Now you may be wondering about the title, or thinking “who the heck is Sophia??” — well, bear with me, and all will be revealed. It’s not as sinister or weird as it may first appear.
I saw a post on my Instagram feed the other day that just got me a little riled up. I’ll admit it, I can be a little short-tempered at times, especially around the subject of Jesus and seeing him/the Christian faith misrepresented to such a degree that it could mislead others down the wrong path. I don’t normally write responses to things like this, but I felt this one deserved it, mainly just to add some clarity to a somewhat confusing topic, and so there’s a place I (or you, if you fancy sharing my posts!) can point people to if this type of ideology is going to spread.
Here’s the Instagram post in question, but it’s the caption below it that got to me. I’ll quote the caption below, too, in case the embedded post doesn't work (here’s a direct link too).
A lot of the comments under that post seemed to find it quite affirming in some ways, others were confused as they’d never heard this before (and rightly so) but were keen to look into it. There were also a lot of references to a single author, and book, called, She Who Is, by Elizabeth A. Johnson, where this idea seemed to have originated in some form. In fact, the majority of the comments were wanting to explore this idea in more depth. So, I think maybe there’s something to be said there for the lack of female representation in the Church if it garnered this type of response, but I also thought if people are this taken by the idea, I wanted to write something to offer some Biblical and historical views on this “Sophia”, as she isn’t a new concept at all. The caption under the Instagram post sounds nice, but it’s ever so slightly off-kilter that it misrepresents everything.
Let’s look at the claims line by line:
Jesus had two moms. Their names are Mary and Sophia.
Well, not much to say here yet, but… nope.
You’ve heard about Mary, but do you know about Sophia?
Well, yes, I do. Maybe you, dear reader, know as well. But I began to question whether the author of the caption did.
Sophia is the Greek word for God’s Wisdom.
OK, finally. Getting to some facts and less conjecture. Although I would clarify that “sophia” (σοφία) is simply the Greek word for “wisdom”, not specifically “God’s wisdom” (or a name), per se. It’s a minor point though, I’m just nit-picking now.
Sophia was there at the beginning of creation. She birthed the world into existence.
Right, so here’s where it gets a little “squiffy”. It’s true that Wisdom, or “Sophia”, was there at the very beginning before anything was created, and that she stood beside God during creation. We can see all of this in the book of Proverbs, and it’s all very interesting. I’m sure you’ll notice parallels with John 1. But was this Sophia a separate entity from who we normally think of as being there in the beginning? Who created everything — the Word or the Holy Spirit?
Proverbs 8:22–31 The Lord created me at the beginning of his work, the first of his acts of long ago. Ages ago I was set up, at the first, before the beginning of the earth. When there were no depths I was brought forth, when there were no springs abounding with water. Before the mountains had been shaped, before the hills, I was brought forth — when he had not yet made earth and fields, or the world’s first bits of soil. When he established the heavens, I was there, when he drew a circle on the face of the deep, when he made firm the skies above, when he established the fountains of the deep, when he assigned to the sea its limit, so that the waters might not transgress his command, when he marked out the foundations of the earth, then I was beside him, like a master worker; and I was daily his delight, rejoicing before him always, rejoicing in his inhabited world and delighting in the human race.
If you have the books in your canon, there are similar things spoken of Wisdom in Sirach 24:1–22 and in Wisdom 7:21–27. They say things like “I came forth from the mouth of the Most High” (like a Word, maybe? See Psalm 33:6!), and, “…wisdom, the fashioner of all things…”. Do you see the picture coming together yet? You can read the other two references on Biblegateway.com to get a better grasp of the texts.
Deuteronomy 32 says that God gave birth to the people. That was Sophia.
This is a reference to Deut 32:18, which says, “You were unmindful of the Rock that bore you; you forgot the God who gave you birth.”. Personally, it seems a bit of a stretch to say so confidently this was “Sophia” when there’s no reference to Wisdom at all in the passage. The surrounding context appears to be speaking more about God in general, or YHWH specifically. But with a proper understanding of who Sophia truly is, this could be an accurate statement, just not within the context of the rest of the Instagram post.
Christians began to associate Sophia with the Holy Spirit. The Spirit is Sophia. She is the divine feminine who is the Third Person of the Trinity.
Here the ‘Insta-theology’ comes to a head, and triumphantly announces Sophia’s true identity, the Holy Spirit! But is this accurate, though? Are Sophia and the Holy Spirit one and the same? Did Christians associate the two? Well… yes. Sort of. But only two in antiquity that I could find, and, interestingly, they both wrote around the same time period of AD 180: Theophilus and Irenaeus. Maybe more modern Christians relate Sophia with the Holy Spirit, but that would be a drastic break from the historical understanding, and would make for a complicated Christology when examining the “Wisdom” Scriptures closer.
