Expedition 44 is Dr. Will Ryan's Theology Video Site. Dr. Ryan is the Chair of Theology and Biblical Studies for Covenant Theological Seminary.

expedition44

Today Dr. Will Ryan and Dr. Matt have a conversation with Dr. Lucy Peppiatt about 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 and the issues surrounding head coverings. 
Bio: Dr. Peppiatt has been Principal at Westminster Theological Centre (WTC) since 2013. She teaches courses in Christian doctrine and in spiritual formation. Lucy holds bachelor’s degrees in both English and Theology, and completed an MA in Systematic Theology at King’s College, London, and a PhD through the University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand. Her research interests are Christ and the Spirit, Charismatic theology, theological anthropology, discipleship, 1 Corinthians, and women in the Bible. Lucy is part of Crossnet Anglican Church in Bristol, which is led by her husband, Nick Crawley. Together, they have four sons and four daughters-in-law. 
Rhetorical Reading of 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 
 
Paul: 
2 I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions just as I handed them on to you. 3 But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the husband is the head of his wife, and God is the head of Christ. 
 
Male opponents: 
4 Any man who prays or prophesies with something on his head disgraces his head, 5 but any woman who prays or prophesies with her head unveiled disgraces her head—it is one and the same thing as having her head shaved. 
 
Paul: 
6 For if a woman will not veil herself, then she should cut off her hair; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or to be shaved, she should wear a veil. 
 
Male opponents: 
7 For a man ought not to have his head veiled, since he is the image and reflection of God; but woman is the reflection of man. 8 Indeed, man was not made from woman, but woman from man. 9 Neither was man created for the sake of woman, but woman for the sake of man. 10 For this reason a woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. 
 
Paul: 
11 Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man or man independent of woman. 12 For just as woman came from man, so man comes through woman; but all things come from God. 13 Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head unveiled? 
 
Male opponents: 
14 Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears long hair, it is degrading to him 
 
Paul: 
15 but if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her for a covering. 16 But if anyone is disposed to be contentious—we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God. 
 
 
 
 
Buy the book: https://a.co/d/bKf4i5W 
Westminster Theological Centre: https://wtctheology.org.uk

Today Dr. Will Ryan and Dr. Matt have a conversation with Dr. Lucy Peppiatt about 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 and the issues surrounding head coverings. 
Bio: Dr. Peppiatt has been Principal at Westminster Theological Centre (WTC) since 2013. She teaches courses in Christian doctrine and in spiritual formation. Lucy holds bachelor’s degrees in both English and Theology, and completed an MA in Systematic Theology at King’s College, London, and a PhD through the University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand. Her research interests are Christ and the Spirit, Charismatic theology, theological anthropology, discipleship, 1 Corinthians, and women in the Bible. Lucy is part of Crossnet Anglican Church in Bristol, which is led by her husband, Nick Crawley. Together, they have four sons and four daughters-in-law. 
Rhetorical Reading of 1 Corinthians 11:2-16

Paul:
2 I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions just as I handed them on to you. 3 But I want you to underst

Dr. Will Ryan and Dr. Matt with Dr. Lucy Peppiatt about 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 and  head coverings

Read the Article on this video here: 
 
https://expedition44.com/2024/09/21/3446/ 
 
Richard Rohr calls “liminal space”—a particular spiritual position where human beings hate to be, but where the biblical God is always leading them. Many of the greatest stories are messages of stepping positively out of liminal space. Abraham, Joseph, David, Jonah, Ruth, Mary and so many others.

Read the Article on this video here:

https://expedition44.com/2024/09/21/3446/

Richard Rohr calls “liminal space”—a particular spiritual position where human beings hate to be, but where the biblical God is always leading them. Many of the greatest stories are messages of stepping positively out of liminal space. Abraham, Joseph, David, Jonah, Ruth, Mary and so many others.

Expedition  44 Biblical Theology Liminal Spaces, the exodus, Chaos Water TOV and RA Thresholds

Dr. Preston Sprinkle is a biblical scholar, speaker, podcaster, a New York Times bestselling author, and is the co-founder and president of The Center for Faith, Sexuality & Gender. He earned a Ph.D. in New Testament from Aberdeen University in Scotland (2007). Preston loves talking and writing about hot-button cultural and theological issues with thoughtfulness, honesty and grace. He has written a dozen books including Erasing Hell (w/ Francis Chan), Nonviolence, Scandalous Grace, People to Be Loved, Living in a Gray World, and Embodied. Preston also hosts a popular bi-weekly podcast titled Theology in the Raw (https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.prestonsprinkle.com%2Fpodcast&data=05%7C02%7C%7Cabf706701b904728a9fc08dca0408458%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638561446176702281%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=oOU%2FMw9nY3fj%2B0%2Bez2QsZoaJI13GNKz2mPpkKb4y%2BF8%3D&reserved=0), where he engages in honest conversations with interesting people. 
 
Today we will be talking with Preston about his new book Exiles: The Church in the Shadow of the Empire. 
 
CONVERSATION QUESTIONS 
 
What would your journey like in writing this book and your political journey? 
 
What is this book about and what do you hope people will take away from it? 
 
Before we dive into some of the content and exegesis of the book, could you explain some of the terms you use such as Empire and Babylon? And do you see these as paradigms? (People will often claim that America is not an empire or is not like Babylon as a democracy to a constitutional republic) 
 
Let’s dive into some of the OT context of your book. Tell us about Israel in the OT and how they were supposed to be an upside down kingdom of priests 
 
Chapter 3 really gets into the concept of exile and Babylon and how were the Jews called to respond to Babylon in exile? 
 
Chapters 4 and 5 are all about Jesus and how his kingdom is not like this world’s kingdom. Walk us through how Jesus subverts the Empire with his kingdom? 
 
Throughout the NT the proclamation of the Gospel is politically subversive. Speak a little to this then and how should it be this way today as well 
 
We know Exile was definitely a OT and Israel thing but where do we find this concept of being exiles in the NT for the church. Also, I find when people read exile language in the NT they just see it as spiritual (This world is not my home, I’m just passing through- going to heaven) rather than about citizenship now. 
 
The book of Revelation maybe one of the most politically subversive books in the NT but many modern evangelical readers do not interpret it that way. But scholars such as yourself, Scot McKnight, and Michael Gorman are bring out the political nature of the letter. Walk us through some of the themes in Revelation and how this applies to living as exiles 
 
You begin the book with: “Going to church should be a subversive political act”. Speak a little to the three approaches you bring up in the book Separatism, transformation, and prophetic witness. How should the church be the church in the world, especially politically? (Eklessia) 
 
So let’s get to the practical part of this book in Chapter 10 where you look at what it might look like to live as an exile today, as a prophetic witness. What about: 
 • Abortion 
 • Political parties 
 • Immigration 
 • Pledging allegiance to the flag

Dr. Preston Sprinkle is a biblical scholar, speaker, podcaster, a New York Times bestselling author, and is the co-founder and president of The Center for Faith, Sexuality & Gender. He earned a Ph.D. in New Testament from Aberdeen University in Scotland (2007). Preston loves talking and writing about hot-button cultural and theological issues with thoughtfulness, honesty and grace. He has written a dozen books including Erasing Hell (w/ Francis Chan), Nonviolence, Scandalous Grace, People to Be Loved, Living in a Gray World, and Embodied. Preston also hosts a popular bi-weekly podcast titled Theology in the Raw (https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.prestonsprinkle.com%2Fpodcast&data=05%7C02%7C%7Cabf706701b904728a9fc08dca0408458%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638561446176702281%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=oOU%2FMw9nY3fj%2B0%2Bez2QsZoaJI13GNKz2mPpkKb4y%2BF8%3D&r

Dr. Preston Sprinkle book interview: Exiles: The Church in the Shadow of the Empire. Expedition 44

J. Richard Middleton Interview 
 
BIO 
J. Richard Middleton is Professor of Biblical Worldview and Exegesis at Northeastern Seminary and Roberts Wesleyan University in Rochester, NY. 
He has been President of the Canadian-American Theological Association (2011–2014) and President of the Canadian Society of Biblical Studies (2019–2021). Middleton has a Ph.D. from the Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, in a joint-degree program with the Institute for Christian Studies, Toronto. 
His most recent book is Abraham’s Silence: The Binding of Isaac, the Suffering of Job, and How to Talk Back to God (Baker Academic, 2021). 
 
