Datasets:

vericudebuget

/

Bible-responses-dataset-gotquestions

like 0

Why are there so many Bible translations, and which is the best?

Answer The fact that there are so many English Bible translations is both a blessing and a problem. It is a blessing in that the Word of God is available to anyone who needs it in an easy\-to\-understand, accurate translation. It is a problem in that the different translations can create controversy and problems in Bible studies, teaching situations, etc. The differences between the translations can also be a subject of great division within the church body. It is probably wise to have access to at least two or three of the major translations KJV (King James Version), NIV (New International Version), NAS (New American Standard), NKJV (New King James Version), ESV (English Standard Version), NLT (New Living Translation), CSB (Christian Standard Bible), for comparison’s sake. If a verse or passage in one translation is a little confusing, it can be helpful to compare it side\-by\-side with another version. It is difficult to say which translation is the "best." "Best" would be determined by a combination of the translation method personally considered best and your interpretation of the textual data underlying your translation. For example, the KJV and NAS attempted to take the underlying Hebrew and Greek words and translate them into the closest corresponding English words as possible (word for word), while the NIV and NLT attempted to take the original thought that was being presented in Greek and Hebrew and then express that thought in English (thought for thought). Many of the other translations attempt to "meet in the middle" between those two methods. Paraphrases such as The Message or The Living Bible can be used to gain a different perspective on the meaning of a verse, but they should not be used as a primary Bible translation. There are many more Bible translations than the seven mentioned above. It is wise to have a personal method for determining whether a particular Bible translation is accurate. A good technique is to have a set of Scripture verses you know well, and look those verses up in a translation you are unsure of. A good idea is to look at some of the most common verses that speak of the deity of Christ (John 1:1, 14; 8:58; 10:30; Titus 2:13\) to make sure a Bible translation is true to the Word of God. Despite the multitudes of English Bible translations, we can be confident that God’s Word is truth and that it will accomplish His purposes (Isaiah 55:11; 2 Timothy 3:16\-17; Hebrews 4:12\).

What is Bibliology?

Answer Bibliology is the study of the Bible, the Word of God. The Bible is the inspired source of knowledge about God, Jesus Christ, salvation, and eternity. Without a proper view of the Bible, our views on these and other issues become clouded and distorted. Bibliology tells us what the Bible is. Common questions in Bibliology are: [Is the Bible truly God’s Word?](Bible-God-Word.html) Our answer to this question will not only determine how we view the Bible and its importance to our lives, but also ultimately will have an eternal impact on us. [What is the canon of Scripture?](canon-of-Scripture.html) The basis of Christianity is found in the authority of Scripture. If we can’t identify what is Scripture, then we can’t properly distinguish any theological truth from error. [What does it mean that the Bible is inspired?](Bible-inspired.html) While there are different views as to what extent the Bible is inspired, there can be no doubt that the Bible itself claims that every word, in every part of the Bible, is inspired by God (1 Corinthians 2:12\-13; 2 Timothy 3:16\-17\). [Does the Bible contain errors, contradictions, or discrepancies?](Bible-errors.html) If you read the Bible, at face value, without a preconceived bias for finding errors \- you will find it to be a coherent, consistent, and relatively easy\-to\-understand book. [Is there proof for the inspiration of the Bible?](proof-inspiration-Bible.html) Among the proofs for the divine inspiration of the Bible are fulfilled prophecy, the unity of Scripture, and the support of archeological findings. Its most important proof, however, is in the lives of those who read it, believe it, and live according to its precepts. Bibliology teaches us that the Bible is inspired, meaning it is "breathed out" by God. A proper Bibliology holds to the inerrancy of Scripture—that the Bible does not contain any errors, contradictions, or discrepancies. A solid Bibliology helps us to understand how God used the personalities and styles of the human authors of Scripture and still produced His Word and exactly what He wanted to be said. Bibliology enables us to know why other books were excluded from the Bible. For the Christian, the Bible is life itself. Its pages are filled with the very Spirit of God, revealing His heart and mind to us. What a wonderful and gracious God we have! He could have left us to struggle through life with no help at all, but He gave His Word to guide us, truly a "lamp to my feet and a light to my path" (Psalm 119:105\). A key Scripture on Bibliology is 2 Timothy 3:16\-17, "All Scripture is God\-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work."

Is the Bible truly God’s Word?

Answer Our answer to this question will not only determine how we view [the Bible](questions_Bible.html) and its importance to our lives, but it will also have an eternal impact on us. If the Bible is truly God’s Word, then we should cherish it, study it, obey it, and fully trust it. If the Bible is truly the Word of God, then it is the final authority for all matters of faith, practice, and morality. If the Bible is the Word of God, then to dismiss it is to dismiss God Himself. The fact that God gave us the Bible is an evidence of His love for us. God communicated to mankind what He is like and how we can have a right relationship with Him. These are things that we could not have known had God not divinely revealed them to us in the Bible. The Bible contains everything mankind needs to know about God in order to have a right relationship with Him. How can we know that the Bible is the Word of God and not just a good book? What is [unique](Bible-unique.html) about the Bible that sets it apart from all other books ever written? Is there any evidence that the Bible is truly God’s Word? These types of questions must be seriously examined. There can be no doubt that the Bible does claim to be the Word of God. This is seen in Paul’s commendation to Timothy: “From infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is God\-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:15–17\). There are both internal and external evidences that the Bible is truly God’s Word. **Internal Evidence that the Bible is God’s Word** Internal evidences are those things within the Bible that testify of its divine origin. One internal evidence that the Bible is truly God’s Word is its unity. Even though it is really sixty\-six individual books, written on three continents, in three different languages, over a period of approximately 1,500 years, by more than 40 authors who came from many walks of life, the Bible remains one unified book from beginning to end without contradiction. This unity is unique from all other books and is evidence of the divine origin of the words that God moved men to record. Another internal evidence that indicates the Bible is truly God’s Word is [prophecy](Bible-prophecy.html). The Bible contains hundreds of detailed prophecies relating to the future of various nations, certain cities, and all mankind. Other prophecies concern the coming of the Messiah, the Savior of all who would believe in Him. Unlike the prophecies found in other religious books or those by men such as [Nostradamus](Nostradamus-prophet.html), biblical prophecies are extremely detailed. There are over three hundred [prophecies concerning Jesus Christ](prophecies-of-Jesus.html) in the Old Testament. Not only was His lineage foretold and where He would be born, but also how He would die and that He would rise again. There simply is no logical way to explain the fulfilled prophecies in the Bible other than citing divine origin. There is no other religious book with the amount of detailed predictive prophecy the Bible contains. A third internal evidence of the divine origin of the Bible is its unique authority and power. While this evidence is more subjective than the first two, it is no less a powerful testimony that the Bible is God’s Word. The Bible’s authority is unlike that of any other book ever written. This power is seen in the way countless lives have been supernaturally transformed. Drug addicts have been cured by it, homosexuals set free by it, derelicts and deadbeats transformed by it, hardened criminals reformed by it, sinners rebuked by it, and hate turned to love by it. The Bible does possess a dynamic and transforming power that is only possible because it is truly God’s Word. **External Evidence that the Bible is God’s Word** There are also external evidences that indicate the Bible is truly the Word of God. One is the historicity of the Bible. Because the Bible details historical events, its accuracy is subject to verification like any other historical document. Through [archaeological evidence](archaeology-Bible.html) and extrabiblical writings, the historical accounts of the Bible proved time and again to be accurate and true. In fact, all the archaeological and manuscript evidence supporting the Bible makes it the best\-documented book from the ancient world. That the Bible accurately records historically verifiable events helps substantiate its claim to be the very Word of God and supports trust concerning other matters the Bible addresses. Another external evidence that the Bible is truly God’s Word is the integrity of its human authors. In studying the lives of the authors of Scripture, we find them to be honest and sincere. The fact that they were willing to die often excruciating deaths for what they believed testifies that these men truly believed God had spoken to them. The men who wrote the New Testament and many hundreds of other believers (1 Corinthians 15:6\) knew the truth of their message because they had spent time with Jesus Christ after He had risen from the dead. Seeing the risen Christ had a tremendous impact on them. They went from hiding in fear to being willing to die for the message God had revealed to them. Their lives and deaths testify to the fact that the Bible truly is God’s Word. Another external evidence that the Bible is truly God’s Word is the indestructibility of the Bible. The Bible has suffered more vicious attacks and attempts to destroy it than any other book in history. From early Roman Emperors like Diocletian, through communist dictators and on to modern\-day atheists, the Bible has withstood a constant onslaught from detractors. Yet it endures and is still today the most widely published book in the world. Throughout history, skeptics have regarded the Bible as mythological, but archaeology has confirmed it as historical. Opponents have attacked its teaching as primitive and outdated, but its moral and legal concepts have had a positive influence on societies throughout the world. It continues to be attacked by pseudo\-science, psychology, and political movements, yet it remains just as true and relevant today as it was when it was first written. This should not surprise us. After all, Jesus said, “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away” (Mark 13:31\). The Bible, unique among books, has transformed countless lives and swayed whole cultures. After looking at the evidence, one can say without a doubt that God has spoken and that, yes, the Bible is truly God’s Word.

How and when was the canon of the Bible put together?

Answer The term “canon” is used to describe the books that are divinely inspired and therefore belong in the Bible. The difficulty in determining the biblical canon is that the Bible does not give us a list of the books that belong in the Bible. Determining the canon was a process conducted first by Jewish rabbis and scholars and later by early Christians. Ultimately, it was God who decided what books belonged in the biblical canon. A book of Scripture belonged in the canon from the moment God inspired its writing. It was simply a matter of God’s convincing His human followers which books should be included in the Bible. Compared to the New Testament, there was much less controversy over the canon of the Old Testament. Hebrew believers recognized God’s messengers and accepted their writings as inspired of God. While there was undeniably some debate in regards to the Old Testament canon, by A.D. 250 there was nearly universal agreement on the canon of Hebrew Scripture. The only issue that remained was the Apocrypha, with some debate and discussion continuing today. The vast majority of Hebrew scholars considered the Apocrypha to be good historical and religious documents, but not on the same level as the Hebrew Scriptures. For the New Testament, the process of the recognition and collection began in the first centuries of the Christian church. Very early on, some of the New Testament books were being recognized. Paul considered Luke’s writings to be as authoritative as the Old Testament (1 Timothy 5:18; see also Deuteronomy 25:4 and Luke 10:7\). Peter recognized Paul’s writings as Scripture (2 Peter 3:15\-16\). Some of the books of the New Testament were being circulated among the churches (Colossians 4:16; 1 Thessalonians 5:27\). Clement of Rome mentioned at least eight New Testament books (A.D. 95\). Polycarp, a disciple of John the apostle, acknowledged 15 books (A.D. 108\). Ignatius of Antioch acknowledged about seven books (A.D. 115\). Later, Irenaeus mentioned 21 books (A.D. 185\). Hippolytus recognized 22 books (A.D. 170\-235\). The New Testament books receiving the most controversy were Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 John, and 3 John. The first “canon” was the [Muratorian Canon](Muratorian-Canon.html), which was compiled in AD 170\. The Muratorian Canon included all of the New Testament books except Hebrews, James, 1 and 2 Peter, and 3 John. In AD 363, the Council of Laodicea stated that only the Old Testament (along with one book of the Apocrypha) and 26 books of the New Testament (everything but Revelation) were canonical and to be read in the churches. The [Council of Hippo](Council-of-Hippo.html) (AD 393\) and the Council of Carthage (AD 397\) also affirmed the same 27 books as authoritative. The councils followed something similar to the following principles to determine whether a New Testament book was truly inspired by the Holy Spirit: 1\) Was the author an apostle or have a close connection with an apostle? 2\) Is the book being accepted by the body of Christ at large? 3\) Did the book contain consistency of doctrine and orthodox teaching? 4\) Did the book bear evidence of high moral and spiritual values that would reflect a work of the Holy Spirit? Again, it is crucial to remember that the church did not determine the canon. No early church council decided on the canon. It was God, and God alone, who determined which books belonged in the Bible. It was simply a matter of God’s imparting to His followers what He had already decided. The human process of collecting the books of the Bible was flawed, but God, in His sovereignty, and despite our ignorance and stubbornness, brought the early church to the recognition of the books He had inspired.

Why should we study the Old Testament?

Answer There are many reasons to study the Old Testament. For one, the Old Testament lays the foundation for the teachings and events found in the New Testament. The Bible is a progressive revelation. If you skip the first half of any good book and try to finish it, you will have a hard time understanding the characters, the plot, and the ending. In the same way, the New Testament is only completely understood when we see its foundation of the events, characters, laws, sacrificial system, covenants, and promises of the Old Testament. If we only had the New Testament, we would come to the Gospels and not know why the Jews were looking for a [Messiah](what-does-Messiah-mean.html) (a Savior King). We would not understand why this Messiah was coming (see Isaiah 53\), and we would not have been able to identify Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah through the many detailed prophecies that were given concerning Him \[e.g., His birth place (Micah 5:2\), His manner of death (Psalm 22, especially verses 1, 7–8, 14–18; 69:21\), His resurrection (Psalm 16:10\), and many more details of His ministry (Isaiah 9:2; 52:13\)]. A study of the Old Testament is also important for understanding the Jewish customs mentioned in passing in the New Testament. We would not understand the way the Pharisees had perverted God’s law by adding their own traditions to it, or why Jesus was so upset as He cleansed the temple courtyard, or where Jesus got the words He used in His many replies to adversaries. The Old Testament records numerous detailed prophecies that could only have come true if the Bible is God’s Word, not man’s (e.g., Daniel 7 and the following chapters). Daniel’s prophecies give specific details about the rise and fall of nations. These prophecies are so accurate, in fact, that skeptics choose to believe they were written after the fact. We should study the Old Testament because of the countless lessons it contains for us. By observing the lives of the characters of the Old Testament, we find guidance for our own lives. We are exhorted to trust God no matter what (Daniel 3\). We learn to stand firm in our convictions (Daniel 1\) and to await the reward of faithfulness (Daniel 6\). We learn it is best to confess sin early and sincerely instead of shifting blame (1 Samuel 15\). We learn not to toy with sin, because it will find us out (Judges 13—16\). We learn that our sin has consequences not only for ourselves but for our loved ones (Genesis 3\) and, conversely, that our good behavior has rewards for us and those around us (Exodus 20:5–6\). A study of the Old Testament also helps us understand prophecy. The Old Testament contains many promises that God will yet fulfill for the Jewish nation. The Old Testament reveals such things as the length of the Tribulation, how Christ’s future 1,000\-year reign fulfills His promises to the Jews, and how the conclusion of the Bible ties up the loose ends that were unraveled in the beginning of time. In summary, the Old Testament allows us to learn how to love and serve God, and it reveals more about God’s character. It shows through repeatedly fulfilled prophecy why the Bible is unique among holy books—it alone is able to demonstrate that it is what it claims to be: the inspired Word of God. In short, if you have not yet ventured into the pages of the Old Testament, you are missing much that God has available for you.

