that if you aren’t observant to the Torah then you certainly can’t claim Abraham as his spiritual father, and thus what His father Yahweh asked of Him and those to come. You aren’t of the same lineage. But Jesus also redefines a few things for us, and I am thankful for that!

Skip Moen interjects, “God promised that Abraham would become the father of many goyim, that is, the father of many who do not descend from his biological line.  But this does not mean these goyim are free to make up their own religious practices.  What it means is precisely what James said at the Jerusalem council in the first century.  “For from ancient generations Moses has those who preach him in every city, since he is read in the synagogues every Sabbath” (Acts 15:21).  We must remember that the promise to Abraham is predicated upon a prior statement, namely, “Walk before Me, and be blameless.”  It is hardly conceivable that walking before Abraham’s God is a matter of personal taste.” [2]

I have written a couple of books on the return to covenant practice. That doesn’t mean that all modern Christians should go back to observing the law, but it might carry some implications. I am saying quite clearly that modern day Christianity is a better picture of unfaithfulness than faithfulness. The primary mission of Jesus was to a lost and carnal world to be reconciled back to Yahweh. The religious leaders of His day had become the farthest from His father. I am not sure that has changed any today.

Jesus was observant. This is a call back to being holy, to leave everything on the beach having no other idols before you and completely follow the Lord. Today if you and your family are largely indistinguishable from those of the world you likely aren’t living by the covenant given. The God of Abraham well might be trying to get your attention by calling out your name and urging you to come back into the fold of his love compassion and mercy. Thankfully that calling is from Yahweh and not a “Darth Vader” father figure that has left this world lacking in so many ways. Return to what is TOV.

[1] Rabbi Shraga Freedman, Living Kiddush Hashem, p. 31.

[2] https://skipmoen.com/

The Posture of the Heart – With John Walton

I have come to cringe when people say things like, God is only concerned about your heart. Or perhaps using the semi-excusive example of David having a “heart after God” all the while being a murderer and adulterer (which clearly doesn’t match up with the character of God). I likely wouldn’t let my kids hang out with him. Clearly so many scriptures continue to share how important it is to have a heart for God, and I would fully agree, even though I view complete devotion as so much more than just the motives of the heart.

  1. Matthew 6:21: “For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.”
  2. Proverbs 3:5: “Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding.”
  3. Proverbs 4:23: “Above all else, guard your heart, for everything you do flows from it.”
  4. Romans 12:2: “Do not conform to the pattern of this world but be transformed by the renewing of your mind.” (a quick word study of “nous” will link the heart and mind)
  5. Proverbs 23:26: “My son, give me your heart and let your eyes delight in my ways.”
  6. Psalms 51:10: “Create in me a pure heart, O God, and renew a steadfast spirit within me.”
  7. Psalms 73:26: “My flesh and my heart may fail, but God is the strength of my heart and my portion forever.”
  8. Philippians 4:7: “And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.”

John Walton has been a good friend and lifelong mentor to me that started back when I was a freshman at Moody Bible Institute in 1993, and I asked for his thoughts on the subject as I continue to wrestle through them. We went back and forth working through some things that have influenced my opinion in this conversation. I will indicate his words in our private conversation using quotation and suggest articles for further study.

To start with, I might even suggest, as I allude to in nearly every article, that we might need to rethink a few things according to a better hermeneutic towards the exegesis of the text rather than popular opinion or tradition. John recently wrote a book entitled Wisdom for Faithful Reading that I would suggest starting with. John suggests that the popular text for David having a heart after God’s heart is usually misinterpreted. In 1 Sam 13:14 the expression used there is used elsewhere in the OT (as well as often in the ANE) not to describe the inclinations of the king (one who pursues knowledge and relationship with the God), but to describe the sovereign choice of the deity (who for his own reasons has chosen the king to rule). So, the claim is not that David pursues the heart of God as a spiritually mature person rather than pursuing his own ends; instead, David is the man that God has pursued with his own criteria in mind rather than Saul, who was someone who met the criteria of the people. It is a statement about God’s sovereignty, not about David’s spirituality or piety. It is therefore not something that we can aspire to in our own lives. He has written an excellent article on this topic here.

It was interesting that in the Old Testament a great amount of wealth was used to construct the temple and tabernacle (it is somewhat ambiguous as to whether this was God’s asking or solely the doing of the people in an effort to worship God similar to the way the rest of the world honored and appeased the gods). This wealth has no value to God, but the gold meant something to them. The gracious donation or perhaps giving it up was possibly viewed as an outward sign of the internal heart. John would say that “We honor God with our extravagance in giving that which is of value to us. God does not need what we give.” (But seems to be honored by the giving through a pure and undefiled heart.)

