We are home to some of the richest prosperity gospel preachers in the world, but we still manage to think that doing business for profit isn’t very “righteous.” I’m writing this from personal experience, so I have no data to back this one up, but take my word for it (at least for now).

You could find among us a Christian considering raising their prices but equally wondering whether doing so is spiritually appropriate. It is a sense of guilt that the profit margin is too much, and even if that profit is legitimate, something says they’ve sinned for aiming at prosperity.

Some of us are so sure that seeking profit, even through work or petty trading, is sinful that you could find a Christian businessman or woman frequenting a church during business hours, praying for a “helper” or for the same prosperity they could gain if they served their customers unforgettably well.

Here’s why I think some Christians are suspicious of doing business for profit.

According to Plato (and this is a simplistic explanation), the material world is a corrupted shadow of a higher, spiritual reality. The body is a prison for the soul. Physical things like commerce, property, and profit belonged to the lower order of existence. In essence, Plato told us that everything in the world falls into two classes: material and spiritual things.

This view of the world is called dualism, and it eventually influenced early Christian teachers, many of them who taught that anything material is bad while spiritual things are good. Today, several known “pastors” teach variations of this understanding as if it’s a new revelation.

One of the biblical references often made to support this assertion is the statement of Apostle Paul to Timothy that ‘the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil’ (1 Timothy 6:10). But, it ought to be obvious that the Pauline emphasis was on love of money and not money itself, so it cannot be profit itself, nor commerce itself.

But the prevalence of monasteries in the medieval period portrayed the highest form of Christian life as one of poverty, prayer, and separation from the world. Monks and nuns who renounced property and commercial life were considered more spiritually advanced than the merchants who travelled the world negotiating transactions and gathering profits to finance them or the workers who toiled for months to build them.

The Catholic church had largely institutionalised a two-tier form of Christianity: the sacred clergy above and secular laity below. In fact, Thomas Aquinas argued that charging interest on a loan was inherently sinful because it meant profiting from time which belonged to God. Never mind that several Christians could have started new ventures with great success had they secured loans from other affluent Christians at the time.

Over two thousand years of church history, the practical theology of many church traditions made a blanket suspicion of financial success that Paul himself would not have recognised (he was a tentmaker, you know).

Nancy Pearcey, in her landmark work Total Truth, says that the sacred-secular divide is not truly Biblical. Still, it would be difficult to dislodge because it is embedded in the institutional structures, the devotional literature, and the unexamined assumptions of the church long before anyone thought to question it systematically.

The marketplace Christian, you and I, must shatter the tiny little variations of this bias towards financial prosperity because it pretends that one’s blessings could not possibly be a gift from God. I’ve been poor and rich, and I know by experience that there’s nothing righteous about depriving yourself of profit.

Martin Luther believed that the cobbler who crafts shoes with skill and honesty is serving God just as faithfully as the monk who prays in his cell. This is the doctrine of vocation, the idea that every legitimate occupation, done faithfully for the common good, is an avenue through which God meets the needs of the world, and you can be certain that those who engage in God’s work shall be richly blessed.

In the beginning, there was no hierarchy of sacred and secular work. There was only faithful work and unfaithful work, work done for God’s glory and work done for self-advancement.

John Calvin taught that prosperity and productivity were not signs of spiritual compromise but of God’s blessing on faithful stewardship. It was Calvin’s theology that Max Weber famously analysed in The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, identifying the religious roots of the work ethic and the legitimisation of profit that helped build the modern economy. And we should be grateful for that!

Despite this, I have heard some honest preachers narrow the church’s mission to strictly “saving souls.” Whatever this means, I sincerely hope they can extend this saving interest in the soul to the body first. A family man must demonstrate his salvation by providing food, clothing and shelter for his family because his family’s life will be better if he is profitable at work or in business, so the church must teach him to sustain such legitimate profitability.

It is C. S. Lewis who said in Mere Christianity that the devil is perfectly happy to have us think of God as a spiritual being who is uninterested in the physical world, so long as this keeps us from bringing our whole lives, including our commercial lives, under his lordship.

Anything short of a profitable approach to work or business (including non-profits) means that we don’t consider this area of our lives to be under God’s domain.

David Kinnaman describes a ‘Sunday-Monday gap’ as a profound disconnect between spiritual identity and working life, leaving millions of marketplace Christians navigating their professional decisions without a coherent theological framework.

Into this vacuum, two distorting messages have repeatedly rushed in. The first is the prosperity gospel, which overcorrects dramatically by treating financial success as the primary evidence of divine favour, reducing faith to a technique for wealth accumulation and God to a vending machine.

The second distortion is more common in serious Christian communities: the belief that the really devoted Christians are those who enter vocational ministry or missionary work, while those in business are doing something secondary that requires spiritual justification to be acceptable to God.

Leave a comment

Yet some problems, even for high-achieving innovators, remain beyond the reach of artificial intelligence, revolutionary scientific discoveries, and mind-bending psychological models.

In a rare setting for an evangelical preacher, Billy Graham’s 1998 TED Talk is one of the most biblically grounded presentations in TED's archives.

Since then, technology continues to advance in ways his audience could scarcely have imagined, but the three fundamental problems Graham identified may remain existential even in the distant future:

1. Human evil

2. Human death

3. Human suffering

   

But on the other hand, you’d find many things awry. Christians are being persecuted in Nigeria. Violence and famine rage on in the Horn of Africa, and Israel is locked in a protracted conflict with various forces in Palestine.

Human evil

Every year, the world loses over $3.6 trillion to corruption, even in the fun and ‘benign’ things that should unite humanity, such as music and sports, but neither is exempt from the dubious and vile.

Since 1844, when horse racing captivated the world, sports corruption has been a concern and has grown in various ways, culminating, we may say, in such high-profile cases as the arrest of former FIFA President Sepp Blatter in 2015.

Music concerts have experienced tragedy of diverse proportions too, ranging from the stabbing of three children at a dance class to death, to the October 7 attack when Hamas killed about 1,200 people and took more than 250 hostage.

We assume that the stronger our technology systems, the more secure we will be. Yet advances in security technology, such as data-informed occupancy management, cannot eliminate the perpetual manifestations of evil, which stem from moral and spiritual failures.

Jesus said, “For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, acts of adultery, other immoral sexual acts, thefts, false testimonies, and slanderous statements.“

Emmanuel Kant suggested that evil stems from:

• a weakness in doing what is right (frailty),

• a desire for gain (impurity),

• or an actualization of selfish interest (perversity).

This tendency for evil is the reason “we can’t get along with other people, even in our own families. We find ourselves in the paralyzing grip of self-destructive habits we can’t break. Racism and injustice and violence sweep our world, bringing a tragic harvest of heartache and death,” Graham said.

He then issued a provocative challenge: “I would like to see Oracle take up that, or some other technological geniuses work on this.”

Granted, there are scientific and systemic innovations aimed at combating corruption even at its root, but they do not scratch the surface, as the problem isn’t merely social or systemic but intrinsic.

That’s why Graham also asked, “How do we change man, so that he doesn’t lie and cheat?”

The ultimate, all-benevolent innovation to human evil, therefore, would need to be invented by a completely neutral force, the only one of which in human and extra-terrestrial history is none other than God.

Human suffering

The second dilemma Graham addressed was suffering, the universal human experience that transcends socioeconomic status and technological advancements.

“I have never met a person in the world who didn’t have a problem,” said Graham.

At nearly 80 years old when delivering the talk, Graham said he was grateful that medical advances had helped preserve his health. Today, we have vaccines, antibiotics, surgical interventions, and pain management. Yet he knew all too well the limits of such progress.

Graham quoted from the Book of Job, one of the oldest texts in existence, which says that we are “born unto trouble as the sparks fly upward.” This observation remains as relevant in the age of computers and biotechnology as it was thousands of years ago.

Today, more than 1 billion people worldwide are living with mental health disorders, with anxiety and depressive disorders being the most common. Depression alone costs the global economy an estimated $1 trillion annually.

According to Our World in Data, it’s estimated that 1 in 3 women and 1 in 5 men will experience major depression in their lives. Yet 91% of people living with depression around the world are unable to access care.

Graham noted that technology cannot touch the deeper sources of human pain: the loneliness of isolation, the grief of loss, the anxiety of uncertainty, the despair of meaninglessness.

Even in wealthy nations with advanced healthcare systems, suffering persists. So suffering isn’t just the result of poverty or a lack of socio-economic development. Taiwan and Singapore are the healthiest countries in the world, according to the Global Health Index 2025.

Yet, they spend roughly 13%-18% of the healthcare budget managing issues of mental health and socio-economic pressures.

Viktor Frankl, one of the few to have survived the Nazi concentration camps, wrote, “If there is meaning in life at all, then there must be a meaning in suffering. Suffering is an ineradicable part of life, even as fate and death. Without suffering and death, human life cannot be complete.”

That may not sound palatable to the ear, but it’s coming from someone who witnessed the horrors of hatred and wickedness, human-inflicted pain, meaningless suffering, and death. So it is true, meaningful suffering informs a meaningful life.

It is precisely why Graham turned to the Bible. He referenced David’s Psalm 23, which doesn’t promise the elimination of valleys but God’s presence within them: “Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me.”

In his speech, Graham observed that no amount of scientific advancement can eliminate suffering because suffering’s resolution is not merely relief, but redemption.

Human death

The final problem Graham identified was death.

“This is the forbidden subject of our generation. Most people live as though they are never going to die,” he observed. Yet death remains perhaps the only certainty that unites all humanity. “There is one thing that we all have in common: we are all going to die.”

Approximately 173,000 people die each day worldwide. Despite our remarkable medical advances, which extend average lifespans, postpone death, and improve quality of life in its final stages, we have not conquered death itself.

Martin Heidegger introduced the concept of “Being-toward-death,” arguing that death is not merely an event at the end of life but an omnipresent possibility that shapes every moment of existence. To say it simply, we are dying from the moment we are born.

