Rootedness in Christ
Jesus as the Creator
Three New Testament texts by different authors explicitly claim that Jesus is the creator of the cosmos. For some strange reasons I do not fully understand, many in the church have historically been uncomfortable with the claim and have found ways to blunt the force of the assertion:
John 1:1, 3, 14 ESV
[1] In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
[3] All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.
[14] And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.
Colossians 1:15-17 ESV
[15] He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. [16] For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. [17] And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together.
Hebrews 1:1-3 ESV
[1] Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, [2] but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. [3] He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,
Who Incited David in 1 Chronicles 21:1-2 and 2 Samuel 24:1-2: God or Satan?
This entry is adapted from a longer one here.
Consider the following texts:
2 Samuel 24:1 ESV
Again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he incited David against them, saying, “Go, number Israel and Judah.”
1 Chronicles 21:1 NRSVUE
Satan stood up against Israel and incited David to count the people of Israel.
These texts record the same event. Yet, the first account says it was God who incited David, while the second says it was Satan. Which is it?
A Brief Note on the End-Times
Typically, eschatology is taught as the doctrine of end times, encompassing final things such as death, judgment, and humanity’s ultimate destiny. I had an unease with this subject and avoided it for a long time. In hindsight, I can think of reasons I did not care enough about it. First, I always had a visceral rejection of the idea of some Christians predicting when the world would end. It seems to me that even with a perfect understanding of everything the Bible says on the eschaton, we still would not be able to map out the future with precision. One reason is that if humans can figure out such things, so would devils and angels. But the Bible seems to suggest that God has not revealed such things to humans. It seems like the end will be just like the first advent:
1 Peter 1:10-12 ESV
[10] Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully, [11] inquiring what person or time the Spirit of Christ in them was indicating when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories. [12] It was revealed to them that they were serving not themselves but you, in the things that have now been announced to you through those who preached the good news to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven, things into which angels long to look.
Romans 13:1-7 and Conservative Politics
This Pauline passage has recently come into the limelight. It is a tough one deserving of a careful wrestle. I’m not interested in the politics. My concern is about making sense of the passage within Romans and the Pauline corpus as a whole:
Romans 13:1-5 ESV
[1] Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. [2] Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. [3] For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, [4] for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. [5] Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience.
Web of Beliefs
This is one of the introductory ideas I included in the curriculum I designed for a local church. I firmly believe that we ought to pay more attention to it.
I am no arachnologist, but it’s my understanding that the center of a spider web is functionally the most essential part of the structure. It’s critical for directing the structure’s geometry and for sensing vibrations. Every part of the web is important, but not equally so. As you travel radially outwards from the center, functional importance reduces. This is instructive by analogy: If we could empty people’s cherished beliefs into buckets – and every human has them – we would see that people do not exactly believe the same things in the same way.
On Romans 10:17: Faith Comes By Hearing?
Romans 10:17 NKJV
So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
This is a popular text in Charismatic circles, especially the Word of Faith variants. In these settings, this text is generally understood as a divinely revealed secret of receiving and/or maintaining faith. If anyone lacked faith, an antidote would be to listen to the “word of God” continuously. There are two practical ways the “word of God” has been construed. In the days before audio Bibles became prevalent, the word of God was generally understood as a preacher’s sermon or his recorded reading of Bible passages. Nowadays, however, people are just encouraged to listen to audio Bibles and sermons. I do not want to invalidate this Charismatic practice, even though I have seen it abused. After all, motivational speakers have convinced us all that there is value in attending to positive speaking. However, I am convinced that this text is not about what some Charismatics have turned it into – a pretext for telling the people to return to hear a preacher’s sermon continually.
We should begin by pointing out some known problems with this text. First, some manuscripts say “the word of Christ” instead of “the word of God.” This, however, is arguably a trivial matter, since many New Testament texts slot Jesus into God’s place. It may serve as further evidence of how early Christians saw Jesus as God. Second, Romans 9-11 are probably the most hotly contested parts of the letter, with various interpretations on offer. In this piece, I shall argue that it is best to see Romans 10:17 as a conclusion of the idea begun in Romans 10:14 and that Romans 10:14-17 is itself a unit within the argument Paul crafts in 10:14-11:6.
