Jesus’ Confession of His Divinity and His Acceptance of Worship: A Theological and Scholarly Analysis

 Jesus’ Confession of His Divinity and His Acceptance of Worship: A Theological and Scholarly Analysis

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

Throughout the Gospel narrative, one truth stands undeniably clear: Jesus Christ never denied His divinity, nor did He ever forbid the worship that was rightly offered to Him. On the contrary, Jesus both confessed His divine identity and accepted worship as an attribute consistent with His eternal nature as God the Son.

1. Jesus’ Divine Confession Before the Sanhedrin (Matthew 26:63–65)

In Matthew 26, Jesus stood before the high priest Caiaphas, accused of blasphemy. The high priest demanded under oath:

“Tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God.” (Matthew 26:63)

Jesus’ response was both profound and revelatory:

“You have said so. But I say to you: From now on you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven.” (Matthew 26:64)

This declaration is not a denial but a divine affirmation. Jesus invoked the imagery of Daniel 7:13–14, where “One like the Son of Man” comes on the clouds of heaven and is given everlasting dominion, glory, and worship. The reaction of the Sanhedrin confirms their understanding: the high priest tore his robes, declaring, “He has spoken blasphemy!” (Matthew 26:65). In Jewish context, blasphemy was not merely claiming to be a prophet or messiah—it was claiming divine status. Jesus’ words therefore constituted a confession that He is indeed God in the flesh.

2. Jesus Never Denied His Deity

Nowhere in the Gospels does Jesus say, “I am not God,” nor does He ever discourage anyone from worshipping Him. In fact, those who approached Him in worship were consistently affirmed rather than rebuked:

• The Magi bowed and worshipped Him as an infant (Matthew 2:11).

• The leper worshipped Him saying, “Lord, if you are willing, you can make me clean” (Matthew 8:2), and Jesus did not reject his worship.

• The disciples worshipped Him after He calmed the storm, confessing, “Truly, you are the Son of God” (Matthew 14:33).

• The blind man healed in John 9 worshipped Jesus, and Jesus accepted it (John 9:38).

• Thomas, upon seeing the risen Christ, exclaimed, “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:28), to which Jesus responded, “You have believed because you have seen me” (John 20:29), affirming Thomas’s declaration, not rejecting it.

In contrast, when worship was wrongly directed toward created beings, the response was immediate rejection. Peter refused worship (Acts 10:25–26), and angels forbade it (Revelation 19:10). Yet Jesus never once forbade or corrected those who worshipped Him—because worship belonged rightly to Him.

3. The Theological Implications of His Confession

Theologically, the confession in Matthew 26 reveals Jesus’ conscious identity as Yahweh incarnate. By declaring that He would sit at the right hand of Power (a Jewish circumlocution for God), Jesus equated Himself with the divine authority of the Father. He did not claim to be a god among many, but the divine Son who shares in the essence and authority of God Himself.

Jesus’ consistent self-revelation—through titles such as “I Am” (John 8:58), “The Light of the World” (John 8:12), “The Resurrection and the Life” (John 11:25), and “The Way, the Truth, and the Life” (John 14:6)—confirms that His mission was not to point to another deity, but to reveal Himself as the visible manifestation of the invisible God (John 14:9; Colossians 1:15).

4. Conclusion

Therefore, Jesus’ silence in denying His divinity is not mere omission—it is a deliberate theological assertion. His acceptance of worship, His divine titles, and His self-identification with the Father all testify that He is truly God. The accusation of blasphemy in Matthew 26 proves that even His enemies understood His claim clearly.

In sum, Jesus never said, “I am not God,” nor did He say, “Do not worship Me.” Rather, He openly confessed His divine nature, accepted worship as His right, and demonstrated through His life, death, and resurrection that He is indeed Emmanuel—God with us.

References

• The Holy Bible, English Standard Version (ESV)

• Brown, Raymond E. The Birth of the Messiah. Doubleday, 1993.

• Hurtado, Larry W. Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity. Eerdmans, 2003.

