
Jesus told His disciples that some of them would not “taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom” (Mt 16:28). This saying appears in the other Synoptics as well. Mark 9:1 describes it as “until they see the kingdom of God after it has come with power,” while Luke 9:27 describes it as “until they see the kingdom of God.” Most focus on identifying the event that Jesus had in mind. I’ll come to that question shortly, but first I want to point out something I never noticed before: Jesus affirmed that at least some of His disciples would die. He said they would “taste death,” but that they would not taste death until they had some particular experience. This is important because many interpreters have claimed that Jesus promised His Second Coming would occur in the first century in His apostles’ lifetime. Here, however, Jesus testifies to the fact that at least some of His apostles would die.

I have started a new podcast series on the Biblical teaching regarding divorce and remarriage. This was an intensive research project for me that I am finally ready to share. I have already posted a 1-N-Done episode on the topic which summarizes my conclusions. This will be followed by a long series of episodes where I will explore the topic in much more detail. Once I have finished the series, I will publish my research paper as well.
I’ve often heard people claim that Saul of Tarsus confessed the deity of Christ during his encounter with Jesus on the Damascus Road by calling him “lord.” We read: “As he neared Damascus on his journey, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. 4 He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, ‘Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?’ 5 ‘Who are you, Lord? Saul asked. ‘I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,’ he replied.” (Acts 9:3-5)
I completely forgot to mention that I was doing a series on the atonement for the Thinking to Believe podcast. It is a four part series. The final episode just went live.
Naturalism cannot support the idea that human beings have real, intrinsic value. This is a feature of the Judeo-Christian theology of the imago Dei – that we are made in the image of God. Absent this theological foundation, there is no reason to think human value is real. At best, humans only have a subjective, extrinsic value; i.e. our value is derived from our own estimation of ourselves. Human beings value particular traits that they possess, and thus value the human beings who possess such traits (a circular, biased, and wholly subjective estimation). This sort of value, however, is fictitious. It only exists in our minds, and it only extends to those that we think it extends to. This value is never equal, and it rarely applies to all human beings. Some human beings will be considered to be more valuable than others, and some will be deemed to have no value at all.
Many Eastern religions make this claim about God. And now, it is being picked up as a popular idea among Westerners. Unfortunately, it is incoherent.
Thomas would not believe the report of the other disciples who said they had seen Jesus alive. He only believed in Jesus’ resurrection after Jesus appeared to Him as well. Jesus’ words to Thomas on that day have been immortalized in the Gospel of John: “Because you have seen me, you have believed: blessed are those who have not seen, and yet have believed” (John 20:29).
Why study theology? Why does it matter? Isn’t theology just for preachers and smart guys? Isn’t theology divisive and difficult? In my latest podcast series titled “The Case for Theology,” I argue that while theology can be difficult and divisive, it’s unavoidable. All of us are theologians. The question is simply whether we will be a good or bad theologian.
While cessationists offer Biblical arguments for their position, truth be told, Scripture plays a secondary role in most cessationists’ epistemology/theology. What’s really driving their position is their experience – or more properly, their lack of experience of the supernatural.
What is the name above every name that was given to Jesus by God (Phil 2:5-11)? Was it “Jesus” or “Lord”?
It’s amazing to me how we can interpret a passage to mean almost the exact opposite of its intended meaning simply because the intended meaning seems to conflict with our theology. A great example of this is Paul’s teaching in Romans 8:35-39:
For many years now I have harbored concerns about the way many churches practice the Lord’s Supper: