Petra Means Rock Churches: Jordan Permits Site’s First Prayers in 1,400 Years

Jayson Casper

Religious tourism initiative at ancient city recalls Moab, Byzantium, and Arab tribal Christianity, amid speculation on Paul’s possible first missionary journey.

Archbishop Christoforus in the Byzantine church of Petra.

Courtesy of Board of Commissioners of the Petra Regional Authority

[This article is also available in Dutch.]

Imagine yourself as Indiana Jones, traversing the narrow, nearly mile-long Siq gorge, with mountain cliffs towering on either side. Turning a corner then reveals the vast expanse of the ancient city of Petra and its majestic Treasury, the first-century rock-carved tomb of an ancient Nabatean king. You pass by the 121-foot-tall structure and its statues of Roman and Egyptian gods, making your way up a steep 800-step ascent to the equally impressive Monastery.

But before reaching Petra’s largest monument, you turn off the path into a different sort of ruin, mosaics lining the floor around half-sized recycled columns as incense wafts through the air. But unlike in the Harrison Ford movie, you do not meet an 11th-century knight preserved by the Holy Grail. Instead, the Greek Orthodox metropolitan of Jordan passes you a cup of Holy Communion.

In January, he offered the first Christian prayers in Petra in 1,400 years.

Other generations of film aficionados may prefer The Mummy Returns, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, or even Mortal Kombat: Annihilation. While onsite Hollywood productions provide revenue for Jordan, this is dwarfed by the $5.3 billion the country earns from its tourism industry. In 2022, Petra received 900,000 visitors, nearly one-quarter of the national total.

But now, the Hashemite kingdom is adding a religious component.

“It is a great blessing to be in this holy place in Petra,” said Archbishop Christoforus, before proceeding to offer the bread and wine. “We are not thinking of what surrounds us in stone, but of the saints and spiritual identity in its heritage, history, and civilization—and our great and blessed [Jordanian] homeland.”

In 2021, Jordan launched a five-year national tourism strategy with an emphasis on religious sites, including the Vatican-endorsed pilgrimage locations of Jesus’ baptism at Bethany-beyond-the-Jordan; Mount Nebo, from which Moses viewed the Promised Land; and Mukawir, home to a Herodian palace where John the Baptist may have been beheaded at the biblical Machaerus. Approximately 85 percent of tourists come for cultural and heritage purposes, and one-quarter of baptism site visitors travel from the United States.

With such tourists likely to visit Petra already, Jordan would like to extend their stay.

“Unfortunately, Petra is known mostly for its Treasury and Siq,” said Fares al-Braizat, chief of the Board of Commissioners of the Petra Regional Authority. “There is plenty more it can offer, and the churches are an additional discovery.”

Ten have been discovered so far, with excavations ongoing. But the fifth-century Byzantine cathedral was only discovered in 1990 and fully unearthed eight years later. Restoration has proceeded sufficiently not only to inspire Braizat to add Petra to Jordan’s list of Christian historical sites but also to revive the ancient city’s religious heritage. It only adds to the nation’s reputation as an open-air museum, he said.

Jordan’s evangelical community is appreciative.

“How can you have a historic church site and not bless it with prayer?” said David Rihani, president of the Jordanian Assemblies of God. “Petra shows that the government cares about the history of Christianity in this land.”

The biblical history is even longer. Petra may have been inhabited as early as 7000 B.C. and became the capital of the Nabatean Kingdom around the fourth century B.C. The Jewish historian Josephus and the Septuagint translators connected the Arab tribe to Ishmael’s firstborn son Nebaioth, and some identify Petra as the biblical Kadesh where Moses struck the rock that gushed water in Numbers 20.

The Iron Age Edomites then refused the Hebrews passage along the King’s Highway—located in Jordan—and Aaron thereafter died and was buried at Mount Hor. Local tradition, Josephus, and the Christian historian Eusebius place this in Petra, where a mountaintop shrine is said to cover his tomb.

Herod the Great, supported by Cleopatra, plundered Nabataea in 32 B.C., but his son Herod Antipas married the daughter of the Nabatean king Aretas IV, whom he divorced in A.D. 27 in favor of Herodias, his brother’s wife, causing the controversy with John the Baptist.

Petra’s initial Christian history is quite contested. After conversion, Paul says in Galatians 1 that he immediately went to “Arabia,” which scholars identify with the Nabatean Kingdom, which included Syria. Many believe this three-year sojourn was a time of contemplation. But noting that Paul’s Damascus Road experience was accompanied by his call to apostleship, Martin Hengel argues that this was actually Paul’s first missionary journey.

Braizat and Giovanni Pietro Dal Toso, the Vatican ambassador to Jordan, at Petra’s Treasury monument.

Jewish Targums relate that Abraham’s wife Hagar settled in the area, and Paul speaks of her in Galatians 4. A Jewish community is known to have existed in Hegra, the second most important city of the Nabatean Kingdom, located not far from Petra. Isaiah 60 mentions the “rams of Nebaioth” offered on Jerusalem’s altar, and Hengel speculates Paul may have been motivated by this vision of the messianic kingdom.

Such explanation provides context to the 2 Corinthians 11 account of Paul’s escape from Damascus, lowered in a basket from the city wall. Acts 9 attributes the trouble to Jewish leaders, but Paul specifically names the governor of Aretas, the only mention of a contemporary ruler in his epistles. It would not be hard to imagine that the apostle’s preaching disturbed his Hellenistic brethren and that the local leader stepped in to calm the scene.

But there is no archaeological evidence that Paul visited Petra, or that the apostle otherwise features in the conversion of the Nabatean people, said Pearce Paul Creasman, executive director of the American Center of Research (ACOR), recognized as a “genius” by National Geographic. Based in Amman, ACOR was founded in 1968 and excavated the Byzantine Church in Petra in 1992. Over the next several years, three other ecclesial sites were unearthed, chronologically descending the mountain.

The late fourth-century Ridge Church is understood to be the oldest, with the Blue Church—named after its colored Egyptian granite construction—likely slightly preceding the originally named “Petra Church,” to which the fourth structure, a baptistry, was later attached. All are easily accessible to tourists today.

The church father Athanasius mentioned a Bishop Asterius of Petra, who denounced Arianism as a heresy and was sent into exile before being restored to his position by Emperor Julian in A.D. 362. Archbishop Christoforus stated there were seven dioceses in Petra, jurisdictionally under the church of Jerusalem. And a set of about 140 papyruses discovered in the Byzantine Church in 1993 show a flourishing community as late as the sixth century. The Greek script depicts a type of proto-Arabic and describes how Emperor Justinian’s edicts were applied locally within only one year of issuance.

But current research, Creasman said, cannot determine how Christianity came to the city. Tombs marked the deification of Nabatean kings, while temples facilitated the worship of the local god Dushara and his three female cohorts al-Uzza, Allat, and Manat. Petra lost its independence to the Romans in A.D. 106, and an earthquake in 363 sealed a decline from its golden era as a regional caravan hub, displaced by Syria’s Palmyra and emerging sea routes.

Yet history is replete with examples of how new religious ideas took hold in trading cities, and Petra was then a lush green center in a regional desert that at one time attracted a population of over 20,000 people. All currently discovered Christian sites, however, date after the earthquake, as the new landscape afforded the opportunity to recast the city in its Christian identity.

Some scholars believe that Petra continued as majority pagan, and while some temples were repurposed—or at least marked with crosses—others maintained their original function. The famous Monastery, originally dedicated to King Obodas I, was transformed into a church at an unknown date, while the Treasury also features later Christian carvings.

“Views and beliefs change,” Creasman said, “even as populations stay the same.”

Petra thereafter fades from history, with little known about the region’s Islamic transformation. There is a 12th-century Crusader castle, and evidence of Muslim curiosity when the Egyptian Mameluke sultan visited a century later. Petra was not rediscovered by Western exploration until 1812, receiving UNESCO World Heritage Site designation in 1985. In 2007, it was voted one of the new seven wonders of the world.

But it is Petra’s status as an “icon of the Arabs” that gives it special significance to Jordanian Christians, said Chris Dawson, a British assistant professor of historical theology at Jordan Evangelical Theological Seminary (JETS). Author of Travel Through Jordan, which he calls a brief guide for Bible students, he has led tour groups to Christian sites for decades and describes 60 locations that shed light on the Scriptures.

“There is an idea that to be authentically Arab you have to be Muslim,” Dawson said. “Putting Petra on the map as an authentically Arab Christian city—however pluralistic it was—is an opportunity to show otherwise.”

But there are other locations as well. Pella is the Decapolis city to which Christians fled after the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. Madaba, in addition to its famous mosaic map of the Holy Land, has a nearby church clearly depicting an Arab identity. And Jerash, one of the world’s best-preserved Greco-Roman cities, allows modern-day believers to imagine a civic life permeated by paganism.

With a previous temple to Zeus built by a surely unrelated “son of Zebedee,” Jerash hosted incense altars to gods, along with what archaeologists have identified as an oracle, an idol-making factory, and a meat market once stocked with the remains of sacrifices. Considering Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians 8, how might Christians have navigated their diet and otherwise culturally related to their surroundings?

“Go not so much for pilgrimage,” Dawson said, “but to put yourself in the shoes of the early believers. It helps us understand their pressures.”

But while Christianity faded from Petra and other Jordanian cities with the advent of Islam, there is an enduring link between them and the followers of Jesus today. Dawson cited how early Arab Christians took the third-century Roman persecuted Cosmas and Damian as patron saints and named churches after them throughout the region—including in later day Jerash. And the Arab Ghassanid tribe adopted same-era Sergius, a Syrian soldier decapitated for his faith.