What does it mean that the Bible is inspired?

Answer When people speak of the Bible as inspired, they are referring to the fact that God divinely influenced the human authors of the Scriptures in such a way that what they wrote was the very Word of God. In the context of the Scriptures, the word “inspiration” simply means “God\-breathed.” Inspiration means the Bible truly is the Word of God and makes the Bible unique among all other books. While there are different views as to the extent to which the Bible is inspired, there can be no doubt that the Bible itself claims that every word in every part of the Bible comes from God (1 Corinthians 2:12\-13; 2 Timothy 3:16\-17\). This view of the Scriptures is often referred to as “[verbal plenary inspiration](verbal-plenary-inspiration.html).” That means the inspiration extends to the very words themselves (verbal)—not just concepts or ideas—and that the inspiration extends to all parts of Scripture and all subject matters of Scripture (plenary). Some people believe only parts of the Bible are inspired or only the thoughts or concepts that deal with religion are inspired, but these views of inspiration fall short of the Bible’s claims about itself. Full verbal plenary inspiration is an essential characteristic of the Word of God. The extent of inspiration can be clearly seen in 2 Timothy 3:16–17, “All Scripture is God\-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.” This verse tells us that God inspired all Scripture and that it is profitable to us. It is not just the parts of the Bible that deal with religious doctrines that are inspired, but each and every word from Genesis to Revelation. Because it is inspired by God, the Scriptures are therefore authoritative when it comes to establishing doctrine, and sufficient for teaching man how be in a right relationship with God. The Bible claims not only to be inspired by God, but also to have the supernatural ability to change us and make us “complete.” What more can we need? Another verse that deals with the inspiration of the Scriptures is 2 Peter 1:21\. This verse helps us to understand that even though God used men with their distinctive personalities and writing styles, God divinely inspired the very words they wrote. Jesus Himself confirmed the verbal plenary inspiration of the Scriptures when He said, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law...” (Matthew 5:17\-18\). In these verses, Jesus is reinforcing the accuracy of the Scriptures down to the smallest detail and the slightest punctuation mark, because it is the very Word of God. Because the Scriptures are the inspired Word of God, we can conclude that they are also inerrant and authoritative. A correct view of God will lead us to a correct view of His Word. Because God is all\-powerful, all\-knowing, and completely perfect, His Word will by its very nature have the same characteristics. The same verses that establish the inspiration of the Scriptures also establish that it is both inerrant and authoritative. Without a doubt the Bible is what it claims to be—the undeniable, authoritative, Word of God to humanity.

What are some interesting facts & stats about the Bible?

Answer Books in the Bible: 66 Books in the Old Testament: 39 Books in the New Testament: 27 Shortest book in the Bible: 2 John Longest book in the Bible: Psalms Chapters in the Bible: 1,189 Chapters in the Old Testament: 929 Chapters in the New Testament: 260 Middle chapter of the Bible: Psalm 117 Shortest chapter in the Bible: Psalm 117 Longest chapter in the Bible: Psalm 119 Verses in the Bible: 31,102 Verses in the Old Testament: 23,145 Verses in the New Testament: 7,957 Shortest verse in the Bible: John 11:35 Middle verses of the Bible: Psalm 103:1\-2 Longest verse in the Bible: Esther 8:9 Words in the Bible: 773,692 Words in the Old Testament: 592,439 Words in the New Testament: 181,253

What is the canon of Scripture?

Answer The word “canon” comes from the rule of law that was used to determine if a book measured up to a standard. It is important to note that the writings of Scripture were canonical at the moment they were written. Scripture was Scripture when the pen touched the parchment. This is very important because Christianity does not start by defining God, or Jesus Christ, or salvation. The basis of Christianity is found in the authority of Scripture. If we cannot identify what Scripture is, then we cannot properly distinguish any theological truth from error. What measure or standard was used to determine which books should be classified as Scripture? A key verse to understanding the process and purpose, and perhaps the timing of the giving of Scripture, is Jude 3 which states that a Christian’s faith “was once for all entrusted to the saints.” Since our faith is defined by Scripture, Jude is essentially saying that Scripture was given once for the benefit of all Christians. isn’t it wonderful to know that there are no hidden or lost manuscripts yet to be found, there are no secret books only familiar to a select few, and there are no people alive who have special revelation requiring us to trek up a Himalayan mountain in order to be enlightened? We can be confident that God has not left us without a witness. The same supernatural power God used to produce His Word has also been used to preserve it. Psalm 119:160 states that the entirety of God’s Word is truth. Starting with that premise, we can compare writings outside the accepted canon of Scripture to see if they meet the test. As an example, the Bible claims that Jesus Christ is God (Isaiah 9:6\-7; Matthew 1:22\-23; John 1:1, 2, 14, 20:28; Acts 16:31, 34; Philippians 2:5\-6; Colossians 2:9; Titus 2:13; Hebrews 1:8; 2 Peter 1:1\). Yet many extra\-biblical texts, claiming to be Scripture, argue that Jesus is not God. When clear contradictions exist, the established Bible is to be trusted, leaving the others outside the sphere of Scripture. In the early centuries of the church, Christians were sometimes put to death for possessing copies of Scripture. Because of this persecution, the question soon came up, “What books are worth dying for?” Some books may have contained sayings of Jesus, but were they inspired as stated in 2 Timothy 3:16? Church councils played a role in publicly recognizing the canon of Scripture, but often an individual church or groups of churches recognized a book as inspired from its writing (e.g., Colossians 4:16; 1 Thessalonians 5:27\). Throughout the early centuries of the church, few books were ever disputed and the list was basically settled by A.D. 303\. When it came to the Old Testament, three important facts were considered: 1\) The New Testament quotes from or alludes to every Old Testament book but two. 2\) Jesus effectively endorsed the Hebrew canon in Matthew 23:35 when He cited one of the first narratives and one of the last in the Scriptures of His day. 3\) The Jews were meticulous in preserving the Old Testament Scriptures, and they had few controversies over what parts belong or do not belong. The Roman Catholic Apocrypha did not measure up and fell outside the definition of Scripture and has never been accepted by the Jews. Most questions about which books belong in the Bible dealt with writings from the time of Christ and forward. The early church had some very specific criteria in order for books to be considered as part of the New Testament. These included: Was the book written by someone who was an eyewitness of Jesus Christ? Did the book pass the “truth test”? (i.e., did it concur with other, already agreed\-upon Scripture?). The New Testament books they accepted back then have endured the test of time and Christian orthodoxy has embraced these, with little challenge, for centuries. Confidence in the acceptance of specific books dates back to the first century recipients who offered firsthand testimony as to their authenticity. Furthermore, the end\-time subject matter of the book of Revelation, and the prohibition of adding to the words of the book in Revelation 22:18, argue strongly that the canon was closed at the time of its writing (c. A.D. 95\). There is an important theological point that should not be missed. God has used His word for millennia for one primary purpose—to reveal Himself and communicate to mankind. Ultimately, the church councils did not decide if a book was Scripture; that was decided when the human author was chosen by God to write. In order to accomplish the end result, including the preservation of His Word through the centuries, God guided the early church councils in their recognition of the canon. The acquisition of knowledge regarding such things as the true nature of God, the origin of the universe and life, the purpose and meaning of life, the wonders of salvation, and future events (including the destiny of mankind) are beyond the natural observational and scientific capacity of mankind. The already\-delivered Word of God, valued and personally applied by Christians for centuries, is sufficient to explain to us everything we need to know of Christ (John 5:18; Acts 18:28; Galatians 3:22; 2 Timothy 3:15\) and to teach us, correct us, and instruct us into all righteousness (2 Timothy 3:16\).

Can/should we interpret the Bible literally?

Answer Not only *can* we take the Bible literally, but we *must* take the Bible literally. This is the only way to determine what God really is trying to communicate to us. When we read any piece of literature, but especially the Bible, we must determine what the author intended to communicate. Many today will read a verse or passage of Scripture and then give their own definitions to the words, phrases, or paragraphs, ignoring the context and author’s intent. But this is not what God intended, which is why God tells us to correctly handle the Word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15\). One reason we should take the Bible literally is because the Lord Jesus Christ took it literally. Whenever the Lord Jesus quoted from the Old Testament, it was always clear that He believed in its literal interpretation. As an example, when Jesus was tempted by Satan in Luke 4, He answered by quoting the Old Testament. If God’s commands in Deuteronomy 8:3, 6:13, and 6:16 were not literal, Jesus would not have used them and they would have been powerless to stop Satan’s mouth, which they certainly did. The disciples also took the commands of Christ (which are part of the Bible) literally. Jesus commanded the disciples to go and make more disciples in Matthew 28:19\-20\. In Acts 2 and following, we find that the disciples took Jesus’ command literally and went throughout the known world of that time preaching the gospel of Christ and telling them to "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved” (Acts 16:31\). Just as the disciples took Jesus’ words literally, so must we. How else can we be sure of our salvation if we do not believe Him when He says He came to seek and save the lost (Luke 19:10\), pay the penalty for our sin (Matthew 26:28\), and provide eternal life (John 17:3\)? Although we take the Bible literally, there are still figures of speech within its pages. An example of a figure of speech would be that if someone said "it is raining cats and dogs outside," you would know that they did not really mean that cats and dogs were falling from the sky. They would mean it is raining really hard. There are figures of speech in the Bible which are not to be taken literally, but those are obvious. (See Psalm 17:8 for example.) Finally, when we make ourselves the final arbiters of which parts of the Bible are to be interpreted literally, we elevate ourselves above God. Who is to say, then, that one person’s interpretation of a biblical event or truth is any more or less valid than another’s? The confusion and distortions that would inevitably result from such a system would essentially render the Scriptures null and void. The Bible is God’s Word to us and He meant it to be believed—literally and completely.

What is the KJV Only movement?

Answer Many people have strong and serious objections to the translation methods and textual basis for the new translations and therefore take a strong stance in favor of the King James Version. Others are equally convinced that the newer translations are an improvement over the KJV in their textual basis and translation methodology. GotQuestions.org does not want to limit its ministry to those of the "KJV Only" persuasion. Nor do we want to limit ourselves to those who prefer the NIV, NAS, NKJV, etc. Note \- the purpose of this article is not to argue against the use of the King James Version. Rather, the focus of this article is to contend with the idea that the King James Version is the only Bible English speakers should use. The KJV Only movement claims its loyalty to be to the Textus Receptus, a Greek New Testament manuscript compilation completed in the 1500s. To varying degrees, KJV Only advocates argue that God guided Erasmus (the compiler of the Textus Receptus) to come up with a Greek text that is perfectly identical to what was originally written by the biblical authors. However, upon further examination, it can be seen that KJV Only advocates are not loyal to the Textus Receptus, but rather only to the KJV itself. The New Testament of the New King James Version is based on the Textus Receptus, just as the KJV is. Yet, KJV Only advocates label the NKJV just as heretical as they do the NIV, NAS, etc. Beyond the NKJV, other attempts (such as the [KJ21](21st-Century-King-James-Version-KJ21.html) and [MEV](Modern-English-Version-MEV.html)) have been made to make minimal updates to the KJV, only "modernizing" the archaic language, while using the exact same Greek and Hebrew manuscripts. These attempts are rejected nearly as strongly as the NKJV and the other newer Bible translations. This proves that KJV Only advocates are loyal to the King James Version itself, not to the Textus Receptus. KJV Only advocates have no desire or plan to update the KJV in any way. The KJV certainly contains English that is outdated, archaic, and sometimes confusing to modern English speakers and readers. It would be fairly simple to publish an updated KJV with the archaic words and phrases updated into modern 21st century English. However, any attempt to edit the KJV in any way results in accusations from KJV Only advocates of heresy and perversion of the Word of God. When the Bible is translated for the first time into a new language today, it is translated into the language that culture speaks and writes today, not the way they spoke and wrote 400 years ago. The same should be true in English. The Bible was written in the common, ordinary language of the people at that time. Bible translations today should be the same. That is why Bible translations must be updated and revised as languages develop and change. The KJV Only movement is very English\-focused in its thinking. Why should people who read English be forced to read the Bible in outdated/archaic English, while people of all other languages can read the Bible in modern/current forms of their languages? Our loyalties are to the original manuscripts of the Old and New Testaments, written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Only the original languages are the Word of God as He inspired it. A translation is only an attempt to take what is said in one language and communicate it in another. The modern translations are superb in taking the meaning of the original languages and communicating it in a way that we can understand in English. However, none of the modern translations are perfect. Every one contains verses that are at least somewhat mistranslated. By comparing and contrasting several different translations, it is often easier to get a good grasp on what the verse is saying than by only using one translation. Our loyalty should not be to any one English translation, but to the inspired, inerrant Word of God that is communicated by the Holy Spirit through the translations (2 Timothy 3:16\-17\).

