I want to talk about what is meant by God’s order, but before I do that, I want to guide you through a brief exegetical teaching through the text. When you hear the word order in relation to a biblical sense we have been conditioned to think about creation, law, hierarchy in the church and marriage, and perhaps even church discipline. Although it encompasses those things, I find it unfortunate that we start there, and therefore I feel we might need some deconstruction to get to good.
In the morning, O Lord, You will hear my voice; in the morning I will order my prayer to You and eagerly watch. Psalm 5:3 NASB
As I begin to read this in Hebrew the first thing that I notice in contrast to most English translations is the phrase “My prayer” is not found in the text. It isn’t a bad translation as I get the context leans that way but in Hebrew the verse better reads, “I will order toward you” which emphasizes a slightly different posture. Interesting the word prayer isn’t really there, perhaps a NT implication or even insertion. Prayer in the OT was a bit different than the way we understand it today. It was communal and far less personal (unless God appeared to you in a bush and orally spoke directly to you), after Jesus ascends to the throne and sends the Spirit to dwell in us and intercede, the biblical concept of prayer takes on a different form than what it had been considered over the last 2000 years or more. The way people thought of “prayer” in the OT may or may not be accurate. Are we just reading what they thought prayer was supposed to be perhaps based on what they knew of their former deities? Is this something that they got a bit off track with and Jesus sought to adjust or shed new light on? Perhaps, but perhaps not. Maybe our prayer should take a cue from the OT notions. When we read this verse in Hebrew form, we see that David isn’t talking about ritualistic prayer, or is he? He isn’t necessarily folding his hands and closing his eyes – but he is sort of. He is making a statement that if his life is in alignment with what is of God – TOV (creation order language), then he expects God to acknowledge and “DO THINGS” on his behalf. This may tie into the never-ending OT grappling over whether God was retributive or not, but it certainly had the trajectory of demonstrating the idea of devotion in connection to intimacy with the Lord. This connection over the years will then be attributed to the conjecture of relationship with the father in prayer. Some prayer is communal and some is personal.
Different people interact with God differently and perhaps in different seasons. Some say they don’t hear God and others act like God never stops screaming in their ear. How can the voice of God differ from person to person? Is it based on the posture of the heart, covenant faithfulness, gifting, seasons, understanding, choice, some sort of prejudice, or something completely different that is higher than our understanding? I believe that God is just that dynamic. I don’t know why He communicates differently to people and what it might be based on; I don’t always have the eyes of God. I believe Him to be Sovereign and know significantly more than we do in a much more complex grid. I am convinced that there are many things that influence this covenant relationship at a cosmic level. It is far bigger than simply me, and to think of my relationship with God (the creator of the universe) as doating on my every thought seems like a selfish notion. Does that view minimize a personal relationship or exemplify it?
God’s order is described in everything naturally defined by Yahweh and described generally as what is good (TOV). This is creation, the waters, the counting of the ark, the building of the temple, the pieces of firewood set in order for a sacrificial fire, showbread set out in two rows of six cakes on the gold table (Lev 24:8); seven altars set up by the pagan mantic Balaam (Num 23:4); stalks of flax arranged by Rahab for hiding the spies (Josh 2:6); a table prepared for dining (Ps 23:5; Isa 21:5); words produced for speaking (Job 32:14); a legal case developed for presentation (Job 13:18); etc. In II Sam 23:5 David exults in the covenant granted him by Yahweh, “for he has made with me an everlasting covenant, / ordered (ʿărûkâ) in all things and secure.[1] We see God’s order in many ways, but the common thread that binds seems to be that it is given as a framework for our devotion to Him. This intimate devotion that is often described as reading or memorizing scripture, devotional repetition, standards of practice and living, and so much more are all described as what it means to be defined as SET APART. That we are defined and claimed as part of God’s order not the chaos of the world.
What defines this? Covenant. Covenant is the secure, accessible, and recognizable attribute of everything good that God offers to us. It is the basis of all of our interaction with the LORD. Without covenant we are detached or separated from the creator and his ways. When David chooses every morning to be in order, he is making a statement about the balance of life and the posture of the heart. The Hebrew term בְּרִית bĕriyth for “covenant” is from a root with the sense of “cutting”, because pacts or covenants were made by passing between cut pieces of flesh of an animal sacrifice.[2] It meant something deep.
The New Covenant is a biblical interpretation originally derived from a phrase in the Book of Jeremiah and often thought of as an eschatological world to come related to the biblical concept of the Kingdom of God. Generally, Christians believe that the New Covenant was instituted at the Last Supper as part of the Eucharist, which in the Gospel of John includes the New Commandment.[3] A connection between the Blood of Christ and the New Covenant is portrayed with the saying: “this cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood”. Jesus is therefore the mediator of this New Covenant, and that his blood, shed is the required blood of the covenant. This is true looking back in both testaments and can be seen in all of the biblical covenants of the bible.
In the Christian context, this New Covenant is associated with the word ‘testament‘ in the sense of a ‘will left after the death of a person (Latin testamentum),[4] the original Greek word used in Scripture being diatheke (διαθήκη) which in the Greek context meant ‘will (left after death)’ but is also a word play having a dual meaning of ‘covenant, alliance’.[5] This notion implies a reinterpreted view of the Old Testament covenant as possessing characteristics of a ‘will left after death’ placing the old covenant, brit (בְּרִית) into a new application of understanding as revealed by the death, resurrection, ascension, and throning of CHRIST THE KING, JESUS. All things will forever connect at the covenants and be defined by the atoning accomplishments that transform into a covenant of eternity.
Order today might be better understood as a continually evolving algorithm based on the posture of your covenant faithfulness which, as I have described, is defined by many facets of devotion. Some may hear the audible voice of God more clearly while others simply see Him in every image. The revelation of God to us isn’t in a form of hierarchy. One form of transcendence doesn’t trump another. Who are we to judge anyway. But I do know that most of Christianity seems to be off course here. Rather than coming to the LORD as the cosmic wish granting genie in a bottle, let’s get back to biblical roots and think more covenantal and devotional based on the order that God modeled for us.
[1] Harris, R. L., Archer, G. L., Jr., & Waltke, B. K. (Eds.). (1999). Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (electronic ed., p. 696). Chicago: Moody Press.
[2]Strong’s Concordance (1890).
[3] “Comparison of the two covenants mediated by Moses and the two covenants mediated by Jesus”. 25 September 2022. Archived from the original on 2022-09-28. Retrieved 2023-01-29.
Is Christmas Pagan? Well sort of yes, sort of not. It’s a great discussion. I’ll frame it first like this as an easy reference. Some Christians are triggered when people say XMASS instead of Christmas, saying things like your taking “Christ” out of Christmas. Well actually X has been a symbol for Christ since at least His death. IXOYE, the Christian Fish Symbol, (ichthus) means “Jesus Christ God’s Son Savior” in Greek. Christ in Greek starts with the X symbol or character. Since Greek is more Biblically correct than English XMass may actually be a more Bible way of saying Christmas than “Christmas” is. As I will go on to show. It is really a similar argument with Christmas as a whole. Is it Pagan? Well yea, there are some pagan things, are we taking back what is Biblical (Christ and celebrating His birth) as ambassadors of truth? Yea I hope so! In that way some of this gets a bit dicey and comes down to how you’re going to think about it or frame it. I love it that the world celebrates the Birth of Jesus! But I want my readers to work through this on your own, so as usual, nothing is spoon fed. Here are some notes, good luck!
Dec 25, -“unconquered son” (Christians stole this day from the Pagans) Not really. There is no reason to conflate some pagan festivity no one cares about with Christmas. If there was a conspiracy back in the fourth Century, then St. Augustine would likely have said something about it. What he did say was that when the barbarians came to sack Rome, they left the churches alone, out of respect for traditions that were foreign to them, but which they could see were clearly holy.
It likely is a result of mixed Jews and Christians trying to figure out how to be unified in the first few centuries after Christ. Some are aware that during the reformation England banned Christmas in 1647 in some part because of connections to paganism. But the reformation had a lot of problems this really shouldn’t surprise anyone. The accusation that Christmas was usurped from Sol Invictus is probably a result of works of the puritans of the 16/17th Century England.
In America Christmas was banned between the years of 1659-1681. Christmas as we know it really didn’t start happening until the late 1800’s and even then, it was foreign to most people. Puritans then where preaching and distributing literature denouncing such celebration. Christmas really became what we think of it today, when in 1843 Charles Dickens wrote “A Christmas Carol”.
If we look at the outlook of the early Western Church (and by Western, I mean both the Latin Catholics and the various Eastern Orthodoxies) towards pagan life and rituals in general, its abundantly clear that they saw it with utter disgust.
Incensing is also interesting. In the Torah it signified holiness, yet later within some orthodoxy it is outright condemned. For them, it was nothing more than a pagan remnant that would defile Christianity, if adopted. Lactantius, the 4th Cent. Christian writer and one of Constantine’s main advisers condemns it in his book Institutiones Divinae. Hippolytus of Roma omits the use of incense entirely in his work, Apostolic Traditions. Of course, Constantine was a mess.
Accusing the Roman Church of usurping/adopting an entire pagan festival and rebranding it as Christmas to gain pagan converts, when it was repulsed by something so frivolous as a stick of incense which it perceived to be pagan, is in the realm of the absurd.
The Roman Empire wasn’t the only place with Christians in the 4th Century. There is no evidence that Sol Invictus was observed anywhere outside of the borders of the Roman Empire. Earliest record of Sol Invictus being celebrated on the 25th of December is from AD354. There is little evidence to suggest it was celebrated before 4th Century in Rome. But we know that the Syriac Christians were already celebrating Christmas (although it was considered a minor feast leading up to Epiphany) in the last week of their season of Subbara, which falls on December in the Gregorian Calendar – this practice dates from at least the mid-4th Century.
During the early centuries AD, the Jews clearly did not give Hanukkah much importance, as the Mishnah obviously omits it. Neither does Hanukkah have any theological connotations – after all, it’s kept for the memory of the Maccabees. Christianity had no need to find a replacement for an obscure Jewish holiday. But I do agree that some Christian communities, especially the ones with Jewish origins, like the Christians of St’ Thomas of Kerala, do observe some rituals reminiscent of Hanukkah. But they do it in the week of Epiphany, not the week of Christmas.
Christ was likely born on Sep 11, 3bc – Yes, I know some think 4BC was the death of Herod but that is definitely not concrete.
It was winter, and the Festival of the Dedication of the Temple was being celebrated in Jerusalem. Jesus was walking in Solomon’s Porch in the Temple, when the people gathered round him and asked, “How long are you going to keep us in suspense? Tell us the plain truth: are you the Messiah?” – John 10: 22 The Hanukkah festivals that Jesus likely took part in was similar enough to Christmas in ritual and custom to assume that early Christians continued with the festival in honor of the birth of Jesus – that might well have fallen on the same day of the year.
The Feast of the Lights (Hanukkah or ‘Festival of Dedication’) took place for two days on the twenty-fifth and twenty-sixth days of Kislev starting with the lighting of candles on the evening of the twenty-fourth. (The Judaic month of Kislev is almost the same as December.) Candles were then lit for a further six or possibly eight days. The specific reason for the festival of Hanukkah is to celebrate the victory of the Maccabees over the Seleucids and the result of that victory, which was the re-dedication of the altar in the Temple after three years when no services took place. In general, it celebrates religious freedom, the light that was lit in Israel for all people, and the spread of that light throughout the world.