Other than those two previously mentioned, the interpretation and understanding was pretty unanimous for the first few centuries: “Sophia” is Jesus.
I’ll give a few examples from the Early Church Fathers below, ranging in date between AD 150 to around 250-ish, so you can see how this conclusion was drawn, though you can read many more quotes from them here.
I shall give you another testimony, my friends,” said I, “from the Scriptures, that God begat before all creatures a Beginning, [who was] a certain rational power [proceeding] from Himself, who is called by the Holy Spirit, now the Glory of the Lord, now the Son, again Wisdom, again an Angel, then God, and then Lord and Logos … – Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, 61
But if, in your surpassing intelligence, it occurs to you to inquire what is meant by the Son, I will state briefly that He is the first product of the Father, not as having been brought into existence [i.e. not ex níhilo, out of nothing] for from the beginning, God, who is the eternal mind [νοῦς], had the Logos in Himself, being from eternity instinct with Logos [λογικός] … The prophetic Spirit also agrees with our statements. “The Lord,” it says, “made me, the beginning of His ways to His works.” [Prov 8:22] – Athenagoras, A Plea for the Christians, 10.3
For “the Lord who created the earth by His power,” as Jeremiah says, “has raised up the world by His wisdom;” [Jeremiah 10:12] for wisdom, which is His word, raises us up to the truth, who have fallen prostrate before idols, and is itself the first resurrection from our fall. – Clement of Alexandria, Exhortation to the Heathen, ch. 8
For He is termed Wisdom, according to the expression of Solomon … He is also styled First-born, as the apostle has declared: “ who is the first-born of every creature.” The first-born, however, is not by nature a different person from the Wisdom, but one and the same. – Origen, De Principiis, 1.2.1
And Solomon, David’s son and successor, presenting the same thought by a different name, instead of the ‘Word’ called Him Wisdom, making the following statement as in her person… – Eusebius of Caesarea, Preparation of the Gospel — Part 2
But if this same Wisdom is the Word of God, in the capacity of Wisdom, and (as being He) without whom nothing was made, just as also (nothing) was set in order without Wisdom, how can it be that anything, except the Father, should be older, and on this account indeed nobler, than the Son of God, the only-begotten and first-begotten Word? – Tertullian, Against Hermogenes, ch. 18
That Christ is the First-born, and that He is the Wisdom of God, by whom all things were made. – Cyprian, The Treatises of Cyprian
But we don’t even have to look that far in history to see this link, as Paul says it explicitly in 1 Corinthians 1:24: “…Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.”.
This “Sophia”/Wisdom, as seen in the Old Testament Scriptures, was well established in Jewish thought by the time of Christ, so obviously the earliest followers of Jesus made the connection, which also followed through into the Early Church exegesis and teaching about Christ as the Wisdom of God, as we have just seen.
John’s Gospel is the one that most closely makes the link between the contemporary thought of Wisdom and the Word of God in the opening words of his Gospel:
John 1:1–3 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.
Cast your mind back to Proverbs 8 and you’ll see the similarities and what John was subtly alluding to here. The subtext of these few sentences was saying a whole lot to the Jewish believers of his day. In Sophia and the Johannine Jesus, James Scott says, “The Logos of the Prologue, found to be influenced at almost every turn by Sophia speculation, proves to be a useful cover employed by the Fourth Evangelist to effect the switch of gender from Sophia to Jesus … John has intentionally presented us with Jesus as Jesus Sophia Incarnate.”.
I hope you can see now that this isn’t a novel idea, nor a modern feminist conception (though it has undoubtedly been picked up by feminists in more recent times). The idea that Jesus, the Word of God, is Sophia the Wisdom of God, is ancient. The connections are throughout the New Testament if we are looking carefully.
Jesus speaks of Wisdom in relation to the Son of Man in Matthew 11:19; Paul, again, combines the “wisdom of God” and Jesus together as one and the same in 1 Corinthians 1:30. 1 Corinthians is filled with veiled references, which take on new meaning when viewed through this new “Sophia” lens. Such as, contrasting faith and human wisdom with the “power of God”, which as we saw earlier in the same letter, is also Christ: “so that your faith might rest not on human wisdom but on the power of God.” (1 Cor 2:5). We know our faith rests in Jesus, and that Jesus is the Wisdom of God, so the subtle contrast here with “human wisdom” is quite clever by Paul.
