A Call for Discernment: A Response to Biodun Shotola and Deji Yesufu
“The wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere.” – cf. James 3:17
As followers of Christ, we are called to be discerning, not divisive. The critique of Apostle Joshua Selman presented by Biodun Shotola and Deji Yesufu demands a response, not for the sake of defending any individual but to uphold the biblical call for truth, love, and unity in the Body of Christ.
Context Matters
In their critique, the authors quote Joshua Selman out of context, such as his teaching on Joseph of Arimathea and financial resources. To state that Selman suggested the name of Jesus “requires financial resources to exalt it before the world” is a gross misrepresentation of his words. Selman’s intent was to emphasize the role of stewardship in advancing the gospel and not to equate financial wealth with spiritual worth. Misquoting him creates confusion rather than promoting truth.
Similarly, Selman’s statement regarding biblical verses must be examined within the broader context of his sermons, which consistently affirm the authority and inspiration of scripture. He often challenges believers to approach the Bible with spiritual insight, not blind literalism, recognizing that not every narrative reflects God’s character but may reveal human flaws for our instruction (e.g., 1 Corinthians 10:11).
Paul and Visions: Biblical Precedents
The authors dismiss Selman’s accounts of divine encounters as fabrications, equating them with the modus operandi of false teachers. However, the Bible is replete with examples of God revealing Himself through visions and encounters (Acts 9:3–6; Revelation 1:10–20). The apostle Paul himself recounted visions and encounters with the Lord (2 Corinthians 12:1–7). While these claims must indeed be tested (1 John 4:1), outright dismissal without biblical evaluation reeks of prejudice rather than discernment.
Growth and Gathering: A Measure of God’s Hand?
Critics argue that Selman’s large gatherings are not indicative of God’s approval. While it is true that popularity is not a proof of divine endorsement (Matthew 7:21–23), it is equally unjust to dismiss the possibility that God is drawing people to Himself through Selman’s ministry. A ministry’s fruit must be judged by its alignment with scripture and the lives transformed by the gospel. Many testimonies from Selman’s ministry reveal genuine repentance, healing, and spiritual growth—hallmarks of God’s work.
Tone and Approach: A Call to Love and Humility
The tone of Shotola and Yesufu’s critique is uncharitable and divisive, focusing more on condemnation than correction. Paul’s admonition to Timothy is instructive:
“And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness.” [Cf. 2 Timothy 2: 24-25].
If Selman is indeed in error, should the response not be one of loving correction rather than public condemnation? The authors’ language—such as “false apostle,” “imposter,” and “enemy of God”—reflects a spirit of judgment that contradicts the humility of Christ (Philippians 2:3–5).
A Balanced Perspective
This rejoinder is not a blanket endorsement of Joshua Selman. Like any human being, he is fallible and subject to correction. However, accusing him of heresy without thorough examination of his teachings is a disservice to the Body of Christ.
We are called to defend the faith (Jude 1:3) but to do so with grace and truth. As believers, let us engage in constructive dialogue rather than divisive diatribe. Let us seek the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace (Ephesians 4:3) and remember that Christ’s ultimate command to us is to love one another (John 13:34–35).
May our efforts always reflect the heart of Christ, who came to save, not condemn/judge (John 3:17 – New Jerusalem Bible Version).
POWERED BY
The Rev’d. Canon A. O. Ewébìyí
Lecturer, Philosophy of Religion
AVCT, ÀKÚRÉ.
Rev. Ewébìyí sent this to Text and Publishing from Akure. It is a response to this article we published on our blog two years ago. Text and Publishing will be providing a rejoinder to this article in the very near future. We nonetheless thank the Rev’d for taking the time to pen this.
Share this: