Fire on Every Head

24 May 2026

This post is officially my 800th since the beginning of this blog back on May 15, 2008. It’s been a privilege to serve you all! If this has been a blessing to you, consider supporting me.

Today at Jason Park in Englewood, Colorado, three churches will gather to worship God, reflect on His Word, and share a meal together. Why do we take time out of our regular routines to do this?

When God called Moses out of the Midianite desert to free His people from slavery in Egypt, He revealed Himself to Moses in fire—a bush that burned, but was not consumed. When Moses led the children of Israel out of Egypt, God stood between His people and the Egyptian army all night in an impassable cyclone of fire. He led them to Sinai, where He came upon the mountain in fire and storm. From that mountain, He spoke the Law, and on that mountain, He showed Moses the heavenly tabernacle, of which Moses made an earthly copy, a place for God’s special presence on earth. When Aaron began priestly ministry at that copy, fire came out of the sanctuary and devoured the sacrifices on the altar, signalling God’s acceptance of their work and His continued intention to dwell among His people. A pillar of fire remained over the tabernacle, and led them through the wilderness. When Solomon dedicated the Temple as a permanent dwelling to replace the portable Tabernacle, fire came down from heaven itself and consumed the sacrifices on the altar, again signalling God’s intention to dwell there, that His people should be a light to the Gentiles and a place where the world could draw near to Him.

To that nation, the custodians of His special presence on earth, God sent His prophets. Some they ignored, some they persecuted, some they killed, until finally He sent His Son—the Way, the Truth, and the Life—whom they took with lawless hands and murdered outside the city. But since it is not possible for Life Himself to be contained by death, Jesus was raised, showed Himself to His people, ascended to the right hand of power, and from Heaven sent His Holy Spirit. At Pentecost as at Sinai, the Spirit came upon His people in storm—a mighty rushing wind—and fire. But with a difference: the fire did not reside on a place or an altar, but on every head. From that day to this, the fire of God rests on the people His Spirit indwells. Jerusalem remains special to Him, and may God grant her peace! but He means to do it by provoking her to jealousy through the Gentiles, in all the different nations and cultures of the ends of the earth to which our people have carried the gospel, running like Samson’s foxes through the Gentile fields, setting everything ablaze as we go.

We come together today, two millennia later, to remember that the fire does not dwell only in Jerusalem, nor only at Christ the Anchor, or Lighthouse, or The Cord, but on every head, uniting us as Jesus prayed to the Father: “May they be one, even as We are one.” We will one day stand all together, every tribe, tongue, and nation assembled before God’s throne, and in this present earthly shadow of our heavenly future, whichever nation, culture, or family you come from, if you belong to Jesus, you belong to us, and we to you, and we are eager to meet the Holy Spirit manifested in each other.

Welcome to Pentecost!


Wrath?

28 April 2026

Does God’s wrath fall on believers? Most Christians think the answer is obvious. The problem is, there are at least two common “obvious” answers:

  1. Of course it does! God’s wrath is against all sin; if you commit sin, you face God’s wrath in this life, even if you eventually escape it in heaven.
  2. Of course not! God’s wrath against sin was poured out on Christ at the cross. While discipline for our correction and sanctification continues to happen for our good, no believer will ever face God’s wrath.

So which is it? Or are both answers missing something?

Faced with a question like this, I turn to Scripture. It’s usually the case that there’s no single passage that decisively vindicates one side or the other. A surprising amount of some folks’ doctrine is supported by little more than innuendo and a conspiracy-theory-esque stitching together of passages that don’t quite say what they’re claimed to say. What passages actually, pointedly speak to the matter? What, exactly, do those passages say? Equally important, what don’t they say?

  • Ephesians 5:6-7//Col.3:5-7 comes to mind, but what it actually says is that believers should not do these things because God’s wrath falls on unbelievers for them. It doesn’t quite clearly say that believers also experience God’s wrath for them. You could read verse 7 that way: “Therefore do not be partakers (of wrath) with them.” But “Do not be partakers (of these sins) with them” is also a live option. It’s clear on what we’re supposed to do, but tantalizingly ambiguous on the question of wrath.
  • Romans 12:19, 13:4 also come to mind as places that might allow for a believer to experience wrath. 1:18 has already clearly said that God’s wrath stands against all ungodliness and unrighteousness, and “saved from wrath” is much more than justification (5:9) and appears to be conditional (10:9-10)
  • Psalm 95//Heb. 3:11, 4:3 point to exclusion from rest as an expression of wrath, and 4:11 calls for believers to be diligent to enter and holds out failure as a real possibility.