Ephesians 1:17 and 3:10 also speak of the “spirit of wisdom” and the “wisdom of God” in relation to how we know God, and in terms of facing off against the “rulers and authorities in the heavenly places”, another thing we know from Scripture that Jesus did through the cross (Colossians 2:15). I won’t list everything out, but I would recommend having a search for yourselves.
Maybe now whenever you read of “wisdom” in the Bible, you’ll picture it differently if you have Jesus in mind from now on, and peel back another layer of the Scriptures, finding a deeper level than before. “The Bible is shallow enough for a child not to drown, yet deep enough for an elephant to swim.”, as Augustine apparently said.
There’s plenty more that could be said on this topic, but I’ll end here as this has become a lot longer than I anticipated! Let’s finish as we began, examining the final part of the claims from the pastor in the Instagram post:
Sophia is our divine Mother.
God is She who loves you.
For the final two lines of the caption, I’m going to quote from Matthew J. Ramage’s book, Dark Passages of the Bible: Engaging Scripture with Benedict XVI & Thomas Aquinas, as he deals with, and concludes, what I find to be the best way to respond to whether we should address God as “mother” or “she”, or anything primarily feminine:
In the Old Testament, see Dt 32:18 ( “the God who gave you birth”); Ps 22:10 (which appears to compare God to a midwife); Ps 131:2 (“like a child quieted at its mother’s breast”); Is 42:14 (where God cries out as a woman in labor); 46:3; 49:15 (“Can a mother forget her infant?”); 66:13 (“As a mother comforts her son . . .”); Nm 11:10–12; Hos 13:8 (“like a bear robbed of her cubs”); Gn 1:2 (where the Spirit hovers over creation as over a brood); Ps 17:8; 36:7; 57:1; 61:4; 91:1,4; Is 31:5 (shelter in the shadow of God’s wings); Jb 38:29 (which contains the image of a divine “womb”). For the New Testament, see Mt 23:37; Lk 13:34 (Jesus sighs, “How often would I have gathered your children together as a ‘hen’”); Acts 17:28 (states that “in him we live, move, have our being”); 1 Cor 3:1–3; 1 Pt 2:2 (calls us “babes in Christ” and speaks of “spiritual milk”); Jn 1:13 (speaks of Christians being “born of God”; 3:5 (“born of water and the Spirit”). Moreover, on three occasions in his first volume of Jesus of Nazareth, 139, 197, 207, Pope Benedict observes that the New Testament’s depiction of Jesus’s “compassion” (cf. Lk 7:13, for example) is intimately bound up with the feminine imagery, particularly the Hebrew notion of a mother’s womb (rahamim).
Benedict XVI, Jesus of Nazareth, 139–40. After treating the issue of whether or not the Old Testament presents us with a God who is not only our Father but also our “mother,” the pope concludes that “we cannot provide any absolutely compelling arguments” for not praying to God as mother; however, he observes that “while there are fine images of maternal love, ‘mother’ is not used as a form of address for God.” The sobriety of Benedict’s conclusion is a testimony to his great humility as an exegete and pastor: he teaches the fullness of Christian truth while willingly acknowledging the presence of myriad difficulties and challenges to it.
– Matthew J. Ramage, Dark Passages of the Bible: Engaging Scripture with Benedict XVI & Thomas Aquinas; (The Catholic University of America Press 2013), p. 30 [Footnotes 14 and 15]
I hope you found this enlightening and as insightful as I have in researching the topic! Leave your thoughts in the comments, and don’t forget to share the article if you enjoyed it.
Matthew J. Ramage, Dark Passages of the Bible: Engaging Scripture with Benedict XVI & Thomas Aquinas; (The Catholic University of America Press 2013), p. 30 [Footnotes 14 and 15]
Enjoying this? Consider contributing regular gifts for this content on Patreon. * Patreon is a way to join your favorite creator's community and pay them for making the stuff you love. You can simply pay a few pounds per month or per post that a creator makes, and in return receive some perks!
Have you ever wondered why God asks us to resist temptation and practise self-control? At first glance, it might seem like God is just trying to limit our enjoyment of life, especially when the world tells us to “follow your heart” and “give in to what feels good.” But what if I told you that resisting temptation is not about taking away your joy, but about protecting and blessing your life — spiritually, emotionally, and even mentally?
I was recently watching a TV series with my wife (called Perception, if you’re interested) about a neuroscience professor who consults for the FBI. The series often gives some interesting facts about the brain and human behaviour, and in one episode the main character capped off the episode by talking about how resisting temptations benefits your mental health.
This piqued my interest, as it made me think of the obvious Scriptural connections, so I looked it up to see if the episode was accurate.