What makes death unique, according to Heidegger’s analysis, is its individuality. It cannot be delegated or shared, for “no one can take the Other’s dying away from him.” This fundamental aloneness of death means that no technological intervention, no matter how sophisticated, can eliminate the singular, unrepeatable nature of each person’s mortality.

The problem is, modern society, as Heidegger noted, seeks to sanitize the reality of death through anti-ageing industries, youth culture, and playful language. Yet this avoidance only increases death’s power over us. Authentic existence, according to Heidegger, requires us to confront our mortality.

Graham sat at the deathbeds of several famous people. He noted that many who were “scared to death” in their final moments had lived as if mortality would never touch them.

Their wealth, achievements, and access to the best medical care could not shield them from death’s inevitability.

Some scientists want to delay death, to extend the boundary, to prevent it, or push back the inevitable. The Bible offers a resurrection and eternal life through a relationship with God. To solve death, therefore, we must rise from it.

If we could hypothetically achieve technological immortality, uploading consciousness, reversing ageing at the cellular level, and replacing organs indefinitely, we would only be addressing death’s biological mechanism without touching its existential meaning.

If we were immortal, our choices would lack the urgency that makes them significant. But with death setting a boundary on existence, we must prioritize and invest in what truly matters.

Why science cannot solve these problems

The reason science can’t solve these problems is that some issues traverse more elements of human nature than the scientific method can investigate.

As philosophers of technology have noted, science and technology are tools that amplify human choices. Still, they cannot determine which options are right because, as tools, they are morally neutral. Moreso, moral and existential problems require fundamentally different solutions than technological ones.

The real challenge, according to scholars, has little to do with the tools science provides us but with the attitudes every innovation fosters.

On the surface, the use of technology is as good as it is bad, but more importantly, we have fundamentally lost the art, or better, reduced the necessity of telling the difference between bad and good use of tech.

What has become certain with the advent of new technologies (including AI) is that they introduce new ethical problems and raise new value issues that they cannot resolve.

Leave a comment

In 2000, Lewis Rambo, a psychologist specialised in conversion for many years, told PBS something that should have revolutionized how we think about conversion:

“Most conversions—not all, but most—take place through kinship and friendship networks. Through a connection with another human being, converts come to have a different view of the world, a different view of self, and a different view of God”.

Yet evangelical culture has promoted the idea of instantaneous conversion as a single “born-again” or “altar call” decision, emphasising the sudden aspect of Saul’s experience on the road to Damascus.

But in his seminal work, The Varieties of Religious Experience (1902), William James, often dubbed the Father of American Psychology, concluded that conversion can be sudden (self-surrender) or gradual (volitional), yet even the former typically follows a period of subconscious incubation.

And what shall we say of C.S. Lewis, the most dejected and reluctant convert in all England,” who recalled, kicking, struggling, and approaching theism with resentment in 1929 and then Christianity about two years later, aided by friends like Tolkien?

Conversion is a process

Rambo’s model consists of seven stages: context, crisis, quest, encounter, interaction, commitment, and consequences. The stages aren’t necessarily fixed or linear, so you need not think of them as rungs on a ladder.

Perhaps the strongest objection to this gradual account of salvation is the notion that all it took for the former chief persecutor of first-century Christians, the Apostle Paul, was a singular encounter with Jesus.

Yet, if we apply Lewis Rambo’s seven-stage model of conversion to Paul’s experience per Acts 9:1-19, 22:1-21, 26:9-23, and Galatians 1:17, here’s what we would find:

• Context: Saul was a devout Pharisee who persecuted Christians.

• Crisis: The sudden appearance of a blinding light and the voice of Jesus saying, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” challenged his mission to Damascus.

• Quest: We may pass his response to Jesus, “What shall I do, Lord?” as the beginning of a search for direction. His quest may also be expanded to include his search for Ananias and his journeys to Jerusalem, Tarsus, and Antioch.

• Encounter: He met the Risen Christ.

• Interaction: Blinded for three days, during which he neither ate nor drank. God sent Ananias to meet him, lay hands on him, restore his sight, and provide initial guidance.

• Commitment: Upon regaining his sight, he was baptized and began to preach in the synagogues that Jesus was the Son of God.

• Consequences: He went from being the church’s chief persecutor to arguably, its most zealous apostle and missionary.

Therefore, even in Paul’s case, what began suddenly grew exponentially over time. This model may also be applied to the conversions of Lydia and the Philippian jailer in Acts 16, among others.

So what are these stages exactly?

1. Context

Rambo describes context as “the milieu in which a person’s spiritual journey begins,” encompassing both macro factors (e.g., the cultural and social environment) and micro factors (e.g., family and community).

“In the United States, we have a wonderful situation,” Rambo explains. “The tolerance in our society provides what I call ‘the ecology of conversion.’ This allows people to examine different options: What is best for me? What is true for me?”

On this note, one study reports that your spiritual worldview is formed mainly by age 13, and what you believe by then is what you’ll die believing unless you actively work to change it.

2. Crisis

“Often some kind of crisis triggers a new way of viewing things: a death in the family, failure in business or, paradoxically, even success in business”, Rambo found.

“I often have people tell me that [conversion came] at the point in their lives when they had achieved every goal they had, but were still not satisfied: ‘Is that all there is?’ So then they began a search.”

When we read the Pauline account of his conversion, looking solely at the moment when the risen Lord appeared to him, we risk idealizing it as a general formula for conversion.

“Even as early as 1924,” researchers noted that “the more typical model of conversion in the New Testament is that of Peter and Andrew on the shore of Galilee.” They were gradual, relational, and process-oriented.

3. Quest

“The quest then often leads someone to an encounter with a missionary or rabbi or teacher or just someone in the workplace. It is as if we have radar working in our lives to find someone who can help us.”

Rambo found that people search for multiple things: “One of the major things they are looking for is meaning in life—not just some vague sense that life has a purpose, but a very clear sense of who I am and what my life means in connection to other people.”

This typically includes:

• Emotional gratification (relief of guilt, overcoming fear)

• Community (meaning and belonging incorporated)

• Power (connection to the Creator provides energy)

• Transcendence (connection beyond finite existence)

4. Encounter

According to Rambo, there is something about us human beings that makes us need to trust someone. Often, a message from a trusted friend has a greater impact because we desire someone we can rely on to lead or guide us into a new way of living.

But only 23% of Christian adults are currently being discipled by someone, and only 60% of church leaders are being discipled themselves.

“Conversion research shows that often people have experiences that are appropriate to the particular group that they may be converting to,” Rambo says.

So, Pentecostal Christians expect mystical experiences, while mainline Protestants expect rational, behavioral change over time.

5. Interaction

“The interaction phase is more focused on what it means to be a new spiritual being. In some cases, they need to learn how to pray. They need to learn how to study the Bible or scriptures,” says Rambo.

This is where most “conversions” stall. So far as I know, only the Catholic tradition requires its members to confess and opens its doors to people for confession.

Rambo explains that motivations change. For example, someone might initially fall in love simply because the other person is attractive and there’s an intense sexual attraction. However, if the relationship endures, it tends to deepen into trust and genuine love that’s not just physical or fleeting. Romantic passion then evolves into something much more enduring.

He continues: “I see that a lot in conversion. One of the parallels to conversion that many people have drawn is the experience of falling in love.”

The interaction stage is when initial attraction develops into a lasting relationship. However, without community, accountability, and regular practice, it cannot solidify.

6. Commitment

This stage represents the point at which a person consciously chooses to belong to, align with, and reorder their life around a new faith. Commitment is a durable act of allegiance, often reinforced by ritual, community, and expressed through lasting changes in identity, relationships, values, and behavior.

Commitment puts the believer in the position of agency, whereas, as Rambo says, “Traditionally, conversion meant a dramatic, sudden transformation. It was often received as a passive experience — ‘God came into me and made this happen,’ not a rational process — ‘I’m searching and changing behavior, changing attitudes.’”

In the words of William James, “the process, gradual or sudden, by which a self hitherto divided or consciously wrong, inferior and unhappy becomes unified and consciously right, superior and happy, by consequence of its firmer hold on religious realities.”

Making lasting commitments and sustaining them helps you build the firm hold that William James refers to.

7. Consequences

The consequences stage encompasses ongoing personal, social, and spiritual outcomes following a commitment to a new faith. It reflects how conversion reshapes identity, emotions, relationships, morals, and meaning. Consequences may include enhanced well-being, reduced fear or guilt, a sense of belonging, and new behaviors.

Still, they can also involve tension, loss, or conflict with prior communities. Importantly, this stage underscores that conversion is not complete at the moment of decision; it is validated and interpreted through the long-term effects it has on how a person lives and understands themselves in the world.

Rambo reported that many of the people he interacted with had never felt happier, having found a place to call home or a sense of belonging. Some said, “I am no longer afraid. I am not afraid of dying. I am not afraid of what people think of me. I am not afraid of guilt, because it can be transformed by God’s forgiveness.”

What about your faith?

I know someone who, despite being from a conservative Bible-believing church, was baptised twice under the same church tradition. He faulted his first baptism because he confessed to having indicated interest in baptism following his friends’ baptism.

Similarly, someone has written about being born again twice. What I think is common to both encounters, and those of others I have interacted with, is a yearning for a turning point. That one incident they could point to that turned things around in their life, that moment that transforms you.

And yes, while a single event has the potential to turn things around, it doesn’t often result in spiritual maturity as people grow because emotions don’t last and sudden conversions, though more emotionally intense, are potentially less stable.

As is widely known, C.S. Lewis’ conversion involved multiple stages, relationships, and intellectual wrestling, which contributed to the development of his faith.

If you’ve been “Christian” for years but feel nothing:

Find the elements in your conversion that are lacking.

Perhaps you’re in a crisis, but you have no quest. We ought to be looking forward to something (Philippians 3:20-21), but maybe you aren’t; you’re lacking a quest. Perhaps you have an intellectual commitment, but you’re paying no consequences, not letting go of sins, nor “paying it forward with good works worthy of emulation.”