John continues, “we can also see a similar picture of this heart in giving when Jesus responded to Judas’ expressed concern for the poor in the context of Jesus’ feet being anointed. Yes, the money could have gone to the poor, but expressing the worthiness of Jesus through the extravagant expenditure with no return was considered not only legitimate, but commendable.”

Today I often wonder whether God smiles at megachurch budgets and building campaigns that resemble much of the world in the name of Jesus. The scripture would suggest that the answers might lie in the motive of the heart rather than on the extravagance of the expenditure. “God smiled on the extravagance of the woman who anointed his feet with oil, and, since he called for great extravagance in the Tabernacle and Temple, I assume he smiled on those projects, but only to the degree that they were carried out with his honor in mind, not their own.” We could also take into account the widow’s mite or the widow’s offering as presented in the Synoptic Gospels (Mark 12:41–44, Luke 21:1–4) Jesus clearly “smiled on” her and commended her sacrifice—an issue of the heart and extravagant even in its lack of relative worth.

Often it seems that what might at one time be a pure motive becomes defiled and abhorrent to the Lord. Some might say that the golden calf was fashioned as an emblem animal or medium to God or possibly a pedestal for the Lord to be invited to come down and dwell amongst the Israelites. However, God is still displeased as John explains that this was a violation of the second commandment. In a similar way the Tower of Babel may have started out as an invitation for God to dwell with the people (which seems to be God’s desire – tabernacling with His people); but then becomes defiled also by the disobedience of the hearts. (Read more about Babel from John’s account.)

John would share that the medium is the message, but motives can corrupt the medium (heart). Yet, any given medium may be used well or badly by different people at different times. Jesus gives an example as he criticizes how the temple is being used (casting out moneychangers) revealing their impure motives yet affirming the value of the temple when rightly perceived (as His father’s house.)

Often, I wonder about the progression to which we allow the defiling of our heart’s original pure intentions. Some things have the original intent of honoring the Lord but quickly become an extravagance that only serves our own egos or only seeks to oblige God.

Spending in the name of God is hard to figure out sometimes. I have so many questions for God, was the church ever intended to be the religious bank it has become? (Acts seems to suggest people directly giving to the needs of the body not the church acting as the collection agency, but there are several passages that may speak otherwise.) What does He think of a modern church budget that is 50% or even 95% salaries and mortgage? Why isn’t the church caring for widows, the poor, and the broken? (Our “evil” government seems to do this much better than the global church.) We are told to not have judgmental hearts, but to test these things by the spirit and know them by their fruit. One of my good friends leads a church in a lower income area and runs out of seats every Sunday, has leaky roofs over kid’s heads, and can hardly pay the measly mortgage every month while the megachurch the next town over is spending 75K on new LED screens and smoke machines every other year with a tech budget that is 10x more than the net worth of my friend’s entire organization. What would God say?

Sometimes it is hard to see whether the extravagance happening around us in the name of the Lord is an outward sign of a great heart, or an idolatrous tower. Sorry, no “answers” today… just a rambling of my heart!

More on my good friend John Walton.

Covenant Relationship

Marriage is a covenant relationship instituted by the Lord. The term covenant in Hebrew (berith) has a literal meaning of ‘a cut where blood flows’ and is used to accurately portray the strongest of all possible relationship structures we could divinely engage in. This word and concept is one of the largest hermeneutics in scripture and is a necessary component for true revelation of the scriptures, the nature of God, and our new life in Christ Jesus and the basis for all relationships.

Written by Dr. Steve Cassell and edited by Dr. Will Ryan

When I was younger I was entangled with the ‘thug’ or ‘gang’ life because, well, I was stupid. I can almost hear the diverse reactions to that revelation among the readership… from guffaws, to eye-rolls, and possibly a few raised eyebrows of shock. Nevertheless, it is an accurate historical reality. The main compelling factor propelling me in that direction was the deep longing of my heart for a real, committed relationship. One of the first things I learned about gang life was the mantra, “Blood in, blood out”. This just simply meant that you were required to shed blood (your own in a self-sacrificial activity like gang-banging in another gang’s territory that would likely get you thrashed or even killed) or the shedding of innocent blood in an armed robbery or potentially a murder. There was no way into the gang without bloodshed. Once you were in, there was no way out without bloodshed. This mostly meant that you were going to die if you ever wanted out, but in some instances, the exiting member would be ‘allowed’ to go through a gauntlet-style beating that would usually hospitalize them and complicate their health for the remainder of their life. I know it sounds barbaric, but I was desperate for authentic relationships. Ultimately (by the enormous grace of God) I chose a different path which mostly had to do with a God-sent gift sashaying into my cosmos by the name of Kay… who is now my covenant bride. We are most definitely committed unto the blood of self-sacrifice to one another without hesitation or consideration.