• Bauckham, Richard. Jesus and the God of Israel: God Crucified and Other Studies on the New Testament’s Christology of Divine Identity. Eerdmans, 2008.

• Wright, N.T. Jesus and the Victory of God. Fortress Press, 1996.

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Shimba Theological Institute

A Comparative Theological Observation on Islamic Prayer Practices

A Comparative Theological Observation on Islamic Prayer Practices
By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

From a comparative religion perspective, Islam’s daily prayer rituals (Salat) include repeated invocations of the Prophet Muhammad’s name through blessings (salawat), expressing reverence for him as the messenger of God. While Muslims understand this as an act of honor and respect, not worship, some scholars from other theological traditions have noted structural parallels between these invocations and ancestral remembrance rituals found in pre-Islamic and other traditional belief systems.

In these systems, adherents often call upon deceased ancestors as part of their spiritual communication or ritual devotion. This similarity invites deeper examination of how monotheistic faiths integrate remembrance of their founders or prophets into religious practice—raising important questions about the boundaries between veneration, intercession, and worship.

Thus, while Islam firmly asserts its monotheism, the ritual emphasis on the Prophet Muhammad in daily life presents an area of comparative study for theologians exploring the evolution of sacred remembrance within world religions.

---

Question for Muslim Scholars and Believers

Question for Muslim Scholars and Believers:
In Islamic theology, the Injeel (Gospel) is described as a divine revelation given by Allah. According to the Qur’an, the Injeel was revealed to ʿIsa (Jesus), who, as even the Qur’an affirms, was sent to the Children of Israel (see Qur’an 3:49; 61:6).

Therefore, a critical question arises:
To which community was the Injeel originally addressed?
A. The Jews, to whom Jesus was sent
B. The Muslims, who did not yet exist as a religious group
C. The Christians, who only later emerged as followers of Jesus’ teachings

From a historical and theological standpoint, the answer must logically be A — the Jews, since Jesus’ ministry, according to both the Bible (Matthew 15:24) and the Qur’an, was directed to the people of Israel.

This question highlights a fundamental point in comparative theology: the Injeel was a revelation within the Jewish context, not an Islamic one, and its message later gave rise to Christianity — centuries before Islam’s formation.

---

A Scholarly Observation on Ritual Invocation in Islam and Ancestral Traditions

A Scholarly Observation on Ritual Invocation in Islam and Ancestral Traditions
By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

From a theological and anthropological standpoint, Islam incorporates ritual practices that involve the frequent invocation of the Prophet Muhammad’s name within daily religious observances. Muslims recite blessings and salutations upon Muhammad in their prayers (known as Salat), recognizing him as the final messenger of God.

However, from a comparative religious analysis, this practice has been interpreted by some scholars as bearing resemblance to ancestral veneration customs found in various traditional religions, where the names or memories of departed figures are invoked as part of spiritual devotion.

While adherents of Islam maintain that these invocations express respect and acknowledgment of prophethood rather than worship, critics argue that such repetition exhibits elements of ritual remembrance parallel to ancient pagan forms of reverence toward the dead.

This contrast illustrates the complex intersection between monotheistic devotion and ritual remembrance in world religions—raising important questions about how faith traditions preserve divine worship while honoring historical or prophetic figures.

---

A Theological Question on Jesus’ Language in the Qur’an

A Theological Question on Jesus’ Language in the Qur’an
By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

A simple but revealing question arises when we consider the portrayal of Jesus (ʿĪsā) in the Qur’an: What language did Jesus speak?

The Qur’an presents Jesus as a historical figure sent to the Children of Israel (Qur’an 3:49; 61:6), yet it does not explicitly mention the language he used. Historically and contextually, Jesus spoke Aramaic, the common tongue of first-century Jewish Palestine.

This raises an interesting point for comparative theology: the Qur’an is in Arabic, and all of Jesus’ speeches and miracles are recorded in Arabic within Islamic scripture. Therefore, readers and scholars must reconcile how a figure who historically spoke Aramaic is represented as speaking Arabic in the Qur’anic text.