What are the Dead Sea Scrolls and why are they important?

Answer The first of the Dead Sea Scroll discoveries occurred in 1947 in Qumran, a village situated about twenty miles east of Jerusalem on the northwest shore of the [Dead Sea](Dead-Sea.html). A young Bedouin shepherd, following a goat that had gone astray, tossed a rock into one of the caves along the seacliffs and heard a cracking sound: the rock had hit a ceramic pot containing leather and papyrus scrolls that were later determined to be nearly twenty centuries old. Ten years and many searches later, eleven caves around the Dead Sea were found to contain tens of thousands of scroll fragments dating from the third century B.C. to A.D. 68 and representing an estimated eight hundred separate works. The Dead Sea Scrolls comprise a vast collection of Jewish documents written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, and encompassing many subjects and literary styles. They include manuscripts or fragments of every book in the Hebrew Bible except the Book of Esther, all of them created nearly one thousand years earlier than any previously known biblical manuscripts. The scrolls also contain the earliest existing biblical commentary, on the Book of Habakkuk, and many other writings, among them religious works pertaining to Jewish sects of the time The legends of what was contained in the Dead Sea Scrolls are far beyond what was actually there. There were no lost books of the Bible or other literature that there was not already other copies of. The vast majority of the Dead Sea Scrolls were simply copies of books of the Old Testament from 250\-150 B.C. A copy or portion of nearly every Old Testament book was found in Qumran. There were extra\-biblical and apocryphal books found as well, but again, the vast majority of the scrolls were copies of the Hebrew Old Testament. The Dead Sea Scrolls were such an amazing discovery in that the scrolls were in excellent condition and had remained hidden for so long (over 2000 years). The Dead Sea Scrolls can also give us confidence in the reliability of the Old Testament manuscripts since there were minimal differences between the manuscripts that had previously been discovered and those that were found in Qumran. Clearly this is a testament to the way God has preserved His Word down through the centuries, protecting it from extinction and guarding it against significant error.

Does the Bible contain errors, contradictions, or discrepancies?

Answer If we read the Bible at face value, without a preconceived bias for finding errors, we will find it to be a coherent, consistent, and relatively easy\-to\-understand book. Yes, there are difficult passages. Yes, there are verses that appear to contradict each other. We must remember that the Bible was written by approximately 40 different authors over a period of around 1,500 years. Each writer wrote with a different style, from a different perspective, to a different audience, for a different purpose. We should expect some minor differences. However, a difference is not a contradiction. It is only an error if there is absolutely no conceivable way the verses or passages can be reconciled. Even if an answer is not available right now, that does not mean an answer does not exist. Many have found a supposed error in the Bible in relation to history or geography only to find out that the Bible is correct once further archaeological evidence is discovered. We often receive questions along the lines of “Explain how these verses do not contradict!” or “Look, here is an error in the Bible!” Admittedly, some of the things people bring up are difficult to answer. However, it is our contention that there are viable and intellectually plausible answers to every supposed Bible contradiction and error. There are books and websites available that list “all the errors in the Bible.” Most people simply get their ammunition from these places; they do not find supposed errors on their own. There are also books and websites available that refute every one of these supposed errors. The saddest thing is that most people who attack the Bible are not truly interested in an answer. Many “Bible attackers” are even aware of these answers, but they continue to use the same old shallow attacks again and again. So, what are we to do when someone approaches us with an alleged Bible error? 1\) Prayerfully study the Scriptures and see if there is a simple solution. 2\) Do some research using some of the fine Bible commentaries, “Bible defense” books, and biblical research websites. 3\) Ask our pastors/church leaders to see if they can find a solution. 4\) If there is still no clear answer after steps 1\), 2\), and 3\) are followed, we trust God that His Word is truth and that there is a solution that just simply has not been realized yet (2 Timothy 2:15, 3:16\-17\).

Why should we read the Bible / study the Bible?

Answer We should read and study the Bible because it is God’s Word to us. The Bible is literally "God\-breathed" (2 Timothy 3:16\). In other words, it is God’s very words to us. There are so many questions that philosophers have asked that God answers for us in Scripture. What is the purpose to life? Where did I come from? Is there life after death? How do I get to heaven? Why is the world full of evil? Why do I struggle to do good? In addition to these "big" questions, the Bible gives much practical advice in areas such as: What do I look for in a mate? How can I have a successful marriage? How can I be a good friend? How can I be a good parent? What is success and how do I achieve it? How can I change? What really matters in life? How can I live so that I do not look back with regret? How can I handle the unfair circumstances and bad events of life victoriously? We should read and study the Bible because it is totally reliable and without error. The Bible is unique among so\-called "holy" books in that it does not merely give moral teaching and say, "Trust me." Rather, we have the ability to test it by checking the hundreds of detailed prophecies that it makes, by checking the historical accounts it records, and by checking the scientific facts it relates. Those who say the Bible has errors have their ears closed to the truth. Jesus once asked which is easier to say, "Your sins are forgiven you," or "Rise, take up your bed and walk." Then He proved He had the ability to forgive sins (something we cannot see with our eyes) by healing the paralytic (something those around Him could test with their eyes). Similarly, we are given assurance that God’s Word is true when it discusses spiritual areas that we cannot test with our senses by showing itself true in those areas that we can test, such as historical accuracy, scientific accuracy, and prophetic accuracy. We should read and study the Bible because God does not change and because mankind’s nature does not change; it is as relevant for us as it was when it was written. While technology changes, mankind’s nature and desires do not change. We find, as we read the pages of biblical history, that whether we are talking about one\-on\-one relationships or societies, "there is nothing new under the sun" (Ecclesiastes 1:9\). And while mankind as a whole continues to seek love and satisfaction in all of the wrong places, God—our good and gracious Creator—tells us what will bring us lasting joy. His revealed Word, the Bible, is so important that Jesus said of it, "Man does not live on bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God" (Matthew 4:4\). In other words, if we want to live life to the fullest, as God intended, we must listen to and heed God’s written Word. We should read and study the Bible because there is so much false teaching. The Bible gives us the measuring stick by which we can distinguish truth from error. It tells us what God is like. To have a wrong impression of God is to worship an idol or false god. We are worshiping something that He is not. The Bible tells us how one truly gets to heaven, and it is not by being good or by being baptized or by anything else we do (John 14:6; Ephesians 2:1\-10; Isaiah 53:6; Romans 3:10\-18, 5:8, 6:23, 10:9\-13\). Along this line, God’s Word shows us just how much God loves us (Romans 5:6\-8; John 3:16\). And it is in learning this that we are drawn to love Him in return (1 John 4:19\). The Bible equips us to serve God (2 Timothy 3:17; Ephesians 6:17; Hebrews 4:12\). It helps us know how to be saved from our sin and its ultimate consequence (2 Timothy 3:15\). Meditating on God’s Word and obeying its teachings will bring success in life (Joshua 1:8; James 1:25\). God’s Word helps us see sin in our lives and helps us get rid of it (Psalm 119:9, 11\). It gives us guidance in life, making us wiser than our teachers (Psalm 32:8, 119:99; Proverbs 1:6\). The Bible keeps us from wasting years of our lives on that which does not matter and will not last (Matthew 7:24\-27\). Reading and studying the Bible helps us see beyond the attractive "bait" to the painful "hook" in sinful temptations, so that we can learn from others' mistakes rather than making them ourselves. Experience is a great teacher, but when it comes to learning from sin, it is a terribly hard teacher. It is so much better to learn from others' mistakes. There are so many Bible characters to learn from, some of whom can serve as both positive and negative role models at different times in their lives. For example, David, in his defeat of Goliath, teaches us that God is greater than anything He asks us to face (1 Samuel 17\), while his giving in to the temptation to commit adultery with Bathsheba reveals just how long\-lasting and terrible the consequences of a moment’s sinful pleasure can be (2 Samuel 11\). The Bible is a book that is not merely for reading. It is a book for studying so that it can be applied. Otherwise, it is like swallowing food without chewing and then spitting it back out again—no nutritional value is gained by it. The Bible is God’s Word. As such, it is as binding as the laws of nature. We can ignore it, but we do so to our own detriment, just as we would if we ignored the law of gravity. It cannot be emphasized strongly enough just how important the Bible is to our lives. Studying the Bible can be compared to mining for gold. If we make little effort and merely "sift through the pebbles in a stream," we will only find a little gold dust. But the more we make an effort to really dig into it, the more reward we will gain for our effort.

What are the Apocrypha / Deuterocanonical books?

Answer Roman Catholic Bibles have several more books in the Old Testament than Protestant Bibles. These books are referred to as the Apocrypha or Deuterocanonical books. The word *apocrypha* means “hidden,” while the word *deuterocanonical* means “second canon.” The Apocrypha/Deuterocanonicals were written primarily in the time between the Old and New Testaments. The books of the Apocrypha include [1 Esdras](first-second-Esdras.html), [2 Esdras](first-second-Esdras.html), [Tobit](book-of-Tobit.html), [Judith](book-of-Judith.html), [Wisdom of Solomon](Wisdom-of-Solomon.html), [Ecclesiasticus](book-of-Ecclesiasticus.html), [Baruch](book-of-Baruch.html), the [Letter of Jeremiah](letter-of-Jeremiah.html), [Prayer of Manasseh](Prayer-of-Manasseh.html), [1 Maccabees](first-second-Maccabees.html), and [2 Maccabees](first-second-Maccabees.html), as well as additions to the books of Esther and Daniel. Not all of these books are included in Catholic Bibles. The nation of Israel treated the Apocrypha/Deuterocanonical books with respect, but never accepted them as true books of the Hebrew Bible. The early Christian church debated the status of the Apocrypha/Deuterocanonicals, but few early Christians believed they belonged in the canon of Scripture. The New Testament quotes from the Old Testament hundreds of times, but nowhere quotes or alludes to any of the Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical books. Further, there are many proven errors and contradictions in the Apocrypha/Deuterocanonicals. Here are a few websites that demonstrate these errors: [http://www.justforcatholics.org/a109\.htm](http://www.justforcatholics.org/a109.htm) <http://www.biblequery.org/Bible/BibleCanon/WhatAboutTheApocrypha.htm> [https://carm.org/roman\-catholicism/errors\-in\-the\-apocrypha/](https://carm.org/roman-catholicism/errors-in-the-apocrypha/) The Apocrypha/Deuterocanonical books teach many things that are not true and are not historically accurate. For centuries, the Roman Catholic Church had included the Apocrypha/Deuterocanonicals in various listings of canonical books, and the [Council of Hippo](Council-of-Hippo.html) in AD 393 and the [Third Council of Carthage](Council-of-Carthage.html) in AD 397 accepted the Apocrypha as inspired. Neither council was an ecumenical or general council, though, and the impact of those decisions was limited. Many within the Catholic Church still viewed the Apocrypha as useful but not inspired. Catholics officially declared the Apocrypha/Deuterocanonicals to be inspired, authoritative Scripture at the Council of Trent in the mid\-1500s, primarily in response to the Protestant Reformation. The Apocrypha/Deuterocanonicals support some of the things that the Roman Catholic Church believes and practices that are not in agreement with the Bible. Examples are petitioning saints in heaven for their prayers and almsgiving to merit grace or atone for sins. Some of what the Apocrypha/Deuterocanonicals say is true and correct. However, due to the historical and theological errors, the books must be viewed as fallible historical and religious documents, not as the inspired, authoritative Word of God.

Where is a good place to start reading the Bible?

Answer For starters, it is important to realize that [the Bible](what-is-the-Bible.html) is not an ordinary book that reads smoothly from cover to cover. It is actually a library, or collection, of books written by different authors in several languages over 1,500 years. Martin Luther said that the Bible is the “cradle of Christ” because all biblical history and prophecy ultimately point to Jesus. Therefore, any first reading of the Bible should probably begin with the Gospels. The Gospel of Mark is quick and fast\-paced and is a good place to start. Then you might want to go on to the Gospel of John, which focuses on the things Jesus claimed about Himself. Mark tells about what Jesus did, while John tells about what Jesus said and who Jesus was. In John are some of the simplest and clearest passages, but also some of the deepest and most profound passages. Reading the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) will familiarize you with Christ’s life and ministry. After that, read through some of the Epistles (e.g., Ephesians, Philippians, 1 John). These books teach us how to live our lives in a way that is honoring to God. When you start reading the Old Testament, read the book of Genesis. It tells us how God created the world and how mankind fell into sin, as well as the impact that fall had on the world. Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy can be hard to read because they get into all the laws God required the Jews to live by. While you should not avoid these books, they are perhaps better left for later study. In any case, try not to get bogged down in them. Read Joshua through Chronicles to get a good history of Israel. Reading Psalms through Song of Solomon will give you a good feel for Hebrew poetry and wisdom. The prophetic books, Isaiah through Malachi, can be hard to understand as well. Remember, the key to understanding the Bible is asking God for wisdom (James 1:5\). God is the author of the Bible, and He wants you to understand His Word. You can be sure that God will bless your efforts to know Him and His Word, no matter where you start and no matter what your method of study. We need the Word of God: “Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God” (Matthew 4:4\). God’s Word is “perfect, refreshing the soul . . . trustworthy, making wise the simple . . . right, giving joy to the heart . . . radiant, giving light to the eyes . . . pure, enduring forever . . . firm . . . righteous . . . more precious than gold . . . \[and] sweeter than honey” (Psalm 19:7–11\). God’s Word is truth, and the truth will change your life (John 17:17\).