Suppose you, our reader, are married or intend to enter into the sacred and divine institution of a marriage covenant at some point in the future. In that case, these words must have a powerful resonation in your soul (nephesh, psyche). I have been doing full or part-time ministry for almost thirty years and the degradation of the covenantal aspect of marriage has been nearly destroyed by our ever-darkening world and the decay of basic humanity as we are propagandized into some animalistic attitudes towards relationships and society.

When a couple is joined in Holy Matrimony the vow is something akin to:

“I swear to honor and love you;

            In riches and in poverty,

            In sickness and in health,

            For the better or the worse,

            Until death do we part,

            So help me God.”

Those are not just words… they are a covenant vow unto another person sworn in the presence of and under the submission to our Great God. In actuality, in antiquity, this was a “blood in, blood out” solemn oath giving God (and the gathered witnesses) the right to punish, even unto the shedding of blood, either participant if they violate that covenant vow. God’s perfect intention in marriage was ‘blood in’ (the blood of the hymen on the wedding night) and ‘blood out’ which was the ‘until death do we part’ provision.

The first thing we, as the image-bearers of God to a broken mirror of the world, need to embrace is doing our marriages the way God says, not the way culture or our fickle emotions scream. If that is a place you dare to transverse with Doc Ryan and I, then I double-dog-dare you to read on…

Glad you are here this far!

Since you have determined to do the hard thing and stay in this message to this point, firstly I want to applaud you for being willing to be a hero (heroes do hard things) and also warn you that you will be shunned as a rarity in our modern world. But consider that God loves to use heroes and rare people to do great things.

______________________________________________

Throughout the Bible God uses the relationship of Marriage to give us an earthly or physical example of our relationship to God and others. You don’t have to be married to glean from this discussion. God positions himself as the forever faith pursuer, the lover that will never leave us despite our shortcomings and continual failure and perhaps even unfaithfulness. Love, compassion, grace, mercy, and forgiveness are just a snapshot of this unending example to us. The Hebrew verb for cling is davaq and is the word used for glue. The implication is longevity, reliability, and consistency in faithful commitment.

What’s important is this:  a husband is to cling to his wife in the same way that we are to cling to God.  There are several other verses in the Bible that portray the same analogy.  In each one, God is represented by the woman, not the man; the scriptures seem to imply a reciprocal role of equality that compliments the relationship by each person’s gifts. A reciprocal circle of grace accepted and freely returned.

______________________________________________

Every relationship is regularly challenged by conflict. There is an undeniable truth to this statement: “Familiarity breeds contempt”. It is true in many Christians relating to their relationship with God and also true in human relationships. The time of Jesus’ life and ministry was regularly hindered by the masses of people who could not reconcile the idea of Jesus being all human and all God at the same time. The majority of people in His time rejected Him because they justified their devaluation of Him based upon His humanity.

Due to the conflict these religious hypocrites could not reconcile they all missed out on the greatest blessing, the greatest gift, and the greatest possible salvation that would give them the greatest life ever. Conflict steals away the blessings of God from one’s life. As people of the Kingdom of our God, we need to walk out a better way of dealing with ‘conflict and resolve’.

In my attempt at brevity, I am going to only give you the ‘big two’.

  • Pride (me first, my wants, my ways, my control)
  • Lack of Understanding (comprehension of your covenant partner)

Let us take up arms against the first evil monster hungry to devour us as its prey… Pride.

Pride has two main expressions. The first we are all mostly familiar with is the overt me-istic, I-centric expression that displays itself in self-aggrandizing, self-focused, self-concerned, self-serving, and narcissistic type attitudes that usually turn our guts when we are confronted with it. Sadly, our culture today has turned pride into an object of worship (by abominable parades and a month-long holiday celebrating perversity). But the scriptures and the life of Christ make it uber clear that pride is an evil foe of everything good and right.

These statements are echoed by Peter (1 Peter 5:5-7) and quoted from the wisdom of Proverbs (3:34). The stories of narcissistic pride destroying people in the scriptures are on nearly every page from the fall of the divine couple, Adam and Eve looking for their own way into the life of God, to the fall of the divine being ‘Lucifer’ into the wretched Satan as the arch-enemy of God and man, to the mind-numbing ignorance of David’s adulterous murder account of self-gratification resulting in a dead baby and a civil war, to the sadness of Judas selling Jesus for a pittance of silver coins. 

A lesser-known expression of pride has the same dangers but is a bit more subtle. This is the prideful attitude of self-debasing words, actions, or identity. A person who operates in insecurity, low self-imaging, fearful social interactions, sheepish or shy behaviors, and isolation as an introvert is equally operating in pride. There are just at the other end of the spectrum. I illustrate it this way: 

PR-I-DE.

