Is the Church the Kingdom of God? Why Christ Reigns Now (Part 1 of 2)

Brent Pollard

Jesus succeeded in establishing His kingdom. The church is not just a temporary solution or a substitute for God’s original plan. Christ reigns today, and His church is made up of people redeemed by His blood who live under His authority.

This belief shapes how I see both the church and biblical prophecy. I do not expect a future earthly millennium where Jesus will start the kingdom He spoke about. I also do not think that denying such a millennium means denying the kingdom itself. The kingdom is real. Its King reigns. Its citizens are already here.

Church and Kingdom: Two Descriptions of One Redeemed People

When we say the church is the kingdom, it helps to see what each term highlights. “Church” refers to Christ’s gathered people. The Greek word ekklēsia means “assembly,” and the New Testament describes this as people God has called through the gospel, out of darkness and into His light (2 Thessalonians 2.14; 1 Peter 2.9). “Kingdom” focuses on Christ’s royal authority and those He rules. The church is these redeemed people seen as an assembly, while the kingdom is the same people seen under Christ’s rule.

These words do not always mean the same thing in every Bible passage. God’s rule covers all creation, even those who resist Him. But when we talk about Christ’s redeemed people on earth, we are not talking about two different groups with separate futures. The people Christ saves and adds to His church are the same ones He brings into His kingdom.

Jesus brought these ideas together. In Matthew 16.18–19, He promised to build His church and then promised to give Peter the keys of the kingdom. This shows a clear link between the community He would build and the kingdom that the gospel would welcome people into. If we separate the church from the kingdom by thousands of years, we lose that connection.

When Did the Kingdom Come? From Mark 9.1 to Pentecost

The timing is important. In Mark 9.1, Jesus said that some people standing with Him would live to see God’s kingdom come in power. Even if the transfiguration that follows is a preview of His glory, this promise means the kingdom would arrive during the lives of those listening. It does not make sense to say the kingdom would wait thousands of years to be established.

Acts tells us that the risen Christ promised the Spirit’s power (Acts 1.8), which was fulfilled at Pentecost (Acts 2.1–4). Peter explained Jesus’ resurrection and exaltation by referring to God’s promise about David’s throne and to Psalm 110 (Acts 2.29–36). On that same day, those who accepted the gospel repented, were baptized, and the Lord added them to His people (Acts 2.38–47). These passages together show that Pentecost was when the church was established under the risen King.

New Testament Evidence That Christ’s Kingdom Exists Now

Other New Testament passages clearly show that the kingdom exists now. Paul told Christians that God had already moved them into His Son’s kingdom (Colossians 1.13). John said he shared in the kingdom with his readers, even while they faced hardship (Revelation 1.9). Hebrews says believers are receiving an unshakable kingdom (Hebrews 12.28). These Christians were already citizens of a real kingdom, not just waiting for one to be created.

Amillennialism and Revelation 20: Christ’s Reign and the Thousand Years

This is why I think the term “amillennialism” can be confusing. It might sound like it simply denies the millennium, and maybe even the kingdom. But this view actually affirms that Christ is reigning now. It sees the thousand years in Revelation 20 as a symbol for the full period of Christ’s reign and His people sharing in His victory, not as a literal future period of exactly one thousand years on earth.

Revelation uses many symbols, like a dragon, beasts, lampstands, a chain, and numbers. Interpreting the thousand years as a symbol fits with this style. The real question is what the symbol means. In this view, John’s vision encourages persecuted Christians that even death cannot take away their life and victory with their King. The martyrs who seem defeated by earthly rulers actually live and reign with Christ.

Satan’s binding has a clear purpose: to limit his ability to deceive the nations (Revelation 20.1–3). This does not mean he is completely inactive. Peter still warned Christians about the devil’s dangerous activity (1 Peter 5.8), which does not go against Christ’s victory over him. Satan’s power is limited, his opposition continues, and his final defeat is certain. The spread of the gospel around the world shows that the enemy cannot keep the earth away from Christ.

For these reasons, I do not believe in a future earthly millennium, but this does not mean I deny the kingdom or Christ’s victory. I also do not accept the postmillennial idea that a golden age must happen before Christ returns. The church’s confidence is based on Christ’s current authority and His promised return, not on the idea that the world must first become mostly Christian.

Was the Kingdom Postponed? Why the Church Is Not Plan B

My main objection is to the idea of a postponed kingdom, especially as taught in classical dispensational premillennialism. This view says that because Israel rejected the kingdom, God delayed its establishment and the church filled the gap in the meantime. Not all premillennialists believe this, and those who do usually affirm God’s sovereignty and foreknowledge. My issue is with the explanation itself: the Bible shows the church as the fulfillment of God’s purpose, not as a backup plan because He could not establish His kingdom.

Ephesians 3.10–11 places God’s work through the church within His eternal purpose, fulfilled in Christ. Acts 2.23 shows that even the crucifixion was part of God’s predetermined plan. The cross was not an emergency response to an unforeseen rejection. Through the very event in which His enemies seemed to triumph, Christ defeated the powers opposing Him (Colossians 2.15; Hebrews 2.14).

I cannot see how Christ’s victory fits with the idea that the church is just a substitute for a kingdom that Satan and human unbelief managed to stop. If opposition could block the promised kingdom once, what would make it succeed the next time? Those who support postponement would say God was not frustrated. Still, I think the New Testament gives a better answer: God fulfilled His purpose through Jesus’ rejection and crucifixion. The King rose, ascended, and now reigns.

To be continued…

Baptism And Salvation: What Does The Bible Actually Teach

Today’s blog post is much longer than usual, but I believe it will be a resource that you will want to download and keep as a helpful tool to refer back to.

Carl Pollard

There are few subjects in Christianity that generate as much disagreement as baptism. Nearly everyone who professes to follow Jesus acknowledges that baptism is important. Most agree that Jesus commanded it, that the apostles practiced it, and that Christians should submit to it. The disagreement begins when we ask a much more specific question: What does baptism actually accomplish, and what relationship does it have to salvation?

Some believe baptism is an outward demonstration of a salvation that has already occurred. Others believe it is a symbolic testimony of faith, an ordinance that Christians obey after being saved. Still others teach that baptism is the moment at which God forgives sins, unites a believer with Christ, and brings that person into a new relationship with Him.

These positions can’t all be correct in every respect. They make different claims about what God does, when He does it, and what He requires of those who come to Him.

Our responsibility is to examine those claims in light of Scripture.

The question deserves more than a few isolated verses. We need to consider the teachings of Jesus, the preaching of the apostles, the conversions recorded in Acts, and the explanations of salvation found throughout the New Testament. We also need to understand how baptism relates to grace, faith, repentance, confession, the blood of Christ, and the work of the Holy Spirit.

And we must be willing to ask difficult questions of our own understanding.

If the Bible teaches that baptism is necessary for the forgiveness of sins, we must accept that teaching regardless of how unpopular it becomes. If the Bible teaches that baptism merely follows salvation, we must accept that instead. Our convictions should be determined by the meaning of Scripture.

Jesus said in John 12:48 that His word will judge us on the last day. That makes the words of Christ and His inspired apostles the standard by which every teaching must be measured.

1. We Must Begin With the Authority of Jesus

Before considering what baptism accomplishes, we need to establish who has the authority to determine its purpose.

Following His resurrection, Jesus said, 

“All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.” (Matthew 28:18–20)

Notice how Jesus introduces this command. He begins by declaring that all authority belongs to Him.

The command to baptize comes directly from the risen Lord, who possesses authority over heaven and earth. Baptism was therefore part of the mission Jesus entrusted to His apostles. They were commanded to make disciples, baptize them, and teach them to obey everything He had commanded.

Mark records another statement of Jesus, “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.” (Mark 16:16)

There is a textual issue worth acknowledging. Mark 16:9–20 is absent from some of the earliest Greek manuscripts, and many modern translations identify this passage as textually disputed. Consequently, our understanding of baptism should not depend exclusively on Mark 16:16.

Nevertheless, the relationship between faith, baptism, and salvation expressed in this verse is also addressed in undisputed New Testament passages.

Matthew 28 establishes that baptism is commanded by Jesus. Acts 2:38 connects baptism with forgiveness. Acts 22:16 connects it with the washing away of sins. Romans 6 connects it with participation in Christ’s death and resurrection. Galatians 3 connects it with putting on Christ. First Peter 3:21 explicitly says that baptism saves.

The question is whether we will allow these passages to speak with their full force.

2. What Is Baptism?

The Greek word commonly translated baptize is baptizō, which frequently carries the meaning of immersing, dipping, or submerging. The word itself should be understood in its context, but the New Testament’s descriptions of Christian baptism strongly support immersion in water.

Consider what happened when Philip baptized the Ethiopian official, “And they both went down into the water, Philip and the eunuch, and he baptized him. And when they came up out of the water…” (Acts 8:38–39)

Both men went into the water, and both came out afterward.

John 3:23 tells us that John the Baptist was baptizing at Aenon near Salim because “water was plentiful there.” While John’s baptism was preparatory and distinct from baptism into Christ, the description is consistent with immersion.

Paul’s language provides another important connection, “We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.” (Romans 6:4)

Paul describes baptism as a burial and resurrection.

Colossians 2:12 similarly speaks of believers being “buried with him in baptism” and raised with Him through faith in God’s powerful working.

Immersion provides a particularly fitting expression of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ.

The biblical pattern is a believer being immersed in water in response to the gospel of Jesus Christ.

The New Testament does not prescribe a particular river, pool, building, or baptistry. The significance lies in what Christ has commanded and what God promises to do.

3. Baptism and the Forgiveness of Sins: Acts 2:38

On the Day of Pentecost, Peter preached to a Jewish audience in Jerusalem. He demonstrated from Scripture that Jesus was the promised Messiah and declared that the very Jesus they had crucified had been made both Lord and Christ. The audience was deeply convicted. “Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, ‘Brothers, what shall we do?'” (Acts 2:37)

Their question was urgent. They recognized their guilt and wanted to know how to respond.

Peter answered:

“Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” (Acts 2:38)

We should carefully observe several details.

First, Peter commanded repentance and baptism. Both were included in his answer.

Second, the command applied to “every one of you.” Peter did not describe baptism as an optional practice for particularly committed believers.

Third, Peter connected repentance and baptism with “the forgiveness of your sins.”

Fourth, he attached the promise of the Holy Spirit to this response.

The Greek phrase translated “for the forgiveness of your sins” is eis aphesin tōn hamartiōn. The preposition eis commonly indicates movement toward a goal or result, although its meaning depends on context.

The identical expression “for the forgiveness of sins” appears in Matthew 26:28, where Jesus says His blood is poured out for the forgiveness of sins. In that passage, the phrase naturally expresses the purpose or result of His sacrifice.

The most straightforward reading of Acts 2:38 is that Peter commands his hearers to repent and be baptized with forgiveness of sins in view.

Some object that eis should be understood as “because of,” making baptism a response to forgiveness already received.

However, this interpretation faces difficulties.

Peter’s audience had just asked what they needed to do in response to their guilt. Peter’s answer directs them toward forgiveness. Nothing in the immediate context says their sins had already been forgiven.

Others point out that “repent” is grammatically plural while “be baptized” is singular. That distinction is true, but it does not establish that baptism is unrelated to forgiveness. The singular command distributes the action individually to each person, while the promise of forgiveness concerns the people being addressed.

The verse connects both repentance and baptism to the response Peter commands.

What happened next?

“So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls.” (Acts 2:41)

They heard the gospel, accepted Peter’s message, and were baptized.

The text never describes these people as having already received forgiveness and then being baptized simply to announce it publicly.

Instead, baptism is presented as part of their immediate response to the gospel.

If baptism had no connection to receiving forgiveness, why did Peter include it in his direct answer to people asking what they needed to do?

4. Saul of Tarsus: Why Was a Believing, Praying Man Told to Be Baptized?

The conversion of Saul is particularly important because Scripture provides several accounts of the same event.

In Acts 9, Saul encountered the risen Jesus on the road to Damascus.

He became convinced that Jesus was Lord. He obeyed the instruction to enter Damascus and wait for further direction.

For three days he was blind, neither eating nor drinking (Acts 9:9).

Acts 9:11 also tells us that Saul was praying.

Consider his condition. Saul believed that Jesus had risen. He recognized His authority. He obeyed His instruction. He was praying and fasting. Yet when Ananias came to him, he said, “And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on his name.” (Acts 22:16)

This statement creates a serious difficulty for the idea that sins are necessarily forgiven at the moment someone first believes.

Saul had already encountered Jesus, submitted to His instruction, and begun praying.

Nevertheless, Ananias told him to be baptized and wash away his sins.

The text associates baptism, the washing away of sins, and calling on the Lord’s name.

Of course, water itself cannot remove moral guilt. Scripture teaches that Christ’s blood provides redemption and forgiveness (Ephesians 1:7).

The question is how God has instructed believers to receive the benefits of that sacrifice. Acts 22:16 identifies baptism as part of Saul’s response.

Some argue that “wash away your sins” refers only to a symbolic demonstration of forgiveness Saul had already received.

But the text never states that Saul’s sins had already been forgiven. Ananias uses an imperative directed toward something Saul is to do.

Others point to the grammatical connection between “calling on his name” and washing away sins. Calling on the Lord is unquestionably important. Yet that observation does not remove baptism from the command. Ananias explicitly tells Saul to arise and be baptized.

In the account of Saul’s conversion, calling upon the Lord and baptism belong together.

This is especially significant when compared with Romans 10:13, “For everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

Acts 22:16 provides an example of what calling upon the Lord involved in an actual conversion. Saul was instructed to call on the Lord’s name as he arose, was baptized, and had his sins washed away.

5. Baptism Into Christ: Romans 6:3–7

Romans 6 offers one of the deepest explanations of baptism in the New Testament. Paul writes, “Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?” (Romans 6:3)  Paul describes baptism as entering into union with Christ and His death.

He continues, “We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.” (Romans 6:4)

Notice the progression.

  • Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection
  • The saving work of Jesus
  • Baptized into Christ’s death
  • Buried with Him through baptism
  • Raised to walk in newness of life

Paul’s argument assumes that his readers have undergone a decisive change in their relationship with sin. He reminds them of their baptism because it represents their participation in Christ’s death and resurrection. Verse 6 explains that the old self was crucified with Christ so that believers would no longer be enslaved to sin.

Verse 7 adds, “For one who has died has been set free from sin.”

Baptism is therefore deeply connected to the believer’s death to sin and new life in Christ.

Some argue that Romans 6 refers only to a spiritual baptism that occurs at the moment of faith.

It is certainly true that the spiritual realities described in this passage are accomplished through God’s power. Yet Paul appeals to an event his readers would recognize as part of their conversion. His description also corresponds with the water baptisms repeatedly recorded in Acts.

