Community, Demons, and Zion

I wrote a comment last night on someone's blog who was asking for a definition and discussion of community. This is what I wrote, which I would like to take the time to expand a bit more in this post:

Community is solely based upon the bearing of the image of God in our faces, and beholding that glory to be moved from glory to glory. It is found when the saints gather, whether for prayer, for Bible study, for worship, or for fun ;)
Community is the stepping out from this world and into the eternal together with other believers. It is the dividing of oneself away from the systems of the world, and the principalities behind those systems, in order to be taken by something much more organic and beautiful: Zion. Zion is the City of God. Zion is the Mount upon which the Temple sits. Zion is twofold – a heavenly dwelling with an earthly counterpart. Zion is the place of freedom. Zion is the beauty of holiness, it is the unadulterated splendor of where God’s people are in unity with Him, and it is where we shine with the radiance of Christ. This is community. It is where we love one another with the love of Christ Himself, and from that love, we pursue absolute perfection in that love together. Community, to put it plainly, is heaven manifest upon earth through the children of God. Though we know that when two or three gather in His name that He is in our midst, we also know there is a time for this literal manifestation, when Zion will come down from heaven, when the earthly Zion and the heavenly Zion will be one. That is community. It is born out of the travail for that reality in our midst, whatever means it might take through the Spirit of God to get there.
Grace and peace, dear brother. May Christ’s love overflow in you to be brought unto that eternal radiant glory.

First, lets start with that first statement. It comes directly from 2 Corinthians 3:17-18. For a little bit of context, know that Paul is expressing the immense glory of the New Covenant in comparison to the Old Covenant. He references Moses' veil when he hid his shining face from the Israelites, and he says that this veil is still over the hearts of all they who are not in Christ whenever Moses is read. This needs a bit of explaining. Isaiah 25:7 speaks of a "veil" that covers the nations. This veil is the principalities and powers of the air. It is the demonic strongholds that rule and influence all nations and peoples. That veil was upon the hearts of the Israelites when the came out of Egypt, for it takes more than just receiving the Law to be saved. There is an inward heart conversion that must take place - that did take place for some, hopefully even many, in that first generation. This veil is the Law, which is the power of sin. Now, Law in Paul's mouth is not the same as what we think. Law does not merely mean the words on the page, but the idea that we can have righteousness apart from faith. If we simply uphold "the law", then we are obedient and righteous. That is a false righteousness, one based upon our ability and pride rather than our humility and brokenness. It utilizes the wisdom of those principalities and powers in order to consider ourselves right before God, simply because we have a form of godliness.

Yet, when the heart turns, that veil is taken away. When the individual will come to Christ, and be regenerated, the veil is broken off. This is why Paul says, "Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as by the Spirit of the Lord." 

Because we are beholding God's glory in one another's face, instead of that veil upon the heart, we are brought into a place of ever increasing glory.

You can see with this how we go from my first statement directly into the next. We step out from the influence of the principalities and power through living a life of reflecting the glory of God in our face unto all others. Freedom from the principalities and powers can only be attained when we come out and be separate unto the Lord. We no longer have our identity within the systems of the world - not even our father's house, our kindred (Irish, German, African, etc), or our national identity. That kind of separation is painful if it is only for the sake of separating. That is the beauty, though. It is not only for the sake of separation. There is a process unto which we must be taken, and sometimes that process is long and difficult, but we are indeed coming unto Zion, and you have indeed come unto Zion if you are in Christ.

Because we are no longer under the oppression of the devil, we are now at liberty to conduct our lives through the freedom of the Spirit. To live out of that Spirit is to wage war against the enemy. Our lives, everything we do, is a battle.

Ephesians 3:8-12 reads, "To me, who am less than the least of all the saints, this grace was given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, and to make all see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God who created all things through Jesus Christ; to the intent that now the manifold wisdom of God might be made known by the church to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places, according to the eternal purpose which He accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord, in whom we have boldness and access with confidence through faith in Him."

This is the purpose of the church. We are to display the wisdom of God to the principalities and powers. What does that even mean? How do we do that?

The wisdom of God is displayed through the cross. It is that through sacrifice, and not selfishness, that we obtain exultation. It is through submission unto death, even the laying down of our lives for our brothers and sisters, that we obtain life. This is utterly paradoxical in our rational world. The reason this seems to be completely opposite of what we would think is because we are influenced all too much by the wisdom of Satan. It is his wisdom that tells us "It is a dog-eat-dog world out there! You have to look out for number one! If you don't, then who will? You have to take care of yourself before you can care for others, right?" It is the wisdom of God that says, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell all your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven." There is an utter contrast.

What is community? It is the place where the saints have come together utterly separated from the world, untarnished by the principalities and their wisdom, in order to serve the Lord their God in whatever way He might command. It is when we do not rely upon the wisdom of the kingdom of darkness - pride, self, manipulation, intimidation, greed, lust, etc - but rely solely upon God that we have entered into community. Our daily life is to go from house to house breaking bread. If we don't meet with all of the saints, and we don't receive from them the impartation of life, then how shall we survive the day? The enemy of my soul is too strong for me alone.

This is community, and this is what we are to display unto even the cosmic realities. May the Lord make you incredibly hungry for such expression of His kingdom in your midst, and may you be unwilling to settle for anything less. Blessings in Jesus' name!

Leviticus Podcasts

I have spent the last week recording audio messages going through the book of Leviticus available for download here:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/setdtm4l4rk3u5h/AAA4toqOaVvpOJpDVnfeV1SKa?dl=0

OR

Watch on youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL3zdMKwnvH8GGQa0qiX62pwF5xgZC0L3r

Feel free to download and listen. Be edified, dear brethren. =)

Satan Destroys Nations

A man from Uganda had given a message that changed my life in regard to the way I perceive spiritual warfare. It has to do with fighting for our nation. Right off the bat, I almost feel the need to stress that this is not about patriotism, but about entering into the ultimate intention of God for our nation. We've prayed for revival for so long, and we've been pouring out our tears, and we've been hearing for so long that persecution is coming to America. So many seem to speak messages of revival, restoration, enduring hardships and suffering, and the coming persecution upon Christians.

Ignore all of it. They know almost nothing of God's purposes.

What people are sensing is from the enemy, and not from God. They are hearing the taunts of Satan, and are then crying because of his jeers. Let me explain this as clearly and concisely as I possibly can.

There are two ways that the enemy destroys nations. The first is only temporary to lead into the second. The principalities and powers will lull to sleep the strong, so that the net comes around them, and when they finally wake up, they have no strength, no authority, no voice, and no hope. Though they know their strength and have desire to fight (and will fight), they simply have handed over all strength to the enemy - like Samson gave his strength over to Delilah.

