In this Sermon Extra video, Mike and I sit down to discuss the question of whether there are apostles today, as well as the 5-fold (or is it 4-fold?!) offices of the church listed in Ephesians 4:11.
Tag: Theology
Theology for the People Podcast – Season 2 Trailer & Preview

It’s been a minute since the last episode of the Theology for the People podcast dropped. That’s because I’m currently in the process of recording episodes for Season 2, which will be released over the next several months.
Listen to the Season 2 Trailer here:
Season 2 Trailer and Preview – Theology for the People
Some of the topics we will be discussing this year include:
- How Adoption is a Picture of the Gospel
- Why the Ascension is More Important than You Might Think
- Did the Reformation Reach the East? Orthodox Churches and the Protestant Reformation
- The True Story of St. Patrick of Ireland
- What is Deconstruction, and How Should We Respond?
- And more!
Also, stay tuned for more information about my upcoming book: I Could Never Believe In…: Down-to-Earth Answers to Nine Tough Questions About God and the Bible. More information about the book and its release coming soon.
Thanks for listening, and keep an eye on your podcast app for new episodes coming soon!
If you’d like to suggest a topic for the podcast, you can do so here: Ask a Question or Suggest a Topic
Book Review: Jesus and John Wayne

Several months ago I read Kristin Kobes Du Mez’s Jesus and John Wayne: How White Evangelicals Corrupted a Faith and Fractured a Nation.
I found the book to be an interesting history of some parts of American evangelicalism. I emphasize that the book is about some parts of American evangelicalism, because the author focuses her writing specifically on a particular corner of the evangelical Christian world: a particular subculture within American evangelicalism associated with Jerry Falwell, the Moral Majority, and militant masculinity. This part of evangelicalism has less to do with the core evangelical beliefs and convictions, and more to do with a culture propagated by certain people.
For this reason, while I found Kobes Du Mez to be an excellent writer, and found her book to be an entertaining read, I also found it incredibly frustrating because it feels that she paints evangelicalism with too broad of a brush, and in some cases she seems to misrepresent certain groups and events in an attempt to bolster her main thesis that Christianity in America has been coopted and altered by men, who have changed it into something it was never meant to be, namely: militaristic, and a tool for white male hegemony.
Not My Evangelicalism
Here’s the thing: Kobes Du Mez isn’t completely wrong in this thesis. However, it must be noted that her scope is very limited.
The fact is: evangelicalism is not monolithic. Evangelicalism is a movement which began in Germany in the 16th century, and is about restoring the place of the Bible to its rightful place of primacy in our theological method, and about “religion of the heart,” AKA: a personal relationship with God.
The word “evangelical” comes from the Greek word euangelion (gospel). An evangelical Christian is a “gospel Christian.”
This definition from Wikipedia is cobbled together from different sources, but accurately summarizes what evangelicalism is, and what its core values entail:
Evangelical Christianity is a worldwide trans-denominational movement within Protestant Christianity that maintains the belief that the essence of the Gospel consists of the doctrine of salvation by grace alone, solely through faith in Jesus’ atonement. Evangelicals believe in the centrality of the “born again” experience in receiving salvation (see Jesus’ words in John 3:3), in the authority of the Bible as God’s revelation to humanity, and in spreading the Christian message.
It is important to note that Kobes Du Mez is a Christian, and admits that she herself would be categorized as an evangelical. What Kobes Du Mez takes issue with in this book is a particular subculture which developed within American evangelicalism. She rightly points out that many of the behaviors of those in this subculture differ from the teachings and heart of Jesus.
British evangelicalism, the setting in which I did my theological studies, embraces the core values listed above, without the cultural trappings of this particular corner of American evangelical subculture which Kobes Du Mez criticizes.
Furthermore, the particular churches I have been a part of in the United States have not aligned themselves with characters like Jerry Falwell, or many of the things which Kobes Du Mez talks about in her book. Part of the reason why I found the book interesting was because much of the what Kobes Du Mez talks about, which she portrays as normative for evangelical Christianity in the United States, was foreign to me and my experience.
I would challenge Kobes Du Mez to keep in mind the fact that evangelicalism is not an American phenomenon – neither in origin, nor in majority. Most evangelicals in the world are not American. Where anyone has created an aberrant form of Christianity, it should be called out. This applies to evangelicals, and it also applies to all other movements and groups. This is, actually, the heart of the Reformation, the adherents of which were the first to call themselves “evangelicals”!