Who were the authors of the books of the Bible?

Answer Ultimately, above the human authors, the Bible was written by God. Second Timothy 3:16 tells us that the Bible was “breathed out” by God. God superintended the human authors of the Bible so that, while using their own writing styles and personalities, they still recorded exactly what God intended. The Bible was not dictated by God, but it was perfectly guided and entirely inspired by Him. Humanly speaking, the Bible was written by approximately 40 men of diverse backgrounds over the course of 1500 years. Isaiah was a prophet, Ezra was a priest, Matthew was a tax\-collector, John was a fisherman, [Paul was a tentmaker](Paul-tentmaker.html), Moses was a shepherd, Luke was a physician. Despite being penned by different authors over 15 centuries, the Bible does not contradict itself and does not contain any errors. The authors all present different perspectives, but they all proclaim the same one true God, and the same one way of salvation—Jesus Christ (John 14:6; Acts 4:12\). Few of the books of the Bible specifically name their author. Here are the books of the Bible along with the name of who is most assumed by biblical scholars to be the author, along with the approximate date of authorship: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy \= Moses \- 1400 B.C. Joshua \= Joshua \- 1350 B.C. Judges, Ruth, 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel \= Samuel/Nathan/Gad \- 1000 \- 900 B.C. 1 Kings, 2 Kings \= Jeremiah \- 600 B.C. 1 Chronicles, 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah \= Ezra \- 450 B.C. Esther \= Mordecai \- 400 B.C. Job \= Moses \- 1400 B.C. Psalms \= several different authors, mostly David \- 1000 \- 400 B.C. Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon \= Solomon \- 900 B.C. Isaiah \= Isaiah \- 700 B.C. Jeremiah, Lamentations \= Jeremiah \- 600 B.C. Ezekiel \= Ezekiel \- 550 B.C. Daniel \= Daniel \- 550 B.C. Hosea \= Hosea \- 750 B.C. Joel \= Joel \- 850 B.C. Amos \= Amos \- 750 B.C. Obadiah \= Obadiah \- 600 B.C. Jonah \= Jonah \- 700 B.C. Micah \= Micah \- 700 B.C. Nahum \= Nahum \- 650 B.C. Habakkuk \= Habakkuk \- 600 B.C. Zephaniah \= Zephaniah \- 650 B.C. Haggai \= Haggai \- 520 B.C. Zechariah \= Zechariah \- 500 B.C. Malachi \= Malachi \- 430 B.C. Matthew \= Matthew \- A.D. 55 Mark \= John Mark \- A.D. 50 Luke \= Luke \- A.D. 60 John \= John \- A.D. 90 Acts \= Luke \- A.D. 65 Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon \= Paul \- A.D. 50\-70 Hebrews \= unknown, mostly likely Paul, Luke, Barnabas, or Apollos \- A.D. 65 James \= James \- A.D. 45 1 Peter, 2 Peter \= Peter \- A.D. 60 1 John, 2 John, 3 John \= John \- A.D. 90 Jude \= Jude \- A.D. 60 Revelation \= John \- A.D. 90

What are the lost books of the Bible?

Answer There are no “lost books” of the Bible, or books that were taken out of the Bible, or books missing from the Bible. Every book that God intended to be in the Bible is in the Bible. There are many legends and rumors of lost books of the Bible, but the books were not, in fact, lost. Rather, they were rejected. There are literally hundreds of religious books that were written in the same time period as the books of the Bible. Some of these books contain true accounts of things that actually occurred ([1 Maccabees](first-second-Maccabees.html), for example). Others contain some good spiritual teaching (the [Wisdom of Solomon](Wisdom-of-Solomon.html), for example). However, these books are not inspired by God. If we read any of these books, such as the [Apocryphal](apocrypha-deuterocanonical.html) ones mentioned above, we have to treat them as fallible religious/historical books, not as the inspired, inerrant Word of God (2 Timothy 3:16\-17\). The [gospel of Thomas](gospel-of-Thomas.html), for example, was a forgery written in the 3rd or 4th century A.D., claiming to have been written by the apostle Thomas. It was not written by Thomas. The early Christians almost universally rejected the gospel of Thomas as heretical. It contains many false and heretical things that Jesus supposedly said and did. None of it (or at best very little of it) is true. For example, the Gospel of Thomas has Jesus saying nonsensical things like “Blessed is the lion that a person will eat, and the lion will become human” (Saying 7\), and “Every woman who makes herself male will enter into the kingdom of heaven” (Saying 114\). The [gospel of Barnabas](gospel-of-Barnabas.html) was not written by the biblical Barnabas, but by an imposter. The same can be said of the [gospel of Philip](gospel-of-Philip.html), the [apocalypse of Peter](apocalypse-of-Peter.html), etc. All of these books, and the many others like them, are [pseudepigraphal](pseudepigrapha.html), essentially meaning “ascribed to a false author.” There is one God. The Bible has one Creator. It is one book. It has one plan of grace, recorded from initiation, through execution, to consummation. From predestination to glorification, the Bible is the story of God redeeming His chosen people for the praise of His glory. As God’s redemptive purposes and plan unfold in Scripture, the recurring themes constantly emphasized are the character of God, the judgment for sin and disobedience, the blessing for faith and obedience, the Lord and Savior and His sacrifice for sin, and the coming kingdom and glory. It is God’s intention that we know and understand these themes because our lives and eternal destinies depend upon them. It is therefore unthinkable that God would allow some of this vital information to be “lost” in any way. The Bible is complete, in order that we who read and understand it might also be “complete, and equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16\-17\).

What is biblical numerology?

Answer Biblical numerology is the study of numbers in the Bible. Two of the most commonly repeated numbers in the Bible are 7 and 40\. The [number 7](number-7-seven.html) signifies completion or perfection (Genesis 7:2\-4; Revelation 1:20\). It is often called “God’s number” since He is the only One who is perfect and complete (Revelation 4:5; 5:1, 5\-6\). The number 3 is also thought to be the number of divine perfection: The Trinity consists of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The [number 40](40-days-Bible.html) is often understood as the “number of probation or trial.” For example: the Israelites wandered for 40 years (Deuteronomy 8:2\-5\); Moses was on the mount for 40 days (Exodus 24:18\); 40 days were involved in the story of Jonah and Nineveh (Jonah 3:4\); Jesus was tempted for 40 days (Matthew 4:2\); there were 40 days between Jesus’ resurrection and ascension (Acts 1:3\). Another number repeated in the Bible is 4, which is the number of creation: North, South, East, West; four seasons. The number 6 is thought to be the number of man: Man was created on the 6th day; man labors 6 days only. Another example of the Bible using a number to signify something is the number 666, the number of the Antichrist in Revelation chapter 13\. Whether or not the numbers really do have a significance is still debated in many circles. The Bible definitely seems to use numbers in patterns or to teach a spiritual truth. However, many people put too much significance on “biblical numerology,” trying to find a special meaning behind every number in the Bible. Often a number in the Bible is simply a number. God does not call us to search for secret meanings, hidden messages, and codes in the Bible. There is more than enough truth in the words and meanings of Scripture to meet all our needs and make us “complete and thoroughly equipped for every good work” (see 2 Timothy 3:16\-17\).

Is there any validity to the Bible codes?

Answer Bible codes are hidden messages purported to exist in the original text of Scripture. Many people claim to have discovered Bible codes using mathematical patterns. Some codes are found by counting letters or by assigning numerical values to each letter in a text (called “theomatics”). More complex codes are being found with the help of computers. For example, some have looked at Isaiah 53:5 (“But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed”) and, using every twelfth Hebrew letter, spelled the sentence “Jesus is my name.” So, there do appear to be some Bible codes that reveal specific, meaningful information. We cannot completely rule out the possibility that God has “hidden” messages in His Word. God is certainly capable of structuring His [inspired Word](Bible-inspired.html) in such a complex way. However, we know that God wants us to understand His Word (2 Timothy 3:16–17\), so we must ask why He would “cloak” valuable information that people would be unable to decipher for thousands of years. There are some problems with the idea of Bible codes. For one, the Bible does not ever hint of the existence of internal codes (Proverbs 25:2 notwithstanding), so all Bible codes are the result of human constructs overlaid on the text. Jesus, in all of the times that He cites Bible passages, never once uses a “Bible code” to draw out a meaning. The apostle Paul, in all the times he references Old Testament passages, never once uses a “Bible code” to provide deeper insight. The same can be said for *all* of the other biblical authors. Also, Bible codes are not necessary. What we need to know and apply is clear enough from a “straight” reading of the Word of God. Our salvation comes through calling on Christ to save us from our sin. Calling on Christ comes as we place our faith in Him. Faith comes as a result of hearing the Word of God. Hearing happens as people go out and preach the Word of God to others (Romans 10:9–17\). After salvation, we grow in Christ as we feed upon the Word of God (Psalm 119:9–11,105; 2 Timothy 3:16–17; 1 Peter 2:2\). All these passages refer to taking the text of the Bible at face value and applying its principles. Salvation and sanctification are not dependent on seeking out Bible codes. Also, identifying Bible codes is always somewhat arbitrary. The process of discovery and interpretation depends greatly on the perspective of the researcher. This is especially true when the Bible codes are seen as prophetic. Some code\-searchers claim to have found references to the World Trade Center, Yasser Arafat, Bill Clinton, anthrax, and various earthquakes and other disasters. Is the Bible a complex book? Yes. Is it more complex than we know? Yes, surely. Is it possible that God embedded hidden messages in the original text of Scripture? Yes, it is possible that Bible codes exist. But, again, a plain reading of the Bible speaks for itself. All that we need from the Bible is obtained from a straightforward study of its text (2 Timothy 2:15; 3:16–17\). There is no need for the time\-consuming tasks of counting letters, searching for sequences, and arranging the text in various grids in order to find what amounts to questionable patterns and subjective interpretations.

How did people know about God before the Bible?

Answer Even though people did not have the Word of God, they were not without the ability to receive, understand and obey God before there was a Bible as we know it. In fact, there are many areas of the world today where Bibles are not available, yet people still can and do know about God. The issue is one of revelation—God’s revealing to man what He wants us to know and understand about Himself. While there has not always been a Bible, there have always been means for man to receive and understand God’s revelation. There are two categories of revelation, general and special. General revelation deals with that revelation from God universally to all mankind. The external aspect of general revelation are those things which God must be the cause or source of. Because these things exist, God must also exist in order to have put them into existence. Romans 1:20 tells us “For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse.” So all men and women everywhere can look at the creation and know that God exists. Psalm 19:1\-4 further explains that the creation speaks clearly of God in a language that all understand. “There is no speech or language where their voice is not heard” (verse 3\). The revelation from nature is clear. No one can excuse himself because of ignorance. There is no alibi for the atheist, and there is no excuse for the agnostic. Another aspect of general revelation—that which God has revealed to everyone—is in the existence of our conscience. This is internal. “What may be known of God is manifest in them” (Romans 1:19\). People today, because of what they have on the inside, are conscious that God exists. These two aspects of general revelation are clearly seen in the countless stories of missionaries coming upon native tribes who have never seen a Bible or heard of Jesus. Yet, when the plan of salvation is presented to them, they know that God exists because they see evidence of Him in nature, and they know they need a Savior because their consciences convict them of their sin and their need of Him. In addition to the two parts of general revelation, there are also methods of special revelation God uses to show mankind about Himself and His will. Special revelation does not come to all people, but only to certain people at a certain time. Examples from Scripture of special revelation are the lot (Acts 1:21\-26, also Proverbs 16:33\); the Urim and Thummim (a special type of lot used by the High Priest\-see Exodus 28:30, Numbers 27:21, Deuteronomy 33:8, 1 Samuel 28:6, and Ezra 2:63\); dreams and visions (Genesis 20:3,6; Genesis 31:11\-13, 24; Joel 2:28\); Appearances of the Angel of the Lord (Genesis 16:7\-14, Exodus 3:2, 2 Samuel 24:16, Zechariah 1:12\) and the ministry of the prophets (2 Samuel 23:2, Zechariah 1:1\). These references are not an exhaustive list of every occurrence, but should serve as good examples of this type of revelation. The Bible as we know it is also a form of special revelation, though it may not seem like it. It is in a category all by itself, however, because it renders the other forms of special revelation unnecessary for today. Even Peter, who along with John witnessed Jesus talking to Moses and Elijah on the Mount of Transfiguration (Matthew 17; Luke 9\), declared this special experience to be inferior to the “more sure word of prophecy, to which you would do well to take heed” (2 Peter 1:19\), by which he meant the Word of God, the Bible. That is because the Bible is a written form of all the information God wants us to know about Him and His plan for our lives. In fact, the Bible contains all that is needed to be known about God in order to have a relationship with Him. So, before the Bible as we know it was available, God used many means to reveal Himself and His will to mankind. It is amazing to think that God did not use just one form, but many. It makes us thankful that God gave us His written Word and preserved it for us today in the Bible, so that we are not at the mercy of someone else, but can study it for ourselves! Of course, the clearest form of revelation God used was when He sent His Son, Jesus Christ, to take on human form and walk this earth among us, and die for our sins in our place on the cross. That alone spoke volumes!

What is the JEDP Theory?

