systematic theology

Why Creation Matters, Part 15: Revelation

April 20, 2026 by Dan Olinger Leave a Comment

As we all know, the Canon ends with the Book of Revelation, which records Christ’s words to the Apostle John about “the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter” (Re 1.19). Four times John includes a creation reference.

Revelation 3.14

And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God.

Here Jesus refers to himself as “the beginning of the creation of God,” which sounds to us like the Jehovah’s Witnesses, or their ancestor Arius the 4^th-century heretic.

Do we have a problem?

No. The word translated “beginning” here is the Greek arche. Like all words, it has multiple nuances, or meanings. It can mean “beginning,” as it does in John 1.1—“in the beginning.” The standard lexicon (dictionary) of New Testament Greek, which its users call BDAG, lists that as the first nuance. The second is “one with whom a process begins”; the third, “the first cause”—the nuance it assigns to this passage.

Thus this verse is quite similar to Paul’s use of “firstborn” in Colossians 1.15; it speaks of position or standing rather than of chronology or sequence.

Jesus is the person behind all of creation. The Laodiceans ought to hear what he has to say.

Revelation 4.11

This is John’s first vision of the scene around the throne of God in heaven. God is seated on throne (Re 4.2-3), surrounded by 24 “elders” (Re 4.4) who fall down to worship God, crying out, “Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.”

It appears to me that unlike the previous passage, the person being described here is not the Son, but the Father; the narrative continues into the next chapter, where “the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of David” (Re 5.5) receives a scroll from the one sitting on the throne (Re 5.7).

But as in the previous passage, the fact of creation is cited as a basis for authority, even worship.

Revelation 10.6

Here the speaker is an angel—evidently a powerful one (Re 10.1-3) who announces a transition in the timeline (“that there will be delay no longer,” Re 10.6 NASB), swearing “by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein” (Re 10.6).

This is John’s third consecutive use of the fact of Creation to demonstrate the authority of the Creator.

Revelation 21.1-5

John climaxes his book with his vision of the New Heaven and the New Earth. But he is climaxing not only his apocalypse, but also the entire Canon of Scripture; he closes the Bible with an inclusio, a bookend that contrasts the Beginning with the End.

“The first heaven and the first earth were passed away” (Re 21.1).

“There was no more sea” (Re 21.1), in contrast with the Creation, which began with the globe entirely covered by water (Ge 1.2).

“The tabernacle of God is with men” (Re 21.3), whereas in the beginning he had walked with him “in the cool of the day” (Ge 3.8)—and we don’t know that this was a daily ritual.

“There shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things [since Genesis 3] are passed away” (Re 21.4).

“And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new” (Re 21.5).

Over these final two chapters of the book, John makes other connections with the first creation; the Tree of Life shows up (Re 22.2), and there are other linkages. See how many you can find.

So our Scripture ends with a full deliverance, a New Creation that overwhelms all that we have done to twist and pervert the old one. The end of the story—and the dawn of eternity—make no sense without the beginning.

Creation matters.

Next time, a wrap-up.

Photo by Greg Rakozy on Unsplash

Why Creation Matters, Part 14: General Epistles

April 16, 2026 by Dan Olinger Leave a Comment

The General Epistles encompass James through Jude; they’re called “general” epistles because they are not addressed to specific churches or individuals, as Paul’s epistles are. Two of these epistles are by Peter, and one of those contains the only substantial reference to Creation theology in this section of the Bible. That’s in 2 Peter 3.

Peter begins the chapter by reminding his readers to take heed of what earlier Scriptures have said is coming: “there shall come in the last days scoffers” (2P 3.3). And what are they scoffing? The idea that Jesus is coming back. They note that things are just proceeding, without supernatural manifestations, day after day, as they always have (2P 3.4).

There’s irony here, for Peter has them reference “creation,” meaning the beginning of history. Even today some who reject the biblical account of creation will use the term for the ancient past, even if they have in mind the “Big Bang” or the formation of our sun or our planet.

The irony, of course, is that there was a “creation,” and it was not the sudden, unexplained rapid expansion of a hypothetical singularity of all matter. It was not the unexplained accretion of rapidly expanding matter into a solar disk, or into a seething hot mass of molten material that eventually cooled into the third rock from the sun.