 
CONVERSATION QUESTIONS 
 
First, tell us a little about yourself and your background in christianity and scholarship. What got you interested in the subject of the binding of Isaac? 
 
You begin the book with a section on vigorous models of prayer in the Bible. Could you begin talking about Exodus 32 and the story of Moses’ intercession and what we can learn about the way God wants us to speak and pray to Him? 
 
Next, you get into the book of Job and ask the question about appropriate speech towards God. What is Job all about and how does this story inform us about interaction and speech with God? 
 
When we get to the Binding of Isaac it seems like a crazy story for God to ask someone to sacrifice their son. I’ve seen many internet atheists go to town questioning God’s character and the God of the Bible based on this story. Also It has caused many well meaning christians (me included) to ask questions about God’s character and the request to be unjust or wrong. What are some of the ways this story has been interpreted and what are some of the problems that you see with certain interpretations of this story? 
 
So you take a literary approach to the text and look at how the story of the binding of Isaac connects to other stories in the Bible and how it connects to the immediate context. Walk us through the Aqedah from your point of view. 
 
Things you can possibly touch on here: 
• Sodom and Gomorrah 
• Elohim vs. Yahweh in Gen 22 
• Ishmael and Abraham- Only son you love? 
• The Lord will provide (freudian slip) 
• The angel’s 2 speeches 
• The aftermath with Isaac, Sarah, and Hagar. What did this even teach the next generations? (Fear of Isaac) 
 
Many see Abraham as a father of faith and yet in the way you explain the story it seem as though Abraham failed the test because he did not discern the character of God and his mercy. Can Abraham still be the “Father of Faith” as the NT often describes him? 
 
Probably someone who would object to your interpretation would bring up the epistle of James where he seems to praise Abraham for not withholding His son? How do you respond to that in keeping with your interpretation? 
 
What would you like the church to learn and do based on your book about prayer, lament (talking back to God), and God’s character?

J. Richard Middleton Interview

BIO
J. Richard Middleton is Professor of Biblical Worldview and Exegesis at Northeastern Seminary and Roberts Wesleyan University in Rochester, NY.
He has been President of the Canadian-American Theological Association (2011–2014) and President of the Canadian Society of Biblical Studies (2019–2021). Middleton has a Ph.D. from the Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, in a joint-degree program with the Institute for Christian Studies, Toronto. 
His most recent book is Abraham’s Silence: The Binding of Isaac, the Suffering of Job, and How to Talk Back to God (Baker Academic, 2021).


CONVERSATION QUESTIONS

First, tell us a little about yourself and your background in christianity and scholarship. What got you interested in the subject of the binding of Isaac?

You begin the book with a section on vigorous models of prayer in the Bible. Could you begin talking about Exodus 32 and the story of Moses’ intercession and what we can learn about the way God wants us t

Expedition 44 Biblical Theology Interview with J. Richard Middleton author of  Abraham’s Silence

Dr. Will Ryan and Dr. Matt interview Dr. Philip Payne. In this episode we discuss the concept of gender roles, the meaning of "head" and "headship", and the text critical issues with 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 and how it relates to inerrancy and gender equality. 
 
Dr. Philip Payne is the founder and president of Linguist’s Software, and is a specialist in New Testament Studies. He is well known for his studies on New Testament Textual Criticism, the Parables of Jesus, and Man and Woman in the Teachings of Paul. He and his wife Nancy were missionaries in Japan with the Evangelical Free Church, where they ministered to students in the Kyoto Christian Studies Center and taught New Testament. He received his PhD in New Testament from Cambridge and has held many NT teaching positions at prominent Universities and Seminaries such as Cambridge, Gordon-Conwell, and Fuller. 
 
Order the book: The Bible vs. Biblical Womanhood : How God's Word Consistently Affirms Gender Equality https://a.co/d/i8RQFcq

Dr. Will Ryan and Dr. Matt interview Dr. Philip Payne. In this episode we discuss the concept of gender roles, the meaning of "head" and "headship", and the text critical issues with 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 and how it relates to inerrancy and gender equality. 

Dr. Philip Payne is the founder and president of Linguist’s Software, and is a specialist in New Testament Studies. He is well known for his studies on New Testament Textual Criticism, the Parables of Jesus, and Man and Woman in the Teachings of Paul. He and his wife Nancy were missionaries in Japan with the Evangelical Free Church, where they ministered to students in the Kyoto Christian Studies Center and taught New Testament. He received his PhD in New Testament from Cambridge and has held many NT teaching positions at prominent Universities and Seminaries such as Cambridge, Gordon-Conwell, and Fuller. 

Order the book: The Bible vs. Biblical Womanhood : How God's Word Consistently Affirms Gender Equality https://a.co/d/i8RQFc

Expedition 44 PART 2 Interview with Dr. Philip Payne : The Bible vs. Biblical Womanhood

Brian Zahnd is the founder and lead pastor of Word of Life Church, a non-denominational Christian congregation in Saint Joseph, Missouri. Brian and his wife, Peri, founded the church in 1981. Brian is also the author of several books, including, Sinners in the Hands of a Loving God, Water to Wine, A Farewell To Mars, Beauty Will Save the World, and Unconditional?: The Call of Jesus to Radical Forgiveness. 
 
Today we’ll be having a conversation about his newest book “The Wood Between the Worlds: A Poetic Theology of the Cross” 
 
CONVERSATION QUESTIONS: 
 
While most books on the cross or atonement try to “sum up” or find a specific mechanism for the cross but in this book you go the route of mystery and contemplation through beauty and poetics, while also being exegetical and theological. Please explain why you wrote this book? Also, explain the title “The Wood Between the Worlds”. 
 
In chapter 2 you talk about the singularity of Good Friday in how it is tied to forgiveness but you also bring out the idea from NT Wright about how we have paganized our atonement theology. How has our atonement theology been paganize resulting in certain views of how God forgives? 
 
You have a chapter on what the Cross meant to Jesus? How did he understand His death? (Chapter 9) 
 
Let’s venture into a bit of the political nature of the cross. Quite a few of your chapters from 10 on deal with how Jesus’ death exposes the Powers and Empire. I love your connections to the ring of power from the LOTR in chapter 10, how does this image connect to the cross? (This is very applicable in this election season!) 
 
In chapter 11 “The War is over” you say “Jesus is the Prince of Peace who died on the cross refusing to wage war upon his enemies. Now we are called to live as citizens of his peaceable kingdom no matter what the rest of the world does.” Walk us through this idea. 
 
We just did a 2 part series looking at Isaiah 53 and something in those episodes we touched on was the idea of scapegoating. In chapter 12: The Sacrifice to end all sacrifice, you also look at scapegoating- about how we often demand a victim but God does not. Please speak a little on scapegoating, sacrifice, and the cross. 
 
This also ties into your chapter 13 on the lynching of the Son of Man- how the cross was a lynching. And how the cross deals with capital punishment in chapter 14. It seems like the modern church is so far from the early church in this view and maybe we need to look more closely at the cross. 
 
Chapter 17 is called the Harrowing of Hell. It’s all about Holy Saturday and resurrection, and how “the death of God dooms death”. Speak to us a little about this because I feel this is a downplayed thing or ignored often in the evangelical church. 
 
Chapter 18 is the Lamb upon the throne. It talks all about Revelation and also the way God rules the world. What does the cross tell us about how God chooses to rule the world? 
 
We believe the cross is something we’ll never fully get to the bottom of. But I do love how you explain it in your intro: 
 
The cross is the pinnacle of divine disclosure, the eternal moment of forgiveness, divine solidarity with human suffering, the enduring model of discipleship, the supreme demonstration of divine love, the beauty that saves the world, the re-founding of the world around the axis of love, the overthrow of the satan, the shaming of the principalities and Powers, the unmasking of mob violence, the condemnation of state violence, the expose of political power, the abolition of war, the sacrifice to end sacrificing, the great divide of humankind, the healing center of the cosmos, the death by which death is conquered, the lamb upon the throne, the tree of life recovered and revealed. And with this brief list of interpretations, I’ve come nowhere near exhausting the meaning of the cross, for indeed the crucifixion of Jesus is an inexhaustible revelation of who God is. 
 
For those who are set in stone on their one mechanical way to view the cross what is you message to them… or even to the church on how we can usher God’s people into a more beautiful view of the cross?

Brian Zahnd is the founder and lead pastor of Word of Life Church, a non-denominational Christian congregation in Saint Joseph, Missouri. Brian and his wife, Peri, founded the church in 1981. Brian is also the author of several books, including, Sinners in the Hands of a Loving God, Water to Wine, A Farewell To Mars, Beauty Will Save the World, and Unconditional?: The Call of Jesus to Radical Forgiveness.

Today we’ll be having a conversation about his newest book “The Wood Between the Worlds: A Poetic Theology of the Cross”

CONVERSATION QUESTIONS: 

While most books on the cross or atonement try to “sum up” or find a specific mechanism for the cross but in this book you go the route of mystery and contemplation through beauty and poetics, while also being exegetical and theological. Please explain why you wrote this book? Also, explain the title “The Wood Between the Worlds”. 

In chapter 2 you talk about the singularity of Good Friday in how it is tied to forgiveness but you also br

Interview with Brian Zahnd “The Wood Between the Worlds: A Poetic Theology of the Cross”

: The Bible vs. Biblical Womanhood : How God's Word Consistently Affirms Gender Equality 
 
Part 1 of 2 
Dr. Will Ryan and Dr. Matt interview Dr. Philip Payne. In this episode we discuss the concept of gender roles, the meaning of "head" and "headship", and the text critical issues with 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 and how it relates to inerrancy and gender equality. 
 
Dr. Philip Payne is the founder and president of Linguist’s Software, and is a specialist in New Testament Studies. He is well known for his studies on New Testament Textual Criticism, the Parables of Jesus, and Man and Woman in the Teachings of Paul. He and his wife Nancy were missionaries in Japan with the Evangelical Free Church, where they ministered to students in the Kyoto Christian Studies Center and taught New Testament. He received his PhD in New Testament from Cambridge and has held many NT teaching positions at prominent Universities and Seminaries such as Cambridge, Gordon-Conwell, and Fuller. 
 
Order the book: The Bible vs. Biblical Womanhood : How God's Word Consistently Affirms Gender Equality https://a.co/d/i8RQFcq

: The Bible vs. Biblical Womanhood : How God's Word Consistently Affirms Gender Equality 

Part 1 of 2
Dr. Will Ryan and Dr. Matt interview Dr. Philip Payne. In this episode we discuss the concept of gender roles, the meaning of "head" and "headship", and the text critical issues with 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 and how it relates to inerrancy and gender equality. 

Dr. Philip Payne is the founder and president of Linguist’s Software, and is a specialist in New Testament Studies. He is well known for his studies on New Testament Textual Criticism, the Parables of Jesus, and Man and Woman in the Teachings of Paul. He and his wife Nancy were missionaries in Japan with the Evangelical Free Church, where they ministered to students in the Kyoto Christian Studies Center and taught New Testament. He received his PhD in New Testament from Cambridge and has held many NT teaching positions at prominent Universities and Seminaries such as Cambridge, Gordon-Conwell, and Fuller. 

Order the book: The B

Expedition 44 PART 1 Interview with Dr. Phillip Payne : The Bible vs. Biblical Womanhood

Isaiah 53: NT use of the OT 
 
In this episode Dr. Will Ryan and Dr. Matt look at the NT author’s usage of Isaiah 53. It is quoted 9 times in the NT directly. We’ll also look at Acts where we’ll see how the disciples use the same depiction we encountered in the last episode to describe the Servant and the people’s actions against Him. Last, we’ll look at “bearing sin” in the NT and show show it also lines up with how it is described in Isaiah 53 where the servant bears the abuse of the people (not God) for their healing. 
 
Isaiah 53:1 
John 12:37-38 
Romans 10:15-16 
 
Isaiah 53:4 
Matthew 8:16-17 
 
Isaiah 5:7-8 
Acts 8:32-33 
 
Isaiah 53:9; 4 
1 Peter 2:22-24 
 
Isaiah 53:12 
Mark 15:28-28 
Luke 22:36-38 
 
8/9 uses of Isaiah 53 in the NT are quoted from the LXX. Remember from the last episode this is the version with 1 voice that shows how God is not acting against the servant but the people are. 
 
Acts and the Suffering Servant 
Acts 2:23-28 
Acts 2:29-36 
Acts 3:13-18 
Acts 4:10-11 
Acts 5:27-28 
Acts 7:51-52 
Acts 10:39-41 
Acts 13:26-41 
 
The Release from Exile and “Bearing Sin” 
Galatians 3:8-14 
2 Corinthians 5:22 
 
Conclusions 
 
As in the interpretation of the OT context of Isaiah 53, we don’t see God acting in wrath against the servant but rather healing and redeeming him. It was the people who acted in violence against the servant. But God used this for our redemption. 
 
Jesus did bear sin… He bore the sinful and violent actions of the people. 
 
Some of the major things we can take away is that God can redeem evil for his good. The evil actions of the people were redeemed in the healing of the servant. And the crowd later realized those actions were not of God, even though they thought they were doing the Lord’s bidding in their scapegoating. 
 
PSA is also non-existent in the interpretations of Isaiah 53 in the OT when we compare the voices of the LXX and the MT. Also the NT writers consistently use the LXX when referring to Isaiah 53 and never apply Jesus’ death to anything regarding wrath satisfaction or appeasement. 
__________ 
Visit www.expedition44.com for posted articles and more. 
 
If you have comments or questions please email us at: ryan@expedition44.com, matt@expedition44.com

Isaiah 53: NT use of the OT

In this episode Dr. Will Ryan and Dr. Matt look at the NT author’s usage of Isaiah 53. It is quoted 9 times in the NT directly. We’ll also look at Acts where we’ll see how the disciples use the same depiction we encountered in the last episode to describe the Servant and the people’s actions against Him. Last, we’ll look at “bearing sin” in the NT and show show it also lines up with how it is described in Isaiah 53 where the servant bears the abuse of the people (not God) for their healing.  

Isaiah 53:1
John 12:37-38
Romans 10:15-16

Isaiah 53:4
Matthew 8:16-17

Isaiah 5:7-8
Acts 8:32-33

Isaiah 53:9; 4
1 Peter 2:22-24

Isaiah 53:12
Mark 15:28-28
Luke 22:36-38

8/9 uses of Isaiah 53 in the NT are quoted from the LXX. Remember from the last episode this is the version with 1 voice that shows how God is not acting against the servant but the people are. 

Acts and the Suffering Servant
Acts 2:23-28 
Acts 2:29-36
Acts 3:13-18
Acts 4:10-11
Acts 5:27-28
Acts 7

Isaiah 53 PART 2 : NT use of the OT Exegesis Hermeneutics Interpretation Expedition 44 Theology

Today Dr. Will Ryan and Dr. Matt dive into Isaiah 53 looking at the textual and message differences in the Septuagint (LXX) and the Masorectic Text (MTT). 
 
 
When read as pros (singular voice) these 2 texts disagree with each other and depict 2 different pictures of God. So, in this episode we examine the message of each (and imported doctrines) and see if they agree. The main points of this conversation are: Inerrancy, the character of God, and how this affects atonement theories. 
 
 
THE LXX TEXT 
13 Look! My child will understand and be raised up and be magnified exceedingly. 14 ⌊Just as⌋ many will be impressed by you, so your appearance will be despised by people and your glory by the people, 15 Thus many nations will be impressed at him, and kings will shut their mouth, because those to whom it has not been declared concerning him will see, and those who have not heard will understand. 
 
53 O Lord, who has believed our report? And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed? 2 We proclaimed as a child before him, as a root in a thirsty land. He has no appearance or glory. And we saw him, and he had no appearance or beauty. 3 Instead, his appearance was dishonored and forsaken among the sons of men, a man who experiences misfortune and who knows how to bear sickness, for his face has been rejected; he was dishonored and was not esteemed. 4 This one carries our sins and suffers pain from us, and we regarded him as one who is in difficulty, misfortune, and affliction. 5 But he was wounded from our sins, and he became sick from our lawless acts. The discipline of our peace was upon him; by his bruise we were healed. 6 We all have been misled like sheep; each person was misled in his own path, and the Lord handed him over for our sins. 7 And because he was afflicted, he does not open his mouth; like a sheep is led to slaughter, and like a lamb is voiceless before the one who shears it, so he does not open his mouth. 8 His judgment was taken away in humiliation; who will describe his family? For his life was taken from the earth; he was led to death because of the lawless acts of my people. 9 And I will give the wicked in place of his tomb, and the wealthy in place of death, because he committed no lawlessness, and there was no deceit in his mouth. 10 The Lord is willing to cleanse/heal him of the injury. If you make a sin offering, our soul will see long-lived offspring, and the Lord is willing to remove him from the difficulty of his soul, 11 to show him the light, and to form him with understanding, to justify the righteous who serves many well; and he himself will carry their sins. 12 Because of this he will cause many to inherit, and he will apportion the spoils of the mighty, because his soul was given over to death, and he was reckoned among the lawless, and he himself bore the sins of many, and he was handed over due to their wickedness. 
__________________________ 
Visit www.expedition44.com for posted articles and more. 
 
If you have comments or questions please email us at: ryan@expedition44.com, matt@expedition44.com

Today Dr. Will Ryan and Dr. Matt dive into Isaiah 53 looking at the textual and message differences in the Septuagint (LXX) and the Masorectic Text (MTT). 


When read as pros (singular voice) these 2 texts disagree with each other and depict 2 different pictures of God. So, in this episode we examine the message of each (and imported doctrines)  and see if they agree. The main points of this conversation are: Inerrancy, the character of God, and how this affects atonement theories.


THE LXX TEXT
13 Look! My child will understand and be raised up and be magnified exceedingly. 14 ⌊Just as⌋ many will be impressed by you, so your appearance will be despised by people and your glory by the people, 15 Thus many nations will be impressed at him, and kings will shut their mouth, because those to whom it has not been declared concerning him will see, and those who have not heard will understand. 

53 O Lord, who has believed our report? And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed? 2 We 

Isaiah 53 LXX MTT Septuagint Masoretic Text Exegesis PSA Interpretation andAnalysis Expedition 44

John H. Walton Interview with Will RYan and Matt Mouzakis of Expedition 44 
 
The Lost World of the Prophets: Old Testament Prophecy and Apocalyptic Literature in Ancient Context (The Lost World Series) 
 
John Walton is an emeritus professor of Old Testament at Wheaton College in Illinois and an editor and writer of Old Testament comparative studies and commentaries. Throughout his research, Walton has focused his attention on comparing the culture and literature of the Bible and the ancient Near East. He has published dozens of books, articles and translations, both as writer and editor, including his Lost World book series (6 books). Today we are going to be talking about his latest book The Lost World of the Prophets. 
 
Part 1: ANE 
I love how you begin each book in the series with a proposition of how to approach the text of scripture. A line we use a lot from you in our own teaching us “the Bible wasn’t written to us but it was written for us”. Please talk to us about accountability to the text, the cultural river, and how to be a faithful reader of scripture 
 
Part 2: Institution 
In part 2 of the book you deal with the institution of the prophet and prophecy. I grew up with prophecy pretty much being about predicting the future and you show that prophecy is not about future predictions. Could you explain prophecy and how it works in scripture and in the ANE? 
 
Since we’ve talked about prophecy, what then is a prophet? In proposition 5 you state that “The classical prophets are champions of the covenant in times of crisis”. Speak to this and the role of the prophet 
 
You have a little excursus on false prophets at the end of this section, which I really enjoyed. What is a false prophet? 
 
Part 3: Literature 
In part 3 you look at the prophets as literature. You have a few different categories of prophetic messages that help the reader understand what is going on in the text. Could you explain these categories? 
 
In Proposition 9 you mentioned that the implied audience of the prophetic books is not necessarily the audience of the prophet. At first glance some might think “Oh does that mean it’s for me”, but I think you are talking about Israel being the audience even when the prophet is addressing the nations. Could you explain this? 
 
Part 4: Methodological and Interpretive issues 
Talk to us about fulfillment of prophecy. What does it mean for a prophecy to be fulfilled? 
 
How does the New Testament use the OT prophecies? 
 
Part 5: Apocalyptic 
What is apocalyptic literature and how is it different from prophecy? 
 
You state that the visions in apocalyptic literature are not the message but the occasion for the message. Please explain this 
 
You conclude this section with looking at the olivet discourse and Revelation and show that it uses the same principals as the OT. Could you summarize that for us?

John H. Walton Interview with Will RYan and Matt Mouzakis of Expedition 44

The Lost World of the Prophets: Old Testament Prophecy and Apocalyptic Literature in Ancient Context (The Lost World Series)

John Walton is an emeritus professor of Old Testament at Wheaton College in Illinois and an editor and writer of Old Testament comparative studies and commentaries. Throughout his research, Walton has focused his attention on comparing the culture and literature of the Bible and the ancient Near East. He has published dozens of books, articles and translations, both as writer and editor, including his Lost World book series (6 books). Today we are going to be talking about his latest book The Lost World of the Prophets. 

Part 1: ANE
I love how you begin each book in the series with a proposition of how to approach the text of scripture. A line we use a lot from you in our own teaching us “the Bible wasn’t written to us but it was written for us”. Please talk to us about accountability t

John Walton Interview and review The Lost World of the Prophets

Will Ryan and Matt Mouzakis interview Steve Gregg on Hell. 
 
Steve Gregg is a teacher, author, and international lecturer on the Bible, theology, and discipleship. He is the author of “Revelation: Four Views: A Parallel Commentary”(1997, 2013) and “All You Want to Know About Hell: Three Christian Views” (2013) and most recently his series on the kingdom of God “The Empire of the Risen Son. His talk show, “The Narrow Path,” broadcasts on stations across the USA and you can find his teachings on the website and mobile app: thenarrowpath.com. 
 
Why Hell is an updated version of your original book “All you want to know about Hell”. Why a new edition and what’s new in this edition compared to the previous one? (Thank you for letting Ryan and I endorse it) 
 
I know when we talked to you about Israel the last time we had you on Expedition 44 you mentioned how your mind was changed based on the text of scripture when it came to dispensationalism. Did you change your mind on Hell after studying scripture too? Tell us about your own journey in studying the doctrine of Hell. 
 
Much of what we think about Hell is directly connected to the character of God. You deal with this concept right off the bat in your book. Please speak to this 
 
Your subtitle for this book is “3 christian views” critically examined. I grew up in a tradition where if you even questioned the Eternal Torment view you would be considered a heretic (I’ve since left ECT), but here you talk about 3 “Christian” views. What are the 3 views and what makes them Christian? 
 
Please give us some of the strengths are weaknesses for each view. 
 
Exegetically, which view is the strongest and which is the weakest in your opinion? 
 
Each view seems to deal with Sin differently. Please walk us through this in each view and how each view approaches the justice of God in dealing with sin

Will Ryan and Matt Mouzakis interview Steve Gregg on Hell. 

Steve Gregg is a teacher, author, and international lecturer on the Bible, theology, and discipleship. He is the author of “Revelation: Four Views: A Parallel Commentary”(1997, 2013) and “All You Want to Know About Hell: Three Christian Views” (2013) and most recently his series on the kingdom of God “The Empire of the Risen Son. His talk show, “The Narrow Path,” broadcasts on stations across the USA and  you can find his teachings on the website and mobile app: thenarrowpath.com. 