Answer In brief, the JEDP theory states that the first five books of the Bible, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, were not written entirely by Moses, who died in the 1400’s B.C., but also by different authors/compilers after Moses. The theory is based on the fact that different names for God are used in different portions of the Pentateuch, and there are detectable differences in linguistic style. The letters of the JEDP theory stand for the four supposed authors: the Jahwist/Yahwist who uses *Jehovah* for God’s name, the Elohist who uses *Elohim* for God’s name, the Deuteronomist (the author of Deuteronomy), and the priestly author of Leviticus. The JEDP theory goes on to state that the different portions of the Pentateuch were likely compiled in the 4th Century B.C., possibly by Ezra. So, why are there different names for God in books supposedly written by a single author? For example, Genesis chapter 1 uses the name *Elohim* while Genesis chapter 2 uses the name *YHWH*. Patterns like this occur quite frequently in the Pentateuch. The answer is simple. Moses used God’s names to make a point. In Genesis chapter 1, God is *Elohim*, the mighty Creator God. In Genesis chapter 2, God is *Yahweh*, the personal God who created and relates to humanity. This does not point to different authors but to a single author using God’s various names to emphasize a point and describe different aspects of His character. Regarding the different styles, should we not expect an author to have a different style when he is writing history (Genesis), writing legal statutes (Exodus, Deuteronomy), and writing intricate details of the sacrificial system (Leviticus)? The JEDP theory takes the explainable differences in the Pentateuch and invents an elaborate theory that has no basis in reality or history. No J, E, D, or P document has ever been discovered. No ancient Jewish or Christian scholar has even hinted that such documents existed. The most powerful argument against the JEDP theory is the Bible itself. Jesus, in Mark 12:26, said, “Now about the dead rising—have you not read in the book of Moses, in the account of the bush, how God said to him, 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'?” Therefore, Jesus says plainly that Moses wrote the account of the burning bush in Exodus 3:1\-3\. Luke, in Acts 3:22, comments on a passage in Deuteronomy 18:15 and credits Moses as being the author of that passage. Paul, in Romans 10:5, talks about the righteousness Moses describes in Leviticus 18:5\. Paul, therefore, testifies that Moses is the author of Leviticus. So, we have Jesus showing that Moses was the author of Exodus, Luke (in Acts) showing that Moses wrote Deuteronomy, and Paul saying that Moses was the author of Leviticus. In order for the JEDP theory to be true, Jesus, Luke, and Paul must all either be liars or be in error in their understanding of the Old Testament. Let us put our faith in Jesus and the human authors of Scripture rather than the ridiculous and baseless JEDP theory (2 Timothy 3:16\-17\).

What is the Synoptic Problem?

Answer When the first three Gospels—[Matthew](Gospel-of-Matthew.html), [Mark](Gospel-of-Mark.html), and [Luke](Gospel-of-Luke.html)—are compared, it is unmistakable that the accounts are very similar to one another in content and expression. As a result, Matthew, Mark, and Luke are referred to as the “[Synoptic Gospels](Synoptic-Gospels.html).” The word *synoptic* basically means “to see together with a common view.” The similarities among the Synoptic Gospels have led some to wonder if the Gospel authors had a common source, another written account of Christ’s birth, life, ministry, death, and resurrection from which they obtained the material for their Gospels. The question of how to explain the similarities and differences among the Synoptic Gospels is called the Synoptic Problem. Some argue that Matthew, Mark, and Luke are so similar that they must have used each other’s Gospels or another common source. This supposed “source” has been given the title “Q” from the German word *quelle*, which means “source.” Is there any evidence for a “Q” document? No, there is not. No portion or fragment of a “Q” document has ever been discovered. None of the early church fathers ever mentioned a Gospel “source” in their writings. “Q” is the invention of liberal “scholars” who deny the inspiration of the Bible. They believe the Bible to be nothing more than a work of literature, subject to the same criticism given to other works of literature. Again, there is no evidence whatsoever for a “Q” document—biblically, theologically, or historically. If Matthew, Mark, and Luke did not use a “Q” document, why are their Gospels so similar? There are several possible explanations. It is possible that, whichever Gospel was written first (possibly Mark, although the church fathers reported that Matthew was written first), the other Gospel writers had access to it. There is absolutely no problem with the idea that Matthew and/or Luke copied some text from Mark’s Gospel and used it in their Gospels. Perhaps Luke had access to Mark and Matthew and used texts from both of them in his own Gospel. Luke 1:1–4 tells us, “Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.” Ultimately, the Synoptic “Problem” is not as big a problem as some try to make it out to be. The explanation as to why the Synoptic Gospels are so similar is that they are all inspired by the same Holy Spirit and are all written by people who witnessed or were told about the same events. The Gospel of Matthew was written by Matthew the apostle, one of the twelve who followed Jesus and were commissioned by Him. The Gospel of Mark was written by John Mark, a close associate of the apostle Peter, another one of the twelve. The Gospel of Luke was written by Luke, a close associate of the apostle Paul. Why would we not expect their accounts to be very similar to one another? Each of the Gospels is ultimately inspired by the Holy Spirit (2 Timothy 3:16–17; 2 Peter 1:20–21\). Therefore, we should expect coherence and unity.

Is it possible that more books could be added to the Bible?

Answer There is no reason to believe that God would present further revelation to add to His Word. The Bible begins with the very beginning of humanity—Genesis—and ends with the end of humanity as we know it—Revelation. Everything in between is for our benefit as believers, to be empowered with God’s truth in our daily living. We know this from 2 Timothy 3:16\-17, “All Scripture is God\-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.” If further books were added to the Bible, that would equate to saying that the Bible we have today is incomplete—that it does not tell us everything we need to know. Although it only applies directly to the book of Revelation, Revelation 22:18\-20 teaches us an important truth about adding to God’s Word: “I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city...” We have all that we need in the current 66 books of the Bible. There is not a single situation in life that cannot be addressed by Scripture. What was begun in Genesis finds conclusion in Revelation. The Bible is absolutely complete and sufficient. Could God add to the Bible? Of course He could. However, there is no reason, biblically or theologically, to believe that He is going to do so, or that there is any need for Him to do so.

Should Mark 16:9-20 be in the Bible?

Answer The very last part of the [Gospel of Mark](Gospel-of-Mark.html) has been a controversial passage for almost as long as the church has been in existence. The question is whether that portion of the Gospel, specifically, Mark 16:9–20, should be included as part of Mark, or if the Gospel should end with verse 8\. Many scholars, from all theological persuasions, consider Mark 16:9–20 to be a spurious addition to Mark’s Gospel. If the number of later Greek manuscripts containing Mark 16:9–20 were the only factor, then the passage would be confirmed as genuine. But there are other factors. One that cannot be ignored is the evidence from other manuscripts. Two of the oldest and most respected manuscripts, the [Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus](Codex-Sinaiticus-Vaticanus.html), do not contain the longer ending to the Gospel of Mark. Both of those ancient Greek manuscripts end at Mark 16:8\. They are given credence because, the older the manuscript, the closer it is to the original autographs. The fewer generations of copies, the fewer opportunities for deviation, and thus an older manuscript can be assumed to be more accurate than a newer one. Since the oldest manuscripts do not contain Mark 16:9–20, many scholars doubt that these verses were in the original Gospel of Mark. In addition to the commonly accepted wording of Mark 16:9–20, there exist two other endings to the book of Mark found among ancient manuscripts This one is translated as an optional ending and included (in brackets) in the New American Standard Bible: And they promptly reported all these instructions to Peter and his companions. And after that, Jesus Himself also sent out through them from east to west the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvation. And this passage is found in various other manuscripts: This age of lawlessness and unbelief is under Satan, who does not allow the truth and power of God to prevail over the unclean things of the spirits. “Therefore reveal your righteousness now”—thus they spoke to Christ. And Christ replied to them, “The term of years of Satan’s power has been fulfilled, but other terrible things draw near. And for those who have sinned I was handed over to death, that they may return to the truth and sin no more, in order that they may inherit the spiritual and incorruptible glory of righteousness that is in heaven.” We should also consider the testimony of the ancient church leaders. Some early church fathers were aware of the long ending of the Gospel of Mark and even quoted from it. However, in the fourth century, two scholars who were aware of the long ending, [Eusebius](Eusebius-of-Caesarea.html) and [Jerome](Saint-Jerome.html), reported that nearly all the known Greek manuscripts ended with Mark 16:8\. Then there is internal evidence against the genuineness of Mark 16:9–20\. Consider the transition between verses 8 and 9: 8 So they \[the women] went out quickly and fled from the tomb, for they trembled and were amazed. And they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid. 9 Now when He rose early on the first day of the week, He appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom He had cast seven demons. (NKJV) We can make four points here: 1\) The transition is abrupt, and the two sections are disjointed. The subject of the narrative was the discovery of the empty tomb by the women, told from the women’s perspective. Suddenly, the focus shifts to Jesus and one woman, Mary Magdalene. 2\) The word *now* at the beginning of verse 9 is a conjunction in the Greek. It is akin to saying, “but,” “and,” “therefore,” or “on the other hand.” The point is that *now* should link what comes next with what came before. It doesn’t, but only serves as a clumsy transition between verses 8 and 9\. 3\) The Greek participle translated “having risen” in verse 9 is masculine and should be referring to Jesus, but Jesus is not mentioned in the previous verse. (Some translations add the word *Jesus* to verse 9 for clarity, but the name is not in the original.) If Mark wrote verse 9 and placed it after verse 8, he was guilty of sloppy grammar and illogical sentence construction. 4\) Verse 9 seems to introduce Mary Magdalene as if for the first time. But Mark had already mentioned her three times previously in his Gospel (Mark 15:40, 47; 16:1\). Beyond what has been shared already is the consideration of the unique vocabulary of Mark 16:9–20\. These last verses certainly don’t read like Mark’s. There are eighteen words in this section that are never used anywhere else by Mark. For example, the title “Lord Jesus,” used in verse 19, is not found anywhere else in Mark. Other words unique to this section of Mark include *apisteó* (“disbelieve”), *blaptó* (“hurt”), *theaomai* (“behold, look”), and *husteron* (“afterwards, later”). Another word, *thanasimon* (“deadly”) is found nowhere else in the entire New Testament. The same can be said of the expression in verse 10, *toís met’ aftoú genoménois* (“those having been with Him”), referring to the disciples: nowhere else in the Bible is this wording applied to the disciples. Also, the reference to signs in Mark 16:17–18 is unique. This is the only post\-resurrection account in the Gospels of a discussion of picking up serpents, speaking in tongues, casting out demons, drinking poison, or laying hands on the sick. Of course, these signs were demonstrated during the apostolic age, so verses 17 and 18 don’t contradict any biblical doctrine, per se. But questions persist about whether Jesus actually said this. Because of the difficulties surrounding Mark 16:9–20, it is unwise to base a doctrine solely on what is found in this section of Mark. Most likely, the long ending to the book of Mark represents an attempt by an ancient, anonymous someone to provide a more “satisfactory” ending. In reality, ending the book with verse 8 is entirely consistent with the rest of Mark’s narrative. Amazement at the Lord Jesus is a theme in Mark: • “They were amazed at his teaching” (Mark 1:22\) • “They were all amazed, so that they debated among themselves” (Mark 1:27\) • “He healed the paralytic, and they were all amazed and were glorifying God saying, ‘We’ve never seen anything like this’” (Mark 2:12\) See also Mark 4:41; 5:15, 33, 42; 6:51; 9:6, 15, 32; 10:24, 32; 11:18; 12:17; 16:5\. Astonishment at Jesus’ work is found throughout Mark’s narrative. With that in mind, consider Mark 16:8: “So they went out quickly and fled from the tomb, for they trembled and were amazed. And they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid” (NKJV). Mark ends his Gospel on yet another note of amazement, a fitting conclusion to a book full of amazement.

What is the proper way to study the Bible?

Answer Knowing how to study the Bible is important, because determining the meaning of Scripture is one of the most important tasks a believer has in this life. God does not tell us that we must simply [read the Bible](why-read-Bible.html). We must study it and handle it correctly (2 Timothy 2:15\). Studying the Scriptures is hard work. A cursory or brief scanning of Scripture can sometimes yield very wrong conclusions. Therefore, it is crucial to understand several principles for determining the correct meaning of Scripture. First, the one who would study the Bible must pray and ask the Holy Spirit to impart understanding, for that is one of His functions. “But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come” (John 16:13\). Just as the Holy Spirit guided the apostles in the writing of the New Testament, He also guides us in the understanding of Scripture. The Bible is God’s book, and we need to ask Him what it means. If you are a Christian, the author of Scripture—the Holy Spirit—dwells inside you, and He wants you to understand what He wrote. Second, to study the Bible properly, we cannot pull a verse out of the verses that surround it and try to determine the meaning of the verse outside of the [context](context-Bible.html). We should always read the surrounding verses and chapters to discern the context. While all of Scripture comes from God (2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:21\), God used men to write it down. These men had a theme in mind, a purpose for writing, and a specific issue they were addressing. To study the Bible, we should understand the background of the book we are studying: it’s helpful to know who wrote the book, to whom it was written, when it was written, and why it was written. Also, we should take care to let the text speak for itself. Sometimes people will assign their own meanings to words in order to get the interpretation they desire. Third, to study the Bible properly, we should not think of ourselves as totally independent in our analysis of the text. It is arrogant to think that we cannot gain understanding through the lifelong work of others who have studied Scripture. Some people, in error, approach the Bible with the idea that they will depend on the Holy Spirit alone and they will discover all the hidden truths of Scripture. Christ, in the giving of the Holy Spirit, has given people with spiritual gifts to the body of Christ. One of these spiritual gifts is that of teaching (Ephesians 4:11–12; 1 Corinthians 12:28\). These teachers are given by the Lord to help us to correctly understand and obey Scripture. It is always wise to study the Bible with other believers, assisting each other in understanding and applying the truth of God’s Word. So, in summary, the proper way to study the Bible is to prayerfully and humbly rely on the Holy Spirit to give us understanding; study verses in their context, recognizing that the Bible explains itself; and respect the efforts of other Christians, past and present, who have also sought to properly study the Bible. Remember, [God is the author of the Bible](Bible-inspired.html), and He wants us to understand it.

