Basically, we should be content with our salvation regardless of what accompanied it and what we had to go through to get saved. Just like Paul said, in our struggle against sin we have not resisted to the point of shedding blood (Hebrews 12:4). This simply means that, no matter what we go through either before getting saved or while working out our salvation, we have not suffered like Jesus did. No salvation story, no matter how gory or messy it is,  can outweigh what Jesus did on the cross. He shed his blood for all mankind, although he was holy, he was treated like the worst of us. We stand to benefit from this and not necessarily repeat this sacrifice exactly. However, we are expected to carry the essence of this sacrifice in our body on a daily basis so that the life of Jesus will be manifested in us (2 Corinthians 4:10). That is, we are expected to live a God-glorifying, self-denying and sacrificial life that is able to further God’s agenda here on earth. 

Let’s take the story of Paul’s conversion as a case study. Paul persecuted the early church and even gave approval of and oversaw the stoning of Stephen. He was renowned for his zeal against the church, the bible describes him in Acts 9:1 as “… breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord…”. However, his encounter on the road to Damascus was one that changed, not only the trajectory of that particular journey, but his entire life and mission. He was on his way to persecute more churches yet he met the Lord Jesus Christ and heard him speak to him so audibly that the people travelling with him also heard the voice. Jesus asked him, “why are you persecuting me?”. (As a little side note, Christians have to understand that persecution of the church or the children of God is actually persecution of Jesus). Anyway, Paul became blind for 3 days; he didn’t eat or drink during this period. One may ask, was it necessary that he became blind for 3 days? I cannot particularly tell. But the point I want to make with this post is that, it doesn’t matter. All that matters is the fact that he was saved although the road to his salvation was not pretty. Paul probably would have preferred a different kind of experience leading to salvation. But nobody is given the right to customize their journey to salvation or their salvation story. You cannot choose how you should be saved. 

After one is saved, there is a lot of work to be done too. People expect a rosy Christian life with zero level of effort from their end. But this is not what the bible teaches. We are expected to work out our salvation with fear and trembling and do everything possible to ensure that we stay in the will of God. Of course, all of this is powered by the grace of God and the leading of the Spirit who is the seal and assurance of our salvation. Therefore, the road to heaven (which I call the culmination of our salvation story) is also not always pretty. During the sermon on the mount in Matthew 5:29-30, Jesus made these 2 statements regarding the level of effort Christians need to put into maintaining their salvation until we enter heaven. He said:

• If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. 
• If your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. 

He ended both statements by saying that it is better to lose your members than for the whole body to be thrown into hell. What does this mean? In the literal sense, it means God would prefer it if you entered heaven with one eye and one arm instead of your entire body thrown into hell. And if this is the case, we too should prefer this level of sacrifice, pain and suffering if it means through these we can enter into heaven. Of course, the bible isn’t insisting that we literally gouge out our eyes or cut off our arms anytime we are tempted or led to sin by them. But this comes as an example of the kind of extreme measures we are expected to take just to stay away from sin and to make it into heaven. Even if it takes losing something or someone that is as important to us as an eye ball or a right arm, we are admonished to do so. The road to eternal salvation is not always pretty. 

Lastly, in Paul’s first epistle to the church in Corinth, he addressed the issue of sexual immorality in the church. He highlighted a single story and pronounced judgement on the perpetrator. In 1 Corinthians 5, Paul refers to a man who was in the church and known to be sleeping with his step mother. The apostle made two recommendations regarding how this individual should be treated. He stated categorically in verse 2 that “Let him who has done this be removed from among you”. This man was to be excommunicated or restricted from fellowshipping with the larger group of believers according to Paul. This seems like a pretty harsh judgment for the sins of a Christian brother but it aligns with what Jesus said during the sermon on the mount, captured in the previous paragraph. For the church of Corinth, this brother was probably that eye ball or right arm they were expected to remove from their midst to ensure that there was sanctity, the fear of God and a literal hatred for sin amongst them. The Apostle spends the remaining parts of this passage, instructing the church on the necessity of excommunicating some of its members who fall into a certain category of sins. He ends it all by saying in verse 13 “purge the evil person from among you”. Sin is a cancer that spreads rapidly; either multiplying itself or engendering other sins. Hence, sometimes to prevent the spread of sin, the perpetrator must be removed from the group. This is the essence of the Apostle’s instruction and it very much aligns with the theme of this post.

My main focus however, is in his second recommendation. Paul gave the instruction that this man should be delivered to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord. Regarding the man being delivered to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, I have written about it in an article you can find in this link, do check it out. My main focus, in this instance, is the fact that Paul believes the perpetrator being delivered to Satan and having his flesh destroyed will lead to his salvation in the day of the Lord. It is as if Paul is implying that, if this measure is not taken, this individual would continue in sin and will miss heaven on the day of judgement. But the discomfort and pain that will come with the destruction of his flesh, will actually ensure that he will be saved in the day of the Lord. 

Again, the road to salvation is not always pretty. Sometimes, you will be forced to inflict pain and misery on yourself just to ensure that you are saved on the last day. Other times, the pain and misery will be inflicted on you to ensure that you don’t miss heaven. And if that time comes, I pray you choose:

1. Salvation over comfort
2. Communion with the Holy God over union with family, friends and relations
3. The reproach of Christ over the pleasures/treasures of Egypt/the world (Hebrews 11:26). 

Because salvation, in and of itself, is valuable regardless of any accompanying conditions.

If there is anything I expect you to walk away with from this short series, it is the fact that no salvation story should be underrated or undermined. Salvation is God’s rescue mission. A rescue mission is still a rescue mission regardless of how long it took, how many boulders were lifted to get to the victim(s) or even what sacrifice had to take place for the victim(s) to be saved. This takes me all the way back to cross. 

I have heard world renowned atheists like Richard Dawkins belittle what happened at calvary and suggesting that the all-knowing God who created the heavens and the earth could have thought of a better way to save the world than to die on the cross. This will appear logical until we deeply interrogate what sin really is and its remedy. One would have expected the all-powerful God to just snap his finger and immediately zap away all that is wrong with the world and start a new one devoid of sin. Well God is not Thanos. This is the real world; we are not stuck in a Marvel comic either. 

First of all, sin is consequential both in the spiritual realm and the physical. I dare say it is more consequential spiritually than otherwise. The bible states categorically that the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23). This death is not a physical one, but a spiritual death which is characterised by a separation from God. In the New Testament, Jesus illustrates this same concept of spiritual death with an agricultural metaphor when he says in John 15:5 that, “I am the vine, ye are the branches … for without me you can do nothing”. When  a branch of a tree is broken off, it is dead because it is has been separated from its source of nourishment. This is what it means to be spiritually dead. 

Adam and Eve were instructed to refrain from eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil because the consequences of doing so was death (Genesis 2:17). From the story, we can tell that they didn’t die a physical death when they disobeyed God, but a spiritual one which was characterised by separation from God and a spread of decay through generations of the human race. Hence, to deal with sin and its consequences with a physical approach and not deal with its spiritual roots is an exercise in futility. Take for example Jesus’ description of the Pharisees and their attitude towards righteousness. We see this clearly in his chastisement of the Pharisees in Matthew 23, popularly known as the “7 woes to the Scribes and Pharisees”. From verse 25 to 28, Jesus referred to the Pharisees as hypocrites because of their approach to righteousness. His chastisements are summarised as follows:

• Jesus accused them of cleaning the outside of cups and plates while there is greed and self-indulgence inside. 
• Jesus described them as whitewashed tombs that are clean on the outside but are full of dead people’s bones and all uncleanness
• Jesus accused them of outwardly appearing righteous to others but being filled with hypocrisy and lawlessness. 

This is how God sees the Pharisees who followed the very laws he had given to the Israelites. It goes to show that it takes a lot more than dressing the outside of a vessel for God to consider it clean. It takes a rebirth of your spirit, a transformation of the heart, for you to be truly saved. If you expect God to snap his finger for all of this to happen then you are expecting him to go against the laws he has made himself. 

This brings me to my second point: without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin (Hebrews 9:22). The debt we owed God while we dwelt in sin is not cancelled unless blood is shed. Hence, all the sacrifices in the Old Testament only serve as a foreshadow to the great sacrifice on calvary. To save us, God intended to do a thorough job. He didn’t set out to do a lazyman’s work of merely washing the outside of the vessels we possess. He intended to create in us a new spirit that is united with his Spirit. This is no joke. It had to take the shedding of precious divine blood. In Hebrews 10:10, we are told that we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once and for all. Which means, the sacrifice of Jesus doesn’t need to be repeated (contrary to what happened in the Old Testament when animals were sacrificed). Jesus’ sacrifice is good enough to deal with all our sins and for all time. This is the essence of God’s approach to saving humanity. He intended for Jesus to be sacrificed to fulfil the law regarding remission of sins and also to offer us salvation that is good enough to save all of humanity and at any point in human history after the cross. 