The passage does not explicitly discuss the amount of water used, but its burial imagery supports immersion. Most importantly, Paul treats baptism as a meaningful participation in the saving work of Christ. If baptism merely announces a spiritual resurrection that has already occurred, we should ask why Paul describes the believer as being buried with Christ through baptism so that he may walk in newness of life.

6. How Does Someone Put On Christ? Galatians 3:26–27

Paul writes, “For in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.”  These verses deserve to be read together. Verse 26 says believers become children of God through faith. Verse 27 explains that those baptized into Christ have put on Christ. Paul does not present faith and baptism as competing means of salvation. He connects them. Faith is essential. Baptism is the faith-filled response through which believers are described as putting on Christ.

Notice that Paul says “baptized into Christ.”

This language is similar to Romans 6:3.

We should also consider the spiritual blessings found in Christ. Ephesians 1:3 teaches that every spiritual blessing is in Christ. Ephesians 1:7 says redemption and forgiveness are found in Him. 2 Timothy 2:10 speaks of salvation “that is in Christ Jesus.”

Romans 8:1 declares that there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. Paul explicitly connects baptism with putting on Christ. A fair reading must also recognize that Paul emphasizes faith throughout Galatians. Baptism does not replace faith, and a person does not earn sonship through performing a ceremony.

Rather, Paul describes baptism within the experience of coming to Christ through faith.

The New Testament never requires us to choose between genuine faith and obedient baptism.

7. Does Baptism Actually Save? First Peter 3:21

Perhaps no passage states the relationship between baptism and salvation more directly than 1 Peter 3:21.

Peter writes, “Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” We must consider the entire statement. Peter begins by discussing Noah and the flood. Eight people were brought safely through water (1 Peter 3:20).

He then draws a correspondence between that event and Christian baptism.

Peter explicitly states that baptism now saves. But he immediately explains what he means. Baptism isn’t washing dirt from the body. The saving significance is spiritual, involving an appeal to God for a good conscience through the resurrection of Jesus Christ. The Greek term eperōtēma is sometimes translated “appeal” and sometimes understood as “pledge.” The precise nuance is debated. Both readings recognize that baptism has a spiritual significance extending beyond physical washing. Most importantly, Peter identifies the resurrection of Jesus as the basis of baptism’s saving significance.

Baptism possesses no independent power to save apart from Christ. It is effective because of what Jesus accomplished through His death and resurrection. An objection frequently raised is that Peter is only discussing an outward symbol of an inward salvation. Yet that explanation must account for the words “baptism … now saves you.”

Peter doesn’t say baptism merely represents salvation. He uses the language of salvation and then clarifies the source and nature of its effectiveness. The passage can’t responsibly be reduced to a statement about water physically removing sin. Peter explicitly rejects that idea. At the same time, it should not be reduced to a purely symbolic ceremony with no relationship to salvation.

Peter connects baptism, the appeal to God, the resurrection of Jesus, and salvation.

8. Baptism and the Work of God: Colossians 2:11–13

One of the most common objections to baptism concerns works.

The argument usually sounds something like this, “If baptism is something a person does, then requiring baptism for salvation means salvation is earned by human effort.”

Colossians 2 directly addresses the relationship between baptism, faith, and divine power. Paul writes, “Having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead.” (Colossians 2:12)

Who performs the saving work in this passage? God does. Paul specifically identifies “the powerful working of God.”

The person being baptized places faith in God’s power. Verse 13, “And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses.” God makes the sinner alive. God forgives trespasses. God accomplishes the spiritual transformation. Baptism is the context in which Paul describes the believer being buried and raised with Christ through faith. A person can submit to something God commands without believing that his obedience earns salvation. When Naaman was instructed to wash seven times in the Jordan River, he was healed only after obeying the prophet’s instruction (2 Kings 5:10–14). The river didn’t possess miraculous healing power. Naaman’s actions didn’t earn a miracle. God healed him when he submitted to the command given through God’s prophet. This is an illustration of the relationship between obedient faith and divine grace, although Naaman’s cleansing is not itself a New Testament doctrine of Christian baptism. Similarly, Joshua and Israel marched around Jericho as God commanded (Joshua 6; Hebrews 11:30). The walls fell by God’s power. Obedience to a divine instruction does not automatically make the resulting blessing a wage earned.

The crucial distinction is between earning salvation and receiving salvation through the response God has commanded.

Colossians 2 describes baptism as an expression of faith in God’s powerful working.

9. Is Baptism a Work That Contradicts Salvation by Grace?

Ephesians 2:8–9 says, “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.”

This passage is central to understanding salvation. We are saved by grace. Salvation is God’s gift. No sinner can earn redemption through personal goodness, religious accomplishments, or obedience to a system of law. Romans 3:23 teaches that all have sinned. Romans 6:23 says the wages of sin is death, while eternal life is God’s gift in Christ Jesus. The blood of Christ is the basis of our forgiveness. Hebrews 9:22 emphasizes the necessity of blood for forgiveness, and Hebrews 9:26 describes Christ’s sacrifice as the means by which sin is put away. The question is whether submitting to baptism contradicts these truths. Consider the nature of faith itself.

In John 6:28–29, the crowd asked Jesus, “What must we do, to be doing the works of God?” Jesus answered, “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.” Jesus calls believing a “work” in response to their question, yet faith does not become a meritorious human achievement that earns salvation. This does not mean faith and baptism are identical. It demonstrates that merely identifying something as an action does not settle whether it constitutes the kind of works excluded by Ephesians 2:9. Repentance also requires a human response. Jesus said, “Unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.” (Luke 13:3) Paul declared that God commands all people everywhere to repent (Acts 17:30). If repentance is necessary, does repentance earn salvation? No. Repentance involves turning away from sin and toward God. It is a response to God’s gracious call.

Confession likewise involves action. Romans 10:9 speaks of confessing Jesus as Lord and believing in His resurrection. Yet Christians who affirm salvation by grace generally do not regard confession as an attempt to purchase forgiveness. We must apply the same careful reasoning to baptism. The issue is whether God has commanded it as part of the response of faith. Titus 3:5, “He saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit.” The identity of the “washing of regeneration” is debated. Many Christians understand it as a reference to baptism, while others understand it primarily as spiritual cleansing accomplished by the Holy Spirit. Regardless of that debate, Paul’s emphasis is unmistakable. Salvation comes from God’s mercy and renewing power.

If baptism is involved in this washing, it remains entirely consistent with salvation by mercy because God is the one who saves.

We should therefore reject two errors.

The first is the belief that water or human effort possesses the power to earn forgiveness. The second is the assumption that any action commanded by God must be a meritorious work. The New Testament consistently teaches that salvation is grounded in grace, received through faith, and accompanied by the obedience that genuine faith produces.

10. What About the Thief on the Cross?

One of the most frequently cited objections involves the criminal crucified beside Jesus.

Luke 23:42–43 records his request, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” Jesus responded, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise.”

The thief was promised paradise, and Scripture never records his baptism.

Does this prove that baptism has no relationship to salvation? We need to consider several facts. First, the text does not tell us whether the thief had ever received John’s baptism. Large numbers of people had been baptized by John (Matthew 3:5–6). We cannot establish that this particular man had or had not been baptized. However, the strongest response does not depend on speculation about his past. Second, Jesus possessed authority to forgive sins during His earthly ministry. In Mark 2:5, Jesus told the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven.”

The scribes questioned His authority, and Jesus demonstrated that the Son of Man had authority on earth to forgive sins (Mark 2:10).

Jesus could forgive the thief directly. Third, the thief died before Jesus’ resurrection and before the apostles began proclaiming the gospel under the Great Commission. Hebrews 9:15–17 discusses Christ’s death in connection with the inauguration of the new covenant, using the language of a covenant or will. The exact relationship between covenant inauguration and every individual command should be handled carefully. Nevertheless, the thief’s situation occurred before the post-resurrection commission of Matthew 28 and before the Pentecost preaching of Acts 2. The thief received a direct promise from Jesus during a unique historical moment. That event establishes the authority and mercy of Christ. It does not necessarily establish what people should do after the risen Lord commissioned His apostles to preach the gospel and baptize disciples. Even if we knew with certainty that the thief had never been baptized, his salvation would demonstrate that Jesus can save someone apart from the ordinary pattern of Christian conversion.

It would not, by itself, prove that Christians are free to disregard a command Jesus subsequently gave. We should learn from the thief’s trust in Christ without using his exceptional circumstances to dismiss the instructions Christ gave His church.

11. Why Did Paul Say Christ Did Not Send Him to Baptize?

First Corinthians 1:17 is another common objection. Paul writes, “For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.”

Some reason that if baptism were connected to salvation, Paul could never have said Christ did not send him to baptize. The context is essential. The Corinthian congregation was divided over allegiance to different teachers. Some claimed to follow Paul, others Apollos, others Cephas, and others Christ (1 Corinthians 1:12). Paul challenged this division, “Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?” (1 Corinthians 1:13) His argument centers on the identity of the one to whom Christians belong.

They were baptized in the name of Christ.

Paul was relieved that he had personally baptized only a few of them because he did not want anyone claiming to have been baptized in his name. He specifically mentions baptizing Crispus, Gaius, and the household of Stephanas (1 Corinthians 1:14–16). Paul did baptize people. Furthermore, Acts 18:8 describes his ministry in Corinth:

“And many of the Corinthians hearing Paul believed and were baptized.” Paul’s statement in 1 Corinthians 1:17 distinguishes his primary commission to proclaim the gospel from personally performing every baptism.nPreaching was his central task. Others could administer baptism. This interpretation fits the context of a congregation struggling with personality-driven division. Paul’s words do not establish that baptism is unnecessary. In fact, his argument assumes that baptism into Christ was a recognized part of the Corinthians’ conversion. If the person performing the baptism had been spiritually decisive, their loyalty might have attached to that individual. Paul wanted their loyalty directed toward Christ. The passage teaches that the identity of the human administrator is unimportant compared with the Lord into whose name the person is baptized.

12. Does John 3:16 Prove That Faith Alone Saves?

John 3:16 is among the most familiar verses in Scripture. “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.”

The verse clearly teaches that salvation is available through faith in Jesus Christ.

But does it teach that baptism is unnecessary? That conclusion requires adding a limitation the verse does not express. John 3:16 does not say that repentance is unnecessary. It does not say confession is unnecessary. It does not say obedience is unnecessary. The verse emphasizes faith as the means by which people receive life in Christ. We must interpret that emphasis alongside the rest of Scripture. Earlier in the same conversation, Jesus told Nicodemus, “Unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” (John 3:5) The interpretation of “water and the Spirit” has been debated throughout Christian history.

Some understand it as a reference to Christian baptism and the regenerating work of the Spirit. Others connect the language with Ezekiel 36:25–27, where cleansing water and God’s Spirit appear together in the promise of a renewed people. Still others propose a contrast between physical birth and spiritual birth. The passage should not be presented as though every interpretive question has been settled. Nevertheless, the connection between water, the Spirit, and entrance into God’s kingdom deserves consideration in light of the New Testament’s later teaching on baptism.

John 3:16 must also be read alongside John 3:36, “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.” The Greek verb translated “does not obey” is apeitheō, which can convey disobedience or refusal to believe. Its use underscores the close relationship between faith and responsiveness to God’s revelation. Biblical faith is more than agreeing that Jesus exists. James 2:19 observes that even demons believe certain truths about God. James 2:17 says faith without works is dead. James is discussing the active character of genuine faith, especially as demonstrated in a life of obedience and love. He is not specifically writing a treatise on baptism. Nevertheless, his teaching challenges the idea that saving faith can be separated from obedience to God.

The proper question is whether baptism belongs to the response Jesus commands of those who believe. The examples in Acts repeatedly answer that question by showing believers being baptized.

13. What About Romans 10:9–10?

Paul writes, “Because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.” (Romans 10:9)

Verse 10 continues, “For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved.” Some argue that because Paul mentions belief and confession without mentioning baptism, baptism cannot be necessary. But we should examine the purpose of the passage.

Romans 10 addresses righteousness through faith and the accessibility of the gospel to Jews and Gentiles. Paul emphasizes that salvation is available to all who call upon the Lord. His purpose is not to provide a comprehensive chronological account of every element involved in conversion.

Consider that Romans 10:9 does not explicitly mention repentance. Yet Jesus commands repentance in Luke 13:3, and Paul commands it in Acts 17:30. Would we conclude that repentance is unnecessary simply because it is not mentioned in Romans 10:9?

Of course not. The omission of a command from one passage does not automatically cancel its presence in another. Furthermore, the same apostle who wrote Romans 10 also wrote Romans 6:3–4, where he connected baptism with being buried with Christ and walking in newness of life. We must interpret Paul’s statements consistently. Romans 10 teaches the necessity of faith in the risen Lord and the importance of confessing Him.

Romans 6 teaches the significance of baptism into Christ. Both passages belong to the same letter. The most coherent interpretation allows both to contribute to our understanding of salvation.

14. What About the Sinner’s Prayer?

Many people have been taught that salvation comes through repeating a prayer such as, 

“Lord Jesus, I know I’m a sinner. I believe You died for me. Come into my heart and save me.” There is nothing wrong with confessing sin, expressing faith in Christ, or asking God for mercy. Prayer is repeatedly encouraged throughout Scripture. The question is whether the New Testament teaches that an unbaptized sinner receives forgiveness simply by repeating a particular prayer.

There is no recorded conversion in Acts where the apostles instruct someone to repeat a sinner’s prayer as the means of receiving forgiveness. Instead, consider their responses. On Pentecost, Peter commanded repentance and baptism (Acts 2:38).

When the Ethiopian official believed, he was baptized (Acts 8:36–39). When Saul believed, Ananias commanded him to be baptized and wash away his sins (Acts 22:16). When the Philippian jailer asked what he must do to be saved, Paul and Silas told him to believe in the Lord Jesus, taught him the word of the Lord, and baptized him that same night (Acts 16:30–33). We should also distinguish between an unbeliever seeking salvation and a Christian who has sinned.

In Acts 8:22, Peter instructed Simon, who had already believed and been baptized (Acts 8:13), to repent and pray for forgiveness.

First John 1:9 likewise speaks of confession and forgiveness within the Christian life.

These passages provide strong biblical grounds for prayer and confession by Christians seeking forgiveness. They do not establish a sinner’s prayer as a replacement for the conversion response described in Acts. If we want to teach people how to respond to the gospel, the clearest examples are the conversions recorded by the inspired apostles.

15. What About Cornelius Receiving the Holy Spirit Before Baptism?

Acts 10 presents one of the strongest objections to the view that baptism is necessary for salvation. Cornelius was a Gentile centurion who feared God, prayed, and gave generously. An angel instructed him to send for Peter. According to Acts 11:14, Peter would declare a message by which Cornelius and his household would be saved.

While Peter was preaching, the Holy Spirit fell on those who heard the word (Acts 10:44).

The Jewish believers accompanying Peter were astonished because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on Gentiles.