But I gotta say, it’s curiously difficult to find a direct statement that God’s wrath falls on believers, while at the same time multiple passages are suggestive in that direction. What’s interesting about that is that it doesn’t really fit with either of the “obvious” takes that we started this post with. If #1 is true, you’d expect there to be some pretty direct threats. If #2 is true, then you would think the biblical authors would be at pains not to say things that sound like believers might experience wrath after all. The fact that the Bible doesn’t speak the way that we would means that we’re missing something.

Wonder what it is?


An Introduction to Romans

24 February 2026

A couple months ago, I had the opportunity to cover the introduction to the book of Romans in some detail. Enjoy!


The “Higher Standard” is Bunk

10 February 2026

What does it mean when James says that teachers will face “a stricter judgment”? Most people interpret that to mean that teachers are held to a higher standard than “ordinary” Christians, but if you think about it a little bit, there are major problems with that idea.

First problem: the idea that there are two different moral standards in Christianity is fundamentally incoherent. Jesus is the standard; every Christian is called to be like Him. So if every Christian is already called to be like Jesus, who is the perfect moral standard, what is this allegedly higher standard teachers are supposed to reach? Or are we going the other way and saying that teachers really do have to be like Jesus, but “ordinary” Christians can slack a bit, and it’s ok?

Second problem: the idea that there are two different standards doesn’t really make sense in James. James’ own summary of the book is in 1:19-20: “So then, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath; for the wrath of man does not produce the righteousness of God.” The “swift to hear” section starts in 1:21 and runs through chapter 2. The “slow to speak” section is chapter 3. The “slow to wrath” section begins with chapter 4 and runs into 5.

All three of these sections lay out demands that James makes of “every man.” It does not seem coherent to say that the “slow to speak” section — a duty required of every man — turns around and says that some men have to meet a lower standard than others. But if it doesn’t mean that, what does it mean?

Notice that James doesn’t actually say that there’s a higher standard, either in other people’s eyes, or in God’s eyes. He says that teachers face a stricter judgment. What might “stricter judgment” mean, if not different standards? Well, perhaps we can see this more clearly by looking at how James himself explains his statement. What he does say is that the tongue is particularly difficult to control and particularly dangerous when it gets out of hand.

So “stricter judgment” in this context doesn’t mean two different standards. It means that teachers are called into an arena where failure is particularly likely and greatly consequential. A teacher’s job is to do neurosurgery on a guy who was just airlifted out of a 6-car pileup. This is not like being a pizza driver. When the neurosurgeon messes up, the patient dies, or maybe is damaged for life. When the pizza driver messes up, the pizza is a few minutes late — not good, as anybody who’s had to entertain a hungry crowd of 6-year-olds for an extra 10 minutes can attest — but nobody dies of it. Now, a pizza driver can also make a mistake that kills someone in the course of his work, and if he does, he’ll find that he’s held to the same standard as the neurosurgeon. But there’s a key difference: the pizza driver’s job is to avoid situations where someone could easily get killed; the neurosurgeon’s job is to get into situations where someone could easily get killed.

To put it a little more in James’ terms, the teacher’s job is to go into a California forest in the third straight year of drought and host a bonfire. There’s a lot that can go wrong, and when it does, as it sometimes will, we face judgment for it. Our judgment is stricter not because standards are higher, but because the stakes are. When we mess up, we damage people, sometimes for life. There’s a reckoning for that, and there should be.

Is this stricter judgment from men, or from God? Yes! As a teacher, I’ve certainly faced consequences from men when I’ve screwed up. No doubt there will be conversations on the last day as well.


Saved Like Paul

2 September 2025

How is it possible to “work out your salvation with fear and trembling?” And is that even compatible with assurance? That question came up this past week; let’s dig into it.

