Testing the Spirits

In these contentious times, many people are claiming to have heard from God. However, one thing that is generally missing from such pronouncements is how the person knows that they have heard from God.

This is especially interesting since the Bible is clear, in both the Old and New Testaments, that we need to be discerning about such claims, and that while we should not despise prophecy, we should carefully test the spirits. Jesus, Paul, and John all warned us about the deceptions that would occur. In most cases, the context is when people are claiming to speak for God. In those cases, Scripture is clear that they need to be tested because the danger of false prophets is real and significant.

Thus, while we should probably be open when others claim to have heard from the Spirit, we should be discerning and careful to test. This is particularly important when what is said affects other people. This is certainly true when the guidance affects many people, but probably applies even when it affects one other person. In generally, whenever someone claims to speak for God into someone else’s life, that claim should be tested.

Continue reading “Testing the Spirits”

False Witness and the Politics of Blasphemy

Revelation pulls no punches in unveiling how empire works against God’s kingdom. The dragon’s chosen servants are not only soldiers and governors, but storytellers—mouthpieces who shape the imagination of the world. Revelation 13 portrays the beast rising from the sea, armed not only with power but with propaganda:

And the beast was given a mouth uttering haughty and blasphemous words, and it was allowed to exercise authority for forty-two months. It opened its mouth to utter blasphemies against God, blaspheming his name and his dwelling, that is, those who dwell in heaven. Revelation 13:5–6 (ESV)

Here we learn something critical: empire’s greatest weapon is not its armies, but its lies. It reshapes God into its own image and invites the world to worship the counterfeit.

Blasphemy is not merely swearing or mockery—it is the slander of God’s character, the peddling of false testimony about who He is and what He desires. It is the beast taking the holy name of God upon its lips and twisting it into a justification for its violence, its greed, its lust for power. And this, Revelation insists, is not an ancient relic but an enduring temptation for every age. The beast still speaks.

Continue reading “False Witness and the Politics of Blasphemy”

Seeing the Mark of the Beast

In the book of Revelation, the “mark” or “number” of the beast has often been used throughout history to target particular people, movements, or institutions. In many end-times interpretations, someone is linked with the number of the beast as if Revelation were predicting a specific person, event, or organization. The number itself—666—most likely refers to Nero, the cruel Roman emperor who was the first to really persecute Christians. Although Nero died before Revelation was written, rumors persisted that he might return.

Yet, given the symbolic nature of Revelation, the number was probably never meant to point to a single individual alone. Instead, it seems to represent recurring spiritual forces—patterns of evil—that can appear in many forms throughout history.

Continue reading “Seeing the Mark of the Beast”

God and the Power of Healing

Throughout history, healing has been inextricably linked with divine purpose. From the ministry of Jesus to modern medical breakthroughs, God’s compassionate design for human health has manifested in increasingly sophisticated ways. This evolution represents not just scientific progress, but the continuing expression of divine love through human hands.

Jesus established the foundation of this legacy through His ministry of miraculous healing. These acts weren’t merely demonstrations of supernatural power; they were profound expressions of love, confirmations of His Messianic identity, and the beginning of a tradition that would transform society. The pattern He established—placing value on healing the sick regardless of their status—became a hallmark of the Christian faith that continues to this day.

Continue reading “God and the Power of Healing”

Pronouns Through the Lens of Evangelism

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) is a topic that sparks significant debate, especially among Christians who grapple with its implications on personal freedoms and faith-based convictions. Many believers feel that the push for DEI policies, particularly regarding language and identity, can infringe on their rights to express their faith and beliefs freely. For example, the use of preferred pronouns is often viewed as a moral dilemma—some Christians see it as an endorsement of behaviors they consider sinful, leading to discomfort and concerns about conscience and religious liberty.

These encounters typically occur outside the church – in workplaces, schools, and public spaces. They represent moments where Christians are called to engage with the broader culture, much like Paul did during his time in Athens. His experience offers valuable insights into how believers might navigate contemporary discussions on identity and inclusion while remaining faithful to the Gospel.

Continue reading “Pronouns Through the Lens of Evangelism”

The Hidden Idolatry of Modern Christianity

In Christianity, idolatry is traditionally understood as the act of worshiping something or someone other than the one true God. Worship, in this context, typically implies acts of adoration, dependence, and prioritization. This definition often conjures images of carved idols or golden statues—physical objects revered in place of God. Yet, the New Testament broadens this concept, equating greed with idolatry. This perspective invites us to rethink idolatry’s implications for our spiritual lives and interactions with the world around us.

Continue reading “The Hidden Idolatry of Modern Christianity”

Effective Evangelism: Spiritual Insights from Acts

The phrase “ends of the Earth” as it appears in the book of Acts pertains to those who are far from God. Acts chronicles a great deal of evangelistic activity, yet it offers only a few instances where we are provided with detailed accounts of the messages shared with people who are in this category. These examples warrant closer examination to uncover insights about the methods used and their outcomes.

In one such example, Paul and Barnabas visit the city of Lystra (Acts 14:8-18). Here, Paul performs a miraculous healing of a lame beggar, which evokes a dramatic response from the townspeople. Believing that Paul and Barnabas are manifestations of their gods, Hermes and Zeus, the people prepare to offer them worship. This reaction is linked to a regional myth about the gods previously visiting in disguise and being overlooked, leading the people of Lystra to vow not to repeat the mistake. Paul and Barnabas reject this misplaced veneration, redirecting the crowd’s attention to the one true God. Interestingly, Acts does not record Paul explicitly mentioning Jesus in this instance. The outcome? There is no mention of conversions, and Paul and Barnabas eventually move on to the next city, seemingly leaving behind a community unchanged by their message.

Athens presents a starkly different scenario (Acts 17:16-34). Paul engages with the local populace in the agora, or marketplace, which leads to his invitation to address the learned elite on Mars Hill. His speech here stands out for its cultural resonance: Paul begins with the Athenians’ own worldview, referencing their religious practices and even quoting Greek poets to introduce them to the concept of the one true God. From this foundation, he moves on to the subject of Jesus and the resurrection. The results in Athens were more mixed: some listeners believed, while others expressed a desire to hear more, and still others dismissed him outright. Nevertheless, it is noteworthy that Paul tailored his approach to align with the intellectual and cultural framework of his audience, resulting in tangible spiritual fruit.

Later in Acts, Paul finds himself arrested in Jerusalem, leading to an audience with King Agrippa (Acts 26:1-32). Given this opportunity, Paul shares his personal testimony, recounting his dramatic conversion on the road to Damascus. Rather than addressing Agrippa’s specific concerns or context, Paul focuses on his own story. The outcome is clear: Agrippa is unmoved, dismissing Paul’s appeal and showing no interest in embracing Christianity.

It is worth noting that the examples above are the primary instances in Acts where messages are delivered to those far outside the Jewish faith or the category of “God-fearers”—non-Jews who already believed in the God of Israel and needed to be introduced to Jesus. Among these three encounters, Paul’s only apparent success was with the intellectuals at Mars Hill. A possible reason for this lies in his method. Unlike in Lystra or before Agrippa, Paul at Mars Hill made deliberate use of the listeners’ cultural context and knowledge to frame his message.

In contrast, Paul’s approach in Lystra seems detached from the people’s preoccupations. The townspeople’s focus on their local myth appears to be ignored or unacknowledged in Paul’s exhortation. His message is a generalized appeal to accept the God of Israel, devoid of specific references to Jesus. Similarly, with Agrippa, Paul relies solely on recounting his personal spiritual journey, without any evident attempt to connect with the king’s unique perspective or concerns.

This leads to a broader reflection on the effectiveness of Paul’s strategies. Could it be that these accounts reveal the importance of speaking not just from personal conviction but in a manner that resonates with the audience? Paul is often assumed to have always spoken under the direct guidance of the Holy Spirit, yet Acts does not explicitly affirm this in every instance. The varying outcomes—particularly the apparent lack of conversions in Lystra and with Agrippa—might suggest that even Paul had to navigate the challenges of effective communication and cultural engagement.

Indeed, Paul later requests prayer for boldness and clarity in proclaiming the Gospel (eg, Eph. 6:19 and Col. 4:4), an acknowledgment that effective evangelism requires divine empowerment as well as thoughtful preparation. This is what I’ve termed “speaking in power” in this blog, and highlights a significant tension in Christian witness: the balance between faithfulness to the message and adaptability to the audience’s needs. The examples in Acts remind us that successful communication of the Gospel often requires humility, contextual sensitivity, and reliance on the Holy Spirit.

Modern Legalism

One of the goals of this blog is to seek an understanding of what’s not working in today’s church, at least from the standpoint of evangelism. The letter to the Laodiceans, for example, is useful for suggesting areas to look at.

One of the things that came up there, for example, is the prevalence of legalism today. In the letter, Jesus’ direction to buy white clothing could be interpreted as being a move away from legalism, suggesting that legalism was one of the things causing the Laodiceans to be lukewarm.

However, I did not define “legalism”, and it would be helpful to think through that at least a little.

In the New Testament, the clearest use of the term was to refer to the Old Testament Law, the Torah. Paul wrote about the error of believing that obedience to the Torah was the key to being saved. Instead, he taught that faith in Christ was key, that the Law was a kind of pointer to our need for Him.

This wasn’t an entirely new idea, because in the Old Testament, prophets pointed out that even performing a good sacrifice, for example, wasn’t acceptable if the people’s hearts weren’t right.1

Now, Christians today generally don’t follow the Torah, or believe it to be a key part of salvation, but the idea of following rules still exists in other forms. It can start by thinking of the Bible as a sort of rule book, with a list of dos and don’ts that must be followed.

For example, it’s possible to believe we must dress properly for church in order to be acceptable to God, perhaps even that He will punish us somehow for not doing so. There are many variations on this theme, but the most extreme version may be to believe that we need to perform certain actions in order to ensure our salvation. Someone may believe that they need to tithe or they won’t go to heaven, for example.

Usually, though, this sort of legalism doesn’t go so far that Christians worry about their own salvation.

It seems much more common for us to believe that other people’s behaviors affect their salvation. It’s easy to find examples of Christians condemning someone else’s actions so strongly as to say that, unless they change their actions, they cannot be saved. This causes Christians to focus on the actions of unsaved people, rather than their relationship with God.

I think this is a very clear example of modern legalism, in which we revert to the idea that obedience to some sort of law, such as the Bible as a rulebook, is necessary for salvation. In that view, trusting in Jesus might also be needed, of course, but it’s not enough without following the rules.

So when I talk about legalism in this blog, I’m talking mainly about this last perspective, that some sort of rule following is necessary to be saved, and especially when this view is presented to people outside the faith.


  1. See, Hosea 6:6, Isaiah 1:10-17, Amos 5:21-24, Micah 6:6-8. ↩︎

Creating God

There is a popular quote that expresses the ease with which we can deceive ourselves when it comes to understanding God:

“You can safely assume you’ve created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.” ― Anne Lamott11

The quote makes the point that we tend to map our own preferences and biases onto God so that our image of Him is really just a projection of our own selves.

Although this quote was mainly about our relationships and how we think of other people, it seems the principle can also be applied elsewhere. In fact, there is probably a danger of mapping many of our own theological perspectives onto God, not just how we think about people.

Continue reading “Creating God”

The Priority of Christian Nationalism

Christian Nationalism seems to be getting a lot of attention these days. Obviously, there are many non-Christians who don’t think much of the idea. But not all Christians agree with it either, and question whether it’s even Biblical. Of course, it may partly depend on what one thinks it means.

In my understanding, one way to think of Christian Nationalism is that it seeks to establish a national framework of laws and behaviors that promote personal and societal flourishing through the adoption of Christian values and behaviors, possibly reflecting what some people believe to be the original vision of the nation’s founders.

Thus, it can be thought of as a sort of legalism – religious values and ideas are encoded into laws that constrain people’s behavior. However, this isn’t necessarily the sort of legalism that asserts that correct behavior is necessary for salvation rather than a result of it. It merely tries to establish a flourishing society through the change of people’s behavior without there necessarily having been a change of heart.

Continue reading “The Priority of Christian Nationalism”