With Due Respect: Is the Reformation just "German autism"?

 

Martin Luther, considered the person who kick started the Reformation

Recently, one of my Roman Catholic friends described how the Reformation is simply "German autistic response to Italian management".

His meme was direct. The Reformers were unnecessarily pedantic and idealistic to the more pragmatic and traditional Roman Catholic Church. So is his criticism valid?

A clash of two worlds
The Reformation did involve a collision between a more literal, text-obsessed, low-trust, high-conscientiousness Northern European mindset against a hierarchical, patronage-driven, Mediterranean ecclesiastical system centered on Rome.

Martin Luther’s obsessive focus on justification by faith, his demand that doctrine be tested against Scripture rather than tradition or papal decree, and the broader German/Swiss willingness to rupture institutional unity over principle all look, from a certain angle, like the theological equivalent of high-systemizing, low-agreeableness rigidity (commonly associated with our memetic view of autism).

The late-medieval papal court, with its Italian-dominated Curia, indulgences, simony, and Renaissance worldly pragmatism, can reasonably be caricatured as “management”—more concerned with cash flow, political alliances, and institutional continuity than with forensic theological purity.

Overly simplified
As with any catchphrase, this view of the history is overly abstracted. 

For one, the theological substance mattered. Sola scriptura and sola fide weren’t just German personality quirks; they addressed real late-medieval abuses and earlier reform currents such as Wycliff (English) and Hus (Czech). Even later Reformers like Calvin (French) and Zwingli (Swiss) expressed similar sentiments. Reducing it to national psychology erases the actual arguments.

Sure, Luther was confrontational, scrupulous, and sometimes pathological in his anxiety, but he was also a university professor, polemicist, and political operator who understood power.

Finally, the Roman Catholic side was not just simply corrupt Italian management. It contained its own reformers, mystics, and rigorous theologians; the Counter-Reformation later demonstrated considerable institutional seriousness.

Pope Leo X, the pope during the Reformation

Conclusion

Calling the core Reformation program "autistic" understates the situation they faced:

Late-medieval Western Christianity had accumulated practices and claims — the treasury of merits, the sale of indulgences as a revenue system, mandatory clerical celibacy amid widespread concubinage, the practical withholding of Scripture from the laity, and an increasingly monarchical papacy — that were not minor administrative quirks. Bear in mind that Rome's responses were rarely to seek clarification, but to condemn and suppress.

If you take the Bible as the final norm (the Reformers’ premise), then questions of how a person is justified before God, what constitutes the Church, and whether the pope has universal jurisdiction are not just fine print. The insistence on precision was closer to necessary clarity on the salvation of mankind.

With Due Respect: Did King David exist?

 

David, as depicted in the 2025 film David

King David was one of the central figures of the Old Testament in the Bible. He was a king who allegedly united Israel, conquered Jerusalem, and founded a dynasty. 

However, pre-1993 few scholars accepted David as a historical figure because there was no clear extra-biblical evidence for him. The general reception was that he was a legendary founding figure of Israel on the scale that King Arthur was the founder of Britain.

Unlike kings such as Omri (1 Kings 16), Ahab (1 Kings 16), or Hezekiah (2 Kings 16), David was not clearly mentioned in surviving inscriptions from neighboring civilizations. This led to the question:

If David was such a significant king, why has no contemporary source ever mentioned him?

Tel Dan Stele

In 1993, the Tel Dan Stele was excavated in Tel Dan, Northern Israel. Dated about 800s - 700s BC it explicitly stated the "House of David". The stele was mostly likely made by the Aramean king, Hazael, and celebrated his military victories over the kingdoms of Israel and Judah.

The crucial point was that it was written by an enemy kingdom, not by Jews.

This meant that a century and a half after David's lifetime, neighboring states recognized a dynasty named after David. Therefore, David was very unlikely to be a completely fictional invention of much later writers.

Conclusion
Today, few scholars doubt the existance of David. The historical questions have shifted to the nature of his kingship (e.g. how big was his kingdom).

The Tel Dan Stele provided the first widely accepted external reference to David's dynasty and significantly changed the debate

Alternative Culture: The theology of the 2026 World Cup

 

AI art of Uzbekistan's Fayzullaev

Every four years, the world stops.

Billions watch matches played across continents. Streets fill with celebration and heartbreak. National anthems are sung with pride. Flags appear in windows. For a brief season, people who otherwise share little in common are united by a common hope -- that their team will lift the trophy.

As a global phenomenon, this event invites theological reflection.

A gathering of nations
After this I looked, and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands -- Revelations 7:9

Scripture reveals at the end times, all nations and culture would unite to worship God. 

The World Cup (while being secular) offers a faint echo of this reality. People from vastly different cultures, languages, and histories gather around a common event. Rivalries remain, yet there is also a shared recognition of our common humanity.

When the sport is played rightly, the World Cup reflects aspects of God's design: discipline, creativity, teamwork, excellence, sacrifice, and perseverance. The World Cup showcases human beings exercising talents that ultimately come from their Creator.

AI art of Scotland's McGinn

The limits of earthly glory

but each person is tempted when they are dragged away by their own evil desire and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death. -- James 1:14-15

Yet the World Cup also reveals the human heart. Good things often become ultimate things.

National identity can become nationalism. Support can become obsession. Healthy enjoyment can become worship. Fans may find their mood, relationships, or sense of worth entirely determined by the success of a team.

Human achievement, however impressive, is temporary. This is not a reason to despise success. Rather, it places success in perspective.

The World Cup reminds us of both the greatness and the fragility of human glory. The celebrations are real, but they do not last. The victories matter, but not forever.

A better kingdom
Your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom,
    and your dominion endures through all generations.
The Lord is trustworthy in all he promises
    and faithful in all he does - Psalms 145:13

While the World Cup gives us a sense of unity, we must remind ourselves this unity at best is temporary. The final whistle eventually blows, and ordinary life resumes.

Christianity teaches that humanity's deepest hope is not found in international sport, political institutions, or cultural achievements. It is found in Jesus Christ.

One day people from every nation will gather, not around a football pitch, but around the throne of the Lamb. Their unity will not be temporary or symbolic. It will be eternal. The World Cup can be enjoyed as a wonderful celebration of human culture and competition. But it also points beyond itself.