The date was of particular importance in the Greek /Roman calendar and in the calendars of many of the ancient societies. On or roundabout this day the star Sirius (the brightest of all stars) that flies behind the earth in its path around the Milky Way is right overhead at midnight. When Sirius is overhead at midnight it means that the sun is at its furthest south and that summer is coming again. For this reason, the date had been associated in many ancient and not so ancient religions with the birth of a god or a new period of religion. It was therefore no accident that Antiochus Epiphanes offered the first sacrifice to Zeus Olympios in the Temple on this date in 167 BCE. It was intended to show that a new period of rule of the Greek gods over the land had begun. Judah Maccabeus would have been fully aware of this and made sure that the first Hanukkah also fell on 25 December 164 (165) BCE to counter the Greek claim. (Now upon the same day that the strangers profaned the Temple, on the very same day it was cleansed again, even the five and twentieth day of the same month, which is Kislev – II Maccabees 10: 5)
Persia was different from the other countries in their beliefs around Sirius and used the star to make predictions. This is based either on changes in color (white, blue, emerald) the star undergoes (in the past there were times when it has appeared red) or on the positional shift in relation to the background stars due to the gravitational influence of a white dwarf companion star. Because these changes are minute and dependent on great knowledge, it is no surprise that nobody, but the Magi noticed them. (This would explain why Herod and the scribes did not notice it. If a huge comet hung over Bethlehem, millions of people would have turned up, as they were strong believers in the magic of stars.)
Because it is closely linked with the Feast of the Tabernacles (Succoth), so close that it is even called that in some communities as an interchangeable title; and now we see that that ye keep the Feast of Tabernacles in the month Kislev – II Maccabees 1: 9. To the original promise made in the desert by the festival of Sukkoth (that one day Israel would no longer live in tents but in houses) the important facet of lights were added. With the rededication of the Temple, came the profound moment of the lighting of the candelabra. They made also new holy vessels, and into the temple they brought the candlestick . . . and the lamps that were upon the candlestick they lighted, that they might give light in the temple – I Maccabees 4: 49 – 50. Josephus said (Antiquities of the Jews, 12: 7: 7), and from that time to this we celebrate this festival, and called it Lights. I suppose the reason was, because this liberty beyond our hopes appeared to us; and that thence was the name given to that festival.
The festival is supposed to be a happy time in accordance with I Maccabees 4: 59 – the days of the dedication of the altar should be kept in their season from year to year by the space of eight days, from the five and twentieth day of the month Casleu, with mirth and gladness. From the earliest, the festivalgoers bare branches, and fair boughs, and palms also, and sang Psalms – II Maccabees 10: 7.
Israel in winter is green as this is the time of the rains and what snow there is (if at all) quickly melts. Bringing greenery into the home therefore has nothing to do with the pagan midwinter festival but with the promise made in the desert and celebrated during the Feast of the Tabernacles.
The twenty-fifth of December (Kislev) that became important to Christianity together with joyous songs and the Christmas tree and lights all originated in Hanukkah.
Dies Natalis of Sol Invictus, or that is the birthday of the unconquerable sun. It is also called Saturnalia as it Honors the deity Saturn. Saturn was worshiped for agricultural purposes. This was later celebrated by the Romans as Dies Natalis of Sol Invictus. It celebrated the renewal of light and the coming of the new year. What day was it celebrated on? You guessed it December 17-23 and 25. Saturnalia was celebrated with feasting, partying, and gifts. Saturnalia
As the Roman empire came under Christian rule pagan holidays were added to help convert pagans to Christianity. You see this mainly under emperor Constantine’s rule. The people whom the Romans conquered had their “religion” and celebrations added to the Romans celebrations.
The names of Saturnalia where later changed to take on a more Christian aspect. The church commemorated December 25 as Jesus’s birthday. The church got pagan converts, and the pagans simply got to keep their holidays.
NOTE: The best general and easily understood book I have yet seen on ‘Jewish’ holidays is ‘Guide to Jewish Holy Days’ by Hayyim Schauss, published in paperback by Schocken Books of New York in 1962.
Here is more on Christmas: Unfortunately, the churches audio video was not great, but it still has some good content.
Expedition 44 was founded by Dr. Will Ryan. It represents a way of life wholly devoted to living as a disciple of Jesus. It is made up of a global assembly of believers united to the Kingdom of Jesus. Dr Ryan and Matt Mouzakis co-host a YouTube channel based on Biblical Theology called Expedition 44 that has about 130,000 subscribers worldwide. There are also various small groups, Bible studies, weekend retreats, and conferences associated with Expedition 44.
The notion of the “image” doesn’t refer to a particular spiritual endowment, a secret “property”…The image is a vocation, a calling. It is the call to be an angled mirror, reflecting God’s wise order into the world and reflecting the praises of all creation back to the Creator. That is what it means to be the royal priesthood: looking after God’s world is the royal bit, summing up creation’s praise is the priestly bit.
– N.T. Wright, The Lost World of Adam and Eve (W/ John Walton)
Expedition 44 represents a way of life based on the pursuit of true discipleship. As those bearing the light of Jesus, we are called to both keep and cultivate life for the Lord in our communal body of believers. The Biblical vision for that culture is Christoformity, or Christlikeness. Nurturing Christoformity was at the heart of the Pauline mission. As New Testament priests, we are charged to mediate Christ in everything. Expedition 44 is based on Biblical Theology teachings encouraging a way of life completely devoted to the Lord.
Everything in the expedition 44 life points towards Jesus, but don’t get too wrapped up in this section. You might find it interesting, but it is just meant to explain a more in-depth pursuit of Jesus that might help you to identify what your journey looks like and pray over the journey of other brothers and sisters within the same kingdom calling.
THE MOSAIC MEANING
Expedition 44 was started by me, Dr. Ryan years ago as a bit of a family crest or coat of arms and has developed into so much more. When I was young, I decided I was different than those in the world in that I wanted to dedicate my life to following Jesus. Many have made that profession and like me, had very little idea of what it really meant, particularly at the time they made the confession.
In ancient times people were often communally represented by what they had in common. For God’s people of Israel, it began with spreading blood over a doorpost. Throughout history people have sought to show their allegiance in similar signs. The flag, a crest, a heraldic symbol, a cross, or even something as simple as a mark on the ground showing a common understanding completed by both parties (the idea of the ixoye) expressed the sign of a common spiritual bond. In eastern society you are communally responsible for those with you. It is very different from our western me-istic thinking. This was the mindset of the early church, that together we are one in the kingdom of Christ. The cross was the culmination of this way of thinking in Christ, but the tone was set to begin thinking this way many years before. Today we have mostly lost this kind of communal consideration and without it, much of the original cultural understanding of proclaiming the kingdom of God has been lost.
There are several ways that this style of thought is described in the Bible and throughout history. The writing of Hebrew itself is actually a bit of a pictograph language with each letter describing a visual identity, many of which contain Biblical truths and meanings. Each letter is a symbol and understanding the letters and how they work together gives insight to deeper meanings, themes, metaphors, and visual imagery throughout the Bible. For thousands of years throughout ancient culture we see these images take form. Representations of an image to signify groups of people or tell a story are very common in the ancient eastern world both inside and outside of scripture.
In western thought we understand the term icon a little bit better as something that represents an image that people might put on a pedestal or desire. Sometimes the idea of an icon was more aligned to words that described idolatry. An icon served as an image that represented something deeper that you claimed. It was and still is associated with spirituality. There were several examples of this kind and other types of imagery in the ancient world. Although Expedition 44 and its logo has been treated like an icon over the years it is actually closer to a Biblical mosaic.
Mosaics date back to the 3rd millennium B.C. and were a major part of Mesopotamian culture. They were pictures that represented something significant in life and were made with whatever could be found. Stones, seashells, bone, and other materials were used to decorate walls and floors for thousands of years. Into the Middle Ages, this was a popular way to create motifs and still continues to be an icon of religious imagery in basilicas around the world. Stained glass is a simple example of a mosaic. The word mosaic as you can imagine, has its roots in the Bible. History shows us that Moses through the law, would give the Hebrew people a collection of small images to live by. (This was the law but so much bigger than the law.) Together all of these images made a collective whole. Similar to the progression we see in the New Testament giftings of various members making up the church. We as westerners understand some of the New Testament picture of spiritual gifts and how they work together but have a hard time understanding the mosaic law because naturally we don’t think of these commands as imagery that builds a complete life. The Lord, through Moses, would give his people a collection of descriptions that would describe holy life and together when practiced by everyone would build a picture of complete devotion to the Lord. Groups of people, families, and tribes would regularly build a collection of imagery, usually something very simple that described who they were. They were communally devoted to a way of living that the image represented. Biblical Mosaics are based on Mosaic covenant.
THE SURFACE MEANING
Years ago, I came up with a symbol that would represent an ancient communal kingdom like way of thinking; it is a symbol that resembles a shield with a front and backwards 44. It has taken on a lot of meaning to me and others bearing the logo to be set apart to a more ancient way of life considering the calling of the kingdom on your life, and the lives of those you are in Biblical covenant with.
The backwards 4 represents Christs backwards, or counter cultural (to our world) kingdom. The first should be last. One of my life themes or motif is to live in the backwards or upside down Kingdom that Christ not only taught but lived.
I am going to encourage you to think in a way that resembled ancient Hebrew and early church culture rather than the culture we live today. Our western thinking doesn’t really consider this kind of representation any more, but the Hebraic, more eastern style of conceptual thought will come to life. The number 44 in the expedition 44 logo on a very surface level represents things like a .44 magnum, my favorite hunting pistol caliber. Throughout the years it has been referred to by many in the 4×4 community (which I am really into), it was also my jeep number when I raced, and has other significance within our family but I think you get the idea. Many hunters, competitive shooters, 4×4 enthusiasts and others have found themselves wearing shirts and hats with the symbol aligning themselves with perhaps part of what the 44 represented, yet often they didn’t fully understand the connection or meaning behind the symbol. It was just a cool image that represented something in their life, in many ways it was more of an icon by that description than anything else. It is very “faith like” in this way. Many will come to desire a relationship with God and accept on a very basic level what that means, yet not first understand the depth that comes with such a relationship. Some will even want to claim ownership, yet their life never takes form to truly represent the mosaic thinking behind what the image represents to those that hold it closer.
I would often hand out 44 t-shirts on 4wheeling trips and people would love them. They would plaster stickers on their jeeps and take great pride that they were part of this select die hard group. I own a private shooting range and the symbol has also taken on a similar form with the competitive firearms crowd. It has been donned in the form of patches, branded into wooden handles, team jerseys, and various other things. There are many other pockets of life that the symbol has represented over the years but perhaps the one closest to its true form is in our church culture. From men’s and women’s weekend retreats to theology videos; the Christian crowd has come to see the symbol on a basic level in a way closer to the real significance of its meanings. To them it is a sign of those that are wholly devoted to the Lord.
Many understand a small part of what the symbol might represent but very few end up understanding the entire mindset. Over the years it has carried with it a very in depth, almost secret sacred definition. Let me explain the deeper meanings behind the symbol.
