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,

Continue Reading

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:

Continue Reading

God and Hagar: Abraham’s Evil Treatment of Hagar

Abraham is a significant figure in Judaism, including the form that has evolved into the mutated form we know today as Christianity. The gospel of Jesus was first preached to Abraham as God sovereignly chose to set his redemption plans in motion through Abraham. Generations of Bible readers have also noted the atypical commitment of Abraham to perform what God required of him in the Aqedah story. This story raises many moral questions, as we discussed elsewhere. These points, along with many others, including Abraham’s mention in the “Hall of Faith” chapter of the book of Hebrews, have led many in the church to downplay his not-quite godly episodes. One of such episodes is how he treated Hagar.

Continue Reading

Celebrating Queen Vashti

Many scholars today believe that the book of Esther was written as a play, not history. There are several reasons why this makes sense, but we will not focus on those here. While the Protestant canon places Esther alongside historical books like Ezra and Nehemiah, the Hebrew Bible Canon places the book alongside Wisdom literature. It is also worth noting that there are several known versions of the Book of Esther, each with notable differences. For instance, preachers have often pointed out that the book of Esther is a book of the Bible that does not mention God at all; God is an invisible hand writing the story. However, in some of the other versions, God is explicitly invoked in the story.

Furthermore, Esther and the Song of Solomon are books that were hotly contested during the process of establishing the Hebrew Bible canon. One apparent reason is that these books are rather sexual, and some of the deciding powers did not think that sex and spirituality walk together. In the case of Esther, there might have been another reason people resisted its canonization: the story is about heroines, not a hero.

That’s right. I think there are two heroines in the book of Esther, though we have often focused on one and maligned the other. The Jewish girl, Esther, certainly deserves the praises that have been accorded her since the book was written. She risked her life by approaching the Persian king unbidded:

Continue Reading

Unpacking Ministry Gifts: A Biblical Reality Check

Defining the Fivefold Ministry Gifts

The phrase “Fivefold ministry gifts” is a common term in charismatic circles, referring to the specific person-gifts the Spirit gives for the building of the Church. The gifts are apostle, prophet, pastor, evangelist, and teacher. Like most things humans touch, people have historically sought to place these gifts in hierarchical orders, with “Apostle” always coming out on top. Christians have also taken on these labels as pre-nominal titles. For example, Apostle Ade and Pastor Chike. Interestingly, to my knowledge, people have not used “teacher” as a pre-nominal title, unlike all others. I guess that “teacher” is at the very bottom of the ladder.

Continue Reading

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.

Continue Reading

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?

Continue Reading

Surprising Quran-Bible Agreement: God as Father

Much of the Quran is devoted to a single idea: Islamic monotheism. While Christianity and Judaism also affirm the doctrine of monotheism, Islam is different. The Quran spells out this idea in clear terms in Surah 6. There are no deities besides Allah alone that govern the entire cosmic order. Hence, Allah sovereignly determines who he guides on the right path and who he leads into error (6:39, 125). Also, if Allah afflicts a person, no one else can remedy it (6:17). For every prophet Allah appointed, he also appointed human and spirit enemies for the prophet (6:112). These ideas convey that Allah alone governs the universe as He sees fit. Indeed, verse 102 explicitly puts it like this:


Surah Al-Anaam, Verse 102:
ذَٰلِكُمُ اللَّهُ رَبُّكُمْ لَا إِلَٰهَ إِلَّا هُوَ خَالِقُ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ فَاعْبُدُوهُ وَهُوَ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ وَكِيلٌ

That is Allah, your Lord, there is no god but He; the Creator of all things, therefore serve Him, and He has charge of all things.

Continue Reading

Christian Marriage: A Fresh Look Beyond Tradition

Abstract
This analysis explores the complex interpretation of 1 Corinthians 11, particularly regarding women’s head coverings and gender roles in early Christian and contemporary contexts. The passage, often read as endorsing male headship and female subordination based on Genesis, is shown to reflect specific cultural concerns of the Corinthian church rather than timeless doctrine. Paul’s nuanced language challenges simplistic patriarchal readings by affirming the woman’s hair as her glory and highlighting mutual dependence between men and women in Christ. The chapter likely includes Corinthian quotations, further complicating direct attribution to Paul.

Transitioning to Ephesians 5, Paul’s teachings on marriage are contextualized within the oppressive Greco-Roman family structure, characterized by male authority and limited rights for women and slaves. Rather than overthrowing this system, Paul subverts it by redefining “headship” through Christ’s example of sacrificial love, calling husbands to love their wives selflessly and view them as equals in one body under Christ. This strategy reflects Paul’s broader approach of gradual cultural transformation rooted in gospel ethics.

