I often feel like a defense attorney representing the apostle Paul

Who is the real Paul?

-Full blog post: 

In Defense of the Apostle Paul: Clearing 4 Major Misunderstandings

I often feel like a defense attorney representing the Apostle Paul.

Over two millennia, Paul has been charged with a litany of theological and ethical crimes. He has been accused of abandoning his heritage, inventing a legalistic doctrine of justification, championing patriarchy, and distorting the simple message of Jesus. But when we examine the historical context, the actual Greek text, and the overarching narrative of his letters, it becomes clear: the real Paul has been systematically misunderstood.

If Paul were on trial today, here is the case for his defense across four key counts.

1. Paul Was Not Against Judaism or the Law
One of the most persistent errors in biblical interpretation is viewing Paul as an apostate who turned his back on Judaism to found a new, "law-free" religion. This reading projects later anti-Jewish biases back into the first century.

Paul lived, thought, and ministered entirely within the world of Second Temple Judaism. He never stopped identifying as an Israelite. His critique was never aimed at the Torah itself—which he explicitly called "holy, righteous, and good" (Romans 7:12)—nor at the covenant God made with Israel.

Rather, Paul’s dispute centered on the status of non-Jews. He argued against requiring Gentile believers to adopt Jewish boundary markers—such as circumcision and dietary laws—to enter God’s covenant family. For Paul, forcing Gentiles to become culturally Jewish was a denial that God was the God of all nations, not just one.

2. The Gospel Is Not a Dichotomy Between Faith and Law
For centuries, Western theology has framed Paul’s gospel around a strict binary: empty "works of the law" versus legalistic "faith." This artificial contrast flattens Paul's rich theological vision into a transaction where one simply "believes" to escape punishment.

When Paul speaks of pistis Christou, he is not describing a passive mental agreement opposed to action. Pistis carries deep connotations of relational trust, allegiance, and covenantal faithfulness—both Christ's faithfulness to God's mission and our embodied response to Christ.

Paul does not pit "faith" against "doing good." He opposes relying on ethnic identity markers ("works of the law") as the mechanism for inclusion, while simultaneously insisting on a life transformed by the Spirit—a life where love becomes the fulfillment of the Law.

3. Paul Was Not a Misogynist
To call Paul a champion of patriarchy requires reading him through the lens of later historical additions or ignoring the lived reality of his ministry.
Throughout his undisputed letters, Paul relies heavily on women as leaders, apostles, patrons, and co-workers:

• Phoebe: A deacon of the church in Cenchreae and Paul's trusted envoy who delivered and likely interpreted the Epistle to the Romans.
• Junia: Prominent among the apostles, acknowledged alongside Paul in prison.
• Prisca (Priscilla): A key teacher and leader of a house church alongside her husband, Aquila.
• When Paul writes that "there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus" (Galatians 3:28), he lays down a radical theological foundation that actively subverted the patriarchal social order of the Greco-Roman world.

4. Paul Did Not Distort or Discontinue the Teachings of Jesus
A common secular and theological critique claims that Paul invented a complex "religion about Jesus" that replaced the simple "religion of Jesus." According to this view, Jesus proclaimed the Kingdom, but Paul proclaimed a theological system.

In reality, Paul and Jesus were in deep continuity. Both rooted their proclamation in the good news of God (euangelion). Both proclaimed God’s decisive intervention to liberate humanity from bondage—whether from socio-political oppression, structural sin, or spiritual corruption.

While Jesus proclaimed the Reign of God within the context of rural Galilee and Jerusalem, Paul carried that exact same royal proclamation into the urban centers of the Roman Empire. Paul did not abandon Jesus’s message; he translated it for a multi-ethnic, global audience.

Reclaiming the Real Paul
Defending Paul is not about preserving dogma; it is about restoring a brilliant, passionate, and deeply radical dynamic thinker to his proper place.

When we strip away centuries of historical misinterpretation, we discover a Paul who fought tirelessly for an inclusive, egalitarian, and Spirit-empowered community—a community where all people, regardless of background or status, stand equal before God.

The Parable of the Pearl of Great Price: Meaning & Historical Context

  

In this video, The Parable of the Pearl of Great Price: Meaning & Historical Context, Dr. Kim explores the unique Matthew 13 parable of the pearl, contrasting it with the parable of the hidden treasure. The teaching focuses on the intentionality of the merchant and the subjective, radical value found in discovering "one pearl of great value." Key Topics Covered:

-The Intentional Search: Analyzing the merchant’s active pursuit of fine pearls compared to the accidental discovery in the parable of the treasure. 

-A Radical Decision: Why the merchant chooses to sell everything for a single pearl, and the personal, subjective nature of that value. 