Peter then asked, “Can anyone withhold water for baptizing these people, who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” (Acts 10:47) Verse 48 says, “And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.” The obvious objection is this, If Cornelius received the Holy Spirit before baptism, was he not already saved?

This is a serious question and should not be dismissed. We should begin by recognizing the purpose of the event. Acts 10 and 11 emphasize God’s acceptance of Gentiles into the people of God. The extraordinary outpouring of the Spirit demonstrated to Jewish believers that God was extending the gospel to Gentiles. Peter later explained, “As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them just as on us at the beginning.” (Acts 11:15)

He connected this event with the promise of baptism in the Holy Spirit and concluded that God had granted Gentiles repentance leading to life (Acts 11:16–18). The Spirit’s coming served as powerful divine confirmation that Gentiles were to be received. The question is whether this extraordinary manifestation necessarily proves that Cornelius had already received forgiveness before baptism.

That conclusion is possible within certain theological interpretations, but Acts does not explicitly state the precise moment at which Cornelius’s sins were forgiven. We should remember that miraculous activity and personal salvation are not always identical categories in Scripture. For example, Matthew 7:22–23 describes people claiming to have performed mighty works in Jesus’ name, yet Jesus declares that He never knew them. That passage does not directly settle Cornelius’s condition, but it cautions us against assuming that the presence of a miraculous manifestation automatically establishes every aspect of someone’s spiritual standing. Acts 10 does explicitly tell us that Peter commanded Cornelius and his household to be baptized. Peter did not regard the Spirit’s coming as a reason to omit baptism. He treated it as evidence that water baptism should be administered. This account presents an extraordinary order of events for a particular purpose in salvation history. It should be studied alongside the broader conversion pattern in Acts.

We must acknowledge that Christians disagree over what the Spirit’s reception establishes about Cornelius’s salvation. The text clearly establishes God’s acceptance of Gentiles and the continuing command to baptize them; it does not provide a separate, explicit statement identifying the precise instant of forgiveness.

16. Why Are People Sometimes Said to Be Saved by Faith Without Baptism Being Mentioned?

Throughout the New Testament, salvation is described in different ways. We are justified by faith (Romans 5:1). We are saved by grace (Ephesians 2:8). We are redeemed by Christ’s blood (Ephesians 1:7). We are saved through the gospel (1 Corinthians 15:1–2).

We are saved through the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit (Titus 3:5). We are saved by baptism (1 Peter 3:21). These statements describe different aspects of salvation. They do not necessarily compete with one another. Suppose a doctor tells a patient that a particular treatment saved his life. The patient might also say the physician saved him. Someone else might say the medicine saved him.

Those statements identify different aspects of the same event. In a much greater way, Scripture can identify God’s grace as the source of salvation, Christ’s blood as its sacrificial basis, faith as the means of receiving it, and baptism as part of the commanded response through which a believer enters Christ. Of course, this illustration cannot establish the doctrine by itself. Scripture must determine whether baptism actually occupies that role. But the illustration shows why multiple statements about salvation do not automatically contradict each other. We should resist the temptation to treat every passage as though it must contain every element of conversion.

The proper approach is to gather all the relevant passages and determine how they fit together.

17. What Does the Book of Acts Actually Show?

The book of Acts provides the clearest narrative record of how people responded when the gospel was first preached.

The following table summarizes major conversion accounts. Several observations emerge. Baptism repeatedly occurs in direct connection with conversion.

The people in these accounts do not wait months or years before being baptized.

The Ethiopian official was baptized during his journey. The Philippian jailer was baptized during the night, after hearing the gospel.

The Corinthians were baptized as they responded to Paul’s preaching. If baptism were merely a public ceremony intended to demonstrate salvation before an assembled congregation, why did the jailer need to be baptized in the middle of the night?

Why did the Ethiopian official request baptism immediately upon encountering water? These accounts do not prove that public testimony is never associated with baptism. Baptism often occurs in the presence of others. But they demonstrate that the New Testament does not require a scheduled church service, a large audience, or a lengthy waiting period. The emphasis falls on responding to the gospel.

18. Does the Ethiopian Official’s Conversion Prove Baptism Was Part of Preaching Jesus?

Acts 8 records Philip’s encounter with an Ethiopian official who was reading Isaiah 53.

The man asked whom the prophet was describing. Luke writes, “Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning with this Scripture he told him the good news about Jesus.” (Acts 8:35) Immediately afterward, as they traveled, they came to water. The official said, “See, here is water! What prevents me from being baptized?” (Acts 8:36) This raises an interesting question. If Philip had been preaching Jesus, why did the Ethiopian official suddenly ask about baptism?

Luke does not provide a transcript of Philip’s sermon. We cannot quote Philip as having said specific words about baptism that Luke did not record. However, the narrative strongly suggests that baptism was included in Philip’s explanation of the gospel or was otherwise understood by the official as the appropriate response. The official’s immediate request is difficult to explain if baptism had no connection to the message he had just heard. Philip baptized him, and the official went on his way rejoicing (Acts 8:38–39). The joy follows his response to the gospel. This account reinforces the connection between hearing Christ proclaimed, believing His message, and submitting to baptism. A textual note is also appropriate. Acts 8:37, which contains an explicit confession of faith in some Bible translations, is absent from many early manuscripts and is generally regarded as a later addition to the text. The surrounding narrative, however, remains clear without it.

19. What About the Philippian Jailer Being Told Simply to Believe?

In Acts 16:30, the Philippian jailer asked Paul and Silas, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”

They answered, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.” (Acts 16:31) Some stop reading there and conclude that belief alone, without baptism, is all that was required.

But Luke continues, “And they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house.” (Acts 16:32) The jailer needed to hear the gospel so that he could believe.

Then Luke writes, “And he was baptized at once, he and all his family.” (Acts 16:33)

This happened during the same night.

Verse 34 says the jailer rejoiced because he had believed in God, along with his entire household. Notice how Luke summarizes the conversion. He says the jailer believed.

Yet the fuller narrative shows that the jailer’s response included hearing the word and being baptized. This is an important example of how the New Testament can use “believe” to summarize a conversion that also includes baptism.The same principle helps explain why some passages emphasize faith without separately mentioning every aspect of the response.

20. Is Baptism Merely an Outward Sign of an Inward Change?

This is probably the most widespread explanation of baptism in contemporary evangelical Christianity. The argument is that a person is saved internally by faith, and baptism subsequently displays that salvation outwardly. There is truth in recognizing baptism’s visible, symbolic character.

Romans 6 associates baptism with Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection.

Baptism visibly expresses identification with Christ. It can also function as a public declaration of allegiance to Him.

The question is whether Scripture limits baptism to those functions.

Acts 2:38 connects baptism with forgiveness.

Acts 22:16 connects it with washing away sins. Romans 6:3–4 connects it with being baptized into Christ’s death and walking in newness of life. Galatians 3:27 connects it with putting on Christ. Colossians 2:12 connects it with burial and resurrection through faith in God’s power. First Peter 3:21 connects it with salvation through Christ’s resurrection. The New Testament uses language that goes beyond public symbolism. Someone who believes baptism is exclusively symbolic must explain why the apostles repeatedly describe it in connection with forgiveness, union with Christ, spiritual cleansing, and salvation. A symbol can certainly be meaningful. But calling baptism a symbol does not settle whether God also uses it as part of His appointed means of bringing a believer into Christ. The issue is whether we should reduce baptism to symbolism when Scripture assigns it a broader spiritual significance.

21. Can Someone Be Baptized Without Being Saved? Yes. The New Testament gives us reason to recognize that merely undergoing a physical ceremony does not guarantee salvation. Consider Simon in Acts 8.

He believed Philip’s preaching and was baptized (Acts 8:13). Later, however, he attempted to purchase the ability to impart the Holy Spirit. Peter rebuked him severely, “For I see that you are in the gall of bitterness and in the bond of iniquity.” (Acts 8:23)

Peter instructed Simon to repent and pray for forgiveness. The account shows that baptism does not eliminate the need for continued faithfulness. It also raises questions about the sincerity and character of Simon’s faith.

First Peter 3:21 specifically distinguishes saving baptism from merely washing the body. Colossians 2:12 connects baptism with faith in God’s powerful working. A person who enters the water without faith, repentance, or genuine submission to Christ has not demonstrated the response described in these passages. This matters because baptism should never be treated as a mechanical ritual. God is not obligated to save someone merely because that person has undergone a physical action while rejecting the gospel. Baptism belongs to a response of faith and repentance. It cannot be separated from the heart’s submission to Christ.

22. What About Infant Baptism?

Infant baptism is practiced by several major Christian traditions. Those who defend it often appeal to God’s covenant promises, the inclusion of children in believing households, and the relationship between baptism and circumcision. Some understand baptism as a sign of covenant membership that should be administered to the children of believers.

Others emphasize baptism as a means of grace through which God acts even before a child can consciously profess faith.

These arguments deserve accurate representation. Nevertheless, when we examine the explicit conversion accounts in Acts, a recurring pattern appears. People hear the gospel, believe, repent, and are baptized. Acts 8:12 says, “But when they believed Philip as he preached good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.” The text explicitly connects baptism with personal belief. Acts 18:8 likewise records Corinthians hearing, believing, and being baptized.

The New Testament also records household baptisms, including Lydia’s household, the jailer’s household, and the household of Stephanas. These passages do not explicitly identify the ages of every household member.

Consequently, they cannot establish with certainty that infants were present.

Nor should we claim that every household baptism explicitly states that no infants were present. The strongest argument for believer’s baptism is the repeated connection between baptism and personal response to the gospel. The New Testament does not contain an unambiguous example of an infant being baptized. It also does not provide an explicit command instructing Christians to baptize infants. The burden of proof therefore rests on establishing infant baptism from broader covenant theology rather than from a direct New Testament command or an unmistakable example. From the perspective of the conversion accounts in Acts, baptism is administered to people who respond to the message of Christ.

23. Does Baptism Have to Be Performed by a Preacher or Elder?

The New Testament does not establish a requirement that only an ordained minister, preacher, or elder can administer baptism.

Philip baptized the Ethiopian official (Acts 8).

Ananias was sent to Saul, who was then baptized (Acts 9). Paul baptized some of the Corinthians, while others were apparently baptized through the work of his fellow laborers (1 Corinthians 1:14–17). The New Testament’s emphasis falls on Christ, the gospel, and the response of the person being baptized. There is no passage stating that baptism becomes invalid because the administrator lacks a particular ecclesiastical title. The authority for baptism comes from Jesus Christ. The person administering it acts in obedience to His command. This also explains why the physical location is not decisive. Baptism may occur wherever sufficient water is available for the action described in Scripture.

24. Must Someone Understand the Purpose of Baptism?

This question is especially important when considering people who were baptized as children or in religious traditions that taught baptism was merely symbolic. How much must a person understand for baptism to be valid? The New Testament does not provide a detailed examination that every candidate must pass. It does, however, establish that baptism belongs to a response of faith in Jesus Christ. Acts 8:12 connects belief and baptism. Colossians 2:12 connects baptism with faith in God’s powerful working. Romans 6 connects baptism with participation in Christ’s death and resurrection. Acts 2:38 connects it with repentance and forgiveness.

We should distinguish between incomplete understanding and a fundamentally different understanding of the action being performed.

No new Christian understands every implication of baptism. Even mature Christians continue learning about the richness of union with Christ. Therefore, it would be unreasonable to require perfect theological knowledge before baptism.

But there is a legitimate question when someone undergoes baptism while explicitly believing that it has no relationship to receiving forgiveness and that salvation was fully completed beforehand. Does that person’s misunderstanding invalidate the baptism? Christians who affirm baptism for the forgiveness of sins disagree on how to answer that question. Acts 19:1–5 is relevant because Paul encountered disciples who had received John’s baptism. After learning more about Jesus and the Holy Spirit, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

The fullest biblical teaching should be presented so that the person understands baptism’s connection with forgiveness, union with Christ, and new life.

25. What If Someone Believes but Dies Before Being Baptized?

This is one of the most emotionally difficult questions in the entire discussion. Suppose someone hears the gospel, believes in Christ, repents, and sincerely intends to be baptized.

Before baptism can occur, the person dies.

What happens to that individual? We must distinguish between what God has revealed as the ordinary response to the gospel and what God may do in circumstances Scripture does not explicitly address. The New Testament commands baptism. It connects baptism with forgiveness and salvation.

It records converts being baptized without unnecessary delay. Those teachings should guide our actions. However, Scripture does not provide a direct account of a post-Pentecost believer who sincerely intended to be baptized, died before the opportunity, and then had his eternal destiny revealed.

Consequently, we should be careful about making absolute claims concerning that hypothetical individual. Genesis 18:25 asks, 

“Shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is just?” God is perfectly just. He knows the heart, the circumstances, and the intentions of every person. We can trust His judgment without claiming authority to make exceptions to His commands. The uncertainty surrounding an extraordinary situation does not justify disregarding what Scripture clearly instructs us to do when baptism is available.

A person who sincerely wants to obey Christ should be encouraged to do so without delay.

The repeated urgency of baptism in Acts is worth following.

26. What About Someone Who Was Never Taught the Truth About Baptism?

Many sincere people have been taught that baptism has nothing to do with receiving forgiveness. They love Jesus, study the Bible, pray, serve others, and strive to live godly lives. How should we think about them? We should begin by recognizing that sincerity is meaningful, but sincerity alone does not determine whether a belief is correct.

Saul of Tarsus sincerely believed he was serving God when he persecuted Christians.

In Acts 23:1, he said that he had lived before God in good conscience. Yet he later acknowledged that he had acted ignorantly in unbelief (1 Timothy 1:13). His sincerity did not make his actions right. Likewise, Apollos was described as eloquent, competent in the Scriptures, fervent in spirit, and accurate in teaching about Jesus, though he knew only John’s baptism (Acts 18:24–25). Priscilla and Aquila explained the way of God to him more accurately (Acts 18:26). The appropriate response to incomplete understanding was further instruction. We should treat sincere believers with the same concern and patience. We can recognize their devotion while carefully examining whether their understanding agrees with Scripture.

We should avoid assuming that everyone who disagrees is dishonest or deliberately rebellious. At the same time, sincerity should never become a reason to ignore a biblical command. Our goal should be to teach the whole counsel of God and encourage every person to follow Christ as faithfully as possible.

27. Does Baptism Replace the Blood of Christ?

Absolutely not. This objection misunderstands the claim that baptism is connected to salvation. The New Testament consistently teaches that forgiveness comes through Christ’s sacrifice. Ephesians 1:7 says, “In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace.”

First Peter 1:18–19 explains that Christians were redeemed through the precious blood of Christ. Revelation 1:5 praises Jesus, who loves us and has freed us from our sins by His blood. Hebrews 9:14 teaches that Christ’s blood purifies the conscience. Nothing in Scripture suggests that ordinary water possesses the power to forgive sin independently of Jesus. The question concerns the relationship between His saving blood and the believer’s response.

