America’s largest United Methodist church sends its pastor into politics
Adam Hamilton, founder and senior pastor of the 25,000-member Church of the Resurrection, is the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate in deeply Republican Kansas. AP reports today that Hamilton intends to continue preaching 12–18 times a year if elected, following the unusual model of Georgia Sen. Raphael Warnock.
His theology is already campaign ammunition: opponents are highlighting a 2022 sermon in which Hamilton suggested salvation may be possible for non-Christians. Hmmm, interesting, that.
So, can someone simultaneously be a shepherd of Christ’s church and a partisan politician? Yeah, I think so. After all politics and religion have a lot in common, right?
And when opponents challenge a pastor’s theology during an election, Christians shouldn’t automatically dismiss that as dirty politics. If a man publicly teaches what Jesus said about salvation, we’re allowed to open the Bible and check.
Political affiliation doesn’t determine theological truth…except when it does.
Remember, Revelation is a vision—not a play-by-play preview of tomorrow’s headlines.
John communicates through symbols, Old Testament imagery, dramatic contrasts, and strange creatures because he is revealing the spiritual reality behind earthly events. That doesn’t mean Revelation has nothing to say about the future.
It means we shouldn’t treat every symbol as a literal piece of technology waiting to be invented. The first question is not, “What modern gadget does this predict?” but, “What did this vision reveal to the Christians who first received it?”
666 Wasn’t a Barcode
Mention the Mark of the Beast, and somebody will immediately point at microchips, vaccines, credit cards, or whatever technology frightened their uncle on Facebook last week.
But what would John’s original readers have understood?
Revelation was written to seven churches living under the shadow of the Roman Empire. Rome demanded more than taxes—it demanded loyalty. Emperors were honored as divine, their images appeared on coins, and civic festivals and trade associations often involved sacrifices to Rome’s gods. Refusing to participate could cost Christians business, social standing, and sometimes their lives.
“And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark….” — Revelation 13:17, KJV
The Greek word translated “mark” is charagma: an engraved, stamped, or branded sign. John places it on the forehead or right hand, probably as a deliberate counterfeit of God’s seal upon His people in Revelation 7. It also echoes Deuteronomy 6, where God’s commands are symbolically placed on the hand and forehead.
The message is about ownership and allegiance: Who shapes your thinking—your forehead? Whose will do you carry out—your hand?
Then Comes 666
Ancient letters also functioned as numbers, allowing names to be expressed as numerical totals—a practice called gematria. The leading historical explanation is that “Nero Caesar,” written in Hebrew letters, totals 666. An ancient manuscript variation reads 616, which fits a shorter Latin spelling of Nero’s name. That is strong evidence John was pointing toward Nero—or using the famously brutal emperor as the model for Rome’s “beastly” power. Bible Odyssey
Most contemporary scholars agree that Revelation 13 must first be interpreted within this Roman setting, although they disagree over whether it also predicts a particular end-times ruler. But it’s important to remember that the symbols and images in John’s vision would have to have meaning and relevance to God’s people in all ages until the end.
The mark was not presented as something people would receive accidentally while buying groceries. It represented knowingly choosing the beast’s system over faithfulness to God.
That is interpretation: what John communicated to his original audience.
Application asks how that truth confronts other generations. The beast’s mark can appear in different forms whenever governments, cultures, institutions, or economic systems demand the kind of loyalty that belongs to God alone.
So What?
So don’t waste your life hunting for three sixes hidden in a company logo. Ask the better question:
What pressure could make you trade truth for acceptance, comfort, money, or safety?
Pastors are using AI—but don’t want it deciding what the Bible means
New Barna research reported today finds an interesting divide among Protestant pastors. Only 5% completely reject using AI to help interpret difficult passages, but just 10% think AI should determine which interpretation of a disputed Scripture is correct. Pastors appear increasingly willing to use AI as a research assistant while resisting the idea of treating it as a theological authority.
And this isn’t hypothetical. AI products now advertise sermon preparation, Bible studies, automatic Scripture detection, devotional writing and even sermon-series creation specifically to churches.
So What?
A concordance is a tool. Google is a tool. AI can be a tool. And it’s okay to use tools to help you understand the Bible.
The danger isn’t asking AI, “What did this Greek word mean in the first century?” The danger is asking it, “Tell me what I’m supposed to believe,” and never opening the Bible yourself.
The news and images coming out of Nepal are almost impossible to process. A catastrophic flash flood triggered by a collapse of ice, rock, and mountain debris near the Nepal–Tibet border has ripped through entire communities. As of today, Reuters reports at least 579 people dead in Nepal, nearly 2,000 still missing, and more than 90,000 affected. Roads, bridges, homes, and villages have simply disappeared beneath mud and debris. (Reuters)
And inevitably, someone asks the question Christians sometimes try too hard to dodge:
If God is good, why does He allow this?
Jesus actually addressed this kind of question. In Luke 13, people brought Him news of sudden, horrifying deaths. His response was not, Those people were worse sinners and God punished them. In fact, He rejected that idea.
“Suppose ye that these Galilaeans were sinners above all the Galilaeans, because they suffered such things? I tell you, Nay…” — Luke 13:2–3 (KJV)
The Bible does not teach that every earthquake, flood, cancer diagnosis, or collapsing mountainside is God personally targeting someone for punishment.
It teaches something much bigger—and harder.
We live in a creation that is not yet what it was intended to be. Paul says “the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together” (Romans 8:22). Human beings die. Bodies fail. Mountains move. Rivers flood. Nature itself is subject to decay and disorder.
Christianity does not give us a neat little explanation that makes hundreds of crushed families somehow feel acceptable.
And the Christian hope is not that God promises to stop every disaster today. It is that disaster, death, and grief do not get the final word.
Revelation ends not with humanity escaping the world, but with God making it new:
“And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying…” — Revelation 21:4 (KJV)
So What?
Until then, the Christian response to Nepal shouldn’t be theological smugness or doomsday predictions procaliming that “the end is near.”
It should be compassion, prayer, generosity, and help.
Don’t ask, “What did they do to deserve this?”
Ask instead: “What can I do for someone who is suffering?” Because our mission is to reflect the coming restored, perfect creation into this current dark and broken world.
Where is God in Nepal? He is in the prayers, giving of resources, and physical presence of His image bearers.
Democratic Congressman Jared Huffman is receiving attention for a new book arguing that Christian nationalism represents a growing threat to American democracy. Huffman—the only openly nonbelieving member of Congress—argues that certain Christian political movements are attempting to merge religious authority with government power.
That argument arrives amid a broader movement in several states to introduce Ten Commandments displays, Bible-related curricula and expanded religious activity in public institutions.
Christians shouldn’t automatically panic whenever somebody says “Christian nationalism.” Nor should we pretend the danger of turning Christianity into a political tribe doesn’t exist.
Jesus said:
“My kingdom is not of this world.” — John 18:36 (KJV)
The kingdom Jesus spoke of will not come from political movements in this age. That’s worth remembering whenever politicians—left or right—try wrapping themselves in Jesus.
And while God’s everlasting Kingdom on earth is not here yet, it’s coming.
The United States has announced an “economic D-Day” against Iran—because apparently ordinary sanctions needed a movie-trailer title.
The plan threatens countries and companies that continue doing business with Iran. Washington wants to choke off Iranian revenue from shipping, aviation, technology, gold and digital assets. Iran says cooperation with the campaign could be treated as an “act of war.”
That sounds explosive. But the truth is, the threatened penalties against Iran’s trading partners have not yet been imposed. Countries are being given time to comply, and no firm enforcement schedule was announced.
This matters because words can move armies, markets and frightened people. Governments speak as though one more sanction, missile or summit will finally force history to cooperate.
Here’s a good reminder that God works with and in presidents, kings, and other temporary bigshots to achieve His grand plan, not ours.
“The king’s heart is in the hand of the Lord… he turneth it whithersoever he will.” — Proverbs 21:1 (KJV)
Biblical prophecy doesn’t require us to label every confrontation “Armageddon.” It teaches that nations rise, threaten and scheme—but none of them controls the ending.
So What?
Watch Iran, Hormuz and the global response carefully. Just don’t confuse Washington’s press conference—or Tehran’s threats—with God’s final timetable.
Read Psalm 2, pray for peace and innocent civilians, then refuse to share any “prophecy update” you haven’t fact-checked.
While we argue about politics, celebrities, and whatever nonsense is trending today, another Christian community in Nigeria is burying its dead.
Gunmen attacked the Bin Mper community in Nigeria’s Plateau State this week, killing at least 25 people. International Christian Concern reports that 24 of the victims were Christians.
This isn’t new. Christian communities in central Nigeria have endured years of attacks, killings, burned villages, and displacement. The reasons behind the violence are complicated—land, ethnicity, politics, religion—but one fact shouldn’t get lost in all that: Christians are being killed, and most of us barely hear about it.
While everybody was busy arguing about whatever went viral yesterday, two stories involving Christians went mostly unnoticed.