Every earthly gathering of the nations is merely a shadow of the greater gathering still to come.

And unlike the World Cup, everyone invited to that kingdom will never go home disappointed.

Alternative Culture: The Theology of Frieren: Beyond Journey's End

 

[The following post is dedicated to my wife, who loves Frieren: Beyond Journey's End]

One of the most popular anime nowadays is Frieren: Beyond Journey's End. I even see it traction among the Christian community who often regard it as the anime version of the Book of Acts.

In this post I want to explore the theology of this anime. I have watched the anime until season 2's end, so all my information is based on that. Furthermore, the creators of the series are probably not Christian, so any apparent relation to Christianity is accidental rather than intentional.

So what happens after the journey is completed?

Unlike most stories, Frieren: Beyond Journey's End takes place after the main quest have been resolved. The demon king is defeated by the human hero Himmel and his companions (one of whom is the elf Frieren). As a result, the story is focused on Frieren trying to find purpose after her quest is done (which includes finding and defeating the remnants of the demon king's followers)

This is similar to the Christian religion where Jesus had already defeated death and assured the salvation of mankind. All that is left with persuading humanity of the truth of the gospel. This immediate aftermath is covered in the book of the Bible called Acts.

The apostles left the Sanhedrin, rejoicing because they had been counted worthy of suffering disgrace for the Name. Day after day, in the temple courts and from house to house, they never stopped teaching and proclaiming the good news that Jesus is the Messiah. - Acts 5: 41-42

Similarly, Frieren continues to do good with the mantra "what would Himmel do?".

Maturing over time

After Himmel's death (due to old age), Frieren wept. She had spent a good ten years with Himmel but yet she hardly knew him as a person. She understood his battle strategy, his values and his behaviour, but she did not know his personality, his likes and his philosophy. She had kept him at an arm's length, and only at his death she regretted not treasuring him.

Instead of staying at the stage of grief, Frieren moves on and starts her own journey and begins to understand Himmel better.

Similarly in Acts, the disciples of Jesus who once not understood that he was Messiah became transformed by friendship with Jesus and each other. They grew in their knowledge of Christ and became brave even in the face of persecution.

All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had. With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And God’s grace was so powerfully at work in them all - Acts 4: 32-33

Beware false teachers

Another point that the series make is to beware of the lies from the demon mouth. In one instance, a demon loosely uses the word "mother" to appeal for mercy from humans. However, the demons were shown not to share the same morals -- they do not even have the concept of family.

This parallels the concept of false teachers in Acts. They appear to be fellow Christians, speak the same language or share the same values but seek to lead people astray.

I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them.
-- Acts 20: 29-30

Conclusion

In short, Frieren feels like a fantasy "Acts" because it captures the spirit of continuing the mission after the great victory — traveling, forming community, doing good, confronting evil, and grappling with time, loss, and eternity. That's why it resonates so deeply with Christian audiences even without intending to. 

Just bear in mind that:

A) Frieren is not allegory or propaganda. It's a secular Japanese fantasy with Buddhist/Shinto influences mixed in, focused on melancholy, slice-of-life pacing, and appreciating the present.

B) Acts is explicitly evangelistic and theological, centered on the Holy Spirit, resurrection, and salvation through Christ.

C) Frieren is slower and more introspective; Acts is full of dramatic miracles, persecutions, and church growth.

Theology 1.0: Who is James Gilmour?

James Gilmour (1843–1891) was a Scottish Evangelical Christian missionary, best known for his dedicated (and often lonely) work among the Mongols in the late 19th century. 

Born on June 12, 1843, in Cathkin, near Glasgow, Scotland, to James and Elizabeth Gilmour, he studied at the University of Glasgow. Inspired by the Great Comission (Matthew 28:19-20), he offered himself to the London Mission Society (LMS) for Mongolia—a vast, nomadic region dominated by Lamaist (Tibetan) Buddhism. At that time, there was a notable lack of missions there.

Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age. - Matthew 28:19-20

Ordained on February 10, 1870, he sailed shortly afterward, arriving in China (then based in Peking/Beijing) to prepare. Unlike earlier LMS pioneers (such as Edward Stallybrass and William Swan, who had worked in the north near Siberia earlier in the century), Gilmour operated from the southeast, using Peking as a base.

His work
Gilmour's approach was methodical. In the summer, he made long, arduous itinerating trips across the Mongolian plains, living among nomadic herders, sharing their tents, food, and hardships. He traveled on foot or horseback, often in harsh conditions.

During the winter he returned to Peking to work among Mongols who came to the city for trade or other reasons, while also continuing language study and medical work.

He learned Mongolian (and improved his Chinese), practiced simple medicine to gain access to people, preached, distributed tracts and books, and engaged in conversations about faith. 

In 1874, he married Emily Prankard (whom he had corresponded with from England) in Peking. They had a happy marriage and children, but it was marked by tragedy: Emily died in 1885, and their youngest son died in 1886. In 1883, he wrote Among the Mongols, a vivid, firsthand account of Mongol life, customs, superstitions, daily habits, and his travels. It remains a valuable window into 19th-century Mongolian culture from a missionary perspective.

The work was extremely difficult. Mongolia was deeply steeped in Buddhism, and many felt little need for Christianity. For the first four years, he saw no converts. It took 14 years before his first known Mongol baptism—a nomadic layman named Boyinto.

Death
In 1891, after a brief return to China, Gilmour attended a committee meeting but was suddenly struck by a severe case of typhus fever. He died on May 21, 1891, in Tianjin (Tientsin), China, at age 47, after about 21 years of missionary service.

Despite the slow results, Gilmour earned affection from many Mongols, who reportedly called him “Our Gilmour.”

Theology 1.0: Who is Karl Barth?

 

Karl Barth was a Swiss Reformed theologian widely regarded as one of the most influential Protestant thinkers of the 20th century. His work was a seen as a rejection to the liberal Protestantism of the 19th century (which blended faith with modern culture, philosophy, and human experience) and a return to the centrality of divine revelation in Jesus Christ.