The second way that Satan destroys nations is to use violence and terror. He will come in like a flood to oppress anyone who stands in his way. Women are oppressed. Men live in fear. Children are taken from their homes and forced to serve in the military. Anyone who opposes the powers that be is annihilated. Absolute oppression is poured out upon all - even they who are being used as puppets at the top. For an example of this, look in the Middle East. See the work of ISIS for what it really is: the tactic of the enemy to destroy entire nations. (Another example in modern times would be Nazi Germany.)

Here is the problem: When we pray about issues regarding the Middle East, or regarding homosexual activism, or regarding abortion, or regarding the political agendas and the government that rules over us, we often are praying in regard to the issues that we see. There are deeper issues than that.

When we examine America's history, what is one of the issues that comes up over and over again? Racism. I saw somewhere that 150,000 people were killed in the trail of tears - the utter destruction of the Native Americans. Slavery has been something that has left a tarnish upon this nation, not just from 1700's, but even from the Civil War through the Civil Right's movement of the 1960's. When we see the racism issue being displayed every day on the media, it is not because we still struggle with racism. Whether that is true or not is a non-issue.

There is a principality over our nation that is driving the racism thing. It is an Assyrian spirit, one that would claim itself to be the "master race" (it was the Assyrians who coined this term), and their leaders were called “Khatti-sars”. From this we have words like Caesar, Tzar, Czar, Kaiser, etc. The Assyrians used symbols like the double-headed eagle, the iron cross, and the swastika as their representations. Yes, the eagle on the dollar bill comes from the Assyrian symbol. They are recorded by Philo and Josephus as being people with blonde hair and blue eyes, and white skin. The Indians (country) called them "white demons". This is what has infiltrated Germany, thus the rise of Nazism, and what has come across the sea into America, thus the racism and elitism.

The roots need to be noted and understood. We are fighting principalities and powers, not racism and abortion. The problem stems unto a spirit that presides over our nation, that until it be cast down by the Church that has come out from all influence of the principalities and powers, we will continue to find these problems. They won't stop here. The goal is to oppress the people of God, to numb them and to deceive them, until  eventually they have no power at all. To use their wisdom at all is to surrender your authority to them (see here and here for more information on their wisdom). To harness patriotism, which I do love what American is supposed to stand for (freedom), is to play directly into their power.

God has called us out of father, kindred, and nation - just as He called Abraham out - so that we might come into a different Kingdom entirely. It is from that heavenly kingdom, with the authority invested in us through freedom from demonic influence and manipulation, and freedom from sin, that we are able to war against those powers over our nation.

Ultimately, the casting down of principalities from a national level requires the command over even the elements of nature (see my blog here on the two witnesses). The replacement of government is not anarchy, but theocracy. The establishment of theocracy would require that we seek the heart of God, to understand what His purposes are for our nation, and to live from the reality of what He has called us to be. As Americans, God has called us to be that nation of freedom. But, what exactly does that mean? What precisely does God demand that we as a nation would do? This is something that we need to prayerfully wrestle with in community, for without the intuition and discernment of the saints in corporeity we cannot possibly come to solid conclusions of what God has called our great nation to be in this time. Whatever it is that He would call us to be and to do, it will relate to the Jew in our midst, and to Israel in the last days. What exactly that means is more than I can express at this moment, but for those interested, I would suggest reading this to start.

The Holy of Holies

When we look at Revelation 4:1-2, we read of the two phrases “voice I had first heard” and “in the Spirit” – both connecting back to Revelation 1:10. This is the same vision, and not a separate vision. The fact that Revelation 1-3 comes first in the book should be noted as preliminary remarks concerning the churches. This also would explain why the word μετα is used. It means both after and with, and not either/or. It is after seeing the first vision, and after writing the seven letters to the churches that John turns his focus to this, which is not a separate vision, but with the first two statements.

In this heavenly vision, we find it paralleling both Isaiah 6 and Ezekiel 1-2. The difficulty with this chapter for many is preconceived notions of what these symbolsmust mean, and often they can’t be tied to anything exactly. We see, just like in Isaiah 6, a throne, and angels singing holy, holy, holy. Just like in Ezekiel 1-2, we find the four living creatures, the throne “with the figure like a man”, the throne like sapphire, light surrounding the throne “like a rainbow”, and when adding Revelation 5:1, the scroll with “writing on both sides”. The two visions in the Old Testament by these prophets are the same thing that John is seeing, but the details given in each of these visions are distinct from one another.

From verse 1, we see an entrance into a new scene. There is a door in heaven, and it seems most logical to conclude that John is outside of this door until being beckoned inside.

The throne is the Ark of the Covenant. Others who saw the throne are found in 1 Kings 22:19, Isaiah 6:1, Ezekiel 1:26, Psalm 47:8, and Daniel 7:9. See Psalm 18:6, 10, 80:1, 99:1, Micah 1:2, Habakkuk 2:20, Exodus 25:22, Numbers 7:89, 1 Samuel 4:4, 2 Samuel 6:2, and Isaiah 37:16 as evidence that the Ark of the Covenant is the throne of God. Therefore, the throne room here in Revelation 4 is the Holy of Holies. See Hebrews 8:5. This also brings new meaning to Hebrews 4:16 and 10:19-22. When we come before God in prayer, entering into His presence, we are entering into this scene.

In Revelation 4:3 we read of the one sitting having the appearance of jasper and carnelian, and the throne being encircled by a rainbow. Ezekiel 1:26-28 reads, “Above the expanse over their heads was what looked like a throne of sapphire, and high above on the throne was a figure like that of a man. I saw that from what appeared to be his waist up he looked like glowing metal, as if full of fire, and that from there down he looked like fire; and brilliant light surrounded him. Like the appearance of a rainbow in the clouds on a rainy day, so was the radiance around him.” We see later (21:11) that the City of God is described as shining like jasper and crystal (carnelian) also.

In verse 4, we read of these twenty-four other thrones and seated upon them are twenty-four elders. These are representative of the twenty-four priestly families (see 1 Chronicles 24). It is strange that this is here ‘interrupting’ the view of the throne (which is taken up again in verse 5). Also, you would assume the four creatures are explained first, for they are closer to the throne and their worship is what promulgates the worship of the twenty-four elders. The fact that these most likely represent priesthood – the white robes and crowns already explained in notes on 3:5 and 2:10 – would imply that the supposed interruption is in view of 3:21. “To him who overcomes, I will give the right to sit with me on my throne, just as I overcame and sat down with my Father on his throne.” Somehow these ‘thrones’ are distinct, and yet they must be mentioned together with God’s throne – compare Daniel 7:9 and Revelation 20:4.