Why Hell is an updated version of your original book “All you want to know about Hell”. Why a new edition and what’s new in this edition compared to the previous one? (Thank you for letting Ryan and I endorse it)

I know when we talked to you about Israel the last time we had you on Expedition 44 you mentioned how your mind was changed based on the text of scripture when it came to dispensationalism. Did you change your mind on Hell after studying

Why Hell?: Three Christian Views Critically Examined with Steve Gregg Expedition 44

Every Year the seniors pass down objects to the junior class. Last year I was passed on the Golden Butter Knife from Raymond Wilson. This year I have to determine who I will pass it onto.

Ty and the Golden Butter Knife to miracle of sound -valhalla calling -ft peyton parrish JSB SPECIAL

TOV is a covenant community wholly devoted to a king Jesus discipleship culture.

Original Sin: Implications & Conclusion (Part 6) 
 
In this series we have looked at the doctrine of Original Sin. We believe there was an original sin but disagree with the doctrine of Original Sin. We observed that Augustine introduced this doctrine into the church over 400 years after Jesus and none of the earliest church writers (or the Bible) affirm this doctrine. It’s actually more closely linked to Pagan and Gnostic ideas than Biblical Ideas. 
 
Recap: What is Original Sin? 
The doctrine of Original Sin teaches that because of Adam and Eve’s sin we are all born guilty before God and that we inherit their guilt from birth (Original Guilt). Augustine defined this though concupiscence which he believed that original sin was passed on sexually. 
 
Total Depravity 
Not only are we born with Original Sin, the guilt of Adam’s offense, but this also totally depraved and unable to respond to God according to this Doctrine. Total Depravity states that all mankind is born spiritually dead, possessing both Adam’s guilt and his sin nature and that man’s intellect, will, body, and spirit are so corrupt they cannot seek God or cry out for his help unless they are first saved and regenerated, given the gift of faith with a new heart and new mind. 
 
Infant Depravity 
According to John Calvin we are born “doomed from the womb”, and Voddie Baucham says all babies are “vipers in diapers”, born in the guilt of Adam and totally depraved. So in this view Jesus comes to save us from Original Sin (God’s wrath)… Or just save “the elect” (if you are consistent). 
We have shown in this series how all of this is a distortion of what the Bible says and we’re going to get into some of the theological implications of this view today in our conclusion, showing how those who hold to original Sin are building on the wrong foundation and bad readings of scripture. 
 
Theological Implications 
Distortion God’s Character 
Exodus 34:6-7 
 
Distortion of the view and nature of Humanity 
Original Sin distorts what the Bible says about the nature and value of humanity. They believe we are totally depraved and unable to seek after God and are like worms. But this tends to distort what the Bible actually says- we are made in God’s image and crowned with his glory (psalm 8). We are fearfully and wonderfully made and created “very good” (Gen 1). As we noted in our episode on the nature of man we have the ability to choose life or death. To submit to the yetzer ha tov or yetzer ha ra. We can sow to the Spirit or the Flesh as Paul says. 
 
 
Penal Substitutionary Atonement 
Anselm 
Wrath 
Limited Atonement 
 
The cross is not about satisfying wrath. It is actually about the liberation from the hostile Powers of Sin, Death, and the Devil and therefore the cross is a rescue. In this, there is still room for the wrath that is being stored up for the ungodly on the "Day of Wrath". 
 
Eternal Conscious Torment 
the notion of retributive punishment flows from original sin and what we have show earlier about Anselm’s medieval feudal views and Calvin’s retributive views of God. 
 
 
The Better Way 
There’s a better way to look at all of this. 
· In the garden Humans were made in God’s image to rule with him and keep creation 
· The humans sinned wanting to define good and evil on their own terms 
· God separated them from the tree of life so that they might not live forever in their sinful state 
· Adam did not transfer his guilt to all of humanity but transferred mortality to all (this is what Romans 5:12 says!) 
· We are not born guilty but born mortal and into an environment of death and sin and because of this we become sinners when we sin. 
· We are born with desires and they are neutral (yetzer). We can choose the good or the evil (tov/ra)- Choose life! 
· The world was held captive by the Powers (D32) , Sin, and Death and Jesus came to release us from that futility of slavery and death. He didn’t need to pay off the Father but rather was on a rescue mission. 
· We now are to walk by the Spirit and conform ourselves to the image of the Son and the Divine nature by walking in His Tov way of Life to return to our original purpose in Eden.

Original Sin: Implications & Conclusion (Part 6)

In this series we have looked at the doctrine of Original Sin. We believe there was an original sin but disagree with the doctrine of Original Sin. We observed that Augustine introduced this doctrine into the church over 400 years after Jesus and none of the earliest church writers (or the Bible) affirm this doctrine. It’s actually more closely linked to Pagan and Gnostic ideas than Biblical Ideas. 

Recap: What is Original Sin?
The doctrine of Original Sin teaches that because of Adam and Eve’s sin we are all born guilty before God and that we inherit their guilt from birth (Original Guilt). Augustine defined this though concupiscence which he believed that original sin was passed on sexually. 

Total Depravity
Not only are we born with Original Sin, the guilt of Adam’s offense, but this also totally depraved and unable to respond to God according to this Doctrine. Total Depravity states that all mankind is born spiritually dead, posse

Original Sin Series: Implications & Conclusion (Part 6) PROBLEMS WITH REFORMED THEOLOGY CALVINISM

Original Sin: Romans 5 (Part 5) Dr. Will Ryan and Dr. Matt Mouzakis 
 
Romans 5 is the central Original Sin prooftext so today we’re going to dig in and look at what it says. As we mentioned in our first episode Augustine used Romans 5:12 as the cornerstone text for his doctrine of concupiscence, original sin, and infant depravity. First we need to set the context of Romans before we exegete the text. 
 
 
Context of Romans 
Romans is a pastoral (Shepherding) letter that does contain theology. The theology in the letter is to service Paul’s purpose in the Roman church (Lived theology and a lived gospel). 
 
 
Summary and connections to Original Sin in Romans 1-4 
As we have seen the narrative is that Jesus is the truly faithful Human and Jew. Because of his faithfulness and our faith in him we are reconciled to God and to our vocation as Imagers. (All have sinned and missed that Mark). 
· There are a lot of connections and allusions to Adam and the image of God but it never says anything about transferred guilt but Romans 1 actually shows how God’s wrath (“handing over”) leads to death just like in Eden. 
· Romans 2 says that pagan gentiles can do the things of the Law instinctively though they do not have it. This goes against total depravity. 
· All HAVE sinned (become sinners) they are not born sinners. But a better way to take this is that both Jews and Gentiles have gone off course from God’s original plan in the garden. 
· All of these arguments are to show how Jews and Gentiles are on an equal plain and need to come to unity in Jesus to truly live out the kingdom in their church. 
 
 
 
Romans 5:12-21 
 
 
All of Romans 5:12-21 is a contrast of 2 ways- Adam or Jesus… the way of life or the way of death: 
o We saw that the thing Adam brought was death through his sin 
o We do not inherit Adam’s sin but we are born into mortality 
o We become sinners when we sin and Adam introduced these systems of sin into the world by our expulsion from Eden 
o Sin and Death are seen as Powers that enslave us. We all need saving from death and from sin 
o Jesus defeats these Powers as the 2nd Adam and brings life. 
o The entire narrative of Romans up to Romans 5 is about “glory”- the image of God. The purpose of this life is for the purpose of being conformed to his image (Romans 8) 
o We can walk this way through the life of the Spirit 
 
Original sin? 
o Where is original sin and total depravity here? It is completely absent! 
o The only way you can get there is through reading Romans out of context. 
o We see that death is the focus and the thing that needs to be dealt with in order to get to the restoration of glory! 
 
