THE REALITY OF FAITH

What is faith? Is it belief? Is it trust? Is it both or much more?

What kind of faith changes a person?

Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.
                                  -Hebrews 11:1 (ESV)

We all have faith! We all believe in something. What do you have faith in? What are you putting your faith in and trusting in? Is your faith in your intellect, your strength, your career, the government? There is only one who will not fail you. There is only one who is the same yesterday, today and forever...JESUS!

Is your faith in Jesus really stronger than your faith in other things? Ouch, that question may hurt a little if you are truly honest.

Our faith is not primarily in what Jesus said. Many know Jesus' teachings forwards and backwards but still remain unchanged. Our faith must be anchored in what Jesus did. He rose from the grave! The Gospel is the Resurrection. It was after the resurrection of Jesus that his followers showed great courage and boldness under persecution. It was after the resurrection that the apostles performed many miracles. It was after the resurrection that the church changed the world.

What evidence is there in your life that that you have faith in Jesus? What change has taken place in your life? Do you share His story with others? How has your faith helped to change others?

How has the congregation you are a part of changed the world (your community)?

3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures,
                          -1 Corinthians 15:3-4 (ESV)

Is your faith planted in the resurrection of Jesus Christ?

What is the reaction or response of true faith? First we must get rid of the conditional faith we are carrying..."As long as...", "I'll believe if...". To have true Christian faith one cannot dictate conditions to God but must trust fully in Jesus Christ.

You must fully worship Jesus and recognize him as Thomas did, "My Lord and my God".

If you truly want the benefits of faith in the Lord then you must come to understand that only in the power of God can you be genuinely changed. God is a powerful change agent for those willing to be transformed from sinners to saints.

"WHATEVER"

“Whatever” is a slang term often expressed with a tone of disagreement meaning "whatever you say", "I don't care what you say" or "what will be will be". The term is used either to dismiss a previous statement or to express indifference. However, the term “whatever” is used quite differently in the New Testament.

“And whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.”                     -Colossians 3:17

Committing one’s life to God is a lifetime commitment and not merely showing up to an assembly of saints where one passively sits for an hour as part of an audience. When you go to school go and study to honor God.  When you go to the work-place work as if Jesus is looking over your shoulder.   When you eat with your family, acknowledge His presence and honor Him by encouraging your loved-ones.  When you go to the grocery store look up and take notice of those also shopping whom God loves also. 

“Whatever you do, work heartily, as for the Lord and not for men, knowing that from the Lord you will receive the inheritance as your reward. You are serving the Lord Christ.” -Colossians 3:23-24

Whatever you do is to be done “heartily” (enthusiastically) for God. Consider this question: If Jesus came back today, what would He find you doing? Whatever it is, are you doing it for Him or are you pursuing your own agenda indifferent to the opportunities God has prepared for you each day? Will you commit or recommit to honoring God 24/7 or will you simply respond as many seem to do as they leave the assembly of the saints on Sunday morning with an attitude of “WHATEVER”?

RIGHT OR WRONG?

The answer to this question depends somewhat on what is meant by “living together.” If it means having sexual relations, it is definitely wrong. Premarital sex is repeatedly condemned in Scripture, along with all other forms of sexual immorality (Acts 15:20; Romans 1:29; 1 Corinthians 5:1; 6:13, 18; 7:2; 10:8; 2 Corinthians 12:21; Galatians 5:19; Ephesians 5:3; Colossians 3:5; 1 Thessalonians 4:3; Jude 7). The Bible promotes complete abstinence outside of (and before) marriage. Sex before marriage is just as wrong as adultery and other forms of sexual immorality, because they all involve having sex with someone you are not married to.

If “living together” means living in the same house, that is perhaps a different issue. Ultimately, there is nothing wrong with a man and a woman living in the same house—if there is nothing immoral taking place. However, the problem arises in that there is still the appearance of immorality (1 Thessalonians 5:22; Ephesians 5:3), and it could be a tremendous temptation for immorality. The Bible tells us to flee immorality, not expose ourselves to constant temptations to immorality (1 Corinthians 6:18). Then there is the problem of appearances. A couple who is living together is assumed to be sleeping together—that is just the nature of things. Even though living in the same house is not sinful in and of itself, the appearance of sin is there. The Bible tells us to avoid the appearance of evil (1 Thessalonians 5:22; Ephesians 5:3), to flee from immorality, and not to cause anyone to stumble or be offended. As a result, it is not honoring to God for a man and a woman to live together outside of marriage.

66 Books?

           

THE OLD TESTAMENT

When it comes to the Old Testament, Jesus Christ affirmed the Jewish Scriptures of His day—consisting of the very same content that is in our Old Testaments today.