Stretching It…
One of my biggest qualms with the book is the number of ways in which the author attempts to strengthen her point by using examples which may sound convincing to the untrained eye, but which are actually a bit misleading.
For example: Kobes Du Mez critiques evangelicals for using sports and military analogies to describe and explain Christianity. The problem with this critique is that the Bible itself uses military and sports analogies to describe the Christian faith! (See: Philippians 2:25, Philemon 1:2, 2 Timothy 2:3-4, 1 Corinthians 9:7, Ephesians 6:10-18, 2 Corinthians 9:24-27, 2 Timothy 2:5, and others)
Kobes Du Mez dedicates an entire chapter to the Promise Keepers movement of the 1990’s. She seems to only reluctantly admit that this evangelical movement contradicted her entire thesis about American evangelicalism, in that it emphasized servanthood, love, and kindness over militarism and dominance, and focused on racial reconciliation. At one point, in what seems like a desperate attempt to find something wrong with the Promise Keepers, Kobes Du Mez states that at the height of the Promise Keepers in the 1990’s, only about 10% of their members were African American. What she doesn’t point out is that, at the time, African Americans made up 12% of the US population. In other words, Promise Keepers’ membership closely resembled the ethnic makeup of the country at the time.
Additionally, Kobes Du Mez criticizes American evangelicalism for seeking to reach men with their messaging, by trying to show that following Jesus isn’t contrary to being masculine. Having spent over a decade in Europe, where many churches are small and made up mostly of elderly women and girls, I have to say that I don’t see anything wrong with seeking to reach men by showing them that following Jesus isn’t contrary to being masculine. I remember hearing from many men in Hungary that “religion is for women and the weak.” I don’t believe this is true at all, and countering this narrative is simply a form of apologetics and evangelism.
The author also claims that the focus on Jesus as a warrior is a uniquely American evangelical aberration of Christianity, and that it would be better to focus on other aspects of Jesus instead. Once again, the problem with this is that the Latin term and concept of Cristus Victor has a long history, predating the United States of America, and even the Protestant Reformation. Misguided militarism in the name of Christianity has cropped up at various times in history, such as the obvious example of the Crusades, and is not an American evangelical invention. Furthermore, the Bible itself, in both the Old and New Testaments, foretells the time of “the great and terrible Day of the Lord,” when God will come to wage war against those who do evil and oppress. This is not an American concept, it’s a biblical concept, and highlighting it is not an American novelty, but has much historic precedent.
A Question for the Author
My question for the author would be how much of her thesis is shaped by biblical concerns, and how much is shaped by current popular discourse in American culture?
Conclusion
In conclusion, I will say once again that I found the book to be an enjoyable read, in that it introduced me to a part of American evangelical subculture that I had only heard about from a distance, but with which I was not very familiar. I agree with many of the author’s critiques, and think they are necessary.
However, I would not encourage others to read this book, because I feel that too much of what Kobes Du Mez writes is potentially misleading in its tone, and what it seeks to imply. It’s not so much what she says, it’s what she leaves out, which I think makes the book unhelpful.
What Does It Mean When It Says “You are gods” in Psalm 82 & John 10?

There is a page on this site where readers can submit questions or suggest topics.
Recently someone wrote in asking about the meaning of John 10:34-36, where Jesus, having been accused of blasphemy for claiming to be God, responds by saying:
Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, I said, you are gods’? If he called them gods to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be broken— do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?
John 10:34-36
There are two schools of thought on this, which are related and are not mutually exclusive.
Viewpoint #1: “gods” = judges
First of all, this passage is interesting because it shows that Jesus had a high view of the Old Testament scriptures. He says that it is written in the “Law,” but then proceeds to quote from Psalm 82:1 & 8, showing that He believed the Psalms to be the inspired Word of God in the same way as the Pentateuch (the first 5 books of the Bible). Some people at this time, e.g. the Sadducees, only accepted the Pentateuch as the inspired Word of God, but Jesus spoke of the Psalms as being part of the canon of Scripture, and just as much “the Bible” as the Pentateuch.
