It is important to note that this is non-essential doctrine. In the end, it is relatively unimportant when the rapture will happen; it is more important that it will happen. Moreover, the premillennial position does not hinge on the rapture. Instead, the timing of the rapture is an in-house discussion within the premillennial view.
Continue reading →
Problem: Critics note that Paul says that “we” will remain until Jesus returns. From this statement, they conclude that Paul made a mistake, thinking that Jesus would return before he died.
Continue reading →
Problem: Paul spoke here to the Thessalonian Christians of “we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord.” This seems to imply that he was affirming that Christ would come before he died. But Christ did not come before the death of Paul (2 Tim. 4:6–7). Did Paul make a mistake here?
Continue reading →
Problem: Several times the Bible refers to the dead as being asleep. Does this mean that the soul is not conscious between death and resurrection?
Problem: Some interpreters[1] argue that the “vessel” refers to a Christian man’s wife (see RSV translation). Peter uses the same Greek word skeuos in 1 Peter 3:7 to refer to Christian wives. Is Paul commanding Christian men to “possess” their wives?
Problem: Critics argue that this passage refers to the destruction of the Temple in AD 70. Since Paul died before this time, critics claim that this must have been added (or interpolated) after his death. In addition to this, critics argue that this passage is Anti-Semitic, which favors the literature of the church fathers in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th centuries.
Continue reading →
Problem: Critics argue that Paul wrote this passage, because he was anti-Semitic and racist against Jews.
Continue reading →
Problem: Some interpreters argue that God chooses some believers for heaven and others for hell.
Continue reading →
CLAIM: Paul commanded that the church of Colossae should exchange letters with the church of Laodicea (a city that was only ten miles away). This implies that Paul had another letter, which was authoritative and inspired that is now lost to us. Is this the case?
Continue reading →
Problem: Paul refers to the “epistle from Laodicea” as a book he wrote that should be read by the church at Colosse, just as the inspired Book of Colossians was to be read by the Laodiceans. However, no such 1st century epistle to the Laodiceans exists (though there is a 4th century fraud). But, it is very strange that an inspired book would perish. Why would God inspire it for the faith and practice of the church (2 Tim. 3:16–17) and then allow it to be destroyed?
Does the Bible support slavery? Skeptics of the Bible often claim that it does. For instance, in their book What the Bible Really Says, skeptics Morton Smith and R. Joseph Hoffman write,
There is no reasonable doubt that the New Testament, like the Old, not only tolerated chattel slavery (the form prevalent in the Greco-Roman world of Paul’s time) but helped to perpetuate it by making the slaves’ obedience to their masters a religious duty. This biblical morality was one of the greatest handicaps that the emancipation movement in the United States had to overcome.[1]
How should believers respond to such claims? Does the Bible support slavery?
Continue reading →
Problem: While Paul told children to obey their parents in everything, Jesus said, “He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me” (Matt. 10:37). Surely children should not obey a parent who commands them to curse God, or hate Jesus, or kill their brother.
Continue reading →
Problem: It was the custom of the Jews to come together on the Saturday Sabbath, cease work, and worship God. Of the 10 commandments listed in Exodus 20:1-17, only nine of them were reinstituted in the New Testament. (Six in Matthew 19:18, murder, adultery, stealing, false witness, honor parents, and worshiping God; Romans 13:9, coveting. Worshiping God properly covers the first three commandments). The one that was not reaffirmed was the one about the Sabbath. Instead, Jesus said that He is the Lord of the Sabbath (Matt. 12:8).
Continue reading →
Problem: Catholic apologist Dave Armstrong writes,
Paul in Colossians 2:11-13 makes a connection between Baptism and circumcision. Israel was the church before Christ [Acts 7:38; Rom. 9:4]. Circumcision, given to eight-day-old boys, was the seal of the covenant God made with Abraham, which applies to us also [Gal. 3:14, 29]. It was a sign of repentance and future faith [Rom. 4:11]… Likewise, Baptism is the seal of the New Covenant in Christ.’[1]
The Protestant Heidelberg Catechism (Question 74) states:
(Question) Should infants, too, be baptized?
(Answer) Yes. For they as well as adults belong to God’s covenant and community (Gen. 17:7) and no less than adults are promised forgiveness of sin through Christ’s blood (Matt. 19:14) and the Holy Spirit, who produces faith (Ps. 22:10; Is. 44:1–3; Luke 1:15; Acts 2:39; 16:31). Therefore, they, too, ought to be incorporated into the Christian church by baptism, the sign of the covenant, and distinguished from the children of unbelievers (Acts 10:47; 1 Cor. 7:14). This was done in the Old Testament by circumcision (Gen. 17:9–14), in whose place baptism was instituted in the New Testament (Col. 2:11–13).
Does circumcision prefigure infant baptism for believers today?
Continue reading →
Problem: Paul writes, “See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception.” This is the only use of the term “philosophy” in the entire Bible, and here, philosophy is given negative connotations. Some fideistic interpreters argue that this implies that reason should not be pursued alongside faith. Does this mean that it is wrong for Christians to study philosophy?