Opposition to World War 1 and 2

During World War 1, Barth was horrified when many of his liberal professors signed a manifesto supporting Germany's war efforts, exposing what he saw as theology's dangerous captivity to culture and nationalism. In response, he wrote his explosive Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (1919) where he insisted that true knowledge of God comes only through God's self-revelation, not human reason or experience. This rebuked attempts to subordinate theology to culture and politics.

He further expounded his thoughts in his book Church Dogmatics (1932). 

Just before World War 2, he became the primary author of the Barmen Declaration (1934), a foundational confession for the anti-Nazi Confessing Church. It rejected any “German Christian” movement that subordinated the gospel to Hitler, the state, or race, declaring: “Jesus Christ, as he is attested for us in Holy Scripture, is the one Word of God.” This document reminded the church that its first loyalty is always to Christ, not to any earthly power, ideology, or “spirit of the age.”

Differences with Reformation

Although Barth was off the Reform tradition, he was definitely not a classical Protestant. (He is often called a neo-orthodox thinker.)

For instance, he did not accept the inerrancy of Scripture. The Reformers (Luther and Calvin) viewed the Bible itself as the inspired, authoritative Word of God—generally inerrant in its original sense.

Barth distinguished sharply: Jesus Christ is the one true Word of God; the Bible is a human witness that becomes the Word of God when God sovereignly speaks through it. This makes Scripture dynamic and event-based rather than statically infallible.

In another instance, Barth was absolutist about nature. He rejected any “point of contact” in fallen human nature or creation for knowing God—insisting on revelation alone can lead us to the knowledge of God. This is in contrast to the Reformers who felt that natural theology can lead us to some (albeit distorted) knowledge of God.

Legacy

Today, Barth is remembered for centering Christianity. Barth revitalized 20th-century theology by making it more biblically serious and Christ-centered at a time when liberalism had diluted the faith.

My Confession: My reflections of Job 16-17

I continue my reflections on Job.

Miserable comforters

Job again rejects what Eliphaz the Temanite said.

“I have heard many things like these;
    you are miserable comforters, all of you!
 Will your long-winded speeches never end?
    What ails you that you keep on arguing?" - Job 16: 2-3

Job maintains that God has targeted him.

"God has turned me over to the ungodly
    and thrown me into the clutches of the wicked.
 All was well with me, but he shattered me;
    he seized me by the neck and crushed me.
He has made me his target;
     his archers surround me.
Without pity, he pierces my kidneys
    and spills my gall on the ground." - Job 16: 11-13

Job still says he is innocent

"My face is red with weeping,
   dark shadows ring my eyes;
yet my hands have been free of violence
    and my prayer is pure.
Earth, do not cover my blood;
    may my cry never be laid to rest!" - Job 16: 16-18

Job's reputation has been tarnished

Job reveals that his misfortune was known in the land, and that people lost their respect for him.

 “God has made me a byword to everyone,
    a man in whose face people spit.
 My eyes have grown dim with grief;
    my whole frame is but a shadow.
 The upright are appalled at this;
    the innocent are aroused against the ungodly." - Job 17: 6-8

Job then says he is simply waiting for death.

“But come on, all of you, try again!
    I will not find a wise man among you.
 My days have passed, my plans are shattered.
    Yet the desires of my heart
 turn night into day;
    in the face of the darkness light is near.
 If the only home I hope for is the grave,
    if I spread out my bed in the realm of darkness," - Job 17: 10-13

Impressions

As Job rightly pointed out, none of whatever his friends said addressed the issue. What did Job do wrong to be a target of God's wrath? 

Despite this poignant rebuttal, tales of Job's misfortune had spread and a majority of people assumed that Job must have sinned.

With Due Respect: Is the Ethiopian Bible the oldest Bible?

 

No, the Ethiopian Bible is not the oldest Bible. This is a common online claim, mostly because people compare the Ethiopian Bible (which was adapted by Ethiopia during 1400s) with the King James Bible (which was complied during the 1600s). Neither translation is the earliest scripture.

The Ethiopian Bible

For the Ethiopian Bible (the canon of the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church, written in Ge'ez):The translation of biblical texts into Ge'ez began in the 4th–6th centuries CE, soon after Christianity became the state religion in the Kingdom of Aksum (Ethiopia) in the 4th century.

The oldest surviving Ethiopian biblical manuscripts are the Garima Gospels (illuminated manuscripts of the four Gospels), radiocarbon dated to roughly 330–650 CE (with some samples as early as 390–570 CE). These are among the world's oldest illustrated Christian manuscripts and the earliest in Ge'ez.

However, a full Ethiopian Bible (with its broader canon of 81–88 books, including texts like Enoch and Jubilees not in most other Christian canons) as a complete, compiled collection appears in later manuscripts.

The oldest version

The oldest surviving nearly complete or complete Bibles (as full codices containing both Old and New Testaments in one set of manuscripts) date to the 4th century AD.

Codex Vaticanus (c. 300–325 AD or slightly later): One of the earliest and most complete Greek Bibles (Septuagint Old Testament + New Testament), housed in the Vatican Library. It is missing some parts but is among the oldest.

Codex Sinaiticus (c. 330–360 AD): Contains the oldest complete New Testament and large portions of the Old Testament in Greek. Discovered at St. Catherine's Monastery, it is widely regarded as one of the most important early biblical manuscripts.

Theology 1.0: What is the New Perspectives on Paul?

 

The "New Perspective on Paul" (often abbreviated as NPP) refers to a scholarly movement in biblical studies that reinterprets the theology of the Apostle Paul, particularly his views on justification, the law (Torah), and salvation. 

Popularised by theologian NT Wright in 1990s, NPP argues that Paul's critiques of "works of the law" (Romans 3:20; Galatians 2:16) were not primarily aimed at a legalistic, works-righteousness Judaism, but rather at ethnic boundary markers that excluded Gentiles from God's covenant people. This perspective emphasizes the historical and Jewish context of the first-century world, portraying Judaism as a grace-based covenant community rather than a religion of merit-earning.

In this post I will attempt to show the best arguments on of the sides supporting and opposing NPP.