-Business vs. The Kingdom: How the merchant moves beyond "business as usual" profit-seeking to pursue something truly precious. 

-The Single Call: Relating the "one pearl" to a singular vocation, ministry, or the love of God.

-Comparison of Parables: Identifying the similarities and differences between the parables of the treasure and the pearl. Discussion Questions: 

How does the merchant’s intentional search change your understanding of seeking the kingdom of heaven? What is your "one pearl of great value" for which you would invest everything? How do you discern between "many fine pearls" (good things) and the one pearl you cannot live without? 00:00 – Introduction to the Parable of the Pearl

00:36 – Who is the Merchant?

01:06 – The Search for Fine Pearls 

01:31 – Finding the "One Pearl of Great Value" 

02:54 – Reading Matthew 13:45-46 

03:48 – Unusual Business Practices: Plural vs. Singular 

06:30 – Subjective Value and Personal Judgment 

07:46 – Moving Beyond "Business as Usual" 

08:45 – Theological Application: The One Call of God 

09:51 – Pearl vs. Treasure: Comparing Two Parables 

10:48 – Intentionality and Radical Action

11:34 – Final Reflection and Discussion Questions

Remote teaching

The power of remote teaching is that I get students from all over the country—from the West to the East Coast, California to Maryland, and from the South to the North, Florida to New Jersey. I have students from Oklahoma, Texas, Georgia, and beyond. I wish I could meet them in class face-to-face, but the reality of our environment makes it impossible. I teach in a new normal, and I enjoy it very much.

Informed Faith: Bridging Belief, Fact, and Epistemic Limits

-Faith, Science, and Historical Reality

Belief vs. Historical Reality
-Belief is a cognitive and existential posture, not a tool for ontological construction. A deeply held conviction can reshape a person’s inner landscape, moral trajectory, and interpretation of events, but it possesses no backward-acting force over material history. 

-Confusing the intensity of a belief with historical proof risks collapsing reality into subjective desire. History demands empirical evidence, textual integrity, and external verification; faith cannot fabricate a past that never occurred.

The Distinction and Relation of Faith and Facts
-The Distinction: Facts describe what is—the objective, verifiable data of the physical and historical world. Faith concerns what matters—meaning, purpose, ultimate concern, and human commitment.

-The Relation: While distinct, they are not entirely disconnected. Faith is always mediated through human beings who exist within physical bodies, specific historical moments, and material environments. When faith ignores facts, it drifts into delusion; when facts ignore the human search for meaning, they remain sterile metrics.

Science and Faith as Different Modes of Discourse
-Science operates on empirical observation, falsifiable hypotheses, and natural laws. It speaks the language of mechanism (how things work). Traditional faith, by contrast, speaks the language of symbol, metaphor, value, and ultimate value (why things exist and how we ought to live). Expecting ancient religious texts or traditional dogmas to function as scientific manuals creates an immediate category error.

The Necessity of Informed Faith
Uncritical faith—one that demands the denial of established scientific or historical realities to survive—is fundamentally fragile. An informed faith accepts reality as it is, integrating critical inquiry, scientific discovery, and historical truth into its framework. Rather than fearing facts, an informed faith uses them as a grounding wire, ensuring that spiritual or moral convictions remain anchored in the real world rather than floating in unexamined dogma.

Johannine Dualism?

John’s Gospel, full of dualistic images, does not support Gnostic dualism. It seeks the embodiment of God’s love for the world. Johannine dualsim is a creative space for transformation.

 

John's Gospel is dualistic?

The answer is definitive no. John's Gospel is unlike Gnostic dualism. It appears to be full of dualistic images or concepts. But Johannine dualism is a creative, narrative space for transformation. 

Article:
The Johannine Realism about the Kingdom of God: "Born from Above, Born of Water and Spirit" (John 3:1-21)

Book:
Truth, Testimony, and Transformation: A New Reading of the "I am" Sayings of Jesus in the Fourth Gospel

Believe yourself

 Why is it so hard to believe oneself?

"Test Everything"

Paul's testing spirit is relentless: "Test everything" (1 Thess 5:21). Nothing or no one is exempted from this test. After that, one may hold fast to what is good. 

"Racial Identity Hermeneutics"

My students enjoy this chapter I wrote very much: “Racial Identity Hermeneutics,” in Handbook on Postconservative Theological Interpretation, edited by Ronald T. Michener and Mark A. Lamport (pp. 365–380; Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2024). I talk about scriptures such as the Tower of Babel, the book of Ruth, and the Canaanite woman's story in Matthew 15:21–28. In this chapter, I problematize a monolithic, European reading and complicate readers' perspectives by asking provocative questions about contextual interpretation.