God’s rescue mission was not all pretty and flowery, but it was effective and that’s just what we should focus on. Christians the world over sing songs about the cross and speak flamboyantly about its essence to the body of Christ, however, the cross is basically a symbol of death. In our world today, it could be synonymous to an electric chair. When we sing songs of adoration for the cross, we are not praising it for the instrument of death that it is, but for the life that came out of that one cross on calvary. At the center of our salvation story is an instrument of death. From the perspective of our Saviour, I can boldly state that salvation can be messy but completely worth it. The agony of Christ on the road to calvary and the pain he felt while hanging on the cross should tell us that our salvation caused him a lot of pain and cost him his life. 

In Hebrews 12:2, we are told that Christ endured the pain of the cross and despised the shame because of the joy that was awaiting him. This affirms the fact that God’s rescue mission of the whole of mankind didn’t come on a sliver platter. However, the Saviour was not perturbed or discouraged by the enormity of the task at hand, neither did he abandon the mission because of the excruciating pain. Rather, he endured the pain and disregarded the shame that came with being executed like a sinner all because of the joy that was set before him. Perhaps, we should also concern ourselves more with the joy of salvation rather than the manner in which salvation comes to us. I know there is exceeding joy in being saved, but today I came to remind you that the road to salvation is not always pretty and maybe we need to appreciate salvation a little more because of this.

Tattoos. Body piercings. Cross-dressing. Are all these acceptable in the sight of God? It is stated categorically in the book of Leviticus that all these are (or used to be) unacceptable to God. Do these commands have a backing in the New Testament?

First of all, I need to state this: the Law does not in any way refer to the 10 commandments alone. The law is a dispensation. It is a mentality (which means it transcends time frames). It is a determinant of the relationship between man and God. The law is God giving men the chance to be acceptable in his presence. Therefore there are more laws the Israelites had to adhere to than the 10 commandments Moses took on Mount Sinai. These laws are outlined in the book of Leviticus and other Old Testament books. Jesus is described in the bible as ‘the lamb that was slain before the foundations of the earth’, meaning, he was destined to die for the sins of the world before creation. But we all know God works according to times and seasons. Therefore the Law was an interim measure to restore man to a shadow of the fellowship he had with God in Eden. It wasn’t time for Jesus to come and die for the sins of mankind yet so God put in place an interim measure to bridge the gaping chasm sin created between God and man.

Not every law given in Leviticus and Deuteronomy has a spiritual bearing. If this is all you would walk away with after reading this post, I would be exceedingly glad. God gave three kinds of laws in Leviticus: Ritual Laws, Laws concerning the Priesthood and Purity Laws. In this post, we will dwell largely on the purity laws. These laws didn’t only make a man spiritually acceptable in the sight of God, most of them, if adhered to, actually made man physically acceptable in the presence of God. This is because God used to manifest himself to these people physically so physical cleanliness was very important. The Law was put in place to reveal the imperfection of man. For if God gave man one law in Eden and man broke it, he clearly wasn’t expecting men to be able to keep many laws. The truth is, it was all in the build up to the arrival of the promised Messiah.

Ok so back to the laws. It doesn’t take much critical analysis to notice that some of these laws were simply personal-hygiene laws. They still fall under the purity laws anyway, because they keep the body clean just as adherence to sexual laws would make a man spiritually clean before God. For example, the law prohibited the Jews from touching the flesh of dead animals. The law also states in Leviticus 15 that a man who discharges semen (in his sleep) and a woman in her menses are both unclean. Both are expected to bath and wash their clothes and anybody who touches either the cloth or the beds they slept on is also unclean. In Deuteronomy 23, the bible says that the children of Israel were prohibited from easing themselves in the camp. But rather they were instructed to go outside the camp, dig a hole and afterward cover up their excrement. These are clearly hygiene laws.