It was, as Peter notes (2P 3.5), a supernatural act by an all-powerful, all-knowing, perfectly aesthetic Being, who formed it all from nothing with merely a word—or a series of them.

Peter says that these scoffers are ignorant of all that (2P 3.5). But with a single word he crushes any possible self-defense from them. Their ignorance, he says, is willing.

Here he calls to our mind a passage in Paul that we’ve already noted: Romans 1.20. There Paul says that the truth is recognizable in the cosmos that we see all around us—but some suppress that obvious truth, they hold it down, because they simply do not want to acknowledge the obvious. In our day it seems that the primary external motive for doing this is peer pressure: the cost to a scientist’s professional standing for embracing creationism is significant. But as Paul goes on to tell us later in Romans, at root the motivation is not primarily external; it springs from each person’s heart:

There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God (Ro 3.11, alluding to Ps 14.2).

This is a point that Peter has already made in our passage (2P 3.3).

Having noted the irony in the scoffers’ reference to creation, Peter proceeds to cite another supernatural historical event: the Flood (2P 3.6). Since God has judged the entire planet once already, he can certainly do so again at the coming of Christ. Perhaps here (2P 3.7) Peter implies God’s promise never again to destroy the earth by a flood (Ge 8.21-22); he says “the heavens and the earth … are kept in store.” (In verse 22 he effectively anticipates the scoffers’ “evidence” in 2P 3.4.) But then he notes that the restriction on floods does leave at least one other option: fire.

Those who scoff at a return of Christ in fiery judgment (cf 2Th 1.6-10) are simply not paying attention to obvious evidences. Willfully.

And as to their allegation that much time has passed with no evidence of the supernatural (2P 3.4), Peter presents a basic fact about God that they are overlooking: the God who created time is not subject to it (2P 3.8). The passage of time means nothing concerning the validity of his words.

Some have interpreted this verse as a formula: 1000 years = 1 day. There’s a theory that as Creation took 6 days, with a 7^th day of rest, so the story of earth will last 6000 years, followed by a 1000-year “rest,” the Millennium. That’s interesting, but I think that’s all we can say about it. Peter’s contextual point here is not about chopping history up into thousand-year segments, but something much broader: God is not bound by time as we are. If he waits hundreds of thousands of years before Jesus returns, that is no matter. The promise will be fulfilled.

Thus we should not ignore, or even worse, scoff at the idea of a future judgment. It’s coming; we should believe. And prepare.

The God who created the cosmos is able to evaluate, judge, and destroy it.

Creation matters.

Photo by Greg Rakozy on Unsplash

Why Creation Matters, Part 13: Hebrews

April 13, 2026 by Dan Olinger Leave a Comment

The book of Hebrews is in a class by itself, for several reasons. First, it’s not a “normal” epistle, since it doesn’t begin as most epistles do; it’s really more of a sermon, a “word of exhortation” (He 13.22)—though in the same verse the author says he has “written a letter” (epistello, the verb from which our word epistle comes). Second, “the author,” as I’ve just called him (or her) is anonymous—and anybody who thinks he knows who the author is has jumped to a conclusion. I’m fairly sure Paul didn’t write it, but beyond that, only God knows (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 6.25.14). Third, it’s not really a “general epistle,” so it fits only awkwardly in that group, and as I’ve just said, it’s not a Pauline epistle either, so it’s just sort of out there alone among the NT epistles. And fourth, in my opinion it presents a picture of the person and work of Christ that is unrivaled for breadth, depth, and expression anywhere else outside the Gospels.

And here this author points three times to the centrality of Creation in his theology.

Hebrews 1.2

In his opening paean to the Son, the second thing the author says about him is that the Father used him as his agent to create the worlds (He 1.2); more precisely, “by whom also he made the worlds.” This statement parallels two others that we’ve already covered: John 1.3 and Colossians 1.16. Three different authors begin their biblical document by establishing that the Son is the Elohim of Genesis 1, from “Let there be light” to his resting on the seventh day.

But the author of Hebrews takes it further than John or Paul. He makes it the basis of a lengthy argument that Jesus is superior to the angels of heaven, for the Hebrew Scriptures use expressions of him that far exceed anything they say about angels (He 1.4-14)—and this at a time when Jewish writings were completely fascinated with angels and had been for a couple of centuries. I’d suggest that there are Christological implications of tinkering with the Genesis account in ways that de-emphasize the role of the Creator in favor of the mechanism.

