Diversity and the Ends of the Earth

I recently watched a video1 in which the speaker described diversity as something harmful—likening it to poison or cancer. His argument was that diversity “doesn’t work” in contexts like marriage or business because communication breaks down. But what he ultimately described wasn’t a failure of diversity; it was a failure of communication.

Yes, some kinds of diversity—such as speaking different languages—can create significant challenges. But that’s not what most conversations about diversity are actually addressing. Instead, they focus on differences of race, culture, citizenship, religion, and more. And while language can play a role, these issues must be understood within the broader context of human relationships and how we choose to engage one another.

The speaker in the video also appealed to Christian identity as if Christian sameness should be the foundation of unity—yet he offered no Scriptural grounding for this view. No teachings of Jesus. No reference to the overarching story of God’s people. Only personal opinion.

That disconnect made me curious to revisit what the Bible actually shows us about diversity.

Continue reading “Diversity and the Ends of the Earth”

The Paradox of Christian Nationalism: When Law and Grace Collide

At the heart of American democracy lies a foundational principle: the rule of law. The United States operates under a constitutional framework where no individual—not even the president—stands above the law. This commitment distinguishes our republic from monarchies and dictatorships, establishing a system where every citizen, regardless of status or power, is equally bound by legal standards. This framework has proven essential to maintaining ordered liberty and protecting individual rights.

Christianity, by contrast, centers on something fundamentally different: relationship rather than regulation. The Christian faith emphasizes a personal connection with God that then naturally produces transformed behavior—what Scripture calls “good fruit.” This is a crucial distinction: good works flow from relationship, not the other way around. Many Christians express this as the doctrine that we are not “saved by works”—that no amount of rule-following can establish or earn our standing with God. The relationship precedes and produces the behavior, not vice versa.

This principle appears most clearly in Paul’s letter to the Galatians, where he vigorously opposed those who insisted that adherence to Jewish ceremonial law was necessary for salvation. While Paul’s immediate concern was a specific set of religious regulations, the underlying principle extends far beyond that historical context: legalistic compliance cannot create spiritual life. Authentic faith transforms from the inside out, not from the outside in.

Of course, this doesn’t mean Christians are exempt from civil law. Believers are called to be model citizens, obeying legitimate governmental authority as an expression of obedience to God. But this obedience is an outflow of an already-established relationship with God, not the means of creating one. The motivation differs entirely from legalism: Christians obey laws not to earn divine favor, but because they already possess it.

Christians have also historically engaged with legal systems to advance human flourishing. The abolition of slavery, efforts to care for the poor and the establishment of social safety nets, child labor laws, civil rights protections—these required legislative action, and Christians often led these efforts. Since Christ calls his followers to demonstrate God’s love through tangible care for others (the call to love one’s neighbor), pursuing just laws becomes a natural expression of faith. This engagement with law is about loving neighbors, not achieving salvation.

These two frameworks—American constitutional law and Christian theology—occupy separate spheres. The United States is built on the rule of law, and Christians rightly work within this legal system to serve others and promote justice. Yet this civic involvement remains categorically distinct from the gospel message of grace.

Christian nationalism, however, collapses these separate categories, fusing them in ways that distort both. It seeks to encode specific theological positions into civil law, transforming doctrinal beliefs into legally mandated behavior. Gender ideology becomes enforced through legislation. Public display of religious texts like the Ten Commandments becomes a legal requirement. Public prayer becomes a governmental function.

While proponents may not explicitly claim these measures “save” anyone, the practical effect reinforces a fundamentally legalistic message: that proper behavior and outward conformity define authentic Christianity. The public rhetoric surrounding these efforts often confirms this, emphasizing moral compliance as the marker of genuine faith. People absorb the implicit message that Christianity is primarily about following the right rules, displaying the right symbols, and enforcing the right behaviors on society.

This tendency appears most clearly in Christian nationalism’s heavy reliance on Old Testament law and its preoccupation with behavioral compliance as the measure of right standing with God. The Old Testament economy indeed operated under a legal framework where obedience to detailed regulations governed Israel’s covenant relationship with God. But this was always intended as a temporary system pointing toward something better. Christian theology teaches that Christ fulfilled this legal system, ushering in a new covenant based on faith and grace rather than law. Yet Christian nationalism frequently gravitates back toward Old Testament categories, emphasizing legal codes, punishments, and external conformity over internal transformation and grace.