Jesus’ main argument is that he should not be accused of blasphemy for calling himself the “Son of God” (see: What Does It Mean that Jesus is the “Son of God”?) since God himself had used the word “gods” to refer to the Jewish people in His inerrant Word.
The word “gods” (Elohim in Hebrew) can also mean “judges.” An example of this is found in Exodus 21:6 & 22:8, where the word translated “master” in English (because it refers to a human master), is actually “Elohim” in the Hebrew text… but since it is referring to a human master, it is understood that though the word for “elohim” is used, it is not talking about Yahweh, but about human “masters.”
E.A. Blum explains, in his commentary on the Gospel of John:
“Psalm 82 speaks of God as the true Judge (Ps. 82:1, 8) and of men, appointed as judges, who were failing to provide true judgment for God (Ps. 82:2–7). “Gods” in Psalm 82:1, 6 refers to these human judges. In this sense, God said to the Jews, You are gods. In no way does this speak of a divine nature in man. Jesus was arguing that in certain situations (as in Ps. 82:1, 6) men were called “gods.” The Hebrew word for God or gods is ’ělōhîm. This word is used elsewhere (e.g., Exodus 21:6; 22:8) to mean human judges. Since the inerrant Bible called their judges “gods,” the Jews could not logically accuse Him of blasphemy for calling Himself God’s Son since He was under divine orders and sent into the world on God’s mission.”
Blum, E. A. (1985). John. In J. F. Walvoord & R. B. Zuck (Eds.), The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures (Vol. 2, p. 312). Victor Books.
Viewpoint #2: “Living like gods”
C.G. Kruse explains another viewpoint, based on the rabbinic exegesis of Psalm 82:6-7:
The full text of Psalm 82:6–7 reads: “I said, ‘You are “gods”; you are all sons of the Most High.’ But you will die like mere men; you will fall like every other ruler.”
The statement ‘You are gods’ was understood in later rabbinic exegesis to be God’s word to the Israelites at Sinai when they received the law. God said to them, ‘You are gods,’ because in receiving the law and living by it they would be holy and live like gods. But because they departed from the law and worshipped the golden calf while still at Sinai, he said to them, ‘you will die like mere men’. The opening words of Jesus’ argument, ‘If he called them “gods”, to whom the word of God came’, suggest that he interpreted the quotation from the psalm in relation to the Sinai events as did later rabbinic scholars.
Jesus used the exegetical methods of his opponents to show they had no grounds for accusing him of blasphemy.
Kruse, C. G. (2003). John: an introduction and commentary (Vol. 4, pp. 240–241). InterVarsity Press.
What Jesus is Not Saying
Jesus is not saying here that all human beings are divine – we are not.
Jesus is not downplaying his own divinity – he affirms it multiple times and in various ways throughout the Gospel of John.
Jesus is not saying that Psalm 82 was incorrect – just the opposite: he references one of the most confusing passages for modern non-Hebrew literate Bible readers, in order to make us dig in to seek understanding of that passage!
What Jesus was Doing
Jesus was masterfully diffusing a situation by using the very Scriptures and exegetical methods of his attackers, to show them they they were being inconsistent in their theological method.
For more on theological method, see: Theological Method: Sources of Theology and Why People Arrive at Different Conclusions About Matters of Faith & the Bible
At the same time, Jesus consistently claimed to be divine, in his seven “I Am” statements, for example.
Ask a Question or Suggest a Topic
If you have a question or would like to suggest a topic for me to address here on the blog, click here: Ask a Question or Suggest a Topic
Most Popular Articles & Podcast Episodes of 2021

On this last day of 2021, it’s nice to stop and reflect on the past year. While many tragedies took place over the course of our last trip around the sun, there is much to celebrate and reason to give thanks for God’s faithfulness.
Rebranding & a Podcast
This year, prompted by my friends at the Goodlion Podcast Network, this blog was rebranded from The Longmont Pastor to Theology for the People. Along with that came the introduction of the Theology for the People podcast.
Increased Readership
Readership of this site grew this year by 130% to over 100,000 page views.
Top 10 Articles from 2021
- Remembering Tom Stipe
- On December 30, 2020 – my pastor, Tom Stipe passed away. He is sorely missed, but he left behind a legacy which will bear fruit for generations to come, particularly here on the Front Range of Colorado.