For the “peals of lightning, voices of thunder, and thunderings” in verse 5, compare Ezekiel 1:13, Psalm 77:18, and John 37:4. The seven lamps and the seven spirits of God are explained in Revelation 1:20, 3:1, and 1:12. In Solomon’s temple there are ten freestanding lamps (1 Kings 7:49). However, there is also high likelihood that these are representing the menorah.

The “sea of glass” in verse 6 is possibly the washing basin outside of the Tabernacle, but there was also “The Sea” in Solomon’s temple (1 Kings 7:23-26). Also see Psalm 104:3, that God sits upon many waters. The “living creatures” are cherubim, and we find the four of them in Ezekiel 1:22, 26, and Ezekiel 10 recognizes them as cherubs. Note that in Ezekiel credits these cherubs as being “under the throne”, but we cannot interpret the Greek in Revelation 4 to meaning under the throne. It means “in the midst” of the throne. Why are the creatures in the midst of the throne here when elsewhere they are described as “around” the throne? John is pulling from 1 Kings 6:27 and 8:6-7. There were two cherubim on the top of the mercy seat and two more “overshadowing” the Ark. The covering of eyes in front and back can be traced to Ezekiel 1:18 and 10:12.

Verse 7 is a four-lined stanza, each line beginning with και (and). In Ezekiel 1:10, the man comes first, not third, but other than that, the order is the same.

In verse 8, John modifies the cherubim into what Isaiah calls “seraphim”. In this, I assume that John is gathering imagery to explain the scene and press the point: he is in the Heavenly Temple, before the Throne, in the Holy of Holies.

Verse 9 is interesting to note the praise of the elders in 10-11 is whenever the living creatures praise. Yet, in verse 8, the living creatures are praising God “continually” (NIV translates as ‘day and night’). This is difficult to reconcile, but the possibility is that the elders are always at the disposition of worship before God, even when they are performing some other work. Compare their praise to Daniel 4:34. The phrase “who lives forever and ever” is repeated in verse 10, 10:6, and 15:7. See Deuteronomy 32:40 and Daniel 12:7.

In verse 10, the twenty-four elders have already been noted to correlate with 1 Chronicles 24. Examine Isaiah 24:23, “The Lord Almighty will reign on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem and before its elders, gloriously.” Here is what we know about these elders:

• 1) They sit on 24 thrones around God’s throne (4:4, 11:16)

• 2) They wear crowns of gold and white garments (4:4)

• 3) They are called πρεσβθτεροι – twenty four in number

• 4) They occupy these thrones presently, not at the end of the age.

• 5) The seer addresses one of them as κθριε (lord) (7:13)

• 6) They act as interpreting angels (7:13-14)

• 7) They have a priestly function in presenting the prayers of the faithful to God in golden bowls (8:5)

• 8) They encourage John when he beholds the inhabitants of heaven (5:5)

• 9) They hold the office of praising God by singing and playing the harp (5:8, 14, 11:16, 19:4)

From these characteristics, we glean that they cannot be men, must be angels. They act as interpreting angels, and unless we say that all messengers of God are human – prophets or glorified saints – we cannot then conclude that these are people. Sorry to the dispensationalist; the rapture didn’t happen. Also, their sitting on thrones prior to the eschaton speaks against them being saints, for the saints receive their reward at the coming of Messiah (22:12). The chief priests were designated “princes of God” in 1 Chronicles 24:5. It is possible that these are angelic counterparts to the twenty-four priestly elders – see note on 1:4 and 1:20. In 1 Chronicles 25:9-39, we find twenty-four orders of Levitical singers as well.

For the phrase “glory and honor and power”, see 1 Chronicles 16:27-28. “For you willed they existed, and were created”; compare this to Psalm 148:5, “For he commanded and they were created.” This seems backward. God had conceived, and therefore created. He thought through what would exist, and then made it physical reality. This could be a verse used to support the eternal existence of the soul, but it wouldn’t be a wise choice to do so. The verse itself doesn’t imply eternality of the soul, but merely conceptions in the mind of God before the creation of the world.

Thus, when we view this scene in chapter 4, we see John taken up from the world and given a seat in heaven to behold the rest of the vision. We see the beginning of God’s ultimate purposes for humanity and history is His glory. In Revelation 1, we saw the glory of God revealed in the Son, and now we see the glory of God in the Father (the Son to be revealed as the Lamb slain in chapter 5), and at the end of Revelations, we find them both sitting upon the throne together in the City of God. The beginning and end is the glory of God, and not the journey to get there. If God is glorified and glorious before we see the end time prophecies, and He is glorified and glorious after the end time prophecies, then He is glorified and glorious in the midst of the prophecies. While it seems as though all hell is breaking out upon the earth, God is still upon the throne, and there is not one detail that falls through the cracks. He is in control of all, not surprised at all, and in all things reveals His absolute sovereignty – even in the midst of displaying the freewill of men to reject Him and curse Him.

This is the God we serve, and it is sobering to consider that when I come before Him, I don’t merely stand before a big party table. I stand before a throne of glory, with angels and elders all around giving praise and homage unto the King of glory. This is sobering, but at the same time exciting. Please, if there is anything that you can take from this, take away that when we pray, we are to show the proper respect that God deserves. Yes, he is our Father – Abba – but no, He is not our “daddy”. He is still God, and if you or I were to behold even partially this glorious sight, we would never again have the thought to simply come before Him with our vain requests of blessings and giving us our desires.

What is Me?

For those of you who follow this blog, you know that I think somewhat uniquely. Today I want to take up the challenge of defining what ‘you’ are. I’ve heard frequently about how we need to die to self, because ‘you’ are not holy. I think that we as Christians need to be extremely cautious and careful with the words and definitions of those words that we choose. In one moment we can say that God loves you, and that He accepts you just as you are, so come to Him for salvation, and then we turn right around in the next statement to say that you need to die to self, you are a sinner, the sinful nature cannot please God, and all sorts of statements like this.

I have a difficult time with this.

Why is it that Jesus would come to give us life and life abundantly, and then expect that we should only die and die and die and die and die and die and die and die and die and die and die and die and die? Are these contradictions? If they are, then why do we continue to teach them? If they are not, then what exactly is being expressed?

Lets start with a simple statement.

Salvation is based upon new birth. What does that mean? The new birth goes back to prophecies like Ezekiel 36:26 and Jeremiah 31:33. Now, if we read the context, it is quite obvious that what is being spoken of is intended for national Israel. Let’s look at these two verses in specific. “I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh.” (Ezekiel) “This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time, declares the Lord. I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people.” (Jeremiah)

When we read our New Testaments, we find the teaching of the apostles declaring that this has already broken forth. For example, “You show that you are a letter from Christ, the result of our ministry, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on the tablets of human hearts,” 2 Corinthians 3:3. “He saved us, not because of the righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit,” Titus 3:5. “Let us draw near to God with a sincere heart and with the full assurance that faith brings, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty consciences and having our bodies washed with pure water,” Hebrews 10:22. “In his great mercy he has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,” 1 Peter 1:3.

