A Change of Mind (For Forgiveness of Sins)

In "Be Baptized for the Forgiveness of Sins" I argued that the Greek word εἰς (eis, pronounced "ice") used in Acts 2:38 when Peter says, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for [εἰς] the forgiveness of your sins," is equivocal, meaning "subject to two or more interpretations." While the word is most often used by the New Testament authors to mean "into" or "unto," or "resulting in," I felt I had demonstrated that in at least two occurrences this is not how the word is used, in which occurrences it is used instead to mean "because of" or "on account of."

Although some of my detractors might assume I would uncritically hold firm to this response to the argument for baptismal regeneration from Acts 2:38, the reality is that I've been giving it a lot of thought and further researching the topic, and may be at the beginning of a process of changing my mind. This is not to say that I am beginning to be open to the idea that salvation isn't experienced until water baptism; the whole of Scripture militates against that heresy. Rather, I'm beginning to think that there is a better understanding of Acts 2:38 which is nevertheless fully consistent with the "grace alone through faith" gospel that Jesus and His Apostles preached.

Challenging Cornelius: As I Began to Speak

In "Saving Cornelius" we learned that the Word of God teaches that Cornelius' household was saved, indwelt by the Holy Spirit of God, sealing them as children of God, promising them redemption and resurrection, all before their baptism in water. I have spoken since with a friend and with a visitor to this blog, both of whom have insisted Cornelius' household was not saved before their baptism in water, and I've sincerely sought an explanation for that insistence. I am still awaiting an exegetical answer, but in the meantime, I want to share one argument I've witnessed put forth in support of the view that Cornelius was not, in fact, saved before being baptized in water (not put forward by the friend and visitor of whom I speak).

Exegetical Eschatology: Do Not Seal Up

In previous articles in this series I've concentrated on many of the presumptions we read into texts dealing with the end times. I demonstrated that we are not justified in assuming that the thousand years of Revelation must refer to precisely 1,000 years and that the reign of Christ during that time would be physical on earth. I demonstrated that we are not justified in assuming that Jesus' disciples ever expected a "first going," so we need to be careful how we understand their questions concerning His future "coming." And I demonstrated that we are not justified in assuming that Jesus' use of lightning imagery in the Olivet Discourse was intended to communicate that the "coming" of which He spoke would be physically visible to the entire world population.

Having dealt with those assumptions, I'd like to start looking at biblical passages which began to make me curious, back when I was a staunch dispensational futurist. The texts we'll be looking at in the next couple of articles in this series are ones which most Christians either gloss over without realizing the weight of the words they're reading, or wave off using "sound byte" explanations without deeply considering the weakness of those explanations. These passages are the so-called "time texts" which we preterists think strongly point to a first century fulfillment of much (but not all) of biblical prophecy, and we're going to begin today by looking at a pair of texts which, considered together, are very powerful.

Episode 13: Unbelievable

Episode 13 of the Theopologetics Podcast is now available! In this episode I interview Justin Brierley, host of the Unbelievable? radio program on Premier Christian Radio UK, discussing how hosting the show has impacted his Christian faith.

Episode 12: Let's Get Physical

Episode 12 of the Theopologetics Podcast is now available! In this episode I interview Glenn Peoples, creator of the Say Hello to My Little Friend blog and podcast, discussing Christian physicalism, the view that man is not comprised of both a physical body and an immaterial soul, but of body only.

In this first of two interviews on the subject, we talk about physicalism in history, the modern evangelical response to physicalism, the biblical basis for physicalism and the metaphysical objection to it. In a future episode I’ll interview Glenn a second time, devoting the entire episode to biblical objections to his position, so email me at theopologetics@hotmail.com if you would like me to include your challenge to physicalism in the second interview.

Episode 11: In Christ Alone

Episode 11 of the Theopologetics Podcast is now available! In this episode I interview Michael Burgos, creator of the Grassroots Apologetics blog, discussing Oneness Pentecostals and how to witness to them.