Episode 25: Flesh and Bone

Episode 25 of the Theopologetics Podcast is now available! The Bible teaches the bodily resurrection of Jesus and that of all the dead, contrary to claims made by theological liberals, hyperpreterists and Jehovah's Witnesses that 1 Corinthians 15 speaks of a spiritual, non-physical resurrection.

A Study in Baptismal Regeneration: Part 2, Justified by Works

In part 1 of this series, "Faith Alone," we looked at some of part 2 of another blogger's series on baptism, the Gift of the Holy Spirit and salvation. We looked at the claim that Ephesians 2:8-9 teaches only that salvation is apart from works of the Mosaic Law, but not that it is apart from any works of obedience at all. In so doing, we looked at Romans 4 in which Paul demonstrates that Abraham was justified by God—forgiven of sin and counted as being righteous before Him—when he believed that God would do what He said He would do, before any acts of obedience. So, too, are Christians justified by God upon faith apart from works. In this part two of my series, we'll look at James 2, the passage arguably most frequently pointed to as evidence that we are not, in fact, justified by God by faith apart from works, and we'll look at another argument made by my fellow blogger.

Episode 24: Mecca and Medina

Episode 24 of the Theopologetics Podcast is now available! Alan Shlemon from Stand to Reason joins me to discuss Islam and how to reach out to Muslims.

Coming Soon: Interview with Mary Jo Sharp

In episode 23 of my podcast I played a promo for the Confident Christianity podcast, and after that promo I mentioned that perhaps I'd ask its host, Mary Jo Sharp, to let me interview her on the topic of women and apologetics. Well, as it turns out, I didn't have to ask. She listened, and contacted me telling me she'd be happy to do so! So sometime after the new year, look forward to this exciting episode of the Theopologetics Podcast!

Episode 23: Youth of the Nation

Episode 23 of the Theopologetics Podcast is now available! Brett Kunkle, Student Impact Directory at Stand to Reason, joins me to discuss youth ministry and the challenges to faith experienced by youth today.

Tweaking Terminology: (Believers') Baptismal Regeneration

The phrase "baptismal regeneration" is commonly and accurately used to refer to the view shared by Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Anglicans, Lutherans, Mormons and the Churches of Christ, which teach that regeneration (spiritual rebirth) occurs at the point of baptism. The phrase does not imply that the water, and not God, is the cause of regeneration, nor that it regenerates without faith, and the phrase is not used to suggest either of those things. It is merely a phrase communicating the belief that regeneration occurs at time of water baptism.

Despite that, a friend of mine, and apparently others, who believe that water baptism is a prerequisite for salvation, object to using the phrase "baptismal regeneration" to refer to their view. After a lengthy dialogue, it seems to me their objection is based on the fact that some groups who teach baptismal regeneration, such as Catholics, believe even infants, unable to have and express faith, are regenerated at baptism. My friend and others, on the other hand, believe only someone old enough to have faith is regenerated at baptism, based on that faith. Therefore, they might argue, using the phrase to apply to their view would inappropriately suggest that they, too, teach that regeneration can happen apart from faith.

I think there's an element of truth in that argument, and so I feel compelled to slightly tweak the phrase when using it to refer to my friend's view specifically, as distinct from the Catholic view. I'm inclined at this point, therefore, to begin referring to this view using the phrase, "Believers' Baptismal Regeneration," thereby communicating that the particular version of baptismal regeneration I'm referring to is one which holds that it's only for believers. This doesn't entirely satisfy my friend, but because it a) clears up any confusion between his view and that of Catholics, while b) using the phrase historically and accurately used to refer to his view, I think it's the best option.