We should inquire what Paul meant by “faith comes by hearing.” What sort of faith did he have in mind, and did he mean to say that faith unfailingly accompanies hearing the gospel message? It is unlikely that he meant to say faith always follows after hearing the gospel for two reasons. First, Paul was present when Stephen gave the longest and most comprehensive gospel sermon. Paul heard the message about Jesus, yet did not obtain faith. On the contrary, he walked away angry and approved of the death of the preacher. In fact, it was a post-resurrection appearance of Jesus on the road to Damascus that led Paul to faith. Charismatics are generally reluctant to allow experience to play a corrective role in a believer’s theology, and this is not utterly unreasonable. However, it must be said that a robust and comprehensive sermon did not save Saul of Tarsus; an experience of the divine did. When he finally did, as a trained Pharisee with deep knowledge of Scripture, he did not delay in boldly proclaiming that Jesus is the Lord. This is why Paul says he did not receive the gospel from any human, as we explored elsewhere. Second, Paul also discusses the thorny issue of many Israelites in his day not believing the gospel (10:16). This strongly suggests that the “faith” Paul had in mind is saving faith; the faith that turns unbelievers to believers. Paul says his fellow Israelites heard the message:
The Gospel without Torah is a Non-archored Half-Truth: An Example from Matthew 12
I recently learnt that the church did not pay attention to the Gospel of Mark for centuries because it assumed that Mark was merely an abbreviated version of Matthew. This caused my mind to entertain several thoughts. Could it be, for instance, that after over 2000 years, we still may be deficient in our understanding of the faith? Consider the following passage:
Matthew 12:1-8 ESV
[1] At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath. His disciples were hungry, and they began to pluck heads of grain and to eat. [2] But when the Pharisees saw it, they said to him, “Look, your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath.” [3] He said to them, “Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, and those who were with him: [4] how he entered the house of God and ate the bread of the Presence, which it was not lawful for him to eat nor for those who were with him, but only for the priests? [5] Or have you not read in the Law how on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath and are guiltless? [6] I tell you, something greater than the temple is here. [7] And if you had known what this means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the guiltless. [8] For the Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath.”
An Exegetical Proposal for Understanding Ephesians 2:20 and 3:5
Ephesians 2:19-20 ESV
[19] So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, [20] built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone,
Earlier, I wrote on some matters arising from the way we have often described the fivefold ministry gifts. A central argument of that piece is that the Bible’s uses of these terms – apostle, prophet, evangelist, pastor, and teacher – are not as rigid as many modern church sermons suggest. On the contrary, these gifts seemed to be mutable roles God empowered believers to perform. In this piece, my focus is slightly different, although it remains on the ministry gifts.
As I have written in a few blog entries, Paul, our chief source on the ministry gifts, connects Jesus’ giving of the gifts to the conquest of Bashan and Hades, long-term foes of Yahweh, through his death, resurrection, and ascension. It was in that context that Paul says ministry gifts were given:
Ephesians 4:11-14 NRSV
[11] The gifts he gave were that some would be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, [12] to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, [13] until all of us come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to maturity, to the measure of the full stature of Christ. [14] We must no longer be children, tossed to and fro and blown about by every wind of doctrine, by people’s trickery, by their craftiness in deceitful scheming.
On the Gender of God: Is God Male?
Presumably, some people, including irreligious ones, would answer the question in the negative: God is not male. In that case, that form of the question may not be the most helpful. What if we modify the question slightly and ask instead: Are men more like God than women are? I suspect that this formulation might yield more fruitful results. The matter before us subtly influences other beliefs; some are harmful and dangerous.
I first became aware of this matter in an undergraduate Hebrew Bible Writings class. The ethnically Jewish, non-religious professor made a comment that set off the rabbit hole: “The name ‘Yahweh’ in Hebrew is as grammatically masculine as “Richard” is in America.” I had not listened closely enough to realize that grammatical and biological genders are separate. My mind immediately went down a long rabbit hole. It seemed to me that whatever it meant to say God was masculine could not exactly mean how we ordinarily use the term for humans. The reason seemed simple: God is a spirit. To be a spirit is to be unembodied. I had to admit, on the other hand, that God is consistently called a Father and Jesus was a male human for 33 years. I managed to get out of the hole by pushing the issue aside so I could focus on the lecture. Now is the time to carefully unpack this crucial matter.
Language Matters: What Does it Mean to be Male?
Many of us today use the terms “male/man” and “female/woman” synonymously – and this is more or less the practice I’ll uphold in this entry. However, it is beneficial to be aware of and learn from advancements in Psychology and Gender Studies. In the ancient world and many parts of our world today, biology is assumed to determine one’s gender. In the Greco-Roman world, for instance, women were thought to be irrational, unsuitable for ruling, needing male guidance, and emotional. Amy Peeler notes that because women were generally smaller in body, they were also thought to be smaller in mind and spirit (90). In other words, to be female meant manifesting the attributes above. The problem begins when we observe that not all women fit into that box, and some men check some of the boxes. This observation motivated some scholars to separate biology from sociology and sex from gender. Biology determines sex, but social factors determine gender. This move raises an obvious question: what does being male (or female) mean?