Hi! It's markTheSon!

El-Bernard and Prophet Samuel: Did they both miss it? We have all seen the videos circulating this week. A popular prophet, El-Bernard, prophesied a specific victory in the recent NPP Flagbearer elections. But when the votes were counted on Saturday, the result was different. Now, social media is buzzing with defenses. The most popular one is the "Samuel Defense." People are quoting 1 Samuel 16:6 , where the Prophet Samuel looks at Eliab and says, " Surely the Lord’s anointed is before Him. " The argument goes: "See? Even the great Prophet Samuel missed it. He got it wrong, so cut the modern prophets some slack." But others have pushed back, arguing that Samuel only thought this—he didn’t say it. So, who is right? It is true that modern translations like the NIV and ESV state that Samuel "thought," but the KJV, NKJV, and ASV all render the word in 1 Samuel 16:6 as "said." This is accurate to the Hebrew because the word used ( amar ) ref...

 Discipleship, as Jesus defined it, was never safe, never neutral, and never cheap. And anyone unwilling to bear that weight...was not ready. When we hear the word "cross" today, we often think of jewellery, tattoos, or a steeple on a building. It has become a symbol of comfort and identity. But when Jesus spoke to the crowds in Luke 14:27, the word "cross" didn't evoke religious sentiment. It evoked terror.  It’s fascinating that in the Gospels, Jesus uses this metaphor repeatedly without ever stopping to explain it. Even more striking? No one ever asks, "Lord, what do you mean by a cross?". That silence matters. It tells us the metaphor was already understood. They didn't need a definition because they lived in a world where the cross was a visible, brutal reality. To a first-century ear, "carrying a cross" meant one thing: you were on a one-way trip to a shameful, agonising end. It was the ultimate punishment—undesirable, painful, and ...

"Jesus introduces a prerequisite for discipleship   to people who already considered themselves followers . That alone should slow us down." In the world of social media and modern metrics, we are obsessed with "reach." We measure success by the size of the crowd, the number of likes, and the volume of the applause. If a lot of people are following, something great must be happening, right? But in Luke 14:25-27, we see Jesus do something that would make a modern marketing strategist cringe. Jesus is on the move, and large crowds are traveling with Him. This is the kind of scene many of us would celebrate—momentum, numbers, influence. By our standards, Jesus was "trending.” But instead of affirming the crowd, Jesus turned, faced the crowd and issues a warning:  “Whoever does not carry their cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:27) He didn't thank them for their support. Instead, He set a barrier to entry that was designed to thin the herd. ...

"To reject modern tongues simply because they do not resemble Acts 2 in being understood by their hearers is to elevate a narrative description over clear apostolic instruction..." One of the most common objections to speaking in tongues today is the claim that biblical tongues must always be intelligible human languages — because in Acts 2, the hearers understood what was spoken in their own languages. Closely related to this is another argument drawn from the same passage: since most human languages are now known, tongues are no longer necessary or relevant today. (I’ll address that particular claim in a separate article. For now, the more pressing question is whether Acts 2 was ever meant to be the sole standard for tongues at all.) “And they were amazed and astonished, saying, ‘Are not all these who are speaking Galileans? And how is it that we hear, each of us in his own native language?’” (Acts 2:7–8) That objection rests on a selective reading of Scripture. Acts 2 is t...

I love to talk about Jesus; I can’t hide that. But I had no idea over time that it would become one of my greatest deceptions. There was a time in my life when I noticed I talked more about Jesus than to Jesus. That’s a slippery place to be. Knowing more about Jesus and teaching others about Him should not be mistaken for knowing Him. If Jesus, with omniscience, will someday say to some people, “ I never knew you ” (Matthew 7.23), then, when He describes eternal life as knowing God and Him, He must be looking for more than being well acquainted with the Bible accounts of Him. “Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent” — Jesus (John 17.3) Let’s set the record straight. Even demons know God, believe God and fear God. They “believe there is one God…and tremble” before Him (James 2.19). Likewise, demons know Jesus, and acknowledge and confess He is “the Holy One of God!” (Mark 1.23–24; Acts 19.15). I dare say many Christians d...

  If you’ve ever been a victim of any of this, I cannot apologise enough for the misrepresentation of the name of Jesus and the trauma you may be subject to. Christianity is primarily a covenant relationship with God that spills out to relationship with others. The role of Jesus here is as follows: He  is the only official moral example — the authorised manual — on how to relate with God and people. Every other Bible character is simply a supporting act who either opposed or promoted the protagonist — Jesus Christ. “ Learn  from me”, He said in Matthew 11:29. Christians must deliberately learn and pick their morals from Jesus Christ only . Christianity is practically unlivable without this intentional commitment to following Jesus as the only manual to the Christian life. He  is the ultimate standard for judging Christianity. Is Christianity true or false? Is Christianity livable or not? Is Christianity the worst or best thing to happen to society? Such question...