Dawson’s colleague at JETS is a Ghassanid descendant.

Haidar Hallasa, a 76-year-old faculty member and pastor in the church of the Nazarene, has dedicated the latter half of his life to studying Arab Christian history. Author of Arabic titles translated Jordan’s Biblical Geography and Our Forgotten History, he said many modern Christians throughout the Levant descend from the ancient tribe—which originated in fourth-century Yemen.

His great-grandfather, a Bedouin Muslim, came to the Transjordan region in 1735, fleeing from his crimes in the Bethlehem area. Describing himself as an Egyptian Copt, he took a job as a shepherd, developing a reputation for honesty that eventually led to a marriage with the one-eyed daughter of a tribal leader.

Hallasa’s resulting subtribe, he said, boasts 10,000 people today.

But the Ghassanids were not the only Christian tribe with influence. During the early Islamic era, the first Umayyad caliph, ruling from Damascus, married a daughter of the Benu Kalb tribe and appointed her Christian relative as the ruling prince of Tiberias. Many members eventually converted to Islam and others fled to Constantinople, so Hallasa sometimes tells open-minded Muslims that their personal religious identity may stem not from faith but from poverty. While intermarriage is a sign of fluctuating good relations, Arab Christians were assessed sometimes exorbitant jizya taxes that designated them as second-class citizens.

In hope that greater knowledge of history might encourage some to ponder the gospel, Hallasa has chronicled an additional 52 tribes from the Arabian Peninsula with Christian origins. But his primary message is for social tolerance.

Though it has been challenging, he has won such acceptance in his native Karak, 75 miles south of Amman—a city once belonging to Moabites, Nabateans, and Christians but that is overwhelmingly Muslim today.

“Radical Islamists want to divide us,” said Hallasa. “I say the opposite: You were Christians, we stayed Christians, but we are all one people.”

Also a Ghassanid, Rihani believes that evangelicals have a special role to play in relating Jordan to global Christianity. Tourists not only bring economic benefit for a struggling economy but interaction with their faith. And those who come to the Holy Land and extend their stay in Jordan further promote an exchange of peace.

Christian prayers in Petra can only help.

Vaguely aware of this history before the announcement, Rihani said it highlights how Jordan had a role in spreading the Bible throughout the region. But mostly, Petra’s Christian prayer is a form of divine encouragement.

“God is telling us, I’ve been here before, and I will continue with you,” Rihani said. “We should not have stones without spirituality, as the message of the gospel is alive in Jordan.”

- More from Jayson Casper

News

Amid Catholic Crackdown, Nicaragua Closes 250 Evangelical Ministries

Hernán Restrepo

Mountain Gateway became the latest Christian ministry to run afoul of the Ortega regime.

Crosses on top of a Nicaraguan flag.

Jose Cordero / Contributor / Getty

When Hurricanes Hilary and Idalia flooded Nicaragua’s coast last August and September, evangelical ministries in the country stepped up and served.

President Daniel Ortega and his wife, vice president Rosario Murillo, had expelled the Red Cross from their country last July after the organization had criticized the country for its inhuman treatment of prisoners. The departure had left a gap in humanitarian aid for the country.

One of these Christians organizations that came through was Mountain Gateway. The American missions and development agency was one of many that helped organize a major event that started out by providing emergency aid like food, clothing, and medicines, and continued as a major evangelistic campaign where thousands heard the proclamation of the gospel.

The event, called Buenas Nuevas Nicaragua (Good News Nicaragua), united more than 1,300 evangelical churches from 13 of Nicaragua’s 15 departments in a massive two-day evangelistic event in the capital, Managua, last November. Local news estimated that up to 300,000 people attended the gathering, and despite ongoing tensions between the Ortega administration and churches, a pro-government publication even highlighted the event.

But the gathering’s success in sharing spiritual encouragement and provisions ultimately had little effect on softening the government’s latest crusade against Christian ministries.

Since 2018, the Ortega administration has imprisoned and exiled Catholic priests who have criticized the regime. But as the population of Nicaraguan evangelicals has grown, so has persecution of the evangelical church. A report recently published by Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW) registered 310 severe violations of freedom of religion or belief between November 2022 and January 2024, and according to Nicaragua Nunca Más, since 2018, the government has closed a total of 256 evangelical organizations, with the majority shutting down in 2022.

Weeks after Buenas Nuevas Nicaragua, the government ordered the closure of Mountain Gateway’s 10 churches and arrested 11 of their pastors, accusing them of money laundering.

Nicaraguan authorities have cited this reason numerous times in the past. Since 2018, it has closed 3,390 non-governmental organizations (10% of them foreign) for “money laundering,” according to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. And in 2022, the government shut down 20 evangelical churches on similar grounds.

Even with increased persecution and false accusations, however, many local Protestant pastors and foreign ministry leaders have largely chosen to keep quiet.

But for Britt Hancock, who founded Mountain Gateway in 2009, these accusations don’t make sense.

“We have not been given any charging documents to know what our US pastors and our Nicaraguan pastors are being charged with, so we have no explanation for what is happening,” Hancock told CT. “We don’t understand the complexity of it all, especially since we have worked to maintain a respectful relationship and abide by their policies and laws.”

“Last year, as we worked with our pastors, I don’t think any of those we interacted with expressed any idea that we needed to demonstrate extreme caution when preaching the gospel.”

Different pages

The Mountain Gateway case is just one of the most recent examples of government repression of evangelicals, who now make up 38 percent of Nicaragua’s population of 6.4 million. One of the earliest examples was that of Rudy Palacios, whose church in La Roca had 1,500 members and six different sites. But after accompanying his children at a 2018 march, the government accused him of terrorism and forced him into exile.

In 2023, Open Doors ranked Nicaragua No. 50 on its annual list of the most dangerous countries in which to be a Christian. In 2024, the Central American country had jumped to No. 30.

Despite these reports, evangelicals aren’t all on the same page about the government’s actions.

“There is no persecution against evangelicals in my Nicaragua,” Douglas Valerio, a pastor who leads a small Pentecostal church in the Iglesias Care network in Jinotepe, 45 kilometers (about 28 miles) from Managua, told CT. “After the marches and road blockades that destabilized the country in 2018, Commander Ortega’s government took measures to reduce foreign interference in politics.”

One of these measures was a law passed in 2022 that seeks to prevent organizations from being used for “money laundering and terrorist financing.” Mountain Gateway violated this, says Valerio.

“It has been proven that in 2018, a lot of money came in through various NGOs to finance those who were protesting and blocking the roads,” he said. “When Mountain Gateway could not explain the origin of so much money used in the Buenas Nuevas Nicaragua campaign, the authorities enforced the law.”

Isaías Martínez, a Presbyterian pastor and Central America coordinator of the Seminario Reformado Latinoamericano (SRL), agrees with Valerio.

“We have freedom of belief and religion in Nicaragua,” he said. “But since 2018, if a pastor speaks against the government, especially on social media, there could be consequences. It is better that we dedicate ourselves to preaching the Word of God and not get involved in politics.”

Pastors who do believe that the government is unfairly treating Christian organizations may be afraid to speak up or may prefer to maintain a distance between their congregation and the political situation in the country.

One pastor of a small congregation in Managua has had his church’s bank account frozen and received violent threats for not promoting pro-government events.

“Those who say there is no persecution do not understand what persecution is,” he said. “We pastors avoid talking about politics in our sermons because we know that among the people who listen to us there may be state agents who accuse us of violating the law.”

For the Managua pastor, the Mountain Gateway situation shows the government’s fear of losing power in the next elections. Regional elections will be held on March 3 and presidential elections will be held at the end of 2026.

“The government is afraid that the church will unify and produce a candidate who will win the elections,” he said. “That is why they were afraid when Mountain Gateway gathered hundreds of thousands of people in a single event.”

Before 2018, some evangelical pastors campaigned for Ortega, who considered them allies, offering those that might have spoken out against his administration’s treatment of Catholics with preferred bureaucratic treatment.

This change in attitude of the Ortega and Murillo regime toward Catholics and evangelicals has been studied by Teresa Flores, director of the Observatory of Religious Freedom in Latin America.

“As the evangelical church does not have a unified leadership, the persecution is different and more difficult to perceive than that of the Catholic church. It is a more diverse community,” she explained to CT from Peru.

“As for evangelicals, we also know that there is an underreporting of persecution. Many pastors who have been threatened or attacked prefer not to report, because they know that if they do, the consequences could be worse,” she said, adding that “this doesn’t mean they’re free. They just don’t want to get involved for fear of government hostility.”

“The regime has treated the Catholic hierarchy and evangelical hierarchy differently,” Nicaraguan activist and award-winning cartoonist Pedro Molina told CT. “The evangelical political leaders had been pacified by having privileges granted, such as permits to hold events and open schools, in addition to obtaining licenses for television channels and radio stations.”

Molina, who now lives in New York and has been in exile since 2018, accused the pastors in his cartoons of receiving a “bloody tithe.”

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Confidencial Nicaragua (@confidencial_ni)

One of the likely subjects of his cartoons is pastor Guillermo Osorno Molina (no relation), who at one time had his own radio stations, a TV channel, and even a political party called Camino Cristiano Nicaragüense (Nicaraguan Christian Road; CCN).

But in 2022 Osorno decided to challenge Ortega and ran as his party’s presidential candidate. In response, the government shut down his channel, Enlace Canal 21, on financial charges, after a broadcast claimed there had been electoral fraud in the 2022 presidential elections. In addition, Osorno was prohibited from leaving the country, and the government outlawed his political party.