I think that this is what we’re talking about with the “dying to self” thing. We die to self, which is to say, our old man. What is the “old man”? The old man is the person that we had become before conversion, the one destined to destruction. There were habits, mindsets, attitudes, sinful ambitions, greed, lust, anger and bitterness, and all sorts of evil built up in that old ‘you’. But when we come to Christ, when we enter the Kingdom of God, that heart of wickedness is taken out and replaced with a heart of flesh – the heart that desires only to do what is good and right. Where, then, is there room for statements of dying to self? Our self is no longer evil. Therefore, Paul boldly proclaims, “He who is in Christ is a new creation; behold, ALL things are become new.”

I actually have a problem when people say that we are continually supposed to die to self. I think it is semantics, though. We are indeed to die to the flesh – that old nature – and live from the power of God. We conform no longer to the pattern and mindsets of this world, but are instead transformed by the renewing of our minds. To this I give a wholehearted amen. My contention, then, is simply on the word “self”. What do we mean by this?

David, for example, in Psalm 56 asks the question, “What can mortal man do to me?” If we really think about it, especially when we look at the context of the Psalm, man can do a lot to David. He is already being persecuted. He is already being slandered and tormented by evil men. Obviously, mortal men are already doing something to him. So, the question can’t be about whether men can harm David physically or socially. The question seems to imply a different definition of the “me” that David is speaking of. What David is speaking of is the new man. It is who David is in the deepest depths. This is who David is in God – who the Maker has created David to be.

Let us go back to the initial difficulty.

Why is there always so much language about death? It seems to me that if you’ve died with Christ and been raised by the glory of the Father that you’ve already died and don’t need to keep dying. This is true. You’ve entered into new life, and therefore you don’t need to any longer “die to self” – unless, of course, you haven’t truly died to self. So, the question is no longer about “me” at that point, but instead about the sin that lives in me. As Paul says, “It is no longer I that sin, but the sin that dwells in me.”

The ‘you’, the ‘me’, it is speaking of who Christ has made us to be. It is speaking of that deep depth of who we are. There is nothing in that that needs to be put to death. When we come to Christ, we find that we’re not living from who God has made us to be. The essence of our being has been suppressed and cast aside – covered over with masks and supposed personality traits – twice dead. We indeed were dead in our trespasses and sins, but don’t neglect that Christ has made us alive through resurrection!

What we need to ask is two things. Does my life conform to how Scripture says I am to live and act? Am I living from who God has intended me to be, instead of someone else’s projection what what “Christ-likeness” is (including my own projection)?

To conclude, then, I hope this is freedom for some of you. Some of you have been oppressed and suppressed through language of dying and always needing to repent and surrender over to God. Have I sinned today? My conscience is clear – God is my judge; I do not even judge myself. Why should I repent of something that I don’t know about? What is the point of that? And if I repent simply because I’m “supposed to”, then is it really repentance? What is more important to me is answering those two questions in regards to everything I do. Am I living out of who God has made me to be, and have I projected a false image of what that means by misinterpreting – or completely ignoring – the Scripture? At the end of the day, those two things are truly what it all comes down to. It is all based upon living out of the core of who you now are in Christ – from the new heart – which is to say, to live out of love for your neighbor.

There is no greater love than this: to lay down your life for your friends. Paul even says that “I die daily”. But there is a significant difference between the dying to self when we enter the Kingdom and Paul’s daily death. It was self-sacrifice on behalf of others – HUGE difference. The wisdom of God is manifest in that when I die, or suffer, on behalf of others, life is imparted to them. This “death” is not about dying or suffering, but about serving. It is about taking up ultimate purposes. As Paul writes in 2 Corinthians 1:6, “If we are distressed, it is for your comfort and salvation; if we are comforted, it is for your comfort, which produces in you patient endurance of the same sufferings we suffer…”

The cross is experienced in the life of the believer once and for all to die to sins, and taken up again to give our lives as a ransom for many. Death and suffering are never glorified, but rather the life and power that come as a result of sacrifice. If we are focusing upon the death and suffering, then we have left the Christian faith. The beauty of the cross is found in the power over death itself, and not in the “Jesus died for me” alone. Why is it that Jesus’ death moves us? Is it simply because He died while I was still a sinner? Or is there something beyond that? I think that what moves us is the significance of the act, and not the act itself. Through His death, He has brought life. Through His resurrection, He has secured eternal salvation for all who come to Him. Likewise, we take up our crosses and follow Him.

On Interpreting the Prophetic Scriptures

*Disclaimer: This is a rant about they who have studied the prophetic texts and actively try to teach them*

I am extremely zealous over this. I spend a lot of time in the prophetic texts of the Bible, and a lot of time reading various opinions on these texts. Something I’ve noticed is rampant is that the prophetic texts – especially the ones full of symbolism – are used to say whatever the person wants it to say. I’ve seen far too often verses pulled completely out of context just so that certain false doctrines could continue to be presented.

I’ll give a couple examples.

The woman in the book of Revelations is Israel – not the Church. In chapter twelve, it is Israel that flees from the dragon. How do I know this? Look at the symbolism. She is standing on the moon, her face is like the sun, and the crown on her head has twelve stars. Go back to Genesis 37 and read of Joseph’s dream where the sun, moon, and eleven stars bow down to him. This is Israel. Jump forward in Revelations 12 to where the serpent chases her. Check the Greek in verse 6. She flees to the wilderness where they will take care of her for 1,260 days. Who are the they? It is the Church. How do I know this? Go later in chapter 12 to verses 13-17. These are further details of that flight into the wilderness. What happens? The earth swallows the flood – something that is looking back to Numbers 16 where Korah is swallowed by the earth. Korah is a type of Antichrist. Who swallows the water? It is the Church. How do I know? Look at verse 17. The result is that those who obey the commands of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus are persecuted. Who are they? That is the Church – something separate and distinct from the woman.

Lets look at the two witnesses. Who are they? People want to say that they are symbolic of the whole Church. What language is used to describe them? They are two olive trees and two lampstands. This is a direct translation from the Hebrew of Zechariah 4:11. These two in Zechariah 4:11 are Joshua and Zerubbabel. Joshua and Zerubbabel are types. What do I mean by type? A type is a pattern. God is foreshadowing through the prophetic words over these two men something larger that is to happen way in the future. These men will perform miraculous plagues. In Revelations 11:6, we see these plagues are likened to Elijah and Moses. Does that mean these two are Elijah and Moses? No. Elijah and Moses are being used as patterns. Just like Elijah and Moses brought about plagues against the kingdom of darkness (see Exodus 12:12), so these two men will also plague the kingdom of darkness.