Romans 6:3 says believers are baptized into Christ’s death. It was in His death that Christ shed His blood. Colossians 2:12 connects baptism with faith in God’s power. First Peter 3:21 connects baptism’s saving significance with Christ’s resurrection. These passages consistently direct attention to Jesus. A person who believes baptism earns salvation through human effort has misunderstood grace. A person who believes water itself possesses independent saving power has misunderstood Christ’s sacrifice. The biblical case for baptism’s necessity rests on God’s promise to act through the response He has commanded. Christ provides the salvation. The believer submits to Christ. The saving power belongs entirely to God.

28. Is Baptism Part of the Gospel?

First Corinthians 15:1–4 identifies the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ as the central historical events of the gospel.

Paul emphasizes that Christ died for our sins, was buried, and was raised on the third day.

Those events are the foundation of Christian salvation. Baptism does not add another saving sacrifice to the gospel. Instead, Romans 6 describes baptism in relation to those very events. The believer is buried with Christ and raised to walk in newness of life.

Acts 8:35–36 also demonstrates that preaching Jesus led directly to a request for baptism. Acts 16 shows that preaching the word of the Lord led to immediate baptism.

The Great Commission places baptism within the task of making disciples. We should therefore distinguish between the saving events that constitute the heart of the gospel and the response Christ commands when that gospel is preached. Christ’s death and resurrection accomplish salvation. Faithful gospel preaching calls people to respond to Him. The New Testament repeatedly includes baptism in that response.

29. Does the Bible Teach Faith Alone?

This question requires precision because Christians use the expression “faith alone” in different ways. Many Protestant theologians use it to mean that sinners are justified by faith apart from meritorious works, with genuine faith necessarily producing obedience. Others use the phrase to mean that a person receives salvation at the instant of belief, before baptism, and that baptism has no role in receiving forgiveness. Those claims are not identical. Scripture clearly teaches that sinners cannot earn justification through their own works. Romans 3:28 says, “For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law.” Paul’s argument excludes reliance upon law-keeping as the basis of justification. But we must also consider James 2:24, “You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.”

James is addressing a faith that claims to exist while producing no corresponding action. His examples include Abraham and Rahab, whose faith was demonstrated through obedience. Paul and James address different errors. Paul opposes reliance on works as the basis for justification. James opposes a lifeless profession of faith that produces no obedience. Neither passage should be isolated from the rest of Scripture.

Hebrews 11 repeatedly describes faith expressing itself through action. Noah prepared an ark by faith. Abraham obeyed when called to leave his home. The Israelites crossed the Red Sea by faith. Faith trusts God enough to respond to His word. That principle is directly relevant to baptism.

When someone believes in Christ and submits to baptism because Christ commanded it, that person is expressing trust in God’s promise. Colossians 2:12 explicitly connects baptism with faith in God’s powerful working. The biblical question is therefore whether baptism is among the actions Christ has instructed believers to undertake in coming to Him. The teaching of Acts, Romans, Galatians, Colossians, and First Peter provides substantial evidence that it is.

30. What Does It Mean to Be Baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ?

Acts 2:38 commands baptism in the name of Jesus Christ. Acts 8:16 speaks of baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus. Acts 10:48 likewise describes baptism in Jesus’ name.

Matthew 28:19 commands baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Do these passages contradict one another?

No. The phrase “in the name of” frequently expresses authority, identification, or allegiance. To be baptized in the name of Jesus is to submit to His authority and identify with Him as Lord. Matthew 28:19 gives the Trinitarian language of Jesus’ commission. Acts emphasizes that baptism is performed under the authority of the risen Christ. The New Testament does not provide a detailed transcript of the exact words spoken during every baptism. Therefore, we should be cautious about claiming that baptism is invalid merely because the administrator used one biblical expression rather than another. The essential concern is whether the baptism is performed in submission to Christ and in accordance with His command. The words spoken by the administrator are not presented as a magical formula that independently produces salvation.

31. Does Baptism Automatically Guarantee Eternal Salvation?

No. The New Testament repeatedly warns Christians against abandoning their faith.

Jesus said, “The one who endures to the end will be saved.” (Matthew 24:13) Paul warned believers in Romans 11:20–22 to continue in God’s kindness. Galatians 5:4 speaks of people who have fallen away from grace through seeking justification by law.

Hebrews 3:12 warns against an evil, unbelieving heart that leads someone to fall away from the living God. 2 Peter 2:20–22 describes the danger of returning to corruption after escaping the defilements of the world. Christians interpret some of these warning passages differently regarding the possibility of losing salvation. Nevertheless, they agree that Scripture calls believers to persevering faithfulness. Baptism is the beginning of a life of discipleship. Matthew 28:20 commands the apostles to teach baptized disciples to observe everything Jesus commanded. Romans 6 emphasizes that those baptized into Christ must no longer live as slaves to sin. A person who has been baptized should continue growing in faith, holiness, love, repentance, and obedience. Baptism is never presented as permission to live in deliberate rebellion against God.

32. Can Baptism Be Repeated?

The New Testament does not present Christian baptism as a ritual that must be repeated whenever a believer sins.

Ephesians 4:5 speaks of “one Lord, one faith, one baptism.” Acts 8:22 instructs Simon, who had already been baptized, to repent and pray for forgiveness. 1 John 1:7–9 emphasizes continuing fellowship with God through walking in the light and confessing sins. The normal New Testament pattern is one baptism into Christ followed by a life of repentance and faithfulness. Acts 19:1–5 provides an important exception involving people who had received John’s baptism.

After Paul explained the fuller revelation of Jesus Christ, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. That account demonstrates that not every religious washing is equivalent to Christian baptism.

Someone who has only undergone an infant ceremony, a non-Christian ritual, or John’s preparatory baptism faces a different question from a Christian who has already been baptized into Christ and subsequently sins. Whether a person baptized under an incomplete theological understanding should be baptized again requires careful examination of the original baptism, the person’s faith, and the biblical purpose of baptism. The goal should be obedience to Scripture, free from both careless assumptions and unnecessary fear.

33. Does the Order of Salvation Matter?

The New Testament gives several commands and descriptions connected to salvation.

We should avoid turning them into a rigid mechanical formula in which every conversion must be described using exactly the same words. Nevertheless, the broad pattern is clear. People hear the gospel (Romans 10:17). They believe in Jesus Christ (John 3:16; Acts 16:31). They are called to repent (Acts 2:38; 17:30). They confess Christ (Romans 10:9–10). They are baptized into Christ (Romans 6:3–4; Galatians 3:27).

They continue in faithful discipleship (Matthew 28:20; Colossians 1:23).

These responses should be understood as belonging together. The New Testament does not teach that someone can earn salvation by completing a checklist. Nor does it encourage us to separate faith from the obedience Christ commands. The central question is what God promises to those who respond to His gospel. When Peter was asked what to do, he commanded repentance and baptism for forgiveness (Acts 2:38). When Saul was instructed, he was told to be baptized and wash away his sins (Acts 22:16). When Paul explained baptism, he described burial and resurrection with Christ through faith in God’s power (Colossians 2:12). When Peter explained baptism, he said it saves through the resurrection of Jesus Christ (1 Peter 3:21). These statements form a consistent pattern.

34. Why Does This Subject Matter So Much?

It matters because Jesus commands baptism. It matters because the apostles included baptism in their preaching.

It matters because the New Testament repeatedly connects baptism with forgiveness, union with Christ, and new life.

It matters because we should never encourage people to disregard something God has commanded. But there is another reason this subject matters. How we approach baptism reveals something about how we approach Scripture itself. Are we willing to reconsider a belief when a passage challenges us? Will we read the surrounding context? Will we examine every relevant passage, including those that complicate our position? Will we distinguish what Scripture explicitly teaches from what we have inferred? And will we extend patience to people who are sincerely trying to understand God’s word? 2 Timothy 2:24–25 says that the Lord’s servant must be kind, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, and correcting opponents with gentleness. A biblical conviction should produce both courage and humility. We should be confident enough to teach what Scripture says and humble enough to admit when a passage raises questions we cannot completely resolve.

This is especially important when discussing baptism with people who have spent their entire lives in religious traditions that understand it differently. Our responsibility is to reason from Scripture with patience and love. The goal is to help people follow Jesus.

35. Bringing the Evidence Together

When all the passages are considered, several conclusions emerge. The New Testament teaches unequivocally that salvation is made possible by the grace of God through the saving work of Jesus Christ.

His death and resurrection are the foundation of redemption. Faith is indispensable. Repentance is commanded. Confession of Christ is significant. And baptism is repeatedly presented as part of the response to the gospel. Peter commands baptism for the forgiveness of sins in Acts 2:38.

Ananias tells Saul to be baptized and wash away his sins in Acts 22:16. Paul describes baptism into Christ’s death in Romans 6:3–4.

He connects baptism with putting on Christ in Galatians 3:27. He describes baptism as burial and resurrection with Christ through faith in God’s power in Colossians 2:12.

Peter states that baptism now saves through the resurrection of Jesus Christ in 1 Peter 3:21. These are substantial biblical statements. They deserve more than an explanation that baptism is simply an optional symbol of a salvation already completed. At the same time, none of these passages teaches that water possesses independent saving power or that human obedience earns forgiveness. God saves.

Christ’s blood redeems. The Spirit renews.

Faith trusts God’s promises. Baptism is presented as an obedient response to the gospel, intimately connected with receiving the blessings accomplished by Christ. There are legitimate interpretive disagreements about particular passages, including John 3:5, Cornelius’s reception of the Spirit, and the precise relationship between faith, regeneration, and baptism. Those disagreements should be acknowledged rather than ignored. But the cumulative evidence of the New Testament strongly supports the conclusion that baptism is an integral part of the conversion response commanded by Jesus and preached by His apostles.

Why Would We Separate What Scripture Joins Together?

Imagine standing in Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost. You have just heard Peter declare that Jesus, whom your nation crucified, is both Lord and Christ. You recognize your guilt. Your heart is pierced. You ask the apostles what you must do. Peter answers, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” (Acts 2:38) Would you have understood baptism to be an unnecessary ceremony that could be postponed indefinitely? Would you have concluded that forgiveness had already occurred before you responded? Would you have told Peter that baptism was a work and therefore could have no connection to salvation? The people who heard his message did something remarkably simple. They received the word. They were baptized. About three thousand souls were added that day. Throughout Acts, we encounter people from different backgrounds. Jews and Gentiles. Religious people and pagans. Wealthy people and prisoners. Men and women. Individuals and households. They heard the same gospel of Jesus Christ. They responded in faith.

And baptism repeatedly accompanied their conversion. We should not make baptism more than Scripture makes it. We should not make it less than Scripture makes it. We should never place our confidence in the water, the person administering the baptism, or the goodness of the individual being baptized. Our confidence belongs in Jesus Christ, whose blood makes forgiveness possible and whose resurrection gives us the hope of eternal life. But trusting Jesus also means taking His words seriously.

He commanded baptism. His apostles preached it. The early Christians practiced it.

And the inspired writers repeatedly connected it with the saving work of God.

The most important question is not what our parents believed, what our favorite preacher teaches, or what religious tradition we inherited. The question is what Scripture says. If Jesus has told us what to do, why would we hesitate to obey Him? And if the apostles taught that baptism is connected with forgiveness, union with Christ, and newness of life, why would we teach people that it has no relationship to receiving those blessings? The invitation of the gospel is an invitation to trust Christ completely. To believe His promises. To turn away from sin.

To confess Him as Lord. To be baptized into His death. And to rise to walk in newness of life. “For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.” (Galatians 3:27) That is a promise worthy of our confidence, because it rests on the authority of Jesus Christ.

Stephen Mentioned A Planet Or Two In His Defense

Gary Pollard

For the next few weeks, I will present passages from the Old and New Testaments which, at least tangentially, have astronomical elements. Today’s comes from Acts 7.2-53, and those elements will be highlighted in footnotes. This passage is a great summary of the events from Abraham to Moses and beyond the unified kingdom period, and its astronomical elements are less important (but still interesting to me, anyway). 

This was Stephen’s reply: “Brothers and fathers, listen to me. Our glorious God appeared to our ancestor Abraham in Mesopotamia before he settled in Haran. God told him, ‘Leave your native land and your relatives, and come into the land that I will show you.’ So Abraham left the land of the Chaldeans1 and lived in Haran until his father died. Then God brought him here to the land where you now live. But God gave him no inheritance here, not even one square foot of land. God did promise, however, that eventually the whole land would belong to Abraham and his descendants—even though he had no children yet. God also told him that his descendants would live in a foreign land, where they would be oppressed as slaves for 400 years. ‘But I will punish the nation that enslaves them,’ God said, ‘and in the end they will come out and worship me here in this place.’ God also gave Abraham the covenant of circumcision at that time. So when Abraham became the father of Isaac, he circumcised him on the eighth day. And the practice was continued when Isaac became the father of Jacob, and when Jacob became the father of the twelve patriarchs of the Israelite nation.

These patriarchs were jealous of their brother Joseph, and they sold him to be a slave in Egypt. But God was with him and rescued him from all his troubles. And God gave him favor before Pharaoh, king of Egypt. God also gave Joseph unusual wisdom, so that Pharaoh appointed him governor over all of Egypt and put him in charge of the palace. But a famine came upon Egypt and Canaan. There was great misery, and our ancestors ran out of food. Jacob heard that there was still grain in Egypt, so he sent his sons—our ancestors—to buy some. The second time they went, Joseph revealed his identity to his brothers, and they were introduced to Pharaoh. Then Joseph sent for his father, Jacob, and all his relatives to come to Egypt, seventy-five persons in all. So Jacob went to Egypt. He died there, as did our ancestors. Their bodies were taken to Shechem and buried in the tomb Abraham had bought for a certain price from Hamor’s sons in Shechem. As the time drew near when God would fulfill his promise to Abraham, the number of our people in Egypt greatly increased. But then a new king came to the throne of Egypt who knew nothing about Joseph. This king exploited our people and oppressed them, forcing parents to abandon their newborn babies so they would die.

At that time Moses was born—a beautiful child in God’s eyes. His parents cared for him at home for three months. When they had to abandon him, Pharaoh’s daughter adopted him and raised him as her own son. Moses was taught all the wisdom of the Egyptians2, and he was powerful in both speech and action. One day when Moses was forty years old, he decided to visit his relatives, the people of Israel. He saw an Egyptian mistreating an Israelite. So Moses came to the man’s defense and avenged him, killing the Egyptian. Moses assumed his fellow Israelites would realize that God had sent him to rescue them, but they didn’t. The next day he visited them again and saw two men of Israel fighting. He tried to be a peacemaker. ‘Men,’ he said, ‘you are brothers. Why are you fighting each other?’ But the man in the wrong pushed Moses aside. ‘Who made you a ruler and judge over us?’ he asked. ‘Are you going to kill me as you killed that Egyptian yesterday?’ When Moses heard that, he fled the country and lived as a foreigner in the land of Midian. There his two sons were born.

Forty years later, in the desert near Mount Sinai, an angel appeared to Moses in the flame of a burning bush. When Moses saw it, he was amazed at the sight. As he went to take a closer look, the voice of the Lord called out to him, ‘I am the God of your ancestors—the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.’ Moses shook with terror and did not dare to look. Then the Lord said to him, ‘Take off your sandals, for you are standing on holy ground. I have certainly seen the oppression of my people in Egypt. I have heard their groans and have come down to rescue them. Now go, for I am sending you back to Egypt.’ So God sent back the same man his people had previously rejected when they demanded, ‘Who made you a ruler and judge over us?’ Through the angel who appeared to him in the burning bush, God sent Moses to be their ruler and savior. And by means of many wonders and miraculous signs, he led them out of Egypt, through the Red Sea, and through the wilderness for forty years. 

Moses himself told the people of Israel, ‘God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from among your own people.’ Moses was with our ancestors, the assembly of God’s people in the wilderness, when the angel spoke to him at Mount Sinai. And there Moses received life-giving words to pass on to us. But our ancestors refused to listen to Moses. They rejected him and wanted to return to Egypt. They told Aaron, ‘Make us some gods who can lead us, for we don’t know what has become of this Moses, who brought us out of Egypt.’ So they made an idol shaped like a calf, and they sacrificed to it and celebrated over this thing they had made. Then God turned away from them and abandoned them to serve the stars of heaven3 as their gods! In the book of the prophets it is written, ‘Was it to me you were bringing sacrifices and offerings during those forty years in the wilderness, Israel? No, you carried your pagan gods— the shrine of Molech, the star of your god Rephan, and the images you made to worship them.4 So I will send you into exile as far away as Babylon.’ 

Our ancestors carried the Tabernacle with them through the wilderness. It was constructed according to the plan God had shown to Moses. Years later, when Joshua led our ancestors in battle against the nations that God drove out of this land, the Tabernacle was taken with them into their new territory. And it stayed there until the time of King David. David found favor with God and asked for the privilege of building a permanent Temple for the God of Jacob. But it was Solomon who actually built it. However, the Most High doesn’t live in temples made by human hands. As the prophet says, ‘Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool. Could you build me a temple as good as that?’ asks the Lord. ‘Could you build me such a resting place? Didn’t my hands make both heaven and earth?’

“You stubborn people! You are heathen at heart and deaf to the truth. Must you forever resist the Holy Spirit? That’s what your ancestors did, and so do you! Name one prophet your ancestors didn’t persecute! They even killed the ones who predicted the coming of the Righteous One—the Messiah whom you betrayed and murdered. You deliberately disobeyed God’s law, even though you received it from the hands of angels.”

1 ”Chaldean” was often used as a term for Babylonian astronomers/astrologists. They had great respect in antiquity for their skill in observational astronomy.

2 The Egyptians were excellent astronomers in the early days, and their “gods” (neteru) were many names and alter egos of planets. Moses would’ve had access to the best records of his time and before. Just wish he told us who built the gigantic pyramids and why!

3 Here Stephen identifies the calf as a celestial deity, which suggests that it was Hathor/Venus.

4 Both of these false gods are representations of Saturn, the most prominent deity in its many forms in just about every ancient nation. In Hebrew, Raephan/Remphan was Khevan, the Assyrian Chiun and Syriac Kewan. This was Saturn, not Venus. Tacitus, who hated the Jewish people, repeated rumors that the Jews once worshipped Saturn (The Histories V:iv).

Equipped 2027

It is hard to believe that our fifth annual Equipped workshop is only about six months away. We will be hosting it again at the facilities of the Cumberland Trace church of Christ in beautiful Bowling Green, Kentucky. At the heart of each workshop, we study a book or books of the Bible in a deep, concentrated way (2023 was James, 2024 was John, 2025 was Isaiah, and 2025 was Genesis). In addition, a host of topics and themes coming out of those books have been presented on practical, relevant daily challenges and needs for elders and church leaders, preachers, youth, young adults, college students, ladies, teachers, song leaders, and those wanting to dig deeper.

April 22-25, 2027, will be no different. The theme of that Equipped will be

1-2 Timothy & Titus: A MANUAL FOR CHRISTIAN LIVING

As we have done every year, there will be a bookstore featuring speakers’ books and other materials, several vendors representing a variety of church-related organizations and opportunities, food trucks on site, Bluegrass Beans coffee, several class options throughout the days, and an abundance of fellowship. The workshop draws men, women, and children from over 20 states. Every year, it is growing in number. We give God the glory for this and want it to continue to grow. Please make your plans to come and attend this transformational event! We start Thursday night and end Sunday night.

You can find the entire 2027 lineup on the Cumberland Trace church of Christ website. This year, one of our deacons, Michael King, has developed an app for the workshop. As of now, it is only available for Apple phones. It will provide access to audio and video for every single session since 2023, real-time updates, schedule, map, speaker bios, and many fully searchable features.

Registration is now open. There is no cost to attend, no charge for reserving space (though subject to approval) (contact Derek Depp to reserve space, dldepp@yahoo.com), and so much to do in the general area (within three hours of us are Nashville, Tennessee, Mammoth Cave National Park, The Creation Museum, The Ark Encounter, Cincinatti, Ohio, and Indianapolis, Indiana). We’d love to have you be a part of next year’s Equipped!

To register, use this link: 2027 Equipped

Directors of the workshop are Hiram Kemp and Neal Pollard. Please feel free to ask questions or obtain more information: equipky@gmail.com.

We’re excited to have you join us!

Are We Rewriting Acts?

Neal Pollard

I would guess that the majority of those professing to be Christians would be greatly offended at the thought of rewriting the Bible in a way to change its meaning. Translation updates are always needed for those speaking living languages, as such languages are ever evolving. That is a different discipline from that practiced by the devil at the beginning, whose change to God’s Word nullified and contradicted what He said (Genesis 3:4). In fact, God condemns such changes as this (John 8:44; 2 Corinthians 11:3). Everywhere, God rebukes such changes (Deuteronomy 4:2; Proverbs 30:6; Revelation 22:18-19).

In light of all that, is it any better to change God’s Word in practice? Specifically, regarding assembling and fellowshipping together, are we trying to rewrite Acts? At least, as it concerns our individual part. Some seem to place a low value on coming together with other Christians week by week. The Pandemic policy adopted by many congregations, to accommodate a brief health crisis back in 2020, has created a subculture of often otherwise healthy people who continue to patronize grocery stores, restaurants, and other public places but not the assemblies. Others, those with newborns or small children, with ongoing extracurricular activities, homework and work deadlines, etc., find It easy and convenient to simply isolate themselves from their spiritual community.

Think of how different this is from Luke’s inspired record of the early church. Can you imagine him chronicling its sacred history this way?

  • “And all those who had believed were alone…” (2:44).
  • “…they were taking their meals alone with gladness and sincerity of heart” (2:46).
  • “When (Peter and John) had been released, they went home by themselves” (4:23).
  • “The place where they had not gathered together” (4:31).
  • “They were not all with one accord in Solomon’s portico” (5:12).
  • “And never a day, in the temple or from house to house, did they keep right on teaching and preaching Jesus as the Christ” (5:42).
  • How does Acts 6:1-7 go with every individual or home staying away? 

Especially in the Jerusalem church, we see a pattern of behavior that created evangelism opportunities, strengthened and matured believers, aided endurance, bolstered hope in God’s promises, gave a powerful sense of distinct identity, and formed the heart and soul of Christians’ focus, purpose, and priorities. They truly appreciated what God gave them through Christ (2:38-41). They took seriously the change this was supposed to bring into their lives (2:47). They desperately wanted others to have what they had found (8:4). Central to all of this was not only a new, vibrant relationship with God. Intrinsically attached to that was an innate desire to be with His people, in good times (2:47; 4:32) and bad times (4:23; 5:11-16). 

Perhaps there are exceptions, but for most of us desire to surround ourselves with God’s people is either growing or waning. Very rarely does it remain static. It is easy to lose sight of the valuable resource God has designed fellowship and assembling to be in not only building our own spiritual strength, but our doing the same for others (Hebrews 10:24-25). We live in a world that fosters a worldview with self at the center and others at the margins. We serve a Savior who fosters just the opposite view (Philippians 2:3-11). 

We probably would not stand for a Bible that totally changes what God preserved. Neither should we allow ourselves to rewrite it through lives that live in a way that opposes what it commands and exemplifies. May we have the humility and honesty to let Scripture be a mirror to help us align our practice with its precepts (James 1:23-24).

Do Not Quench The Spirit: Receiving God’s Word Without Contempt Or Credulity

Brent Pollard

A campfire seldom goes out merely due to neglect; often, someone covers it with dirt, leaving the woods in darkness.

Paul conveyed five concise commands to the church at Thessalonica: “Do not quench the Spirit. Do not despise prophecies. Test all things; hold fast what is good. Abstain from every form of evil” (1 Thessalonians 5.19–22). While no Christian can overpower the Holy Spirit, we can choose to ignore His guidance, and such refusal stifles His work within us just as dirt can smother a flame.

What “Do Not Quench the Spirit” Means in 1 Thessalonians 5

In the first-century church, the Spirit spoke through prophets. When a Thessalonian delivered a message from the Spirit, the church had to decide: listen or dismiss. Contempt stifled the divine fire that God had ignited.

Israel had walked this road before. God warned His people “by Your Spirit in Your prophets,” yet they refused to listen (Nehemiah 9.30). Stephen told the Sanhedrin, “You always resist the Holy Spirit; as your fathers did, so do you” (Acts 7.51). Resisting the Spirit has always meant closing our ears to His spoken word.

Testing Prophecy: Biblical Discernment That Receives and Examines

Paul will ensure the church stays balanced and doesn’t veer into extremes. “Test all things” encourages discernment. No Thessalonian was required to follow every self-proclaimed prophet, and John also urges us to examine spirits carefully, as many false prophets are active in the world (1 John 4.1).

Paul warns against two mistakes: dismissing all spiritual claims without consideration, and accepting them uncritically. Both the cynic and the gullible avoid the effort of evaluation. The Bereans, however, eagerly received Paul’s message and daily examined the Scriptures to confirm its accuracy (Acts 17.11). Genuine discernment involves being open yet cautious.

Why Miraculous Gifts Ceased With the Apostles

God established His church on the foundation of apostles and prophets (Ephesians 2.20), and a builder sets a foundation only once. Signs and wonders confirmed both the messenger and the message (Hebrews 2.3–4).

Acts 8 illustrates the spread of spiritual gifts. Philip preached Christ in Samaria and performed miracles; the Samaritans believed and were baptized. However, the miraculous gifts only came after Peter and John laid hands on the new believers—a detail Simon the sorcerer observed and attempted to buy (Acts 8.18–19). Although Philip performed wonders, the account does not indicate that he passed on these gifts.

No single verse states that apostles alone transmitted these gifts; the overall pattern in the New Testament indicates this. The gifts extended from apostles to recipients, not through endless generations. Once the apostles died, the usual means of imparting gifts ceased, and those gifts diminished as their recipients left the earth. Events like Pentecost and Cornelius’s household (Acts 2.1–4; 10.44–46) marked key milestones in the gospel’s spread, not a process that could be repeated. Additionally, the apostolic office was not passed down to successors; it required an eyewitness of the risen Lord (Acts 1.21–22).

God has not diminished in power. Having a gift is separate from God’s sovereign freedom to act.

How Christians Honor the Holy Spirit Through Scripture Today

God delivered His revelation through temporary means, yet it retains its complete authority. The Spirit continues to speak through the Scriptures He inspired, preparing us for every good work (2 Timothy 3.16–17). He still wields His sword—the Word of God (Ephesians 6.17). We quench His Spirit today whenever we open the Bible but close our hearts—especially when a passage confronts our pride and we dismiss it.

This command also protects us from spiritual tyranny. A pulpit doesn’t automatically mean a sermon is inspired, and a preacher’s authority depends on faithfully conveying Scripture. Disagreeing with a teacher’s mistake isn’t the same as rejecting the Holy Spirit. Questioning an interpretation isn’t rebellion against God. Feelings and impressions don’t equal revelation. No elder, author, or tradition is beyond scrutiny — even the tradition we cherish most.

Hold Fast What Is Good: A Call to Faithful Christian Living

God does not give us His Word to burden us; instead, He presents it as a feast, sweeter than honey (Psalm 119.103). The believer who finds the most joy in God will listen to Him more attentively and obey Him with greater joy.

Fuel your spiritual growth by engaging with the Scriptures daily with humility and careful study, like a child and a Berean. Evaluate Sunday’s sermon by comparing it to the actual text. When a passage deeply impacts you, respond by putting it into practice—don’t just listen, do what it says (James 1.22). Hold tightly to every truth God reveals and turn away from all evil.

The fire ignited in the first century continues to burn within the pages He kept. Do not extinguish it. Worship it, and bring its illumination into a cold world.

The Sermon Jesus Never Finished

Carl Pollard

Have you ever wondered what it would’ve been like to hear Jesus preach? Imagine sitting in a synagogue, listening to the Son of God open the Scriptures and explain their meaning.

In Luke 4, we get a glimpse of that very thing. Jesus returned to Nazareth, the town where He grew up. On the Sabbath, He entered the synagogue, stood up to read, and was handed the scroll of Isaiah.

He found the passage we know as Isaiah 61 and began reading about the One who would bring good news to the poor, proclaim liberty to captives, give sight to the blind, and set the oppressed free.

Then, Jesus rolled up the scroll, handed it back to the attendant, and sat down. Luke tells us that every eye in the synagogue was fixed on Him.

Can you imagine the silence in that room?

Then Jesus said, “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing” (Luke 4:21).

For centuries, Israel had waited for the promised Messiah. Generations had read those words, prayed for their fulfillment, and longed for the day when God would send His Anointed One.

And now, sitting in their synagogue, was the fulfillment of everything Isaiah had written.

Initially, the people marveled at His gracious words. But their amazement quickly turned into questions. They knew His family, and they knew where He’d grown up. They couldn’t understand how someone so familiar could make such an extraordinary claim.

Jesus continued by reminding them of two Old Testament accounts. During a terrible famine, God sent Elijah to a widow in Sidon. During Elisha’s ministry, Naaman the Syrian was cleansed of leprosy.

Both examples showed that God’s mercy had reached people outside Israel, and His blessings weren’t limited by the expectations of those listening.

In that moment, everything changed. Luke 4:28 says, “When they heard these things, all in the synagogue were filled with wrath.”

The congregation became so furious that they drove Jesus out of town and attempted to throw Him off a cliff. The people who had gathered to hear God’s Word became angry when God’s Word challenged them.