Every journey of faith begets commitments and consequences.

Fan the embers of your faith every day, forever.

Just as lasting, faithful marriages do not have endless but rekindled love, lasting faith also needs kindling.

Leave a comment

"Those who hate me without reason outnumber the hairs of my head; many are my enemies without cause, those who seek to destroy me. I am forced to restore what I did not steal. You, God, know my folly; my guilt is not hidden from you." - Psalm 69:4-5

The raw honesty with which King David laments the target at him should tell us that we aren't likely to live completely lovable lives, especially when we step into roles that challenge existing norms in the Church.

For some of us, our portion is to pursue a system we think is good and engineer programs within the Church to such ends. Sometimes, we create systems, alter procedures, and manage new initiatives. These ideas can be ambitious to many, but usually, they spring from a desire to meet a need and for the gospel to move efficiently through faithful programs.

When others prioritise consensus, we push for efficiency. Not that these concepts are mutually exclusive. Whatever we do in the Church, the goal is to nurture all believers with the Gospel of Jesus Christ so that we can all be transformed. Whether we ask the Church to fund tertiary education, serve food to the less privileged, or visit prisoners, the goal is to touch people.

The relationships we build to achieve this are as meaningful as the programs we create and implement. Yet the reality is that we are not all equally talented at both. Some of us are drawn to processes more than we are to people. Unlike preachers, we are seldom charismatic, so we often draw suspicion for airing unpopular opinions. In my experience, we usually find ourselves misunderstood, dismissed, or resented.

The New Testament calls people like this deacons. Tasked with managing the needs of the early Church, they were appointed not because they preached well but because they administered justice faithfully. These deacons, filled with the Spirit and wisdom, distributed resources while the Apostles preached and prayed. Many of us live out this same call today.

Not that I have been appointed a deacon, but in several ways, I thrust myself into various initiatives and insist on decisive administrative actions like the first deacons. Yet, I have managed to create a personality fit for animosity. I have received several emotionally triggered attacks for even recommending that we reduce unnecessary expenses in my Church.

I have worked in the education and nonprofit sectors over the past ten years, supporting and delivering meaningful impact through various programs, which I wish to see in my congregation. Once, I had a month to coach a select list of students at a church for the SAT, all of whom did not know the examination until then. Several parents courted me to enlist their children when I was appointed to manage the project. And barely a week into the program, parents of some participants protested against my methods, as did some of my students. My consolation was that five out of nine students scored over 1000, and four now study abroad.

Doing the right thing doesn’t always earn affection in the Church. Suppose millennials like me, who are often eager to serve and implement effective strategies, continue to be met with suspicion or resentment. What assurance does the church have that we will genuinely aspire to such vital roles as deacon or elder? And is it not the Holy Spirit’s desire that these spiritual administrators be in the Church?1

Many of us are already functioning as deacons without the title, but it feels like we’re on our own, without the love and protection of the Church.

The Church Has Always Needed Deacons

Systemic problems benefit people even in the church. It is therefore understandable that beneficiaries in such cases will resist change.

Take the situation in Acts 6 as an example. Were the Hebraic widows not better off, excluding the Grecian widows, when sharing the provisions? Calling that selfish only undermines the problem because the apostles thought it significant enough to warrant new leadership to handle such matters.

The Church had just started, but was on the verge of collapse right then, over nothing else but logistics. This wasn’t a doctrinal matter. It was simply about "waiting on tables."

The apostles didn’t want any of it. They would not be entangled in such matters. Then the world had yet to know the name, Jesus Christ. And they had been given the Great Commission for that very purpose. They were clear about their calling.

They understood that the Church needed people with a different kind of gifting: wise, Spirit-filled, practically minded leaders who could organize, coordinate, and administer justice in the name of Jesus Christ.

Even when Bible scholars debate the earliest controversies in the Church, they don’t mention this. But think about it for a moment.

The twelve apostles, anointed by our Lord and Saviour, appointed a new set of leaders to wait on tables. They were admitting a fundamental crack in the formation of the Church, what we might call a systemic failure, and what better way to deal with that than introducing administrative reforms?

Now, how do you think the beneficiaries of the status quo hitherto felt? The Hebraic Jews must have raised their eyebrows against the apostles and the newly appointed seven deacons for implying that the Hebraic Jews either didn't know what they were doing or were corrupt.

With a new leadership, the apostles called out and overruled the brethren managing food distribution.

Even today, some of us push for structure, documentation, and measurable impact. When we do this genuinely, we’re like the seven deacons, "full of the Spirit and wisdom," even if we unintentionally offend others, especially those who may benefit from faulty processes.

The first appointed deacons were solution architects. Their role was as spiritual as it was practical. They had to be both respected by the people and deeply aligned with the apostles because they were not just managing programs but preserving the unity and testimony of the Church.

I believe millennial Christians will make effective church leaders. Having experienced a VUCA world (Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity, and Ambiguity), we are professionally equipped in various areas, from project management to web development and public health. The Church can benefit enormously from these gifts.

When Doing Good Gets You in Trouble

I've been actively involved in several initiatives in the Church. I am convinced that some believers have no business with their assigned roles.

Recently, a brother from another congregation contacted my fiancée. He contacted her on a Wednesday, inviting her employer (a hospital) to conduct a free public eye screening on a Saturday (the same week) for an expected beneficiary of up to 300 people. No prior consultation. There were no feasibility checks. It was just a presumptive announcement and subtle pressure to deliver. Imagine sourcing facilitators days before your event, after planning and announcing your program to the Church.

That’s the kind of "fire brigade" approach to things that burns people out and breeds cynicism about church projects. As Apostle Peter writes in 2 Peter 1:10, “make every effort to confirm your calling and election.” That calling requires excellence in program management.

The Church needs to utilize the best hands. Let’s not assign people to responsibilities because they are available or likable. If we do average things, we’ll get average results. And there’s nothing godly about average outcomes because we are called to excellence.2

I’ve also heard tales of Church members trading punches and even taking machetes to meetings. Sometimes, the cause is that one person attempted to disrupt someone else’s preferred status quo. But who can guarantee that we won’t offend others whenever we set out to do good? Who can ensure that our strategies, however well-intended, won’t brush up against people’s insecurities, egos, or assumptions? Who can promise that some won’t take deep personal offense over how what we said or did made them feel?

When people take up arms against us over the programs we proposed or implemented, have they not taken the place of God? Shouldn't our maker be our judge since He made us talents, watching us through uncommon paths where we failed or sinned, yet He shaped us for His purposes? Other than that brief moment of satisfaction at one's downfall, what else would a self-appointed enemy gain from my loss that they will not also lose?

Despite being a man after God’s heart, David offended many people. In Psalm 69 (quoted at the start of this article), he confesses his isolation and persecution. "I am forced to restore what I did not steal," he says. That’s the reality for many of us, too: paying relational debts we never owed just because we tried to lead something well.

I hope I have not claimed righteousness in this article or pretended to be perfect. I am asking for patience and room. Room for program-oriented millennials to contribute their unique skills and experiences for the Church's growth. Room for those whose first instinct is to organize, whose hearts beat for process and clarity, not just charisma and consensus.

We need our vibrant millennials to love God enough to stay in the Church, so they will love the Church enough to become deacons and elders. If, instead, we hate them for trying to help, we’re training the next generation to stop trying.

God Calls Program Managers, too.

God has always used administrators, organizers, and problem-solvers to build His Church. He continues to do so today. God chooses them for a short time (project) as He does for a recurring need (programs).

During the exodus from Egypt, God gave Moses the Torah as a blueprint for the growing nation of Israel. He also made Bezaleel and Ohaliab, designers and project managers, to supervise the construction of the Tabernacle (Exodus 31:15). Their work was equally holy, not because the outcome was a righteous people or a tabernacle; it was sacred because they served the needs of God’s people.

Joseph was a supply-chain genius whose vision and inventories saved entire nations. Similarly, King David’s military campaigns and resourcefulness prepared King Solomon to build the first temple. When God calls people, He calls them to vision and execution, and a responsibility to withstand accusations, betrayals, and suffering.

Appointing deacons today is a commitment to the tradition of the twelve apostles. When various issues beset the young Church, the apostles didn’t pray them away. They didn’t "leave it to the Holy Spirit" as some people claim to do today. The apostles appointed deacons to resolve issues decisively. That’s what program managers do. They design processes for the unity, edification, and growth of the Church. Being likable or charismatic is merely secondary to this office.

Now, are we perfect? No. Are church administrators immune to sin? No.

God chose David to establish Israel, but David wasn’t righteous. He took another man's wife and killed him to cover up the former sin. But it was Prophet Nathan who called King David to order and repentance.

We may rightly be concerned that people do evil in the name of God and get away with it. After all, leaders, regardless of their administrative or charismatic gifts, are fallible.

We must ensure the integrity of the programs our administrators and deacons manage and the gospel. We must affirm their essence by supporting them, but we must also insist on accountability and discharge them for unrepentant sins. When God raises people to fill particular needs in His Church, and they sin, it's the mandate of others, equally called by God, to guide their amends, not to wish them dead.

Christian millennials are quietly losing their faith without even noticing it.

We have replaced calling with ambition, joined influencer-owned communities instead of churches, and sought total freedom rather than a covenantal faith. Our social systems, such as economics, media, and politics, are often primed to steer us away from godliness. Over time, these shallow attractions pull us away from the very Source we need most.

Biblical history indicates that faithful movements began when ordinary young believers rebuilt old altars. If Christian millennials return to God now, the church will successfully pass the leadership baton to them in the next decade.

From Joseph to Timothy, God's chosen youths were negotiating systems and strongholds beyond their merits, including empires, corruption, religious bureaucracy, exile, and minority status.

God often empowers people through covenant faithfulness in their millennial years against oppressive systems. He calls young people because we are unburdened enough to pursue a vision and be resilient in adversities.