Everything in the prophetic Scriptures form together. They aren’t independent symbols that we need to “figure out” so that we can become famous because we found hidden symbolism in the Bible. The Branch is spoken of by many of the prophets. Every time, it is a reference to the messiah. There is the ominous king of the north – sometimes defined by the Assyrian, sometimes by Babylon, sometimes by another enemy of Israel, and sometimes just a shadowy figure “from the north”. Every time, it seems like the prophecy extends beyond the person being spoken of to the Antichrist that will arise at the end of the age.

This is the way that you read prophetic Scripture. You compare Scripture with Scripture, prophet with prophet, vision with vision, prophecy with prophecy, and even story with story. Many times there are patterns in the stories of the Scripture. Amalekites tried to destroy Israel when they were walking around the desert in Exodus. Later, Saul is told to destroy the Amalekites and doesn’t kill Agag. This causes Samuel to weep through the night. We find in the book of Esther that Haman was an “Agagite” – a descendant of that king of Amalek. The Amalekites have the pattern of always seeking the destruction of Israel. That is a pattern set up in the Scripture.

It is incredibly important that we learn this. King Saul was anointed by God, and yet we find at the end of his life he is possessed by demons and seeking the counsel of a witch. We find that John calls Judas who betrayed Jesus the “son of perdition” – one who was entered by Satan to betray his friend. In Psalm 55:13-14, we find David use that same language about Saul – the companion and friend is the one who betrays him. In 2 Thessalonians, we find Paul call the Antichrist the “son of perdition” – the only other time in the New Testament that this phrase is being used. This is a pattern. These men are types and foreshadowing.

What is the point of all this? If we do not want to do the digging necessary to understand the prophetic texts, we should just keep our mouths shut. That isn’t to say that I have all of the correct interpretations, but to say that when we just make up interpretations that “sound good”, we really do more damage than help. It is more beneficial when I read or listen to someone who has done their homework and they challenge my view biblically than when I’m talking to an internet infidel who doesn’t know that the prophetic words intertwine.

Context is Everything

In our current Christianity – especially in the Western World – we have learned to quote Bible verses and make Scripture references to prove our points of view. We should indeed use the Bible when considering our beliefs. But I’ve found that often the verses are pulled out of context. (By often, I don’t mean the majority of the time, but instead that it happens more than it should.) We’ll use verses like 2 Timothy 3:15-17 to ‘prove’ that the Bible is the inspired word of God, yet neglect entirely what the point of the verses were: the conclusion to the first part of the chapter, which was about those who would rise up and promote heresy and ungodly living. Yes, the verse says that the Scripture is the inspired word of God, but no, that isn’t the point of the verse.

In the New Testament times, the Jewish scholars – called rabbis – would debate the Scripture with one another. When they debated, they would quote a verse or a passage. But, when they quoted the verse or passage, they didn’t mean just that verse or passage. They knew that their opponent would know the verse, and know the context of the verse. So, they would quote the verse – sometimes part of the verse – and the other rabbi would then pull it up in their mind as to what the context is, what the chapter is about, what the book is about, and where it is located in the whole schema of the Scriptures. Out of that context, the rabbi would then know that the point being made is not simply about that one verse, but rather the whole context gives a more full and complete argument. Therefore, to respond simply to that verse would completely miss the brunt of the argument.

I try to do this in ALL of my writings. I’ll admit, I am unsuccessful. Yet, especially when I’m trying to make a point, I will use a verse or passage knowing that the context supports the argument being made. I think this is so necessary for our time. We need to be willing to dig into the texts of the Bible for multiple reasons.

First, we need to see that when Scripture is being referenced or quoted in other parts of the Bible, that reference is not simply there because they want to quote one part of a verse. The reference is there because they expect if you don’t know the verse you will look it up and see the context and get the bigger picture and the fuller argument being made.

Second, we need to dig into the Scripture so that we too can make these sorts of arguments. When we’re debating, when we’re discussing, when we’re teaching, when we’re learning, when we’re apologetic-ing – ANY time that we quote the Bible we need to use the context of that verse and make sure that it is the context making the argument and not one specific verse. It has taken me years to overcome the many verses pulled out of context (like John 3:16) that we have this “understanding” of what this verse means, and when we come to it, we read this understanding into it, but when we read up to it or after it, we understand that is the context. How many times have I seen it in myself? I’ll be tracking, and then suddenly a verse that I have quoted and known and put to memory will come up, and I’ll say, “What?!? That’s what that verse means?”

How about I give a couple of examples and then end.

“Wives, submit to your husbands…” Ephesians 5:22. I’m expecting that you know the verse, and you know the following couple verses. What comes before this verse? Do you know? Paul just finished speaking about how we’ve come out of darkness and into light. Darkness and light are metaphors for two different kingdoms. The way that Paul concludes this introductory thought is by saying, “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ”. This is the verse directly before, “Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord.” What is the context telling us? Just like everyone submits to everyone else, so too should the marriage relationship be one of submission one to another. What comes after this verse/passage? “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.” This plays in perfectly with what I just said: the point is that the relationship is one of submission unto one another – the husband even submitting himself unto death on behalf of his wife! What comes after that? We find Paul giving advice to children and parents, to slaves and masters, and finally to bear the full armor of God. This passage is the commencement of Paul explaining what it means to be children of the light, who have come out of darkness. He concludes the whole thought with the “put on the full armor of God” passage.

Let us try another. “Do not judge, or you too will be judged” Matthew 7:1. What is the context? We are in the sermon on the mount, where Jesus begins with these beatitudes, basically clarifying what it means to typify the kingdom of God. Then, he gives two examples of what these traits look like: salt and light. From there, Christ tells us that He fulfills the Law (a rabbinical way of saying that He is teaching it in its purest form), and that our righteousness needs to exceed the Pharisees’. How does that happen? Jesus spends the next 13 ‘teachings’ explaining what it means. The first six are in relation to the Law and the way that we understand and obey it. The next seven are in relation to our daily lives and attitudes. At the beginning and at the end of these teachings we find the phrase “the Law and the Prophets”. This teaching on judging others is the second to last of these teachings on what it means that our righteousness should exceed that of the Pharisees. From there, Jesus explains that the gate is small, and the path is narrow that leads to life. How do we get onto this path? We live in righteousness that exceeds the Pharisees’. How do we know we are indeed on that path? Jesus explains that we will know by our fruit. Then He ends by giving the parable of two builders: one wise and one foolish. So, when we come to judging others, this is the context. We find verse 7:5 saying, “first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.” Jesus is actually telling us to judge! He is distinguishing between the unrighteous judgment and the righteous judgment, though. So, 7:1 fits in with the whole context – a comparison of the two “righteousnesses” (one true, and one false) – and also stands as an introduction to what it means to righteously judge your brother.

So, in conclusion, I would highly recommend that we start seeking to understand the context of these verses and passages we quote as “proof texts”. Many false doctrines have entered the mind of believers simply because they haven’t gone and looked at the context of the verses quoted. This will save you from falling for much deception – not all – and will give you such a firm foundation in your faith. Hopefully this helped someone. God bless you all!

Is it a Goat or a Demon?

Browsing through Leviticus, I came across chapter 17 where God tells the Israelites not to eat blood. Now, it is interesting that in the letter to the Gentiles, the Jerusalem church tells them that this is one of the laws that they cannot break. Circumcision – whatever – but do not eat/drink blood. Before we reach this command in verse 10, we find verses 1-9 speaking of how the people must offer their sacrifices to the Lord at the Tent of Meeting, and not outside of the camp.

But there is something fascinating that happens in verse 7. “They must no longer offer any of their sacrifices to the goat demons to whom they prostitute themselves. This is to be a lasting ordinance for them and for generations to come.”

Wait… What?

What is a goat demon? The Hebrew word is se’irim, which simply means “hairy one”. It is used in 2 Chronicles 11:15 and Isaiah 13:21 as well. Sometimes it is translated as goat. Sometimes it is translated as Satyr. Sometimes it is simply translated as “baboon”.Some have thought that maybe these se’irim are false gods in Egypt that were “blood thirsty”, and God is saying “Don’t you indulge in that.” What in the world is going on here?

There is this weird connection between offering to the goat demon, and eating the blood. God says don’t eat blood, because the life is in the blood. When we examine Acts 15:29, we find that the things mentioned to the Gentile believers to abstain from are the very things that were used at times to worship false gods. Do not eat sacrifices offered to idols. Do not eat the meat of strangled animals. Abstain from sexual immorality. Sandwiched in the middle is this command to not eat blood. So, it seems likely that this is indeed one of those things that would have been performed as a ritual when sacrificing to a certain false deity.

Jump ahead to 1 Corinthians. Paul is talking to these believers, and he says to them “about eating food sacrificed to idols…” that “food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do.” Then, to top it off, Paul says, “If anyone… sees you… eating in an idol’s temple, won’t he be emboldened to eat what has been sacrificed to idols? So this weak brother, for whom Christ died, is destroyed by your knowledge.” This dialogue is found in 1 Corinthians 8.

Jump ahead in 1 Corinthians to chapter 10. Paul makes the statement to “flee from idolatry”, and then wraps that intimately with communion. Then, if that weren’t confusing enough, he flips the subject around and says, “Do not those who eat the sacrifices participate in the altar? Do I mean that sacrifices offered to an idol is anything, or that an idol is anything? No, but the sacrifices of pagans are offered to demons, not to God, and I do not want you to be participants with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons too; you cannot have part in both the Lord’s table and the table of demons.”

What just happened? One minute Paul seems to say that it isn’t a big deal to eat of the sacrifices offered to demons – which is deliberately against what the Jerusalem counsel said – and then in chapter 10 it seems like he starts back-peddling. Might I suggest that what is being expressed is bigger than just meat offered to idols? The whole point isn’t about the meat, nor about the idols. The point goes beyond this to a deeper truth. It is about what the communion itself means.

Communion with the Lord is about marriage to God. When the Jewish people would become “engaged” (truthfully, the courtship of the ancient Israelites was much more than what we would call engagement), the father would go with his son to the woman’s home. They would speak to the father of the woman, and they would try to work out a marriage pact. Then, at the end of it all, the son would take a cup and fill it with wine. He would say over the cup, “This is my blood of the covenant. Take and drink of it.” The daughter will then have an option: take the cup and accept marriage with God, or politely decline. When we take of the cup of the Lord, we are committing ourselves to marriage with Him. Jump back to Leviticus 17. Notice the language is about harlotry when the Israelites would offer to this “goat demon”.

We have before us two tables. There is the table of the Lord, which is a covenant between God and His people of marriage with them. Then, there is the table of demons, which is a covenant with death and hell solemnly sworn against the Lord.

To the table of the Lord, we find verses like Genesis 14:18, where Melchizedek brings wine and bread to break with Abraham. We find Psalm 78:19, where God spreads a table in the wilderness for Israel. We find in Mark 8:4, where the disciples ask Jesus, “Where will we get enough bread to feed all these people in this remote place?” In Ezekiel 20:35, the prophet speaks of a time still yet in the future when Israel would be scattered into the wilderness of the nations and sup with God face-to-face. Revelation 12:6 speaks of a time where the woman (Israel) flees into the wilderness to a place that God has prepared to take care of her for 1,260 – another prophecy that is most likely future. It is spoken of this communion that unless you eat Jesus’ flesh and drink His blood, you cannot be His disciple.

Then there is another table. There is a contrast. Psalm 14:4 speaks of evil doers who “devour my people as men eat bread”. Jeremiah 10:25 prophecies of a wrath to be poured out on all the nations and people who “have devoured Jacob; they have devoured him completely and destroyed his homeland.” But the most blatant of all these Scriptures is in Micah 3. “Listen, you leaders of Jacob, you rulers of the house of Israel. Should you not know justice, you who hate good and love evil; who tear the skin from my people and the flesh from their bones; who eat my people’s flesh, strip off their skin and break their bones in pieces; who chop them up like meat for the pan, like flesh in the pot?”

What is the point? There is somehow a direct connection between taking the meat sacrificed to idols – joining in the table of demons – and devouring the people of the Lord. There are few things that God says He will cut the people off for. This is one. Another is the blaspheme of the Holy Spirit. Thirdly there is taking the mark of the beast. I believe that all three of these are connected deeply and intimately. Notice Matthew 12:28 that Jesus compares the Spirit of God with the kingdom of God – “If I drive out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.” Then, Jesus goes on to express that the strong man – Satan – must be bound in order for the Kingdom of God to come. Then, Jesus goes back to the subject of the Spirit of God by saying those who blaspheme the Spirit of God will not be forgiven. Why? Because the Spirit of God is the one that is casting out the kingdom of darkness. The Spirit is being likened to the kingdom of God. To say that the work of the Spirit is actually the work of Satan is the ultimate affront.