That’s a very real possibility for us, too! We can spend years attending worship, studying Scripture, and listening to sermons. We can become familiar with the language of faith and still struggle when the Bible exposes something in our own hearts.

The people of Nazareth had an incredible opportunity. Jesus was standing right in front of them, opening the Scriptures and revealing God’s purpose. Yet their familiarity with Him and their unwillingness to accept His message kept them from receiving what He offered.

Jesus eventually passed through their midst and went away. Luke never records the rest of what Jesus might’ve taught that day. The sermon was interrupted by the anger of the people listening.

So that forces us to ask, when Scripture challenges something we’ve always believed, something we’ve always practiced, or something we don’t want to change, how do we respond?

The people of Nazareth remind us how dangerous it is to become so comfortable with our understanding of God that we stop allowing His Word to correct us.

May we always have hearts willing to listen, even when what God says is difficult to hear.

Acts 19

Gary Pollard

Afterward Paul felt compelled by the Spirit to go over to Macedonia and Achaia before going to Jerusalem. “And after that,” he said, “I must go on to Rome!” He sent his two assistants, Timothy and Erastus, ahead to Macedonia while he stayed awhile longer in the province of Asia. About that time, serious trouble developed in Ephesus concerning the Way. It began with Demetrius, a silversmith who had a large business manufacturing silver shrines of the Greek goddess Artemis. He kept many craftsmen busy. He called them together, along with others employed in similar trades, and addressed them as follows: “Gentlemen, you know that our wealth comes from this business. But as you have seen and heard, this man Paul has persuaded many people that handmade gods aren’t really gods at all. And he’s done this not only here in Ephesus but throughout the entire province! Of course, I’m not just talking about the loss of public respect for our business. I’m also concerned that the temple of the great goddess Artemis will lose its influence and that Artemis—this magnificent goddess worshiped throughout the province of Asia and all around the world—will be robbed of her great prestige!”1

At this their anger boiled, and they began shouting, “Great is Artemis of the Ephesians!” Soon the whole city was filled with confusion. Everyone rushed to the amphitheater, dragging along Gaius and Aristarchus, who were Paul’s traveling companions from Macedonia. Paul wanted to go in, too, but the believers wouldn’t let him. Some of the officials of the province, friends of Paul, also sent a message to him, begging him not to risk his life by entering the amphitheater. Inside, the people were all shouting, some one thing and some another. Everything was in confusion. In fact, most of them didn’t even know why they were there. The Jews in the crowd pushed Alexander forward and told him to explain the situation. He motioned for silence and tried to speak. But when the crowd realized he was a Jew, they started shouting again and kept it up for about two hours: “Great is Artemis of the Ephesians! Great is Artemis of the Ephesians!”

At last the mayor was able to quiet them down enough to speak. “Citizens of Ephesus,” he said. “Everyone knows that Ephesus is the official guardian of the temple of the great Artemis, whose image fell down to us from heaven.2 Since this is an undeniable fact, you should stay calm and not do anything rash. You have brought these men here, but they have stolen nothing from the temple and have not spoken against our goddess. If Demetrius and the craftsmen have a case against them, the courts are in session and the officials can hear the case at once. Let them make formal charges. And if there are complaints about other matters, they can be settled in a legal assembly. I am afraid we are in danger of being charged with rioting by the Roman government, since there is no cause for all this commotion. And if Rome demands an explanation, we won’t know what to say.” Then he dismissed them, and they dispersed.

1 The planet Venus was worshiped as Artemis, and many, many other names all over the world. Demetrius clearly had financial motives, but he knew the people were sincere (sincerely wrong) in their belief in Artemis. The peoples’ anger was not over the threat to Demetrius’s business — they were likely afraid of the “consequences” of disrespecting or abandoning this universally deified planet. This was the same false goddess worshiped by the Israelites as the Queen of Heaven. When Aaron made the golden calf, they “celebrated with feasting and drinking, and indulged in pagan revelry” (Ex 32.6). The image he chose and the way they worshiped it strongly suggest it was Hathor. Herodotus, Plutarch, Strabo, and Diodorus Siculus all identified Hathor with Aphrodite/Venus. This is a very small sample of the long list of false deities associated with Venus. Whether they were worshipping personified representations of the planet or were using the beautiful morning star as an excuse to do naughty things is not crystal clear. The universal nature of this false deity’s worship makes the typical explanation (syncretism alone) seem inadequate. No one will argue that it wasn’t done at all (c.f. interpretatio graeca), but this does not explain why the same false deity was worshiped in the Americas or China or anywhere else too far from Greek and Roman culture to have been influenced by them or by each other.

2 Διοπετης, i.e. Jupiter/Zeus. The image of Artemis was a meteorite. These were often worshiped as images of the planetary false gods, a practice as ancient as writing itself. Moses strictly warned against this practice in Deut 4.19 and 17.3 and in Ex 20.4.  

The Ziz

Dale Pollard

Psalm 50.11

“I know every bird of the mountains, and the Ziz of the field is Mine.”

If a simpleton took a gander at Psalm 50:11 he would likely assume that the verse spoke of a mere bird or some generic beast. But over the centuries, Jewish interpreters transformed the mysterious Hebrew word ziz into one of the largest creatures of biblical lore. A colossal, winged monster that ruled the skies, much as Leviathan ruled the sea, and the Behemoth ruled the land.

When Ziz Became a Giant

The verse itself does not describe its size– that detail comes later.

During the centuries after the Old Testament, Jewish writers began pairing three enormous creatures together:

Leviathan — ruler of the sea

Behemoth — ruler of the land

Ziz — ruler of the air

This titanic trio appears in several ancient Jewish writings.

 One of the oldest surviving descriptions appears in the Babylonian Talmud, where the bird is portrayed as unimaginably large.

The rabbis write:

 “An egg of the ziz once fell and shattered three hundred cedar trees, and its contents flooded sixteen cities.” — Babylonian Talmud, Bekhorot 57b

Although clearly presented in a legendary style, the story emphasizes the bird’s extraordinary size. Another famous tradition says:

“It’s ankles rest upon the earth while its head reaches the heavens.”

— Midrash, Leviticus Rabbah 22:10

The point was clear; the Ziz was thought to dwarf every other bird.

Perhaps the best-known description comes from the Midrash, which says the bird’s wingspan was so immense that opening its wings could darken the sun.

The traditional version states:

“When the Ziz spreads its wings, it obscures the light of the sun.” — Midrash

Psalms on Psalm 50

This sort of publicity helped the Ziz become the flying counterpart to Leviathan.

An Extinct Giant Bird?

The Bible never identifies the Ziz with any known species. Because later Jewish tradition describes it as an enormous flying creature, it’s been compared with extinct giant birds such as Argentavis magnificens, Pelagornis sandersi, or even giant pterosaurs such as Quetzalcoatlus. These identifications remain speculative and are not found in ancient Jewish sources. Whether understood literally, symbolically, or as legendary embellishment, the Ziz remains one of the most fascinating creatures associated with the Bible—a mysterious being whose reputation grew from a single obscure Hebrew word into the greatest bird in Jewish imagination.

Note: The descriptions of the Ziz blotting out the sun, towering into the heavens, and laying obnoxiously large eggs come from later rabbinic and midrashic tradition—not from the biblical text itself. The Bible only briefly mentions the ziz without describing it as gigantic.

The Hebrew word ziz appears only a few times in the Old Testament (Psalm 50:11, 80:13). The word probably comes from a root meaning “to move,” “to swarm,” or “living thing.”

“Each Man Must Remain In That Condition In Which He Was Called”

Neal Pollard

Yesterday, as part of a Bible class on 1 Corinthians, it fell my lot to teach chapter seven. This tends to be a controversial chapter, one in which too many teachers, preachers, elders, and other church leaders have misled people and asserted a doctrine known as “The Pauline Privilege.” Among the arguments used to defend this position, people say:

  • “Not under bondage” (15). If an unbeliever departs, the believing mate who is abandoned is free to remarry.
  • “God has called us to peace” (15). Peace includes the idea that the abandoned is free to remarry (this is not seriously or widely taught as credible).
  • “Each man must remain in that condition in which he was called” (18-24).

We spent our time in class dealing with the main argument, the first argument concerning “not under bondage” (watch class here). This position cannot be right, as it has Paul contradicting himself (see 7:10-11) and, in doing so, contradicting Jesus (see Matthew 19:1-9). “Under bondage” means enslaved and is never used in the New Testament as the marriage bond. Paul uses a different word for the marriage bond (cf. Romans 7:2; 1 Corinthians 7:27,39). Paul is saying one is not enslaved to his or her unbelieving spouse, and the Christian should not choose the spouse over Christ. Paul had said not to leave the non-Christian mate (12-14), but if divorce occurred he had already given the two options available in verses 10-11: “remain unmarried…or be reconciled.”

One other matter that is often used in arguing a broader acceptance of divorce and remarriage than Jesus taught in Matthew 5 and 19. The argument is made that a person is allowed to stay in whatever condition they are in when they obey the gospel. So, if one has been married and divorce multiple times when they become a Christian, Paul is saying it is acceptable to stay in that situation. He compares it to circumcision and slavery, so the argument goes.

The central problem with this is that it also makes Paul contradict himself and Jesus in the explicit teaching on marriage, divorce, and remarriage. Remember that after Jesus states His authoritative position, the apostles lament that if such was the case it would be better not to marry. No one would conclude this of this position.

It also misunderstands the point Paul is making. It is a summary of the position he set forth in verses 12-14. If you become a Christian and are married to a non-Christian, don’t dissolve the marriage. Under the Old Law, “mixed marriages” were forbidden (Exodus 34:16) and those that were formed had to be dissolved (Ezra 10, Nehemiah 9). These new Christians may have been influenced by such teaching and wondered if that applied to them. Whatever they may have thought, Paul makes clear that they should stay married.

Without a doubt, sorting through and untangling the real-life circumstances of people’s marriages is among the hardest challenges to face in being faithful to Jesus and His will. Our task is to show the compassion of Christ and lovingly minister to all who are confronted with challenges and struggles. While our hearts break for difficult situations, we are not at liberty to pick and choose which commands and teachings of His to teach and which to ignore or change.

Who’s Gonna Feed Them Hogs?

Brent Pollard

On a recent drive home, Tom T. Hall’s “Who’s Gonna Feed Them Hogs” played on the radio. The song’s story of a hog farmer whose life is unexpectedly imperiled strikes a chord with people of faith, who can identify at least three salient points from Scripture in its lyrics. The old man decides that because his pens are full of hogs needing tending, he cannot die, and he makes a remarkable recovery.

1. Feed the Hogs: Responsibility as Biblical Stewardship (Proverbs 27.23)

First, the song touches on responsibility. Someone has to feed all those hogs. The farmer’s concern is not inherently wrong. He has 400 hogs that require tending. As good stewards of what God has entrusted to us, we see that a righteous man cares for his animals (Proverbs 12.10a). Solomon advises: “Know well the condition of your flocks, and pay attention to your herds” (Proverbs 27.23). Biblical faith is not an excuse for irresponsibility. We have families to provide for, work to perform, congregations to serve, and promises to keep. In this, Tom T. Hall’s farmer deserves commendation. He cares about what has been entrusted to him.

2. Tomorrow’s Plans Are Written in Pencil (James 4.13-17)

However, the farmer’s awareness of his mortality should also have led him to reflect on the truth James points out in the fourth chapter of his epistle (vv. 13-17). Whereas the farmer had expected a routine day of chores, he is unexpectedly hospitalized and facing death. The merchants in James 4 say, “Today or tomorrow we will go to such and such a city, and spend a year there and engage in business and make a profit” (13). James replies: “…you do not know what your life will be like tomorrow” (14). The Parable of the Rich Fool (Luke 12.16-21) dovetails nicely with this thought.

Full Barns and Full Pens: The Parable of the Rich Fool (Luke 12.16-21)

The rich fool had barns full of crops. In fact, he had to build more barns to house his surplus. The hog farmer of Hall’s song had pens full of 400 hogs. Death says to both of them, in effect: “What happens to all of this if tonight is your last night?” However, a key difference remains. The rich fool trusted his possessions. As such, he showed where he invested his heart (Luke 12.34). Jesus warns that only hearts invested in heaven have eternal security (Matthew 6.19-21). In contrast, the hog farmer was worried about responsibilities. Yet both confront the same fact: Tomorrow’s plans are always written in pencil.

3. The Delusion of Being Indispensable (Matthew 6.25-34; Psalm 127.1-2)

Ultimately, we arrive at our strongest application for this illustration. The farmer’s anxiety arose from his delusion that he was indispensable. He asks: “If I’m not there, who’s gonna feed them hogs?” Metaphorically speaking, we all have our hogs. Who will take care of my family? Who will teach my class? Who’s going to do this job? Who will carry out this church program? Who will solve this problem if I don’t? This brings us to Matthew 6.25-34 and Psalm 127.1-2. Don’t give in to anxiety and let God build the house.

When Stewardship Mutates Into Anxiety

I am confident in making this point, having already stressed responsibility. We should work diligently. But stewardship can mutate into anxiety, and we can begin to behave as though everything depends on us. “God has given me something to do” becomes “Nothing can function without me.” The first is stewardship, and the second is a burden God never gave. That gives us a memorable progression and our three points.

  • Feed the hogs.
  • Don’t presume you will be here to feed them tomorrow.
  • Trust God when it’s time for someone else to feed them.

What Falls Under These Three Points

Other issues lurk around the periphery—worry, priorities, life’s brevity, wealth, legacy, even preparing others to assume our responsibilities (see 2 Timothy 2.2). However, these all fall beneath the umbrella of the three areas we have already discussed, not creating new categories.

The Hogs Will Get Fed Without Us

The song’s humor makes the third point especially effective. The old hog farmer essentially tells death, “You’ll have to come back for me later because I have 400 hogs depending on me.” And sooner or later, everyone must learn that the hogs will get fed without us. That, too, is God’s providence. It’s not an argument that our lives don’t matter, far from it. It is the argument that God remains God even when our shift is finally over.

Naming Your Own Hogs

So, what are your hogs? Name them honestly, then tend to them faithfully. Work like the task matters, since it does. Yet hold it loosely enough to lay it down when the time comes, trusting that the God who entrusted you with the work will not abandon it when you are gone. God requires faithfulness in our shift, not permanence in it.

Remember God 

Carl Pollard

My wife and I were talking the other night about the ladies’ class she just started teaching at church. During our conversation, we ended up walking through Deuteronomy 6–8, and I was amazed by just how practical and relevant these chapters still are for us today. There’s a lot here that hits close to home. So, here’s what stood out to me.

Israel was standing on the edge of a new life. The generation that left Egypt had largely died in the wilderness, and their children were preparing to enter the land God had promised them. Moses knew he wouldnt cross the Jordan with them, so he used his final days to prepare them for what was ahead.

One of his greatest concerns was forgetfulness.