- Will God Remove the Holy Spirit from a Person Because of Disobedience?
- Reader Questions: Why Was Eli Judged for the Sins of His Sons?
- Did Jesus Heal a Centurion’s Same-Sex Partner?
- Was Jesus Racist? Why Did He Call a Gentile Woman a Dog?
- Why Did Jesus Say that “No One Has Ascended Into Heaven?” Did He Forget About Elijah?
- Reformation Day: Martin Luther, the Bible, & the Gospel
- Kay Smith & Should a Church Have a “Women’s Ministry”?
- Kay Smith, the wife of Pastor Chuck Smith (the leader of the Calvary Chapel movement) passed away this year. She left behind an incredible legacy.
- What Does It Mean to be “Born Again”?
- Bible Translations: Translation Philosophy, Textual Criticism, & Source Documents
Top 5 Podcast episodes from 2021
For this first season of the Theology for the People podcast, I published 35 episodes. Here are the top 5:
- Theological Method: Sources of Theology and Why People Arrive at Different Conclusions About Matters of Faith and the Bible
- The Formation of the New Testament Canon: Part 1 – Nicaea, Constantine, & Conspiracy Theories
- The Formation of the New Testament Canon: Part 2 – Recognition, Disputes & the Gospel of Thomas
- If “It’s All Gonna Burn” Then What’s the Point? – How the Resurrection Gives Meaning to Work & Art
- Biblical Interpretation with Dr. Roy Collins: Guidelines for Correctly Understanding & Faithfully Applying God’s Word
What to look forward to in 2022
- I will be publishing a book in the first quarter of 2022! It’s called I Could Never Believe in a God Who ______. More information to come soon!
- Season 2 of the Theology for the People podcast
Deconstructing Deconstructionist TikTok Videos – Part 1

To “deconstruct” something is to seek to take something apart and examine the parts that make it up.
In my Masters studies, one of my focuses was on “theological method,” which is a process by which you can deconstruct the implicit process by which people arrive at different theological beliefs or conclusions. (For more on Theological Method, click here)
#Deconstruction #Exvangelical
However, the word “deconstruction” is currently being used in popular culture in a way which is different from the scholarly usage of the term. People who were raised in Christian environments are deconstructing their faith, which means that they are questioning what they were taught and believed.
This is nothing new, people have been doing this for thousands of years, and sometimes it can be a very good thing. For example, it is helpful to go through the process of differentiating what about a belief system is culturally influenced, which parts are tangental or superfluous “chaff” which deserves to be shed, or at least relegated to secondary importance, and which things are core, essential beliefs.
It is also important and necessary for a person, as they mature, to make the transition from inherited or assumed belief, to personal and sincere, heartfelt beliefs. This is exactly what we see in the Book of Deuteronomy, for example, where Moses speaks to the new generation: their parents had been the ones who had experienced the Exodus and had seen God’s miraculous provision in the splitting of the Red Sea, water from the rock, and the fire on the mountain. This new generation had heard about these things, but had not experienced them personally, and in Deuteronomy – at the end of his life, Moses speaks to this younger generation and urges them that they must have their own faith, they can’t merely ride on the coattails of their parents’ faith.
In the process of examining what you believe and why, some people go through a process of deconstruction: a critical examination of what they were taught, what they experienced in the church environment, and whether actually believe those things themselves. This is always a precarious process by nature, but in a way, it is necessary for a vibrant, personal faith commitment.
Recently there has been a trend online, encouraging people to deconstruct their faith, but not necessarily for asking important questions which will lead to vibrant, personal faith – rather more for the purpose of influencing others to abandon their faith in Christianity.
Don’t Forget to Deconstruct Your Deconstruction…
In examining some of the videos and other materials that people have shared with me on this topic, what I’ve found is that many of these people, while they may be sincere, they fail to deconstruct their deconstruction.
Theological Method is, in fact, the true and greater deconstruction, because it has the capacity to not only deconstruct religious beliefs, it also has the capacity to deconstruct the reasons why people abandon their previously-held religious beliefs, or even why people reject certain beliefs altogether.
I describe what Theological Method is and how it works in this podcast episode: Theological Method: Why People Arrive at Different Conclusions about Faith and the Bible.