Original Context: 
o The pastoral context of Romans is not just about some abstract theologies of original sin and total depravity, or a road to individual salvation (Romans road). 
o Paul exhorting the Roman house churches to live out the way of Jesus in unity instead of the divisions of the Weak and the Strong. He wants them to be conformed into Christ’s image and live out the gospel under Jesus’ kingship- GLORY and GLORIFICATION. 
o This message is also for us today- Choose the Life and Way of Christ and live in it (the Truth)! 
 
_________ 
 
 
Visit www.expedition44.com for posted articles and more. 
 
 
If you have comments or questions please email us at: ryan@expedition44.com, matt@expedition44.com

Original Sin: Romans 5 (Part 5) Dr. Will Ryan and Dr. Matt Mouzakis
 
Romans 5 is the central Original Sin prooftext so today we’re going to dig in and look at what it says. As we mentioned in our first episode Augustine used Romans 5:12 as the cornerstone text for his doctrine of concupiscence, original sin, and infant depravity. First we need to set the context of Romans before we exegete the text. 


Context of Romans
Romans is a pastoral (Shepherding) letter that does contain theology. The theology in the letter is to service Paul’s purpose in the Roman church (Lived theology and a lived gospel). 


Summary and connections to Original Sin in Romans 1-4
As we have seen the narrative is that Jesus is the truly faithful Human and Jew. Because of his faithfulness and our faith in him we are reconciled to God and to our vocation as Imagers. (All have sinned and missed that Mark). 
·      There are a lot of connections and allusions to Adam and the image of God but it never says anything

Original Sin Series : Romans 5 (Part 5) Expedition 44 & Covenant Theological Seminary

Today Dr. Will Ryan and Dr. Matt consider the incarnation of Jesus and the ramifications regarding Original Sin. 
 
We want to give a Shout out to Warren McGrew of Idol Killer and Will and Brian of The Church Split for their series’ on Original sin and for helping us articulate some of the content in this episode. 
 
• The immaculate conception of Mary is a late dogma created to prop up original sin. But not only this a “preservative redemption” is also needed for Mary to remain sinless 
• The Virgin birth in both Protestant and Catholic circles is used incorrectly to promote the doctrine of Original Sin. 
o For Catholics it deals with the issue of concupiscence 
o For Protestants it actually does nothing as Mary was born of human parents and still would transmit Original Sin 
o We affirm the virgin birth but in Isaiah 7 it is called a sign pointing to the miracle of the messiah and has nothing to do with original sin. 
• The way Protestants try to get around this is the hypostatic union, which we also affirm, but Protestants use it incorrectly to support this Doctrine. 
 
• 3 points from these verses: 
o Jesus came in flesh- he was fully human like us (yet fully God). He experienced what we do. 
o Jesus had no sin in him (he wasn’t born with it) 
o And Jesus never sinned 
 
• Thus, no Original sin if Jesus assumed exactly what we are and partook of the same nature yet did not sin. 
• If Original Sin is true and Jesus was spared it through the immaculate conception then Jesus was not like us in every way and cannot sympathize with our weaknesses and Hebrews 4:15 is a lie and Jesus is an unfit High Priest. 
o This is what the Doctrine of original sin gets us into. 
 
Conclusion/ The Better Way 
 
Jesus was fully God and Fully Man. He assumed all that we are so that he could make us all that he is and heal us. 
 
The Incarnation 
o We saw that Jesus came in the flesh just like us (but also fully God) 
o We saw that there was no sin in Jesus (no original sin) 
o We saw that Jesus did not sin 
 
We also looked at Mary and all the gymnastics that needed to happen with her to hold up this unbiblical doctrine. 
 
We looked at how Calvinists have no foundation to stand on with Original sin in the Virgin Birth (we affirm it!), the Hypostatic Union (in which they downplay Jesus’ humanity), and they come dangerously close to many Gnostic heresies. 
 
The Better Way 
As humans it is comforting to know that Jesus went through all that we did and was still sinless. He has redeemed us and comes beside us to conform us into his image. 
 
So rather than focusing on the negative theology of Augustinianism and Calvinism look at the beauty that is in Jesus becoming just like us in every way to heal us and make us whole! 
 
_________ 
 
Visit www.expedition44.com for posted articles and more. 
 
If you have comments or questions please email us at: ryan@expedition44.com, matt@expedition44.com

Today Dr. Will Ryan and Dr. Matt consider the incarnation of Jesus and the ramifications regarding Original Sin. 

We want to give a Shout out to Warren McGrew of Idol Killer and Will and Brian of The Church Split for their series’ on Original sin and for helping us articulate some of the content in this episode. 

• The immaculate conception of Mary is a late dogma created to prop up original sin. But not only this a “preservative redemption” is also needed for Mary to remain sinless
• The Virgin birth in both Protestant and Catholic circles is used incorrectly to promote the doctrine of Original Sin. 
o For Catholics it deals with the issue of concupiscence 
o For Protestants it actually does nothing as Mary was born of human parents and still would transmit Original Sin
o We affirm the virgin birth but in Isaiah 7 it is called a sign pointing to the miracle of the messiah and has nothing to do with original sin. 
• The way Protestants try to get around this is the hypostatic union, 

Original Sin Series PART 4: The Incarnation with Dr. Matt and Dr. WIll Ryan of CTS

Original Sin: Original Guilt & Infant Depravity 
 
Today we are going to look at 2 main things: 1) Does the Bible say sin is transferable or inheritable? And 2) What does the Bible say about the state of infants and children (are they doomed from the womb?). Do they inherit Adam’s guilt. 
 
Does the Bible say Sin and Guilt are Transferable/Inheritable? 
Deut 1:39 
 
Sons punished for a Father’s sin? 
Ezekiel 18:19-23 
Deut 24:16 
2 Kings 14:6 
Exodus 32 
John 9:1-3 
Exodus 34:6-7 
 
What about the nature of Infants and Children? 
As we said in the first episode of this series; the Reformers who inherited their doctrine from Augustine believed in the depravity of infants and their damnation from birth without baptism to wash off Original Sin. 
 
Johnathan Edwards (famous Reformed Puritan) sums up their beliefs saying: 
 “It is most just, exceedingly just, that God should take the soul of a new-born infant and cast it into eternal torments [due to Adam’s sin]” Or as Voddie Baucham says: All babies are vipers in diapers. 
 
Isaiah 7:14-15 
Psalms 22:9-10 
 
Jeremiah and Innocent Babies 
Jer 19:4-6, 7:30-33, and 32:32-38 basically say the same thing: The burning of INNOCENT babies never entered God’s mind. 
Notice: Babies are declared innocent (not sinful) by God. They are not born guilty of Original Sin but become sinners when they sin and can be held accountable for it. This has major ramifications on the abortion debate, as we mentioned in the first episode. If babies are born in Original Sin then why advocate for human life? They are born under the hatred and wrath of God anyways! 
 
The Parable of the Prodigal Son as a Paradigm 
· The son is born in the father’s house. (we are born in the Father’s House- innocent) 
· A time comes the son can choose to stay in the house or squander the inheritance. ( We can choose to stay in Christ or squander the inheritance of innocence) 
· Yet, the father is merciful and welcomes the son back when he comes in repentance and reinstates his inheritance. (Same is true for us when we turn back to Him!) 
Therefore, we are not born dead but choose to leave the Father’s house of our own Free Will. 
 
Infant Depravity Proof texts 
Psalm 58:3 
Go astray means they weren’t already astray at birth. It was something they had to leave to become astray. They become this way “FROM” (or after) birth. Not IN birth. 
 
Psalm 51:5 
The Hebrew never says that David started out condemned in sin, but the act of his conception was sinful (but this is not concupiscence). It also says that it was David’s mother’s sin/iniquity and not David’s in Hebrew. It does not say that David was born in sin. (NIV and NLT translate this horribly!) 
 
 The Jewish view is that David was conceived in adultery. This makes sense when Samuel was looking over Jesse’s sons to anoint a king and denies them all. He asks if Jesse has more children and says David is tending the sheep. 
 