Together, these passages reveal Paul’s intent to engage and redeem existing social norms rather than impose rigid, culturally bound hierarchies. Contemporary application invites Christians to embrace mutual respect, giftedness, and flexible roles in marriage, transcending traditional patriarchal frameworks.

Paul and Women

“The man is the head of the woman and the home.”

This phrase is a familiar refrain, often delivered with divine finality at Christian weddings. Of course, the idea is not new for a couple—it has been absorbed over years of teaching and reinforced through sermons, family norms, and church culture. But what if this foundational message is, at best, incomplete—or at worst, a misreading? The dominant framework for Christian marriage rests heavily on the writings of the Apostle Paul, whose epistles are frequently cited as the authoritative blueprint for household structure. But have we engaged his letters carefully, contextually, and with the interpretive humility they demand? Since so much weight is placed on Paul’s words, it is only fitting to begin where so many start and end—with Paul. Consider the following:

Galatians 3:27-29 ESV
[27] For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. [28] There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. [29] And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.

It is essential to understand why Paul wrote the letter to the Galatians. Galatia was a Roman province in central Asia Minor, now located in central Turkey. Paul took the message about Jesus to this area and helped establish the church during his three missionary journeys. Some years later, some “agitators” – likely Jewish Christians – began to teach the Galatians that they must do more to inherit the promise. These agitators claimed that Jesus was not enough. They wanted the Gentile Galatians to embrace some aspects of Jewish mysticism involving the observance of special days (4:10), circumcision (5:2), and general Torah-observing (5:4). None of these things is wrong per se – after all, the church today continues to do them selectively: we mark Easter and Christmas, boys get circumcised, and we select what portions of Torah we like. The problem was doing them because one believed so doing would add to what Jesus had done and complete one’s redemption.

Continue Reading

Paul and Women (Series Part 5): Women Shall be Saved through Childbearing?



Abstract
This entry provides a nuanced examination of 1 Timothy, particularly chapter 2, one of the most contentious texts regarding women in Christian communities. The essay argues that Paul’s instructions to Timothy must be read against the backdrop of the Artemis cult in Ephesus, which had deep cultural, religious, and economic roots in the region and significantly shaped the societal status and expectations of women. Far from enshrining patriarchal norms, Paul’s letter, when read with cultural literacy, reveals a strategy to establish theological clarity and ecclesial stability in a setting deeply influenced by a goddess-centered worldview. Modern readers can better discern Paul’s pastoral intent and theological coherence by understanding Artemis and the Ephesian context.

Earlier in the series, we discussed a unique problem letters pose for understanding. We have looked at letters Paul wrote to the Corinthians and the Ephesians. But the pastoral epistles are different. Whereas the letters to the Corinthians and Ephesians, for instance, were meant to be read aloud to respective church members, the letters to Timothy (and Titus) are personal in a different way because they were addressed to named individuals. Just as it is true for the Corinthian correspondence, we do not know precisely what the problems were because Paul did not spell them out. We also do not comprehensively understand the issues 1 Timothy was written to address. Of course, Timothy and Paul knew what the problems were, but all we have are hints.

Internal Difficulties

1 Timothy 2 is one of the most challenging passages with explicit, seemingly misogynistic words. After all, this is the passage that says women will be saved through childbearing – thereby suggesting that the means or mechanism of salvation differs by gender. Many are Christian women who had too many children because their church traditions taught them that their womb was a highway to heaven. And, of course, considering how dangerous the birthing process still is, many Christian women did lose their lives in childbirth. Many churches treat women differently because of this passage and similar ones today. So, it is a significant passage we will carefully and sensitively address.

To begin with, even a face-value reading of 1 Timothy suggests that more must be going on beneath the surface. Consider the following:

1 Timothy 2:11 NKJV
Let a woman learn in silence with all submission.

Leaving aside the fact that various church traditions have grossly misunderstood the imperative in this verse – focusing on the “silence” instead of the “learn” part – this charge does not square well with what Paul says to the Corinthians:

1 Corinthians 11:5 NRSV
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.

We have addressed this passage elsewhere. The point here is that Paul takes it for granted that women could pray and prophecy in church settings. This is not surprising because when the Spirit descended on the believers at Pentecost, he did so on both men and women (Acts 1:14, 2:4). Nobody prophecies with her mouth shut. So, the women in the Corinthian church were not silent, and Paul was okay with it. The only relevant problem Paul addressed with the Corinthian church was disorderliness resulting from not taking turns to speak.

Here is another point to consider:

1 Timothy 5:14 NRSV
So I would have younger widows marry, bear children, and manage their households, so as to give the adversary no occasion to revile us.

The first letter to Timothy contains hints implying that the church had a significant problem with single women. In this verse, Paul advises Timothy to encourage young widows to remarry and bear children. This would ensure the church could focus its limited resources on older widows. The problem is that Paul provides the opposite counsel to the Corinthians:

Continue Reading
1 2 3 7