Now, you might say God uses everybody whenever he wants, so if not now, maybe later. One might even suggest that the age of youth isn't as significant as I am making it sound because Jesus knew he would die at about age 33, yet he began His ministry only three years prior. Yes, and you will be partly right, but even with him, God was working by an age pattern common among the Old Testament prophets.

Priests had internships1 and began their 20-year ministry, which typically lasted from around the age of 30 to 502. Jesus, our Great High Priest3, appears to have followed a similar pattern (Matthew 3:13-15).

The point isn't that you must be a millennial. It is that your thirties, especially for men, are significant enough for you to commit permanently to spiritual matters, including marriage and church leadership.

Twenty-something-year-old Christians are waiting until their thirties to become serious about godly matters, while the thirty-somethings are waiting for stability (after debt clears, when they earn team-lead promotions, or after making "real money").

Hear this:

Therefore, the decision to be made is whether you will surrender to the systems around you or step boldly into your early vocation. Christian millennials appear to have surrendered. We have a shallow faith, are enticed by endless distractions, and live isolated lives. Little wonder we struggle to build good relationships and hold on to hope.

If millennials are to lead the church by the next decade and overcome the systems that drive young people away, we must stop waiting and start restoring what we've lost by rebuilding faith, community, and lasting purpose.

Share

What’s up with Christian millennials?

As if the proliferation of social media weren't enough, the development and use of AI make resistance to content creation and personal aggrandizement (cum personal branding) seem unreasonable.

You're applying for a job? HR professionals expect you to include a LinkedIn profile. You must keep it updated with regular posts about things you've achieved, lessons you learned at work, and industry leaders you admire, whether true or false.

Social media innovators promised to bridge the gap between people; however, the ability of Christian millennials to communicate effectively has plummeted due to overreliance on technology, as reported by the Cultural Research Center at Arizona Christian University. It doesn't matter who you are or what you have to say; fame wins over conviction. Unsurprisingly, relationships are fleeting, for we've lost patience with one another, which we attribute to reduced attention spans.

What's worse? Though only 6% have a "very negative" view of Jesus as the Son of God, Christian millennials have redefined "Christian" to mean being a good person, regardless of embracing biblical beliefs or principles far off from the earliest "follower of Christ" meaning and its spiritual and covenantal imperative. In fact, fewer and fewer Christian millennials believe the biblical view of God as the all-powerful creator and universal ruler, as 74% think that all religious faiths have equal value.

About half of millennials who identify as Christians have a stronger sense of social justice than a commitment to the Gospel. We think it is wrong to evangelize to people of other faiths.

These observations don't indicate we want total disconnection from the church. Some don't know or even care to believe that God exists. The problem is that Christian millennials wish to redefine the faith for diverse reasons, including the unfortunate fact that far too many church leaders have ensnared themselves in sins that make even pagans choke.

However, our newer notions of the faith among Christian millennials are costly to all stakeholders.

The Cultural Research Center found that only 2% of American adults believe Hell is a place of eternal torment and do not acknowledge their sinfulness to God. How, then, would we embrace Jesus Christ as our Savior? We want to control our destinies now and after we die. So the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus have diminishing significance. It's like saying, "Jesus, we understand you were crucified unjustly, but you didn't have to go through that for our sakes."

It would seem that since we have such a heightened view of ourselves and can redefine a spiritual movement that has outlasted generations of powerful nations, then all is well. Maybe not.

George Barna points out that Christian millennials struggle to discover purpose amid muddled worldviews. This spiritual poverty leads to a superficial outlook, favoring short-term comfort over the lasting truths and peace that the Gospel offers. Despite living in the most prosperous era in human history with more opportunities than our parents' generation, many of us still feel a lack of purpose. Things have gone awry because we refuse to be called according to God's purpose.

A Harvard researcher in 2023 stated that "far too many young adults told us that they feel on edge, lonely, directionless, and that they worry about financial security. Many are 'achieving to achieve' and find little meaning in either school or work."

We can't keep healthy relationships because we don't trust the people in our lives to do us good and are unwilling to make compromise. We'd rather tweet or send status updates than converse in person. We take nearly everything personally and believe morality is a simply a matter of preferrences. We are losing the family unit daily due to fewer formal marriages, increased levels of divorce, separation, liberalized sexual morality, and unhappiness about raising children.

Based on extensive research of Christian millennials, Barna says that rejecting God's presence and authority intensifies our feelings of anxiety and fear. We hold a low value on human life and disrespect others for daring to disagree with us, as the destruction of Elon Musk's property shows. Yet we think the world has become chaotic, as if we had no part in it.

Our misguided spiritual beliefs harm our health and overall well-being, and the systems that perpetually influence our lives appear to incentivize our destruction. The grand winner in all this isn't God. It's the devil. He gains if we are socially destructive and spiritually disengaged.

But the good news is that this isn’t the end.

We need a worldview that gives purpose.

The church can be glad that 14% of millennials want a better relationship with God, and 35% have already adopted a belief in Jehovah as the all-powerful, all-knowing creator of the world.

The church can build on these numbers in the next decade by championing a revival to raise millennials who are righteous and confident in God's ways. Why millennials? In the next decade, many of us will be old enough to be appointed elders and deacons in the church, and our parents will mostly have retired. Leadership succession will fail if we don't take this seriously. On our part, we must seek early vocation, renew our membership in Bible-believing churches, and confidently proclaim our faith.

Biblical data shows that we are made for connection, and our youth is the prime time to deepen our relationship with God and His church.

From the beginning, faith was never a private matter. Community was never optional, and purpose was never delayed. A biblical worldview will strengthen our faith, community, and purpose. Millennials need purpose. Seventy-five percent said they were actively trying to discover their purpose in life. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reported that suicide rates increased by 5% among men aged 25 to 34 in 2020.

A biblical perspective of life will help people build a relationship with Jesus Christ. He wants to transform us into new creations. 2 Corinthians 3:18 (NLT) states, "And the Lord—who is the Spirit—makes us more and more like him as we are changed into his glorious image."

Adopting a Christian worldview is essential for millennials today because it affords us a role to play in God's Kingdom and teaches us to play it young. God has a pattern of using young people who initially had little idea of the significant impact they would have in God's Kingdom. It worked in Babylon, Egypt, and Rome, and it still works today.

Share

For example, when a non-Muslim who has no zealous commitment to Christ in the way of water baptism, but attends church occasionally or is born to Christian parents, is asked in a public office to fill out a personal data form, they indicate Christianity as their religion without flinching.

At the time, I articulated this to my conversation partner as social Christianity and I said it was okay for such Christianity to exist.

To my surprise, he was devastated.

You see, I worship with the Church of Christ. We are on the conservative side of doctrinal issues, with an apt motto encompassing all we believe about God: “We speak where the Bible speaks…” My conversation partner and I attend the same congregation. So, it was shocking that I would observe such Christianity though the New Testament denounces weak faith in Christ.1

Months later, when Richard Dawkins publicly admitted to being a cultural Christian, like many people, I was surprised, though he simply articulated what I had said about social Christians.

So there are Christians who don’t believe in God? Yes. And Richard Dawkins is one of them.

Why then did Dawkins’ admission come as a surprise? He has spent much of his life as a leading atheist, a member of the Four Horsemen movement playing down the role of faith and proposing countless times to remove religion from public life. Konstantine Kisin says of Dawkins and his pairs, “Not content with proving that religion wasn’t true, they ventured further in attempting to prove religion was, at best, unnecessary and, more likely, harmful.”

Subscribe now

What about cultural Christianity?

It is certain that Christian traditions, ethics, historical influence, and values such as compassion, forgiveness, and justice appeal to people irrespective of their religious convictions. Dennis Prager, a Jew, promotes Christmas and counts efforts to cancel it as an attack on American culture.

Cultural Christianity may be thought of simply as a label, I.e., “declaring a religious affiliation, as opposed to being “Muslim” or “Buddhist.” Madeleine Davies published a report on cultural Christianity recently, observing among other things that Dawkins “has happily owned the first label, joining Philip Pullman (a self-professed “Church of England atheist”) and, more recently, Elon Musk in rejecting all religious belief while holding in affection aspects of its cultural legacy, including sacred music.”

Citing Tom Holland’s impressive book Dominion, Davies subtly says that cultural Christianity is a Western inclination in debt to an indissoluble Christian heritage. Holland theorized to Davies that Christianity innoculates the West from thinking as the Nazis did that might is right. Christianity’s emphasis on love and the dignity of all persons nurses the appeal to the faith professed by cultural Christians.

What does the Bible say about cultural Christianity?

A remarkable metaphor I have seen about cultural Christianity is this, “They are branches that hang around the True Vine but have no true attachment.” The first time the word “Christian” was used, it was in response to a common observation that the earliest Christians imitated Christ. Cultural Christianity does not imitate Christ so the Bible has no mention of it.

However, by definition, we may glean references to cultural Christianity i.e. people laying claim to Christ or Christianity without a commitment, from the Bible:

1. It exists.2

2. Its root is unbelief.3

3. It’s a form of resistance.4

4. It’s more about culture than faith.

5. Jesus Christ permitted but did not accept it.5

6. It requires the zeal of Bible-believing Christians.6

   Subscribe now

So, do cultural Christians need the cross?

Yes. Some now, and others, down the road. So I propose believing Christians engage cultural Christians in two ways:

1. In the short term, they need the uncompromising truth of the cross.

2. In the long term, they need the open arms of the gospel.

   

Short term

This is the approach we must take when engaging the likes of Richard Dawkins, who vehemently opposed gospel preachers and convinced the public to eradicate religion. In the same interview, Dawkins repeatedly emphasizes that he believes nothing of the Bible, calling it “pernicious nonsense.” Dawkins wants the cultural benefits of Christianity and prefers to keep it that way as opposed to believing in Christ or replacing Christianity as a “decent religion” with any other such as Islam.

