The Naked Bible Podcast

This episode begins a series on learning how to engage the biblical text in ways that take you beyond merely reading the Bible. Dr. Heiser overviews a popular Naked Bible blog post ("Heiser's Laws for Bible Study") as an introduction.  You don't have to be a scholar to learn to engage the biblical text and move beyond just reading the Bible in English. There are tools that will help you penetrate the text, and techniques for reading more carefully.

This episode builds on the previous one, where Dr. Heiser discussed the context of Paul's teachings on the Lord's Supper in 1 Corinthians 11 -- namely, the three chapters prior, 1 Corinthians 8-10. Those chapters show Paul laying out the "fellowship context" of the Lord's Supper, that Paul wants believers to know that they "partake" of a meal by which they enjoy fellowship (koinoinia) with the Lord. His context for that thought is the partaking of OT priests in sacrificial meat (though not of the sacrifices for atonement or sin offering), and the demonic "fellowship" that is the result of pagan sacrifice. This episode moves into 1 Corinthians 11, where Paul describes the Lord's Supper in relation to a fellowship meal. This context is crucial to understanding the focus of the Lord's Supper and the admonitions of Paul in connection with observing the Lord's Supper.

This episode transitions the discussion of a biblical theology of the Lord's Supper to the primary passage in the New Testament on the topic: 1 Corinthians 11. The episode focuses on the context of 1 Corinthians 8-10 for informing what Paul says about the Lord's Supper in chapter 11. The "fellowship context" of the Lord's Supper is shown to be important for understanding the issues Paul will get into in 1 Corinthians 11. Paul wants believers to know that they "partake" of a meal by which they enjoy fellowship (koinoinia) with the Lord. His context for that thought is the partaking of OT priests in sacrificial meat (though not of the sacrifices for atonement or sin offering), and the demonic "fellowship" that is the result of pagan sacrifice -- his primary concern in the disputation over meat sacrificed to idols in 1 Cor 8-10.

Today's episode continues the problem of John 6, the “bread of life” passage. We explore the rest of the passage, drawing attention to two items: that the second half of the passage needs to be interpreted in light of the first half, and that John 6 is not an account of the Last Supper, which the epistles are clear was the context for the Lord's Supper or Communion

When I introduced this topic and series, I said that I’m convinced that this doctrine is one of the least critically examined of all biblical doctrines. This episode gets us into some territory that illustrates the pervasive influence of assumptions about this topic. Anyone who has studied the doctrine knows that it is linked to the Last Supper. They also know about the problem of John 6, the "bread of life" passage. But did you know that John 6 isn't in the context of the Last Supper? Most students don't, and the observation begs the question of whether the controversial "eat my flesh and drink my blood" wording in John 6 has anything at all to do with the Lord's Supper, despite centuries of assuming that it's central to the topic

Today we begin a new topic, and with it a short series on a doctrine that most listeners will have heard of or experienced firsthand. I think it would be difficult to find anyone who has spent any time in a Christian church of any denomination who has not heard of the Lord’s Supper, also known as communion or the Lord’s Table. But while most listeners will have heard of the doctrine before, I’m willing to bet few have really thought about or, perhaps stated more precisely, have ever questioned what they’ve been taught about it in light of their own reading of the Scriptures. As familiar as you might think it is, I’m convinced that this doctrine is one of the least critically examined of all biblical doctrines. If I made a “Top Ten” list of things churches do without much thinking, this would be in the list for sure

Our next problem passage related to baptism is Acts 2:38. The interpretation of this passage involves the Greek preposition eis as well as the overall context of the book of Acts when it comes to repentance and baptism.

Acts 22:16 is a passage that often provokes debate due to its apparent connection between baptism and "washing away" of sins. But that idea is connected to other phrases in succession in the passage. How should Acts 22:16 be interpreted amid these other phrases and the verbal actions described? This episode takes listeners into some Greek grammar for the answer.

1 Peter 3:14-22 is an odd, controversial passage since it amalgamates, baptism, salvation, Noah, the ark, and Jesus' descent to preach to spirits in the Underworld. The key to understanding the passage is to recognize that Peter embraces the worldview of non-canonical Jewish literature like 1 Enoch and seems an analogy between the events of Genesis 6-8, salvation, and baptism.

How should baptism be done -- immersion, sprinkling, or pouring -- and can we gain any clarity about this from the biblical text? This episode of the Naked Bible focuses on the mode of baptism, focusing on the Greek word baptizo, frequently translated "baptize" in the New Testament. Is the meaning of this word sufficiently clear to settle the mode issue? Does it matter?

Getting the Baptism-Circumcision Relationship Right: Adult and Believer's Baptism In the previous episode,  we talked about how to articulate a biblically defensible doctrine of infant baptism, one that avoids the theological problems created when one fails to say only about baptism what one can say about circumcision. Getting that relationship right also helps us talk about the baptism of adults

Contradictions over baptism and salvation in creeds, continued (Part 3). In the previous episode, we saw how the Belgic Confession and Heidelberg Catechisms offered muddled, contradictory statements on salvation by grace through faith and what happens at baptism. This episode details more of the same, this time in the Westminster Confession.

Contradictions over baptism and salvation in creeds, continued (Part 2). In the previous episode, we saw how the Belgic Confession was, in places, clear on its articulation of the doctrine of salvation by grace through faith alone. And yet when it discussed baptism, these ideas were muddled, creating theological confusion. This episode details more of the same, this time in the Heidelberg Catechism.

Baptism: Contradictions in Creeds, Part 1. In the first podcast episode on baptism, I made the comment that many well-known Christian creeds are internally contradictory when it comes to articulating the clear gospel (salvation by faith in Christ apart from any work or merit of our own) and baptism. That might seem hard to swallow, but it's true. In this episode, I illustrate the problem via the Belgic Confession, whose clear description of the gospel turns to muddled thinking when it comes to the section on baptism.

Inaugural Episode: Introducing the series on understanding and misunderstanding baptism. Everyone knows about baptism, right? What’s there to think about? Turns out quite a lot. Christian traditions all have positions on baptism, but it is rare to find a coherent articulation of the topic that doesn't create theological dilemmas with other points of doctrine. Don't believe that? Then you need to listen to the Naked Bible Podcast's series on baptism, starting with this episode