A study of the gospels shows that, throughout His ministry, Jesus affirmed the Old Testament in its entirety (Matt. 5:17–18)—including its historical reliability (cf. Matt. 10:15; 19:3–5; 12:40; 24:38–39), prophetic accuracy (Matt. 26:54), sufficiency (Luke 16:31), unity (Luke 24:27, 44), inerrancy (Matt. 22:29; John 17:17), infallibility (John 10:35), and authority (Matt. 21:13, 16, 42). He affirmed the Law, the Writings, and the Prophets and all that was written in them; clearly seeing the Old Testament Scriptures as the Word of God (Matt. 15:16; Mark 7:13; Luke 3:2; 5:1; etc.).

There is a cluster of about 14 books, known as the Apocrypha, which were written some time between the close of the Old Testament (after 400 B.C.) and the beginning of the New. They were never considered as part of the Hebrew Scriptures, and the Jews themselves clearly ruled them out by the confession that there was, throughout that period, no voice of the prophets in the land. They looked forward to a day when “a faithful prophet” or the “Messiah” should appear.

Why don’t we accept the Apocrypha even though they may be in the Roman Catholic Bible. Significantly, the first century Jews did not consider the books of what is called the “Apocrypha” to be Scripture. Jesus Himself never affirmed or cited he Apocryphal books – and neither do any of the other writers of the New Testament. Many of the early church fathers did not regard the Apocryphal books as being authoritative either. Even the fifth-century scholar Jerome (who translated the Latin Vulgate — which became the standard Roman Catholic version of the Middle Ages) acknowledged that the Apocryphal books were not to be regarded as either authoritative or Scripture. So we accept the Scriptures of the Old Testament on the basis of our Lord’s authoritative affirmation of it. And we reject the authority of the Apocryphal books based on the absence of His affirmation or affirmation of the apostles. After Malachi no other books were added and during the Intertestamental period there was no revelation or voice from God through any prophet. The first Century Jewish historian and scholar Josephus, writing around A.D. 90, clearly stated in his defense of Judaism that, the Scriptures, what we refer to as the Old Testament, had divine authority and acceptance. Since there are literally hundreds of direct quotations or clear allusions to Old Testament passages by Jesus and the apostles, it is evident what the early Christians thought of the Hebrew Scriptures.

For the Jews, therefore, Scripture as a revelation from God through the prophets ended around 450 B.C. with the close of the book of Malachi. This was the Bible of Jesus and His disciples, and it was precisely the same in content as our Old Testament.

THE NEW TESTAMENT

Other alleged “gospels” were written long after the time of the apostles (2nd -4th centuries A.D.) For example,the so-called “Gospel of Thomas”, of which there are references to more than one version, has distinctly Gnostic influences. In short, the Gnostics believed that the flesh is bad, but the spirit is good. As a result, they denied that Jesus truly came in the flesh, a position the early church countered by writings such as 1 John.

The transmission of the New Testament documents through history is astounding. Not only do we have thousands of manuscript copies, as well as thousands more fragments or portions of the New Testament, but in comparing the New Testament copies we have today in various languages with those available centuries ago we can see the message remains intact. When it comes to transmission and translation, then, we can indeed trust the documents.

Our Lord not only affirmed the Jewish canon of the Old Testament, He also promised that He would give additional revelation to His church through His authorized representatives—namely, the apostles.

John 14:25–26 – “These things I have spoken to you while abiding with you. But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.”

Jesus promised the apostles that the Holy Spirit would help them remember all the things that He had said to them. Two chapters later, in the same context, the Lord promised the apostles that He would give them additional revelation through the Holy Spirit:

John 16:12–15 – “I have many more things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak of His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come. He will glorify Me, for He will take of Mine and will disclose it to you. All things that the Father has are Mine; therefore I said that He takes of Mine and will disclose it to you.”

Where is that additional revelation found? It is found in the New Testament epistles, wherein the Spirit of Christ guided the apostles to provide the church with inspired truth.

The New Testament was pre-authenticated by Christ Himself, as He authorized the apostles to be His witnesses in the world (Matt. 28:18–19; Acts 1:8). We embrace and submit to the New Testament writings because they were penned by Christ’s authorized representatives, being inspired by the Holy Spirit in the same way as the Old Testament prophets (cf. 2 Pet. 3:19–21).

Every book of the New Testament was written under apostolic authority—either by an apostle or someone closely linked to their apostolic ministry. Thus, we submit to these books because they come from Christ’s authorized representatives. In submitting to them, we are submitting to the Lord Himself. The reason there are no additional books is because there are no longer any apostles in the church today, and have not been since the end of the first century.

Why Did It Take So Long?

The New Testament was not all neatly printed and bound shortly after the last apostle (John) died. Nor were they sent out by the pallet load into all the bookstores and kiosks of the Roman Empire. Here are six reasons why it took time for the books of the New Testament to be gathered together.

1. The originals were scattered across the whole empire. The Roman Empire reached from Britain to Persia, and it would have taken time for any church even to learn about all the letters Paul had written, let alone gather copies of them.

2. No scroll could easily contain more than one or two books. It would be impossible to fit more than one Gospel onto a scroll, and even when codices (books) were used, the entire New Testament would be extremely bulky and very expensive to produce. It was therefore far more convenient for New Testament books to be copied singly or in small groups.