THE ESSENES
I want to introduce you to a sect during the second temple period called the Essenes אִסִּיִים . They were similar to the Pharisees or Sadducees except dedicated to Biblical (more than Rabbinical) truth. Similarly, it seems today that we have gotten away from seeking the truth of the scripture and Christians are often more defined by tradition similar to the way the pharisees or Sadducees may have acted “religiously.” Part od the Expedition 44 culture is to be less “religious” and more scripturally motivated.
The Essenes were a tight community of dedicated believers who devoted themselves to the scripture and actively sought to preserve what they held sacred to life. Josephus shares that they practiced piety, celibacy, the absence of personal property and of money, the belief in communality, and commitment to a strict observance of Sabbath. He further adds that the Essenes ritually immersed in water every morning, ate together after prayer, devoted themselves to charity and benevolence, forbade the expression of anger, studied the books of the elders, preserved secrets, and were very mindful of the names of the angels kept in their sacred writings. (Josephus, The Wars of the Jews)
So rewind 2000 years and we find a group that in obedience to the prophet Isaiah, went to the desert to “prepare the way for the Lord” (Isaiah 40:1-5). Though small in number (ancient sources indicate 4,000), they exerted significant influence on the religious community of their day. Some have even alluded that they may be the converts mentioned in Acts 6:7.
Now, as in any group, things often get generalized. Such as we say the Essenes were basically pacifistic scholarly types, but as we would argue for any group, not all of them followed this description. The Essenes had their issues, and I am not building a case by any means to be just like them. But they did share some observable qualities that Jesus asked of His church that we seem to have lost in our American or Western influenced culture. They went against the grain of their cultural society to live the way they believed the scriptures taught. They didn’t want to be influenced by anything other than the Word of the Lord.
The Essenes are most known for the Dead Sea Scrolls which are commonly believed to have been their library. But most people don’t realize that this was not the main body of the Essenes but a more aggressive offshoot of them. The place in Qumran where the scrolls were found in the ruins seem to have been a fortress, used as a military base for a very long period of time. Some have argued that this doesn’t make since for the Essenes as they were mostly monk type pacifistic group, yet the facts would confirm that this was indeed part of their community.
There is something that sheds light on this with the discovery of the seven scrolls at the first cave in Qumran. Most of the other scrolls, like in cave four were fragments and scholars believe that they were likely fragments when they were placed in the caves, because they were worn out – retired. All written words were sacred according to Jews, so these scrolls were placed in a Genizah. You might think of this as a protected burial place, nearly every synagogue in the world has one. But many of the scrolls besides these are in much better condition and it is largely assumed that the Essenes were the authors of these scrolls and much of the Pseudepigrapha.
There is a scroll here called the war scroll. It is very eschatological in nature describing the great war that Revelation describes as GOG- MaGOG. What’s interesting is this was written before the book of Revelation. You see they thought the Messiah was coming again and the war would be within their lifetime. Whoever wrote the war scroll, was writing in a spoken dialect of Hebrew and they understood Roman warfare and Persian rule; in other words, they were incredibly well prepared and gave their life to readiness for the coming kingdom.
There is a group known as the Essaioi, and Philo’s Therapeutae describes them as pursuing an active life. The War Scroll, or The War of the Sons of Light Against the Sons of Darkness, was different than many of the others, it has a different writing style, even the jar of clay and Asphalt seal was different. The scroll describes a war in two distinct parts, first (the War against the Kittim) described as a battle between the Sons of Light, consisting of the sons of Levi, the sons of Judah, and the sons of Benjamin, and the exiled of the desert, against Edom, Moab, the sons of Ammon, the Amalekites, and Philistia and their allies the Kittim of Asshur (referred to collectively as the army of Belial), and [those who assist them from among the wicked] who “violate the covenant.” The second part of the war (the War of Divisions) is described as the Sons of Light, now the united twelve tribes of Israel, conquering the “nations of vanity.” In the end, all of Darkness is to be destroyed and Light will live in peace for all eternity.
When we make the connection that this scroll was likely written by this particular group of Essenes, we find the terminology that they refer to themselves as the SONS OF LIGHT.
Interestingly there are many verses in the Bible Like Jn 12:36 that make note of SONS OF LIGHT. What is interesting about this regarding Expedition 44 is that I (Dr. Ryan) am wired a little bit more towards writing a war scroll such as the minority group of the Essenes referred to as the Sons of Light and Matt (who co-leads the video series with me) is a pacifist such as the majority of the Essenes; yet together I like to think we continually bring out the best in each other and have a bit of a communal covenant between us in regard to understanding Biblical Theology. Much like the Essenes in their culture, we are the studious remnant who seek to preserve and live out the true intentions of the scriptures.
THE NUMBERS:
Throughout the Bible numbers matter, they are important and sometimes carry Biblical truth. I would advise not getting too hung up non these numbers and the study of them (numerology), but I do believe we can gather value from them in some areas of study.
In the Bible, God’s chosen ones (both Jew and gentile) are attributed to the number 22, which has some ties to the book of Revelations and the day of judgment (which Biblically appears to have more correlation to 70AD then it does to a dispensational idea of end times). It is usually referred to as the number of completeness. But then you get more specific by narrowing it down to those more deeply devoted (I might even say as true disciples); you see that number doubled which is a concept from Isaiah that is applied to those that are within the Lord’s favor and often ask for or are given a double portion, the number 22 doubled is 44. The idea is that we bring God all of who we are and all of what we can offer. In the Old Testament the word Nephesh would best describe all that God has given us as a person. We can only offer 100% of what we have no more. Yet when we give God our complete life, he takes that life and does exceedingly more than what was possible in of itself. He multiplies what is given (at the altar). Throughout the Bible that is what is often implied by a double portion. It would be like saying I want you to give 110%. That’s western culture thinking. We can’t give more than 100%. Biblical thinking says that Christ gave all for us and asks that we do the same. By Grace we offer our complete lives to Him and he continues this reciprocal dance of Grace by taking that life and doing more than we could ever fathom, God’s part is better than ours. Not 110%, not 200%, something more like 70X7. This way of thinking is rooted deep within the Old Testament narrative and is echoed throughout the pages of the New Testament. We often miss it because we read these pages with 20th century eyes. Expedition 44 represents the expedition of life to completely give God your life and ask that in Him, you might do exceedingly more to the glory of the kingdom. Giving all that is humanly possible while God multiplies that offering and answers by what is his double portion in the spiritual kingdom and is innumerable in His eyes.
The numerology of number 44 is efficient, disciplined, and confident. The number also bears with it the idea of spiritual beings guarding or preserving. Interesting how both of these traits also would have described the Essenes and the first priests. The Essenes were priestly, they were scholarly, they were incredibly devoted in their way of life, and were not influenced by the world around them. They were missional to the scriptures and aware of the spiritual climate of their world.
THE SONS OF GOD
When we study the term often used for spiritual beings in the Bible, sons of God (Bənē hāʾĔlōhīm), it often unfortunately carries a negative connotation perhaps based on Genesis 6. However, I would encourage you to take on the understanding that this term in basic form simply represents all spiritual entities initially created by the hand of God. It has no male or female designation. We are told, and most would believe, that eventually 1/3 of all of these beings fell from the heavenly realms to be opposed to God. (I would argue that this number is more controversial than you might think though, so don’t give it too much weight.) Yet when we enter into covenant relationship in the new kingdom we are also described as “Sons of God” (again gender neutral, so some say sons and daughters of God to align with our western thought) which shows that we are recreated directly by the hand of God. That we are adopted into this royal lineage and now considered sons of God.
THE DEEPER (DIRECTIONAL) CALLING
There is a notion (especially within more Orthodox Christianity) that perhaps the way that we live on this earth will have an impact on our rank, jewels, or proximity to God (direction) in heaven or in the recreated heaven and earth. The expedition 44 way of life implies that we desire to make the spiritual investments here as called into Christlike living that could have lasting eschatological affects. But this is not to be confused with some kind of pie in the sky dispensational fantasy, quite the opposite. We believe that we were “saved for” the life work of Christ’s kingdom here and now. This is a journey or expedition that we might be found faithful, humble, and obedient servants here on earth and on to the final destination of the recreated heavens and earths as we take on our new spiritual bodies. Life and salvation are a journey with Christ as the king of the eternal kingdom.
I might be walking on thin ice with some where I am going next, but I assure you it is Biblical thinking. This is going to seem like a bit of a rabbit trail, but it will come together in the end. Throughout the last 2000 years many have sought to understand the complexities of the re-creation of the new heavens and earth. In my last book, “This is the way?!,” I venture into this a little bit more, so I won’t get to far into it here. We aren’t given the full story in the Bible. We don’t have the New Heavens and Earth or recreated being’s manual yet. But we are given a few hints in the story of the Biblical Narrative that is given to us. We know that some of us will rule angels (I Corinthians 6:3). We also are told that every knee will bow. What does that mean? I have always found it interesting that if God desires that all come to Him, and He is omnipotent or able for all to come to Him, then possibly, could He have found a way that all might come to Him? Is that what every knee will bow means eschatologically? Perhaps we all should be hopeful universalists in that sense. As you can imagine this kind of thinking also will influence your thoughts of hell, but as I said, my previous book explored some of this so I will mostly leave it alone here. Personally, I don’t see the framework for Universal reconciliation, but I might say that I am hopeful. Wouldn’t it be great if all of the world for all of time could be reconciled to Jesus?
Now that I have that out of the way, my point it to say that some may serve in different capacities in the final state of the recreated heaven and earth. Perhaps it is possible that some will rule and others will be ruled in the heavenly realm. It is interesting that some view this very similar to the way the Garden of Eden and the first priests Adam and Eve may have been intended. Some see Adam and Eve partnering to rule and reign with God in the high mountain temple garden over the others on the earth. What others you ask? For just a moment consider the fact that we don’t actually know God’s plan for Adam and Eve in the garden, we can only speculate. We actually don’t even know for sure if there were others living on the rest of the earth when Eden existed. I know to most traditional western readers this is starting to sound crazy but consider it as a more scriptural alternative. Consider the Genesis story as being more concerned with teaching theology (God’s relationship with the universe) as opposed to its being concerned with cosmology (how the universe was created).
Today we would call this science and many of us want to read Genesis as a Science book but that is not what it is. That doesn’t mean it is scientifically inaccurate, it just means that God’s goal in giving us this story was not to teach us science or even history for that fact! It’s not a science book and it’s not even really a history book. That is not its intent. It’s God’s love story to us showing the broken plan and the hope that what was lost will be found and given new life in a new kingdom.
This is going to take a second, have you ever read Genesis chapters one through three straight through? You would likely stop for a second and think that it is restating creation, that it tells the story twice. Isn’t it interesting that Genesis one does not mention Adam and Eve? Genesis 1 says God created humanity, male and female He created them. Then Chapter 2 starts to talk about the creation of Adam and Eve. Let me challenge you that chapter 2 “could” be a sequel to chapter 1 which implies there were more people. As we look at the Bible, we see several hints at this, such as Cain finding a wife. Remember when Cain says anybody who finds me will kill me? Who would he have been talking about? His family? Why would they have killed him? It just doesn’t make sense unless there were other people on the earth. And how do you explain Cain building a city? To you have a city you have to have people, likely more than just your family. Or how do you name all the animals in one day? You don’t, it took longer. Also, did you realize that after Genesis chapter 5 Adam and Eve are never mentioned again in the Old Testament?