Do I have to believe the Bible is inerrant to be saved?

Answer We are not saved by believing in the inspiration or inerrancy of the Bible. We are saved by believing in the Lord Jesus Christ as our Savior from sin (John 3:16; Ephesians 2:8–9; Romans 10:9–10\). At the same time, though, it is only through the Bible that we learn about Jesus Christ and His death and resurrection on our behalf (2 Corinthians 5:21; Romans 5:8\). We do not have to believe everything in the Bible in order to be saved—but we do have to believe in Jesus Christ, who is proclaimed by the Bible. We should definitely hold to the Bible as the inerrant Word of God, and we should absolutely believe everything the Bible teaches, but sometimes that comes after salvation, not before. When people are first saved, they generally know very little about the Bible. Salvation is a process that begins with an understanding of our sinful state, not an understanding of the inerrancy of the Bible. Our consciences tell us that we are not able to stand before a holy God on our own merits. We know that we are not righteous enough to do that, so we turn to Him and accept the sacrifice of His Son on the cross in payment of our sin. We place our full trust in Him. From that point on, we have a completely new nature, pure and undefiled by sin. God’s Holy Spirit lives within our hearts, sealing us for eternity. We go forward from that point, loving and obeying God more and more each day. Part of this “going forward” is feeding daily on His Word to grow and strengthen our walk with Him. The Bible alone has the power to perform this miracle in our lives. If we believe and trust in the Person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ, as taught in the Bible, we are saved. When we trust in Jesus Christ, though, the Holy Spirit will work on our hearts and minds—and will convince us that the Bible is true and is to be believed (2 Timothy 3:16\-17\). If there are doubts in our minds about the inerrancy of Scripture, the best way to handle that is to ask God to give us assurance about His Word and confidence in His Word. He is more than willing to answer those who seek Him honestly and with their whole hearts (Matthew 7:7\-8\).

What is the book of Enoch and should it be in the Bible?

Answer The Book of Enoch is any of several [pseudepigraphal](pseudepigrapha.html) works that attribute themselves to Enoch, the great\-grandfather of Noah; that is, Enoch son of Jared (Genesis 5:18\). A piece of ancient literature is a pseudepigraphon if it makes false claims as to authorship. A pseudepigraphon will purport to have a (usually) well\-known author, but its claims are unfounded. [Enoch](Enoch-in-the-Bible.html) is also one of the three people in the Bible taken up to heaven bodily, the only others being Elijah and Jesus (and only Jesus having experienced a resurrection). We read about Enoch’s translation in Genesis 5:24: “And Enoch walked with God, and he was not; for God took him” (see also Hebrews 11:5\). Most commonly, when people refer to the Book of Enoch, they mean 1 Enoch, which is wholly extant only in the Ethiopic language. The Book of Enoch is accepted as canonical by the [Ethiopian Orthodox Church](Coptic-Christianity.html) and the Eritrean Orthodox Church. In addition to 1 Enoch, there are 2 Enoch (“The Book of the Secrets of Enoch”) and 3 Enoch (“The Hebrew Book of Enoch”). Fragments of the Book of Enoch in Aramaic and Hebrew were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. Much of the Book of Enoch is apocalyptic—it uses vivid imagery to predict doom and the final judgment of evil. There’s a heavy emphasis on angelology and demonology, and a large portion of the book is devoted to filling in the backstory of Genesis 6:1–4\. The Book of Enoch thus explains the origin of the [Nephilim](Nephilim.html) and the identity of the “sons of God,” mentioned in Genesis 6:2 and 4\. The result is a strange and sensationalistic piece of non\-canonical literature. In its Ethiopic form, the Book of Enoch is arranged in five sections: Section I (chapters 1—36\) has Enoch pronouncing God’s judgment on the angels who cohabited with the daughters of men (see Genesis 6:1–4\). In this section, two hundred angelic “Watchers” rebel against God and are cast out of heaven along with Satan. On earth, they indulge their lust and have sexual relations with human women, producing the Nephilim, a race of evil giants who terrorize the antediluvian world. Enoch sees a “chaotic and horrible” place and a fiery prison reserved for the angels who sinned (Enoch 21:3, 7\). Section II (chapters 37—71\) has three parables relating apocalyptic judgments. It also contains the story of Enoch’s translation into heaven (see Genesis 5:24\). In this section, Enoch describes the activity of an angel named [Gadreel](angel-Gadreel.html): “He it is who showed the children of men all the blows of death, and he led astray Eve, and showed \[the weapons of death to the sons of men] the shield and the coat of mail, and the sword for battle, and all the weapons of death to the children of men. And from his hand they have proceeded against those who dwell on the earth from that day and for evermore” (Enoch 69:6–7, trans. by Charles, R. H., 1917\). Section III (chapters 72—87\) is primarily an explanation of the workings of the stars in their pathways, as per a vision that Enoch has. Section IV (chapters 88—90\) contains Enoch’s vision of the coming flood and prophecies concerning other events yet future, including the Exodus, the conquest of Canaan, the building of the temple, the fall of the northern kingdom, the destruction of Jerusalem, the final judgment, the building of the New Jerusalem, the resurrection of the saints, and the coming of the Messiah. Section V (chapters 91—105\) pronounces woes on sinners and promises blessings to the righteous. It ends with a promise of peace to the “children of uprightness” (Enoch 105:2\). The biblical book of Jude quotes from chapter 1 of the Book of Enoch in Jude 1:14–15, “Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men: ‘See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones to judge everyone, and to convict all the ungodly of all the ungodly acts they have done in the ungodly way, and of all the harsh words ungodly sinners have spoken against him.’” Jude’s quotation does not mean the Book of Enoch is inspired by God or that it should be in the Bible. Jude’s quote is not the only quote in the Bible from a non\-biblical source. The apostle Paul quotes Epimenides in Titus 1:12, but that does not mean we should give any additional authority to Epimenides’ writings. The same is true with Jude 1:14–15\. Jude quoting from the Book of Enoch does not indicate the entire Book of Enoch is inspired, or even true. All it means is that particular passage of Enoch is true. It is interesting to note that no scholars believe the Book of Enoch to have truly been written by the Enoch in the Bible. Enoch was seven generations from Adam, prior to the flood (Genesis 5:1–24\). Evidently, though, the words Jude quotes were genuinely something that Enoch prophesied—or the Bible would not attribute it to him: “Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men” (Jude 1:14\). This saying of Enoch was somehow handed down through the generations and eventually recorded in the Book of Enoch. We should treat the Book of Enoch (and the other books like it) in the same manner we do the other apocryphal writings. Some of what the [Apocrypha](apocrypha-deuterocanonical.html) says is true and correct, but much of it is false and historically inaccurate. If you read these books, you should consider them interesting but fallible historical documents, not as the inspired, authoritative Word of God.

What is the documentary hypothesis?

Answer The documentary hypothesis is essentially an attempt to take the supernatural out of the Pentateuch and to deny its Mosaic authorship. The accounts of the Red Sea crossing, the manna in the wilderness, the provision of water from a solid rock, etc., are considered stories from oral tradition, thus making the miraculous happenings mere products of imaginative storytellers and not events that actually happened and were recorded by eyewitnesses. The documentary hypothesis, along with the [JEDP theory](JEDP-theory.html), denies that Moses wrote the Pentateuch and instead ascribes its authorship to four (or more) different authors/redactors spread out over several hundreds of years. The documentary hypothesis is liberal theology’s attempt to call the veracity of the Pentateuch into question. Proponents of the documentary hypothesis believe as follows: instead of placing the writing of the Pentateuch around 1400 BC (when Moses died), the timeframe has shifted 1,000 years to around 400 BC. A 1,000\-year\-old memory, even when passed down as faithfully as possible, will change the story of the original events. Remember, the Pentateuch was still being written during the time when the Israelites wandered in the wilderness as a result of their rebellion against God. To finally record this journey some 1,000 years after it happened is to invite speculation on the genuineness of the original journey. Liberal theologians have, through the years, tried to weaken the Word of God, and one way they do that is by casting doubt on the historicity and authorship of the Pentateuch. The question is whether this liberal theological view has any basis in reality. The date for the writing of the Pentateuch is a case in point. Liberal theology dates the writing of the Pentateuch from 400 BC, which is after the Babylonian Captivity. This means that Moses could not possibly have written the Pentateuch, for he died about 1,000 years before that. However, Jesus said in Mark 12:26, “Have you not read in the book of Moses, in the account of the bush, how God said to him, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’?” Jesus states plainly that Moses wrote the account of the burning bush in Exodus 3\. To date the Pentateuch some 1,000 years after the death of Moses is to deny Jesus’ words, for He specifies that Exodus is part of “the book of Moses.” There is strong evidence that Moses also wrote the other books of the Pentateuch, disproving the whole documentary hypothesis. Peter, in Acts 3:22, comments on Deuteronomy 18:15 and credits Moses as being the author of that passage. Paul, in Romans 10:5, says, “Moses writes this,” and then proceeds to quote Leviticus 18:5\. The documentary hypothesis calls into question the testimonies of Jesus, Peter, and Paul, for all of them testified that Moses wrote at least three of the books of the Pentateuch. Jewish history and tradition also credit Moses as the author of the Pentateuch, giving no support whatsoever to the documentary hypothesis. The documentary hypothesis is only a hypothesis; it has never been proved, no matter how many liberal theologians claim that it has been.

Old Testament vs. New Testament - What are the differences?

Answer While the Bible is a unified book, there are differences between the Old Testament and the New Testament. In many ways, they are complementary. The Old Testament is foundational; the New Testament builds on that foundation with further revelation from God. The Old Testament establishes principles that are seen to be illustrative of New Testament truths. The Old Testament contains many prophecies that are fulfilled in the New. The Old Testament provides the history of a *people*; the New Testament focus is on a *Person*. The Old Testament shows the wrath of God against sin (with glimpses of His grace); the New Testament shows the grace of God toward sinners (with glimpses of His wrath). The Old Testament predicts a Messiah (see Isaiah 53\), and the New Testament reveals who the Messiah is (John 4:25–26\). The Old Testament records the giving of God’s Law, and the New Testament shows how Jesus the Messiah fulfilled that Law (Matthew 5:17; Hebrews 10:9\). In the Old Testament, God’s dealings are mainly with His chosen people, the Jews; in the New Testament, God’s dealings are mainly with His church (Matthew 16:18\). Physical blessings promised under the [Old Covenant](old-covenant.html) (Deuteronomy 29:9\) give way to spiritual blessings under the New Covenant (Ephesians 1:3\). The Old Testament prophecies related to the coming of Christ, although incredibly detailed, contain a certain amount of ambiguity that is cleared up in the New Testament. For example, the prophet Isaiah spoke of the death of the Messiah (Isaiah 53\) and the establishing of the Messiah’s kingdom (Isaiah 26\) with no clues concerning the chronology of the two events—no hints that the suffering and the kingdom\-building might be separated by millennia. In the New Testament, it becomes clear that the Messiah would have *two* advents: in the first He suffered and died (and rose again), and in the second He will establish His kingdom. Because God’s revelation in Scripture is progressive, the New Testament brings into sharper focus principles that were introduced in the Old Testament. The book of Hebrews describes how Jesus is the true High Priest and how His one sacrifice replaces all previous sacrifices, which were mere foreshadowings. The Passover lamb of the Old Testament (Ezra 6:20\) becomes the Lamb of God in the New Testament (John 1:29\). The Old Testament gives the Law. The New Testament clarifies that the Law was meant to show men their need of salvation and was never intended to be the means of salvation (Romans 3:19\). The Old Testament saw paradise lost for Adam; the New Testament shows how paradise is regained through the second Adam (Christ). The Old Testament declares that man was separated from God through sin (Genesis 3\), and the New Testament declares that man can be restored in his relationship to God (Romans 3—6\). The Old Testament predicted the Messiah’s life. The Gospels record Jesus’ life, and the Epistles interpret His life and how we are to respond to all He has done. In summary, the Old Testament lays the foundation for the coming of the Messiah who would sacrifice Himself for the sins of the world (1 John 2:2\). The New Testament records the ministry of Jesus Christ and then looks back on what He did and how we are to respond. Both testaments reveal the same holy, merciful, and righteous God who condemns sin but desires to save sinners through an atoning sacrifice. In both testaments, God reveals Himself to us and shows us how we are to come to Him through faith (Genesis 15:6; Ephesians 2:8\).

Is there proof for the inspiration of the Bible?