Perhaps the reason people feel entitled to invent such a thing as cultural Christianity is the age-old but convenient simplification of Christ as a “Moral Teacher.” Davies notes that the English are particularly susceptible to this, but neither Nietzsche nor CS Lewis would welcome it. Nietzsche observed:

Similarly, CS Lewis warned, that it is the thing you must not say, for “let us not come with any patronising nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”

Subscribe now

Long term

The gospel is benevolent. Jesus Christ says, “It is not the healthy people who need a doctor.”7 The gospel is for those who need it most, for people with poor church attendance in the Church of England were found most likely to exit the church. We need not abandon them.

This does not mean the church should dilute its message, since, in reaching out to the social outcasts of that age, Jesus never stopped saying He was Christ, the Saviour. It means that Christianity’s gains in society, particularly Western ones, automatically (by birth or affiliation) admit many people on a journey to Christ. Others are far behind on that journey and may never get closer but some are gradually making their way to Christ. Our solemn duty is to refrain from hindering the latter while charging the former to earnest repentance.

Cultural Christians may use Christianity as therapy for their spiritual void but they will come and some are well on their way. Davies notes that the church has a post-reformation tradition that invites people to testify of their encounters with God. JD Vance, the vice president-elect of the United States of America, “felt the touch of God” in 2020.

What cultural Christians on a longer route to Christ must not do is assume that without the spiritual, metaphysical premises of the Christian faith, they can have a passive one. Madeleine Davies quotes Graham Tomlin as saying:

The long-term approach suits those with little to no entrenched sentiments against the Messianic claims of Christ, the existence of God, and belief in the Bible’s inspiration.

We preach so that all men may come to God but everyone may not come at once. And if some are content with our fruits, we must give them more fruits to enjoy.

Dawkins now admits that replacing Christianity with another religion would be bad for Britain. Larry Siedentop, according to Davies, warned that underplaying Christianity’s role in the West would be dangerous.

Of course, the fear of losing its Christian heritage to intolerant religions or beliefs is no justification for Christianity in the West. The necessity for Christianity in the West is the same for all societies. God loves humanity and seeks to save us from sin and death through Jesus Christ.8

Tom Holland, Davies writes, cheers us on to preach this true gospel and remind cultural Christians where their beloved faith comes from:

Modern Western society may claim the cultural traditions of Christianity but it cannot exist without the practice of Bible-believing Christianity.

The onus isn’t on cultural Christians to become Bible-believing Christians so that these traditions may remain. It’s on Bible-believing Christians to live out their faith in a way worthy of emulation so that all nations will journey to Christ, and in so doing, preserve a desirable culture.

Thanks for reading. Everything good will come.

Share

Subscribe now

Without faith, it is impossible to please God, but our relationship with Him has no basis without hope. The Bible reveals the character, plans, and intentions of God. So, biblical knowledge, even about how all things began, will give us hope to build and strengthen a faithful relationship with Him.

The Psalmist1 says that the words of the Lord revive the soul and make the wise simple. Paul would add that “…hope does not disappoint us….”

Understanding the ways of God, His character, and plans for our lives is a journey that spans generations. It never ends. But it begins with our knowledge of the origin of things.

Though they’re often misunderstood today, these 16 origins from Genesis will help you understand God’s character, His purposes for humanity, and the ultimate meaning of life.

16 origins in Genesis:

1. Origin of Life

2. Origin of Evil

3. Origin of Man

4. Origin of Work

5. Origin of Death

6. Origin of Culture

7. Origin of Nations

8. Origin of Conflict

9. Origin of Religion

10. Origin of Marriage

11. Origin of Language

12. Origin of Government

13. Origin of the Solar System

14. Origin of the Chosen People

15. Origin of Order and Complexity

16. Origin of Hydrosphere and Atmosphere

Subscribe now

Origin of life

How a seemingly formless state became the ideal place for skyscrapers and habitation for great and common people goes back to God, i.e. the vibration of the Spirit of God.

The Spirit of God “hovered” amidst the void (moved). The Hebrew for "move" suggests a rapid back-and-forth that energized the void and gave it form. The movement of the Divine was necessary for all other things to follow.

Several scientists and philosophers, some atheists, have refuted Darwin’s postulation that a big bang caused everything. Casey Luskin observes that “nonreligious scientists and scholars who doubt modern Darwinian theory include former U.S. National Academy of Sciences biologist Lynn Margulis, medical professor Raymond Tallis, Rutgers cognitive scientist Jerry Fodor, New York University philosopher and legal scholar Thomas Nagel, and Princeton-trained mathematician David Berlinski—all of whom have publicly challenged neo-Darwinism and/or sympathized with [Intelligent Design].

What I find surprising is certainly not the fact that God created the universe, nor the staunch defense of evolutionary biology by new atheists—cum the four horsemen. My surprise is the proposal by some theologians (gap theory) to reconcile evolution with Genesis 1:1-2, saying, “God created the heavens and the earth, and then something happened that caused the earth to go from fully created and beautiful to ‘without form and void,” which is rather suitable for the claim that the earth is older than 10,000 years.

On the contrary, Mike Mazzalongo notes, “There are no philosophical problems with a young created earth. That an all-powerful and wise being created the universe which reflects His complexity and wisdom is logical and possible. As a matter of fact, the existence of an eternal God creating the earth can logically be demonstrated in a variety of ways (i.e. Moral argument, First Cause argument).”

The Bible says life began with God. Albert Einstein's theory of general relativity reveals time, matter, and space have a definite beginning while Herbert Spencer itemized from Genesis 1:1 the 5 scientific principles that evolution cannot explain:

1. Time: "In the beginning"

2. Force: "God"

3. Action: "created"

4. Space: "the heavens"

5. Matter: "the earth"

Origin of Evil

We mistakenly assume that evil began with the fall. As much as I’d like to trace these origins from Genesis, Isaiah has more details concerning the history of evil.

Satan rebelled against God before the first temptation. He wanted to be like the Most High who drove him out of heaven. Genesis 3 describes the passage of evil into the physical from the spiritual through Satan’s deception of Eve. As Paul says, “… through one man sin entered into the world….” 3

This clarification is important because it shows that while we may rebel against God’s righteous will and yield to temptation, He made us good.4 It took an external prompt, from Satan, for the first of us to consider a rebellion against God.5 It has been said that the emphasis on Satan's inability to dominate the woman and her offspring after the fall suggests it was the reason he tempted her so he could subdue her and her offspring.

Genesis also bears God’s plan to save us from evil. The first gospel (protoevangelium) comes out of Genesis 3 when God says His plan of saving humanity will come through the Seed of a woman. “He [her Seed] shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel.” 6 In his much-loved letter to the early church, Apostle John says, “The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil’s work.” 7

God is compassionate towards us. He announced His salvation to us when sin plunged into the earth and His saving grace endures through His Word so that the gates of Hell cannot prevail against it.

Origin of Man

The most significant point about the creation of man in Genesis is the idea of fit or fitting. There was “no man to work the ground,” so God made Adam. But the world was too big a place, so God created the Garden of Eden and was present with him. Seeing Adam alone, God made him a helper ‘fit’ for him.

It suffices to say that God does everything fitting for the man to whom he gives dominion over all the good things He has made.

Subscribe now

Origin of Work

Genesis contains expansive details about work that reveal God's creativity, humanity's purpose, and the development of culture. Key details about work in Genesis include:

1. God worked in the beginning. Jesus would allude to this later saying, “My Father worked, therefore I work.”8 This is important because it clarifies the notion that work is a consequence of sin or a burden on humanity.

2. God created man to work. Genesis 1:28 and 2:15 reveal God’s mandate to humanity to sustain His work. Therefore, work is not a survivalist effort but a participation in God’s creativity and cultivating work in the world.

3. There is dignity in work. To Tim Keller, “Work is as much a basic human need as food, beauty, rest, friendship, prayer, and sexuality; it is not simply medicine but food for our soul. Without meaningful work, we sense significant inner loss and emptiness.”

4. The fall made work harder, frustrating, and sometimes futile, yet it retains its essential creative, serving, and reflecting purpose.

5. Tim Keller also observed, “Since God rested after his creation, we must also rest after ours. This rhythm of work and rest is not only for believers; it is for everyone, as part of our created nature.” Our modern fascination with work-life balance finds its theological appeal in the Sabbath principle.

Origin of Death

Genesis tells us the following about death:

1. God did not create death.

2. Death entered the world because of Adam and Eve’s sin.

3. Physical death is the lowest form of death, but spiritual death is profound.

4. The Bible’s focus on death is not primarily scientific but theological, i.e. the basis for redemption.

5. God removed Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden to prevent them from eating from the Tree of Life.9

6. The death of animals may not be a consequence of sin. As John Lennox observed, “Plant death cannot therefore have been a consequence of the first human sin, even though plant death is death. What about the animals? Whales, for instance, are mammals, and they do not live on green vegetation. Their food is living seafood; and so, by eating, whales cause death.”

Subscribe now

Origin of Culture

By Genesis 6, humanity has formed a strong pattern of life that God observes: “Every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time.” 10 However, “God’s response to human sinfulness brings with it blessings we might not have expected.”

The following cultural elements emerge in Genesis:

1. Cities

2. Nations

3. Language

4. Agriculture

5. Government

6. Technology and arts

7. Marriage and family

Origin of Nations

Genesis 10 reveals that all nations descended from Noah’s three sons: Shem, Ham, and Japheth, after the flood. Other notable facts about the origin of nations in Genesis include:

1. The diversity of nations and languages originated at the Tower of Babel.

2. The scattering of people and the confusion of languages are divine judgments.

3. According to Genesis, we share a common ancestry from Adam and Eve through Noah.

4. Dr. William F. Albright11 observed that “The Bible is the only document that confirms the existence of these peoples and is very accurate according to archaeological findings.

Mike Mazzalongo notes that scholars agree on the unity of humanity. “The problem is how distinct nations could develop from one race and language. Only the book of Genesis explains this in an adequate fashion.”