This question opens a space for critical discussion about historical context, linguistic translation, and theological interpretation within Islam — and invites interfaith dialogue on how sacred texts present historical figures.

---

Unequal Equality? A Critical Examination of Race, Gender, and Hierarchy in Early Islamic Texts

Title: Unequal Equality? A Critical Examination of Race, Gender, and Hierarchy in Early Islamic Texts
By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

Abstract:
Islam is often presented as a religion promoting universal equality and social justice. Yet, a careful analysis of early Islamic texts—including the Qur’an, Hadith literature, and biographical sources such as Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah—reveals persistent hierarchies based on race, gender, and Arab identity. This article examines these texts critically, exposing tensions between Islam’s theological claims of equality and the practical implications of its early interpretations.

---

1. Introduction

Islamic theology frequently emphasizes that all humans are equal before God. Yet, a deeper exploration of foundational texts shows that equality is often framed in a selective or hierarchical manner. Certain passages appear to marginalize specific groups—most notably women and Black communities—both in moral and eschatological terms. By analyzing these texts in historical and cultural context, this article seeks to understand how early Islamic literature constructs social hierarchies and the implications for contemporary interpretations.

---

2. Race and Moral Symbolism

Qur’an 3:106 describes the blackening of faces in the context of divine judgment. While some commentators interpret this as symbolic of shame or moral failure, historical reception demonstrates that such imagery has frequently been racialized. Early Islamic narratives, including Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah, at times link Blackness with demonic imagery, creating an association between racial identity and moral corruption. These constructions contribute to a subtle but persistent racial hierarchy that privileges Arab identity over non-Arab peoples.

---

3. Gender and Eschatology

Hadith literature, particularly Sahih Bukhari, asserts that women constitute the majority of Hell’s inhabitants. Exegesis often attributes this to women’s supposed moral or spiritual failings, including ingratitude or disobedience. This depiction mirrors broader 7th-century Arabian social norms in which women were frequently assigned subordinate roles, yet the theological framing extends these limitations into the eschatological realm. Such narratives reinforce the perception of women as inherently more prone to failure in spiritual and moral terms.

---

4. Arab Supremacy and Cultural Hierarchy

The Qur’an repeatedly underscores the primacy of Arabs, emphasizing their role as preservers of the Arabic language and genealogical lineage. This Arab-centric framework intersects with both racial and gender hierarchies, creating a multi-layered social stratification: Arabs at the top, women and non-Arabs often positioned as morally or spiritually inferior. Consequently, the text’s universalistic claims of equality coexist uneasily with these culturally specific hierarchies, revealing a tension between theological ideals and historical realities.

---

5. Theological and Ethical Critique

The hierarchical treatment of race and gender in early Islamic texts raises significant ethical and theological questions. While Islam purports to advocate universal equality, textual evidence suggests that equality is conditional, favoring Arab men while subordinating women and Black communities.

• Racial Implications: Associating moral failure or divine punishment with Blackness undermines the universality of God’s justice. Such interpretations implicitly validate historical racial hierarchies and may contribute to systemic inequities in societies influenced by these texts.

• Gender Implications: Portraying women as the majority of Hell’s inhabitants contradicts the claim of spiritual equality and imposes a moral burden based on gender alone. This framework perpetuates patriarchal structures under the guise of divine authority.

• Ethical Tensions: The intersection of race, gender, and Arab identity illustrates a selective application of divine justice. Textual hierarchies create ethical dilemmas: if equality before God is truly universal, why do these texts consistently privilege certain groups over others?

This critique demonstrates that Islam’s proclaimed egalitarianism is complicated by historical, textual, and interpretive factors that elevate certain communities while marginalizing others. Addressing these contradictions is essential for any contemporary theological or ethical engagement with Islam.

---

6. Conclusion

This study reveals a persistent tension between Islam’s theological assertion of equality and the hierarchical treatment of race, gender, and Arab identity in foundational texts. Women and non-Arab communities, particularly Black individuals, are disproportionately associated with spiritual failure, while Arab men are positioned as morally and culturally superior. Recognizing and critically analyzing these textual hierarchies is vital for scholars, theologians, and practitioners seeking a more equitable understanding of Islamic ethics and theology.