Hebrews 1.10-12

As part of his contrasting the Son with angels, the author quotes from Psalm 102.25-27:

Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands: ¹¹They shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment; ¹²And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail.

This reference to Creation is different from the others we’ve seen. Most of the earlier ones emphasize the power demonstrated in Creation and thus implied in the Creator. This one, though, emphasizes the temporality of it all; it will pass away. But the Son is not like his creation: he is forever.

This statement, of course, speaks to the deity of Christ—not because he is powerful enough to create the cosmos, but because he is unchanging enough to outlast it. By a mile.

Hebrews 11.3

Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

This brief verse begins the author’s discussion of that all-important virtue, faith. He will eventually list numerous people from the biblical history who exemplified faith in their earthly dealings.

But he begins with Creation, and he tells us two important things about it.

First, we understand it through faith. Not blind faith—we always have to say that, and I’ve discussed that before—but openness to hear and believe God’s story, because we know that he tells the truth. Thus those who reject the doctrine have not an intellectual problem, but a volitional one; they have chosen not to believe what God has said.

And second, God created everything—matter, energy, and anything else that might be out there—from nothing. He created substance from non-substance.

We humans have never done that. Even the artist, who envisions a concept and paints it, uses canvas and brushes and paints that he or someone else has manufactured. The author, who thinks of things and publishes them, uses paper and ink, or electrons that excite LCDs, or something to place his ideas into communicable form.

But everything from nothing?

You can have faith in someone who can do that—and did.

Creation matters.

Photo by Greg Rakozy on Unsplash

Why Creation Matters, Part 12: Pauline Epistles 2

April 9, 2026 by Dan Olinger Leave a Comment

Paul cites Creation theology in three more passages, two of them on the same subject.

1 Corinthians 11.9; 1 Timothy 2.13

In two passages Paul cites Creation as the basis for worship protocols.

⁸For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. ⁹Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man (1Co 11.8-9).

¹³For Adam was first formed, then Eve (1Ti 2.13).

Both of these passages have long and complex interpretational histories, and it’s not my purpose to develop that in a brief blog post. Both passages are addressing proper protocol in a worship service—the first specifically headwear, and the second leadership in the church. In a feminist age, both of these passages are highly controversial.

But the point I’m focusing on here is not at all controversial—or it shouldn’t be. I note, first, that Paul views the creation account as history, as non-fiction; he accepts its historicity outright. And second, Paul determines the appropriate protocols for corporate worship, a contemporary morality, if you will, from that ancient historical account.

It matters.

2 Corinthians 4.6

⁶For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

Paul’s citation of Creation in this context feels almost off-handed. In this chapter Paul is contrasting the permanent, eternal value of spiritual life with the transitory treasures of life in the world. He will eventually write,

our light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory; ¹⁸While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal (2Co 4.17-18).

In making this contrast between the seen and the unseen, Paul uses the most logical metaphor, that of light; in his ministry practice he rejects “the hidden things of dishonesty” but manifests the truth (2Co 4.2). A hidden gospel reflects the “blinded” minds of the lost, who cannot see “the light of the glorious gospel of Christ” (2Co 4.4).

The greatest need of a blind world, then, is the ability to see the light that is all around them. The fact that God originally spoke light into existence gives us assurance that he can speak a deeper light, a more powerful light, into existence in our inner beings so that we can recognize the light that shines inherently from Jesus Christ, the true light.

Christians argue over how this works. Arminians emphasize the centrality of human responsibility in believing, while Calvinists focus on the moving of God in sovereign grace. The Bible is clear that both factors are important. We will not believe unless God does a work of grace in us, and we must believe; our choice matters.

This passage emphasizes the divine work of turning on the switch. The light is there to be seen; but blind eyes must be given the capacity to see.

How do we know that God can do this?

He’s spoken the original light into existence, and he’s created eyes in Adam and Eve to see it. As we’ve already noted, Jesus replicated that act during his earthly ministry by creating, from clay, functioning eyes for a man who had never had them. He can certainly do it again, creating spiritual eyes to see spiritual light.

Creation matters.