Subscribe now

Origin of Religion

In Genesis 4, people began to call on God. Some people call this the first prayer. The context is that as the first few humans began to populate the world, a contrast among the offspring (Cain and Abel) emerged and it is the line of Seth who would begin the living of practicing prayer.

Mike Mazzalongo notes that many world religions say there must be an ultimate truth and direction in life. “Genesis explains the origin of this characteristic of man's consciousness as well as the origin of true worship and the true God of all origins.”

Origin of Conflict

As I said about the origin of evil, Genesis does not mention the spiritual conflict that ensued in the heavens when Satan attempted to take the place of God, but the following types of conflict are notable:

1. The Fall

   As you read through Genesis, you’re immediately enamored by the tranquil nature of all things, as they flow from the mind, observation, pronouncement, or work of God. The scenery assumes some tension from Genesis 3, where the serpent poses a creepy question and “man doubts, distorts, and defies God’s Word—reducing it to an alternative viewpoint.”

2. The Curse

   The curse contains the first mention of childbirth, and it comes with great pain. Before that, God had made Adam and Eve out of dust and a rib. Since God had commanded them to multiply before the fall, chances are that childbearing would have ensued palatable. And why not? As for Adam, God told him to keep the garden, and was doing a good job at it. The curse just made it harder and tragic, if you add his return to dust.

3. Cain v. Abel

   Thieves come to steal and destroy, but brothers? Genesis 4 says they come along too, just as Cain rose against Abel and killed him, and the first innocent man was murdered in cold blood.

4. The Seed of the Woman vs. The seed of Satan

   The conflict that began with the fall now returns to a spiritual dimension, but the Seed of the woman shall prevail.

5. Sin Spreads

   Genesis 4 reveals how the devil’s lies degenerated into wickedness. Lamech boasts of his killings, men seek many women, weapons of destruction become common, and men make art to provoke God.

6. Nations

   The prophecy was, “Two nations are in your womb, and two peoples from within you shall be divided; the one shall be stronger than the other, the older shall serve the younger.”12 Esau would eventually sell his birthright, but the Edomites would not let the Israelites have it peacefully.

Origin of Marriage

Legal or not, all distortions of marriage contradict God’s plan in Genesis. Polygamy, infanticide, adultery, pedophilia, divorce, and homosexuality are all distortions of marriage.”

What does Genesis tell us about marriage? 11 quick facts:

1. It can be distorted.

2. It is an expression of God’s image.

3. It is a loving stewardship of creation.

4. It is the first institution created by God.

5. It is a union between a man and a woman.

6. It establishes a unity since “they shall become one flesh.”

7. It is complimentary because Eve was “a helper fit for him.”

8. The man is the head of the woman, though her desires may be contrary.

9. It is how families are formed, and tribes begin. It is the foundation of society.

10. It is God’s response to Adam’s (man’s) loneliness because “it is not good for man to be alone.”

11. God orchestrated and witnessed the first marriage, but He is present now just as he was then.

Origin of Language

The Tower of Babel is remarkable, isn’t it? For as men ascend to the heavens, they assume different tongues.

Mike Mazzalongo writes,

“The gulf between the chattering of animals and the abstract, symbolic systems of man is completely unbridgeable by the evolutionary process. You can teach an animal to mimic sound [and] repeat conditioned responses, but you cannot have him give an opinion or [ask it to] tell time. Genesis accounts not only for language in general but also [for] national languages in particular.”

Subscribe now

Origin of Government

Unlike marriage, the emergence of a structured human leadership of society is a later development to manage the degenerating impact of sin. Four forms are observable: patriarchal, tribal, national, and global.

Our leadership potential was established long before the flood when men (patriarchy) led their families.13 As the account of Abram’s (later Abraham) life shows, men received their authority from God. So there is a limited human or formal political arrangement in the beginning. In fact, it would take the wisdom of Jethro to have Moses initiate perhaps the first national assembly in history.

By Genesis 9, restraint must be established in the new world. After the flood, God said, “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image.” This sets up the legitimacy of capital punishment. Moreso, the fear of man, which God imposed on animals, suggests that the earliest form of government recorded in Genesis maximized fear and terror as a deterrent, as Mike Mazzalongo notes,

“If man has the right to execute capital punishment, he also has the right and responsibility to develop laws that will help prevent and discourage the type of things that lead to the ultimate crime (robbery, rape, etc.)”

As the population of the world grew, selfish ambitions began to influence social policies. The great hunter, Nimrod, sets himself as king and his descendants would build a city to penetrate the heavens, whereas God wanted them to disperse the earth. The selfish acts of many politicians as we know it, are as old as man.

Origin of the Solar System

Scientists do not agree on the big bang even with it being a description of “effect” and not “cause” but they certainly don’t agree on the origin of the solar system. On this matter, I will defer to the apt submission of Roger Patterson, who says:

Origin of the Chosen People

Let’s set aside growing antisemitism in the West for less than a minute and observe history in Genesis. Its historical record of Israel and its purpose in God’s salvation plan is accurate.

From Adam to Noah, Abraham to the twelve tribes, and from Egypt to exile, Genesis gives us a framework for studying Israel’s journey, triumphs, and struggles as they relate to God. For example, how do we understand the fulfillment of God’s promise that Jesus would crush the serpent if we can’t trace his genealogy to Adam?

No doubt, God’s choice of Jacob over Esau poses a problem to non-Christians, but we know that birthright is not enough in God’s plan, a person’s character and alignment with God’s will takes ample consideration.

As the account of Joseph’s life shows, Abraham's lineage became a "light to the Gentiles," so that God's blessings and salvation would reach all nations.

Subscribe now

Origin of Order and Complexity

Genesis also helps us understand how order and complexity became a feature of the human experience. It reveals God’s creative intention, spiritual power, and guidance. Professor John Lennox has said, “At each stage of creation God injected a new level of information and energy into the cosmos, in order to advance creation to its next level of form and complexity.”

As one reads through Genesis even for the first time, the concept of kinship and its accompanying boundaries become apparent. The waters created have living organisms peculiar to them, just as birds find their place in the sky, while plants, animals, and man move along “according to their kinds.”

Origin of Hydrosphere and Atmosphere

Mike Mazzalongo notes that “the combination of liquid water, oxygen, and nitrogen in an atmosphere that can sustain life has only been found in its present state on the Earth. Genesis explains the how, who, and why of this unique mixture here on earth.”

He adds that the term ‘firmament’ or heaven, refers to the atmosphere, which “permitted life on earth and separated the two existing bands of water, one above and the other below the atmosphere. The waters under the firmament would be the water on and under the earth. The waters above the firmament would be a special water vapor canopy that would provide the unique environment that existed in the pre-flood world of Adam and Eve.” This water canopy dissolved on the earth like a torrent of rain for 40 days and nights.

Thanks for reading.

Everything good will come.

Share

I’d like to speak to this through prayers. How do we pray through the seasons of life?1

3 principles to help you reframe your relationship with God through the seasons

• Seasons are providential

• Seasons are purposeful

• Seasons are passing

4 lessons to help you build a closer relationship with God through prayers

1. Embrace

2. Seek

3. Esteem

4. Testify

Why should we approach the seasons of life through prayers? Many of us easily accept divine purpose when things are going well but struggle to understand God's will when things don’t go our way. We aren’t constant in connecting with God during life's ups and downs.

But once you develop a mindset (principles) that yearns to connect with God at all times, you can employ these aspects of prayer (lessons) for a deeper level of peace, resilience, and spiritual growth.

Subscribe now

The Three Principles of Seasonal Prayers

Seasons are providential

The first principle we must know about praying through seasons is that seasons are providential.

We cannot truly acknowledge how God gives us everything without knowing that He has set everything in time and season.

As the Psalmist (Psalm 74:16) says, God has “fixed all the boundaries of the earth; [He has] made summer and winter.”

Job and Joseph had different experiences, and the context does determine when we refer to their relationships with God but there’s a common thread about them.

Their stories illustrate God's divine providence and His sovereignty over all experiences of our lives. They both began with favor, endured suffering, and received great rewards. Joseph was favored by his father but a family feud saw him sold into slavery, subsequently, he was falsely accused and imprisoned. Eventually, God elevated him to a position of power in Egypt.

Job had all he needed and did all could to be right with God but the devil tried him with great loss and pain but he would not give up on God. God blessed Job abundantly, restoring his losses and giving him a new family.

It is God who makes the seasons.

If we thank God for every season in our lives, we show that we know He created all seasons.

Seasons are purposeful

The second principle to praying through seasons is to know that the seasons have their purpose too, just as day and night are different.

God established the seasons by His Word and they took shape as He said it. But He did that for a purpose. The Psalmist (Psalm 104:19) puts it this way, “He made the moon to mark the seasons, and the sun knows when to go down."

Perhaps, farmers know the seasons best. For,

• In winter (December - February), they rest and prepare their machinery

• In spring (March - June), they start planting

• In summer (July - September), they monitor the fields and expect growth

• In autumn (December - February) they harvest

But most Christians don’t have a problem with this schedule for plants. The challenge lies in accepting that God has a purpose for the darkest times in our lives even when we don’t see how His purpose materializes into a benefit for us. The reason is that suffering makes us concentrate only on the present, makes us powerless, and challenges our beliefs. All of which prevent us from seeing the bigger picture of God’s plan.

Even at such times, we must ask God to help us draw closer to Him and see us through to the next season.

Share Theology of Growth🌴

Seasons are passing

The last principle of praying through seasons is that seasons are passing. And we have a pretty relaxed way of expressing this, we say that time flies.

When things are going smoothly, we want to pause our time so we can enjoy the moment. But when life presents difficulties, we fear that our hardship is permanent and want time to move quickly.

But knowing that seasons are temporary can bring hope and blessing. What you're experiencing now won't last forever.

The word season is from the Latin, serere which means to sow. The earliest usage showed that the intention was temporary, befitting of a specific time or activity.