The book of Revelations contrasts the seal of the 144,000 with the mark of the beast. To one, the mark of God is put upon their forehead. To the other, it is the mark of the beast upon the forehead. What is the difference? They who see the antichrist and will actually claim this man is God is to equate the kingdom of God with the kingdom of darkness. It is the same as they who blaspheme the Spirit – which is the same as they who will feast at the table of demons. Look at Luke 11:20. The same verse in Matthew 12 that compares the Spirit of God with the kingdom of God is said in Luke 11:10 “If I drive out demons by the finger of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.”

This phrase is found in Exodus 8:19. The Egyptians see the plagues as the “finger of God”. What is happening? The contrast is being made: Egypt or Israel? Goat demons or Jehovah? The Spirit of God or the false miracles performed by the false prophet? Jesus or the Antichrist? The kingdom of God or the kingdom of darkness? Which do you choose?

Sin and Death

            Toward the end of 1 Corinthians, we find a verse that helps us to explain the connection between sin and death. Interestingly, the two words are not used as we commonly use them today. The reference is, of course, 1 Corinthians 15:56: “The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law.” Notice here that death is not necessarily the thing that happens at the end of life, for we simply don’t know if there is or is not a sting in that death. Instead, death seems to be something that we all know exactly what is being spoken of. It is a daily thing, suffering the normal aspects of life. Because the sting of death is sin, we see that sin is something that has us in its grips. Death is defined as a moment-by-moment decision to continue in the bounds of sin, or to step out through the cross of Christ Jesus to choose life. We are given the choice, and if we choose death, then we shall face death ultimately (reference Revelation 20:14).

            What shall we say of sin? If death is moment by moment because of sin, then we must ask what we mean by sin. For many, sin is the action that offends God. It is the disobedience to the law of Christ. However, we’ll see later in this section why exactly that cannot be. Sin is a power. It is a condition. We cannot relieve ourselves from the grips of sin. It takes a supernatural work to break the chains of sin. It is at work in our members so that when we were once under the law of sin and death, we found that no matter how greatly we desired to obey the law, we did the very things we did not want to do. We strove to obey God’s commands, but there is something at work within us to prevent us. This prevention is actually not some sort of human nature, but rather a sin nature. It is a secondary nature that has been put upon us.

            The actions called sins are not to be understood as the “end all be all”. Instead, we should understand that the actions are a result of something deeper. There is an inward working of death in our mortal bodies. We are increasingly being moved further and further away from God and toward death. Sin reigns in our bodies, and therefore we are stuck in the grips of death – to be absent from God. It is our sin that separates us from God, but sin of what kind? Certainly it is not the petty shortcomings that we all face, for when we are in Christ there is no condemnation. No, this sin being expressed by Isaiah the prophet is an inward reality of death having its way in our members. It is a condition, a disposition, and that without remedy.

            Now, what is meant by Paul when he says that the power of sin is the law? In Romans 7, he establishes the fact that the law is not unholy, nor evil. On the contrary, the Law is the mechanism that God used to express His heart to us. It is holy, holy, holy. When Paul uses the term “law”, it needs to be understood in the context of two kingdoms. There is a wisdom of the kingdom of darkness that says we can do on our own strength. To walk according to the law is to say that God has given us His ‘manual’ and we only need to live in accordance to it. After all, we do read the B-I-B-L-E – the Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth. To view the Scripture in this manner is to take the holy things of God in a carnal manner – walking out our faith by our own strength and power – and thus utilizing the wisdom of demons to achieve a preconceived notion of righteousness. Thus, we are not simply talking about the law in content, but the law in practice. It is not just the law, but the law manipulated through the wisdom of this age.

            It is all about self-preservation. Because we know what God commands, we can perform these regulations in order to attain unto righteousness. However, righteousness comes through faith and faith alone. To trust in the works of the law is to trust in sin and death, for through the law sin came. In the ever-nagging question of whether we’re supposed to obey the Torah, we want to answer question number two without asking question number one. The first thing to answer is whether we have indeed established our righteousness upon faith, or whether we in fact do have some sort of religious system and tradition to uphold a preconceived notion of righteousness. Once that has been established, we can then seek to understand the Law according to faith. For they who desire to observe a Sabbath day, do it unto Christ through faith. For they who say that every day is a Sabbath, do so unto Christ through faith.

            We do not observe the letter of the Law as was once taught. Instead, we see that the Passover is fulfilled in Christ, and so when we keep the Passover, it is through Christ and not of fleshly obligation. We see in the kosher diet as ascribed in Leviticus 11 that Christ is our clean food – the bread of truth and sincerity without leaven, and our meat in due season – thus anything clean points us to Christ, and anything unclean reveals to us what Christ was not. In all things, whether eating or drinking, we do it unto Christ. The question of whether we’re free to live apart from the law is answered as follows: Love your neighbor as yourself, for in this the whole of the law is summed up. You who are not circumcised, remain as you are. You who have not kept the kosher diet, think heavily before taking up that kosher diet. Do all things unto Christ through faith, for the power of sin is the law. Now that you have been given freedom, do not exchange that freedom for bondage. You’ve been set free for freedom’s sake.

            This is the power of the kingdom of darkness: Death being at work in us through sin, and sin being at work in us through our own attempts at being righteous. To be free from this is to be free indeed. That kind of freedom comes with a price. The author of Hebrews warned his readers, “In your struggle against sin, you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your blood.” It takes the Gethsemane experience of every believer to break past the bounds of sin and death and into the realm of eternal glory. It is that resurrection glory that we seek, not just at the end of the age, but to be alive within our members even now. We are of a different kingdom, and therefore we are of a different wisdom. We are not bound by sin and death – the power of the kingdom of darkness – but instead we are bound to Christ. Now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve the new way of the Spirit, and now in the old way of the written code. We are set free, not to avoid the Torah, but to find the deeper expression of it through life lived unto Christ through faith.

Greek Philosophy versus Hebrew Bible

In the first couple centuries of this common era, the Christians were severely persecuted. It was with Constantine having a vision that he decided to examine Christianity a little more openly. Unlike what many teach and say, Christianity did not become unified with the Roman culture during the reign of Constantine. It was actually afterward. However, we can still trace it back to Constantine as the man who initiated this "conversion".

Now, when Christianity became the "in" thing, suddenly you have a lot of people claiming Christianity as just another religion. There were some who were genuinely converted. Yet, what we don't see after this point is a clear and direct stream of thought to understand the Hebrew Bible in its own context. I only need to think of men such as Augustine, Jerome, and Thomas Aquinas to come to these conclusions. It was with the Greek philosophy that these men were taught that they understood the Bible. They read the Old Testament with a bent, and this likewise caused them to read the words of Paul and the other apostles with that same bent. Instead of letting Paul speak for himself, he was then reinterpreted through the mouths of Socrates, Aristotle, and the Stoics.