And it was!
A 2017 neuroscience research study highlights how beneficial self-control and resisting temptation are for your brain and mental health. These findings echo the timeless truths of Scripture, showing us that God’s design for self-control is not just a moral obligation but a pathway to wholeness and flourishing as a healthy person.
The Science Behind Resisting Temptation
The study on self-control and temptation explored the brain’s salience network — the system responsible for detecting what’s important — and found something really very interesting: people better at resisting temptation have a healthier dynamic between this network and other parts of the brain, such as the visual system. In other words, their brains are better at ignoring distractions and focusing on what truly matters.
Here are some of the benefits of self-control revealed by the study:
Improved Focus — Resisting temptation strengthens your ability to stay on task and avoid distractions.
Emotional Resilience — Self-control helps regulate emotions, making you less reactive and more at peace.
Mental Clarity — It improves how your brain processes information, aiding decision-making.
Protection from Harm — It reduces the risk of mental health issues like depression, addiction, and impulsive behaviour which may help mitigate some symptoms of ADHD by strengthening attention regulation and executive function.
Spiritual Growth—Though not a part of the study, self-control aligns with God’s call for holy living and leads to greater spiritual maturity.
This isn’t just science talking; it’s evidence of God’s amazing design for your body and mind which has been testified to in the Scriptures for thousands of years, long before neuroscience could confirm it. I couldn’t help but be struck by this connection when I came across this study.
What Does the Bible Say?
The New Testament repeatedly highlights the importance of self-control and resisting temptation. These teachings are not arbitrary rules to suck the “fun” out of life, but divine guidance to help you thrive. Let’s explore how the Bible speaks to this:
Self-Control is a Gift from GodThe Bible teaches that self-control is a fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22–23) and that God has given us a spirit of “power and of love and of self-discipline” (2 Timothy 1:7). The ability to resist temptation is not something we muster up alone; it’s a gift God gives to help us grow in Him and rely on His strength.
Resisting Temptation Brings FreedomJames 1:14–15 warns us that temptation, if left unchecked, leads to sin and ultimately to death. Science backs this up, showing that unchecked impulsivity can lead to destructive behaviours like addiction and emotional instability. God’s commands to resist temptation protect us from harm and lead us to freedom in Christ (John 8:36).
Your Mind MattersRomans 12:2 urges us to “be transformed by the renewing of your minds.” Resisting temptat...
Monarchical Trinitarianism, also referred to as the “Monarchy of the Father,” is a theological perspective that asserts the Father as the sole source (or monarch) within the Trinity. This view maintains a clear distinction of roles among the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit while upholding their unity in essence. It is essential to distinguish this from Monarchianism, a heretical belief condemned in the 4th century, which posited that God is a single person rather than three distinct persons.
The Eternal Begottenness of the Son
The term “created” used by the early pre-Nicene Fathers does not align with the Arian view, which posits that the Son was created ex nihilo (out of nothing), making Him a creature. As Arius infamously declared, “there was a time when the Son was not”. Rather, the Fathers articulated that the Son was begotten out of the Father, emphasising His divine origin and eternal existence within the Father’s bosom (cf. John 1:18 in Greek). As Justin Martyr explains, “For Christ is the first-begotten of God, and we have declared above that He is the Word of whom every race of men were partakers; and those who lived reasonably are Christians, even though they have been thought atheists” (Justin Martyr, First Apology, Chapter 46). This highlights that the Son, the Word, existed eternally with the Father before being begotten and manifested.
Similarly, Hippolytus expounds on this concept, noting that “God, subsisting alone, and having nothing contemporaneous with Himself, determined to create the world … For He was neither without reason, nor wisdom, nor power, nor counsel And all things were in Him, and He was the All. When He willed, and as He willed, He manifested His word in the times determined by Him, and by Him He made all things. … And thus there appeared another beside Himself. But when I say another, I do not mean that there are two Gods, but that it is only as light of light, or as water from a fountain, or as a ray from the sun. For there is but one power, which is from the All; and the Father is the All, from whom cometh this Power, the Word. And this is the mind which came forth into the world, and was manifested as the Son of God.” (Hippolytus, Against the Heresy of One Noetus, Chapter 10–11). Here, Hippolytus underscores the eternal existence of the Word within God, proceeding from the Father and being of the same essence.
The Procession of the Holy Spirit
The procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father is another essential aspect of Monarchical Trinitarianism. The Spirit, like the Son, derives His essence from the Father, ensuring that He is co-equal and consubstantial with the Father and the Son. Tertullian speaks to this procession in his work, Against Praxeas, explaining how the Word and Spirit derive their essence from the Father.