Therefore every season is by nature transient. Don’t rush your seasons, your seasons will pass at their set time. It is never permanent but as King Solomon puts it,

What can you make out of these?

Embrace the season

The very first step to building a stronger relationship with God in every season is to acknowledge that each is a unique season. Just as farmers rest from their labors every December, you too should get some rest. Ending the year intentionally allows you to appreciate the lessons learned and prepare for what's ahead.

Take a few minutes each day in December to think about what you’ve learned and how you've grown over the past year. Consider what you want to carry with you into the new year and what you'd like to leave behind.

But if this isn’t your season for rest, know that there are three other meanings. Perhaps, this is your season of beginning, growth, or harvest.

As the seasons change, so does our disposition. By acknowledging our emotions and surrendering them to Him, we open ourselves to His comfort and guidance. Prayer is our lifeline, we can talk to God, express our feelings honestly, and receive His peace. This is how we will build a stronger trust in His sovereignty and timing.

Prayer Point:

Seek God’s plan for the season

The next step to building a stronger relationship with God in every season is to seek God's guidance in understanding the lessons He intends to teach you and inquire about His plan for the season.

By asking insightful questions and actively listening for His answers, we gain a clearer understanding of His purpose for our lives. The Bible is a rich view of the heart of God. The more we study it the greater our knowledge of his ways, love, and grace. Prayer and Bible study strengthen our faith and our relationship with Him.

Prayer Point:

Leave a comment

Esteem your seasons

This is where many of us fail. We value certain periods over others, perhaps because of the victories, breakthroughs, and accomplishments we get.

But esteeming our seasons, even the difficult ones, enables us to see God’s hand at work in our lives. You can’t have a constant relationship with God if you think that you shouldn’t at certain times and once you feel that you shouldn’t hold on to God, you deny Him the honor of controlling your life. The nature of our relationship with God is that He is in charge, not us. His is to lead, ours is to surrender.

By recognizing His sovereignty and trusting in His plan, we can cultivate a spirit of gratitude and hope. We can thank and praise Him, no matter what we may be facing. As we learn to esteem God’s purpose, we develop a greater sense of peace and contentment.

Prayer Point:

Testify in every season

How do you feel when all a person does to you is complain about their difficulties? Surely, that isn’t as impacting as the testimony of someone who may be going through similar difficulties. Marianne Williamson is famous for saying,

“Your playing small does not serve the world. There is nothing enlightened about shrinking so that other people won't feel insecure around you. We are all meant to shine, as children do. We were born to make manifest the glory of God that is within us. It's not just in some of us; it's in everyone. And as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same. As we are liberated from our own fear, our presence automatically liberates others.”

Testifying about God’s faithfulness through our seasons allows us to share His love with others. The reason this is hard to do in difficult times is, again, because hardship makes us short-sighted and forgetful. We must ask God to help us remember all that He’s done for us and be hopeful about all that He will do.

But by sharing our stories of hope and redemption, we inspire others to trust in God’s faithfulness. Sometimes, prayer becomes a means of intercession, as we pray for others who may be struggling. Testifying to God’s faithfulness strengthens our faith and deepens our connection with Him.

Prayer Point:

As always, thanks for reading.

Everything good will come.

Subscribe now

“In facing death, the possibility of a spiritual realm is conjectured. In the depth[s] of despair, one may be overcome with a sense of burden because of a sinful act. Under the umbrella of the stars, one asks, Who made these?”1

Scientologists and naturalists can deny it all they want, but the reality of this life, the whole universe, is that the spiritual and the material coexist. There are just far too many shades of ‘spirituality’ nowadays, some of which aren’t even ‘spiritual.’

Some scholars define spirituality purely by the wellness benefits one derives from it, like “a self-chosen2 connection that inspires individuals to achieve their optimal being, and these connections are not limited to some higher power, supernatural or omnipotent.” But what this definition succeeds in doing is merely changing the source of the ‘connection’ from divine to human (that is, human-centered spirituality).

This appeal to “inner strength, resilience, and connectedness” makes human-centered spirituality self-centered because (1) begins with humans, (2) derives its goals for humans, and (3) values a person’s “autonomy and freedom [and] rejects the idea of an absolute source of moral authority.” There is nothing spiritual about this view. It cannot serve the fulfilling ‘essence’ that seekers need. Even more, such a perspective permits inherent human limitations (subtle and otherwise).

On the contrary, a divine approach offers “a transcendent external focus,” which is necessary to achieve “an embracing of the transformational reconciliation with God and the world and our true self made possible by Jesus' dying and rising.” This redemptive approach is the goal of Christian spirituality, not wealth, health, or whatever else any charming guru might affirm.

The Nature of Spirituality

Despite prolonged efforts in modern society to distance morality and spirituality from their divine origins, certain proposed scholarly definitions and classifications of these terms still have biblical roots. For instance, the “spiritual but not religious” (SBNR) phenomenon has been given a broad definition, in keeping with predominant religious traditions, of spiritual life as consisting of “(1) an ethically directed (2) way of life, (3) with a particular focus on inner transformation (4) in the light of what is taken to be ultimate.”

Similarly, the Holy Spirit undertakes some activities (processes) to reconcile us with God (goal) while we express certain fruits (Gal. 5:22-23). “As we pursue God, we will become more like him, which is exactly what God intended and empowered us to be… [with] Christ’s righteousness becoming our righteousness, we see that we are holy as God is holy because we have become a part of the Sacred.”3

Spirituality and the Human Experience

When it comes to spirituality, Christians have an advantage that other religious systems can seldom afford: the Holy Spirit, whose endeavors to refine us toward redemption are in perpetuity. The Holy Spirit leads, empowers, proclaims, and resides within us to stabilize us in virtuous living. Why? Because of the “essence of man that is drawn toward physical inducements … known as the ‘natural man'.”

If this sounds rather lofty, pardon me, but it should. After all, Moses didn’t draw near the burning bush with his shoes on. Christian spirituality calls us to holiness so that we can be with God. It calls us to cast the sacred upon the profane and not merely separate them, as some of us like to keep our business and our faith apart.

However, our progression toward godliness does not exempt our quest for meaning, the satisfaction we get from ordering our material existence to some divine ideals. Some would say that all this talk about righteousness will not pay the bills. And they’re right, as Viktor Frankl once said, “A man's concern, even his despair, over the worthwhileness of life is an existential distress but by no means a mental disease.” Jesus also said, “In this world, you will have many troubles,” some of which are answerable by money. Christian spirituality calls us to holiness, but it doesn’t banish our concerns for clothes, food, shelter, and school fees. The holes in our hearts are often triggered by the pursuit of the material with diminishing divine guidance.

Someone once disclosed an affinity for Èṣù (Satan), a deity in the Yoruba pantheon known for facilitating communication between humans and other deities, yet he’s notoriously dubious. Upon probing, I was told that his duplicitous nature makes him likable, as this reflects the “true nature” of humans. True, we are capable of holding dubious personalities. We, and others we may know, exhibit some degrees of cognitive dissonance and hypocrisy. The logic, then, is that since Èṣù is capable of good and evil like humans, spirituality should be centered around such affinity via Èṣù worship. 

That would be spiritual, by the way. Still, a flaw in Èṣù veneration worth mentioning here is that it tailors spirituality as a reflection of the ‘natural man,’ an example being duplicity. No doubt, there are gray areas in life, and in such cases, people may seek spiritual direction. The Bible acknowledges the sense that some things may not be “clearly commanded, prohibited, or permitted,” but “God wants us to obey his commands in the black and white areas, and to seek his wisdom in the gray areas.” The Christian knows that even in such gray areas, one must be careful not to fall into sin.4

Our tendency towards evil and good, however, continuously seeks permission to maximize opportunities that appear to be on the fringes of moral binaries. If one believes that Satan understands our animated desires better, then those desires will find fulfillment and amplification with him. It is, therefore, no surprise that numerous satanic temples may be found openly across the world. This kind of spirituality has no transformational value.

Basically, duplicity undermines integrity and erodes trust, and no reasonably functional capitalist society can function without these. Like other sins, it seeks to secure affluence or other gains for the one who wields it.

Again, spirituality that fulfills its ends only in mental or physical well-being, at best, conscripts some godly ideals to foster human-centeredness. Such spirituality misses the point. One can show kindness while rejecting its source, God. If one doesn’t acknowledge God, one isn’t spiritual because the essence of spirituality is to bridge the gap between the profane and the sacred.5 And no one is more interested in that in our redemption than God.

The Necessity of Divine Redemption

Biblical spirituality begins on two accounts: (1) God opens up the possibility of a spiritual relationship with him, and (2) we seek Him when we realize the necessity of that relationship. Spirituality would never be possible without the benevolent and merciful God who not only acknowledges our nature regarding sin but also offers a compassionate way out of the challenging complexities we face.6

‘Redemption’ is of Latin roots, meaning to ‘buy back.’ For example, there was once something that we lost or gave up, but we want it back to redeem it. Economists call it seller’s remorse. In scripture, it means that a desired state once ensued in “original creation, at one's birth, and in the redeemed state.”7 In the Garden of Eden, when our first parents, Adam and Eve, opted for the serpent’s explanation of God’s direct command, they lost their purity and fell into the world as we know it.

Morally, as children, we assume a clean slate (without sin, not without ‘purpose’) at birth, but as our consciousness grows with age, we pick up desires and habits that shape the rest of our lives. Nevertheless, even if we are morally righteous, we cannot enter a spiritual relationship with God on the basis of our good deeds.8 As Srygley & Lynn9 put it, “The redeemed state is where the condemnation brought on by breaking the law is removed (Romans 8:1-2). It is an actualized spirituality; it is not a guarantee of salvation to the redeemed person who later chooses an alternative faith or unspiritual behavior.”

Various forms of spirituality exist, but the concept of redemption is nearly unique to Christianity. Our faith rests in God’s redeeming invitation to lasting spiritual fulfillment through Jesus Christ.