What about the idea that Adam and Eve were immortal? From dust we are formed & from dust you return (Genesis 1:19). I would suggest that Adam and Eve were always mortal beings, but when they ate from the tree of wisdom and were kicked out of The Garden they lost the remedy for continued life in a relationship walking with God. They were no longer eating the fruits that granted life.
So, if they weren’t the first people then what is the significance of Adam and Eve? You have probably heard it before, but they are the first pictures of priests. Genesis 2:15 says to serve and keep; doesn’t that sound like the Priestly language described in Leviticus? This is why God created us, because he wanted to be together, and if you read your entire Bible, guess how the story ends? We’re united in this togetherness relationship with God to serve and rule over God’s creation in the new Heaven and Earth. In the Old Testament the priest had knowledge and access to God‘s presence. We see this idea carried over throughout the Bible and into the New Testament as the royal priesthood of believers.
Perhaps in the New Heavens and Earth those who come to an allegiant knowledge of Christ and are found faithful to this coming kingdom while on earth are those that rule over the rest. Perhaps there are even more levels, jewels, or distinctions that will set us apart. This fits very well if you’re considering some version of being a hopeful Universal Reconciliation where every knee bowing might meaning access to the heavenly realm eschatologically. Perhaps there are different degrees of what it means to be found faithful. To be honest I don’t know, we don’t have all the cards to the entire kingdom in the narrative that we are given. It is all speculation given on the scripture that we have. As I have mentioned before, I personally do not see the theology for a universal reconciliation view concerning hell, but I am open to the fact that God could do this.
But what I do know is that I want to be considered the faithful, those set apart, those given a deeper calling, the remnant, the martyrs, those that rule, and those that found faithful in the kingdom to become immeasurably more than they brought to the alter. To completely give all of what I have been given and receive the double portion that only God can give by the power of the only King Jesus in an everlasting Kingdom. This is the heart of Expedition 44.
PSALM 144:1
If you look closely at the logo you will find that within the logo lie the numbers 1441. The bar on the left is a 1, the 44 in the middle and the bar on the right is a 1. Psalm 144:1 says “Praise be to the LORD my Rock, who trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle. He is my loving God and my fortress, my stronghold and my deliverer, my shield, in whom I take refuge, who subdues peoples under me.” If you can’t tell, I (Dr. Ryan) came up with this one (Not Matt!) It is often associated with the gun toting group although, that may actually be taking it out of context! The idea of the verse is complete reliance of every day on the Lord. There is a theological belief that David seemed to hold that God was supposed to fight the battles and when men tried, they usually messed things up and got in the way. That is the essence of Psalm 144:1, that David could simply be a humble instrument devoted to the actions of the Lord and not of himself.
THE SHIELD OR CHALICE
The Box with a chevron under it actually means something as well. At first it appears to be a shield, and it is. Some know that shields in ancient warfare weren’t intended for individual battle. They were best used when locked together as a communal force. This is most commonly known from the Roman Legions using the testudo or tortoise formation as a type of shield wall. As you have figured out, the shield in the 44 means we are all in this together. It’s a picture of the body of Christ.
But that’s not all. You might know that Matt and Ryan are Egalitarians. The egalitarian interpretation of Scripture is based on the view that Scripture does not limit women’s (or anyone else’s) roles and contributions in any arena, including the Church. From Eden to our role in the new heavens and earth, God’s ideal is equality. Everything in between is a mess of the earth, sin, and the fallen spiritual beings. The double line at the bottom of the shield also resembles a chalice. The chalice symbolizes communion and Christ’s blood. In Ancient culture the chalice was a symbol of life. As in other cultures there is also an ancient understanding that a chalice represents the significance over the power God gives to create life in the order of his cosmos. Men are predominantly mentioned in the Bible (due to culture) but the chalice is a constant reminder that we men need women (and I might argue are equal in God’s eyes.) Thus, the eternal chalice is the female uterus, where human life begins. That’s why some say ancient chalices were shaped the way they were. It started with the appearance of humans on Earth, and it will continue until the end of time. The chalice shaped V in the 44 logo is a constant reminder that Man and Women together are the recipe that God gives and communally we are all working together as if we were in one accord moving together as one locked shield.
MYSTERIUM TREMENDUM
There are 44 days between Jesus’ crucifixion and his ascension to Heaven.
There were 44 months in Jesus’ ministry
Jesus was crucified over a period of 4 days. In addition, the four gospels are the story of Jesus, his life, and his ultimate mission, as told by Matthew, Luke, Mark and John.
There is a huge significance in the correlation of the number 44 and sonship (& Daughters) in the Bible.
The number of candles used in a Hanukkah celebration is traditionally forty-four
The number 10000 is used 44 times in the Bible.
The word tribulation is used 44 times in the Bible and typically best describes a tough journey or expedition (not the end times!)
Expedition 44 represents a way or walk of life for those who more than anything else, wish to be true disciples of Jesus, fervently devoted to a deeper calling of intimacy in Him.
The Mesha Stele, also known as the Moabite Stone, is one of the oldest artifacts connecting biblical history to the ancient world dating over 2800 years old with the inscription dating at 840 BC. Stelae (plural of stele) are monuments in the form of upright stone slabs or pillars that are often inscribed. The language of the inscription is Moabite, very similar to Hebrew. It uses an alphabetic script almost identical to the Old Hebrew (or Paleo-Hebrew).
You might notice what resembles several “44” inscriptions on this stone and other paleo- Hebrew relics. Some of the imagery behind X44 is to capture the ancient mindset of those devoted to God as indicated by the earliest known images from Ancient Israel.
_______
The “Moabite” language was a different dialect of the common language spoken (and written) in this region that could just as well be called an early form of Hebrew. Several biblical names and events are mentioned on the stele with amazing specificity.
This stele contains several lines of Aramaic referring to an individual who killed Jehoram of Israel, the son of Ahab and king of the house of David. The account can be found in 2 Kings 9:24.
References to biblical history contained in the Mesha Stele inscription include:
“Nicodemus said to Him, “How can a man be born when he is old?”” John 3:4
Nicodemus heard Jesus say that a man must be “born from above” if he is to be a son of God. He asked, “How can I make this happen?” He just wanted the steps but didn’t want the “why.” Sounds like our Christian culture today – Just get in the water, and maybe that’s not all bad! But it’s not about what you can do, it’s about what God will do. In a very eloquent and rhythmic fashion Jesus answers Nicodemus with the words gennēthēnaianōthen. The witty inference is that we must be born from above regenerated by the Spirit. The answer to the real question, why must a man be born from above, is far more important than the how. God knows how. What we need to know is why.
You do not become what you are, but you are what you become.
I studied philosophy first which led me to a better theology. I don’t believe we are simply a product of our environment, nor do I believe in the Calvinist sense that God has predetermined all things and is the grand puppet master.
Our decisions shape us.
Jesus’ answer shares an entire “remez” of theology. I’ll give you the short version. God separated the water and created man in His image within His order. Man fails and falls numerous times, and God does a “reset” with His newly chosen people coming out of Egypt and through the redemptive waters of the red sea, they are “baptized” as a nation and become a “new” people. Those originally created by the direct hand of God were referred to in Genesis as the Bene Ha Elohim. Fast forward to Jesus when we are now “reborn from above”, we take on the same terminology. We are now directly created by the hand of God and are a new royal priesthood set apart as ambassadors for a new kingdom. Jesus Himself was an example – image – foreshadow – archetype of this. As He was born of a virgin, His creation or re-creation to earth in the form of a “second Adam”, was directly by the hand of God. In a similar fashion, all of us now “born from above,” have entered into completely new life with God. The old person is dead.
When Jesus answers Nicodemus He says that we are at a total start over through Him. Nicodemus is a Pharisee and a member of the Sanhedrin who is drawn to hear Jesus’s teachings. As is the case with Lazarus, Nicodemus is not mentioned in the synoptic Gospels and is mentioned only by John. [1] This famous encounter is contextually set before John 3:16, you might consider that. Most Biblical scholars have identified the Nicodemus of the New Testament with a 1st-century historic Nicodemus Ben Gurion, which would have him being a key figure 40 years later in the First Jewish Roman War. [2]
He was a wealthy and popular holy man reputed to later have had miraculous powers, which some would say was a sign that God was with Him. [3] In the account in John we aren’t given the whole picture or all the details. In fact, we seem to get the opposite idea. Jesus tells Nicodemus to leave the world at the beach and he seemingly can’t do that. He comes to Jesus in secret in the night because He is afraid of what His pharisee friends will think if he is aligned with Jesus, yet he says that many of them believe and uses the title Rabbi with Jesus out of honor and respect.
Nicodemus is mentioned in three places in the Gospel of John. This is the first encounter. The second is four chapters later when he reminds his colleagues in the Sanhedrin that the law requires that a person be heard before being judged. He seems to be a friend of Jesus or possibly advocating for Him. The third and final encounter is in John 19 when Nicodemus appears after Jesus’s crucifixion to provide the customary spices for anointing the dead and assists Joseph of Arimathea in preparing the body of Jesus for burial. Some believe this is a sign of conviction. Nicodemus brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes—about 100 Roman pounds (33 kilograms, or 73 lb). Nicodemus must have been a man of means; in his book Jesus of Nazareth: Holy Week, Pope Benedict XVI observes that, “The quantity of the balm is extraordinary and exceeds all normal proportions. This is a royal burial.”[5] If you take the notion that He was the notable Nicodemus Ben Gurion, then it means that over the next 40 years he would lead many to a “born again” notion and eventually be considered a saint within orthodoxy for his actions. But we also may want to question “that notion,” and we likely should.
The decision for Nicodemus wasn’t easy. Brian Zahnd shares, “Undoubtedly, he was raised in a Pharisee household, educated in the Pharisee school of Jewish thought from a child and placed on a course that would inevitably make him what he became. But now Jesus was challenging him to make a choice that would fundamentally alter his self. To make the choice to rethink everything. To start over. To radically change his dominant paradigm; instead of viewing the kingdom of God through the paradigm of the Pharisees, to view the kingdom of God through the new paradigm of Jesus. No easy task.” [6]
Jesus’ words to Nicodemus were life changing. We don’t know if Nicodemus ever “got there.” The orthodox church would say he did, Nicodemus is venerated as a saint in Eastern and Oriental Orthodoxy and in Catholicism. The Eastern Orthodox and Byzantine Catholic Churches commemorate him on the Sunday of the Holy Myrrhbearers, which is celebrated on the Third Sunday of Pascha (i.e., the second Sunday after Easter).[7]But from my perspective, the text nor history gives us the confirmed answer. Jesus’ words were hard. Leave it all at the Beach and start over. Rethink. Everything.
The world and the Christian church (alike) often don’t decipher this story well.