This has caused much damage. For example, when Paul tells us that there is neither slave nor free in Christ, it was the philosophers that argued that slaves are barely even human. Aristotle remarks, "That person is by nature a slave who can belong to another person and who only takes part in thinking by recognizing it, but not by possessing it. Other living beings (animals) cannot recognize thinking; they just obey feelings. However, there is little difference between using slaves and using tame animals: both provide bodily help to do necessary things." Aristotle then proceeds to tell us that a slaves is no more than "a tool of his master". Aristotle even claims that some people "are by nature destined to be ruled, even though they resist it". He thus concludes this thought by saying, "That is why the poets say: 'It is correct that the Greeks rule barbarians", for by nature what is barbarian and what is slave are the same." (Aristotle, Physica, vol. 1; Loeb Classical Library, 1252 b 8. See A.TH van Leeuwen, The Nacht van het Kapitaal, Nijmegen 1984, pp. 182-205)

It was then this Greek philosophy that would be used later in time to validate slavery. Yet, when we hear the historians tell us about slavery, they typically want to speak about how it was Christians that were extreme and difficult to convert to seeing the African Americans as people. Yet, I can't help but ask, if it were in Christianity that these thoughts festered, from where did Christianity gather them? It was in the work of marrying the Greek philosophy with the Hebraic teaching of the Scriptures that such a thought could even possibly be found in Christianity. 

What about women? We find Socrates arguing that women were the "weaker sex" , and claimed that being born a woman was a divine punishment, since being a woman is halfway between being a man and an animal. (Plato, Timaeus, trans. H.D.P. Lee (Baltimore: Penguin, 1965), 42A-C, 90C, 91A) We find also in Socrates' thought that men can do all things better than women (Plato, The Republic, trans. W.H.D. Rouse (New York: Mentor, 1956), 456A). It was Aristotle that taught, "The courage of a man is shown in commanding, of a woman in obeying." (Aristotle, Politics, trans. Oxford University, The Basic Works of Aristotle, Richard McKean, editor (New York: Random House, 1941), 1.1254A, 1259B, 1260A). In this, Aristotle argues that the man is the head over the wife, and that the wife is meant to be ruled over as the soul rules over the body. Aristotle also used this terminology to explain how a master rules over his slave. 

When we read our English versions of the Bible, we need to understand that it is translated from Greek. The original Greek interpretation of those verses is somewhat lost, simply because it is difficult to capture the full intent of the Greek words when translating into any other language. At the same time, we find that there are biases that also get translated into the text. So, when we are taught that the woman is the weaker vessel by Socrates, and we read 1 Peter 3:7 say the same thing, we assume that the apostle is repeating Socrates. Likewise, when we read Paul tell the people in Ephesus that the husband is the head of the wife, we assume naturally that he is reaffirming what Aristotle taught. The thought never even enters our minds that maybe what the apostles were saying was quite contrary to what the philosophers taught. 

One man wrote a book titles, "What Paul Really Said About Women". In this book, he looked at some of major texts that are used to oppress women, and he simply asked the question of whether the apostle Paul was affirming or speaking contrary to the philosophers. In the preface, he writes, "Theoretically, if I took our English translation of his words and translated them back into Greek, my words should be similar to Paul's original words. But when I tried doing this, such was not the case at all! In reality, the words that Paul chose to use imply different ideas from those conveyed by the English words we use to translate his writings. In fact, our English words imply ideas that Paul deliberately avoided! If Paul had wanted to say what we think he said, then he would have chosen quite different words than what he wrote" (John Temple Bristow, What Paul Really Said About Women, (New York: HarperCollins Publishers 1988), pp xi). 

As I've been looking into this myself, I've begun to realize that the Bible was written by many different authors, and all of them were Jewish. The only man that might not be Jewish descent was Luke. That is debated. Yet, I do ask the question, if 64 books of the Bible were written by Jews, then wouldn't their mindset be a different mindset of the Greek philosophers? The argument can be made that the New Testament writers would have been Hellenized, yet I would like to appeal to Acts 6:1 to make the case that not all of the Jews were Hellenized. Even with this, if some were, then how do we know that Peter and Paul were not? We know because the way that they write is thoroughly Jewish. 

For example, when the Hebraic man debates, he will mention on verse, or only part of the verse, knowing that his audience knows the verse and context. We find this throughout both Paul and Peter's epistles. They reference the verse, but they don't simply mean that verse, they mean the whole context of that verse, and we then see that the context of the verse is actually pointing to this larger picture. Yet, because many of us are not Hebraic, we don't pick up on these things. When we read Paul, we find that he uses a lot of word plays. The reason for this is because the Hebrew Bible also uses a lot of word plays. In fact, the Hebrew language itself is set up in a manner that word plays are necessary. 

So, were the apostles reaffirming that the Greek philosophy was correct? Absolutely not! In no way did they ever agree with the Greek philosophers. Instead, when they wrote to the Greek speaking Hellenized world, they corrected their wrong mentalities. Because we have been too Catholic in following the traditions of the church fathers (which sounds like a rebuke Jesus gave to the Pharisees) instead of seeking to understand the original intent and heart of God, we have perpetuated wrong philosophy through the generations. Slaves are not less than. Other races are not less than. The Jewish people have not been left out of the promises of God. Women are not under men. Wives are not to be ruled over by their husbands. Teachers are not to teach in lecture form like the Greeks. Discipleship is not about learning information - it is about maturity and character. Authority is not about rule or governing; it is about being a servant. We do not rule over one another like the goyim (Gentiles), but instead those that are in authority are they that serve. In this way, there is neither male nor female, slave nor free, Jew nor Gentile, black or white, boss nor employee, clergy nor layman, teacher nor student, fathers nor children, city folk or country folk, or anything else that might divide us. We are all one and the same in Christ - He has broken down that wall of hostility between us. 

That is what is Hebraic. It is the marriage that brings us all to equal status together. We are no longer two, but now have become one. All the things that we have thought would cause someone to be "under" or "less than" us is taken away in the marriage that we partake to become adopted children of God. We are the Bride of Christ, and to be in Christ, we are all now unified and one. No one is over or under - all are made one in Christ. That is the difference between the Hebrew and the Greek. The Greek looks for distinctions between, but the Hebrew sees the marriage and reconciliation of all things. The Greek sees that spirit and flesh fight against one another. The Hebrew sees that in Christ the spirit and flesh marry to become one in harmony together. Every single verse in the Bible teaches us this. Even the ones that speak against it are actually advocating it, because they are spoken in contexts that tell us these views and opinions are wrong. It is an endless study to understand the heart and disposition of God, but I think we need to start here. God is the one who frees the captive and gives liberation to the oppressed. If we are then bringing oppression and bondage to people, we are not in Christ.