3. No one church or leader bossed all the others. There were strong and respected leaders among the churches, but Christianity had no supreme bishop who dictated to all the others which books belonged to the Scriptures and which did not.

4. The early leaders assumed the authority of the Gospels and the apostles. It was considered sufficient to quote the Gospels and apostles, since their authority was self-evident.

5. Only when the heretics attacked the truth was the importance of a Scriptural collection appreciated. It was not until the mid-second century that the Gnostics and others began writing their own pseudepigrapha (false writing); this prompted orthodox leaders to become alert to the need for stating which books had already been recognized across the churches.

In the light of all this, the marvel is not how long it took before the majority of the churches acknowledged a completed list of the New Testament, but how soon after their writing each book was accepted as authoritative.

· There were only ever the four Gospels used by the churches for the life and ministry of Jesus. Other pseudo-gospels were written but these were immediately rejected by the churches across the empire as spurious.

· Tertullian of Carthage, around A.D. 200, was the first serious expositor and used all the NT books. They were equated with the Old Testament, and he referred to “the majesty of our Scriptures.” He clearly possessed a collection of New Testament books like ours.

· By A.D. 240, Origen of Alexandria was using all our 27 books, and only those, as Scripture alongside the Old Testament books.

And these are just examples of many of the church leaders at this time.

What Made a Book “Scripture”?

At first, the churches had no need to define what made a book special and equal to the Old Testament Scriptures. If the letter came from Paul or Peter, that was sufficient. However, it was not long before others began writing additional letters and gospels either to fill the gaps or to propagate their own ideas. Some tests became necessary, and during the first 200 years, five tests were used at various times.

1. Apostolic—does it come under the authority of an apostle?

The first Christians asked, “Was it written by an apostle or under the direction of an apostle?” They expected this just as the Jews had expected theirs to be underwritten by the prophets. Paul was insistent that his readers should be reassured that the letters they received actually came from his pen (e.g., 2 Thessalonians 3:17).

2. Ancient—has it been used from the earliest times?

Most of the false writings were rejected simply because they were too new to be apostolic, written many years after the last apostle died. Early in the fourth century, Athanasius listed the New Testament as we know it today and claimed that these were the books “received by us through tradition as belonging to the Scriptures.”

3. Accepted—are most of the churches using it?

Since, as we have seen, it took time for letters to circulate among the churches, it is all the more significant that the 27 books were universally accepted well before the middle of the second century. When tradition carries the weight of the overwhelming majority of churches throughout the widely scattered Christian communities across the vast Roman Empire, with no one church controlling the beliefs of all the others, it has to be taken seriously.

CONCLUSION:

So … why these 66 books? Because God inspired them! They are His divine revelation. Christ confirmed that fact. He affirmed the Old Testament, and He authorized the New Testament through the apostles (cf. Heb. 1:1–2). The authority of the Lord Jesus Himself, then, is the basis for our confidence in the fact that the Bible we hold in our hands is indeed “All Scripture.”

It was not the Catholic church that determined the Scriptures. No, it is the authority of Christ Himself, the Lord of the church and the incarnate Son of God, on which the authority of Scripture rests.

Sound doctrine is important because our faith is based on a specific message. 

The overall teaching of the church contains many elements, but the primary message is explicitly defined: “Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures [and] . . . he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures” (1 Corinthians 15:3-4). Change that message, and the basis of faith shifts from Christ to something else. Our eternal destiny depends upon hearing “the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation” (Ephesians 1:3; see also 2 Thessalonians 2:13-14).

Our duty is to deliver the message, not to change it. Jude conveys an urgency in guarding the trust: “I felt I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints” (Jude 1:3; see also Philippians 1:27). To “contend” carries the idea of strenuously fighting for something, to give it everything you’ve got. 

Sound doctrine is important because what we believe affects what we do. 

Behavior is an extension of theology, and there is a direct correlation between what we think and how we act.

Sound doctrine is important because we must ascertain truth in a world of falsehood. 

“Many false prophets have gone out into the world” (1 John 4:1). There are tares among the wheat and wolves among the flock (Matthew 13:25; Acts 20:29). The best way to distinguish truth from falsehood is to know what the truth is.

Sound doctrine is important because the end of sound doctrine is life. 

“Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers” (1 Timothy 4:16). Conversely, the end of unsound doctrine is destruction. “Certain men whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are godless men, who change the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord” (Jude 1:4). Changing God’s message of grace is a godless thing to do, and the condemnation for such a deed is severe. Preaching another gospel (“which is really no gospel at all”) carries an anathema: “let him be eternally condemned!” (see Galatians 1:6-9).

Sound doctrine is important because it encourages believers. 

A love of God’s Word brings “great peace” (Psalm 119:165), and those “who proclaim peace . . . who proclaim salvation” are truly “beautiful” (Isaiah 52:7). A Godly leader “must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it” (Titus 1:9).