Now here comes the controversial laws. In Leviticus 18:28 the Israelites were warned against making marks on their skin (tattoos). Deuteronomy 22:5 speaks against cross-dressing. The question then is, why do some Christians have tattoos on their skin and are bold enough to attend church services with their skin looking like the map of a swampy area? Why do Christian women wear trousers? Why do Christian men wear earrings? Are they ignorant of what the bible says about cross-dressing?

In Galatians 5:6, it says:

For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision accounts for anything but only faith working through love.

Circumcision is the mark of the covenant the Jews had with God. It involved the physical cutting away of the foreskin of the manhood. Therefore, circumcision was pretty much a big deal in those days. Acts 15 addresses this issue too. Paul had come across a group of believers in Antioch who believed one would have to be circumcised to become a Christian. Hence he traveled all the way back to Jerusalem to meet up with the elders of the church to discuss this very issue. Some of the remarks of the elders were astounding. Peter asked ‘now, therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?’. He said this in reference to the issue of circumcision – which basically stands for keeping the law. He calls it a yoke! It means the very moment we choose to follow the law we have willingly thrown a yoke around our necks. James made a similar submission at the council. None of them implied that Grace is a license to sin. No! Far from that. What I’m saying is grace is a better reason to live right than the law. Grace empowers you to do the right thing other than following a bunch of laws.

From the verse we read from Galatians, it says that neither circumcision nor uncircumcision accounts for anything. Which means whether you are circumcised or uncircumcised it really doesn’t matter. Whether you have tattoos or not, it really doesn’t matter. Whether she wears trousers or not it really doesn’t matter. It even amazes me that the people who say it is sinful to have tattoos don’t realize that the verse that speaks against tattoos is preceded by a verse that speaks against shaping your hair as a guy. I have shaped my hair by the way. Am I guilty of any sin because of this? Will I go to hell because of this? Can a mere hairstyle outdo and undo what Christ did on the cross? Certainly not! This is what happens anytime we try to judge people by the law, we end up implicating ourselves. Little wonder the bible says that whoever keeps the whole law but breaks one of them is guilty of all. As simple as that. So if you are going around judging men for piercing their ears, braiding their hair, tattooing their skin etc. yet you have shaped your hair, you are as guilty as you claim they are. You break the entire law by breaking one. If you have a toilet in your home, please know that you have broken the law (refer to Deut. 23). A lady who goes to church in her menses or a man who goes to church the morning after having wet dreams has also broken the law. This is tiring already! Even typing it out is tiring!

This is why Grace is the solution. After the death of Christ, we are totally changed from the inside out. We are born anew. Already acceptable in the sight of God on Jesus’ score. God is pleased with you. Therefore we don’t have to follow a bunch of rules to be pleasing in the sight of God. We don’t have to follow the law to attain righteousness. We are already righteous. Does this in any way mean we can do whatever pleases us? Definitely no! The only thing is, whatever we do that will ever please God should stem from his grace and not by works – so the glory goes back to him.

Going back to Paul’s epistle to the Galatians he told them they’ve been called to a life of freedom, nevertheless, they mustn’t use this freedom as an opportunity for the flesh. Interesting. Which means we are at liberty to do certain things but we mustn’t do them because we want to please our flesh. At another place Paul says ‘everything is beneficial but not everything is helpful (edifies)’. A tattoo doesn’t mean you are of the devil. Piercing your nose doesn’t mean you are hell-bound. We are at liberty to do these things, but we mustn’t let it be a quest to merely please our flesh. ‘Oh facial tattoos are in vogue so I need to get one’. That is wrong!

Also, we are admonished to desist from such things for the sake of the weaker brethren in the faith. There are some people who aren’t mature enough to understand the gospel of Grace and the freedom it comes with. Such people would be compelled to judge when they see another Christian fully exercising his liberties without constraints. They might just tag you a sinner and it is not their faults but yours. You should know better.

Sometimes we need to understand these things also from a cultural point of view. I’m saying so because even in Acts 15, culture was at the center of the debate the disciples had. There are certain things that are acceptable in one culture and totally abhorred in another. In the ghettos in America, having tattoos is no big deal. Therefore when someone from this kind of background comes to Christ, he would be inclined to having even more tattoos. Let’s take for example Scottish men in kilts. They wear skirts because it is a cultural norm in Scotland. A man wearing a skirt is largely regarded worldwide as cross-dressing. Are we saying all Scottish men are not possible candidates of God’s grace? Can’t a Christian Scottish man wear his skirts to church and feel at ease to worship God? Why do we want to put a yoke around their neck (as Peter would say)?