Repression increases

Nicaragua has a long history of repressive governments. The Somoza family ran the country under a military dictatorship from 1947 to 1979, until the communist guerrilla group Frente Sandinista de Liberación Nacional (Sandinista National Liberation Front; FSLN), where Daniel Ortega served as one of the main commanders, successfully staged a coup d’état.

Ortega is currently ruling his fifth term as president. He first served between 1985 and 1990, then returned to power in 2007. Since then, he has been reelected three more times, though some have claimed election fraud.

The Catholic church has a long history of involvement in Nicaraguan politics, including supporting the Sandinistas when they first took power in the 1980s. In this current term, Ortega enjoyed relative popularity and a more or less cordial relationship with both Catholics and evangelicals until 2018.

Things changed in April that year, when the government announced unwelcome changes in the public pension system. Police and paramilitary groups met many of the tens of thousands who took to the streets with tear gas and rubber bullets and worse, with at least 350 people killed. Religious leaders went from being mediators of the conflict to becoming protectors of young people fleeing violent repressions and finding refuge in church buildings, as Flores described in an article for the International Journal of Religious Freedom.

But these actions were seen by the government as treason, thus giving them grounds to arrest priests and pastors. When some Catholic clergy became vocal against the government, Ortega began to close organizations and to arrest or exile priests.

This growing wave of religious persecution has been well documented since 2018 by Nicaraguan lawyer Martha Patricia Molina Montenegro, a 2024 winner of the International Religious Freedom Award granted by the United States Department of State.

“In Nicaragua, there is hatred on the part of the Ortega-Murillo dictatorship toward the pastoral work carried out by both Catholic priests and evangelical pastors,” Molina, the Nicaraguan activist, told CT. “The regime needs a church that kneels before them. Since they have not achieved this, they persecute Christians.”

Molina, who has been in exile since 2021 and now lives in Texas, has documented 667 attacks on Catholic churches and 70 on evangelical ones between 2018 and 2023. These attacks are not limited to physical attacks on church infrastructure, including also graffiti theft, and vandalism; prohibitions on some religious activities, like processions and Masses; and death threats, forced exile, and expulsion of religious nationals and foreign workers.

Though Ortega is technically president and his wife is technically vice president, they are essentially co-dictators, says Molina, the cartoonist.

He says that the couple aspires to another level of authority over the population. “[She and her husband] want people to listen to them not only as political leaders but also as divine leaders,” he added. “They want people to not only obey them but also worship them.”

Though Ortega and Murillo’s cult of personality has attracted few evangelicals, their government’s actions have increasingly made it hard for the growing community to find unity.

“The government’s aim is not simply to silence the voice of Christians but, given their influence in the country, to hinder their credibility and to stop their message from spreading,” stated an Open Doors 2024 report. “It should be noted that while many Christians are in the firing line, there are a minority of believers who either out of fear or conviction are choosing to keep quiet. Among some church communities, this is causing division.”

Despite the attacks against the church in Nicaragua, the population of that country continues to be receptive to the message of Jesus.

“The spiritual climate in Nicaragua during the mass evangelism campaigns was one of the most extraordinary examples of John 17 unity between all denominations and movements I have ever seen,” said Hancock, Mountain Gateway’s founder.

“Every pastor we engaged with was infused with excitement over the fact that so many new believers were in their churches. Their church members were motivated in ways to share their faith as they never had been, and their buildings were out of space to hold all the new people directly following each campaign.”

Hernán Restrepo is a Colombian journalist who lives in Bogotá. As of 2021, he manages the social media accounts for in Spanish.

- More from Hernán Restrepo

News

Was Carnival Rapture Warning Courageous or Inappropriate? Brazil Debates Eschatology

Franco Iacomini

After pop star’s surprise witness ends with a bang, evangelical leaders discuss whether to axe apocalypse talk as ineffective evangelism.

A crowd celebrating during a Carnival street party in Brazil.

Edits by CT / AP Images

When two Brazilian pop stars began chatting on live TV two weeks ago, few likely thought their conversation would start a debate about the end times.

On February 11, in the midst of Carnival, Baby do Brasil joined fellow veteran Ivete Sangalo in a trio elétrico, a truck equipped with a powerful sound system that drives through the streets as partygoers follow. The two greeted each other in Salvador, a city of nearly three million in northeastern Brazil, and quickly exchanged compliments about their careers.

Then Baby do Brasil took the mic.

“Everyone, pay attention, because we have entered the apocalypse,” she said. “The Rapture is expected to happen in the next five to ten years. Seek the Lord while you can find him.”

Sangalo, who seemingly had not anticipated her cohost venturing into eschatology, made a crude joke.

“I won’t let it happen because we will bang the apocalypse,” she said, referencing her new song “Macetando,” which roughly translates to “smashing” or “banging.”

Baby do Brasil followed up by asking Sangalo to sing “Minha Pequena Eva,” her hit from the ’90s, which tells of a couple isolated in a spaceship when an atomic war takes place on Earth.

“I’m going to sing ‘Macetando’ because God is telling me to,” Sangalo replied.

As Baby do Basil shouted, “Oh, glory,” Sangalo began to sing.

The awkward exchange soon went viral, generating plentiful commentary, numerous memes, and one TV show anchor even signing off, “Let’s be happy before the apocalypse.” Scorned by many Brazilians (one tweet described the exchange as “clowneries of a believer”), the Rapture reference also divided evangelicals, who alternately found Baby’s words courageous and inappropriate.

“Maybe you think that Carnival is not a place for Christian believers, and I agree. But she is a music professional, and in the midst of her work, her profession, she obeys Jesus and is the salt of the earth and the light of the world,” Pedro Barreto, senior pastor of Comunidade Batista do Rio, a Baptist church in Rio de Janeiro, wrote on Instagram.

In just a few minutes, he said, this type of communication could reach “more people than I touched in my 20 years of ministry.”

On the other hand, Christian YouTuber Zé Bruno wrote on X that “Baby from Brazil was unfortunate in what she said and when she said it. This episode is an example of a lack of wisdom and common sense.”

Probably, he added, Sangalo didn’t understand the whole speech as theological, but as “something bad, scary. This is how it is in the popular imagination.”

As their surging number of churches indicates, evangelicals overall have been successful at sharing the gospel in Brazil. But as Barreto’s commentary suggests, some believe the church too often preaches to the choir, rarely venturing to reach those beyond.

For instance, evangelicals generally eschew Carnival. While the streets are crowded with people dancing and playing, churches organize retreats and special services designed to keep their members away from scenes they largely regard as immoral. As a result, even as the evangelical movement has grown significantly in recent decades, its influence on the country’s most well-known time of year has stayed negligible.

But is there an appropriate time to address difficult theological questions in the public square?

“It largely depends on the hermeneutical lenses we use to interpret what the Lord expects from us,” said Marcos Amado, founder of the Martureo Centro de Reflexão Missiológica, a ministry center that trains missionaries. “We should preach in season and out of season, as 2 Timothy 4:2 tells us. But what does it mean today?”

Some will say that the duty is to preach, so consequences and fruits are up to God, says Amado. Others would balance this position with 1 Peter 3:15–16, which urges Christians to speak with gentleness and respect.

“In my opinion, there is, biblically speaking, no inappropriate time to testify about Jesus,” he said. “But there are inappropriate forms and subjects depending on the moment and the circumstances.”

The widespread mockery and derision of Baby do Brasil’s comments suggests that Brazilian society—long the world’s largest population of Catholics—is still trying to understand evangelicals, a group that registered as low as 6.5 percent of Brazilians as recently as 1980. Brazilian evangelicals can’t act like public officials in the United States, who can assume a level of public knowledge about the Bible and Christian theology because of the American people’s long Protestant history.

Today about one-third of Brazil’s population of 203 million is evangelical, and this numerical shift should prompt reflection on the increased public scrutiny they are receiving, says Pentecostal theologian Gutierres Fernandes Siqueira. For instance, though the idea of the Rapture is likely widely accepted by most Brazilian evangelicals, 60 percent of whom are Pentecostals, premillennial theology is far from mainstream.

“One of the problems with growth is that some people feel comfortable discussing topics in public that until recently were restricted to Bible study groups,” said Fernandes.

This does not mean that God is not present in these initiatives. “In my faith journey, I have seen God using the most unusual situations to touch someone’s heart,” said Amado. “But under normal circumstances, issues of this kind should be addressed after other basic Christian concepts have already been presented, and at a time when one can interact, ask questions, and obtain responses.”

“There would be more appropriate biblical forms and themes for the moment [of Carnival] than the Rapture, which easily ends up being a laughingstock when it’s not the right conditions to explain the subject appropriately,” he said.

Churches should be better prepared and readier to seize these opportunities, says Fernandes. He urges churches to train specialists on hot-button issues like the end times or evolution. Once Christians are equipped, they can not only take advantage of opportunities but pursue spaces to share their convictions.

“Take, for example, the debate about sexuality,” said Fernandes. “Brazilian evangelicals are willing to talk about this on social media, but you don’t see many of us at public health meetings where we could make a difference.”

Instead of experts more frequently presenting their thoughtful opinions to the general public, Fernandes finds too many uninformed Christians sharing their hot takes on social media.

“The problem is that we currently just have these activists,” he said.

–

- More from Franco Iacomini

News

Trump on Track to Sweep South Carolina

Harvest Prude

Despite some tension within churches over the candidates, evangelicals mostly side with the former president’s track record over their former governor Nikki Haley.