God’s spiritual plan to redeem us from our sinful tendencies has been established through Jesus Christ so that  “each person [can] respond to God”13 but our spiritual experience cannot ensue without the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit empowers us to break free from the chains of sin and experience genuine spiritual renewal. It is through the Holy Spirit's work that the promise of redemption is fulfilled, that believers in Christ are reconciled to an eternal relationship with God.

The Transforming Power of the Holy Spirit

Redemption is not merely spiritual talk because the Holy Spirit works to produce certain fruits in our daily lives.14 “The outward, daily life of the Christian is a reflection of his or her faith. It takes shape out of a conscious decision to become a disciple of Jesus Christ. It is empowered by God through the Holy Spirit. It involves ethical behavior, ministry, and worship.”15

Without the work of the Holy Spirit, we are liable to the consequences of sin, no matter the type. The physical consequence of sin affects us and other people. Even such things as telling a white lie can have damaging results beyond obvious self-deceit and erosion of trust to infamous social proportions. One may opt for an honest life rooted in Christ, where “... the truth shall set you free (John 8:32),” or be confined to the contrary. As Jordan Peterson16 says, 

Romans 1 reveals the spiritual consequence of sin, for God gives humanity up to “sinful desires,” “shameful lusts,” and “a depraved mind” when we refuse to glorify Him, swap His “truth for a lie,” or discard His knowledge. However, believers “who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit” are not subject to the damnation of sin (Rom. 8:1) because the Holy Spirit informs their desires (Rom. 8:5), controls their body (Rom. 8:9), and gives them life (Rom. 8:11).

…for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him. — Heb.11:6

The timely interventions of God have been one of the strongest reminders of God’s existence to me. I realize it often whenever I take a moment to think about my life. Having taught youth Sunday School a couple of times, I have been privileged to hear my students share occasions where God made a timely intervention in the order of their lives to meet their needs. I think that examining the role God plays in our lives is equally a rational way to engage the question of God’s existence. Why? Because the world is a great place, and if all the knowledge we have acquired has taught us anything, it is that there’s much we don’t know.

Therefore, God could not possibly provide if He didn’t exist. For “anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him” (Heb. 11:6). And we seek God through prayers. One might say that if God doesn't answer all prayers, then God doesn’t exist.

Share

Regardless, unanswered prayers do not negate answered ones. I have been praying about certain things for years, and if one of those prayers remains unanswered, it does not diminish the instances where God intervened. Additionally, we can only conclude that God didn't answer a prayer if we asked for His help with a specific need and are certain that the lack of a positive response will not affect other areas of our lives. 

But we can’t know that for sure. I think Paul preempted this line of thought when he wrote in Romans 8:28, “And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.” Moreover, God says in Isaiah 55:9, “As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.”

Another way that prayer brings about divine providence and intervention is indefinite solicitation. Some prayers require God to intervene continually in the affairs of believers and His Church.

God communicates His existence to us through His providence, and as He answers our prayers, He constantly reminds us of His sovereignty over the physical and spiritual worlds He created.1

Leave a comment

Share Theology of Growth🌴

What is blush, and where does it come from?

There are various kinds of blush, but the “scientific” description of blush goes something like this:

We’re made to blush like our maker. When I read Genesis 1 and see the many instances in which God observes His works, I can see Him grinning. Why not?

After God had made everything else, He blushed. And seeing that Adam was alone, He blushed and made Adam a helpmate. When Adam saw his fitting companion approaching, he said, blushing, “This one is bone from my bone, and flesh from my flesh!” and they all blushed.

Share

Blushing is an act of duty and worship.

Blushing is involuntary. We do it shy, embarrassed, or happy. But it’s only possible because we’re human.

And humans who depend on God and fear Him should blush every day.

Michal blushed

While his brothers and the rest of Israel shake in their boots, David walks in with a heart of gold and says, “Who is this uncircumcised Philistine that he should defy the armies of the living God?”

If you were a young lady aware of the big issues of that day and received details that an equally fine young lad without battle experience had made such a naive remark, wouldn’t you have blushed?

“That must have been something.” You’d think to yourself or maybe say to other girls in your court. And that’s what Michal said. She loved him, married him, celebrated victorious battles with him, and saved his life.

“Michal weds David,” began with a blush!

Isaiah blushed

Just before Isaiah is annointed, he saw the seraphim declaring the holiness of God, and at once, the temple quaked, and he trembled and said:

So, one of the seraphim touched his lips with a burning coal, and Isaiah said, “Here I am, send me.” Isaiah blushed.

I think you get the point.

Sunday-only blushing is fake.

We’re made to blush in the sense that it happens to us. And it has an impact on others.

It’s not something we can decide to do only in Sunday service. If that’s it, we’re just making up our minds to smile and pose. Nothing is inspiring about that.

I think we add the blush to our sense of piety on Sundays and scare the daylight out of others on Mondays. Then, people see us without the blush and the light.

I hope we can blush more often.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

Whether theologians are better practitioners of the faith they teach is a dirty debate for several reasons, which I won’t bother you with, save that anyone willing to have that debate is already on the wrong footing for assuming that all theologians are believers.

No theological tradition has suffered so much hate, persecution, and sectionalism as Christianity. Yet, Christian theology owes its enduring nature, in part, to its attraction to opposing forces, whatever their roots. That includes the inquisitions of modern academia.

Take quantum theology, for example, a product of the relatively new field called Science and Religion. I found an article by Andrej Zeman, who recorded an interesting interview with Professor Mark Harris in 2021, to be a useful expose. However, I won’t substitute a detailed introduction for it.

Science & Religion Café

Mark Harris on Science, Religion, and Quantum Theology

Professor Mark Harris holds the position of the Andreas Idreos Professor of Science and Religion, which is attached to a Professorial Fellowship at Harris Manchester College. As a physicist working in a theological environment, he thinks of himself as a theologian of science, interested in the complex ways that the natural sciences and religious beliefs…

Read more

2 years ago · Andrej Zeman

Rather than reposting the article, I have provided a highlight of the key issues raised in the conversation below with essential lessons for Christians to note.

What is Quantum Theology?

Quantum theology explores the relationship between quantum mechanics and theological concepts, such as the nature of God's interaction with the world. Professor Harris defines the emerging field as “trying to understand how fundamental physics tells us about the very depths of nature: What might physics say about the way that the creator God (or gods, if you prefer) relate to the created world?”

Harris also explains the intersection of both fields using this hypothesis, “if physicists are right that quantum mechanics tells us about nature at its most fundamental level, then that would suggest that nature begins and ends with quantum mechanics. So, if you believe that your God has some relationship with the created world - and perhaps can even work in that world, answers prayer, for instance - then quantum mechanics should have some kind of way of informing the way that might happen.”

Share

A striking example Harris used to exemplify his definition is prayer. According to him, since Christians believe in a God who engages the world, then when God answers prayers, quantum mechanics might explain how He did so.

The problem is that if science can accurately determine the world's movements, then God might have fewer roles to play. The removal of God from mundane life is not a guarantee for scientists, though, since quantum mechanics cannot precisely describe the future.

One of the notable points established early on in the conversation is that there exists a conflict between religion and scienChristianity'shristianity’s notable engagement with natural theology makes it adequately equipped to forge a healthy understanding of religion and science through quantum theology.

What’s at stake?

A challenge highlighted in the conversation is the age-old “God-of-the-gaps" fallacy. Asked about the integrity of the claims theologians might make when using quantum theology. Whether such claims may be trusted, Harris adds a word of caution, declaring that scholarship in the subject matter is sometimes experimental:

A great example of this is the famous conundrum since the earliest days of Christianity: How to describe Jesus Christ as Son of God? The church councils have maintained that he is both fully divine and fully human, but how can he be both of those and one person at the same time? Does it make sense? One of the things that theologians have latched onto is the early discovery in the development of quantum mechanics that fundamental entities like electrons and light waves and so on can behave as both waves and particles depending on the way you look at them. And I should say that waves and particles can be used as analogies for the divine and the human, since waves and particles are mutually exclusive types of physical matter. The fact that we might need to use mutually-exclusive categories (wave, particle) to describe one entity (e.g. an electron) is known as complementarity. Thus, one of the things that theologians do is to use this model of wave-particle dualities — a way of talking about the humanity and divinity of Christ – as a kind of thought experiment. Now that's all very well as long as you’re cautious about it. But sometimes it's taken too far and almost as though it's “This is exactly what quantum mechanics tells us.” Then you start to run into theological problems about the way you use scientific models to make definite theological truths, for instance. So as long as you're careful and take these as rather loose metaphors, I think that you can do a certain amount of work with quantum mechanics or with science in this way.

What’s in it for Christians?

It’s mostly academic stuff for now, at least based on the flow of the conversation. That said, for believing Christian theologians faced in the field, areas of conflict with faith could be a major concern.

Harris cites Sir Arthur Eddington, who “wrote and lectured prominently about his attempts to reconcile his religious faith with what he was learning as a scientist during this momentous time in physics.”

However, as the field develops, the implications that quantum mechanics could have on theology could become even more practical to one’s faith. So it’s worth knowing a few academic things:

1. Quantum theology is interdisciplinary, and it’s like the rising field of digital humanities, which I also find interesting and will write about later.

2. For Christians who enjoy rigorous religious and science debates, the field rides on the rich history between both fundamental areas.

3. Reading through the lengthy interview was an exercise in the mind. This field will test the strengths and limitations of different approaches to integrating science and faith.

Thanks for reading.

Edit:

Is this the first article you’ve read in this publication? Not to worry if this sounded rather abract; my writing isn’t always like this way. People are searching for God in places where valuable things get lost, or worse, people get missing. Months ago, a video of women paying thousands of dollars to scream in a bush trended across the internet. So, I started this newsletter to share Biblical resources that help ground our desires for personal growth in God. You can read more about my reasons in the post below. — Justice.

Leave a comment