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?

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. Is God male? It may be helpful to ask the same question differently: Are men more like God than women are? Obviously, how one answers this question is enormously important. Several downstream ideas in a person’s economy of beliefs rest on the answer.

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

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

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

The Impotence of Nature in Aristotle’s Politics: The Case of Natural Slavery

The far-reaching divide on the authenticity, intentions, and compositional arrangement of Aristotle’s Politics is quite understandable. In the all-encompassing system Aristotle was building, the Politics was supposed to be its crown. The Nicomachean Ethics is to find its ultimate fulfillment in the Politics since politics, as Aristotle asserts, is the noblest place where human eudemonia can be found. The apparent inconsistencies and seemingly infra dig arguments found in the Politics, however, have raised several questions. In an apparent move to rescue Aristotle, some experts have advanced interpretive alternatives to the work.

Theories abound on what one could make of the body of works titled Politics. As Carnes Lord explains: “the specific difficulties posed by the text of the Politics continue to be regarded by many as convincing evidence of a lack of unity and coherence in the work as a whole, and in its basic argument” (459-60). For instance, Lord summarizes the position of Werner Jaeger, an Aristotle scholar, thus “the Politics is essentially an amalgam of two separate treatises or collections of treatises written at widely separated intervals and embodying very different approaches to the study of political phenomenon” (460). Internal evidence within the work informs the general suspicions scholars hold about the work’s integral status. Scholars have pointed out inconsistencies in the endings of a sizeable portion of the work’s books, as well as in transition clauses that do not seem to belong where they are found. The discovery that some of Aristotle’s works were intended solely as educational treatises and not for popular consumption has also split scholarly views on the matter.

Continue Reading

On the Bishop of Rome: Matthew 16:13-21 is Certainly not about the Papacy

Matthew 16:18-19 ESV
[18] And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

One of the key biblical texts used to defend the office of the Bishop of Rome is Matthew 16. I have written fuller exegetical blog entries on this passage elsewhere without referring to the Papacy. I think it is a good time to do so now. Please note that I am tabling this in the service of truth and not to malign or offend. I respect several Catholics and hope they will have much to add to enrich our collective understanding of this matter. In the end, I want to argue that, at best, the office of the Bishop of Rome had to be one of the least concerns of Jesus and Peter in this passage.

Continue Reading