The consequences of this conflation are serious and multifaceted. First, it systematically corrupts the Christian message itself, gradually shifting the faith from a gospel of grace to a burden of legalism. People inside the church begin to believe that Christianity is fundamentally about correct behavior and political alignment rather than about transformation through relationship with God. The message that drew people to faith in the first place—that God offers freely what we could never earn—gets obscured beneath layers of cultural and political requirements.
Second, this approach profoundly alienates those outside the faith. When Christianity becomes identified with political power, legal coercion, and cultural warfare, it creates barriers that make the actual message of grace nearly impossible to hear. Non-Christians see a religion that seems primarily concerned with control rather than love, with winning rather than serving, with power rather than humility. This cultural Christianity drives people away from the very message that might genuinely transform their lives.

The tragic irony is that Christian nationalism, despite its stated goal of advancing Christian faith and values, actually undermines both. By substituting legal enforcement for spiritual transformation, it produces neither true justice nor genuine faith. By collapsing law and grace into a single framework, it distorts both. And by alienating both believers and non-believers from the authentic gospel message, it works directly against the faith’s true mission.

Continue reading “The Paradox of Christian Nationalism: When Law and Grace Collide”

Beyond Antioch

Recently, I’ve been part of some conversations where Acts 16:5 has been used as an encouragement for pursuing church growth. Here’s the verse:

“So the churches were strengthened in the faith, and they increased in numbers daily.”  Acts 16:5 (ESV)

It is indeed an uplifting passage, describing churches that were flourishing both spiritually and numerically. But the natural question is: what was happening that led to this kind of growth—and what might it teach us about how the Spirit can still work among us today?

Continue reading “Beyond Antioch”

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. ↩︎

Pentecost and the End of Slavery

Pentecost is often seen to be the start of the church, as the Holy Spirit filled the small band of believers. Sometimes focus is placed on the result of the Spirit’s filling, namely speaking in tongues, as an indication of the presence of the Spirit. Others see the primary impact to be the fellowship that existed shortly after this event as more and more people entered the community.

In this blog, we’ve looked at the effectiveness of Peter’s speech, how it was the first example of Jesus’ statement that the Father would give us words to speak of Him, and how this example was followed by others in Acts, modeled by Paul’s prayer requests, and described in the theology in his letters.

I think that there’s another way of looking at the Spirit’s effects in the lives of the early believers, and that is to consider the difference between freeing slaves and ending slavery that I discussed earlier. In that discussion, slavery was used as both a literal problem and as a metaphor for the many ways that people are subject to the kingdom of this world, rather than the kingdom of God. The idea is that, while it is good to free slaves, to help people whenever we can in whatever ways we can, it is better to remove the institutions of slavery completely.

Continue reading “Pentecost and the End of Slavery”

Lukewarm Tools

On its own, humanity lives enslaved to a worldly system of excessive pleasure, greed, and selfish pride.

Jesus proclaimed freedom, the coming of the kingdom of God, in which such slavery would no longer exist. All forms of slavery that could not be eliminated through natural means would be eliminated as He sent His disciples out to announce this good news and bring about the kingdom, changing the nature of the world. To be effective at this work, the disciples learned to be channels through which the Spirit worked to change hearts, not just minds.

From the beginning, Christians followed this call in ways that overtook empires and changed society, altering the very fabric of Western civilization. When freeing slaves looked like healing people, ending slavery looked like establishing hospitals, advancing medicine. Reading and writing became ubiquitous as formal education was made widely available even up to university levels, and the institution of literal slavery itself was dismantled. All these are examples of the Spirit working through those who had more in order to help those with less.

Today, however, we have gone back to natural means for establishing God’s rule, relying on human capabilities. Through things like rationality, organization, and legalism, we have worked to change circumstances and behavior. This seems successful as we continue to free slaves, but falls short of both Jesus’ command and the early church’s example of ending slavery. Many of our efforts today reach only some of those who need to hear of God’s love, and so limit the degree to which the kingdom can advance.

Perhaps as Western society flourished as a largely Christian place, we became complacent to the spiritual needs around us. Perhaps we have allowed ourselves to feel good about freeing the occasional slave while leaving slavery itself intact. However, being a good steward of God’s grace means bringing reconciliation to society, not just individuals.

So, while we’re patting ourselves on the back for how many slaves we’ve freed, Jesus stands at the door, calling us out of lukewarmness with offers of His Spirit.