But still the tree is not severed from the root, nor the river from the fountain, nor the ray from the sun; nor, indeed, is the Word separated from God. … Now the Spirit indeed is third from God and the Son; just as the fruit of the tree is third from the root, or as the stream out of the river is third from the fountain, or as the apex of the ray is third from the sun. Nothing, however, is alien from that original source whence it derives its own properties. In like manner the Trinity, flowing down from the Father through intertwined and connected steps, does not at all disturb the Monarchy, while it at the same time guards the state of the Economy. (Tertullian, Against Praxeas, Chapter 8).
Looking at how Tertullian describes this doctrine, we can see how he has gone to lengths to carefully explain how the relationship within the Trinity exists together and relate to one another, while keeping intact the source and essence of divinity united and uncompromised. When we talk about these things, we use terms like “ontological” and “economy” to help to describe the Godhead. Ontology is the study of being, and what make...
The Trinity is a cornerstone of Christian faith, defining God as one Being in three Persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. However, throughout history, various misunderstandings and false teachings — known as heresies — have arisen, challenging this core doctrine. Understanding these heresies can strengthen our faith and deepen our appreciation for the truths held by the Church since its earliest days.
What Is the Trinity?
Before diving into the heresies, let’s briefly review what we mean by the Trinity. The Christian doctrine of the Trinity teaches that God is one essence in three distinct Persons:
The Father: The Creator and sustainer of all.
The Son (Jesus Christ): God incarnate, who lived, died, and was resurrected for our salvation.
The Holy Spirit: The presence of God active in the world and within believers.
This concept is rooted in Scripture and has been affirmed by the Church through various councils and creeds.
Common Historical Heresies
Arianism
What It Taught: Arius, a priest in the early 4th century, claimed that Jesus Christ was not of the same substance as the Father. He taught that the Son was a created being, distinct and subordinate to the Father.
Church’s Response: The Council of Nicaea in 325 AD condemned Arianism, affirming that the Son is “of the same substance” (homoousios) as the Father. This is reflected in the Nicene Creed: “We believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only Son of God… of one Being with the Father.”
Patristic Quote: Athanasius, a staunch defender against Arianism, wrote, “For the Son of God became man so that we might become God” (On the Incarnation, 8:54).
Modalism (Sabellianism)
What It Taught: Sabellius proposed that God is one Person who reveals Himself in three different modes or aspects: as the Father in creation, as the Son in redemption, and as the Holy Spirit in sanctification. This denies the distinctiveness of the three Persons.
Church’s Response: Modalism was rejected because it undermines the relational aspect of the Trinity. The distinct Persons interact with each other, as seen in Jesus’ baptism where the Father speaks, the Son is baptised, and the Spirit descends like a dove.
Patristic Quote: Tertullian argued against Modalism by affirming the distinctiveness within the Godhead: “We do indeed believe that there is only one God, but we believe that under this dispensation… there is the Son, who has issued from the Father, and the Spirit, who has issued from both Father and Son” (Against Praxeas, 2).
Nestorianism
What It Taught: Nestorius, a 5th-century bishop, suggested that Jesus Christ was two separate persons — one human and one divine — rather than one Person with two natures.
Church’s Response: The Council of Ephesus in 431 AD declared that Jesus is one Person with two distinct yet united natures: divine and human. This ensures that Jesus is fully God and fully man, capable of bridging the gap between humanity and divinity.
Patristic Quote: Cyril of Alexandria emphasised the unity of Christ: “Wherefore we confess one Christ, one Son, one Lord. According to this understanding of this unmixed union, we confess the holy Virgin to be Mother of God; because God the Word was incarnate and became Man, and from this conception he united the temple taken from her with himself.” (Cyril of Alexandria Letter to John of Antioch).
Docetism
What It Taught: Docetists believed that Jesus’ physical body was an illusion and that He only seemed to suffer and die on the cross.
Church’s Response: The Church affirmed that Jesus’ incarnation and suffering were real, as this is essential for our salvation. Jesus’ true humanity allows Him to truly represent us and atone for our sins.
Patristic Quote: Ignatius of Antioch stressed the reality of Jesus’ incarnation and suffering: “He was truly of the seed of David according to the flesh, and the Son of God according to the will and powe...
This past Sunday at church, we were looking at Genesis 14 in the sermon. There’s a lot going on in this chapter with nine different kings all at war fighting one another, and Abram and Lot somehow mixed up in the middle of it (this is before Abram is renamed to Abraham). Sodom gets invaded, Lot gets taken captive (along with everyone else) and then Abram mounts a daring rescue with 318 of his men! It’s really quite action-packed for such a short chapter. I don’t know about you, but I always think of Abraham as this kindly old man, not some tribal warrior ready to go all “Taken” on his enemies (Gen 14:14–16).
