Today’s post is a fine-tuning of how we use the term, “the Antichrist.” No doctrinal issues are in jeopardy that I am aware of, but Zane Hodges proposed that the term, “the Antichrist,” refers to the coming false prophet of Revelation 13:11, not to the first beast of Revelation 13:1. Here is Zane’s argument from his commentary on 1 John:[Read More]
linguistics
The Prophet of Deut. 18:15 (TL;DR; it’s Messiah)
There is a debate as to whether Deuteronomy 18:15 refers to the Messiah, or Joshua, or maybe even both or more. It seems to me that Messiah is in view here.[Read More]
Ancient Forerunners to Theistic Evolution: The Cosmological Compromise and Ramifications of רקיע in the LXX
We had our first event for the International Society for Biblical Hermeneutics. It was a webinar on “Topics in Cosmology.” I spoke on the raqia of Genesis. You can watch the presentation above. We will be posting it to a future ISBH website, so stay tuned!
Response to “Luke’s Gay Apocalypse” Part I: Intro and Word Studies
This is part one of a response to a post by Jeremy Myers. In that post, Myers summarizes the view of Ron Goetz, which proposes that Luke 17:34–35 is about saved non-celibate homosexuals. While I believe that there are saved non-celibate homosexuals, I disagree with the process of forcing a gay reading into this text (especially by using Document Q and Pagan mythology).[Read More]
Repentance: More Than A Change of Mind
The word, repentance, is perhaps the most controversial word in the New Testament to define. The three basic opinions are that repentance is a change of works that is necessary for eternal life, a change of mind that is necessary for eternal life, or a change of works that is not necessary for eternal life (this article defends the third definition). Each of these three have several nuances and subversions, and each of them is able to comply with the notion of the kingdom offer and postponement. Regardless of the compatibility of the views with the main contention of the kingdom postponement, a study of repentance is in order as the kingdom offer itself is Μετανοεῖτε, ἤγγικεν γὰρ ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”[Read More]
The Biblical sustainability of the de jure interpretation of Col 1:13
Across the theological spectrum it is agreed that easy texts are to interpret the difficult texts. The challenge for the interpreter is to discern which passages are easy and which are difficult. Since the only other occurrence of “kingdom” in the book of Colossians occurs in the final greetings in chapter 4,1 the meaning of “kingdom” likely occurs in an easier text somewhere else. The Bible develops the idea of a literal kingdom, the “kingdom of God,” established on land from Genesis all the way through the New Testament, so one would anticipate that this is the same kingdom in Col 1:13. There is an alternative theory, however, that Paul here is speaking of a spiritual facet of the kingdom, rather than the Millennial Kingdom. This theory that there is a spiritual facet of the kingdom is not necessarily in conflict with postponement theology. Much of this dissertation has responded to external threats to dispensational theology, but since a Spiritual Facet of the kingdom can coincide with postponement theology, Col 1:13 will be treated with the spirit of unity as an in-house dispute. Some fine dispensational scholars, propose that this Spiritual Kingdom is God’s rule in the heart of the believer and that it is composed of all believers, and only believers, of all time.[Read More]