Theological Method: Sources of Theology and Why People Arrive at Different Conclusions About Matters of Faith and the Bible – Theology for the People
Let’s Deconstruct a Deconstruction TikTok
Recently someone sent me this video, and asked for my take on it.
This person comes across smart, winsome, and knowledgable about Christianity. There are some things she says which are correct about what Christians believe regarding the person of Jesus and his atoning death.
The problem with her argument, however, comes at the beginning where she lays out the basis of her premise. Her fundamental assumption is that God has established some completely arbitrary rules, and then punishes people for breaking those rules. Then, she claims that Jesus’ death was essential unnecessary, since it was just God appeasing his own unnecessary rules which he set up in the first place.
Her Assumptions: God’s “Rules” are Arbitrary, and Judgment is Unnecessary
This woman’s view of sin, is that sin = things which God forbids, or not doing what God commands. In other words, her view is that nothing is inherently bad or good, but God capriciously chooses what He thinks are bad or good, and imposes that standard on His subjects.
The problem with this view, is that it is NOT what the Bible actually teaches. What the Bible teaches is that morality is rooted in actuality: some things are actually good, and other things are actually bad – whether God says they are or not, and whether you believe in God or not.
In other words: Sin is not bad because it is forbidden, rather: Sin is forbidden because it is bad.
Sin is Not Bad Because It’s Forbidden, Sin is Forbidden Because It’s Bad
As Moses tells the Israelites in Deuteronomy: All of God’s commandments have been for your good always. (Deuteronomy 5:29, 6:24, 10:13). Since God loves, and since He knows more than you, He – as a loving Father – tells you what to do and what not to do, because sin (missing the mark, doing wrong) is destructive. It’s as if there’s a glass of water and a glass of antifreeze on the table, and God’s command is: “Drink the water, Don’t drink the antifreeze!” – and our reply is: “God is just making up arbitrary rules…” No, God loves you enough to tell you, based on his infinite knowledge, what will be best for you.
Furthermore, as God is the embodiment of goodness and love, morality is directly linked to his character and attributes. For this reason, to rebel against God is to sin, and this brings with it the natural consequence of judgment for those actions.
Interestingly, we live in a world today where there is an increasing consensus and belief that certain activities (racism, hatred, prejudice, etc.) are fundamentally, objectively wrong (whether you believe in God or not). It is widely accepted that to do those things is actually wrong and deserves some form of judgment. This is based on the belief that there is a standard of morality which is not arbitrarily defined by a cosmic deity, but which truly and actually exists. This is what Christians, informed and confirmed by the Bible, actually believe as well.
So, the premise presented in this video can be seen to be a gross misrepresentation of what the Bible teaches and what Christians believe.
Did Jesus’ Death Cause God to Change His Mind About Judging Us for Our Sins?
One final point: She claims at the end, that because of the death of Jesus, God “changed His mind” about punishing us for His own arbitrary rules. This is not what Christians believe, nor what the Bible teaches either – rather: the message of the gospel is that all of us have sinned and fallen short – not only of God’s standards, but of even our own standards of right and wrong. We have all done things and thought things which missed the mark, and the result of sin is death. However, the good news of God’s grace is that He came to us in the person of Jesus Christ to do for us what we could not do for ourselves: in life, death, and resurrection – in order to reconcile us to Himself without compromising His fundamental characteristics of justice and mercy.
If “justice” = giving someone exactly what they deserve, and “mercy” = not giving someone the judgment they deserve for the wrong things they’ve done, then justice and mercy cannot co-exist since they negate each other. However, as part of the definition of goodness, God, we are told in the Bible is BOTH just and merciful. It is only in His self-sacrifice that we see how these two seemingly incompatible characteristics can both be embodied by God at the same time – and that’s really good news!
Send Me Videos to Deconstruct!
Using this form, send me any TikTok videos you’d like me to deconstruct.
What Did Jesus Mean When He Said “You Must Eat My Body and Drink My Blood”?

Recently I had the opportunity to be a guest on the Basics of Life Podcast with Rob Salvato.
The Basics of Life is not only Rob’s podcast, but the episodes are broadcast on KWVE Christian radio in Southern California.
Rob is currently doing a series on that podcast on “the hard sayings of Jesus,” and he asked me to tackle John 6:52-55, which says:
The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink.