Israel knew how to depend on God in the wilderness. They had been hungry, thirsty, surrounded by enemies, and completely dependent upon God’s provision. Now they were about to experience something very different. They were going to live in cities they didn’t build, drink from wells they didn’t dig, and eat from vineyards they didn’t plant.

Moses warned them, “Take care lest you forget the LORD” (Deuteronomy 6:12).

The answer to forgetfulness began in the heart. Moses told Israel, “You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might” (6:5). Their relationship with God was supposed to shape every part of life. His words were to be on their hearts, taught diligently to their children, and discussed throughout the ordinary routines of the day.

Their children needed to know why they lived this way. When they asked, Moses told the parents to tell them the story, “We were Pharaoh’s slaves in Egypt. And the LORD brought us out of Egypt with a mighty hand” (6:21).

They were to remember where they came from and who brought them out.

Chapter 7 reminds Israel that they belonged to God. They were His “treasured possession” (7:6). God had chosen them because of His love and His faithfulness. When they faced nations stronger than themselves, they were to remember what God had already done to Pharaoh and Egypt. Remembering yesterday’s faithfulness would give them courage for tomorrow.

Then chapter 8 takes the warning even further. Moses tells them to remember the wilderness. God had humbled them, tested them, fed them with manna, and sustained them for forty years. Even the hard years had served a purpose.

Soon their houses would be built, their stomachs would be full, and their possessions would multiply. That success carried its own spiritual danger. Moses warned that they might eventually say, “My power and the might of my hand have gotten me this wealth” (8:17).

His answer was simple, “You shall remember the LORD your God.”

That message still matters for Christian’s today! 

Remember who carried you through the hard years. Remember who provided when you had very little. Remember the prayers He answered and the doors He opened. Remember that even your ability to work, build, earn, and accomplish comes from Him.

And when your children ask why God matters so much to you, tell them the story! Tell them about the God who brought you here.

Psalm 77

Gary Pollard

I came across this passage today (Tuesday) and appreciated Asaph’s candor. This week will be

Psalm 77:

I cry out to God for help. I cry out to you, God; listen to me! My Lord, in my time of trouble I came to you. I reached out for you all night long. My soul refused to be comforted. I thought about you, God, and tried to tell you how I felt, but I could not. You would not let me sleep. I tried to say something, but I was too upset. I kept thinking about the past, about things that happened long ago. During the night, I thought about my songs. I talked to myself, trying to understand what is happening. I wondered, “Has our Lord rejected us forever? Will he ever accept us again? Is his love gone forever? Will he never again speak to us? Has God forgotten what mercy is? Has his compassion changed to anger?” Selah

Then I said to myself, “What bothers me most is the thought that God Most High has lost his power.” LORD, I remember what you have done. I remember the amazing things you did long ago. I think about those things. I think about them all the time.

God, all that you do is holy. No god is as great as you are. You are the God who does amazing things. You showed the nations your great power. By your power you saved your people, the descendants of Jacob and Joseph. Selah

God, the water saw you and became afraid. The deep water shook with fear. The thick clouds dropped their water. Thunder roared in the sky above. Your arrows of lightning flashed through the clouds. There were loud claps of thunder. Lightning lit up the world. The earth shook and trembled. You walked through the water and crossed the deep sea, but you left no footprints.

You led your people like sheep, using Moses and Aaron to guide them.

Adam And Eve’s Nine To Five

When botanists count trees in the Amazon today, they notice something strange. Useful, tasty trees—like the Brazil nut, acai palm, cacao (chocolate), and the ice-cream bean—are everywhere. In fact, they’re five times more common than they should be by natural standards.

Dale Pollard

For centuries, humans have been obsessed with finding the Garden of Eden. We’ve looked in the Middle East, mapped out ancient rivers, and generally envisioned it as a pristine, five-star resort planted by God where humans could lounge around eating grapes until someone ruined it. Adam and Eve weren’t designed for laziness, though. They were made to work and tend the garden (Gen. 2.15).

The pre-Columbian Amazon, the world’s most famous “wild” rainforest looks less like an untamed jungle and more like history’s largest, most successful grocery store.

20th-century scientists looked at the Amazon and basically said, “Wow, look at all that beautiful, untouched wilderness! Also, the soil is terrible, so there’s no way anyone could ever live here.”They assumed the natives of the past were just small; nomadic groups playing a permanent game of survival mode.

LiDAR (which uses lasers to look through the tree canopy) has revealed that the Amazon was actually packed with people. We’re talking about 8 to 10 million people living in sprawling “garden cities” connected by highways, canals, and bridges.

If you were to design a paradise, you’d probably want your favorite foods within  arm’s reach. That is exactly what the ancient Amazonians did.

When botanists count trees in the Amazon today, they notice something strange. Useful, tasty trees—like the Brazil nut, acai palm, cacao (chocolate), and the ice-cream bean—are everywhere. In fact, they’re five times more common than they should be by natural standards.

Those ancient folks had a shared philosophy. If a tree was useless or tasted like cardboard, they chopped it down. If it grew good nuts or fruit planted more of it and tended to them. The Amazon was basically a multi-tiered giant orchard.

Here’s the kicker. The rainforest soil is awful. Heavy rains wash away nutrients and leave behind acidic, yellow clay that kills most edible plants.

Somebody way back in the day figured out how to make a better version of dirt called Terra Preta (Amazonian Dark Earth). They mixed charcoal, ash, food scraps, and bones into the earth. This created a super-powered, pitch-black soil that doesn’t just hold nutrients—it regenerates itself over time. It’s so fertile that modern farmers still dig it up and use it today.

So, if this place was an engineered paradise of chocolate, nuts, and super-soil, why did it look so wild when European explorers arrived?

Somehow, an estimated 90% of the “gardens” caretakers died in a tragically short amount of time. Without millions of humans actively pruning, weeding, and managing the landscape, the jungle did what jungles do– it went wild. The garden became overgrown, swallowing the cities, canals, and highways. When explorers turned up hundreds of years later with machetes, they assumed nobody had ever been there before.

Adam and Eve had a job to do in the garden, and the Amazon is a neat case study for what that could have potentially looked like. God planted the garden, and they took care of it.

Saying Yes To Our Stewardship

Neal Pollard

There’s a word found less than 20 times in the New Testament that means “to entrust something to someone with the intention of preservation. This word can indicate putting something in front of someone…it can also be used of entrusting something to someone” (Lexham Theological Wordbook, np). While several of the occurrences have to do with setting food before someone to eat (Mark 8:6-7; Luke 9:16; Luke 10:8; Acts 16:34; 1 Corinthians 10:27), it has at least three other uses. They have to do with what we have been given to manage and care for. Ultimately, it’s correctly handling what comes from God or belongs to God. And it concerns way more than money!

Entrust. Jesus entrusted His spirit to God as He was dying (Luke 23:46). When elders were appointed, they were “commended to the Lord in whom they had believed” (Acts 14:23). Paul entrusted commands to Timothy to help him fight the good fight of faith (1 Timothy 1:18). Paul also wanted Timothy to entrust what Paul had taught him to faithful men who could teach others (2 Timothy 2:2). Saints who suffered could entrust their souls to a faithful Creator, no matter what happened to them (1 Peter 4:19). This is the idea of putting something into the hands of others to care for or protect it. We can put our souls in God’s care, but God puts the Word in our hands in order to help other people know that care and protection. Just as I can trust God to take care of me and to save me, God’s trusting me to faithfully share His message to all those people out there that He loves and cares about.

Demonstrate. When revealing about Paul’s work among the Jews in the synagogues of Thessalonica, Luke tells us that “for three Sabbaths [Paul] reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and giving evidence that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead” (Acts 17:2-3). Used in this context, the original word (παρατιθέμενος) means “to provide evidence for; stand as proof of; show by one’s behavior, attitude, or external attributes” (Brannan, 2020, np). What does it take to be able to give evidence for our beliefs? Time, work, and persistence. Paul drew his evidence from the Scriptures, suggesting the vital importance of always growing our base of sacred knowledge. In other words, we must become better Bible students. The better we know the Book, the better we can prove it. But noticing the definition, our life must also become a Bible for others to read. We can’t afford to nullify the truth of Scripture by a poorly-lived life. A synonym for παρατιθέμενος (paritathemenos), συνίστημι (synestemi), means to commend our lives for others to inspect or imitate (Romans 16:1; 2 Corinthians 3:1; 4:2; 6:4; 10:12; 12:11). Are we faithfully preparing ourselves to prove Christ, then faithfully presenting ourselves as evidence of what Christ looks like in His followers’ lives?

Propose. Twice, Matthew uses this word in the sense of bringing something forward for consideration. Both times, Jesus is setting forth parables (Matthew 13:24, 31). He is using these stories to help people understand what the Kingdom of heaven is like (the parable of the tares and the wheat and the parable of the mustard seed). Of course, Jesus is the source of truth (John 14:6). He originated it. But He gave it to us to share with others. He expects us to make His word lives in people’s lives. We do this by sharing His word with them, being thoughtful and prepared enough to make this practical and useful.

Paul told Corinth, “it is required of stewards that one be found trustworthy” (1 Corinthians 4:2b). Can we apply that principle to money? It’s certainly true that God gives us everything, and we should handle all resources responsibly. Yet, isn’t it interesting that none of the passages regarding stewardship in the New Testament is talking, contextually, about material things? Steward the gospel and steward your soul, then all of you will belong to God. Not only that, but you will give people much more than silver and gold! You will give them the opportunity to have everything God promises those who yield their lives to Him!

Pontius Pilate on the Couch, Part 3: “WhatI Have Written I Have Written

Brent Pollard

The Final Session: Closing Pilate’s File

We’ve reached our final session with Pontius Pilate. So far, our patient has proven to be an interesting case. In the previous two articles, we saw a man who questions the truth while repeatedly acknowledging it, holds significant political authority yet fears losing it, and knows Jesus is innocent while desperately trying to avoid the consequences of doing what he knows is right.

Seven Observations So Far

Seven observations now fill Pilate’s file. We have seen the skeptic, the political pragmatist, the man who resists pressure until it becomes personal, the increasingly fearful governor, the insecure authority figure, the morally conflicted judge, and, finally, the man strangely drawn to Jesus yet unable to find the courage to act on what he sees. Again and again, the same underlying weakness emerges: self-preservation ultimately matters more to Pilate than truth, justice, or conviction.

Three Traits That Complete the Profile

As Pilate settles onto the couch one last time, three traits complete our profile. We will see how he responds to personal risk when the crowd threatens his standing with Caesar, how he delivers profound irony without recognizing it, and how, after the chief priests force his hand, he expresses resentment through passive aggression. He may surrender, but he will not let them forget who holds the pen.

8. Pilate Is Highly Sensitive to Personal Risk

Eighth, Pilate is highly sensitive to personal risk. The crowd prevails not on the merits of its case, but by threatening Pilate’s relationship with Caesar. As noted, Pilate belonged to the Equestrian rank. Though likely from a wealthy family, he was below Rome’s Senatorial nobility and therefore had to begin in military service. His office as prefect, often compared to a governor, was more precisely a “military governor.” In many respects, he remained a soldier with authority. Lacking political backing in Rome, Pilate depended entirely on the emperor’s personal endorsement and a patron’s support.

Career and Security Over Justice: The Pull of Loss Aversion

Pilate could tolerate theological accusations, an angry crowd, an unusual prisoner, and uncertainty about Jesus’ supernatural origins. But he could not risk the controversy reaching Tiberius, which threatened his standing. Thus, his ultimate priorities may have been career and security over justice. Before condemning Pilate, however, we should recognize how universal his reasoning is: justice often seems abstract, while safety feels concrete. Humans appear wired for loss aversion.

Did Pilate Have Children? Protecting a Family Under Pressure

When I discussed this concept in my adult midweek Bible class, one brother made an excellent point: Pilate’s need to protect his family placed him between a rock and a hard place. Matthew says Pilate had a wife, but did he have children? For a middle-aged Roman equestrian of high political rank, children were socially expected to preserve the family’s inheritance and line. However, Roman historians rarely recorded the children of provincial equestrian officials unless they achieved notable military or senatorial success. Thus, we do not know whether Pilate had children, though saving his own neck may also have meant protecting his wife and children.

When Self-Preservation Becomes Disordered (1 Timothy 5.8)

Self-preservation does not necessarily indicate our fallen nature. The desire to live, protect one’s family, and steward one’s work is laudable. Paul writes that anyone who fails to provide for his household is worse than an infidel (1 Timothy 5.8). Solomon calls enjoying one’s labor God’s gift (Ecclesiastes 2.24; 3.12-13; 5.18). Thus, the fall did not create these desires; it distorted their order. The self remains necessary, but has become the center around which everything revolves. Consequently, when justice and safety conflict, safety prevails—not because of miscalculation, but because the self has risen to the top of the hierarchy.    

9. Pilate Speaks Irony Without Realizing It: “Behold, Your King!” (John 19.14)

Ninth, Pilate can be ironic without realizing it. Fearing accusations that he has allowed a man to claim kingship against Caesar, he nevertheless repeatedly calls Jesus the “King of the Jews,” eventually telling the mob: “Behold, your King!” (19.14). Though the title may mock the Jewish leaders, John’s narrative makes it profoundly ironic: Pilate speaks more truly than he understands. This reinforces his portrayal as a man standing before reality but interpreting it politically. He thinks he is manipulating the language of kingship; John presents him as unknowingly proclaiming it.

Pilate’s Central Contradiction: Knowledge Without Courage

Note Pilate’s central contradiction: he can distinguish right from wrong and repeatedly acknowledges what is right. His tragedy is not ignorance but a lack of moral courage to face the consequences. He is therefore a portrait of compromised conviction. His progression moves from skepticism to curiosity, to recognition of innocence, to uneasiness, to fear, to political pressure, and to capitulation.

The Crowd Changed Pilate’s Calculation, Not His Verdict

The crowd does not change Pilate’s view of Jesus. Nothing suggests he believes Jesus deserves death. Instead, the Jewish mob changes his calculation of the cost of doing what he knows is right. This may be the passage’s darkest psychological feature: Pilate condemns Jesus without believing him guilty. He embodies the danger of a functioning conscience subordinated to self-interest.

10. Bonus Trait: Pilate the Resentful and Passive-Aggressive

Tenth and last is our bonus characteristic. It is a bonus because I addressed this aspect of Pilate’s personality nearly a year ago in the article “What Is Truth? When We Know But Won’t Act.” Here, however, we will describe Pilate as psychologically resentful and passive-aggressive when his authority is successfully challenged.

Pilate can be pressured to surrender what he knows is right, but afterward seeks a smaller arena to prove he remains in charge. Hence, John 19.19-22.

Pilate also wrote an inscription and put it on the cross. It was written, “JESUS THE NAZARENE, THE KING OF THE JEWS.” Therefore many of the Jews read this inscription, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city; and it was written in Hebrew, Latin and in Greek. So the chief priests of the Jews were saying to Pilate, “Do not write, ‘The King of the Jews’; but that He said, ‘I am King of the Jews.’” Pilate answered, “What I have written I have written.”