Anything that has “I” in the center is pride. Whether it takes the form of PR-omoting the “I” or in the DE-basing of “I”… both are “I” in the center. Covenant is a commitment to lay down your “I” for another as Christ exemplified. The definitive aspect of what separates covenant from contractural- or performance-based relationships is the self-sacrificial commitment. In a secular performance-based contract of marriage, the normal interaction will be, “You do this for me and I will do that for you”. That is basically a business transaction where we are ‘purchasing’ the affection or performance of our spouse. The Bible has a word for this type of faux marriage: concubine.

Only… that is a big word. The cause of any and all contention is pride. Yikes!

When I counsel marriages in this the most normal response is, “No way!” Most folks do not think the contention in their marriage is their fault… it has to be that OTHER person. The scriptures argue that it takes two to tango, and it would behoove us to agree with the scriptures.

I often refer to this as the ‘other’ 3:16 verse that is WAY less memorized. John 3:16 makes us have warm fuzzies, James 3:16 makes us angry… Jesus said the truth will make you free (John 8:32) but in my experience, before the truth liberates you it tends to make you REALLY mad. Pride is the ONLY root of ALL contention. Where there is contention there is chaos and EVERY evil thing. (Think about that for a second… EVERY evil thing… like sickness, abuse, poverty, anger, oppression, depression, sin…) Does that statement illustrate any of the areas of your marriage?

The second cause of conflict in our covenant relationships is a lack of understanding. You do not know what you do not know. When we do not understand, the natural human response is to assume, analyze, or project our own opinions into the circumstances or motives. “I know why you did that! It is because you think I am stupid!” “No… no, I do not think you are stupid… I just wanted to do something nice for you.”

One of the most precarious places we can attempt to transverse is thinking we know another person’s motives. Kay and I have established a ‘rule’ that we are not allowed to assume one another’s emotions, intentions, or motives. It has actually affected the overall culture of Beloved Church because we have adopted the statement, “That person is blankety-blank at me right now.” What we mean by that is we recognize that something is going on in their heart but we will not speculate in arrogance as to what it is exactly. It requires communication, honesty, courage to be transparent, and a relational commitment to sincerely listen to one another.

But spiritual and covenantal ‘understanding’ is much larger than just a psychologically invented, and sociologically driven ‘model’ of interpersonal communication tactics. That is worldly, and frankly, arrogant as well. 

The divine weapon against pride is humility. Humility is the most virtuous character that is the most shunned and avoided in all of Christianity. The more humble we engage in relationships with one another the more fruitful, intimate, and unified they will ultimately be. Humility is a necessary component to spiritually based relationships, as in marriage covenants, because without humility true communication cannot exist.

If you look closely at that text you will see an eternal principle being expressed: it is only by the Spirit that any one of us can understand the heart. That means our own heart as well as the heart of our covenant spouse. Humility is required to embrace a principle like that because human wisdom and psychological analysis will defiantly argue that our cognitive functions are primitive chemical processes as a derivative of whatever emotion or disposition we randomly are being controlled by. No, Beloved reader. We were created much more complex than science has the capacity to embrace. ONLY by the Spirit of God can we rightly and effectively navigate the deep waters of each other’s souls.

When the Bible declares that something is deep, you can bet your bottom dollar it is DEEP. Notice though, that the way to draw that sweet cool water that is in that deep well out is through the ‘bucket’ of understanding. There is much strength and determined effort involved with lowering a bucket on a rope into a deep well and then, hand-over-hand, lifting that heavy bucket back up for the reward of a refreshing drink. The Spirit of God is Who gives us the ability (grace) to ‘understand’ each other in an accurate way. This should convince us of the great importance of knowing each other through the Spirit and not only by the flesh (or psychologically analyzed personalities). 

Our regard for one another needs to be of a spiritual valuation, not a carnal or natural one. This is only possible by intimacy with the Spirit where we are humbly submitted to allowing God to help us ‘understand’ our mate. This imperative to comprehend our spouse goes much further than just having a happy marriage.

The commitment to live with one another without contention, in humility, and submitted to the intimacy that can only come through the Spirit is necessary for our overall spiritual/soulical health beyond just our marital well-being. This verse says plainly that your prayer life will be hindered if this is not engaged in properly. You can search the scriptures and you will not find another place that declares a more direct reason for hindered prayers. That should impress upon us the needful resolve to guard our marriages voraciously, in these ways.

Doc Ryan and I are deeply invested in the covenantal realm for the body of Christ, especially in the arena of the marriage covenant. This is why we have penned this teaching together and sacrificed our time and energy to sow into your lives. We pray that your life is impacted and blessed by these words are truths to the degree that they inspire true repentance and change in whatever places your Good Father and your covenant community is shepherding you into.

In Great Love,

Dr Steve and Dr. Ryan