A spiritual re-birth meant a new and/or total spiritual re-learning. A new start. Discipleship. Could he do that? Did he do that the next 40 years? Perhaps. Or perhaps he was still “off” as he might have led thousands to their death in 70AD and completely missed the “WHY” of Jesus. The world (and Christians) often puts those “types” on a pedestal. We nearly “worship” those that are very opposite to the ways and words of Jesus. Maybe he got the fame his heart was postured towards but never could die to himself as Jesus challenged him to do; or maybe He did as His “saint hood” would later venerate. Only God knows.
What about you. The call wasn’t to simply make a decision to get on your knees in tank of water as the lights and lasers dazzle everyone to chalk up another bar of statistics for the year of tallied success. It was to enter total discipleship. The first step is a proclamation of the heart to total faithful allegiance in Jesus by getting in the water, the second step should be towards a changed life of discipleship. I pray the lasers and lights lead that way! That was always the calling of Jesus. Leave it all on the beach.
That is the ONLY commission of Jesus. There was no halfway or halfhearted version of this story. Are you all in? Will the water set you apart?
This article is dedicated to my good friend and disciple Paul Lazzaroni as he is shepherding so many others to walk this journey well. Love you and proud of you, my friend. -Halak
x44 has an old but good video on Nicodemus here:
Driscoll, James F. (1911). “Nicodemus” . In Herbermann, Charles (ed.). Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 11. New York: Robert Appleton Company.
Reid, George J. (1907). “Acta Pilati” . In Herbermann, Charles (ed.). Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 1. New York: Robert Appleton Company. p. 111.
ee, for instance:
Flusser, David (16 December 2013). “Character Profiles: Gamaliel and Nicodemus”. Jerusalem Perspective.
Burke, Daniel (17 March 2013). “Nicodemus, The Mystery Man of Holy Week”. The Washington Post. Religious News Service. Archived from the original on 14 May 2023.
Holy Greek Orthodox Church of Saint Paraskevi, Saint Barbara, Saint John the Merciful & Our Mother of Consolation. St Albans, Melbourne: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia. Archived from the original on 20 March 2023.
Wait what? All that in the one word? -I don’t think so!
Just about every day I scroll through a “BIBLE” meme on Facebook that makes me cringe. I used to comment but I no longer do largely because I think sometimes people don’t interpret the comments as useful, or teaching better theology but as some kind of self-promotion, or “I think I am better than you” type of thing. I think that is unfortunate. I believe part of shepherding and discipleship is a Mars Hill or rabbinical teaching method of being open to constantly learning and working through a better understanding of the test with the giftings of those around you. To keep each other Biblically sharp and accountable to be faithful to the text. Letting people get really loose with the text has led to alot of bad theology and ditch diving. I believe the Bible greatly encouraged textual exploration together within the body. That is what the body of Christ is supposed to do. I have 40 years of deeply studying the Bible under my belt and God has gifted me with a certain learned spiritual intuition of exegesis. I hope it comes as a gift to those that have a learning posture towards the scripture. To those more interested in fighting or finger pointing, or making internet dumpster fires, I am not interested.
THE MEME:
At first glance this probably looks pretty neat. It’s challenging, it looks at the original language rather than an English glossed translation, it comes off as going deeper. So, what’s the problem? Well, it isn’t faithful.
A faithful translation means you let the text speak for the text. You don’t read your own desire into the text. This commonly referred to as good exegesis.
In this case, here are some issues:
One word? Sort of. The text is Genesis 3:9. Start by typing that into a browser followed by the word interlinear. The first link will be the Bible Hub, click it. The word is ’ay·yek·kāh and you will see the [are] is in parentheses. It technically isn’t in the text but linguistically it is- but it is understood such as an understood “YOU” in English. Click the word and you are going to find there is only one occurrence of this “word” or conjunction of words in the Bible. This is called a Hapax Legomenon. The basic hermeneutical law or idea of any Hapax Legomenon is because it is rare don’t read too much into it. See if you can find how it is used outside of the Bible to give you a better understanding of how the text uses it. But in this case, it isn’t a “TRUE” Hapax Legomenon in the sense that if you click the root word above which is Strong’s 335 you will see the root is “ay” in Hebrew which occurs 36 times in the Old Testament. We have a pretty good idea of what it means! There are some words or phrases in the Bible where we don’t even have the root anywhere else and that is a better example of a Hapax Legomenon, but they are both technically considered Hapax Legomenon’s. This one we can see essentially means “where or how” which makes sense in the English translation “where are you?” I would encourage you to read the usage and cultural notes below the word. These are theologically very basic and at times arguable, but still give you a better start. In this case it notes that the word can come with distress or lament. Seems true to this text! It also notes that this particular word is often noted of spiritual locations within the cosmos. Again, true to the text. Most of the time these notes don’t get too controversial and are written by well noted scholars. This is sort of important because there are other similar words in Hebrew that could have been used without a sometimes-spiritual emphasis. We see this importance in Deuteronomy 32 when the text asks “Where are there gods.” It is also used in 1 Samuel 9:18 in regard to the SEER. It is used in 2 Samuel 15:2 in regard to the city which is interesting and could be signified as one of the reasons I believe in ancient times cities were gatherings of fallen spiritual beings and people aligned to their ways and rival to Yahweh. In Job 2 it is used to ask where “the satan” came from. The problem is (as you can see to the column on the right of all the verses using this Hebrew root) there are at least a few texts that don’t seem to take on “spiritual spatial” significance, it just means where? So that tells us we can’t read too much into a sense of cosmic space every time we see the word used. Hermeneutically it may or may not have spiritual bearing. Therefore, we have to determine from the rest of the text whether it does or not. In other words, we don’t have the “RIGHT” to attribute a spiritual significance to the simple text “where” unless something in the rest of the text gives it to us for certain. If the text doesn’t grant it, then we have to determine if we the ability to say it could go that way, but we don’t know for sure. It may or may not have spiritual spatial implications. In this text we already know they are in Eden, so the context gives us the sacred space.
To say that it is one word is accurate (I would have said the same thing), but it’s a bit complicated as in Hebrew bits of different words form one word. This is actually really helpful in determining what one word can mean because we can break the word up and study the microcosm of it. In this case you would think all the things the author of that post says the word means would be great if the word could have been textually broken up that way. The problem in this case is it doesn’t say all those things. We get “where” which (as we already noted) may or likely implies a spiritual search-find. You could take away from the text exegetically that God is “searching us out” or “looking for us” or perhaps even noting that the space is spiritual as I already alluded to. All of those things could be good exegesis. That is what the text gives us. Next, we have the understood {ARE}. We don’t really get anything magical from that. Then we have “you” essentially as formed into the singular word. There is really not much to exegete there either. He is talking to a certain person. DO we have the right to insert our name here? Well, the genre of this text is a historical narrative. Simply telling the story. So no, we don’t really have the right to insert our name. Because God was seeking out Adam in the garden doesn’t give us the textual ability to say He searches us out the same. He may or may not, but the text doesn’t give us that warrant. So here you see the author of the meme breaking some huge theological and hermeneutical laws. He takes a text that isn’t about him and tries to make it about him or us. This is called reading into the text. Using the Bible to twist it into saying what you want it to say without the merit of the text giving you that. Now could it mean that later God will act the same towards you? Yeah, later the text may do that but here it doesn’t. However, if you read the text doing that for others in the story over and over and over you might come to an ontological conclusion that if there are 26 examples of God acting this way in the narrative, we have then maybe he acts this way towards me too! (But to be clear, the text still wouldn’t give us that for certain.) Sometimes people take a lot of latitude to say the scripture means something that the text never gave or intended to give. That seems to be the case here. It simply isn’t good theology or maybe even theology at all. It is saying the Bible says something in a text that doesn’t say that.
“God’s first words after the fall” – We don’t know this either. The Bible doesn’t give us the full account. There may have been other words. Perhaps these are the first words in the Bible after the fall. But making the statement that the author makes in the way that he does isn’t true. Does this seem nitpicky? Maybe but there is a difference, and it matters in biblical interpretation and textual criticism.
This is classic for someone trying to make a doctrine or in the authors words, “a whole theology” over something the text doesn’t say. The text says nothing of the lost. Was Adam lost? We aren’t told that he was. Was he asking for a confession. Later scripture tells us that when we sin, we need to confess, but that isn’t in the text here. What about restoration and redemption? Well, everyone knows God wants restoration and redemption, right? But this text doesn’t go here either. Are you following me? There are texts that talk about redemption and restoration but not this one. In fact, maybe the opposite. This text leads to exile from the garden, that is the opposite of restoration. So what it does tell us is exile may come before restorative acts. That could be a more faithful takeaway than what the author of the meme comes up with. The author improperly says the text means something that isn’t given to us. It is as if the author is trying to write his own Bible and proof text the word to say what he wants it to say. The real problem is that we are saying the word says something that it isn’t. Maybe other places say that, but a better hermeneutic is to only exegete what the text says. Don’t add or fill in anything. There is no context for the takeaways the author asserts over the text.
CONCLUSION
A Faithful reading of the text means we only take away what the text gives us. We can’t read anything else into it. I can’t tell you how many times in a sermon I hear a pastor say “the Bible says this” and goes on to quote a verse that doesn’t say anything close to what the pastor says it said. In many cases we have become all too comfortable with accepting things like this, and it has led to a lot of bad consequences. It seems there are so many people are using the Bible for their own gain saying what they want it to ay and that is unfaithful to the text.
NOTE; The Bible Hub is free, easily accessible and works well. LOGOS is better but is $$$.
You have been told your entire life that good Christians should “do their job” and vote. That is the mainstream evangelical Christian view. However, everyone knows “that guy” who seems to be a great Jesus follower and has either totally politically checked out to go live like a monk or perhaps has just convinced himself that the way of the cross isn’t to become “overly” politically aligned as a Christian. To most in the first category the second two positions may also seem “un-Christian.” Nilay Saiya in his global politics of Jesus [1] describes these three positions as the Patriot position or Christianism believing it is your biblical responsibility to vote (7 mountain mandate type of thinking), the second position he describes as the pietists position or detachment such as the first century Essene community; and the last being that of the prophetic witness position describing more of an exilic position of speaking truth passively as a witness. Perhaps there is a time, a calling, or season for all three in your life dependent on each specific situation and your personal position, but as with most issues pertaining to our modern lives, the word of God is not silent here. Let’s see what it says.
Global Christianity – What we all agree on
As with all x44 articles the intended audience here is those that are “all in” for Jesus. For the most part here is what the all in community agrees on. Jesus inaugurated a new kingdom and set apart nation. There is nothing that Jesus talked about. After his resurrection and victory over death on the cross, Jesus assumed the throne in the heavens and sent His spirit to dwell in us. This kingdom is here and now as well as described as coming (eschatologically.) To be clear, the Bible treats this kingdom as a rival kingdom to the other kingdoms of the world using phrases like, “you can’t serve two masters.” The definition given of those that are not in alignment with this ideology is that of “an enemy” to His kingdom even describing some that claim to be His followers as lukewarm unequivocally stating that “He never knew you,” which seemingly describes those that do not follow his commands to leave their formal world behind and live in complete devotion to Him. As strange or counter cultural as it may be, the hope of this kingdom is that the “enemies” might be reconciled by these “good neighbors faithful to Jesus” and eventually won over and shepherded into obedience into the Jesus kingdom. We are told eschatologically that Jesus will eventually wipe away all the other kingdoms of the world. In this nation Christ alone is King.