---

References

1. The Qur’an.

2. Sahih Bukhari.

3. Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasul Allah.

4. Rahman, F. (1980). Major Themes of the Qur’an. University of Chicago Press.

5. Esposito, J. (2002). Islam: The Straight Path. Oxford University Press.

6. Ahmed, L. (1992). Women and Gender in Islam. Yale University Press.

---

Islamic Halal Slaughter: A Theological and Ethical Critique

Islamic Halal Slaughter: A Theological and Ethical Critique

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba

From both a theological and ethical standpoint, the practice of halal slaughter without stunning raises serious moral and scientific concerns. Within Islamic jurisprudence, halal slaughter (dhabiha) requires that the animal be fully conscious at the moment of death, and that its throat be cut while invoking the name of Allah. This process, however, stands in stark contrast to modern principles of animal welfare and humane treatment, which emphasize the reduction of pain and suffering in sentient creatures.

Scientific studies in veterinary neurology and physiology have consistently demonstrated that animals subjected to slaughter without stunning experience acute distress, intense fear, and prolonged pain due to the delay in loss of consciousness following exsanguination. The release of catecholamines and corticosteroids—stress hormones triggered by terror and pain—contaminates the bloodstream and muscle tissue, potentially affecting the biochemical composition of the meat. From a biological perspective, such stress responses are not inconsequential; they have measurable implications for both meat quality and public health.

Theologically, for Christians, the concept of halal cannot be reconciled with Biblical dietary ethics. Acts 15:29 and 1 Corinthians 10:25–28 clearly prohibit the consumption of meat sacrificed to another deity. Therefore, any slaughter performed as a ritual act of devotion to Allah—who is not the Triune God of Christian revelation—renders the meat spiritually unclean (haram) to Christians. The Apostle Paul emphasized that believers must abstain from foods offered in pagan contexts, for participation in such practices implies spiritual fellowship with the altar of another faith (1 Corinthians 10:20–21).

In light of these ethical, scientific, and theological realities, halal slaughter without stunning cannot be defended as a humane or theologically neutral act. It represents not only a violation of animal welfare principles but also a fundamental conflict with Christian doctrine concerning sanctified food and worship. Thus, while modern societies continue to advance in moral and scientific understanding, the persistence of ritual slaughter practices that enshrine suffering stands as a relic of antiquity—ethically indefensible, spiritually incompatible, and scientifically harmful.

---

 

Nikāḥ ḥalālah (tahlīl) — an academic overview

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

Abstract

This short paper explains the Islamic legal rule commonly called nikāḥ ḥalālah (also tahlīl): the situation in which a woman who has become permanently divorced from her first husband (after a third, irrevocable talaq) may only remarry him if, after that final divorce, she lawfully marries another man and that marriage is consummated and then ends. The note summarizes the scriptural bases (Qurʾān and ḥadīth), the classical juristic rationale, the prohibition of pre-arranged or manufactured halālah, and ethical implications. Key primary sources from the hadith corpus are cited.

---

1. Scriptural and textual basis

Qurʾānic text. The principal Qurʾānic verse is explicit: “And if he has divorced her (the third time), then she is not lawful unto him thereafter until she has married another husband.” (Qurʾān 2:230). This verse is the foundational legal text that creates the condition requiring an intervening marriage after an irrevocable third divorce. (Quran)

Prophetic practice and explanatory ḥadīth. The Prophet’s practice and sayings further explain what “another husband” and the required condition mean. Sahih reports narrated in collections such as Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī describe instances and rulings where the Prophet explained that the subsequent husband must consummate the marriage for the woman to become lawful again for her first husband. For example, Bukhārī records the Prophet’s reply that a wife who was divorced and then married another man can only return to her first husband if the second marriage was consummated in the normal way. (Sunnah.com)

---

2. The classical juristic rationale

Classical jurists (Hanafi, Shāfiʿī, Mālikī, and Ḥanbalī schools) read Qurʾān 2:230 together with the Prophet’s explanations to achieve two objectives:

1. Protection against abuse. The rule prevents husbands from treating pronouncements of divorce as a reversible threat (pronouncing and then rescinding talaq capriciously) to coerce wives. The third, irrevocable divorce with the intervening-marriage condition is a deterrent against such abuse.