Abraham, probably
It’s in the midst of all this action that we meet a mysterious character who pretty much just turns up out of nowhere: Melchizedek, king of Salem.
He is one of those characters from the Old Testament whose actions reverberate down through history into the New Testament era and beyond and into our present-day worship. Despite the number of kings fighting all across Canaan, Melchizedek doesn’t appear to be a part of these conflicts and only enters the scene when it’s all over, and Abram has rescued Lot and subdued the king who captured Sodom. Then “the king of Sodom went out to meet [Abram] at the Valley of Shaveh, that is, the King’s Valley.” (Gen 14:17), which is modern-day Kidron Valley, just outside of Jerusalem. So the meeting was local and close to Melchizedek, but still doesn’t explain what happens next to Abram:
Genesis 14:18–20And King Melchizedek of Salem brought out bread and wine; he was priest of God Most High. He blessed him and said, “Blessed be Abram by God Most High, maker of heaven and earth,and blessed be God Most High, who has delivered your enemies into your hand!”
The blessing of bread and wine by Melchizedek connects us with the divine thread that will flow through all time and history: the then-future Passover and, ultimately, with Jesus’ institution of the Eucharist. This connection underscores a sacred continuity that we, as Christians, continue to partake in today until Jesus returns.
Melchizedek: Priest and King
Melchizedek appears in Genesis 14:18–20, where he is described as the king of Salem and a priest of the Most High God. His encounter with Abram (Abraham) is brief but significant. He brings out bread and wine and blesses Abraham. He then responds by giving Melchizedek a tenth of everything. Both of these acts point to aspects of the Law, tithes and sacrifices, which at this point in time had not yet been given, which leaves us with more unanswered questions regarding what this priesthood of Melchizedek was (and its origins), and also why Abraham would give a tenth like a tithe.
Salem, which is understood to be the ancient name for Jerusalem, means “city of peace”. This is highly significant as it links to the messianic prophecy of Jesus being the Prince of Peace (Isaiah 9:6). The connection between Melchizedek being the king of Salem and Jesus being in the lineage of David, who reigned in Jerusalem, ties the notion of peace directly into the divine narrative. Melchizedek’s role as a king and priest in the city of peace prefigures the ultimate role of Jesus as Messiah.
Jesus, the Prince of Peace, not only fulfils the royal lineage through King David but also the priestly order of Melchizedek. Hebrews 7:2–3 elaborates on Melchizedek’s name and title, explaining that Melchizedek “means ‘king of righteousness’; next, he is also king of Salem, that is, ‘king of peace’.” This dual kingship of righteousness and peace perfectly summarises Jesus’ ministry and mission.
Psalm 110:4 further cements Melchizedek’s significance by declaring the Messiah as “a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek”. This eternal priesthood signifies a lasting peace and righteousness that Jesus embodies and imparts to His followers (John 14:27). Thus, Melchizedek’s brief appearance becomes a profound for...
This is a guest post by “KingsServant”
In 2019 a book called Defying Jihad was published by Tyndale House, the reputable Christian publisher telling the story of “Esther Ahmad” a pseudonym used by the author alongside her co-author Craig Borlase, who has previously written alongside, well known Christian personalities such as Matt Redman the singer and Andrew Brunson, an American pastor imprisoned by the Turkish government.
As I began to read this book over this past year I was expecting an encouraging account of how a former Jihadi found Christ and escaped her previous accomplices. Very quickly, however, I became uncomfortable, her descriptions of her background involved allegedly committed Muslims doing very un-Islamic things and the unnamed militant group doing unusual things that didn’t fit my knowledge gained from years of study of Islam and interactions with Muslims, including extremists. As my doubts about the authenticity of the book solidified, and yet I couldn’t find anyone else who had questioned these things before me, or on the other hand provided verification of her story. I decided to contact Craig. During our brief and cordial email exchange he told me that he had been in touch with people who knew Esther after she escaped her family home, but so far has not suggested he has any other lines of evidence confirming any of the key elements of her account before that time. As a result, I am writing this article to draw attention to the aspects that raise suspicion.
According to “Esther’s” story, she was raised in Pakistan where she was sent to an extremist madrassa (or Muslim school) for girls, there they were shown images of victims of violence and told that Christians and Jews were responsible - the emphasis on Jews and particularly Christians by a militant group based in Pakistan is strange. All the terrorist groups in Pakistan direct their efforts towards Hindus (especially in Kashmir) or other Muslims, since Christians are such a tiny minority there.