As to assurance, the answer is yes. You were never meant to even consider how to work out your salvation without already having full assurance. How do I know? Because that’s how Paul presented it. Read the whole context starting in 1:1. 1:1-7 present the assurance with which you are meant to read the rest of the book.

Paul himself is assured of his own salvation, as you will see in 1:19 — some translations render it “deliverance,” but it’s the same word as in 1:28 and the passage we’re discussing (2:12). The problem with the translation “deliverance” is it obscures Paul’s meaning later in the book. Note that as he elaborates in v. 20, he adds “by life or by death,” which means that he’s not actually talking about being delivered from tribulation. No, for him, “salvation” is a much bigger picture than getting out of jail. He ultimately concludes that for the present, he’d rather live and minister to them, which moves him into challenging them to also live worthy of the gospel, which–if one has eyes to see–is a demonstration of their salvation (1:28). He then challenges them to one-mindedness, following the sacrificial example of Christ, who laid aside divine prerogatives in order to give Himself for us, with the result that the Father enthroned Him over everything.

Having laid the foundation of assurance, set himself forth as an example of things working out for his salvation, and then transitioned to Jesus as the ultimate model of how these things should go, Paul now challenges the Philippians. “Work out your own salvation,” he says, because God is at work in them (as he’s been saying since the beginning of the book).

Many interpreters play games with “work out.” I remember as a kid being taught that God “works your salvation in,” and then it’s your job to “work it out,” as though salvation were a bit of food coloring dropped into a lump of dough or something. The Greek word there is κατεργάζομαι, and it means “accomplish.” Accomplish your salvation, because God is at work in you.

What does that even mean? If God is at work in them, then why are they supposed to accomplish it? And how it is possible for any Christian to accomplish their own salvation?

Good questions. In order to answer them, we need to pose one more question: What does “salvation” mean here? The Greek word is σωτηρία (soteria), and it’s usually translated “salvation” or “deliverance,” but that’s not actually all it means. Koine Greek often used the word to mean something closer to “prosperity,” “wellbeing,” or “peace.” Consider this example from the Greek Old Testament: “Then they arose early in the morning and swore an oath with one another; and Isaac sent them away, and they departed from him in peace.” (Gen. 26:31) The word translated “peace” there is the Hebrew shalom, and when they were rendering it into Greek, they used soteria. Can you imagine translating that “…they departed from him in salvation”?

Of course not. You’ll see similar uses of soteria in Genesis 28:21 and 44:17. The Greek is translating the Hebrew shalom, which means “peace,” but in a really rich way — whole books have been written on the meaning of shalom. It’s not just the absence of conflict, but the active presence of wellbeing.

Hear it that way: “But I know that things will work out for my peace and wellbeing.” (1:19) “Which is to them proof of perdition, but to you of peace and wellbeing, and that from God.” (1:28) “Work out your own peace and wellbeing with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you to will and to do for His good pleasure.” (2:12-13)

Makes more sense, doesn’t it?


Preach the Word!

26 August 2025

Do we preach in church? No.

But isn’t that what Paul tells Timothy to do? “Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season….” No. The word translated “preach” there is kerusso. It means public announcement, not private commentary to an in-group. (Check the lexicon; do the word study in Scripture; expand the word study to the secular literature – all the evidence points the same way, as I’ve argued elsewhere.) It’s not something you do with an in-group in a home; it’s something you do in the marketplace at the top of your lungs for anybody in earshot. That’s just what the word means throughout the literature (notwithstanding our English misappropriation of it).

2 Timothy 4:2 is not an exception to the general usage of kerusso. Absent a compelling contextual reason to read the Sunday meeting into the passage — and it isn’t there — Timothy would have heard the word in its ordinary sense. The only reason we don’t hear it that way is because we’re imposing our usage of “preach” on the passage. Public proclamation was a mainstay of Paul’s ministry, and it’s not exactly a surprise that he charges Timothy to carry on this aspect of his work. The inclusio with “do the work of an evangelist” in v. 5 clinches it, if we needed additional evidence of its public-facing meaning.

Should we thunder the Word from the pulpit? Absolutely. Arguably, that falls under the biblical headings of teaching and prophecy, but in any case there’s not much exegetical case for calling it “preaching.”

