-
Was Paul Against Circumcision, Or Not?
Most Christians assume that the Apostle Paul was adamantly against circumcision. After all, this is the man who warned the Galatians that receiving circumcision could make Christ “of no advantage” to them (Gal 5:2). He even declared that those who accepted circumcision were obligated to keep the entire Mosaic Law (Gal 5:3). Those are strong words! So, the matter would seem straightforward: Paul opposed circumcision. But then we continue reading the New Testament and discover something surprising. Paul personally circumcised Timothy (Acts 16:3). Not only did Paul circumcise him, but he did so immediately after participating in the Jerusalem Council, where the apostles had just decided that Gentile believers did not need to be circumcised. At first glance, Paul’s actions appear inconsistent. Was Paul against circumcision or not? Why would he refuse to circumcise Titus but then turn around and circumcise Timothy? Was he compromising his convictions? Or was something…
-
Were Levites Allowed to Own Land? A Look at Acts 4:36-37
Levites weren’t supposed to own land—or so the common understanding goes. Yet in Acts 4:36-37, we read about Barnabas, a Levite, who sells a field and generously donates the proceeds to the Apostles. Was Barnabas acting in disobedience to his heritage? Or is this a possible contradiction in the details of Scripture? The answer is that the Levites’ relationship with land ownership is a bit more complex than we might initially expect. The Levites and Land Ownership It is a well-known fact that, as a tribe, the Levites were not given their own land allotment among their fellow tribes. While Joshua delegated specific tribal allotments to the eleven tribes of Israel (cf. Josh 12–22), the tribe of Levi did not receive any specific land allotment. The Levites were not left completely homeless, however, for they were given cities to dwell in among their brothers (cf. Josh 14:4). They would at…
-
Resolving an Alleged Contradiction: Did Paul’s Companions Hear the Voice?
Scripture is often subjected to scrutiny when it comes to perceived contradictions, and one of the most debated examples involves Paul’s conversion experience as recounted in Acts. In Acts 9:7 and 22:9, we find two descriptions of the same event, but they seem to differ in the details—specifically, what Paul’s companions heard. This has led many to question whether the Bible contradicts itself on this point. By examining the original language and context, however, we can gain a clearer understanding of these passages. In this post, we’ll explore the nuances in the Greek text and discuss how these apparent differences actually harmonize, demonstrating that the Scriptures remain consistent and reliable. Let’s take a closer look at the issue and see if this is truly a contradiction or if there’s a more reasonable explanation. The Alleged Contradiction between Acts 9:7 and 22:9 “The men who traveled with him stood speechless, hearing…
-
A Significant Chronological Problem for Postmillennialism in Acts 3:21
Postmillennialism is trending upward on the eschatological popularity scale. It has many visible and popular adherents, such as Doug Wilson, Jeff Durbin, and more recently, James White. As postmillennialism gains popularity, many questions arise about whether it is an accurate view of the world’s future. One significant challenge postmillennialism has is a chronological issue in Acts 3:21. Postmillennialism teaches that, over time, the church will emerge victorious by progressively and gradually triumphing over the world. Eventually the whole world will embrace the gospel, times of immense blessings will flow, and then Jesus will return to receive the kingdom. A self-assessed optimism of the future marks this view. In contrast to postmillennialism, premillennialism teaches that the coming of Christ must precede the establishment of a peaceful earthly kingdom. When Christ comes, he himself will establish a thousand-year reign (millennium) on the Earth. There are many ways to assess the theology of…
-
Does Baptism Save You? Looking at Acts 2:38
There are a few texts that seem to indicate that baptism saves an individual. A few churches even teach that baptism is the timing and place one receives God’s grace, meaning that without baptism, one cannot be saved. However, Christians recognize Ephesians 2:8-9 and that salvation is not dependent on works. This puts us in a bit of a quandry. Does baptism actually save us? Does everyone need to be saved to be baptized? In order to work through the apparent contradiction in Scripture, many will cross reference other texts to explain away the passages which speak of the link between baptism and salvation. Although a noble effort, I have mentioned in the past that we need to be careful reading one passage over another. There is potential danger in cross-referencing. It can be helpful and should be utilized. But the key to understanding Scripture is identifying authorial intent. The…
-
Is the Book of Acts a Template for the Church?
Many readers struggle with the book of Acts because they assume that it has to be a model for us to follow. Reading through the book of Acts we might wonder why we don’t speak in tongues, perform miracles, or exercise control over demons. But even on the more practical level, some read the book of Acts as a pattern for church growth. Similarly, I once heard a well-known Christian speaker say that he was in the process of rethinking how his church operated because when he compared his church with the church of Acts, he didn’t see enough similarities. The problem with this view is that the book of Acts was not written to be a template for the church to follow. Rather, the book of Acts is a historical record of how the church developed. The Connection between Acts and Luke One of the ways we can tell…