Things rapidly become even stranger when a Mullah displays weapons to the group of girls telling them “… one day you will get to handle these” as the book continues describing them being encouraged to aspire to physical violence towards Jews and Christians specifically, the description of “Aunt Selma” volunteering for and dying fighting Jihad is likewise out of place. Islamic terrorist groups very rarely recruit women for combat roles, as Devorah Margolin describes Hamas and ISIS as departing from convention by encouraging female participation in violence and even then in only a very restricted way under particular circumstances with a specific fatwa (or Islamic ruling) being issued.1
On page 33, the militant group leader “Anwar” suggests that Esther could find a husband in the west to bring him to Islam. It is strictly forbidden for a Muslim woman to marry a non Muslim man, the idea that they would be encouraged by a scholar to date is about as unbelievable. In a conservative Pakistani culture, she would more likely find herself the victim of a so-called “honour killing” for such a thing.2
After her initial chance encounters with her future husband “John” (not as a result of trying to follow “Anwar’s” advice), on page 92 it is recorded that he said to her “… I’m not against your faith and beliefs…”, it’s the kind of thing that we might expect a liberal in the west to say, but not a Pakistani believer who knows that Islam denies that Jesus is the Son of God and that he died for sinners.
Following her conversion according to her account, she engaged in a number of public debates with clerics in which she defended her decision to leave Islam and follow Christ. It is not uncommon for apostates to have meetings with scholars arranged by their family members in the hope that they might be won back to Islam, but it is very surprising that her influential father would want to give his apostate daughter su...
Ash Wednesday marks the beginning of Lent, a season of repentance, fasting, and preparation for Easter in the Christian calendar. It is observed by many Western Christian traditions, including the Roman Catholic Church, Anglican Communion, Lutheran churches, and some Methodist and Reformed communities. The day falls 46 days before Easter Sunday and is always on a Wednesday.
Origins and Historical Development
The practice of Ash Wednesday can be traced back to the early centuries of Christianity, though its formal observance developed over time. The use of ashes as a sign of repentance has deep biblical roots, appearing frequently in the Old Testament. People would cover themselves with ashes as an outward sign of sorrow for sin and a desire to turn back to God (e.g., Job 42:6, Daniel 9:3, Jonah 3:6).
By the 8th century, the imposition of ashes on the forehead became a common practice in the Western Church. Pope Urban II (r. 1088–1099) helped formalise Ash Wednesday as the official beginning of Lent, reinforcing the idea of a season of penitence leading up to Easter. The name “Ash Wednesday” itself comes from the tradition of marking the faithful with ashes, typically in the shape of a cross, while the priest or minister recites words such as, “Remember that you are dust, and to dust you shall return” (Genesis 3:19) or “Repent, and believe in the Gospel” (Mark 1:15).
The Lenten Fast
Fasting has always been a central aspect of Lent, and by the time of the Council of Nicaea (AD 325), a forty-day period of fasting before Easter had become a standard part of Church practice. This was based on the example of Jesus’ forty days in the wilderness (Matthew 4:1–2) and was intended to prepare believers spiritually for the Passion and Resurrection of Christ.
Athanasius, the great bishop of Alexandria, regularly wrote paschal (Easter) letters to the churches to encourage fasting, self-control, and moderation during this period. His writings provide valuable insight into how Lent was observed in the early Church and confirm that the practice was well established long before later claims that it had pagan origins. In one of his letters, written around AD 332, he describes the structure of the Lenten fast:
The beginning of the fast of forty days is on the fifth of the month Phamenoth [Ash Wednesday]; and when, as I have said, we have first been purified and prepared by those days, we begin the holy week of the great Easter on the tenth of the month Pharmuthi [Palm Sunday], in which, my beloved brethren, we should use more prolonged prayers, and fastings… — Athanasius, Letter III (c. AD 332)
The early Lenten fast was stricter than modern observances. Many early Christians abstained not only from meat but also from dairy, eggs, and wine. In some traditions, believers ate only one meal per day, typically in the evening. While practices have evolved over time, the principle remains the same: Lent is a time of self-discipline, spiritual renewal, and preparation for Easter.
Meaning and Observance of Ash Wednesday
Ash Wednesday serves as a solemn reminder of human mortality and the need for repentance. The ashes, often made by burning the palm branches from the previous year’s Palm Sunday, symbolise both death and the hope of renewal in Christ.
The day is also marked by fasting and abstinence in many traditions, such as within Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, the faithful are required to fast and to abstain from meat and dairy on various days. Many other denominations encourage similar practices or personal acts of self-denial as a way of focusing on spiritual growth.