To those in the original intended first century audience this word certainly would have been received as traitorous and blasphemy towards the Roman empire and the emperor, which is (in part), why Jesus was crucified and explains the sign over his head. Nevertheless, entering into the Kingdom and coming into belief in and agreement with the terms of the king is how salvation is achieved. The Bible describes this decision of our heart and mind as being born into new life, we are then dead to our old ways. We gain citizenship to this new kingdom (Phil 3:20) and should no longer desire or pursue our former life. We are dead to it in every way. We willingly and full accept the call then to function as ambassadors of the new kingdom towards those still dying in the old rival kingdoms of the world as we now happily exist as foreigners or exiles dwelling in our former broken world which scripture describes to be ruled by Satan. The Jesus kingdom is characterized and embodied by those who serve others not themselves, those with the desire to love their enemies and turn the other cheek in grace and mercy shepherding and winning them over them to a better more beautiful way of life. As ambassadors to the pagan nations, we are the physical manifestation of Jesus to our world. In this way, Christians are called to pledge their allegiance to God and his Kingdom, not to any worldly nation, government, political party, flag, or ideology. One of the main tasks of a Christian is to live set-apart which means separated. Separated from what? The world. To live wholly devoted and undefiled for Jesus.
Of course, 2000 years later some circumstances might complicate, cloud, or entangle your thinking. Paul was a part of three kingdoms, he maintained Jewish citizenship, Roman citizenship and was certainly fully devoted primarily to the Kesus kingdom. Most Jesus followers didn’t have a “vote” in Rome; yet today our Rival nation asks us what we think by casting a vote. It is actually pretty amazing that the evil empire allows Christians a vote. In many ways every decision you make is a “vote” of some sort.
Patriotism doesn’t necessarily mean you love the evil satanic ongoings of our government and Washington DC, although it certainly can and often does; but the better idea is that you love the people of the nation and the soil by which it is represented. Godly presence means that the land you inhabit became sacred space unto the Lord. Eventually all the land and world will be won back for the Lord and consecrated back to Him. Do we start now? Isn’t that what we are supposed to be doing?
The enemy is willing to give you a “place” at his table, should you take it? Would Jesus have eaten at that table? Obviously, peoples answer to these questions, even based on scripture and interpretation will vary. Jesus “entertained” the table but not the rival kingdom.
Christian Patriotism
As much as this is the mainstream view and what most Americans believe the Bible teaches, the exegetical “proof” (IMHO) is slim if there at all. However, those that believe that the Bible aligns with casting a vote for your government make a rather convincing philosophical argument. Some of the founding fathers truly believed and sought after creating a platform of government in America by which Godly principles and Godly men could lead our country. Charles Finney, John Adams, John Jay, and Samuel Adams are amongst my favorites that I truly believe were “all in” seekers of the Jesus kingdom, but my verdict is out on the other 55 people in that “boarded up” room. If you haven’t listened to our Expedition 44 interview with Michael Gaddy, I would encourage you to give it a listen. In one regard you might not care what the founding fathers said or thought or might believe that only 4-5 of the founding fathers were postured towards the kingdom. What they say isn’t God’s voice to you and therefore you might think is largely irrelevant to you. But that view might seem to take on a selfishly driven perspective of historical learning.
There are a few ideas in the Bible that might promote such a dual citizenship. Matthew 22:37-40 tells us to Love God and our neighbor. If we truly want the best for our neighbor, wouldn’t we exercise our influence against the evil atrocities of the world and government? But if your already not a great neighbor and you use this passage to justify voting as helping your neighbor then you have some “order issues” or might be guilty of doing something you are accusing others of (ie being a hypocrite and we all know that isn’t helping the body of Christ with their “image”.)
Others might cite Romans 13:8 or I Tim 2:1-4 or even Gal 6 as having influence in our world. The New Testament is filled with examples of Godly people who do not obey the government. As there is a conversation of the narrative and the authors personal opinion coming out in their writings. The bible makes it very clear to follow Jesus first and foremost. Paul himself, the author of the letter to the Romans, disobeyed the government on numerous occasions. Paul uses the word ‘hypotassō,’ which gets translated as “subject.” Paul could have used the word ‘hypakouō’ which means ‘obey,’ but he doesn’t. This difference in words is important.
One of the problems with this view is political corruption. Does your vote even matter? Personally, probably not, but collectively -Yes (is hard to argue). Much of the Biblical theme dwells on the communal body of Christ making a kingdom difference in the world we live in.
Piety / Detachment
When you start asking questions like, whose table are you eating from, or whose flag are you flying, or who are you “in bed with,” you might understand the current political problems of potentially aligning with any system of the world. You also might find an issue with casting a vote for someone you don’t think is a good person, or should we be voting for anyone that isn’t directly part of the Jesus kingdom? (But then the issue comes that if you think this way then no Christian would ever be in a place to vote.) Are you voting for the lesser of two evils – well then, you’re still voting for evil? How does that work as a Christian? There are many Biblical reasons why some have decided to simply not be “aligned” with any system of the world and remain “checked out” of that world and only interested in the happenings of the Jesus Kingdom. The Essenes were an entire first century culture that chose to go this way. Some conservative Baptists also have made choices like this. Most of the prophets were aligned this way and John the Baptist seems to also be described in a similar historical context. Rather than get wrapped up in the ways of the world and their ongoings maybe it would just be better to exit that arena and completely focus all of your time treasure and talent on the kingdom of Jesus? Sounds sort of Biblical, doesn’t it?
Prophetic Witness
This seems to be where Jesus hung out. Tends be personified by a pacifistic voice. It finds its basis by taking exilic language and applying the “babylon” thinking to the context of our current situation.
Jer 29 4 Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, to all who were carried away captive, whom I have caused to be carried away from Jerusalem to Babylon: 5 Build houses and dwell in them; plant gardens and eat their fruit. 6 Take wives and beget sons and daughters; and take wives for your sons and give your daughters to husbands, so that they may bear sons and daughters—that you may be increased there, and not diminished. 7 And seek the peace of the city where I have caused you to be carried away captive, and pray to the Lord for it; for in its peace you will have peace.
Beginning with Moses, God appoints several figures to act as Prophets. Walter Bruggemann, asserts that the task of the prophetic is to nurture, nourish, and evoke a consciousness and perception alternative to the consciousness and perception of the dominant culture around us. Prophets speak truth to power—yes, but they are also there to remind the people of God who they are and to speak as one of the Spirit. [2] As Christians we have been commissioned to make disciples, not political leaders. We have sacrificed our witness at the altar of power. We are Kingdom people— Kingdom of God. We are not empire people.
THE WRAP UP
I echo the call of Bryan Zhand: The entire creation is groaning for the Sons and Daughters of God to reveal themselves (Romans 8:19). [3] Some would argue that we can’t escape the “politics” of the world around us, and maybe we shouldn’t be trying to. Our politics (if any) must understand the Kingdom of God first and the politics of Jesus is our platform. As I began stating, the body of Christ has many dynamics. Those that are part of the same body read and interpret the same text differently. They see the ongoings of the world and the way Jesus interests through different lenses. Time and situations are constantly shifting. What you couldn’t or wouldn’t consider or justify last year you might this. We should all be in a state of rethinking and reconsidering truly what Jesus would do in each and every situation. Edification is sometimes supporting your brothers and sisters in Christ when you might not fully get them. Seasons change, people change, but God’s character is unchanging, and his ways are always faithful to us despite our broken ways.
The idea or doctrine of separation from God is often misunderstood within current evangelical Christianity. Make no mistake, humanity continues to make choices to be separated from God, but I would venture to say most Christians have an inaccurate view of this separation. Adam and Eve’s sin separated them from the life that the tree gave but it didn’t necessarily separate them from God. At that moment death was passed on, but not their original sin. And to be clear fellowship with God was also not lost as you often hear! That is the continual message of God to His people. He still desires to walk with them. If you remember in the garden, He didn’t walk with them 100% of the time (Genesis 3 alludes to this.) It is true that Adam and Eve were “removed” from the garden, which was God’s domain; and then placed or led back down to lower or common earth and guards were placed at the entrance as to not allow them back into Eden.
In a basic sense humanity at that moment was separated from God. If my kids are fighting, I separate them (and often relocate them) but that doesn’t mean that my intent is to sever the relationship, I am merely changing their space. After the fall what changed is that from this point on God would have to go to people and meet the people where they were, rather than the people naturally dwelling in God’s sacred space -Eden. Metaphorically, instead of my kids playing in my room I have to go visit them in their room. In this sense there was a type of “separation” but not inability. Perhaps it would make the relationship more difficult but, but the intent certainly was not to sever, quite the opposite actually. This understanding is important when forming your “separation theology” and your basis for understanding the character of God to Humanity.
Similarly, after the fall, to Israel He was a cloud and “walked” with them similar to the way that he walked with Adam and Eve in the garden, that aspect of their relationship to God wasn’t lost, it was always offered and up to humanity to accept or reject. The intent and purpose that God started in the Garden to walk with his royal priesthood didn’t change after the fall, it just “distanced” the plan.
One thing that is very important that few have come to realize is that today, through Jesus we are actually better off or closer is distance or proximity than Adam and Eve were in this sense of walking with God, this is the heart of the new covenant -we have His Spirit residing in us continually as we are His temple. Jesus not only returned us to what we had in Eden but perfected it. Does He come and go such as described in Genesis 3? No, He is always with us, we are promised that time and time again as the core of who and what His Spirit offers to us. We may receive a fresh anointing (and that may be up to your theology here); but make no mistake, He never leaves us. I am not really even comfortable saying that we are or were temporarily separated from God as I truly see the Spirit continually meeting the most broken people in the most broken places. (I will remind you that after the fall God still sent his presence to reside with people.) Today, God and His spirit are continually available to us, but we also still have to make the cognitive choice to enter into that walk. That’s always been the choice of humanity -choose to walk with God or choose to be separated (live divided or rival) from Him. That is the core of our free will. Adam and Eve’s banishment from the garden did a lot of things theologically, but to say that it separated (severed) us from the presence of God, as a lot of doctrines would understand it -seems to be theologically inaccurate. The offer from God to continue fellowship with Him strongly continued after the garden. In fact, that may actually be the central theme of all of scripture!!! One of the main character attributes of God is the desire to continue walking with everyone that would enter into a covenant with Him. He would continue to be faithful to that relationship when others would be unfaithful.
Separation from God is theologically defined as “Hell”. One of the issues that people have a hard time understanding is that our English translations use only one word for “hell” when there are several words that described slightly different contexts of what our one word meant in both the Old Testament and the New Testament in Hebrew and Greek. The great majority of the time we see the English word Hell translated in our Bibles it is the Geek word “Gehenna” describing more of a loose “hell on earth” separation from God. Gehenna was an actual place in the ancient world. The Valley of Hinnom, Gehinnom or Gehenna is a historic valley surrounding Jerusalem from the west and southwest that has acquired various theological connotations, including as a place of divine punishment, in Jewish eschatology. The term Gehenna in the first century was regularly used as an idiom for something like “the other side of the tracks” (Matthew 5, 10, 18, 23 as well as Mark 9 and other places). in this way when the word hell was used it had a metaphorical sense similar to what we might say as “life is hell.” But I also would say we have to be careful here as the implication was that these places were thought of as being “far from God” but that isn’t necessarily accurate. Jesus actually spent a good deal of time in these darker places. In other words, the world would say that God may be separated from these places but God, especially through His son doesn’t seem to be bound by any kind of separation to them. In this sense as I express early, Jesus regularly met people in “their hell.”
There is also a parallel to this way of thinking in most of the early church creeds in the understanding that after Jesus’ crucifixion he descended into the depths to “meet people in their hell” and possibly regain the lost keys of life and offer them to those in that place that was formerly “separated from Him. I would venture to say that Jesus’ theology would be consistent having the same or very similar requirements to these “souls” that we are given in the rest of the scripture and particularly the new covenant. Interesting to think that a large part of Jesus’ mission was to again offer this kind of relational life in the afterworld to those that seemingly rejected it (or had never had the chance perhaps) to now accept that relationship.
In some cases (similar to those listed above) and in the OT, the realm of the dead is the Hebrew word sheol often translated as hell. The New Testament Greek equivalent to sheol is hades. In the New Testament, this is only found a few times such as in Matt 16 when the “gates of Hades” was used as a colloquial Jewish phrase for death and a reference of the fallen spiritual beings in a Deuteronomy 32 worldview sense. Surprisingly, the least used term for Hell in the Bible is the one most people think of the most “as hell”, and is translated as the lake of fire, mentioned only in Revelation 19:20 and 20:10, 14-15, and takes on the traditional view of the “final hell”, for what seems to be the destiny of both fallen spiritual beings (to which it was created by original intent) and human beings that have not chosen to accept and live for God – this is an eschatological state of judgement.
However, in some way, all the translated types of hell seem to describe a condition of being separated from God.
In conclusion, traditionally we have misinterpreted separation to be something that was put between us and our relationship with God in Eden, yet the Bible doesn’t say that. God’s intimate and vivacious pursuit to walk or have intimate relationship with us is tied closely to His character and thus never changes. Through Jesus we are actually closer in proximity to Have His spirit in our Hearts than what was first given at Eden. God’s pursuit to have intimate communion with us is stronger and closer than ever before.
If you grew up in modern evangelical circles, I am sure you were raised in church hearing something like,
Because of the sin of Adam and Eve, you and I now live personally separated from the tree of life and from the presence of God. The whole human race at that moment was flung into the downward spiral of the curse of man and God’s wrath, the weight of their sin and God’s judgement fell on them and therefore continues to fall on us as if we also made the cognitive choice that Adam and Eve made.
Many x44 people have gone through a bit of an exegetical deconstruction of what they have always been told that the Bible says finding out that what they have traditionally been fed and believed likely isn’t the nature of God or what the Bible actually says. Renovation is needed and usually bears fruit and opens the thresholds towards devotion to the Lord. As I agree with a good part of the statements above, I believe such similar statements to be misleading and stunt a person’s road to sanctification. First much of this way of thinking is tied to the pillars of Calvinism. I will mostly quote from R.C. Sproul who is commonly known as the best Theologian to hold to and explain Reformed theology and Calvinism. To be clear I have read every article and book I source completely. My library has as many books defending Calvinism (and likely more), than I own from the free will camps. Before Sproul passed, I knew him personally and greatly respected him and agreed theologically with him in some capacities (such as partial preterism) but unfortunately feel that he was way off on becoming the popular spokesperson for Calvinism. This article is intended to be a “quicker” read, if you are interested in diving into this conversation, I would suggest the X44 Original Sin series here.
To be clear, thinking that every person is somehow under spell handed down to them generation after generation by reformed circles camps own definition is called Total depravity (also called radical corruption and is foundationally tied to the concept of original sin)[1] and asserts that as a consequence of the fall of man into sin, every person is enslaved to sin. People are not by nature inclined to love God, but rather to serve their own interests and to reject the rule of God. Thus, all people by their own faculties are morally unable to choose to trust God for their salvation and be saved (the term “total” in this context refers to sin affecting every part of a person, not that every person is as evil as they could be).[2] This doctrine is derived from Calvin’s interpretation of Augustine’s explanation about Original Sin.[3] The singular scripture that is used for this is:
“Sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned” (Romans 5:12).
We also have an entire x44 series on Atonement and get into regularly why the way the reformed camps use this verse singularly (along with a few others) is neither exegetical nor follows the laws of hermeneutics. Notice that it was death that passed (separated now from the sustaining Tree of Life) or came upon all, not Adam’s personal disobedience. But to remind you of a few basics, Romans 5 needs to be read in context, not simply plucking one verse out to make a doctrine out of it. Scripture seems to teach that sin itself is not inherited (although the consequences for Israel often stretched to 4 generations): “[T]he son shall not bear the iniquity of the father” (Eze. 18:20). Everyone is responsible for their own conduct (Rom. 14:12). Sinfulness often begins in one’s youth (Gen. 8:21; Jer. 3:25). Children must reach a level of maturity before they are able to choose good and evil (Isa. 7:15, 16). Little children are held up as models for those who seek the kingdom (Matt. 18:3; 19:14). The human spirit is not inherited from one’s parents; it is given by God (Ecc. 12:7; Heb. 12:9).
In our YouTube video ORIGINAL SIN series we addressed how Original Sin (the pre-cursor to Calvinistic doctrines) is not Biblical or Ancient.
The first 400 years of the Church did not believe this.
There is zero evidence that Judaism ever believed this. Modern Messianic Jews do not believe this.
Augustine was the inventor of this doctrine in the 5th century and much of it was due to his importation of his pagan background into Christianity and lack of the knowledge of the Greek language.
NONE OF THESE EARLY CHURCH FATHERS AFFIRMED THIS: Clement, the Didache, Athanasius, Irenaeus, Ignatius, or Justin Martyr
The doctrine came into the church through Augustine of Hippo (396-440 CE) and the doctrine was originally called Concupiscence. Augustine could only read Latin, not Greek, or Hebrew. Augustine came to original sin by reading Romans 5:12 in a bad Latin translation. The original Greek would read: “Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death came through sin, and so death spread to all because all have sinned” Yet his Latin translation said, “all have sinned in Him (Adam)”. Where the Greek says that death has spread to all because all (each) have sinned.
Concupiscence
Concupiscence, according to Augustine, relates to Adam’s sin being transferred through sexual reproduction.
Its root definition is a base sexual desire. We get our word concubine from this.
He believed that through this all men are born with their will, body, and mind corrupt, and this is transmitted sexually. They inherited the sin through the sexual act leading to birth.
He taught that Jesus had to be born of a virgin because he connected this to the sexual act. Therefore, the virgin birth spared Jesus from a sinful nature.
I affirm the virgin birth but Isaiah said this is a “SIGN” and has nothing to do with original sin.
God’s first command to humans to be fruitful and multiply. If sex is in itself a sinful act as reformed theology says than God would be commanding humans to sin.
We also get the doctrine of infant depravity from this, and Pastors today even keep this bad doctrine going:
John MacArthur said, “At no point is a man’s depravity more manifest than in the procreative act…by what he creates. Whatever comes from the loins of man is wicked.”
Augustine of Hippo said, “The only innocent feature in babies is the weakness of their frames; the minds of infants are far from innocent.”
One issue with teaching that sin is inherited is that it means God is then judging you for someone else’s action. That obviously isn’t scriptural. Thinking this way holds you back. In Christ we have life -not death. Once we accept this life here and now and eschatologically to come, we are called and charged to live in holiness separated from any ties of sin. That is what it means to live a life in Sanctification.
FROM HERE I WANT TO SHOW THE PROGRESSION INTO 5PT CALVINISM, but if you already know that, skip down to the next similar starred divider to continue reading:
The next problem with thinking we are bound to the sin ascribed to us that it would mean that we are also then unconditionally elected (also called sovereign election)[4] which asserts that God has chosen from eternity those whom he will bring to himself not based on foreseen virtue, merit, or faith in those people; rather, his choice is unconditionally grounded in his mercy alone. Some may argue the connection, but if you believe you came into this world already doomed by someone that came before you then you believe at least some part of the decision has been made for you. I do believe in the corruption of the fallen world, but we are called to be delivered and live in freedom. The effects of the death that came in through Adam are not or do not have to be continual towards you. You are only responsible for your choices in terms of life with Jesus. With this you also venture into a very similar doctrine called limited atonement (also called definite atonement)[5] asserts that Jesus’s substitutionary atonement was definite and certain in its purpose and in what it accomplished. This implies that only the sins of the elect were atoned for by Jesus’s death. This is cosmic lottery language. I can’t find anything in the Bible that goes this way and neither could the early church. These are all modern “inventions” that came from the Reformation.
Thinking this way is also tied to the idea of irresistible grace (also called effectual grace)[6] which asserts that the saving grace of God is effectually applied to those whom he has determined to save (that is, the elect) and overcomes their resistance to obeying the call of the gospel, bringing them to a saving faith. Essentially this believes that God created robots and determined their ways before time. It completely discounts the many passages that clearly teach free will. It leaves reformed theologians having to do all kinds of theological gymnastics with verses about free will.
Finally thinking that you are responsible for the sins of the ones that came before you is also ties to a Calvinist doctrine called the perseverance of the saints (also called preservation of the saints;[7] the “saints” being those whom God has predestined to salvation) asserts that since God is sovereign and his will cannot be frustrated by humans or anything else, those whom God has called into communion with himself will continue in faith until the end. Those who apparently fall away either never had true faith to begin with (1 John 2:19), or, if they are saved but not presently walking in the Spirit, they will be divinely chastened (Hebrews 12:5–11) and will repent (1 John 3:6–9).[8]Most people refer to this as once saved always saved. But in this case, if you believe that sins were tied to you at birth, your theology if it is consistent would also then get to the place of believing that everything was set before you and if that is the case, to be consistent if you were intended by a sovereign God to be saved then how could you lose that? The problem again goes back to the fact that the Bible continually teaches that we are responsible for the decisions we make and even though when we make and allegiant confession our past is made clean, we continue to be held responsible by a just God for decisions thereafter. You can’t make a onetime proclamation and go on living in sin and expect to be saved. The proclamation of life in Christ is ongoing. Ot is a journey, an expedition. This is why I have said many times, if you are going to take on any form of reformed theology it should be one or all of them. Perhaps the worst theology is those that try to adhere to a few points of Calvinism but not all of them.
Here is a better way of thinking about original sin rather than falling into Calvinist doctrines such as the above… (these are borrowed and slightly reworded from my good friend Greg Boyd at reknew.org.
1) I do think it is theoretically possible for an individual to live a sinless life, you do too if you truly believe in the complete humanity of Jesus! Yet, this isn’t inconsistent with admitting that everyone will inevitably sin. Think of it like this. Every car crash (let us assume) is preventable, if only drivers were more careful. Hence, it is theoretically possible that there will be no car crashes anywhere on the earth today — or this month — or this year — or ever. But it is certain there will be car crashes, for which drivers are responsible. The thing is, statistical certainty doesn’t negate individual responsibility. We are responsible for every sin we commit, -we didn’t need to do it. We could have done otherwise. It’s theoretically possible to go the rest of our lives without sinning. Yet, it’s certain that, over our lifetime of decisions, we will sin. I believe most evangelical American Christians are far from this, but we don’t have to be. The worldly entanglement has led way to daily sins. But I do believe we were called and created and expected to do better before the Lord.