Differences between traditional (old perspective) and NPP

I would like to highlight some of the key differences here:

A) View of Judaism
Traditionalists see Judaism as a legalistic system. In other words, you earn your salvation (in Judaism) via good works. 

NPP proponents see Judaism as a grace-based system where you obtain salvation via election.

B) Works of Law
Traditionalists see "works of law" as human efforts to obtain righteousness, while NPP proponents see it as describing Jewish practices such as observing Sabbath and circumcision.

C) Justification
Traditionalists see justification as forensic; God declares sinners righteous based on Christ's imputed merit, received by faith alone (sola fide). 

NPP proponents see justification as declarative; God's verdict on covenant membership; faith marks inclusion, works evidence it.

D) Paul's critique
Thus, traditionalists see Paul's writings as being against human inability to keep the law perfectly due to sin.

NPP proponents see Paul's writings as being against ethnic exclusivity; Torah's role is fulfilled in Christ for all.

My view
I think the NPP attempts to reading Paul in his Jewish context, avoiding anachronistic Protestant lenses. It highlights Gentile inclusion as central to Paul's gospel and reminds us that faith produces works.

NPP also recognises Paul’s positive view of the law (Romans 3:31) and his Jewish identity, while addressing the social realities of Jew-Gentile tensions in early Christianity.

However, NPP runs the risk of injection modern ideas (like social justice and inclusion) into the text, while downplaying Paul’s emphasis on human sinfulness and inability to keep the law, central to the traditional view. Paul’s critique of "works of the law" includes any effort to achieve righteousness apart from Christ, not just ethnic markers. Romans 7:14–25 portrays the law’s inability to overcome human weakness, pointing to universal need for grace.

Alternative Culture: The exposure of the lies of the BBC

 

Logo of the British Broadcasting Corporation

The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) is the world’s oldest national broadcaster and the United Kingdom’s public-service media organisation. It prides itself on being impartial, fair and accurate.

For decades, BBC News was seen as the most trusted news source in the world (Reuters Institute rankings 2015-2022). Its style—calm, fact-based, no shouting—is copied by public broadcasters in Canada (CBC), Australia (ABC), Japan (NHK), etc.

Yet in 2025, a scandal rocked the BBC, calling into question its integrity. A 19-page internal memo by Michael Prescott, a former external adviser to the BBC's editorial standards committee, was leaked to The Daily Telegraph. Chief among the examples of clear bias was a misleading edit in a Panorama documentary titled Trump: A Second Chance?, broadcast in October 2024. 

The program spliced together non-consecutive parts of U.S. President Donald Trump's January 6, 2021, speech—specifically combining his remark "I’ll be there with you" (about marching to the Capitol) with a later phrase "fight like hell"—creating the false impression that he directly urged supporters to storm the Capitol and engage in violence

Other several examples of alleged systemic bias, including pro-Palestinian slant in BBC Arabic's Gaza coverage and suppression of stories critical of transgender activism (e.g., favoring "pregnant people" over "women"). Prescott accused the BBC of inaction despite internal warnings.

As a result, BBC Director-General Tim Davie and CEO of BBC News Deborah Turness resigned on 9 November 2025. The latest YouGov survey (covering this scandal) revealed that 50% of Britons feel that BBC is biased (31% feel that BBC shows left-wing bias while 19% view BBC favors the right-wing). 

To summarise: It is a state-funded broadcaster caught doctoring primary-source footage of a sitting world leader, followed by the resignation of its entire top tier, during a funding-review year, while facing a billion-dollar lawsuit. That combination makes it arguably the worst crisis in the BBC’s 103-year history.

Leeds Castle, 2011

What does this mean for Christians?
Again, the purpose of this blog is to look at the theological aspect rather than to blame or defend the parties involved.

First lesson is that the truth is sacred. Jesus himself states that he is the truth, and therefore Christians should seek to present information as honestly as possible.

Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. - John 14:6

The Lord detests lying lips,

    but he delights in people who are trustworthy. - Proverbs 12: 22

The second lesson is to beware of institutional loyalty trumping Christ. We can love our church/denomination/ministry, but never more than we love Jesus and His truth. If we see patterns of dishonesty or favouritism, we speak up.

Many in the BBC were aware of the bias, but chose to remain silent to keep their jobs.

Better is open rebuke

    than hidden love. - Proverbs 27: 5

Lastly, we should pray for those in authority to do the right thing. The BBC shapes more worldviews than most pulpits. Its journalists, editors, and regulators are also children of God, and therefore need salvation and wisdom.  

I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people— for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. - 1 Tim 2:1-2

Personally, it is a bit surreal for me that the scandal happened. Having studied and lived in the UK for 4 years, I often relied on the BBC for accurate information. This incident reminded me to "trust but verify".

With Due Respect: Did Apostle Paul endorse slavery?

 

Saint Paul Writing His Epistles, (Valentin de Boulogne, c. 1618 - 1620)

Recently I saw some Christian critics online saying that Christianity endorsed slavery, with special attention to Apostle Paul. After all, Paul instructed slaves to serve their masters well in Ephesians 6:5-8.

Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not people, because you know that the Lord will reward each one for whatever good they do, whether they are slave or free. -- Ephesians 6:5-8

However this is a very myopic reading. We have to be fair to the text. Paul lived in the 1st-century Roman Empire, where slavery was a widespread and deeply entrenched institution. His letters, written to early Christian communities, reflect this context. He does not explicitly condemn or endorse slavery as an institution, but his writings address how Christians should navigate relationships within that social structure.

Slaves in the Roman Empire
The modern concept of slavery is different from the Roman concept of it. Slavery in the Roman world was not based on race but on conquest, debt, or birth. Slaves could hold varied roles, from laborers to educated professionals, and manumission (freeing slaves) was common. Yes, slaves in the Roman Empire could earn their freedom.

Paul’s audience included both slaves and slaveholders, and his letters aimed to foster unity in diverse Christian communities.  As a religious leader, not a political revolutionary, Paul focused on spiritual transformation.

In one explicit example, Paul appealed for the freedom of a slave
In this short letter, Paul writes to Philemon, a Christian slaveholder, about Onesimus, an enslaved person who had become a Christian. Paul urges Philemon to receive Onesimus "no longer as a slave, but better than a slave, as a dear brother".