In Sudan, a Christian pastor was reportedly executed along with six others after being detained by an armed faction in the Nuba Mountains. The Rev. Adil Idris Jangoul of the Sudanese Episcopal Church was taken from his church residence in July; his body was later found with six members of the Otoro ethnic group. Sudan’s civil war involves a messy mixture of political, tribal, ethnic and resource conflicts—but recent reports indicate that church leaders and Christian communities are particularly vulnerable. — International Christian Concern, Aug. 11; Open Doors, Aug. 12 (Persecution.org)
Meanwhile, a Nigerian court has handed a Christian convert an important religious-freedom victory. The ruling prohibits Kano State and its Hisbah religious police from pursuing a young woman for converting from Islam to Christianity. The ruling itself came earlier, but the case was publicized internationally this week by ADF International. — ADF International, Aug. 11 (Alliance Defending Freedom International)
Here in America, we sometimes call it persecution when somebody mocks us for quoting the Bible and professing our faith. Elsewhere, living for our risen and returning Lord can mean losing your freedom—or your life.
Maybe those stories deserve a little more of our prayerful attention.
And remember the words of Jesus:
“If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you.” — John 15:18 (KJV)
Abdul El-Sayed, who won Michigan’s Democratic U.S. Senate primary on August 4, 2026, says he opposes antisemitism, yet he repeatedly chooses to campaign with Hasan Piker, whose record goes well beyond ordinary criticism of Israel.
So why does El-Sayed keep campaigning with him?
Piker isn’t controversial because he once criticized Benjamin Netanyahu or questioned Israeli policy. Plenty of people do that.
We’re talking about a guy who has called Orthodox Jews “inbred,” called Zionism a “mental illness,” generated controversy over his comments about Hamas and October 7—and once famously declared:
“America deserved 9/11, dude.”
Piker later called his 9/11 wording “inappropriate” and said it was intended as satire and criticism of American foreign policy. I call BS. He only backtracked on his outrageous comment after it received massive public attention and condemnation. Trying to weasel out of an outrageous statement doesn’t magically erase it. In fact, it raises questions about the ugly and insidious thinking behind the original statement.
And this week—after winning Michigan’s Democratic Senate nomination—El-Sayed was again asked whether he would continue working with Piker. He didn’t give a straight answer, even as he continued celebrating with Piker.
El-Sayed has every right to criticize Israel. He has every right to oppose U.S. military aid to Israel. And criticism of Israel is not automatically antisemitism. But anti-Zionism can sometimes become a subtle and convenient hiding place for bigotry.
El-Sayed also has a choice about whom he puts beside him on a campaign stage, and if he continues to cozy up to Piker, that should be disqualifying to anyone with a lick of common sense and decency.
Jesus put it pretty simply:
“Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.” — Matthew 7:20 (KJV)
If a Republican Senate candidate repeatedly campaigned alongside someone with an ugly history of remarks about Jews, Muslims, or Black Americans, would the media reasonably ask why?
Of course they would, and of course they have. So why should the standard change here?
Antisemitism is wrong. Anti-Muslim hatred is wrong. Racism is wrong. And deliberately looking the other way because somebody can deliver votes is wrong too.
Your friends don’t automatically define you—but choosing to repeatedly give someone your stage tells us something about your judgment and may tell us something about the biases you’re willing to tolerate.
Because sometimes the biggest red flag isn’t what a politician says—it’s whom he’s unwilling to walk away from.
Here are three of the most significant current headlines from the Middle East.
Remember Matthew 24:6-7
And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.
For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.
Israel launches strikes in southern Lebanon after evacuation warning The Israeli military carried out targeted strikes in southern Lebanon after issuing evacuation orders for the village of Mansouri, saying Hezbollah had violated the existing ceasefire. The strikes came as Israeli and Lebanese officials resumed U.S.-mediated talks in Rome aimed at advancing an agreement involving Israeli withdrawal and Hezbollah’s disarmament. (Reuters)
Iran and Oman move closer to reopening the Strait of Hormuz Iran and Oman announced progress on an agreement to reopen shipping through the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most important oil transit routes. Negotiations remain tied to broader U.S.-Iran discussions, while regional tensions continue to affect global energy markets. (The Guardian)
Israel-Lebanon negotiations continue despite renewed fighting Israeli forces remain deployed in parts of southern Lebanon while negotiators prepare for another round of talks in Rome under a U.S.-brokered framework. The discussions seek to reduce border tensions and establish longer-term security arrangements even as sporadic military action continues. (AP News)