2) I see “original sin” as mostly being born into a screwed-up world that is oppressed with fallen powers. This doesn’t make us sin nor are we responsible for the sins before us that contributed to it. Yet, it does render it certain that we will eventually sin (see above). This is, in part, why we need a savior. To be clear one we are dead to our old selves we should not continue to live in sin or the slavery of the world. Paul makes this exceedingly clear.
3) Finally, it is important that we not think about this only in individualistic terms. From a biblical perspective (and now, with much confirmation from science), the human community is, in a sense, one person, extending back to Adam. We were made to live, disciple, and be discipled in the community of those that walk with Jesus. We influence each other, and are responsible, in varying degrees, for one another. So we have collectively gotten ourselves into a situation where we can’t avoid sin, and the responsibility is shared by all of us. This is what Paul means when he says we were in Adam. Yet, we are now placed in Christ — all of us (I Cor. 15:22; Rom 5:14-20). It’s just that we all (including believers) tend to see ourselves and our world as though we were yet in Adam. Transitioning from Adam-thought to Christ-thought is what discipleship is all about. One of my biggest grumbles with evangelical modern church is we don’t disciple to live devotionally to the LORD in communion with the perseverance of the saints.
Getting back to where we started, Adam and Eve’s sin separated them from the life that the tree gave but it didn’t necessarily separate them from God. I have an article on this here.
That is the continual message of God to His people. He still desires to walk with them. God does not remain separated from us, He is always with us, we are promised that time and time again. We may receive a fresh anointing (and that may be up to your theology here); but make no mistake, He never leaves us.
We don’t have to live in depravity or a downward spiral. That is another huge theme of the Bible! God has more for you! Claim him, get into the word, be surrounded with the community of saints, and live and walk with Him every hour of every day! Refuse the world and all that it offers. You were purposed for more! Don’t let Satan sell yourself short! Claim victory and live in perseverance walking with the LORD and those that walk with Him. Seek discipleship and disciple! Live out your kingdom destiny!
God’s wrath in scripture is the handing over of his unrepentant sinful people to what they have coming or what they have earned. It is removing the providential hand from their lives. The weight of your sin and consequences of your decisions are real but you don’t need to and shouldn’t dwell there! Don’t dwell in your sin. Get redeemed! God offers you healing and freedom here and now! Step into it, believe it and live it. You are no longer to be bound to your flesh or former ways of the world. Step into it and live it!
let me articulate a better view:
The sin of Adam and Eve separated humanity from the tree of life but God is still offering the relationship that He had with them in Eden and actually desires a better way, not to just occasionally walk with you as He did with Adam and Eve in Eden, but through Jesus now offers even more, He wants to never leave you, to continually reside in your heart as you become His temple being the very physical manifestation of the presence of God to those you interact with. Yes, the world has been taken over by evil, but you represent light and have the power to make the presence that you fill sacred to make what is broken healed. You are the source of God to renew the Earth. You no longer live under a curse, but the power of the LORD is in you. Choose this day to no longer live in sin and dwell richly in the presence of the LORD. 1 Jn 3:6-9, 1 Jn 5:18, Rom 8:11, Gal 2:20, Col 1:27, I Peter 2:8-9, Eph 3:17, 2 Thess 1:10, 2 Cor 5:17, and so many more passages make all of these things abundantly clear.
Sproul, R. C. (March 25, 2017). “TULIP and Reformed Theology: Total Depravity”. Ligonier Ministries. Archived from the original on August 5, 2021. Retrieved August 5, 2021. I like to replace the term total depravity with my favorite designation, which is radical corruption. Ironically, the word radical has its roots in the Latin word for “root,” which is radix, and it can be translated root or core.
^ Steele, David; Thomas, Curtis (1963). The Five Points of Calvinism Defined, Defended, Documented. P&R. p. 25. ISBN978-0-87552-444-3. The adjective ‘total’ does not mean that each sinner is as totally or completely corrupt in his actions and thoughts as it is possible for him to be. Instead, the word ‘total’ is used to indicate that the “whole” of man’s being has been affected by sin.
Sproul, R. C. (April 1, 2017). “TULIP and Reformed Theology: Unconditional Election”. Ligonier Ministries. Archived from the original on August 5, 2021. Retrieved August 5, 2021. Unconditional election is another term that I think can be a bit misleading, so I prefer to use the term sovereign election.
Sproul, R. C. (April 8, 2017). “TULIP and Reformed Theology: Limited Atonement”. Ligonier Ministries. Archived from the original on August 5, 2021. Retrieved August 5, 2021. I prefer not to use the term limited atonement because it is misleading. I rather speak of definite redemption or definite atonement, which communicates that God the Father designed the work of redemption specifically with a view to providing salvation for the elect, and that Christ died for His sheep and laid down His life for those the Father had given to Him.
Sproul, R. C. (April 15, 2017). “TULIP and Reformed Theology: Irresistible Grace”. Ligonier Ministries. Archived from the original on August 5, 2021. Retrieved August 5, 2021. I have a little bit of a problem using the term irresistible grace, not because I don’t believe this classical doctrine, but because it is misleading to many people. Therefore, I prefer the term effectual grace, because the irresistible grace of God effects what God intends it to effect.
Sproul, R. C. (April 22, 2017). “TULIP and Reformed Theology: Perseverance of the Saints”. Ligonier Ministries. Archived from the original on August 5, 2021. Retrieved August 5, 2021. I think this little catchphrase, perseverance of the saints, is dangerously misleading. It suggests that the perseverance is something that we do, perhaps in and of ourselves. … So I prefer the term the preservation of the saints, because the process by which we are kept in a state of grace is something that is accomplished by God.
“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:
“A voice of one calling in the wilderness,
‘Prepare the way for the Lord,
make straight paths for Him.’”
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.
Vss 5:6 “People went out to him from Jerusalem and all Judea and the whole region around the Jordan. Confessing their sins, they were baptized by him in the Jordan River.”
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.
Vss 7-8 “But when John saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his place of baptism, he said to them, ‘You brood of vipers, who warned you to flee from the coming wrath? Produce fruit, then, in keeping with repentance.’”
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:
Luke 3:3-17
3 He went into all the region around the Jordan, preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins (noun),
4 as it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet:
“A voice of one calling in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for Him.
5 Every valley shall be filled in, and every mountain and hill made low.
The crooked ways shall be made straight, and the rough ways smooth.
6 And all humanity will see God’s salvation.’”
7 Then John said to the crowds coming out to be baptized by him, “You brood of vipers, who warned you to flee from the coming wrath?
8 Produce (Aorist Imperative Active) fruit, then, in keeping with (accusative adjective of ‘fruits’ meaning ‘worthy, suitable, deserving, matching value) repentance (metanoias). And do not begin to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ For I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham.
9 The axe lies ready at the root of the trees, and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire.”
10 The crowds asked him, “What then should we do?”
11 John replied, “Whoever has two tunics should share with him who has none, and whoever has food should do the same.”
12 Even tax collectors came to be baptized. “Teacher,” they asked, “what should we do?”
13 “Collect no more than you are authorized,” he answered.
14 Then some soldiers asked him, “And what should we do?” “Do not take money by force or false accusation,” he said. “Be content with your wages.”
15 The people were waiting expectantly and were all wondering in their hearts if John could be the Christ.
16 John answered all of them: “I baptize you with water, but One more powerful than I will come, the straps of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.
17 His winnowing fork is in His hand to clear His threshing floor and to gather the wheat into His barn; but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.”
Acts 8:26-38
26 Now an angel of the Lord said to Philip, “Get up and go south to the desert road that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza.”
27 So he started out, and on his way he met an Ethiopian eunuch, a court official in charge of the entire treasury of Candace, queen of the Ethiopians. He had gone to Jerusalem to worship,
28 and on his return was sitting in his chariot reading Isaiah the prophet.
29 The Spirit said to Philip, “Go over to that chariot and stay by it.”
30 So Philip ran up and heard the man reading Isaiah the prophet. “Do you understand what you are reading?” Philip asked.
31 “How can I,” he said, “unless someone guides me?” And he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.
32 The eunuch was reading this passage of Scripture:
“He was led like a sheep to the slaughter, and as a lamb before the shearer is silent, so He did not open His mouth.
33 In His humiliation He was deprived of justice. Who can recount His descendants? For His life was removed from the earth.”
34 “Tell me,” said the eunuch, “who is the prophet talking about, himself or someone else?”
35 Then Philip began with this very Scripture and told him the good news about Jesus.
36 As they traveled along the road and came to some water, the eunuch said, “Look, here is water! What is there to prevent me from being baptized?”
38 And he gave orders to stop the chariot. Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and Philip baptized him.
1 Peter 3:18-22
18 For Christ also suffered for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive in the Spirit,
19 in whom He also went and preached to the spirits in prison
20 who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built.
In the ark a few people, only eight souls, were saved through water.
21 And this water symbolizes the baptism that now saves you also— not the removal of dirt from the body, but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God— through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,
22 who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers subject to Him.
Romans 6:1-7
1 What then shall we say? Shall we continue in sin so that grace may increase?
2 Certainly not! How can we who died to sin live in it any longer?
3 Or aren’t you aware that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death?
4 We were therefore buried with Him through baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been united with Him like this in His death, we will certainly also be united with Him in His resurrection.
6 We know that our old self was crucified with Him so that the body of sin might be rendered powerless, that we should no longer be slaves to sin.
7 For anyone who has died has been freed from sin.
Bloom, J.J. 2010 The Jewish Revolts Against Rome, A.D. 66–135: A Military Analysis. McFarland.
Hitti, Philip K. (2002). Hitti, P. K. Gorgias Press. ISBN 9781931956604. Archived from the original on 15 April 2021. Retrieved 28 July 2022.
Schwartz, Seth (2014). The ancient Jews from Alexander to Muhammad. Cambridge. pp. 85–86. ISBN 978-1-107-04127-1. OCLC 863044259.
Taylor, J. E. (15 November 2012). The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea. Oxford University Press.
Armstrong (2011). Jerusalem: One City, Three Faiths. p. 163.
Karesh, Sara E. (2006). Encyclopedia of Judaism.
Harrison, Peter (June 2017). “‘I Believe Because it is Absurd’: The Enlightenment Invention of Tertullian’s Credo”. Church History.
Gonzáles, Justo L. (2010). “The Early Church to the Dawn of the Reformation”. The Story of Christianity. Vol. 1. New York: HarperCollins Publishers.
This translation was created in conjunction with the Patristics Project at Faulkner University.
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.
Tertullian: Douglas Powell, Tertullianists and Cataphrygians, Vigiliae Christianae 29 (1975)
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.
Matthew 6:21: “For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.”
Proverbs 3:5: “Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding.”
Proverbs 4:23: “Above all else, guard your heart, for everything you do flows from it.”
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)
Proverbs 23:26: “My son, give me your heart and let your eyes delight in my ways.”
Psalms 51:10: “Create in me a pure heart, O God, and renew a steadfast spirit within me.”
Psalms 73:26: “My flesh and my heart may fail, but God is the strength of my heart and my portion forever.”
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!