2. Affirmation of marital sanctity. The requirement of a bona fide intervening marriage and consummation underscores that the woman cannot be made “lawful” again to her first husband by arrangement or artifice; rather a genuine change of marital status must occur. Classical manuals thus emphasize that the intervening marriage must be genuine and not a sham. (See classical commentaries on Kitāb al-Talaq and the works of jurists explaining Qurʾān 2:230.) (Quran)

---

3. Prohibition of pre-arranged halālah (manufactured tahlīl)

While the Qurʾān and Sunnah set the condition for returning after an irrevocable divorce, the Prophetic literature also contains clear condemnations of manufactured halālah — that is, when a man marries a divorced woman with the explicit intention of divorcing her solely so that she becomes lawful for her former husband. A hadith reported in Sunan Abī Dāwūd (and reported elsewhere) records the Prophet as saying, in reference to such conduct, “May Allah curse the muhallil and the muhallal lahu” — that is, the man who performs the intervening marriage as a trick and the man for whom this is being done. This hadith has been authenticated by many scholars and is widely used by jurists to declare pre-arranged tahlīl unlawful and morally condemned. (Sunnah.com)

Scholarly fatwās and juristic texts therefore distinguish sharply between:

• A lawful intervening marriage (entered sincerely, consummated, and not undertaken as a ruse), which makes remarriage to the first husband legally possible; and

• A sham/contracted halālah (a marriage contracted with the explicit, pre-agreed purpose of making the woman lawful for her ex-husband), which is condemned and invalid as a means to circumvent the law. (Islam-QA)

---

4. Representative ḥadīth evidence (select primary references)

• Qurʾān 2:230 — the foundational verse establishing the intervening-marriage condition. (Quran)

• Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī (Book of Divorce) — narrations describing that the married-again husband must consummate the marriage for return to the first husband to be permissible. (See Bukhārī, Book of Divorce, relevant hadiths). (Sunnah.com)

• Sunan Abī Dāwūd 2076 / Sunan Ibn Mājah 1934 (and related chains) — the tradition recording: “May Allah curse the muhallil and the muhallal lahu,” used by classical jurists to proscribe pre-arranged halālah. (These reports have been assessed and authenticated to varying degrees by later scholars; they are widely cited in fiqh discussions on nikāḥ halālah.) (Sunnah.com)

Note: jurists also consult additional narrations and the context in which early Companions and the Prophet ruled on real cases; see classical commentaries on Kitāb al-Talaq for fuller chains and legal argumentation. (IIUM)

---

5. Practical and ethical considerations for contemporary application

1. Do not arrange or instrumentalize another person. Islamic legal ethics and the explicit prophetic condemnation caution strongly against arranging an intervening marriage as a device to reverse an irrevocable divorce. Such behavior is described as sinful in the Prophetic traditions and undermines the moral aims of the law. (Sunnah.com)

2. Protect the vulnerable. In many contemporary contexts, women are at risk when husbands use talaq irresponsibly or when economic and social pressures push women into exploitative arrangements. Scholars emphasize protective measures: family counseling, legal reform where necessary, and community education about the consequences of rash divorces.

3. Authenticity of the second marriage matters. If, after a legitimate and consummated second marriage, that marriage ends (by divorce or death), reunification with the first husband is legally possible — provided the intervening marriage was entered into sincerely and not merely as a pretext. The law thus preserves an objective procedural reality (a genuine change of marital status) while discouraging circumvention. (Pfander Center)

---

6. Conclusion

Nikāḥ ḥalālah as a legal institution is rooted in Qurʾān 2:230 and expounded in the Sunnah and classical jurisprudence: it permits a woman, after an irrevocable triple divorce, to be lawful again for her first husband only after a genuine interposing marriage that was consummated. However, the prophetic condemnations recorded in the ḥadīth literature make clear that pre-arranged or instrumental uses of such intervening marriages to circumvent the law are forbidden, morally condemned, and—according to the ḥadīth—cursed. Ethical application therefore requires both fidelity to the text and protection of human dignity.