Answer Here are some evidences that the Bible is inspired (God\-breathed), as declared in 2 Timothy 3:16: 1\) Fulfilled prophecy. God spoke to men telling them of things He would bring about in the future. Some of them have already occurred. Others have not. For example, the Old Testament contains more than 300 prophecies concerning Jesus Christ’s first coming. There is no doubt that these are prophecies from God because of manuscripts dated from before the birth of Christ. These were not written after the fact but beforehand. 2\) The unity of Scripture. The Bible was written by approximately 40 human authors over a period of approximately 1,600 years. These men were quite diverse. Moses, was a political leader; Joshua, a military leader; David, a shepherd; Solomon, a king; Amos, a herdsman and fruit picker; Daniel, a prime minister; Matthew, a tax collector; Luke, a medical doctor; Paul, a rabbi; and Peter, a fisherman; among others. The Bible was also written under a variety of circumstances. It was written on 3 different continents, Europe, Asia, and Africa. Yet, the great themes of Scripture are maintained in all the writings. The Bible does not contradict itself. There is no way, apart from God the Holy Spirit supervising the writing of the Bible, that this could have been accomplished. Contrast this with the Islamic Qur’an. It was compiled by one individual, Zaid bin Thabit, under the guidance of Mohammed’s father\-in\-law, Abu\-Bekr. Then, in A.D. 650, a group of Arab scholars produced a unified version and destroyed all variant copies to preserve the unity of the Qur’an. The Bible was unified from the time of its writing. The Qur’an had unity forced upon it by human editors. 3\) The Bible presents its heroes truthfully with all of their faults and weaknesses. It does not glorify men as other religions do their heroes. Reading the Bible, one realizes that the people it describes have problems and do wrong just as we do. What made the heroes of the Bible great was that they trusted in God. One example is David, who is described as “a man after God’s own heart” (1 Samuel 13:14\). Yet, David committed adultery (2 Samuel 11:1\-5\) and murder (2 Samuel 11:14\-26\). This information could have easily been omitted from Scripture, but the God of truth included it. 4\) Archaeological findings support the history recorded in Scripture. Though many unbelievers throughout history have tried to find archaeological evidence to disprove what is recorded in the Bible, they have failed. It is easy to say that Scripture is untrue. Proving it to be untrue is another matter. In fact, it has not been done. In the past, every time the Bible contradicted a current “scientific” theory, the Bible was proven later to be true and the scientific theory wrong. A good example is Isaiah 40:22\. All the while that science declared the earth to be flat, the Bible stated that God “sits on the circle \[sphere] of the earth.” The Bible’s claims of being from God should not be understood as circular reasoning. The testimony of reliable witnesses—particularly Jesus, but also Moses, Joshua, David, Daniel, and Nehemiah in the Old Testament, and John and Paul in the New Testament—affirms the authority and verbal inspiration of the Holy Scriptures. Consider the following passages: Exodus 14:1; 20:1; Leviticus 4:1; Numbers 4:1;Deuteronomy 4:2; 32:48; Isaiah 1:10, 24; Jeremiah 1:11; Jeremiah 11:1–3; Ezekiel 1:3; 1 Corinthians 14:37; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; 2 Peter 1:16–21; 1 John 4:6\. Also of interest are the writings of Titus Flavius Josephus, a Jewish historian who wrote during the first century A.D. Josephus records some events which coincide with Scripture. Considering the evidence given, we wholeheartedly accept the Bible as being from God (2 Timothy 3:16\).

What is the Septuagint?

Answer The Septuagint (also known as the LXX) is a translation of the Hebrew Bible into the Greek language. The name *Septuagint* comes from the Latin word for “seventy.” The tradition is that 70 (or 72\) Jewish scholars were the translators behind the Septuagint. The Septuagint was translated in the third and second centuries BC in Alexandria, Egypt. As Israel was under the authority of Greece for several centuries, the Greek language became more and more common. By the second and first centuries BC, most people in Israel spoke Greek as their primary language. That is why the effort was made to translate the Hebrew Bible into Greek—so that those who did not understand Hebrew could have the Scriptures in a language they could understand. The Septuagint represents the first major effort at translating a significant religious text from one language into another. In comparing the New Testament quotations of the Hebrew Bible, it is clear that the Septuagint was often used. Many of the New Testament quotes from the Hebrew Bible are taken from the Septuagint. This is the result of the fact that by the late first century BC, and especially the first century AD, the Septuagint had “replaced” the Hebrew Bible as the Scriptures most people used. Since most people spoke and read Greek as their primary language, and the Greek authorities strongly encouraged the use of Greek, the Septuagint became much more common than the Hebrew Old Testament. As faithful as the Septuagint translators strove to be in accurately rendering the Hebrew text into Greek, some translational differences arose. But the fact that the apostles and New Testament authors felt comfortable, under the direction of the Holy Spirit, in using the Septuagint should give us assurance that a translation of the original languages of the Bible is still the authoritative Word of God.

What is biblical hermeneutics?

Answer Biblical hermeneutics is the study of the principles and methods of interpreting the text of the Bible. Second Timothy 2:15 commands believers to be involved in hermeneutics: “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who . . . correctly handles the word of truth.” The purpose of biblical hermeneutics is to help us to know how to properly interpret, understand, and apply the Bible. The most important law of biblical hermeneutics is that the Bible should be interpreted [literally](Bible-literal.html). We are to understand the Bible in its normal or plain meaning, unless the passage is obviously intended to be symbolic or if figures of speech are employed. The Bible says what it means and means what it says. For example, when Jesus speaks of having fed “the five thousand” in Mark 8:19, the law of hermeneutics says we should understand *five thousand* literally—there was a crowd of hungry people that numbered five thousand who were fed with real bread and fish by a miracle\-working Savior. Any attempt to “spiritualize” the number or to deny a literal miracle is to do injustice to the text and ignore the purpose of language, which is to communicate. Some interpreters make the mistake of trying to read between the lines of Scripture to come up with esoteric meanings that are not truly in the text, as if every passage has a hidden spiritual truth that we should seek to decrypt. Biblical hermeneutics keeps us faithful to the intended meaning of Scripture and away from allegorizing Bible verses that should be understood literally. A second crucial law of biblical hermeneutics is that passages must be interpreted historically, grammatically, and contextually. Interpreting a passage historically means we must seek to understand the culture, background, and situation that prompted the text. For example, in order to fully understand Jonah’s flight in Jonah 1:1–3, we should research the history of the Assyrians as related to Israel. Interpreting a passage grammatically requires one to follow the rules of grammar and recognize the nuances of Hebrew and Greek. For example, when Paul writes of “our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ” in Titus 2:13, the rules of grammar state that *God* and *Savior* are parallel terms and they are both in apposition to *Jesus Christ*—in other words, Paul clearly calls Jesus “our great God.” Interpreting a passage [contextually](context-Bible.html) involves considering the context of a verse or passage when trying to determine the meaning. The context includes the verses immediately preceding and following, the chapter, the book, and, most broadly, the entire Bible. For example, many puzzling statements in Ecclesiastes become clearer when kept in context—the book of Ecclesiastes is written from the earthly perspective “under the sun” (Ecclesiastes 1:3\). In fact, the phrase *under the sun* is repeated about thirty times in the book, establishing the context for all that is “vanity” in this world. A third law of biblical hermeneutics is that Scripture is always the best interpreter of Scripture. For this reason, we always compare Scripture with Scripture when trying to determine the meaning of a passage. For example, Isaiah’s condemnation of Judah’s desire to seek Egypt’s help and their reliance on a strong cavalry (Isaiah 31:1\) was motivated, in part, by God’s explicit command that His people not go to Egypt to seek horses (Deuteronomy 17:16\). Some people avoid studying biblical hermeneutics because they mistakenly believe it will limit their ability to learn new truths from God’s Word or stifle the Holy Spirit’s [illumination](biblical-illumination.html) of Scripture. But their fears are unfounded. Biblical hermeneutics is all about finding the correct interpretation of the inspired text. The purpose of biblical hermeneutics is to protect us from misapplying Scripture or allowing bias to color our understanding of truth. God’s Word is truth (John 17:17\). We want to see the truth, know the truth, and live the truth as best we can, and that’s why biblical hermeneutics is vital.

Is the Bible relevant for today?

Answer Hebrews 4:12 says, “For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double\-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.” While the Bible was completed approximately 1900 years ago, its accuracy and relevance for today remain unchanged. The Bible is the sole objective source of all the revelation God has given us about Himself and His plan for humanity. The Bible contains a great deal of information about the natural world that has been confirmed by scientific observations and research. Some of these passages include Leviticus 17:11; Ecclesiastes 1:6\-7; Job 36:27\-29; Psalm 102:25\-27 and Colossians 1:16\-17\. As the Bible’s story of God’s redemptive plan for humanity unfolds, many different characters are vividly described. In those descriptions, the Bible provides a great deal of information about human behavior and tendencies. Our own day\-to\-day experience shows us that this information is more accurate and descriptive of the human condition than any psychology textbook. Many historical facts recorded in the Bible have been confirmed by extra\-biblical sources. Historical research often shows a great deal of agreement between biblical accounts and extra\-biblical accounts of the same events. However, the Bible is not a history book, a psychology text, or a scientific journal. The Bible is the description God gave us about who He is, and His desires and plans for humanity. The most significant component of this revelation is the story of our separation from God by sin and God’s provision for restoration of fellowship through the sacrifice of His Son, Jesus Christ, on the cross. Our need for redemption does not change. Neither does God’s desire to reconcile us to Himself. The Bible contains a great deal of accurate and relevant information. The Bible’s most important message—redemption—is universally and perpetually applicable to humanity. God’s Word will never be outdated, superseded, or improved upon. Cultures change, laws change, generations come and go, but the Word of God is as relevant today as it was when it was first written. Not all of Scripture necessarily applies explicitly to us today, but all Scriptures contain truth that we can, and should, apply to our lives today.

Does the inerrancy of the Bible only apply to the original manuscripts?

Answer To be [inerrant](Biblical-inerrancy.html) is to be free from error. Only the original autographs (the original manuscripts written by the apostles, prophets, etc.) are under the divine promise of inspiration and inerrancy. The books of the Bible, as they were originally written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (2 Timothy 3:16–17; 2 Peter 1:20–21\), were 100 percent inerrant, accurate, authoritative, and true. There is no biblical promise that copies of the original manuscripts would be equally inerrant or free from errors. As the Bible has been copied thousands of times over thousands of years, some copyist errors have likely occurred. It is important to remember that the biblical manuscripts we have today are in 99 percent agreement with one another. Yes, there are some minor differences, but the vast majority of the biblical text is identical from one manuscript to another. Most of the differences are in punctuation, word endings, minor grammatical issues, word order, etc.—issues easily explainable as scribal mistakes or changes in spelling rules. No important theological issue is thrown into doubt by any supposed error or contradiction. Biblical manuscripts from the fifteenth century agree completely with manuscripts from the third century. We can have absolute confidence that the Bible we have today is almost exactly identical to what the apostles and prophets wrote 2,000\-plus years ago. We should not be quick to say, “Oh, that is just a scribal error.” The Bible’s “errors” can be explained in a logical and believable manner. Discrepancies that cannot be explained—or are very difficult to explain—could very well have an answer that we simply do not know at this point. Just because we cannot find a solution does not mean that a solution doesn’t exist. Believing there to be a scribal error must be the absolute last resort in clearing up any supposed Bible “error.” It is possible that minor errors have crept into our modern manuscripts and translations of the Bible. Copyists and translators are human beings, and they make mistakes. The fact that the Bible we have today is incredibly accurate is a testimony to its inspiration and preservation by God. Can we still trust the Bible? Absolutely! Modern Bible translations are God’s Word. The Bible today is just as authoritative as it was in the first century AD. We can completely trust the Bible as being God’s message to us. Yes, the biblical promises of inspiration and inerrancy only apply directly to the original manuscripts. But that does not impact our modern Bible’s accuracy and authority. God’s Word endures forever, despite the occasional failings and mistakes of copyists and translators.

What is sola scriptura?