Perhaps the reason he was separated from you for a little while was that you might have him back forever— no longer as a slave, but better than a slave, as a dear brother. He is very dear to me but even dearer to you, both as a fellow man and as a brother in the Lord. - Philemon 1: 15-16

Paul’s language advocates for Onesimus’ freedom, as treating him as a "brother" in Christ undermines the slave-master dynamic.

William Wilberforce

Paul's letters inspired William Wilberforce to abolish slavery

William Wilberforce, the British parliamentarian and evangelical Christian who led the successful campaign to abolish the slave trade in the British Empire in 1807 (and slavery itself in 1833), drew deep inspiration from Scripture. His faith, awakened in the mid-1780s, compelled him to view abolition as a divine mandate to address social injustice.

In his diaries (as revealed by the book The Life of William Wilberforce), he would quote Galatians (one of Paul's letters) often.  It encapsulated his endurance amid fierce opposition, including parliamentary defeats, personal health struggles, and public vilification over nearly 20 years of advocacy.

Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up. - Galatians 6:9

Wilberforce's worldview was shaped by verses emphasizing human equality, such as Galatians 3:28 ("There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus"), which he saw as a foundational critique of slavery's dehumanization.

So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise. - Galatians 3:26-29

Inspired by his Christian faith, he wrote in A Practical View of Christianity (1797),
“The grand object of religion is to bring the soul to a state of just affections towards God and man... the love of our neighbor must know no bounds.”

Conclusion
Paul did not endorse slavery as a moral good, but he also did not outright call for its abolition. His concerns were to encourage Christians to live out their faith within existing social structures while emphasizing spiritual equality and ethical treatment.

Paul's writings were also inspired William Wilberforce 1700 years later to abolish slavery in the British Empire.

Theology 1.0: Who are the Hidden Christians of Japan?

The 26 Martyrs in Japan

Hidden Christians, often referred to as Kakure Kirishitan in Japan, are communities of Christians who practiced their faith in secret due to persecution and bans on Christianity. The term is most commonly associated with Japanese Christians during the Edo period (17th to 19th centuries) when the Tokugawa shogunate outlawed Christianity starting in the early 1600s

The introduction of Christianity in Japan

Christianity was introduced to Japan in 1549 by Jesuit missionary Francis Xavier, initially gaining converts. However, fearing foreign influence, the shogunate banned it, expelling missionaries and forcing Christians to practice in secret. Their communities were concentrated in areas with historical ties to early Catholic missionary activity and where geographic isolation helped them evade detection.

This led to the development of unique rituals and syncretic practices.

The theology of the Hidden Christians

The theology of the Kakure Kirishitan (Hidden Christians) in Japan diverged significantly from mainstream Christianity due to their centuries-long isolation from the Catholic Church and the need to practice in secret under the Tokugawa shogunate’s ban on Christianity (1614–1873). Cut off from priests, formal scriptures, and ecclesiastical guidance, their beliefs and practices evolved into a unique, syncretic form shaped by oral tradition, Japanese cultural influences, and the necessity of concealment.

Such differences from mainline Christianity include:

A) Simplified theology
With no access to the Bible or formal teachings, Kakure Kirishitan relied on oral transmission of prayers (called orasho, derived from Latin or Portuguese oratio). Over time, these prayers became distorted, and their meanings were often lost or reinterpreted. Core Christian doctrines, like the Trinity or the Resurrection, became vague or were understood in localized terms.

Their theology became less dogmatic and more focused on devotion to specific figures (e.g., Mary, Jesus, and certain saints) rather than complex theological concepts. For instance, the concept of salvation was often understood through a lens of ancestral continuity rather than the eschatological framework of mainstream Christianity.

B) Syncretism with Shinto and Buddhism

To avoid detection, Kakure Kirishitan blended Christian practices with Shinto and Buddhist elements. For example, they venerated the Virgin Mary as resembling Kannon, the Buddhist goddess of mercy, and used Buddhist-style statues or scrolls to represent Christian figures. Prayers were often disguised as Buddhist chants, and Christian rituals were performed in ways that mimicked Shinto or Buddhist ceremonies.

This syncretism led to a theology that incorporated animistic and polytheistic elements from Shinto and Buddhist cosmology, diluting the monotheistic core of Christianity. Some Kakure communities revered ancestors alongside Christian saints, reflecting Shinto ancestor worship, which mainstream Christianity would not typically emphasize in this way.

Japanese Christians praying, Nagasaki 2017

After Japan legalised Christianity

After the ban was lifted in 1873, some Hidden Christians rejoined the Catholic Church, while others, known as Kakure Kirishitan, continued their distinct traditions, which diverged significantly from orthodox Catholicism. They maintained rituals like chanting "orasho" prayers (derived from Latin or Portuguese) and used hidden icons, such as scrolls of Mary and Jesus disguised as Buddhist figures.

In 2025

Today, Kakure Kirishitan are a dwindling group, primarily found in remote areas like Ikitsuki Island and the Gotō Islands in Nagasaki Prefecture. Their numbers have drastically declined, with estimates suggesting fewer than 100 practitioners remain on Ikitsuki as of 2025, down from thousands in the mid-20th century.

Theology 1.0: Who else wrote about Jesus?

 

The Gospels of the New Testament are often regarded as a trustworthy account of Jesus's life. Yet there are many doubters who rejected that this reliability of the Gospels as they see it as Christians attempting to claim political power. The most sincere of them want non-Christian testimony that corroborates with Jesus's life.

Such testimonies do exists.

Such sources collectively confirm Jesus’ existence, his crucifixion under Pilate, and the early spread of his followers. They align with the broad outline of Christian accounts but offer little detail on his teachings or miracles (as Jesus was seen as a marginal figure in the hugeness of the Roman Empire).

Let us examine a few.

Josephus Flavius (Antiquities of the Jews, c. 93–94 CE)

Josephus, a contemporary of Jesus, describes Jesus as a wise man, a doer of wonderful works, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate. It mentions his followers and suggests he was believed to be the Messiah by some. 

Josephus was a well-regarded Jewish historian, so many scholars regard his descriptions as authentic and factual.

Tacitus (Annals, c. 116 CE) 

Roman historian Tacitus describes Emperor Nero blaming Christians for the Great Fire of Rome in 64 CE. He mentions "Christus," executed under Pontius Pilate, as the origin of the Christian movement. 

Tacitus is a reliable Roman source, and this passage confirms Jesus’ execution and the spread of Christianity shortly after. He had no apparent agenda to promote Christianity.

Pliny the Younger (Letters, c. 112 CE)  

Pliny, a Roman governor, describes Christians worshiping Christ "as a god" and their practices, based on interrogations in Bithynia. 

This showed that the divinity of Jesus was held by Christians from the start.

Conclusion

Non-Christian sources are not the bedrock of Christian faith, which rests on scripture and tradition, but they provide historical grounding that strengthens the case for Jesus as a real figure who lived, taught, and died in 1st-century Judea. For believers, this external validation complements the spiritual and theological truths of Christianity, showing that Jesus’ impact was recognized beyond his immediate followers. For skeptics or scholars, these sources offer a bridge between faith-based accounts and secular history.

For more information:

Be Thinking

Alternative Culture: John MacArthur and his legacy

 

John Fullerton MacArthur Jr recently died of pneumonia on July 14, 2025, at age 86 in Santa Clarita, California. A titan among Protestant circles, his legacy endures through his extensive writings, sermons, and influence on evangelical Christianity.

Origin

MacArthur was a prominent American pastor, theologian, and author, best known for his long tenure as pastor of Grace Community Church in Sun Valley, California (1969–2025) and his radio and television ministry, Grace to You, which reached a global audience. Born in Los Angeles to a family with a strong Christian heritage—his father, Jack MacArthur, was a Baptist preacher, and his grandfather, Harry MacArthur, was an Anglican minister—MacArthur felt called to ministry early in life despite initially aspiring to a career in professional sport.

MacArthur authored or edited over 150 books, including the bestselling MacArthur Study Bible, which sold over a million copies and received a Gold Medallion Book Award. He founded The Master’s University (1985) and The Master’s Seminary (1986), serving as chancellor emeritus, and was a key figure in updating the Legacy Standard Bible (2021). 

Theology

Classic Protestants and Reformed Christians like myself admired John MacArthur for several key reasons, rooted in his theological convictions, ministry approach, and cultural impact. 

A) MacArthur was a staunch defender of the Bible as the infallible, authoritative Word of God. His expository preaching—verse-by-verse, with emphasis on historical and grammatical context—resonated with Protestants who prioritize Scripture over tradition or subjective experience.

B) He kept to the historical view of Jesus. As a Calvinist, MacArthur championed doctrines like predestination, total depravity, and the sovereignty of God, aligning closely with classical Protestantism’s Reformation heritage (e.g., the teachings of Luther and Calvin). His clear articulation of these doctrines appealed to those who value theological precision.

C) His expository preaching style. His methodical, text-driven preaching style became a gold standard for many Protestant pastors. Through Grace to You and his books, like The MacArthur Study Bible, he equipped churches with resources to study Scripture deeply, earning respect from those who see preaching as central to worship.

Thus, his consistent theological stance led him to cover critiques of theological liberalism, charismatic excesses, and seeker-sensitive megachurch trends endeared him to classical Protestants who felt modern Christianity was drifting from its roots. His opposition to progressive cultural shifts, such as on issues of gender and sexuality, aligned with conservative Protestant values.

For instance, his book Strange Fire (2013) was critical of the charismatic movement in Christianity, which he felt was overly focused on passions and emotions over discernment in Scripture.

Controversies

MacArthur’s controversies often stemmed from his unwavering commitment to his interpretation of biblical truth, which he prioritized over cultural or ecclesiastical harmony.

For instance, many felt his tone towards the charismatic movement was overly harsh and lacked charity. In another case, he continued to hold indoor services against the COVID rules of California in early 2020s.

MacArthur's critics viewed his approach as rigid, sometimes lacking empathy or openness to dialogue, particularly on sensitive issues like charismatic movement (of the early 2010s) or public health (of the 2020s). 

Legacy

Despite this, his unwavering commitment to Scripture, Reformed doctrine, and pastoral training made him a towering figure for Protestants who valued theological fidelity and biblical authority.

With Due Respect: Did the Protestants/Catholics remove/add books to the Bible?

If you compare the Bible that the Roman Catholics use and the one that Protestants use, you will notice that the books are slightly different. The seven books excluded in the Protestant Bible are known as the Deuterocanonical books (Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, plus parts of Esther and Daniel).

I have often been asked if the books were removed by the Protestants or added by the Roman Catholics. The truth is much more complicated than that simple answer.

The historicity of the text

Part of the Septuagint but not Hebrew Masoretic Text

The Deuterocanonical books were part of the Septuagint, a Greek translation of Jewish scriptures from the 3rd–2nd century BC, widely used by Hellenistic Jews (Greek Jews) and early Christians. The New Testament frequently quotes or alludes to the Septuagint (e.g., Hebrews 11:35 referencing 2 Maccabees 7), suggesting its authority in the early Church. Catholics saw this as evidence of their inspired status, as the Septuagint was the Bible of the apostolic era.

However, the Protestant Reformers claimed that these books that were not part of the Hebrew Masoretic Text, finalized by Jewish scholars around the 1st century CE. The Deuterocanonical books were not universally accepted by all Jewish communities.

The reception of early Christians
Accepted but not universally accepted

Early Church Fathers like Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and Augustine cited them as authoritative. Regional councils, such as Hippo (393) and Carthage (397), included them in their Old Testament canons, reflecting widespread use in liturgy and teaching. Catholics viewed this consistent tradition as affirming their canonicity.

However  some prominent Church writers rejected the Deuterocanonical books. Jerome (347 -420), who translated the Bible into Latin (the Vulgate), questioned the canonicity of the Deuterocanonical books. In his prefaces to the Vulgate, he noted that these books were not in the Hebrew canon and labeled them "apocryphal," though he included them in his translation at the Church’s request. For example, in his preface to the Books of Samuel and Kings, he listed the Hebrew canon as authoritative but acknowledged the Church’s use of the Deuterocanonical books for edification, not doctrine.

Athanasius of Alexandria (296–373) was also sceptical of the books. In his 39th Festal Letter (367), which lists the canonical books, Athanasius excluded the Deuterocanonicals from the Old Testament canon, though he included Baruch and omitted Esther. He considered the others "useful for instruction" but not on par with inspired scripture.

The theology of it all
Deuterocanonical books affirm Catholic practices 

The Deuterocanonical books supported doctrines central to Catholic theology. For example, 2 Maccabees 12:44–46 endorses prayers for the dead, aligning with Catholic beliefs in purgatory and intercession. Wisdom 2:12–20 contains messianic imagery that Catholics saw as prefiguring Christ.

The Catholic Church at the Council of Trent (1546) formally reaffirmed the Deuterocanonical books as inspired scripture, standardizing the canon to counter Protestant claims and defend Catholic doctrine. 

On the other hand, the Protestant principle of sola scriptura (scripture alone) emphasized a clear, authoritative canon as the sole basis for doctrine. Reformers sought to streamline the Bible to texts they believed were indisputably inspired, excluding those with debated or uncertain status to avoid reliance on tradition, which they associated with Catholic authority.

Conclusion
The Roman Catholics included the Deuterocanonical books because they were found in the Septuagint. They see the books as NOT an addition but a codification of a long-standing tradition.

The Protestant Reformers did not see the exclusion of the books as a removal, but an attempt to have a pure Jewish canon determined in Hebrew

My Confession: Reflections on Job 15

 

I continue my reflections on Job.

After hearing Job defend himself yet again, Eliphaz the Temanite responds.

The meaninglessness of Job's defence

Eliphaz accuses Job of engaging in empty rhetoric.

“Would a wise person answer with empty notions
    or fill their belly with the hot east wind?
 Would they argue with useless words,
    with speeches that have no value?" - Job 15: 2-3

He criticises Job's wisdom and claiming that Job's limited experience of a human limits his understanding of God.

“Are you the first man ever born?
    Were you brought forth before the hills?
 Do you listen in on God’s council?
    Do you have a monopoly on wisdom?
What do you know that we do not know?
    What insights do you have that we do not have?
 The gray-haired and the aged are on our side,
    men even older than your father."- Job 15: 7-10

Eliphaz puts forth his wisdom on the consequence of good and evil

Eliphaz then explains his position.

“What are mortals, that they could be pure,
    or those born of woman, that they could be righteous?" - Job 15: 14

“Listen to me and I will explain to you;
    let me tell you what I have seen,
 what the wise have declared,
    hiding nothing received from their ancestors
 (to whom alone the land was given when no foreigners moved among them):
All his days the wicked man suffers torment,
    the ruthless man through all the years stored up for him." - Job 15: 17 -20

In fact, he reiterated that the wicked will face punishment.

"Let him not deceive himself by trusting what is worthless,
    for he will get nothing in return.
 Before his time he will wither,
    and his branches will not flourish.
He will be like a vine stripped of its unripe grapes,
    like an olive tree shedding its blossoms." - Job 15: 31-33

Impressions

I think my first takeaway is that despite Eliphaz's claim that no mortal has monopoly on wisdom (Job 15:8), he presents his own wisdom to counter Job's earlier arguments. Eliphaz's justification was that Job was not the first man alive or the oldest or had a vast wealth of experience.

Such ad-hoc arguments may be good for a sound bite, but none of what Eliphaz said had any bearing on what Job had discussed before. What had Job done wrong that God allowed the misfortunate of the loss of wealth and the death of his loved ones to fall on him? (Job 12:7-9)

Finally Eliphaz affirms earlier claims (eg: Job 8:2-3)that Job must have done something wicked to deserve such fate. As this did not sway Job the first few times, Eliphaz repeat of the logic reveals that he may lack the wisdom that he felt Job lacked.

This lack of wisdom will eventually be addressed in the next chapters, Job 16-17.

Alternative Culture: Pope Francis and his legacy

Pope Francis passed away on 21 April 2025. He was elected Pope in 2013 (the first South American to be Pope), and had served till his death.

He will likely be remembered as a transformative yet polarizing figure in the Catholic Church. Despite not being Roman Catholic, I want to give my nuance take on his legacy.

The People's Pope? 
Born Jorge Mario Bergoglio, he chose the name "Francis" after St Francis of Assisi to indicate his intention to pastor to the poor, the marginalized, and the suffering. 

His 2015 encyclical Laudato Si’ was a landmark, framing environmental care as a moral imperative and linking climate change to systemic inequality. With regard to migration, he called for building bridges rather than walls, and also criticized unbridled capitalism.

In addition, he cleaned up the Roman Catholic Church by defrocking high-profile abusers (e.g., Theodore McCarrick) and issuing Vos Estis Lux Mundi (2019) to hold bishops accountable. He also appointed more Cardinals from the Global South to have more representation in the College of Cardinals.

The Establishment's Pope?
Yet many do not see Pope Francis positively. His focus of inclusivity often confused the Christian message. For instance, he famously said “Who am I to judge?” in 2013 regarding gay individuals seeking God. This is weird because homosexuality is explicitly a sin in Roman Catholic doctrine, and also that the pope is given an authority to judge by "having the keys of heaven".

Another concern was the Pope Francis’s warm reception by secular media and world leaders (e.g., his influence at the UN on climate issues) has led some to view him as a pope who courts globalist agendas. He often made political statements that favoured the progressives in Western countries over the conservatives. The Hollywood movie, The Two Popes, even portrayed him very positively without any criticism of his progressive views. 

Furthermore, the cardinals he appointed form the Global South were often seen to be based on sharing of his political views, rather than adherence to theological matters.

His silence on controversial cultural issues in the West (e.g., abortion in political contexts) while emphasizing climate or migration can feel like a strategic alignment with progressive elites, alienating grassroots Catholics who expected a bolder defense of traditional values.

Interfaith meeting in Singapore 2010

My take on Pope Francis

As a Christian with Lutheran/Calvinist leanings, I do not recognise papal authority. Nevertheless, I do see him as a important political figure among Christian circles.