Photo by Greg Rakozy on Unsplash

Why Creation Matters, Part 11: Pauline Epistles 1

April 6, 2026 by Dan Olinger Leave a Comment

In Acts, of all the preachers cited, only Paul bases a sermonic point on God’s work of Creation. It should be no surprise, then, that his epistles touch on the doctrine repeatedly. And he applies it more broadly than one might expect.

Romans 1.20

Early in his epistolary writing he lays down an application that apparently underlies all the others:

For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse (Ro 1.20 NASB).

This is Paul’s clear response to the “What about those who have never heard?” question. He says, “They are without excuse.”

I should note that he clearly identifies the “they” here in the previous verses; they are “men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness” (Ro 1.18). God, he says, has made that truth evident to such rejecters (Ro 1.19) through the things that he has made. I’ve written on this principle at greater length earlier in this blog, so suffice it to say here that anybody ought to be able to recognize all kinds of attributes of the Creator by just looking at what he has created—whether or not the observer has modern observational tools.

To deny that the cosmos evidences the power or wisdom or skill or goodness of a Creator is simply to suppress what is obvious. The assumed atheism of much of modern “science” reminds me of the Iraqi Information Minister, Muhammad Saeed Al Sahhaf, who during the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 went on television to deny that American troops had reached Baghdad, when plentiful videos showed American tanks and armored personnel carriers rolling through the streets. For his gaslighting Saeed earned the moniker “Baghdad Bob.”

The atheist scientist knows. He does. But he will not see, because either his own will or that of his colleagues simply will not allow him to. It’s not just teens who are susceptible to peer pressure.

Colossians 1.16

Paul develops this principle in more detail in a later epistle, written during his house arrest in Rome while waiting for Caesar (Nero) to hear his appeal. Here he asserts that Jesus, the Son, is Lord over all the cosmos (Co 1.15) for the simple reason that he has created it:

For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through Him and for Him (Co 1.16 NASB).

Note how the claim ends; his right to reign is absolute not only because he created the cosmos, but because he is the person for whom it was created.

Again, I’ve written on this passage in (much) more detail earlier, demonstrating the falsehood of the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ allegation that Colossians 1.15 shows that Jesus was created and thus cannot be God. We won’t rehash that material here. Instead we’ll focus on the actual point of the passage: Jesus is Lord—of all that is, ever has been, or ever will be. A key basis for that is his role in Creation.

And on this day after Easter, it is appropriate as a significant aside to assert as well that another evidence of his lordship is his emergence from the tomb, triumphant over death and leading a long line of followers who are thus triumphant over death as well.

When I was a boy I assumed that I’d be alive when Jesus returned for his church. Though I still hold open that hope, I realize that at age 71 the odds are increasing that I’m going to die just like all those folks from history.

That’s OK. Death has died in the resurrection of the Son, the Creator, the Lord.

Creation matters.

Photo by Greg Rakozy on Unsplash

Why Creation Matters, Part 8: Minor Prophets

March 26, 2026 by Dan Olinger Leave a Comment

What we call the Minor Prophets the Hebrew canon calls The Book of the Twelve, a single book in the Latter Prophets with Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel. Within this book I’d like to focus on 3 Creation passages, 1 each in Amos, Jonah, and Zechariah.

Amos 5.8

Amos is one of the earliest of all the writing prophets. He is writing to the Northern Kingdom of Israel, calling them to confess and repent of their sins in light of the coming invasion by Assyria. He begins chapter 5 by predicting their downfall (Amos 5.2), a literal decimation (Amos 5.3). He gives them yet another chance to repent (Amos 5.4-6), culminating with a reminder of God’s great power to do all his will:

Seek him that maketh the seven stars and Orion,
And turneth the shadow of death into the morning,
And maketh the day dark with night:
That calleth for the waters of the sea,
And poureth them out upon the face of the earth:
The LORD is his name:
9 That strengtheneth the spoiled against the strong,
So that the spoiled shall come against the fortress (Amos 5.8-9).

As we’ve seen earlier, God here presents not only his power to create (the seven stars and Orion), but his power to direct both cosmic (day / night, sea / land) and political (spoiled [looted] / strong) forces.

The God who can—and does—do these things can both overwhelm the unrepentant in judgment and deliver the repentant.

Jonah 1.9

Jonah, writing at roughly the same time as Amos, demonstrates the truth of his prophetic colleague’s words by his own actions—and disobedient ones at that.