---

Select bibliography & primary sources (recommended reading)

• Qurʾān 2:230 (exegesis and classical commentators). (Quran)

• Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī — Book of Divorce (Kitāb al-Talaq), hadiths on remarriage after divorce. (Sunnah.com)

• Sunan Abī Dāwūd, Hadith no. 2076 (on the curse of the muhallil and muhallal lahu). (Sunnah.com)

• Sunan Ibn Mājah (related narrations) and juristic discussions on tahlīl and nikāḥ halālah. (Sunnah.com)

• Contemporary fiqh explanations and fatāwā (e.g., IslamQA and IslamOnline summaries on tahleel/halala). (Islam-QA)

---

Militant Attack on Chibok: Churches and Vehicles Set Ablaze in Renewed Violence

 Breaking News Report – Academic Newsletter Edition

Date: November 8, 2025
Location: Chibok, Borno State, Nigeria

Headline:
Militant Attack on Chibok: Churches and Vehicles Set Ablaze in Renewed Violence

Report:
On November 8, 2025, armed militants affiliated with an Islamist extremist group launched a violent attack on the town of Chibok, located in Borno State, northeastern Nigeria. According to preliminary reports from local authorities and eyewitnesses, the assailants targeted several Christian churches and residential areas, setting vehicles and buildings ablaze.

The attack, which occurred in the late evening hours, reignited fears among residents who continue to face recurring waves of violence from extremist factions operating in the region. Witnesses described scenes of chaos and destruction, with smoke rising from burned structures and charred vehicles scattered across the town.

Local security forces have since been deployed to the area to restore order and assess the extent of damage. Humanitarian organizations are calling for urgent assistance to support displaced families and rebuild destroyed infrastructure.

This tragic incident underscores the persistent insecurity in northern Nigeria and the need for comprehensive peace and reconciliation initiatives to address the root causes of extremism, religious intolerance, and underdevelopment in the region.

Prepared by:
Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Shimba Theological Institute
Theological and Peace Studies Division

The Theological Infiltration of Islam into Christian Thought: A Critical Examination

The Theological Infiltration of Islam into Christian Thought: A Critical Examination

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

Throughout history, various theological systems have attempted to align themselves with or reinterpret elements of Christian doctrine. One of the most persistent efforts has come from Islamic theology, which claims continuity with the Judeo-Christian revelation while fundamentally diverging from its core tenets. Islam asserts that Allah is the same deity worshipped by Christians and Jews; however, this claim warrants serious theological scrutiny.

From a biblical and doctrinal standpoint, the God revealed in the person of Jesus Christ — the incarnate Son of God and the second person of the Holy Trinity — is fundamentally distinct from the Allah described in the Qur’an. The Christian understanding of God emphasizes divine love, relationality, and incarnation, culminating in the redemptive work of Christ (John 1:1–14; Colossians 1:15–20). Conversely, the Islamic conception of Allah explicitly denies the Trinity and the Sonship of Christ (Qur’an 4:171; 5:116–117), positioning itself in direct theological opposition to the essence of Christian revelation.

This persistent attempt to merge Islamic monotheism with Christian theology represents not a harmonious synthesis, but a form of doctrinal infiltration — an effort to obscure the uniqueness of the Christian faith. The Church must, therefore, remain vigilant in guarding the integrity of its message. As Scripture commands, believers must “contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 1:3). The distinct identity of the Christian God — Father, Son, and Holy Spirit — must be upheld without compromise or confusion.

The safeguarding of Christian orthodoxy demands theological clarity, spiritual discernment, and unwavering commitment to the truth revealed in Christ alone (John 14:6). The Church must resist all attempts, however subtle, to conflate the God of the Bible with theological constructs that deny His triune nature and redemptive work through Jesus Christ.

---