In Acts 2:38 Peter contended that baptism is “for” (eis) the remission of sins. Since many religionists deny this biblical truth, they seek comfort in a supposed parallel that they imagine nullifies the force of eis in Acts 2:38. Some imagine they have found a solution to their theological problem in Matthew 12:41. But have they?

In a new volume on Greek grammar, Dr. Daniel Wallace (of the Dallas Theological Seminary), has made a monumental concession which devastates a common denominational rationalization relative to the meaning of eis in Acts 2:38.

It has long been known that denominationalists, welded to the theory of salvation by “faith alone,” repudiate the connection between baptism and the forgiveness of sins. Some, formally sound on this issue, now are capitulating to sectarian error. Take a brief look at this issue with us.

The Greek term onoma takes on a very important place in the New Testament.

Sometimes, by a figure known as metonymy, the name stands for the person himself. To trust in the Lord’s name is to trus...

The Greek word paradeisos derives from the Persian term pairidaeza, which meant an enclosure, a royal park, a garden with a wall. In the Greek Old Testament (LXX) the term is employed of the garden...

The Bible explicitly teaches that immersion is “for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38).

One dirty little trick used to confuse sincere people about the purpose of baptism.

In a previous article, I inadvertently mischaracterized Professor Daniel Wallace’s religious affiliation. He kindly corrected the matter. Here is my response.

Must baptism be administered “in the name of Jesus” only to be valid?

Tucked away in Romans 14:9 are some rich nuggets of truth that will enhance your faith.

Many denominationalists have long argued that “for the remission of sins” in Acts 2:38 can mean “because of” (i.e. – be baptized because your sins have been remitted). But the same term is found in Matthew 26:28 – clearly indicating the meaning of the term.

When the plan of salvation is so easy to understand, why do some go to such great lengths to obscure it?

Some protest the use of illegal drugs by a glazed-eyed sub-culture, all the while popping pills daily to cope with a variety of problems common to humanity.

Does the English Standard Version of the New Testament promote the doctrine of “salvation by faith alone” in Romans 10:9-10? No, but the translation is not as precise as it should be.

Was Jesus Christ “immersed” in the Jordan River, or did John merely pour water upon the Lord’s head? Some scholars have attempted to argue that the case for Jesus’ “immersion” cannot be proved. But what does the evidence actually reveal?

What will be the state of the wicked after their death, prior to judgment?

Poignant words concisely spoken are echoed in worship assemblies every Lord’s Day. In remembrance of him, Christians recall the words of Jesus, “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many unto remission of sins” (Matt. 26:28).

Scholarly sources may be helpful, but good Bible students recognize any human source can be biased or flawed. God’s Word is the ultimate standard of faith and practice.

It is a grievous tragedy that many, like Oprah Winfrey, and those mesmerized by her, are enmeshed in antiquated superstition.

Abilene Christian University (Abilene, Texas) is rapidly departing from the strong base upon which it was founded. A reckless breed of mavericks flaunts the new course it has charted.