One thing I think he did well was to clean up the image of Christians, and attempt to reach out to the underrepresented. He managed to rally Western leaders to be more compassionate in their policies, especially with regard to immigration and climate change.

Yet, the most important thing I do hold against Pope Francis is that his explicit silence on the suffering of Christians worldwide.

In one example, Francis has spoken broadly about peace and religious freedom, notably during visits to Iraq (2021) and South Sudan (2023), where he met with Christian communities under threat. His interfaith efforts, like the Document on Human Fraternity (2019), aimed to foster dialogue to protect religious minorities. However, his statements often avoid naming specific perpetrators (e.g., Islamic extremism or communist regimes) to preserve diplomatic ties, frustrating those who wanted a more confrontational stance. 

In another example, he endorsed the 2018 Vatican-China agreement on bishop appointments (renewed in 2020 and 2022). Intended to unify China’s underground and state-sanctioned Catholic communities, it was criticized for conceding too much to a regime that persecutes Christians. Figures like Cardinal Joseph Zen accused Francis of betraying China’s faithful for geopolitical leverage, reinforcing the “establishment” critique.

Conclusion
Pope Francis was a great political leader, but a poor pastor. He had an uncancellable platform to bring attention to Christian persecution worldwide, but chose instead on focusing on imaging and tackling on well-established issues like climate change and transparency.

Theology 1.0: What are the differences between the English translations of the Bible?

 

General differences between translations of the Bible

In this post, I will be briefly examine the differences of the English translations of the Bible. I will assume all translators had good intentions to make the Bible as knowable to the general audience, and will not be throwing shade at translations I disagree with. So let me start:

One of the criticisms of the Bible I do agree with is that we have so many English translations of the Bible. In Bible Gateway alone we have over 60 translations in English! In contrast the same website has 13 translations in Chinese, 5 in Italian and 1 in Tamil (as of 20 March 2025).

So why so many English translations?

Same goal but many approaches
Translating Biblical text is not a new thing. The Jews translated the Old Testament from Hebrew into Greek so that Greek-speaking Jews could read and understand the Scriptures. Similarly, English translations pop up to cater to an English-reading audience so that they may personally read the Word of God.

However, English is a relatively young and fluid language. This means the frequency of usage and meaning of words have changed with time. For instance, let us compare how translations of Psalms 23 has changed over time.

As you can see the phrase "I lack nothing" is more in used now than "I shall not want" in 1611.

The issue with all translations
Thus translators will come to an issue. Should they do a word-for-word translation at the cost of making the Bible more difficult to understand for the modern audience? This approach is known as formal equivalence, and it used by the translators who worked on the English Standard Version (ESV) and the New King James Version (NKJV).

Yet another way is to do complete paraphrasing, at the expense of precise wording. This makes the passages easy to read. This is done by the translators who worked on the Message (MSG) and the Good News Translation (GNT).

An alternative is to do a balance between the two earlier approaches. This is known as the dynamic/optimal equivalence. This approach is favoured by the translators who worked on the New International Version (NIV) and New Living Translation (NLT). 

In conclusion
Translations allow people to understand the Word of God and thus grow in their walk with God. However, all translations have their limitations and it is good practice to read various translations (and in different languages if possible). 

For instance, I generally use both the ESV (the one I used most during Bible study) and NIV (the one I use the most in my personal reading). I also have used the NLT during my university days in England, and NSRV (New Standard Revised Version) from my old church.

I also use the Nuova Riveduta (2006) when I read in Italian, and Chinese Union Version with New Punctuation (CUNPSS or CUVMPS) with the simplified script when I read in Chinese.

Source:
Bible Gateway Blog

Wesly Huff

With Due Respect: Was Jesus cruicified in the Sinai Bible?

 

Recently, I came across popular historian and author Billy Carson. Billy Carson has continually claimed that a Bible discovered in Sinai in 1844 does not state that Jesus was crucified. He also claimed that this "Sinai Bible" was more accurate than the King James Bible.

The event of Jesus's death is central to Christianity. 

But we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.  - 1 Cor 1:23-24

But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.  - 1 Cor 15:12-14

Thus it is important to examine whether Carson's claim is true.

What is the Sinai Bible?

The Sinai Bible is a misnomer - among scholarly circles it is known as Codex Sinaiticus. As Carson claims, it was dated to 4th century AD, nearly 1200 years before the King James Bible was compiled.

The Codex Sinaiticus consists of the Greek Old Testament, the Greek New Testament, and the Epistles of Barnabus and the Shephard of Hermas. It is considered to be a landmark document, along with Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Vaticanus, as it is one of the most complete manuscripts of the Bible.

A translation of Codex Sinaiticus is here, and clearly states that Jesus was crucified.

And they struck his head with a reed, and spit upon him, and bowing the knees they worshipped him. And when they had derided him, they took of from him the purple, and put on him his own clothes. And they led him out to crucify him, - Mark 15:19-20 [Codex Sinaiticus]

Conclusion

It is unfortunate that Billy Carson continues to pursue this claim, and he eventually was called out by Christian theologian, Wesly Huff as since in the reference video below.

For reference

Theology 1.0: How did Christianity come to Ethiopia?

 

After the ascension of Jesus, many early Christians decided to leave Jerusalem to spread the religion. Some Christians eventually came to Ethiopia, but the communities were not significant until the 4th century.

Frumentius and Aedesius, two Syrian Christians, were shipwrecked on the Red Sea coast and taken as slaves to the Aksumite court during the reign of King Ezana. Frumentius gained the trust of the royal family and was eventually freed, becoming a prominent advisor to the young King Ezana. By 330 AD, King Ezana of the Aksumite Empire converted to Christianity. About ten years later, Christianity became the official religion of the Aksumite Empire.

Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church itself claims to have been established in 330 AD.

The Nine Saints
During the late 5th century, nine Christians (often called the Syriac Nine Saints, even though most of them were not Syrian) decided to do missions across Ethiopia.  

Theses missions also served as permanent centers of Christian learning in which monks finally began to translate the Bible from Greek and Aramaic into Ethiopic so that Ethiopians could read Scripture for themselves. 

Thus Christianity was no longer a religion for the small percentage of Ethiopians who could read Greek or Aramaic/Syriac, but for all Ethiopians.