I personally do not like tattoos and piercings. Nevertheless, not mine, but the will of God be done. In the New Testament, circumcision is of the heart and not by the law (Rom 2:29). So it is not about what you have written on your skin but how much of God’s word is inscribed on your heart. It isn’t about the number of piercings you have in your ears and nose, it is about how much you keep your eyes fixed on His nail-pierced hands. It isn’t about cross-dressing but it is solely about putting on the righteous garment you obtained by grace and keeping it clean. You can wear a crucifix with the cross hanging so low that it touches your knee when you bend, if you still don’t carry your cross daily and follow after Jesus, you are merely burdening your neck.

The deity of Jesus Christ is a controversial topic especially in inter-religious debates. Mostly because he didn’t state it categorically that he is God but he implied it in so many ways that one cannot help but accept that fact in all honesty. It is even pathetic when some Christians doubt it too. Obviously the reality is a bit absurd. God, became flesh and dwelt amongst men? Well, yes. In Christian doctrine, Jesus is said to be fully man and fully God. Hence people assume that this reality is evident in two of the names used to refer to him in the gospels: Son of man and Son of God. This may appear to be the logical implication of both names, but it isn’t. Yes, anytime Jesus referred to himself as the Son of God, the Jews and Pharisees almost stoned him, because he was making himself equal with God by saying that. People need to get this fact, by calling himself Son of God he wasn’t referring to the same level of sonship to which Adam, David, the angels or we lay claim to. He was expressing equality with God. If it weren’t so, the Pharisees wouldn’t have accused him of being blasphemous. Also, he used to call himself the Son of Man. Don’t get it wrong, he wasn’t referring to his humanity here either. He was simply making reference to the highly exalted divine personality in Daniel 7. This being that Daniel talks about shares similar attributes with God. Daniel said that He (The Son of Man) has been given an everlasting dominion and that all people, nations and languages should serve him. We see the Son of Man in the very presence of The Ancient of Days in this verse. Ha! This makes a very strong case for the trinity too. I dare say this vision Daniel saw is probably one of the pre incarnate appearances of Jesus in the Old Testament. Preincarnate, meaning, he made an appearance before he was birthed into this world finally in the new testament. Guess what, there are so many instances of this in the Old Testament. All I am saying is Son of God and Son of Man both point to the deity of Jesus. He is God.

On several occasions, Jesus used the personal, sacred Old Testament title of God, Yahweh (YHWH), when referring to himself. Permit me to refer you to the time He incited anger among the Jews after saying ‘Before Abraham, I AM’ in John 8. YAHWEH, which means ‘I AM’ or ‘He who is’, is the exact name the God of the Old Testament used in His self-revelation to Moses at the burning bush. I want to draw your attention to something really important over here. Jesus wasn’t merely saying He was some god that pre-existed even before Abraham became a clot of blood in his mother’s womb. That would have easily been laughed off. A surge of indignation rushed over the Jews because Jesus actually implied He was The Eternal One
: the God of the Old Testament they worshipped. According to the Jews, Jesus wasn’t fifty years old, yet His statement implied that from ‘once upon a time’ to ‘thy kingdom come’, He is God. As if that isn’t enough, Jesus’ use of YAHWEH (‘I AM’) added more fuel to the fire because it was strongly prohibited to use that name then. The Jews understood the significance of names. They understood it to be something worth more than a random combination of letters. A simple ‘What is your name?’ required information such as the historical background and reputation of the person being queried. This is why the use of God’s sacred name was a big deal to them. According to some Rabbinic teachings, anyone caught using the YAHWEH title was a serious crime offender and had to be put to death. Oh wait, there’s more! While the Jews feared the name of the Lord so strongly, Jesus went ahead and authorized His disciples to cry out Abba Father when praying to God. Abba Father? Who do you think you are to relate to God on such intimate terms? And secondly, what makes Jesus think this kind of relationship is only possible at his permission? I’m pretty sure the Jews were intellectually and emotionally overwhelmed by His remark because they [the Jews] could only go as far as addressing God as ‘The Holy One, blessed he be’. But here is Jesus initiating a new covenantal relationship (a very intimate and personal one)…by His own authority. So for Jesus to press this as far as referring to Himself as YAHWEH or setting new laws on how people could relate to God can only mean one thing: Jesus is equal to God in all nature and essence!

If you think He went too far, wait till you hear Him say that He shares the same glory and honour that is given to God. Code Red Alert! This was purely antagonistic to the Old Testament teachings which emphatically stated that God didn’t franchise His glory. God was the only one to be worshipped according to Jewish culture. Was Jesus increasing the number to two? To them, Jesus was way out of line to not  have considered it robbery to be equal with God by making such an outlandish statement. But the reality of the matter is, Jesus was only corroborating a transcendent truth (John 17:5). Before the mountains were brought forth and the world was formed, Jesus shared (and still shares) a unique glory with His Father that makes Him equally honored with the Father. It then comes as no surprise that Jesus said or did nothing whenever He was worshipped by people. What say do you have when the Father Himself has decreed that His son be worshipped by every creature in Heaven and on Earth? In effect, one’s dealings with Jesus is same as dealing with God: to have knowledge about Jesus is to have knowledge about God, to love/hate Jesus is to love/hate God, to believe/reject Jesus is to believe/reject God etc. In simpler terms, Jesus is claiming to be God just as the Father is God.

What intrigues me is that Jesus never denied, not even once, any of the accusations of He claiming to be God. In a system where equating one’s self to God was punishable by death, we expect Jesus to have said something like ‘Hey folks! Don’t try to get me killed by putting words into my mouth. I never said I’m God!’, if truly He was being misconstrued.  But what do we see every time such allegations were made? He either ignored them or provided proof the more that He is God. Every objective reader of the Bible cannot escape the fact that scripture confirms without doubt Jesus did make reference to His deity several times. Jesus’ words may not have been as direct as those of us in the 21st century might have expected them to be but Jesus’ original audience got the message very clear. And that is why His opponents were itching so much to end His life for blaspheming under the Jewish legal system–for claiming to be God.

One of the most outstanding events that consolidates the deity of Jesus Christ is his resurrection from death. The empty tomb shall forever point to the deity of Christ. If you say he didn’t die, how come the Roman Soldiers couldn’t ransack the whole city in search of his body? Trust me, the disciples had gone into hiding, except John, so they couldn’t have gone to steal his body. Many people believe in the Swoon Hypothesis: a bunch of ideas that assert that Jesus never died but he survived the cross. That isn’t true. According to historical accounts, not many even made it to carry the cross. The beatings Jesus was subjected to killed many others. The Roman Soldiers used what is called a flagrum, a whip designed to rip the skin off the criminals flesh. With one stroke, the flagrum tore into the flesh. Though the criminal had his back turned against the Roman soldier, yet the weight of the pointy tip of the flagrum made it possible for it to go all the way to the tummy. The spikes rip open the criminal’s flesh. Many spill their intestines there and die immediately. They don’t make it to the cross. Jesus did. So imagine the state in which he was in even on the cross. The amount of blood loss. The fact that they pierced his side with a spear to be sure he was dead. The only human contact he had after being taken off the cross was 3 days after. He did die. Some say, it is easier to believe that God saved him from death than to believe he was resurrected. It isn’t about which is more easy to believe but which one is in sync with God’s salvation plan for humanity. Which of the scenarios makes sense so far as God’s purpose for the incarnation of Jesus is concerned? He died. He rose again and was seen by his disciples. When we read the gospels, we aren’t reading some concocted stories. We are reading a historically reliable account documented within the lifetime of eyewitnesses of the event.

Jesus Christ is God. He is the express image of the father in heaven and in him the fullness of God was pleased to dwell. The bible is the last book anybody should try to use to debunk the reality of the deity of Christ. It was prophesied in the Old Testament, materialized in the gospels and revealed in glory in Revelations.

Written by: Elvis Sampson and Elikplim Sabblah

References: John 10:30-33, Luke 11:20, Exodus 8:19; Exodus 3:14, Matthew 14:27, John 8:58, Luke 11:1-4, John 14:6, Daniel 7:13 – 15, Matthew 9:6, John 10:18, John 5:20-23 Isaiah 42:8, The Case for Christ, Lee Strobel.  Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus, Nabeel Qureshi.