Jonah rejects God’s command to preach the destruction of Nineveh—as we later learn, because he knows that God will forgive those who repent (Jonah 4.2)—and purchases a boat fare in the other direction, to Tarshish. God then hurls a storm upon the Mediterranean, one so fierce that seasoned sailors believe they’re done for. They cast lots to determine who is being judged by the storm, and the lot falls to Jonah. When they ask him for an explanation, he replies,

I fear [worship] the LORD, the God of heaven, which hath made the sea and the dry land (Jonah 1.9).

The God who created the sea, and separated it from the land—boy, would these sailors love to bring them back together right now!—can bring overwhelming judgment. But, Jonah says, he will also deliver them if they obey him.

Just what Amos said.

Zechariah 12.1

The Creation theology of the Hebrew Scriptures ends* on a positive note. Zechariah is a post-exilic prophet, an exact contemporary of Haggai. Both of them worked together to encourage the returned exiles from Babylon to rebuild the Temple, initiating the Second Temple Period. A major theme in both prophets is the blessing and even glory that lie ahead for God’s people in Jerusalem.

Here Zechariah describes God as the one who

stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth,
And formeth the spirit of man within him (Zec 12.1b).

To these returnees, who have been rebuilding the Temple, Zechariah speaks of a God who knows something about laying a foundation and using a measuring line, who has invested mankind with his very breath (and thereby his image [Gen 1.26-27]), will take notice of their obedience in building and will demonstrate his love for them by blessing them in the days ahead. He even looks ahead to the day when the Shepherd will be smitten and the sheep will be scattered (Zec 13.7), and beyond even that to the Day of the Lord, when his feet shall stand on the Mount of Olives (Zec 14.1-4), and God will usher in a day when “every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah shall be holiness unto the LORD of hosts” (Zec 14.21).

All will be well, because the God who began it all, powerfully and intelligently, will bring it to his benevolent and designed conclusion.

Creation matters.

* Malachi makes a brief reference to Creation (Mal 2.10) as the unifying basis for God’s covenant people—a fitting closure to the Older Covenant.

Photo by Greg Rakozy on Unsplash

Demystifying Discipleship, Part 4: What, and Where / How?

January 15, 2026 by Dan Olinger Leave a Comment

Part 1: Introduction | Part 2: Why Disciple? | Part 3: When?

As I anticipated in the previous post, I think a couple “journalism questions” remain for our survey of discipleship:

What happened when you were converted?

Where do you go from here?

And because I’ve written on these questions here before, I think a couple of links and a comment or two might be sufficient for this post.

We begin discipling a new convert by explaining to him where he is, or what happened to him when he came to Christ in repentance and faith (or, in today’s common expression, “got saved”). God was doing things in his heart before that happened, and a whole raft of things, many of which he didn’t notice, happened to him at the moment of conversion. And God’s work will continue in him in the days ahead, and for the rest of his life.

He needs to know these things in order to understand his place in God’s plan now.

I’ve written about those things in this series, using the analogy of opening presents at Christmas. It’s a long series (22 posts!), because it needs to be.

We conclude by answering the question “Where do we go from here?” To some degree the last few posts of the series linked above will help to answer this question—there’s progressive sanctification and filling and glorification—but our new brother will need some help with getting there—with fulfilling his responsibilities in the shared (“synergistic”) work of progressive sanctification.

For these helps, I suggest another earlier series, in which I use the analogy of working out, or building muscle. That’s just 6 posts, covering what we call the three (or maybe five) “means of grace.” It’s a subject that I think is taught less clearly than it ought to be these days.

May we all comprehend, and apprehend, our inheritance and our responsibilities in this remarkable spiritual journey.

Photo by Nathan McDine on Unsplash

Demystifying Discipleship, Part 3: When?

January 12, 2026 by Dan Olinger Leave a Comment

Part 1: Introduction | Part 2: Why Disciple?

I suppose there are two “when” questions having to do with discipleship:

When should I seek to make disciples (“evangelize”)?

When should I call for a decision in evangelism?

The first question, I think, has already been answered in our survey of the Great Commission: “As you are going,” Jesus said, “make disciples of all nations” (Mt 29.19).

That means it’s a natural extension of daily life.

Now, Jesus told us to be “wise as serpents, and harmless as doves” (Mt 10.16). I know there are people who would disagree with me—vigorously—but I think that statement at least implies that we should evangelize in ways that are reasonably adapted to the culture in which we’re working.