But let’s look more closely at the context here. In chapter 1, Paul addresses Timothy’s qualifications and his inner life/personal prerequisites for ministry. He continues that theme in 2:1-13, challenging Timothy to endure hardship for the sake of God’s chosen people. 2:14 forward specifically addresses the way Timothy should minister to those people within the church community, and then (3:1ff) begins to address the hazardous people Timothy will face in that endeavor. Beginning in 3:10, Paul returns his focus to Timothy, contrasting him to the people in 3:1-9 and challenging him to continue in what he’s been taught, knowing that the God-breathed Scriptures themselves will fully equip him.

4:1 begins Paul’s final charge to Timothy, and here he begins with a command that specifically means public announcement and concludes in v.5 with “do the work of an evangelist.” As with his instructions for Timothy’s conduct within the church in 2:14-3:17, Paul leads off with the command (2:14//4:1-2), follows with a warning that it’s likely to be ill-received (3:1-9//4:3-4), and returns to Timothy with “But you…” (3:10ff//4:5). He follows the same pattern of instruction as when he was talking about Timothy’s ministry within the church, but this time, he’s talking about how Timothy faces the world.


An Overview of Hebrews

26 March 2025

Most of you are aware of the series I’ve been doing with Chris Morrison of Gulfside Ministries. The overview episode is now available. Check it out!


Lessons on Worship

25 February 2025

A Fuller Fulfillment

11 February 2025

When we talk about “fulfilled prophecy,” what we usually mean is a straightforward prediction along the lines of Micah 5:2, which says that Messiah will be born in Bethlehem. Matthew shows how the prophecy was fulfilled. But that’s not the only thing that “fulfilled” can mean.

“Fulfill” has a fuller sense (if you’ll pardon the expression) than just the Micah 5:2 predictive prophecy meaning. In the Hosea 11//Matthew 2 usage, the original sense in Hosea is critical to Matthew’s meaning. Knowing that Israel is God’s son is necessary to understanding the points that Matthew is making: first, that Jesus is Israel (in exactly what sense is a question Matthew will spend the whole book exploring), and second, that the land of Israel has become spiritual Egypt.

Don’t miss that latter point. Matthew invokes “out of Egypt I called My Son” not when Jesus leaves literal Egypt, but when Jesus flees Judea. Judea is the “Egypt” Jesus is fleeing, and Herod is the baby-boy-slaughtering “Pharaoh.” John the Baptist will later reinforce this same point by calling repentant Israelites to come out into the desert to pass through water, a new Exodus forming a new people of God (Jesus joins the new people of God “to fulfill all righteousness”). John the evangelist will much later make the point explicit in Revelation 11:8.

We don’t want to read something into the text that isn’t there, but neither do we want to miss something that is there—and the NT shows us repeatedly that there’s a LOT more there than one might think at first glance. From Jesus Himself proving the resurrection by exegeting a verb tense in Genesis (Matt. 22:32) to the fulfillments of the first few chapters of Matthew to the dizzying displays of Hebrews, the NT shows us a way of reading the OT that we perhaps wouldn’t have come up with on our own, but that’s ok. God is revealing it to us in the way He handles His own revelation.

In conservative circles, we have gotten our hermeneutics from the Book of Nature (mostly as read by E. D. Hirsch), which is very useful as far as it goes. But if that’s all we have, then our hermeneutic will force us to condemn the Holy Spirit’s exegesis of His own work. There has to be something wrong with that picture. What is it? Easy: the Book of Nature isn’t all we have. The Book of Scripture also has something to teach us about how to read.


The Hall of Faith

26 November 2024

This week, I noticed that this will be the 700th post on Full Contact Christianity. It’s been a privilege to serve y’all here for the past 16 years. Thank you for reading!

A lot has changed since that first post in May of 2008. I still teach exegesis, but no longer in a seminary. I still serve a house church, but I also spend Saturday evenings with my homeless neighbors. I practice a trade — bodywork — alongside my ministry these days. A lot has changed in our world, too. Among the many changes, podcasts have become a thing.

Of recent, I got a chance to discuss Hebrews 11 with Chris Morrison of Gulfside Ministries and 2 Peter 3 with Joe Anderson of The Anchor Drop podcast. Hope they’re helpful to you!