Trump rally in Conway, South Carolina

Win McNamee / Getty Images

In the lead-up to South Carolina’s primary contest on Saturday, former South Carolina governor Nikki Haley held a news conference to tell supporters that she’s “not going anywhere” and is committed to offering voters an alternative to former president Donald Trump.

Meanwhile, her presidential rival—who has a 2–1 lead in her home state—spoke at an evangelical conference in Nashville, touting his record on issues important to conservative Christians during his first term and pledging to continue in his second term.

Trump pledged to 1,500 attendees at the National Religious Broadcasters (NRB) convention that despite threats from the Left, “no one will be touching the cross of Christ under the Trump administration, I swear to you.”

“Christian voters had a good relationship with Nikki and they liked Nikki, but they do love Trump,” said Chad Connelly, who was at the NRB gathering.

The South Carolina native and former two-term chairman of the South Carolina Republican Party is the founder of the conservative Christian organization Faith Wins, which involves 16,000 pastors in evangelical voter registration.

Connelly said the thing he hears most from faith leaders is that Trump “did what he said he was going to do … that’s a rare politician. That’s the number one comment.”

Specific policies come up more than others: Trump’s releasing a list of potential Supreme Court nominees in 2016 and then nominating three conservative judges to the court, as well as his move of the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.

But more than any particular list of issues motivating this election, multiple sources described a deep sense of personal loyalty that GOP primary voters feel for Trump, something that has intensified along with his legal troubles.

“People felt like these are political hit jobs,” Connelly said. “Those things are helping him in the weirdest way. I wouldn’t have predicted it. But they are absolutely helping him. It has brought out a fervor and an excitement. … I’ve never seen [this] depth of support and enthusiasm.”

In 2016, white evangelicals dispersed their votes in South Carolina’s GOP primary: Trump gained 34 percent of the vote, Sen. Ted Cruz gained 26 percent, and Marco Rubio gained 21 percent. Political watchers don’t expect much of a divide this time around.

“There are evangelicals in South Carolina that are somewhat suspicious of Trump and are probably supporting Nikki Haley, or are going to reluctantly support Trump,” Tony Beam, director of church engagement at North Greenville University and policy director for the South Carolina Baptist Convention, told CT. “But I would say the largest group are those who are probably going to be pretty solidly behind Trump for the primary and for president.”

The state has plenty of “evangelicals in name only” who are fervent Trump supporters, Beam said. But others are “in church every Sunday, I serve on committees, I’m serious about my faith–type believers that believe Trump is the answer.”

Danielle Vinson, a politics and international affairs professor at Furman University in Greenville, South Carolina, has noticed tension within churches, though she believes the excitement for Trump is more uniform in rural churches compared to their urban and suburban counterparts.

In her evangelical church, she’s at times been “very mystified by little old ladies completely rationalizing Trump, but they do,” she said. “But I have noticed a small smattering of very vocal opponents to Trump in those very same congregations. So it’s not a universal love, but I also think there’s more enthusiasm than you might find in other parts of the country.”

More notable divides may fall along socioeconomic lines.

“I do think South Carolina has more of what we would traditionally view evangelical voters to be,” Nicholas Higgins, chair of the political science department at North Greenville University, told CT. “I just think that the information is going to be less useful because it’s getting mixed with other types of groups.”

Higgins has observed that in his conversations with students or professors, there’s a marked preference for Haley over Trump at times. But when he speaks with blue-collar workers at his church or elsewhere, he’s noticed more support for Trump.

It’s not ubiquitous, he said, but it’s more marked than divisions along faith: “I find Christians of higher education tend to support Haley, Christians with lower education tend to support Trump. Seculars of higher education tend to support Haley, seculars of lower education tend to support Trump. I think that’s where you’re finding greater variation.”

There are some rumblings that Haley’s reason for powering through, despite the losses, is the possibility of a shakeup in the race due to her rival’s outstanding issues in state and federal courts. Trump faces 91 felony counts in two state courts and two federal districts, as well as a civil suit in New York.

There are also states that have filed cases using an obscure provision in the 14th Amendment to argue a legal theory that Trump is ineligible for appearing on the 2024 ballot due to his role in the January 6, 2021, US Capitol insurrection. It’s not clear how they will rule, though justices seemed skeptical during oral arguments earlier this month that the state could exclude Trump from the ballot in Colorado.

“It’s going to be nigh impossible for Haley to pull up enough to prevent Trump from getting the majority of delegates,” Higgins said. But he said her strategy may still be to be the next highest delegate holder to show viability, in the event that Trump’s legal issues take him out of the running.

She may be hoping, Higgins said, that “the other side is going to have to forfeit. And so coming in second, getting the silver medal, then finding out the gold medal winner took a pile of performance-enhancing drugs—you get the gold medal.”

Former state representative Garry Smith told CT he hears from Christian friends who are opting out of engaging politically at the moment. “There’s lots of confusion in the church,” he said. But as November draws closer, he believes tension will dissipate between the various wings of the Republican party for “more focus on the objective—which is to elect candidates of the party.”

Chip Felkel, a South Carolina native who grew up in what he described as a “deep water” Southern Baptist church and now attends a Methodist church, said he finds it hard to recognize the evangelical and Republican circles he grew up in.

“I will never completely understand the connection from the evangelical community with Donald Trump,” Felkel told CT. “The evangelical community—he’s their champion.”

“Within the ‘Trump party,’ they liken him to King David. Some even go so far as a Second Coming, and I know that’s extreme, but I have heard and I’ve read where people think he’s anointed by God to lead their effort,” Felkel said.

He’s worked for multiple Republican campaigns in South Carolina and is a longtime conservative GOP consultant. He’s not associated with a campaign this cycle.

But Felkel—as well as other white Christian voters who are skeptical of former president Donald Trump—are set to be the minority in this weekend’s South Carolina GOP primary.

“Look, I mean, Trump will win big here. There’s no question about that,” Felkel said.

After South Carolina, Michigan holds its contest on February 27.

The next landmark in the election is Super Tuesday, which falls on March 5. Fifteen states will vote, and the result will account for 874 of the necessary 2,429 Republican delegates. While it won’t be enough for Trump to sweep the nomination, Super Tuesday is likely Haley’s last shot at proving her viability.

- More from Harvest Prude

Books

Review

Gender Difference Is Real, but Too Complex to Spell Out All the Specifics

Branson Parler

A theologian articulates an Augustinian alternative to the reigning perspectives on nature and culture.

Illustration by Mallory Rentsch Tlapek / Source Images: WikiMedia Commons

When asked to define time, Augustine remarked that he knew what it was until someone asked him to define it. One could say the same of the term gender in contemporary debate. Although there is no lack of debate about gender, rarely is the term clearly defined.

Gender as Love: A Theological Account of Human Identity, Embodied Desire, and Our Social Worlds

Fellipe do Vale (Author)

Baker Pub Group/Baker Books

272 pages

$18.11

In his book Gender as Love: A Theological Account of Human Identity, Embodied Desire, and Our Social Worlds, theologian Fellipe do Vale aims to bring greater clarity to the concept of gender. In doing so, he refuses the binary framing that casts it as a matter of either pure biology or pure social construction. Instead, he draws on an Augustinian theology of love to argue that gender refers to a “bundle” of human loves and social goods that shape how we manifest our male and female bodies.

Further, do Vale clarifies that affirming the basic reality of gender does not entail affirming an exhaustive and fully cohesive understanding of it, in part because our knowledge is shaped by our narrative context. That is, our place in the story of creation, fall, redemption, and consummation affects both the lived reality of gender and our capacity to know the fullness of what it signifies.

Between the essentialists and the constructivists

Do Vale’s critique and constructive proposal unfolds in three sections. In the first, he draws on the late theologian John Webster, arguing for a “theologically theological anthropology” that comprehends gender within biblical and theological sources rather than merely building on or reacting to the existing claims of philosophy and sociology. Having laid this foundation, he engages the dominant view of gender today—namely, that we construct it according to personal desires and social conventions rather than inheriting it as a fixed reality rooted in biology.

As do Vale argues, this “constructivist” argument fails for two reasons. First, this position ends up dissolving any meaningful reference to men or women as such. If the meaning of woman and man varies from culture to culture, then we lose any ability to speak or act (politically or ethically) with reference to these categories. Second, if this position is correct, we cannot meaningfully evaluate any particular cultural practice related to gender. Without some kind of ontological anchor, judgments of better or worse, just or unjust, lack any solid footing. The gender-skeptical position of the constructivists thus leads to problematic ethical conclusions.

In the second section, do Vale presents his constructive proposal on gender. Against the constructivists, he argues that gender is an essence, though not merely of a biological nature. He contends that, taken together, the complexity of gender, the effects of the Fall on sinful minds, and the ethical effects of injustice preclude anyone from enjoying full and direct access to the essence of gender. Given the effects of sin, he argues, any theology of gender must cultivate justice in the here and now, as we await a perfected understanding of gender in the world to come.

Drawing on Augustine, do Vale presents a theology of human love in which “human identity is a bundle of many loves, and included in that bundle are the complex social identities that we bear, like gender.” This lays the groundwork for his central claim that gender is love—or, more specifically, to invoke his technical language, that gender is the love of certain goods, including social goods, by which the sexed body is socially manifested.

This complex reality is neither merely biological (per some essentialists) nor strictly cultural (per constructivists). Rather, gender is one way inherently cultural beings make sense of the givenness of the world, including the maleness and femaleness of bodies.