Churches hold special services where worshippers receive the imposition of ashes. The act is not merely ritualistic but is meant to be a public declaration of one’s commitment to turn away from sin and seek God’s grace.
Greek Orthodox Yearly Fasting Calendar (2025). Fasting isn’t just for Lent!
An Anglican Perspective
The Ch...
The Bible is often described as “God-breathed,” a phrase taken from 2 Timothy 3:16: “All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.” But what does it mean for Scripture to be “inspired,” and how did the books of the Bible come to be recognised as part of the canon — the authoritative collection of writings that make up the Bible? Were they really “decided” at the Council of Nicaea, as some popular myths claim?
Table of Contents
Understanding Biblical Inspiration
What is the Canon?
The Septuagint and the Deuterocanonical Books
How Were the Books of the Bible Selected?
Why Were Some Books Excluded?
Has the Bible Been Edited or Corrupted Over Time?
Did the Church Decide the Canon at Nicaea?
Conclusion
Further Reading
Understanding Biblical Inspiration
A helpful analogy for inspiration is that of an architect designing a great building. Consider St. Paul’s Cathedral in London — Christopher Wren was the architect who planned and designed it, yet he himself did not lay a single brick. Instead, countless workers followed his design to bring the cathedral into existence. Similarly, God is the ultimate author of Scripture, yet He worked through human writers to bring His message to us. The Holy Spirit inspired them, guiding their words while allowing their personalities, historical context, and literary style to remain evident in their writings.
This means that while the Bible is written by human hands, it carries divine authority because its true source is God Himself. The process of inspiration does not mean God dictated each word like a secretary taking notes, or by possessing the authors, but rather that He ensured the truth of His message was faithfully recorded by the biblical writers.
What is the Canon?
The word “canon” comes from the Greek κανών (kanōn), meaning “rule” or “measuring rod.” In the context of the Bible, the canon refers to the official list of books recognised as divinely inspired and authoritative for faith and practice.
The canon developed over time as the early church recognised which writings carried divine authority. The Old Testament canon was largely settled by the time of Jesus, based on the Hebrew Scriptures used in the Jewish community. The New Testament canon, however, was formed through a process of discernment over several centuries, as the church recognised which writings were truly inspired and authoritative.
The Septuagint and the Deuterocanonical Books
The Septuagint (LXX) is the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, produced in the 3rd-2nd centuries BC. It was widely used by Greek-speaking Jews and later by early Christians, including the apostles. The Septuagint included several books not found in the Hebrew Bible, known as the Deuterocanonical books (such as Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, and 1–2 Maccabees). While these books were accepted in many early Christian communities and remain part of the canon in Catholic and Orthodox traditions, Protestant reformers later removed them, considering them useful but not divinely inspired at the same level as the rest of Scripture.
The reformers’ view was influenced by Jerome, who, in the 4th century, argued that these books were not part of the Hebrew Bible and therefore should be considered separate. However, he still included them in his Latin Vulgate translation, recognising their historical and devotional value. The Reformers followed Jerome’s stance, moving these books into a separate section rather than outright removing them. It was not until the 19th century that an American Bible Society, citing printing costs and other practical considerations, physically removed these books entirely from Protestant Bibles. This decision solidified what is now commonly referred to as the “Protestant canon” of 66 books.
And the other Books (as Hierome saith) the Church doth read for example o...
For 1700 years, the Council of Nicaea has been surrounded by myths, misunderstandings, and outright fabrications. From claims that Constantine “invented” the Trinity to the idea that the council decided the books of the Bible, there’s no shortage of misinformation floating around.
That’s why I’m excited to announce my upcoming book, What Really Happened at Nicaea? This book sets the record straight, taking you inside the actual events of 325 AD—what was debated, what was decided, and why it still matters today.
If you’ve ever wondered:✅ Did Constantine rewrite Christianity?✅ Was Jesus’ divinity really up for debate?✅ Did Nicaea create the Bible?✅ What was actually said about Arianism?
Then this book is for you.
Be the First to Know!
What Really Happened at Nicaea? will be available soon, and you can be among the first to hear when it’s released. Head over to lukejwilson.com/what-really-happened-at-nicaea.html and sign up for updates.
Let’s cut through the myths and uncover the truth about Nicaea!
...
Heart Soul Mind Strength: The Greatest Commandment
My new book is now available Order now wherever you get books!
Discover the transformative power of Lectio Divina. This comprehensive guide invites you on a spiritual journey, enriching your prayer life and deepening your relationship with God through the ancient practice of Lectio Divina.