What is the context of the psalm? David’s sin with Bathsheba. David is putting his sin with Bathsheba in parallel with his mother’s sin in his conception. “brought forth” here is always used of “an animal in heat” in the Hebrew Bible and not the normal words used of sex or conception within a covenant. 
 
What about Job? 
Job 15:14-16 
Job 25:4-6 
Job 14:4 
Two of these are the false words of Job’s friends (See Job 42:7-9) and the 3rd is about ritual uncleanness and not about the nature of man. 
 
Jesus and the Children 
Matt 18:3-6 
Mark 10:13-16 
Children are equated with innocence, purity, and trust. They are the example of the Kingdom. 
 
Conclusion/The Better Way 
We looked at 2 things today: Inherited guilt and Infant depravity. 
 
Inherited Guilt 
o We saw that the Bible says that sins cannot be transferred. 
o Each will be accountable for their own sins 
o Thus when Original Sin says we inherit Adam’s guilt it goes against God’s Law and all of the scriptures 
 
Infant Depravity 
As we can see in scripture babies and children are innocent before the Lord. God does not hold them accountable until they can truly know good from evil. 
o Some call this the age of accountability or as the Jews call it Bar mizpah (becoming a son of the commandments- age 13) 
o We are born with desires and we must learn how to act upon them because they can be used for good or evil. 
o We are not born doomed from the womb or as sinners but rather become sinners when we sin knowingly. 
 
Jesus invites us into the kingdom to become innocent like children and renewed into the state we were at the beginning in order to bear his name in this world. 
 
The Take Aways 
o We need to be formed in Christlikeness from our youth 
o God has placed life in front of us and we must choose it 
o He guides us by the Spirit to be able to walk in this way 
o The discipleship of children is so important! 
_________ 
 
Visit www.expedition44.com for posted articles and more. 
 
If you have comments or questions please email us at: ryan@expedition44.com, matt@expedition44.com

Original Sin: Original Guilt & Infant Depravity

Today we are going to look at 2 main things: 1) Does the Bible say sin is transferable or inheritable? And  2) What does the Bible say about the state of infants and children (are they doomed from the womb?). Do they inherit Adam’s guilt.  
 
Does the Bible say Sin and Guilt are Transferable/Inheritable?
Deut 1:39

Sons punished for a Father’s sin?
Ezekiel 18:19-23
Deut 24:16 
2 Kings 14:6 
Exodus 32
John 9:1-3 
Exodus 34:6-7 

What about the nature of Infants and Children?
As we said in the first episode of this series; the Reformers who inherited their doctrine from Augustine believed in the depravity of infants and their damnation from birth without baptism to wash off Original Sin. 
 
Johnathan Edwards (famous Reformed Puritan) sums up their beliefs saying: 
 “It is most just, exceedingly just, that God should take the soul of a new-born infant and cast it into eternal torments [due to Adam’s sin]” Or as Voddie Baucham says: All babi

Original Sin Series Part 3: Original Guilt & Infant Depravity

Original Sin: The Nature of Man 
 
Genesis 2-3 
In Genesis we see Adam and Eve as the first priests in Eden with the vocation to image God. God gives them one command- to not eat of the tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil. Notice it is the tree of the KNOWLEDGE of GOOD and EVIL. It is knowledge and not just of evil. 
 
Some things to notice: 
· The things cursed are the Nahash and the ground. Adam and Eve are not. 
· God promises that the Seed of the Woman (Jesus) will crush the serpent (a foreshadow of the major picture of atonement) 
· We see that pain will increase in child bearing and it will be there will be thorns and thistles making cultivation harder. 
· There will be inequality and “lording over” that will happen due to eating of the tree between the man and woman. (This is not God’s ideal but the result of the fall) 
· Notice what God says: “they have become like us”… Totally depraved??? No! Knowing Good and Evil. Adam and Eve have knowledge but not maturity. 
· God mercifully separates them from the Tree of Life so that they will not live in this way forever. 
· Death comes into this world (This is what Romans 5 says!) 
· The logic here is also that God is life and separation from him = death. Eternal life is partaking in God’s life. 
 
The Jewish View (The Yetzer) 
When you have the knowledge of something you can have the desire for it. This is where the Jews get the view of the Yetzer (desire). The Calvinist view is that all human desires and actions are evil. But was this what we saw in the Genesis account? All we saw was that they has the KNOWLEDGE of the good and evil and thus could act upon either. 
 
Yetzer Ha Tov (Good desire) and Yetzer Ha Ra (Evil desire) 
The Jewish view is that the eating of the tree awakened the two desires in mankind and we much choose which we entertain. 
Yetzer: God given drives, desires, and appetites . The Yetzer itself is neutral and it is God given 
 
OT-Yetzer 
Gen 4:6-7 
 Isaiah 26:3 
1 Chron 28:9 
Gen 6:5 (cf. Gen 8:21) 
 
NT-Epithumia 
Mark 4:19 
John 8:44 
Luke 22:15 
James 1:13-15 
Gal 6:7-10 
James 5:17 
1 John 3:7-8 
Ephesians 2:1-3 
 
 
Augustine and Concupiscence 
What in Hebrew is yetzer and in Greek is epithumia was translated as concupiscence in Latin. 
As we have seen yetzer and epithumia are completely neutral in meaning in Greek and Hebrew but in Latin usually concupiscence nearly always takes on a negative meaning. Remember Augustine could not read Hebrew or Greek. And he still was dealing with a lot of Pagan presuppositions that he brought into the Bible. He introduced this new doctrine where sex is a sin and we inherit guilt through Adam and are born totally unable to act on the good desires. 
 
Conclusion/Better View 
· Throughout all of this we have seen that God given desires and ambitions are good but we can use them for evil as well when abused. 
· We are not created as sinners but become sinners when we chase after evil desires (yetzer ha-ra). 
· We are weak in the flesh and without the work of the Spirit in us we are prone to the yetzer ha-ra. (Matt 26:41; Rom 8:3-4) 
· God says we can practice righteousness, we can sow to the Spirit, and we can rule over the sin crouching at our door. If he says it we can do it with his help! 
· We are not totally depraved and unable to seek after God and exercise the yetzer ha-tov. 
· Everyday we have the choice to walk out our discipleship or walk according to the world. Choose this day whom you will serve! 
_________ 
 
Visit www.expedition44.com for posted articles and more. 
 
If you have comments or questions please email us at: ryan@expedition44.com, matt@expedition44.com

Original Sin: The Nature of Man

Genesis 2-3 
In Genesis we see Adam and Eve as the first priests in Eden with the vocation to image God. God gives them one command- to not eat of the tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil. Notice it is the tree of the KNOWLEDGE of GOOD and EVIL. It is knowledge and not just of evil. 

Some things to notice:
·      The things cursed are the Nahash and the ground. Adam and Eve are not. 
·      God promises that the Seed of the Woman (Jesus) will crush the serpent (a foreshadow of the major picture of atonement)
·      We see that pain will increase in child bearing and it will be there will be thorns and thistles making cultivation harder. 
·      There will be inequality and “lording over” that will happen due to eating of the tree between the man and woman. (This is not God’s ideal but the result of the fall)
·      Notice what God says: “they have become like us”… Totally depraved??? No! Knowing Good and Evil. Adam and Eve have knowledge but not matu

Original Sin PART II : The Nature of Man Biblical Theology Covenant Theological Seminary

Today Dr Will Ryan & Dr. Matt launch a series examining the Doctrine of Original Sin. 
 
If you’ve followed us long enough you’ve probably seen there are 2 theologies we tend to jab at quite a bit: Dispensationalism, Calvinism/Reformed Theology, So we basically have issues with doctrines that promote fear and a distortion of God’s Character. 
 
In this series we’ll be looking at how Original Sin 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. Messianic Jews do not believe this. 
 The Eastern Orthodox church along with some Protestant denominations never adopted this view. 
As we’ll see in this intro, 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. 
 