In the book’s third and final section, do Vale delves further into the complex relationship between gender and the biblical storyline. In the context of creation, he acknowledges the pain and suffering of intersex individuals and others born with sexual irregularities. But he cautions against the theological moves made by thinkers like Susannah Cornwall and Megan DeFranza who, he contends, suggest a kind of Gnostic redemption from the categories of creation, not from sin and its effects.

In his section on the Fall, do Vale explores sexual assault as a signal instance of warped gender expression, noting that it warps the oppressor even as it transgresses the dignity and value of the victim. Finally, he articulates a vision of redemption and consummation that, rather than erasing who we are as male and female, restructures our disordered loves and purges false distinctions of superiority and inferiority attached to gender. Seen in this light, the church’s central task is not to present an exhaustive theory of gender but to model patience and grace as we await the consummation of all things, gender included.

Clarity and confusion

Gender as Lovehas a number of strengths. Do Vale rightly resists the simplistic binary of nature and culture that stands beneath the social constructionist view of gender. And he charitably but clearly points out the metaphysical and ethical deficiencies that prevent this view from speaking or acting coherently.

Furthermore, do Vale helpfully distinguishes between ontology and epistemology, clarifying that both reality and our knowledge of it are affected by our position within the biblical story. This gives us confidence in the enduring, transcultural reality of gender while encouraging humility in our efforts to define and understand it within particular cultures.

Yet do Vale’s work, while helpful in some respects, does have shortfalls. On the one hand, I appreciate his emphasis on a kind of pragmatic realism about gender norms. He is correct, I believe, that the church’s most pressing need is not to identify some timeless set of gender norms but rather to engage discerningly with the gender expressions that exist within our particular cultures.

All cultures have identified certain social goods in gendered ways, some of which are more defensible than others. Our first task is to describe these social goods accurately, determining what they mean for the culture in question—and how they are gendered (as in Paul’s reference to women wearing veils in 1 Corinthians 11). Without first laying this descriptive foundation, we cannot engage in any kind of moral or theological reflection. Within each cultural context, though, we must press on to ask: How should we, as Christian women and men in this culture, love these goods in relation to our male and female bodies?

And this is where I’m unsure whether do Vale’s proposal brings greater clarity to the confusions around gender today. He does affirm the biological distinctions between men and women, and he is insightful in describing how individuals come to a sense of gender identity. But even here some ambiguity creeps in.

Do Vale agrees, at the outset of the book, that the differences between male and female are differences in kind rather than degree, in that there are certain properties that define one as male or female exclusively. Later on, however, he is unwilling to specify any of these properties, which seems to imply that gender is something that transcends them. If we can’t state any definitive properties of being male or female, how can we hope to even approximate them this side of heaven?

How does one make prescriptive judgments about being properly masculine or feminine? Do Vale speaks of rightly ordered gendered goods as being used for the flourishing of humanity. And he speaks of disordered gendered loves as being unjust, harmful, and oriented toward dominating others. But this definition supplies no concrete criteria for determining what is just or unjust, or what counts as flourishing rather than harm. In today’s cultural context, justice language (“oppression,” “harm,” “unjust”) can rival gender language in its occasional lack of conceptual clarity. Thus, do Vale’s combination of gender and justice language raises as many questions as it answers.

In a similar vein, it’s unclear how do Vale’s ideas can help us sort through complex questions of transgender identities or gender roles. For example, does an individual’s love of certain gendered goods entail belonging to that gender? If, for instance, a man (a person with a male sexed body) loves the goods associated with femininity in contemporary American culture, is that person’s gender identity female even though his sexed body is male? From a purely descriptive angle, do Vale’s answer would appear to be yes.

To be clear, I am not at all sure do Vale actually wants to draw this conclusion. I recognize that his book is a highly technical treatment of gender and theology, but its value could have been enhanced by more clearly spelling out the practical implications and judgments entailed in certain contested areas.

On the whole, though, do Vale’s work is a helpful and engaging resource for those who want to take a deep dive into contemporary gender theory and theological engagement with it. He should be commended for affirming a clear theological grounding for gender, offering a helpful Augustinian framework for relating gender to human loves, and reminding us to view passing gender controversies—important as they are—in the light of God’s ongoing work of redemption.

Branson Parler is director of theological education and professor of theology at The Foundry. He is the author of Every Body’s Story: 6 Myths About Sex and the Gospel Truth About Marriage and Singleness.

- More from Branson Parler

Theology

Picture Jesus: Is He Shiny?

Patrick Schreiner

Christ’s resplendence in the Transfiguration says more than we think.

The Transfiguration painted by Alexander Ivanov

WikiMedia Commons / Edits by CT

Jesus Christ is arguably the most famous man who ever lived. His image is everywhere. But what did the God-Man from Nazareth actually look like?

We often imagine a particular “look” based on artistic renderings we’ve seen, but many of these designs are influenced by the artist’s culture. And while we may be able to assume certain visual traits based on the time and culture in which Jesus lived, there is little explicit evidence for these assumptions. In fact, the Bible tells us very little about Jesus’ appearance at all.

Other than Isaiah’s remark that he “had no beauty or majesty” (Is. 53:2), the Scriptures never tell us how tall Jesus was, what kind of hair he had, his body type, the color of his eyes, what sort of clothes he wore, or even the color of his skin.

It’s somewhat unexpected for the Bible not to comment on Jesus’ physicality, since back then a person’s physical looks often corresponded to their character traits. Ancient authors might note aspects of their main character’s appearance to highlight or foreshadow something about them.

For example, the Old Testament tells us King Saul was “as handsome a young man as could be found anywhere in Israel, and he was a head taller than anyone else” (1 Sam. 9:2) and King David was “glowing with health and had a fine appearance and handsome features” (1 Sam. 16:12). Each of these descriptions signaled their heroic and kingly appeal to the people of Israel.

The New Testament narrative only focuses on Jesus’ appearance in the Transfiguration (see parallel accounts in Matt. 17:1–8; Mark 9:2–8; Luke 9:28–36; 2 Pet. 1:16–20). And although there is much we could say about the ultimate significance of the Transfiguration, let’s look at it from a more philosophical perspective—and especially in its unique emphasis on Jesus’ face and clothes.

In Matthew’s account, the author notes that his face “shone” (17:2), while Luke says its appearance had “changed” (9:29). Before this, only a handful of texts even mention Jesus’ face. We know Jesus sets his face toward Jerusalem (Luke 9:51–53), that he fell “with his face to the ground” in Gethsemane (Matt. 26:39), and that people spit on his face and blindfolded him while he was on trial (Matt. 26:67; Mark 14:65). There are also texts about Jesus not showing “partiality,” which more literally refers to showing his face to people (Matt. 22:16; Mark 12:14; Luke 20:21).

Even though the Transfiguration texts don’t describe what Jesus’ face looks like, their emphasis on it is important. In ancient times as now, our face is one of the most relational parts of us—seeing someone’s face often involves having a personal encounter with them. It’s also seen as an intimate aspect of God when it comes to his unique appearances to humans in Scripture.

The Old Testament describes moments where God interacts with certain people “face to face.” The first time we see this phrase is after Jacob wrestles God, when the narrator says Jacob named the place Peniel, the Hebrew word for “face of God.” “I saw God face to face,” says Jacob. “And yet my life has been spared” (Gen. 32:30). God also reveals his face and speaks to Moses “face to face, as one speaks to a friend” (Ex. 33:11)—which was a rare and significant honor.

The phrase “face to face” shouldn’t be understood literally, since Moses’ request to see God’s face is denied (Ex. 33:18–20), but it’s an idiom for divine encounter that communicates relational closeness. In a similar way, the Transfiguration’s emphasis on Jesus’ face implies it is a divine encounter. And while we might not know exactly what Jesus’ face looked like, we come to learn this isn’t the most important thing to know about Jesus.

Another unique feature of the Transfiguration accounts is their mention of Jesus’ clothes. Matthew affirms they “became as white as light” (17:2) and Mark asserts they became “dazzling white, whiter than anyone in the world could bleach them” (Mark 9:3). Similarly, Luke says his clothes became “as bright as a flash of lightning” (Luke 9:29).

Our clothes are formed to fit and attach to our bodies and so they are, in some sense, an extension of our personal presence. Our clothes also both reveal and conceal us—they reveal something about our figure but also hide other aspects. And ultimately, clothes are created things and thus representative of creation. Humankind first sought to clothe themselves with fig leaves (Gen. 3:7) but God was their true tailor, making them “garments of skin” (Gen. 3:21).

The Gospel writers don’t tell us any specific details about Jesus’ transfigured clothes, other than that they shone. But this single detail says a lot—about Jesus and ultimately about us. The fact that Jesus was wearing clothing in his encounter with the Father and that they were shining along with his face makes a powerful statement: Everything that is united to Christ, even his ordinary clothes, is transformed by him. Whoever and whatever Jesus touches will eventually shine with light. Those of us who are united to Christ will one day be glorified as Jesus was glorified (1 Cor. 15:40–44).

Jesus’ clothes both cover and reveal him. They shine so brightly that we can’t see them in detail, but they also give us a preview—not only of his glory but also of our future glory and the glory of the coming kingdom. The Book of Revelation tells us those who persevere to the end will also be dressed in white clothes (Rev. 3:5). God invites his people to receive white clothes from him, and those in the heavens are described as being dressed in white robes (4:4; 7:9–14).

In other words, the emphasis on clothes in the Transfiguration narratives acts as a preview to the ultimate transformation of God’s people and their home. And although we might not know any other tangible details about what kind of clothing Jesus wore, the Gospel authors seemed to be writing with a more important reality in mind.