An example. Some Christians preach on street corners. You can do that; I’ve done some of that myself, in years past. But in our culture, such people are typically viewed as, well, crazy, or at least socially maladjusted, and I haven’t heard of their having much success. The only response I ever got was from someone who was inebriated, and there was no way that I could take him through the plan of salvation in that condition.

Evangelism is simply a part of the way we live our lives. Recently I flew somewhere on Southwest, which at the time didn’t assign seating. The way that works is that the first people to board grab either an aisle or a window seat, as close to the front as possible, and then they all fervently hope that nobody sits in the middle. I boarded relatively late, and as I walked down the aisle I could see that fervent hope on every face I passed. I managed to get an aisle seat waaaay in the back, and when a big guy came down the aisle to claim the middle seat, I just slid over so he could have the aisle seat. He commented on that, and I said, “I’m the littlest guy in the row; makes sense for me to sit in the middle.” (I’m happy to say that this was not a transpacific flight; if it were, the decision would have wrenched my soul.) We had a long and congenial conversation about spiritual things—turned out he was already a believer—and the guy on my right heard the whole thing, even though he wasn’t inclined to join the conversation.

So when do we evangelize? All the time. As we go. Wisely.

My answer to the second question might be controversial as well. I’ve already written some thoughts on how much pressure we place on children to convert. Stop here and go read that brief piece. I’ll wait.

No, really. Go read it.

All right. We can do serious damage when we pressure people to accept something they don’t understand or agree with. Prayers are not magic words; God knows the heart, and even a prayer with all the right words is useless if the one praying doesn’t mean them.

That’s true of adults as well as children. Would that enebriated man on the sidewalk in Boston have been regenerated if he had prayed a prayer that I recited to him, but that he likely would remember only dimly, if at all?

No, he wouldn’t have been. But if he did remember it dimly, then for the rest of his life he could tell future evangelists that he’d already done that, and “it didn’t work for me.”

There’s no way I’d set up a situation like that.

So when do you call for a decision?

The Bible says that salvation consists of repentance—turning from sin attitudinally—and conversion—turning to Christ in faith. Repentance, without which salvation simply will not happen, is animated by conviction of sin, a sense of sinfulness and of guilt before God. And how does conviction happen?

Someone shouting at you?

Someone telling you a sad story that moves you deeply?

Someone telling you about the eternal fires of hell and scaring you half to death?

No. Not by themselves.

Conviction, the Scripture says, is a work of God’s Holy Spirit.

So when do we call for a decision, a prayer of repentance?

When we see evidence of conviction. In a child, or in an adult.

Otherwise, we’re just inoculating the person against evangelism.

Next time, we’ll finish the series by laying out the content of discipleship:

What happened when you were converted?

Where do you go from here?

Part 4: What, and Where / How?

Photo by Nathan McDine on Unsplash

Demystifying Discipleship, Part 2: Why Disciple?

January 8, 2026 by Dan Olinger Leave a Comment

Part 1: Introduction

If we’re going to be equipped to disciple others, we need to start with the basics:

What is discipleship?

Why is this a priority? (or, to put it more bluntly, why should I care?)

I’m going to answer those questions in reverse order.

It all begins with God’s will.

Just before he returned to heaven, Jesus left his disciples with a command, the one we call The Great Commission. It appears in Mark 16.15, Luke 24.46-49, and Acts 1.8, but its classic expression is in Matthew 28.18-20:

All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. ¹⁹Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: ²⁰Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.

Jesus begins by asserting that he has obtained all the authority (“power”) there is in the universe.

That’s quite a claim, and it’s backed up elsewhere in Scripture (e.g. Co 1.14-20).

He’s not bluffing.

So the Great Commission is based on the infinite, universal authority of the one giving it. It’s not merely an option.

And what does this authority command?

The main verb of what follows is “teach.” This word means simply to “make disciples.” When are we to do that? Here Jesus uses a participle, “going,” or “as you go.” So whenever you’re out, take the opportunity to make disciples of all people groups. Of course, to do that you need to go to all the people groups. That’s a key basis of what we call “missions,” and I note that he didn’t restrict the command to a subset of professionals. His command assumes that we’ll all be going, and that as we go we’ll take the time to make disciples in the places where we go.