John 6:52-55
Not Cannibalism Nor Communion
When people originally heard Jesus say these words, they thought he was talking about cannibalism – but he most certainly wasn’t!
Many readers since that time have assumed that Jesus is talking about communion, i.e. the Lord’s Supper or Eucharist. This assumption is understandable in light of the fact that Jesus called the elements for the Lord’s Supper his “body” and “blood” – and yet, that is not what he is talking about here either.
What Jesus is talking about here can be understood by reading the passages which come before and after (context is king!). I share what Jesus is talking about in the conversation with Rob, which is linked below.
Why Be Cryptic?
And yet, even if it can clearly be derived from the context what Jesus was referring to, the question remains: Why did Jesus speak in a way that was cryptic or hard to understand? Didn’t he want people to understand what he was saying? Why would he speak in a way that people could misunderstand, and perhaps even choose to not follow him because of their misunderstanding?
I answer this question in the podcast episode linked below, but this is something we see Jesus did on more than one occasion! For example, we see this from Jesus in John 9 and Matthew 13, where Jesus speaks in a way that those who want to understand will lean in and seek to understand, but those who weren’t willing to lean in and seek the truth could misunderstand or easily miss.
Clearly Jesus is communicating that a desire to understand is a prerequisite for spiritual understanding.
Listen to the Episode Here
Listen to the episode in the embedded player below or by clicking this link: The Basics of Life Conversations: Nick Cady | Jesus said to “Drink His Blood”?
Nick Cady | Jesus said to "Drink His Blood"? – The Basics of Life Conversations
Rob Salvato
Pastor Rob is the lead pastor of Calvary Vista, in San Diego County, California. Calvary Vista is my wife Rosemary’s home church, which sent her out as a missionary to Hungary years ago. Later, after Rosemary and I met in Hungary and got married, Calvary Vista became our home base and one of our main supporting churches. We love Rob and his wife Denise, and he has been a faithful pastor over that wonderful congregation for many years. Right now the church is experiencing a time of growth and a real move of God. Pray for them during this exciting time!
Missional Ecclesiology: What is the role of the church in the mission of God? – with Kellen Criswell

In this week’s episode of the Theology for the People Podcast, I am joined by Kellen Criswell.
Kellen Criswell is a pastor, ministry leader, and former missionary who holds and MA in Global Leadership from Western Seminary and is currently working on his doctorate. He is the Executive Director of Calvary Global Network and has a heart for the mission of God and the global church.
After a brief discussion about Kellen’s favorite music and the fact that he is from Utah (AKA “Colorado Jr.”), we dive into a discussion about Missional Ecclesiology, which is a way of understanding the identity, purpose, and function of the church within the Missio Dei (the love-motivated, self-sending, mission of God into the world to save, redeem, and restore).
One more thought about Utah: If you have to tell people (on your license plates) that you have “the best snow in the world,” you probably don’t. It’s kind of like using the world “Real” in a title. If you have to say that something is “real ______” – it probably isn’t. And also, what Margaret Thatcher said: “Being a leader is like being a lady: If you have to tell people you are one, you probably aren’t.” Same with the snow, Utah…
But I digress…
Ecclesiology is the discussion of what the Church is called to be and to do – including its nature, purpose, hopes, structures, and practices.
We discuss how this concept works out practically, including a discussion of “foreign missions” and how they fit into this understanding. Furthermore, we discuss what the past nearly two years of pandemic has revealed about ecclesiology, and why there is hope as we move forward.
Listen to this episode in the embedded player below or by clicking this link: Missional Ecclesiology: What is the role of the church in the mission of God? – with Kellen Criswell
Missional Ecclesiology: What is the role of the church in the mission of God? – with Kellen Criswell – Theology for the People
Make sure to check out some of the books and papers listed below for more information and study on this topic.
Bibliography and recommended resources:
- Hirsch, Alan. The Forgotten Ways: Reactivating Apostolic Movements.
- Goheen, Michael. The Church and it’s Vocation: Leslie Newbigin’s Missionary Ecclesiology.
- Stetzer, Ed. Planting Missional Churches: Your Guide to Starting Churches that Multiply.
- Newbigin, Leslie. The Gospel in a Pluralist Society.
- Van Engen, Charles. Transforming Mission Theology.