The Transfiguration is the only place in Scripture that includes a description of Jesus’ physical form—and even then, his form is mostly obscured by a blinding radiance. Yet the brightness of this scene is intentional. The Scriptures affirm throughout that humans cannot see God. Just as God told Moses that no man can see his face and live (Ex. 33:20), we are told that “no one has ever seen God” (1 John 4:12) and that God is “invisible” (1 Tim. 1:17; Heb. 11:27).

Paul further clarifies that God “dwells in unapproachable light, whom no one has ever seen or can see” (1 Tim. 6:16). And so, the light described in the Transfiguration narratives serve as two functions at once—it is both blinding and revealing. The light is blinding because no one can see God and live. Yet it simultaneously reveals that Jesus is the mediator between God and humankind and that it is only in and through him that we can see the true glory of God (John 1:14, 18).

Maybe this is why we don’t get a more detailed description of Jesus’ physical appearance. For other figures in the ancient world, it was appropriate. But for Jesus, who is “the image of the invisible God” (Col. 1:15), it is more suitable for the biblical authors to depict him in resplendent light. Yet it is also fitting for them to single out his face and clothes as the primary focal points of light, for he is also fully a man.

Ultimately, the Transfiguration accounts simply offer us another way to affirm what we have always said about Jesus: that he is truly God and truly man, possessing two natures in one person. It reminds us that we must respect both the transcendence and the immanence of Jesus. He is both near to us and far from us—he is both like us and unlike us. And one day, those who trust in him shall become just like him, for we will finally see him as he truly is (1 John 3:2).

Patrick Schreiner teaches New Testament at Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Kansas City, Missouri. He is the author of numerous books, including The Transfiguration of Christ.

- More from Patrick Schreiner

Theology

The True Master of the Elements

Sara Kyoungah White

Netflix’s live-action Avatar: The Last Airbender speaks to a longing C.S. Lewis described—and can remind us of our promises in Christ.

Gordon Cormier as Aang in Avatar: The Last Airbender on Netflix.

He can part water, command fire and wind, and move mountains. He’s not a super-Christian—he’s Avatar Aang, master of the four elements and protagonist of the Netflix’s live-action version of Avatar: The Last Airbender (ATLA), which began streaming Thursday.

Watching a live-action remake of a beloved animation is fraught with trepidation. In a poor adaptation, humor is either awkwardly forced or axed completely; costumes and casting choices can take on a cosplay veneer; and condensed, mashed, or added storylines suggest a fan-inspired medley put on by a high school drama club. The new ATLA, while a marked improvement from the 2010 travesty, sadly slips into these foibles more often than not.

I hate to render that verdict, because I wanted so badly to love this show. And that longing is part of a greater desire to see imagined worlds in the “real world”—to be, as C.S. Lewis famously wrote, “united with the beauty we see, to pass into it, to receive it into ourselves, to bathe in it, to become part of it,” to “get in.” Merely looking at a rendering of beautiful stories, the mythologies with which “we have peopled air and earth and water with gods and goddesses and nymphs and elves”—or, in this case, benders and Avatars—isn’t enough.

As Lewis recognized, at its heart, this longing is rooted in Scripture (Rev. 22:1–5). And it’s why, even with repeated disappointments (I’m looking at you, Dragonball Z, Beauty and the Beast, and Ginny Weasley), I’ll still watch live-action adaptations every time.

I first followed the story of Aang and his friends nearly two decades ago, when Avatar first aired as an animated series on Nickelodeon. At the time, I had never seen anything like it: a fantasy world clearly made in America but shaped by Asian (and Native) cultures, mirroring my own experiences as a Korean American. The first-rate writing tackled complex themes with hilarity and depth, and characters like Zuko became some of my all-time favorites.

When all three seasons released on Netflix in 2020, ATLA experienced something of a revival, claiming the title of the most-viewed show on the streaming platform. Critical acclaim deemed it close “in spirit and complexity to The Lord of the Rings trilogy,” “both a comfort watch and a means of catharsis.” Rotten Tomatoes rated it 100 percent fresh. I knew ATLA had made it as a cultural fixture when I came across a large, climbable replica of Appa the sky bison at a shopping mall in New Jersey.

This new version largely follows season 1 of the original. In a world where some people can “bend,” or telekinetically control, either water, earth, fire, or air, 12-year-old airbender Aang (Gordon Cormier) is the Avatar, the only one who can bend all four elements and who is therefore responsible for keeping the peace between the four other groups (or “nations”) of benders. But just when he is needed most, as the famous intro scene recounts, Aang vanishes, preserved in ice.

A century later, he resurfaces to a world dominated by the Fire Nation, who have completely wiped out the Air Nation and are at war with the Earth and Water Nations. Along with waterbender Katara (Kiawentiio Tarbell) and her brother, Sokka (Ian Ousley), Aang embarks on a journey to stop the Fire Nation and its ruler, Fire Lord Ozai (Daniel Dae Kim), and to restore harmony.

This retelling is marred by hit-or-miss CGI, a few questionable casting choices, amateur acting moments, and some poor writing. Yet despite these shortcomings, it gets some things right. Aiming for an older audience, the episodes lean into difficult concepts that are dealt with more obliquely in the animated version. The production team’s careful attention to cultural accuracy—from large-scale renderings like the Southern Air Temple and the city of Omashu to the smallest details of tea sets, funeral scenes, and on-screen signage—is commendable. And the episode with Koh (George Takei) in the spirit realm succeeded in being truly frightening, at least for my kids.

Those successful elements bring to life a modern myth that, like all compelling stories, resonates with reality. Of course, Lewis’s reflection on our love of such myths comes with a caveat: As Christians, we must engage culture with discernment, even when we’re watching “safe” shows made with kids in mind.

Because of its Asian influences, ATLA is something of a Buddhist fantasy, which is apparent in story elements from reincarnations and enlightenment of the Avatar to the air temple monks and an overall theme of balance in the universe. But, just as Lewis wrote of Western, pagan-inspired mythologies, Eastern stories can fund thoughtful Christian reflection or appreciation.

In Avatar, an obvious point of reflection is Aang’s possession of powers over the elements that appear in Scripture as miraculous demonstrations of God’s presence or authority. We’re told that when we follow Jesus, a spring of living water will well up from our souls (John 4:14). With faith as small as a mustard seed, we can tell a mountain to move (Matt. 17:20). God’s Spirit stirs through us like wind and breath, unloosing our tongues and bringing dead bones to life, however metaphorically (Acts 2:2, Ezek. 37:9). We are sons and daughters of a God who is the all-consuming fire—and to know him is to have a fire shut up in our bones (Heb. 12:29, Jer. 20:9).

When we read Scripture passages like these, it isn’t enough for us to appreciate them at a literary or intellectual level, or even to see them alive in our imaginations. We are made to live the reality that Scripture speaks of, to experience life in Christ for ourselves. Faith, in the end, always seeks the live-action version.

It’s fitting that this latest adaptation of ATLA was released during Lent. Like that of the Avatar’s four nations, our time is marked by division, war, and power-hungry rulers. It’s here in the darkness of the Lenten season, both literally and figuratively, that we can most anticipate Holy Week—Maundy Thursday and that first Communion—wherein this Lewisian desire to “get in” is most beautifully embodied.

At that Last Supper, Jesus says yes to our longing. He invites his disciples to not just watch him from the sidelines but to become one with him—to take, eat, and drink of his very self, to know him as the promised Savior, to be united with him completely in his life, death, and resurrection (Matt. 26:26–28, John 17:23). Here I am, he says: the real pillar of fire and cloud, the breath of life, the cornerstone, the fountain of life. Follow me.

That invitation still stands. Jesus, the true master of the elements—both earthly and sacramental—fulfills the biblical prophecies and narratives and embodies them once and for all, enfolding us into his story: the ultimate reality. Thank God it’s unimaginably better than the new Avatar.

Sara Kyoungah White is a copy editor at Christianity Today.

- More from Sara Kyoungah White

Church Life

Can ‘Dirty Money’ Do the Lord’s Work? Indonesian Christians Weigh In

Compiled by Mellie Cynthia

How churches and ministries in Indonesia navigate accepting—and refunding—donations from corruption and other sources that conflict with biblical ethics.

Illustration by Elizabeth Kaye / Source Images: Getty / Lightstock / Pexels

Indonesia’s Catholic community learned last year that thousands of dollars donated by a public official were proceeds from a multimillion-dollar telecom bribery case.

Johnny Gerard Plate, a cabinet minister before he was sentenced to a 15-year prison term, had a history of donating to his religious community in Indonesia’s Christian-majority East Nusa Tenggara province.

The court’s decision stated that a portion of these graft funds had been allocated to church institutions, including the Kupang archdiocese, Widya Mandira Catholic University, and the Timor Evangelical Christian Church, a Protestant group in Kupang. Following Plate’s conviction, Catholic authorities pledged to return these donations, emphasizing their commitment to ethical financial practices.

This is not the first time Christian officials involved in corruption cases have donated illegal funds to religious organizations. In 2017, former sea transport director general Antonius Tonny Budiono was found guilty of accepting bribes. During the trial, he stated to the judges that he used the funds for orphan care and for renovating a damaged church and school. In response to this case, Indonesia’s Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) challenged religious institutions, including churches, to conduct financial audits to promote transparency.