Pilate’s Revenge in Writing: The Titulus on the Cross (John 19.19–22)

Pilate gets his revenge in writing. He caves, but not quietly. A Roman titulus had to state the crime. Rather than writing “Claimed to be King of the Jews” or “Treason against Caesar,” Pilate presents an unvarnished fact: “The King of the Jews.” This mocks the Jewish leadership more than Jesus. Forced to grant the execution, Pilate uses the sign to tell the passersby: this is your king, executed like a slave by Rome. Their victory becomes public humiliation. Written in Hebrew (Aramaic), Greek, and Latin, the insult was guaranteed to reach locals, Roman officials, and Passover visitors.

In doing so, Pilate forces those who pressured him to return and ask a favor: “Please change the wording.” This restores the power they had taken from him. Pilate responds with finality. His famous reply in verse 22 uses the Greek perfect tense—ho gegrapha, gegrapha: “What I have written stands.” No argument, discussion, or defense follows—only indirect hostility and refusal to engage. Afraid of Caesar, he cannot oppose the crucifixion, so he rejects this small symbolic request, ending the conversation. John uses Pilate’s character to make a theological point. The Jewish leaders want the sign to say Jesus claimed to be king, but Pilate unintentionally writes the truth: Jesus is the King of the Jews. His stubbornness makes that truth public throughout the city.

So Pilate is shown as a man too weak to do justice, but petty enough to get the last word.

Letting Pilate Off the Couch: A Warning, Not Just a Historical Figure

And with that, we can finally let Pontius Pilate off the couch. Our patient was skeptical, politically calculating, fearful, insecure about his authority, morally conflicted, fascinated by Jesus, sensitive to personal risk, unintentionally ironic, and resentful when challenged. Yet these traits reflect one central weakness: Pilate recognized what was true and right but repeatedly let self-preservation overrule conviction. That makes him more than an interesting historical figure; Pilate is a warning. We can stand near the Truth, speak with It, and defend It briefly, yet surrender It when obedience becomes costly. Pilate needed no more evidence—only courage.

Perhaps his time on our couch leaves us with this question: when knowing what is right comes at a price, will we merely recognize the truth—or have the courage to act?

Love Your Enemies

Carl Pollard

When we hear the word “enemy,” we tend to think of somebody extreme, like a terrorist, a criminal, or someone actively trying to destroy us. But most of us have enemies in a much more ordinary sense.

An enemy might be someone who embarrassed you, lied about you, betrayed your trust, or hurt your family. It might even be someone you secretly enjoy seeing fail because of how they’ve treated you.

Jesus gave us an incredibly difficult command, “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Matthew 5:44).

This command would be easier if Jesus just told us to leave our enemies alone. But He tells us to LOVE them! But the question is, what does that actually look like?

First, it means praying for people who have wronged us. While Jesus was being crucified, He prayed, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do” (Luke 23:34). Stephen prayed for the very people stoning him (Acts 7:60). It’s difficult to sincerely pray for someone’s salvation while secretly hoping for their destruction.

Second, it means loving people who don’t deserve it. Jesus reminds us that God sends sunlight and rain on the righteous and unrighteous alike (Matthew 5:45). God shows goodness every day to people who curse His name. Our natural instinct is to treat people according to how they treat us. Jesus teaches us to treat people according to the character of our Father.

Romans 5:10 says, “While we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son.” At one point, WE were the enemies! 

God didn’t wait for us to become lovable before demonstrating His love. Christ died for us while we were still sinners (Romans 5:8).

So here’s the question for you. Is there someone you would struggle to see God forgive? Someone whose salvation would bother you because of what they’ve done?

Sometimes our greatest struggle isn’t believing God will forgive us. It’s accepting that He’s willing to forgive them.

Jesus doesn’t ask us to call our enemies good. He asks us to do good to our enemies.

We love our enemies because our Father loved His.

Sometimes We Don’t Know As Much As We Think We Do

Gary Pollard

As recently as 1942, some medical textbooks still recommended bloodletting as a potential treatment for pneumonia.1 One hundred years earlier, the prevailing scientific wisdom was that disease spread through “bad air”, called miasma. This had real world consequences, with one in five women dying after childbirth because their doctors didn’t wash their hands. Ignaz Semmelweis recommended that doctors wash their hands with a chlorinated lime solution, and the mortality rate dropped from 20% to less than 1%. Semmelweis was ridiculed by the scientific mainstream because he couldn’t demonstrate why his method worked. He was fired from his job and was eventually beaten to death by guards in an asylum. In 1901, Rear Admiral George Melville wrote in The North American Review, “A calm surveying of the field of science…forces the conclusion that the unassisted navigation of the air is an impossibility.”2 Two months before the Wright brothers successfully flew their plane, the New York Times said that a flying machine might be built if mathematicians and engineers worked together continuously for one to ten million years. Until very recently, mainstream astrophysicists asserted that it was impossible for charge separation to exist at scale in space. Hannes Alfvén, who won the Nobel Prize in Physics (1970), argued that large-scale electrical currents could still flow and create localized structures (double layers). He was dismissed entirely, but was later vindicated.3

There are many other examples of prevailing wisdom attacking revolutionary ideas and their proponents, only to be later found flatly wrong.4 Since new discoveries have ousted erroneous ways of thinking so many times historically, why have we not learned from the blunders of our predecessors? History views the blindly skeptical — the dogmatic naysayers — as narrow-minded and foolish for good reason. The skeptics at the time had, in their view, good reason for being skeptical. They had meticulously observed phenomena, performed experiments, created mathematical proofs, and had, to some degree or another, reached consensus. They were still wrong! So why does humanity still not learn from the past? I believe there are a few reasons. 

  1. Consensus can be a powerful tool for intellectual enslavement when inflexible. If everyone agrees, it must be true. I remember being told in school, “If you come up with an interpretation that no one else has put forward, you’re probably wrong.” Theologians are not immune to the blindness consensus can cause. 
  2. Pride. Our ideas are our intellectual offspring. Acceptance of an idea that one may have dedicated their entire career to developing is, rightly so, a point of pride. To have an idea disproved is both painful and devaluing. Also in this category is the fact that many breakthroughs happen outside of their respective fields.5 Revolutionary breakthroughs in a specific field should come from that field. They’re the experts, after all. But 1 and 2 can and do stagnate progress. Humility is critical to preventing stagnation in any field. 
  3. Interpretation. We bring our own experiences and biases to every problem. So much of reality is invisible to our eyes, and we have to rely on proxy data and technological assistance. For example, scripture often uses symbolism to bring ineffable things down to a level we can process. Symbolism is designed to speak to our intuition, not necessarily to our analytical mind, but we have to start somewhere to make sense of the symbols. Exegesis can be helpful, but is only step one. We must interpret what we see, and our interpretation is influenced heavily by our priors. This is true both in religion and in science (which are not truly separate, but do have different objectives) — we bring some kind of framework to the problem, and our interpretations can only be as good as the assumptions they’re built on. This category probably affects us more than any other because it is immune to motive. A heart of gold, tireless work ethic, and intellectual humility can still lead to an erroneous interpretation. 
  4. Worldview. This probably should be a subcategory under 3. What we aim at and what we believe fundamentally affects our interpretation. A catastrophist and gradualist looking at the same problem come away with radically different results. Our worldview is the sum total of our assumptions, experiences, and beliefs. In many ways, our worldview is what we think we know. 

These obstacles all have something in common (with a provision): they can be easily kept in check by adopting the teachings of Christ. For 1, we understand that the wisdom of an age is far from infallible. For 2, we believe that pride is incompatible with godliness. The provision falls under 3: some things are not up for interpretation (like the deity and humanity of Jesus, his resurrection, the existence of God), but dogmatism can be deadly.6 We must be open to the possibility that anything not overtly incompatible with the fundamental, transparent truths of scripture is potentially valid. Finally, for 4, our worldview is ideally built around an acknowledgement of a divine creator, our own fallibility, the supremacy of truth, and genuine love for other people. Putting others above self may not advance our own aims in the short term, but certainly avoids stagnating a field for centuries. There is so much left to solve, cure, fix, discover, and improve — and nothing will improve the human condition more than adopting the mind of Christ in everything we attempt. 

1 Thomas, D.P. (2014) The demise of bloodletting. The journal of the Royal College of Physicians of Edingburgh, 44(1), 72-77. https://doi.org/10.4997/JRCPE.2014.117
2 Melville, George W. (1901) The engineer and the problem of aërial navigation. The North American Review, 173(541), 820. He also said, “The successful flying machine, to spring full-fledged from the ashes of present failure, would have to be a Phoenix.”
3 Data from Transit 5E-11 (1966), Triad (1973), ESA’s Swarm fleet, Sweden’s Viking (1986) and Freja (1992), NASA’s Fast Auroral Snapshot satellite (1996), and NASA’s Juno (2016-) flew through Jupiter’s polar magnetosphere. If charge systems in space are impossible, they should only exist near Earth; they were found to be universal.
4 Meteorites originating from space was considered impossible by the mainstream (including the French Academy of Sciences and famous figures like Thomas Jefferson); only “uneducated peasants” believed that rocks could fall from space. In 1803, thousands of meteorites fell over L’Aigle, France in broad daylight. Fusion was considered impossible by the scientific establishment — Einstein himself said in 1932, “…[T]here is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable. That would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will.” Even more examples can be found in soft science fields like archaeology and geology.
5 e.g. The laws of heredity and genetics were discovered by Augustinian friar and monk Gregor Mendel; Uranus was discovered by a professional musician (William Herschel) whose hobby was astronomy; Microbiology/microscopy was pioneered by a fabric merchant (Antonie van Leeuwenhoek); The longitude problem — which science at the time said could only be solved with advanced math and astronomy — was solved by uneducated carpenter and self-taught clockmaker John Harrison. There are many, many other examples of this, both modern and historic.
6 I highly recommend reading the contents of the Edict of Thessalonica (AD 380), its consequences, its targets, and its outcomes. It signaled the death of primitive Christianity, and we still strongly feel its effects today.



The Bible And Magic

Dale Pollard

The Bible is surprisingly full of strange references to divination, sorcery, and attempts to communicate with the supernatural.

One of the strangest appears in Acts 19. When Paul preached in Ephesus, people who had practiced magical arts brought their books together and burned them publicly. Luke says the value of the books came to 50,000 silver pieces (Acts 19.19).

These weren’t ordinary books. Ephesus was famous throughout the ancient world for magical formulas and amulets known as the “Ephesian letters.” Ancient writers describe these as combinations of mysterious words and symbols believed to provide supernatural protection or have other magical effects.

Then there is an even stranger passage in Hosea 4.12:

“My people ask counsel at their stocks, and their staff speaks to them.”

The Hebrew word translated “staff” refers to a rod or piece of wood used for divination. Old Christian commentators, Cyril of Alexandria and Theophylact, described a practice in which two sticks were erected and a charm was spoken; the direction in which they fell was interpreted as an answer. Later commentators called this rhabdomancy—divination by rods.

It wasn’t the only form of forbidden supernatural practice, though. Deuteronomy 18.10–12 lists divination, interpreting omens, sorcery, spellcasting, consulting mediums, and communicating with the dead. 1 Samuel 28 then gives one of the Bible’s most infamous examples. Saul visits the medium of Endor and asks her to summon the deceased prophet Samuel.

The Bible even portrays magical practitioners appearing to accomplish supernatural signs. Pharaoh’s magicians imitate some of Moses’ miracles in Exodus 7–8, while Simon the Magician amazes people in Acts 8, and Elymas the sorcerer opposes Paul in Acts 13.

The biblical writers knew the ancient world was filled with people who claimed to manipulate, discover, or communicate with hidden powers—and they repeatedly warned Israel and the early Christians not to seek any power that wasn’t from God.

Singing With The Understanding: “Whispering Hope”

Neal Pollard

English is a living language and poetic wording requires interpretation. When we come to interpret poetic words written long ago, we can easily find ourselves failing to understand meaning. This is true of our worship in song, as we sing words that we may fail to comprehend. Because we are worshipping God, we want to correct this whenever necessary.

The hymn, Whispering Hope, is soft and sentimental, having a beautiful tune that makes a favorite almost 160 years after it was written. Septimus Winner, the author of the song, is probably as well known for children’s songs like Listen To The Mockingbird and Oh Where, Oh Where Has My Little Dog Gone? A song that would later become a bluegrass standard, What Is Home Without A Mother, was also a Winner song.

Winner writes in the poetic style of the 19th Century for the song we sometimes sing in church. The first verse personifies hope with these eloquent words: “Soft as the voice of an angel, breathing a lesson unheard, hope with a gentle persuasion, whispers her comforting word.” This seems to suggest that, at times, hope is a feeling without words that can grow and move us to trust the One who gives it. What encouragement can we have faith in? The message of hope: “Wait till the darkness is over, wait till the tempest is done. Hope for the sunshine tomorrow, after the shower is done.” Things may be going badly now, but wait and hope. Things will get better.

This same mindset of waiting and trusting is depicted in the second verse, if the lyrics are complicated. Winner writes, “If, in the dusk of the twilight, dim be the region afar, will not the deepening darkness, brighten the glimmering star? Then when the night is upon us, why should the heart sink away? When the dark midnight is over, watch for the breaking of day.” The entire verse pictures how, when we are suffering, struggling, or enduring something difficult, it can serve to help us see the promises of hope that will be realized whether after the trial or at the very end. Hope will not disappoint (cf. Romans 5:5).

The last verse includes some words we don’t use or may struggle to understand. It begins with a clear allusion to Hebrews 6:19: “Hope, as an anchor so steadfast, rends (rips or tears, NP) the dark veil for the soul.” The latter phrase makes me think of what happened to the temple curtain separating the holy place and most holy place when Jesus died on the cross (see Matthew 27:51). Hope not only anchors us, but through it God shows His power. “Whither (where, NP) the Master has entered, robbing the grave of its goal.” We have hope because death has been defeated (1 Corinthians 15:55-57; Hebrews 2:14-15). “Come then, O come, glad fruition (the realization of hope, NP), come to my sad weary heart; come, O thou blest hope of glory, never, O never depart.” This seems to be asking, “Please let my hope be fulfilled and never let me lose that hope.”

When we are struggling with temptations, trials, difficulties, and loss, hope is elusive and hard to find. This song urges us to persist and trust that this hope will be realized. This is reinforced in the simple refrain: “Whispering hope, oh how welcome thy voice, making my heart in its sorrow rejoice.” While it is notable to me that there is no mention of God, Christ, or the Bible, in Esther-like fashion, it pictures hope as something tangible and trustworthy. It calls us to embrace it. Armed with the promises of Scripture, we should always be reminded to choose hope over doubt when in the midst of spiritual storms.