- Wright, Christopher J.H.. The Mission of God: Unlocking the Bible’s Grand Narrative.
- Bosch, David. Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission.
- Hooker, Paul. “What is Missional Ecclesiology?”
Reader Questions: Does the Bible Encourage People Who are Poor to Ask for Help?
There is a page on this site where readers can submit questions or suggest topics. Recently I received the following question:
Does the Bible encourage people who are poor to ask for help, or does it put the onus on the rich to provide for the poor?
The Bible gives a pretty nuanced view of provision for the poor, which includes both proactive provision for the poor, while still requiring action on the part of the recipient.
For example, in Leviticus 19:9-10, farmers were instructed to leave the corners of their fields unharvested so the poor could come and glean. So while the rich were called to sacrifice some of their profits to provide for the poor, the poor were still required to go and harvest the food for themselves. Rather than giving them flour, for example, those in need were required to harvest grain and grind it into flour themselves. If someone was unwilling to work, in this case, they would not eat – but provision was made for them, via sacrifice on the part of those who had enough, to be able to get what they needed to survive.
A similar sentiment is found in the Epistle to the Galatians, where in Galatians 6:2 it says, “Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ,” but a few verses later, it says, “Each person will have to bear his own load.” (Galatians 6:5). The difference is that the “burden” mentioned in 6:2 refers to a crushing burden, whereas “load” in 6:5 refers to an individual’s burden of responsibility. So, we are called to help those who are facing burdens they are unable to bear on their own, yet with the goal of helping those people to stand on their own two feet and take responsibility for themselves and their lives.
In 2 Thessalonians 3, we read an interesting passage:
If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat. For we hear that some among you walk in idleness, not busy at work, but busybodies. Now such persons we command and encourage in the Lord Jesus Christ to do their work quietly and to earn their own living.
2 Thessalonians 3:10-12
For some reason, there were people in the Thessalonian church were unwilling to work, and were living off the generosity of others. Some believe that the reason for this attitude is because they believed it was more spiritual not to work, since they expected the imminent return of Jesus. While Paul encouraged them that Jesus could return at any time, they were encouraged to work in order to provide for themselves if they were able. Here again, we see the importance of providing for those in need while at the same time encouraging people to take initiative and responsibility to work if they are able.
So, to answer the question: The onus is first on those who have to help provide for the poor, no matter how or why they became poor. But this generosity is not to be done in order to create dependence, but rather to relieve a burden and encourage responsibility and independence.
Local Resource: Table of Hope Food Pantry
Table of Hope Food Pantry is a ministry which was born out of White Fields Community Church in Longmont, Colorado and serves Southwest Weld County, Longmont, and the surrounding communities by providing residents in need with nutritious food, the ability to become more self-sufficient, and hope for their future.
Table of Hope is open to anyone, no questions asked, and no ID required. For more information about Table of Hope, check out Table-of-Hope.com
What Has Athens to Do with Jerusalem?: How Should Christians Relate to Ideas and Practices Which Originate Outside of Christianity?

In this episode of the Theology for the People Podcast, Michael and I discuss the topic about which I wrote my BA dissertation: How should Christians relate to ideas and practices in our culture and society which have their origin outside of Christianity?
Some good examples would be:
- Can Christians practice yoga? (Origins in Hinduism)
- How about martial arts?
- What about Christmas? (December 25 was originally a pagan solstice festival which Christians “took over,” detached it from its pagan origins, and infused it with new meaning and made it all about Jesus)
- What about psychology?
- How about certain instruments, like drums?
- What about rock music and electric guitars?
This discussion of how Christians should relate to ideas and practices which originate outside of Christianity can be traced all the way back to a historical argument between Tertullian and Justin Martyr, early Christian apologists and theologians, and can be summarized by Tertullian’s classic question: “What Has Athens to Do with Jerusalem?”
In this episode, Michael and I discuss the relevant principles from the Bible we should follow as guides in navigating these matters.
How does the redemptive narrative arc of Scripture affect how we relate to these practices? How about what Paul says about meat sacrificed to idols in 1 Corinthians 8-10 and Romans 14?
Check out our discussion in the embedded player below, or by clicking here: What Has Athens to Do with Jerusalem?: How Should Christians Relate to Ideas and Practices Which Originate Outside of Christianity?