In a country where the corruption situation has seemingly deteriorated in recent years, CT asked Indonesian church and ministry leaders: “Should a Christian organization ever accept a donation gained from an unethical source?” Answers are arranged from firmly “No” to more nuanced stances:

Jimmy Kawilarang, director of Torchbearers Indonesia, West Java:

Churches and ministries should reject all activities that do not reflect the glory of God, including unethical ways of seeking and accepting donations that do not align with the teachings of the Bible. God’s Word condemns money obtained through deception, cheating, corruption, theft, or usury.

When an individual or organization intends to make a significant donation to the church, it is respectful and, for the sake of transparency and accountability, necessary to ask for an explanation of the origin of the donated money. The church can set guidelines to identify donation sources and request more details when donations exceed a certain amount.

To balance financial needs and moral integrity, churches and ministries should make financial reports public, involve the church council or board of trustees when making financial decisions, and build a strong internal supervision system to ensure accountability and openness to external oversight or independent audits.

Fostering a culture of transparency, accountability, and good governance in the financial context of the church or ministry is also the primary responsibility of Christian leaders. The apostle Paul speaks about the criteria for selecting someone to be a leader or servant of God (1 Tim. 3:1–10). A culture of transparency and accountability can only occur when church and ministry leaders have personal integrity and where their words and actions are consistent, motivating others to follow suit.

T. Christian Sulistio, lecturer at Southeast Asia Bible Seminary (SAAT), Malang, East Java:

The church has limitations when tracing the origin of funds or knowing all the motivations of Christians who give offerings. To prevent Christians from giving offerings or donations from work that does not align with God’s will, the church can communicate that offerings first and foremost are presenting oneself first to the Lord (2 Cor. 8:5), meaning our entire lives are living offerings, holy and pleasing to God (Rom. 12:1).

Offerings originating from money obtained unethically contradict the nature and will of God and are abominations to God. Deuteronomy 23:18 says, “You must not bring the earnings of a female prostitute or of a male prostitute into the house of the Lord your God to pay any vow, because the Lord your God detests them both.” In The Book of Deuteronomy, Peter C. Craigie writes that “money that had been acquired by sinful means could not be a part of God’s gift, and therefore could not be used in paying a vow to him.”

In another passage, Matthew 23:23 says, “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices—mint, dill and cumin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law—justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former.” We see that offerings to our Lord must also be based on the lives of Christians with these attributes.

Wahyu Pramudya, pastor at Indonesian Christian Church (GKI) Ngagel, Surabaya, East Java:

I had an interesting experience regarding these “problematic” offerings. Once, when I was guest preaching, someone handed me a check after a sermon. It was not a common occurrence, so I checked the name on the check via Google. I was surprised to find that the name was on the list of the popular Panama Papers at that time.

I contacted the local church minister to inquire about his involvement in the Panama Papers. But I did not receive a response regarding this matter from the minister of the church where I preached. I decided to cash the check and give it to one of my acquaintances (who was a church minister) who needed funds for his child’s school tuition fee.

I explained the origin of the money, and he was willing to accept it. He felt that this money might not necessarily come from unethical business. Personally, I felt uncomfortable accepting it because I couldn’t communicate with the giver of the check to clarify the source of the funds they were offering for my ministry.

In our church, congregation members and attendees can access financial reports, where the reports are examined by public accountants to ensure that the income and expenditures are reasonable and accountable. This is possible because our church adheres to a collective leadership system and is not held by only one pastor.

At times, such as when someone pays in cash, it can be challenging for us to know the identity of the donor and what their occupation is. Even knowing this information about our members comes at their own discretion.

If proven in court, [I feel] the church is obliged to return unlawfully obtained offerings. However, the number of cases that go to court is very minimal. And what about offerings clearly originating from businesses that pose health problems, such as smoking? This business is legal and one of the largest taxpayers in Indonesia. In general, the church will reject sponsorships (from this type of donor), which take the form of printed advertisements in bulletins, but still accept offerings that do not require the donor to be listed in print.

In my opinion, what pastors or churches should not do is to exploit the congregation’s guilt by demanding offerings as “redemption” from lifestyles that are displeasing to God, as if through these donations, the forgiveness and redemption of God can be “bought.” This behavior has occurred in the history of the church and has been one of the triggers for the church’s reformation. Pastors and churches must teach that offerings are expressions of gratitude, with a broken heart thanking God’s mercy amidst one’s own sinfulness, and not as a substitute for ongoing, unending sin.

Ryadi Pramana, founder of the EFOD, a ministry that serves and equips pastors in rural areas, Jakarta:

Our organization’s principle in accepting donations is knowing the background of the donor and whether the donor is a Christian with the heart of a servant or just a nominal Christian. A Christian with the heart of a servant will give wholeheartedly without any hidden motives.

When it comes to an organization’s financial needs, the more ambitious the desired outcome, the greater the need for funds, and this often causes us to become short-sighted. An organization that has over faith [an excessive belief that its ambitious wants will be met] does not first ask God whether it is what he desires or what one desires. If we follow our own will, the result will be accepting donations indiscriminately.

There are several things we do if we doubt the origin of a donation. Firstly, we advise the donor to directly give their money to those in need so that we are relieved from worrying about the origin of the funds. Secondly, we avoid using donations to purchase assets. This is because people tend to remember the money they have donated, so they feel very entitled in the journey of the church/foundation. This is contradictory to the principle of giving, where we consciously release what we have to others and the money no longer belongs to us.

Many churches and Christian foundations are destroyed because they do not have good financial management. In our ministry, our organization uses financial software that facilitates God’s servants in preparing good and proper financial reports according to accounting standards. If the system and the steward are good, then the result is very good.

Daniel Andy Hoffmann Sinaga, pastor at Batak Christian Protestant Church (HKBP) Medan Sudirman, North Sumatra:

Because this is an election year in Indonesia, many churches are receiving funds from legislative candidates in this year’s elections. It may be difficult for the church to know whether these funds are personal donations or campaign funds from their supporting party. However, church leaders should inquire further about the source of large donations, communicating with the individual in a friendly manner and private setting.

To validate the source of donations, Christian leaders should communicate their offering ethics in written form or verbal communication during worship. They don’t have to necessarily write these from scratch. Instead, they can use existing banking system procedures, like asking people to write a statement on the deposit form about where their money comes from, including from one’s salary, savings, investments, inheritance, and so on. These guidelines should come from biblical convictions but also be combined with legal principles regulating the source of funds, such as anticorruption and anti-money-laundering laws.

That said, the church cannot automatically prohibit itself from accepting money from a source of funds regardless of whether it was obtained ethically or not. The story of the sinful woman who anointed Jesus’ feet with expensive oil (Luke 7:36–50) is an apt illustration. Much to the disdain of the Pharisees, a woman who is a prostitute pours expensive oil on Jesus and washes his feet with her tears and hair. Jesus’ response is remarkable; he forgives her sins—not because of the expensive oil she uses but because her heart was moved toward God and he accepts the woman’s service and offering.

Similarly, the church that accepts funds that come from unethical means does not necessarily have to be rejected. I have visited churches located in the midst of red-light districts, and on Sundays, many prostitutes come to worship and give their offerings. So are we becoming like the Pharisees who are reluctant with the offering of the sinful woman? Again, the Lord sees the heart and love far more than the giving and offerings.

- More from Mellie Cynthia

Theology

‘Continue to Remember’ the Suffering in Ukraine

Andrew Moroz

Christians should be known for uplifting the afflicted before a distracted world.

Diego Fedele / Getty

By now, two years after the initial conflict, many Americans have largely forgotten about Ukraine. As often happens after a global crisis, we eventually become too distracted, irritated, or entertained by other news and media. Of course, there have been other more recent international conflicts as well, which also deserve our attention and prayers.

In early 2022, Ukraine began receiving widespread global attention during Russia’s invasion, but much of the initial aid has since diminished. Not only has general financial, material, and moral support been greatly reduced, but in some circles, Ukraine has become a political pawn for some—especially with the US presidential elections fast approaching.

When the conflict in eastern Ukraine began a decade ago in 2014, the global community knew Russia was likely preparing for more aggressive actions. But nothing could have prepared me for the morning of February 24, 2022, when I was shaken to my core as images of explosions and armored vehicles began filling the news and internet.

I’m a pastor in Lynchburg, Virginia, but I was born in Ukraine and have many friends and relatives who still live there. As the initial shock wore off and I was able to communicate with my loved ones, something was awakened in me. By the second month of Russia’s invasion, when millions of people were struggling to leave Ukraine, I traveled there to encourage and serve those affected by the conflict.

I have visited Ukraine four times over the past two years—and have witnessed firsthand the ongoing devastation of war. In my most recent trips, it has been disheartening to meet with fellow brothers and sisters who have felt neglected or forgotten by the global church.

Today, with our short attention spans and so many ongoing global crises, it is difficult to center our hearts on individual stories of devastation. Yet I believe it is vital for us as believers to consistently remember the suffering of our siblings in Christ—and to cultivate this remembrance as a habitual practice in our busy and distracted lives.

Whenever I think about Ukraine, I can’t get the words of Hebrews 13:3 out of my mind. The author implores followers of Jesus Christ to “continue to remember those in prison as if you were together with them in prison, and those who are mistreated as if you yourselves were suffering” (emphasis mine).

As citizens of God’s kingdom, we are called to pay special attention to the needs of the most vulnerable among us (Prov. 31:8–9, 1 John 3:17–18, James 1:27). We are connected within one body, the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:12), and our local churches are micro-expressions of a global church designed to function in unity. Just as we would never ignore a part of our own body if it were suffering, Christ’s body—the church—functions in a similar way. As Paul says, “If one part suffers, every part suffers with it” (v. 26). Neglecting or forgetting a member that is suffering can cause harm to the whole body.