Next he uses two more participles to tell us how we’re to do that. First, we’re going to baptize them. That assumes, of course, that they will have been converted, will have expressed repentance from sin and faith in Christ. And second, we’re going to teach them what they need to know—what Christ has commanded of his disciples.

As the church has functioned throughout its history, some have specialized in certain people groups—and that makes sense. But all of us have been given this command, and by an infinite authority at that. As we go, wherever we go, we should be telling of Christ’s work, encouraging others to repent and believe, and helping to teach them what happens next.

We all have the obligation to evangelize. All of us. Not just the professionals, whether pastors here in the States or overseas. And once, through our evangelistic labors, someone has believed, we have the obligation to teach him. To disciple him.

Apparently, 2 out of 3 of us aren’t doing that.

Maybe they’re too busy screaming at their political opponents about how stupid they are.

I doubt that’ll open many doors. And I doubt that our infinite, universal authority will be pleased with our priorities, or our devotion to the real cause.

The Bible includes many examples of evangelism; we would do well to study those examples and consider how we might apply them to our time and culture:

Pentecost (Ac 2.38)

Temple (Ac 3.19-26)

Sanhedrin (Ac 4.12)

Sanhedrin 2 (Ac 5.31)

Simon (Ac 8.20-23)

Saul (Ac 9.20; 22.16; 26.18-20)

Cornelius (Ac 10.43; 11.17-18)

Antioch (Ac 13.38-39)

Iconium (Ac 14.1)

Gentiles (Ac 15.9)

Philippian Jailer (Ac 16.30-31)

Berea (Ac 17.12)

Athens (Ac 17.30-31)

Corinth (Ac 18.8)

Ephesus (Ac 19.4-5, 18-19)

Rome (Ac 28.23-24)

There’s no lack of patterns provided.

Next time we’ll consider how to proceed in evangelism.

Part 3: When? | Part 4: What, and Where / How?

Photo by Nathan McDine on Unsplash

Demystifying Discipleship, Part 1: Introduction

January 5, 2026 by Dan Olinger Leave a Comment

We hear a lot about discipleship in the church these days. Pastors and teachers often point out that discipleship is the focus of the Great Commission (we’ll get to that in a bit), but a recent Barna study (2022) concluded that while about 56% of Christians are being discipled, only about 33% are discipling others.

A couple of caveats.

Accurate surveying is a complicated business; minor inattention can produce huge errors, and every survey that does its statistical work prudently will report a certain “margin of error,” usually 3 to 7 percent, based on sample size and other factors. (The margin of error in this study is +/- 1.5% at 95% confidence.) But even a very large sample size can yield unreliable results—as is the case in virtually every Facebook poll, in which the respondents self-select. That said, Barna is a well-regarded research group.

Nowhere does the article report how Barna defined “Christian”; it says simply that the respondents self-identified as Christian. (I didn’t read the study itself, which is behind a paywall.) Given Barna’s history, I think it’s safe to assume that they were interacting with evangelicals.

The article also doesn’t define “discipleship,” though I’m sure the study itself does. Given that only 56% percent of Christians are “being discipled,” I’m confident that the definition does not include pulpit ministry.

With those factors in mind, I think we can take the percentages as reasonably accurate. That said, though the percentage of Christians who are being discipled is significantly higher than the percentage of those who are discipling others, I still think it’s lower than it ought to be; and the number of those discipling others is disturbingly low.

When a subset of the survey group was asked why they’re not discipling anyone, the most common response was that they didn’t think they were qualified. I rather suspect that apathy and/or fear play a larger role than the survey indicates, but because people are not likely to give answers that find fault with themselves, I doubt that any survey would yield reliable data on that question.

So then. A large percentage of self-proclaimed Christians are rendering only casual obedience, if that, to Jesus’ last command.

Maybe we should try to clarify, in a few posts, what discipleship is all about.

I plan to proceed by tracking the basic journalistic questions:

Why should we disciple others?

What does discipleship consist of?

When should we call for a decision in evangelism?

What should we teach the disciple about salvation? (This will consist of a blog series I posted some years ago. A link will suffice.)

How should the disciple be enabled to grow? (This too will be an earlier series on this blog.)

We’ll start down this path next time.

Part 2: Why Disciple? | Part 3: When? | Part 4: What, and Where / How?

Photo by Nathan McDine on Unsplash