Defining original sin 
 
We do not deny that there was AN ORIGINAL SIN. What we will be referring to as “Original Sin” is the doctrine of Original Sin which teaches that because of Adam and Eve’s sin we are all born guilty before God and that we inherit their guilt from birth. Sometimes we may refer to this as Original Guilt. This is also called Augustinian Anthropology or Augustinian Original Sin 
 
Original Sin is the building block for Total Depravity or Total Inability of Calvinism’s TUPLIP which is about the nature of man in that they are so totally depraved that they cannot even seek after God. 
 
Augustine and Original Sin 
The doctrine came into the church through Augustine of Hippo (396-440 CE) and the doctrine was originally called Concupiscence. 
 
“Concupiscence” , according to Augustine, relates to Adam’s sin being transferred through sexual reproduction. It’s root definition is a base sexual desire. We get our word concubine from this. He believe that though 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. Augustine could only read Latin. He tried to learn Greek but despised it due to his teacher who was very hard on him and so never learned it. He also could not read Hebrew. Augustine came to original sin by reading Romans 5:12 in a bad Latin translation. 
 
Augustine and Pelagianism 
Often the label thrown at those who disagree with Original Sin or who hold to Freedom of the Will is “Pelagian”. 
 
Augustine developed 14 points of accusation against Pelagius. But you can look Pelagius’ writings and they completely refute the accusations. 
 
The 14 Points of Pelagianism: 
 
1. Adam was created mortal & would die whether he sinned or not 
2. Adam’s sin harmed only Adam, not mankind 
3. The law leads to heaven in the same way as the Gospel 
4. Newborn infants are in the exact same state as Adam before his sin 
5. The whole human race doesn’t die through Adam & live through Christ 
6. Even unbaptized infants possess eternal life 
7. The wealthy must renounce their possessions or they will not see the Kingdom of Heaven 
8. God’s grace & help are not given for individual actions, but consist in free will, the law & teaching. 
9. God‘s grace is given in accord with our merits & is located in the human will 
10. Only those who are without sin can be called children of God 
11. Forgetfulness & ignorance are not sinful since they’re not done willingly 
12. A choice is not free if it needs God’s help 
13. Our victory is not the result of God’s help, but free will 
14. The soul can be as sinless as God. 
 
“Pelagianism” based on Augustine’s 14 slanderous claims is not a real thing, but rather a strawman, a distortion, defamation and slander of the beliefs of a truly Orthodox Christian in order to change orthodoxy in the church. 
 
 
 
In conclusion, we would say that man is born innocent with desires towards the good and the evil. We create habits based on what we act upon. We also have positive and negative consequences based upon our choices. God offers us a gift (grace) of life (Christ) but we must walk in it. We are not born totally depraved or unable to seek him. But we are born weak in the flesh and prone to sin. The Spirit in us helps us to walk in the way of Life and Light. 
 
As Deut 30 says: 
See, I have set before you today life and prosperity, and death and adversity; in that I command you today to love the Lord your God, to walk in His ways and to keep His commandments and His statutes and His judgments, that you may live and multiply, and that the Lord your God may bless you in the land where you are entering to possess it. “But if your heart turns away and you will not obey, but are drawn away and worship other gods and serve them, I declare to you today that you shall surely perish.

Today Dr Will Ryan & Dr. Matt launch a series examining the Doctrine of Original Sin. 

If you’ve followed us long enough you’ve probably seen there are 2 theologies we tend to jab at quite a bit: Dispensationalism, Calvinism/Reformed Theology,  So we basically have issues with doctrines that promote fear and a distortion of God’s Character. 

In this series we’ll be looking at how Original Sin 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. Messianic Jews do not believe this.
 The Eastern Orthodox church along with some Protestant denominations never adopted this view. 
As we’ll see in this intro, 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. 

Defining original sin

We do not deny that there was AN ORIGINAL SIN. What we will be referring to as “Original Sin” is the doctrine of Original Sin wh

Original Sin: Intro & Historical Background Expedition 44

We started a series on the church back in July of 2022 and a year and a half later we are wrapping It up. Today we’re going to recap where we’ve been. 
 
The big idea is that the church is not an institution … it’s an organism (it’s organic)! 
· There was equality- No clergy/laity divide 
· The giftings of the entire body were active to display Jesus 
· They met face to face throughout the week in relationships 
 
7 Churches of Revelation (Nationalism and Dispensationalism) 
The point of looking at these 7 churches is that it pointed out Jesus’ ideals in his Body. Much of the issues here deals with the World seeping into the church. 
 
Leadership and Oversight 
the glaring question we need to ask is “Are these offices or simply people using their god given gifts?” Positional thinking is hung up on nouns, while functional thinking stresses verbs. 
 
The view of oversight in the NT church is about the whole body operating in their giftings and being discipled by those who are wise, mature, and have the character of Christ in them. This is what leadership and oversight looks like rather than the CEO structure that focuses on offices and hierarchy which hurts the church. 
 
5-Fold Ministry 
Ephesians 4 describes these as “ascension gifts” not “ascension offices”. This entire chapter focuses on unity in the body of Christ, not positions which divide clergy from laity. 
 
Reimagining Gifts 
Spiritual gifts are not about hierarchy but about building up the body of Christ. The church is a body- a mutual and co-equal body- that reflects Jesus. There is no hierarchy in giftings. These giftings don’t lead to an office, though some might lead or administrate in their gifting better than others based on maturity and humility- we should all mutually submit to each other. 
 
Reimagining Community 
· Spiritually- We need to be together in spiritual friendship gathering around the Way of Jesus, studying scripture, breaking bread, praying for each other. DEVOTED- They devoted themselves to these things. 
· Physically- meeting the needs of the community, being generous and being available. 
· Emotionally- This is about completeness and transformation- How is our mindset and focus? Is it singularly on Jesus or is there entanglement with the world? 
· Missionally- Do we live in unity or are there offenses and divisions among us that we have swept under the rug? Division and disunity kills the mission to be lights to the world. 
 
Reimagining Giving 
The main ideals of giving in the New Covenant: 
· Give Cheerfully 
· Take care of fellow believers (and support the work of the Lord) 
· Care for the least of these 
· Celebrate God (see communion and the love feast in 1 Cor 11) 
 
Whenever the church gathers together, its guiding and functioning principal is simply to incarnate Christ (1 Cor 12:12) 
 
The Edenic Ideal: 
 
We always take everything back to God’s ideals. The Bible begins and ends with Eden. New Creation has broken into the present through the resurrection, so the church should be living according to God’s ideals in our communities even if the world looks completely opposite. 
 
God’s eternal purpose was to have a people in relationship with him working in equality under God’s kingship. This is God’s ideal for his church too. Each of us bringing our gifts to the altar/table and using them to image him to creation. 
 
· The western view of leadership connected to authority, hierarchy, control, and covering has handcuffed the bride of Christ - making her ineffective for the kingdom. 
· We need to get back to the servant mindset rather than the CEO leader mindset in the church 
· We need more feet washing and less discussions about “who’s your covering” 
· More mutual submission and less “human headship” 
· More family, less institution 
· More verbs, less nouns

We started a series on the church back in July of 2022 and a year and a half later we are wrapping It up.  Today we’re going to recap where we’ve been. 

The big idea is that the church is not an institution … it’s an organism (it’s organic)!
·      There was equality- No clergy/laity divide
·      The giftings of the entire body were active to display Jesus
·      They met face to face throughout the week in relationships

7 Churches of Revelation (Nationalism and Dispensationalism)
The point of looking at these 7 churches is that it pointed out Jesus’ ideals in his Body. Much of the issues here deals with the World seeping into the church. 

Leadership and Oversight
the glaring question we need to ask is “Are these offices or simply people using their god given gifts?”  Positional thinking is hung up on nouns, while functional thinking stresses verbs. 
 
The view of oversight in the NT church is about the whole body operating in their giftings and being discipled by those who are wis

expedition44 Videos

Dr. Will Ryan and Dr. Matt with Dr. Lucy Peppiatt about 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 and head coverings

Expedition 44 Biblical Theology Liminal Spaces, the exodus, Chaos Water TOV and RA Thresholds