We are called to share in the burdens of others by allowing ourselves to press into their pain. Doing so reflects the character of Jesus, who entered time and space to join us in our mortal afflictions. Scripture assures us that our Savior is “a man of suffering, and familiar with pain” (Is. 53:3) who knew both sorrow and grief (Matt. 26:38, Heb. 5:7). And because of this, he knows how to help those who are suffering (Heb. 2:18). The more we share our heartfelt prayers, presence, and resources with the suffering, the more we behave like Jesus.

More than that, continuing to remember the suffering of others prepares us for our own potential suffering. Nobody wants to suffer, but we are guaranteed to go through it at one point in our lives—for Scripture promises that “in this world you will have trouble” (John 16:33). No person, community, or nation is immune from conflict and tragedy. Fellow Christians in places like Ukraine can teach us about resilience and courage—and the power of the gospel amid calamity and heartbreak. We need them as much as they need us!

Lastly, and equally importantly, we can use our voices and share our resources. We tend to be great ambassadors for the things we love, and we instinctively want to share them with others. I often can’t wait to tell people about a new restaurant or movie I enjoyed. If we really love our suffering brothers and sisters, why wouldn’t we tell others about their plight?

This includes amplifying the voices and stories of those who are in need as well as gathering and sharing our resources—including partnering with organizations on the ground to provide life-sustaining necessities like food, water, and medical supplies. God can use the different resources we have in our lives, as well as our spheres of influence, to meet specific felt needs. For instance, I started The Renewal Initiative to connect people and resources with vulnerable individuals worldwide, and this spring we are partnering with a group of mental health professionals to provide encouragement and support for relief workers in Ukraine.

One of the ways we fulfill the “law of Christ” is by carrying the burdens of others (Gal. 6:2), but we can’t share this burden alone—nor were we meant to. No one individual could meet all the needs of those who were suffering. No one organization has all the resources that are necessary to care for those who are in need. But as individuals and organizations come together, the burden gets lighter, and many needs can be met. To be sustainable, we need others to help us bear the burden of continuing to remember those who are suffering.

But perhaps our most powerful weapon is to carry this burden before the Lord in prayer. Never underestimate the power of prayer or how the Holy Spirit can use our specific prayers to bless and encourage those in need. Not everyone is able to go and serve in Ukraine, but all of us can make room in our spiritual rhythms to pray for our brothers and sisters there and in other vulnerable communities around the world.

I wish you could see the look on people’s faces in Ukraine when I tell them that my friends in the West are praying for them. Their response is usually, Thank you! Please tell everyone thank you for praying for us, and please don’t stop.

On one of my first trips back to Ukraine, I met a pastor who stayed to serve his church during Russia’s initial invasion—even after more than 60 percent of his congregation had left the area. Hundreds of refugees showed up from other parts of Ukraine requiring special care. And yet one of the things he said, which will always stick with me, is that he did not feel alone in his efforts because of the sustained prayers of saints around the world.

On the second anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion, let’s continue to remember our brothers and sisters in Ukraine. This act of obedience will both bless them and enrich our spiritual walks. For as we draw close to the suffering of others, our hearts can expand to better reflect God’s love for the world at large. Jesus is still at work amid the suffering of men, women, and children in Ukraine, and we can partner in that labor by continuing to remember them.

Andrew Moroz is a Ukrainian American pastor and founder of The Renewal Initiative.

- More from Andrew Moroz

News

Alabama Rules that Frozen Embryos Are Children

Kate Shellnutt

The first-of-its kind decision affirms life at its earliest stages but complicates the future of IVF.

BSIP / Universal Images Group via Getty Images

Last week, Alabama extended protections beyond the unborn in the womb to the unborn outside it, becoming the first state to rule that frozen embryos are children under the law.

The decision has elicited praise from some evangelicals who, believing life begins at conception, want to see these “snowflake babies” treated as people rather than as commodities.

It’s also complicated the future of in vitro fertilization (IVF) across the state, upsetting parents and prospective parents who have turned to the procedure. At least one hospital system has halted IVF treatments for now.

After Roe v. Wade was overturned, parts of the pro-life movement evoked the 14th Amendment, which bars depriving “any person of life, liberty, or property,” and rallied around fetal personhood laws to ban abortion and grant human rights at conception.

The move to protect embryos was anticipated by both anti-abortion and reproductive rights activists. It follows a pattern of pro-life policies in the Southern state: Alabama’s constitution protects “the rights of the unborn child,” and the state’s abortion ban went into effect after Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization in 2022.

In a case brought by the parents of several embryos destroyed at a fertility clinic, the Alabama Supreme Court affirmed on Friday that unborn children fall under its Wrongful Death of a Minor Act, regardless of “developmental stage, physical location, or any other ancillary characteristics,” that is, even if they are stored in a freezer and have not yet been implanted.

An estimated 1.5 million embryos are on ice in the US, and fertility treatments like IVF are becoming more common. Last year, 42 percent of Americans—and 44 percent of white evangelicals—said they or someone they knew had sought fertility assistance, up from 33 percent in 2018, according to the Pew Research Center.

The ruling doesn’t ban IVF, but since the procedure often results in leftover embryos that are kept indefinitely on ice or destroyed, fertility clinics aren’t sure what the implications will be for them and their storage.

“Why is it that all of the fertility doctors in red states were freaking out after Dobbs?” Katy Faust, founder of the nonprofit Them Before Us, previously told CT. “It’s because they [may not be able] to do business there if they can’t destroy human life.”

The issue of excess embryos from IVF and the ethics of the process itself have become a bigger part of the pro-life conversation among evangelicals, including advocacy for embryo adoption.

Justice Jay Mitchell—who attends the Church of the Highlands, a multisite megachurch—wrote the majority opinion in the embryo ruling. He focused on the understanding of the word child and didn’t mention God.

“Here, the text of the Wrongful Death of a Minor Act is sweeping and unqualified. It applies to all children, born and unborn, without limitation,” the ruling said.

“It is not the role of this Court to craft a new limitation based on our own view of what is or is not wise public policy. That is especially true where, as here, the People of this State have adopted a Constitutional amendment directly aimed at stopping courts from excluding ‘unborn life’ from legal protection.”

A concurring opinion from Chief Justice Tom Parker, though, relies on a biblical understanding of personhood and references Genesis, the apostle Paul, Thomas Aquinas, St. Augustine, and John Calvin. Parker—a member of Frazer Church, a Free Methodist congregation in Montgomery—concluded:

The theologically based view of the sanctity of life adopted by the People of Alabama encompasses the following: (1) God made every person in His image; (2) each person therefore has a value that far exceeds the ability of human beings to calculate; and (3) human life cannot be wrongfully destroyed without incurring the wrath of a holy God, who views the destruction of His image as an affront to Himself.

Andrew Walker, ethics and public theology professor at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, called the ruling “a stunning development full of moral significance.”

Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley, who got pregnant with her son through intrauterine insemination (IUI), has referenced her fertility struggles on the campaign trail and agreed that embryos “are babies” on NBC News on Wednesday.

“One thing is to save sperm or to save eggs, but when you talk about an embryo, you are talking about—to me, that’s a life,” said Haley, whose IUI didn’t require the creation of embryos outside the body.

Haley, a Methodist who describes herself as pro-life, has emphasized the need for consensus on the federal level when it comes to abortion and sees more opportunities on the state level.

“When you see more women who are having trouble getting pregnant, and you see more women doing artificial and in vitro, those are conversations that we need to have,” she said. “But it’s also conversations where we need to have women and doctors involved in the conversation to say, ‘How do we want to handle this going forward?’”

Even before the Alabama decision, Dobbs had made it harder for IVF couples to donate embryos they opted not to implant to researchers. The Washington Post reported that Stanford University’s RENEW Biobank went from accepting embryos from 49 states to just 7—the rest require extra review in case donors violate their home state’s laws.

Catholics have historically carried more theological concerns around assisted reproduction than Protestants, though more in the pro-life movement are paying attention to the issue. Evangelical parents who desire children but struggle with infertility may opt to do IVF but limit the number of embryos created so that each can be implanted.

Despite some reservations, theologian Wayne Grudem wrote in 2019 for The Gospel Coalition that “if IVF is used by a married couple, and if care is taken to prevent the intentional destruction of embryos, then it is a morally good action that pleases God because it violates no scriptural guidelines, achieves the moral good of overcoming infertility, and brings the blessing of children to yet another family.”

Jennifer Lahl, president of The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network, has raised concerns for years about assisted reproduction. After Alabama’s decision, she pointed to Germany’s ban on freezing embryos, which has been in place since 1990.

“IVF is still legal, and the sky has not fallen,” she said. “You just can’t make a lot and freeze them, you must implant them.”

- More from Kate Shellnutt

Share

Share

Share

Different pages

Repression increases

Share

Share

Share

Share

Share

Share

Between the essentialists and the constructivists

Clarity and confusion

Share

Share

Share

Share

Share

Share

Jimmy Kawilarang, director of Torchbearers Indonesia, West Java:

T. Christian Sulistio, lecturer at Southeast Asia Bible Seminary (SAAT), Malang, East Java:

Wahyu Pramudya, pastor at Indonesian Christian Church (GKI) Ngagel, Surabaya, East Java:

Ryadi Pramana, founder of the EFOD, a ministry that serves and equips pastors in rural areas, Jakarta:

Daniel Andy Hoffmann Sinaga, pastor at Batak Christian Protestant Church (HKBP) Medan Sudirman, North Sumatra:

Share

Share

Share

Share

Share