Answer The phrase *sola scriptura* is from the Latin: *sola* having the idea of “alone,” “ground,” “base,” and the word *scriptura* meaning “writings”—referring to the Scriptures. *Sola scriptura* means that Scripture alone is authoritative for the faith and practice of the Christian. The Bible is complete, authoritative, and true. “All Scripture is God\-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16\). *Sola scriptura* was the rallying cry of the Protestant Reformation. For centuries the Roman Catholic Church had made its traditions superior in authority to the Bible. This resulted in many practices that were in fact contradictory to the Bible. Some examples are [prayer to saints and/or Mary](prayer-saints-Mary.html), the [immaculate conception](immaculate-conception.html), [transubstantiation](transubstantiation.html), [indulgences](plenary-indulgences.html), and [papal authority](pope-papacy.html). Martin Luther, the founder of the Lutheran Church and father of the Protestant Reformation, was publicly rebuking the Catholic Church for its unbiblical teachings. The Catholic Church threatened Martin Luther with excommunication (and death) if he did not recant. Martin Luther’s reply was, “Unless therefore I am convinced by the testimony of Scripture, or by the clearest reasoning, unless I am persuaded by means of the passages I have quoted, and unless they thus render my conscience bound by the Word of God, I cannot and will not retract, for it is unsafe for a Christian to speak against his conscience. Here I stand, I can do no other; may God help me! Amen!” The primary Catholic argument against *sola scriptura* is that the Bible does not explicitly teach *sola scriptura*. Catholics argue that the Bible nowhere states that it is the only authoritative guide for faith and practice. However, this is only true in the shallowest sense. The principle is strongly indicated by verses such as Acts 17:11, which commends the Bereans for testing doctrine—taught by an apostle, no less—to the written Word. *Sola scriptura* is all\-but\-explicitly indicated in 1 Corinthians 4:6, where Paul warns not to “go beyond what is written.” Jesus Himself criticized those who allowed traditions to override the explicit commands of God in Mark 7:6–9\. Whether *sola scriptura* is overtly mentioned in the Bible or not, Catholicism fails to recognize a crucially important issue. We know that the Bible is the Word of God. The Bible declares itself to be God\-breathed, inerrant, and authoritative. We also know that God does not change His mind or contradict Himself. So, while the Bible itself may not explicitly argue for *sola scriptura*, it most definitely does not allow for traditions that contradict its message. *Sola scriptura* is not as much of an argument against tradition as it is an argument against unbiblical, extra\-biblical and/or anti\-biblical doctrines. The only way to know for sure what God expects of us is to stay true to what we know He has revealed—the Bible. We can know, beyond the shadow of any doubt, that Scripture is true, authoritative, and reliable. The same cannot be said of tradition. The Word of God is the ultimate and only infallible authority for the Christian faith. Traditions are valid only when they conform with Scripture. Traditions that contradict the Bible are not of God and are not a valid aspect of the Christian faith. *Sola scriptura* is the only way to avoid subjectivity and keep personal opinion from taking priority over the teachings of the Bible. The essence of *sola scriptura* is basing one’s spiritual life on the Bible alone and rejecting any tradition or teaching that is not in full agreement with the Bible. Second Timothy 2:15 declares, “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth.” *Sola scriptura* does not nullify the concept of church traditions. Rather, *sola scriptura* gives us a solid foundation on which to base church traditions. There are many practices, in both Catholic and Protestant churches, that are the result of traditions, not the explicit teaching of Scripture. It is good, and even necessary, for the church to have traditions. Traditions play an important role in clarifying and organizing Christian practice. At the same time, in order for these traditions to be valid, they must not be in disagreement with God’s Word. They must be based on the solid foundation of the teaching of Scripture. The problem with the Roman Catholic Church, and many other churches, is that they base traditions on traditions which are based on traditions which are based on traditions, often with the initial tradition not being in full harmony with the Scriptures. That is why Christians must always go back to *sola scriptura*, the authoritative Word of God, as the only solid basis for faith and practice. On a practical matter, a frequent objection to the concept of *sola scriptura* is the fact that the canon of the Bible was not officially agreed upon for at least 250 years after the church was founded. Further, the Scriptures were not available to the masses for over 1500 years after the church was founded. How, then, were early Christians to use *sola scriptura*, when they did not even have the full Scriptures? And how were Christians who lived before the invention of the printing press supposed to base their faith and practice on Scripture alone if there was no way for them to have a complete copy of the Scriptures? This issue is further compounded by the very high rates of illiteracy throughout history. How does the concept of *sola scriptura* handle these issues? The problem with this argument is that it essentially says that Scripture’s authority is based on its availability. This is not the case. Scripture’s authority is universal; because it is God’s Word, it is His authority. The fact that Scripture was not readily available, or that people could not read it, does not change the fact that Scripture is God’s Word. Further, rather than this being an argument against *sola scriptura*, it is actually an argument for what the church should have done, instead of what it did. The early church should have made producing copies of the Scriptures a high priority. While it was unrealistic for every Christian to possess a complete copy of the Bible, it was possible that every church could have some, most, or all of the Scriptures available to it. Early church leaders should have made studying the Scriptures their highest priority so they could accurately teach it. Even if the Scriptures could not be made available to the masses, at least church leaders could be well\-trained in the Word of God. Instead of building traditions upon traditions and passing them on from generation to generation, the church should have copied the Scriptures and taught the Scriptures (2 Timothy 4:2\). Again, traditions are not the problem. Unbiblical traditions are the problem. The availability of the Scriptures throughout the centuries is not the determining factor. The Scriptures themselves are the determining factor. We now have the Scriptures readily available to us. Through the careful study of God’s Word, it is clear that many church traditions which have developed over the centuries are in fact contradictory to the Word of God. This is where *sola scriptura* applies. Traditions that are based on, and in agreement with, God’s Word can be maintained. Traditions that are not based on, and/or disagree with, God’s Word must be rejected. *Sola scriptura* points us back to what God has revealed to us in His Word. *Sola scriptura* ultimately points us back to the God who always speaks the truth, never contradicts Himself, and always proves Himself to be dependable.

What are redaction criticism and higher criticism?

Answer Redaction criticism and higher criticism are just a few of many forms of biblical criticism. Their intent is to investigate the Scriptures and make judgments concerning their authorship, historicity, and date of writing. Sadly, most of these methods end up attempting to destroy the text of the Bible. Biblical criticism can be broken into two major forms: higher and lower criticism. Lower criticism is an attempt to find the original wording of the text since we no longer have the original writings. Higher criticism deals with the genuineness of the text. Questions are asked such as: When was it really written? Who really wrote this text? Many redaction critics and higher critics do not believe in the inspiration of Scripture and therefore use these questions to dispel the work of the Holy Spirit in the lives of the authors of Scripture. They believe that our Old Testament was simply a compilation of oral traditions and were not actually written until after Israel was taken into captivity to Babylon in 586 B.C. Of course we can see in the Scriptures that Moses wrote down the Law and the first five books of the Old Testament (called the Pentateuch). If these books were not really written by Moses, and not until many years after the nation of Israel was founded, these critics would be able to claim the inaccuracy of what was written, and thereby refute the authority of God’s Word. But this is not true. Redaction criticism is the idea that the writers of the Gospels were nothing more than final compilers of oral traditions and not actually the direct writers of the Gospels themselves. Redaction critics hold that the purpose for their study is to find the “theological motivation” behind the author’s selection and compilation of traditions or other written materials within Christianity. Basically what we are seeing in all these forms of biblical criticism is an attempt by some critics to separate the Holy Spirit’s work in the production of an accurate, reliable written document of God’s Word. The writers of the Scriptures explained how the Scriptures came to be. “All scripture is inspired by God” (2 Timothy 3:16\). God is the one who gave to men the words He wanted to be recorded. The apostle Peter wrote, “No prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of the human will” (2 Peter 1:20, 21\). Here Peter is saying that these writings were not dreamed up in the mind of man, created simply by men wanting to write down something. Peter continues, “But men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God” (2 Peter 1:21\). The Holy Spirit told them what He wanted them to write. There is no need to criticize the authenticity of the Scriptures when we can know that God was behind the scenes directing and guiding men in what to record. “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and BRING TO REMEMBRANCE ALL THAT I SAID” (John 14:26\). Here Jesus was telling His disciples that soon He would be going away, but the Holy Spirit would help them to remember what He taught here on earth so that they could later record it. God was behind the authorship and preservation of the Scriptures. Redaction criticism and higher criticism are trying to force the limitations of human beings onto the God of no limitations.

What is the Latin Vulgate Bible?

Answer “The Vulgate” is the popular name given to the Latin version of the Bible, a translation usually attributed to [Jerome](Saint-Jerome.html). Before Jerome’s time, as the number of Latin\-speaking Christians grew, the Bible was translated into Latin so that the Christians of the time could understand it. It is believed that the first Latin translation was completed around A.D. 200, although no manuscripts of this era exist today. The first Latin manuscripts were surely created in North Africa, for it seems that the church in North Africa was Latin\-speaking from the start as compared to the predominantly Greek\-speaking churches in Asia and Europe. Two centuries later Pope Damasus I commissioned a scholar by the name Jerome to produce one standard Latin text of the Bible; there were as many different Latin versions of the Bible as there were different forms of the text, and Damasus wanted the church to have a standard version to promote universal doctrine. Jerome completed the translation in A.D. 400, and his version was known as the *editio vulgate* (the current text of Holy Scripture), because he used the common (or vulgar) language of early medieval times. Jerome started by revising the Gospels, using the Greek manuscripts available. This he did because of the vast differences he found in the various Latin texts that were available. About the same time, he started revising the Old Testament by using the Septuagint (a Greek version of the Old Testament). Jerome also translated the Old Testament into Latin by using the Hebrew text, a task he did without ecclesiastical sanction. The present Vulgate contains elements which belong to every period of its development, including (1\) an unrevised Old Latin text of the Book of Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, 1 and 2 Maccabees, and Baruch; (2\) an Old Latin form of the Psalter, which Jerome corrected from the Septuagint; (3\) Jerome’s free translation of the books of Job and Judith; (4\) Jerome’s translation from the Hebrew Old Testament excluding the Psalter; (5\) an Old Latin revision of the Gospels from Greek manuscripts; (6\) an Old Latin New Testament, revised. Some of the books mentioned belong to a division known as the "[Apocrypha](apocrypha-deuterocanonical.html)," normally considered books of Jewish origin which lie outside the canon of the Old Testament.

What are the beatitudes?

Answer The Beatitudes are the eight declarations of blessedness spoken by Jesus at the beginning of the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:3\-12\), each beginning with "Blessed are..." It is debated as to exactly how many beatitudes there are. Some speak of seven, nine, or ten beatitudes, but the number appears to be eight (verses 10\-12 of Matthew 5 being one beatitude). The Greek word translated “blessed” means “happy, blissful” or, literally, “to be enlarged.” In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus uses the word to refer to more than a superficial happiness; in this context, *blessed* refers to a state of spiritual well\-being and prosperity. The happiness is a deep joy of the soul. Those who experience the first aspect of a beatitude (poor, mourn, meek, hungry for righteousness, merciful, pure, peacemakers, and persecuted) will also experience the second aspect of the beatitude (kingdom of heaven, comfort, inherit the earth, filled, mercy, see God, called sons of God, inherit the kingdom of heaven). The blessed have a share in salvation and have entered the kingdom of God, experiencing a foretaste of heaven. Another possible rendering of the beginning of each beatitude is “O the bliss \[or blessedness] of . . . .” The Beatitudes describe the ideal disciple and his rewards, both present and future. The person whom Jesus describes in this passage has a different quality of character and lifestyle than those still "outside the kingdom." As a literary form, the beatitude is also found often in the Old Testament, especially in the Psalms (1:1; 34:8; 65:4; 128:1\) and in the New Testament as well (John 20:29; 14:22; James 1:12; Revelation 14:13\).

Has the Bible been corrupted, altered, edited, revised, or tampered with?

Answer The books of the Old Testament were written from approximately 1400 BC to 400 BC. The books of the New Testament were written from approximately AD 40 to AD 90\. So, anywhere between 3,400 and 1,900 years have passed since a book of the Bible was written. In this time, the original manuscripts have been lost. They very likely no longer exist. Since the time the books of the Bible were originally written, they have been copied again and again by scribes. Copies of copies of copies have been made. In view of this, can we still trust the Bible? The Holy Scriptures are God\-breathed and therefore inerrant (2 Timothy 3:16–17; John 17:17\). Of course, [inerrancy](Biblical-inerrancy.html) can only be applied to the original manuscripts, not to the *copies* of the manuscripts. As meticulous as the scribes were with the replication of the Scriptures, no one is perfect. Through the centuries, minor differences arose in the various copies of the Scriptures. The vast majority of these differences are simple spelling variants (akin to American *neighbor* versus British *neighbour*), inverted words (one manuscript says “Christ Jesus” while another says “Jesus Christ”), or an easily identified missing word. In short, over 99 percent of the biblical text is not questioned. Of the less than 1 percent of the text that is in question, no doctrinal teaching or command is jeopardized. In other words, the copies of the Bible we have today are pure. The Bible has not been corrupted, altered, edited, revised, or tampered with. Any unbiased document scholar will agree that the Bible has been remarkably well\-preserved over the centuries. Copies of the Bible dating to the 14th century AD are nearly identical in content to copies from the 3rd century AD. When the [Dead Sea Scrolls](dead-sea-scrolls.html) were discovered, scholars were shocked to see how similar they were to other ancient copies of the Old Testament, even though the Dead Sea Scrolls were hundreds of years older than anything previously discovered. Even many hardened skeptics and critics of the Bible admit that the Bible has been transmitted over the centuries far more accurately than any other ancient document. There is absolutely no evidence that the Bible has been revised, edited, or tampered with in any systematic manner. The sheer volume of biblical manuscripts makes it simple to recognize any attempt to distort God’s Word. There is no major doctrine of the Bible that is put in doubt as a result of the inconsequential differences among the manuscripts. Again, the question, can we trust the Bible? Absolutely! God has preserved His Word despite the unintentional failings and intentional attacks of human beings. We can have utmost confidence that the Bible we have today is the same Bible that was originally written. The Bible is God’s Word, and we can trust it (2 Timothy 3:16; Matthew 5:18\).

What is biblical typology?

Answer Typology is a special kind of symbolism. (A symbol is something that represents something else.) We can define a type as a “prophetic symbol” because all types are representations of something yet future. More specifically, a type in Scripture is a person or thing in the Old Testament that foreshadows a person or thing in the New Testament. For example, the flood of Noah’s day (Genesis 6—7\) is used as a type of baptism in 1 Peter 3:20–21\. The word for “type” that Peter uses is *figure*. When we say that someone is a type of Christ, we are saying that a person in the Old Testament behaves in a way that corresponds to Jesus’ character or actions in the New Testament. When we say that something is “typical” of Christ, we are saying that an object or event in the Old Testament can be viewed as representative of some quality of Jesus. Scripture itself identifies several Old Testament events as types of Christ’s redemption, including the tabernacle, the sacrificial system, and the Passover. The Old Testament tabernacle is identified as a type in Hebrews 9:8\-9: “The first tabernacle . . . which was a figure for the time then present.” The high priest’s entrance into the holiest place once a year prefigured the mediation of Christ, our High Priest. Later, the veil of the tabernacle is said to be a type of Christ (Hebrews 10:19\-20\) in that His flesh was torn, (as the veil was when He was crucified) in order to provide entrance into God’s presence for those who are covered by His sacrifice. The whole sacrificial system is seen as a type in Hebrews 9:19\-26\. The articles of the “[first testament](First-Testament.html)” were dedicated with the blood of sacrifice; these articles are called “the patterns of things in the heavens” and “figures of the true” (verses 23\-24\). This passage teaches that the Old Testament sacrifices typify Christ’s final sacrifice for the sins of the world. The Passover is also a type of Christ, according to 1 Corinthians 5:7, “Christ our passover is sacrificed for us.” Discovering exactly what the events of the Passover teach us about Christ is a rich and rewarding study. We should point out the difference between an illustration and a type. A type is always identified as such in the New Testament. A Bible student finding correlations between an Old Testament story and the life of Christ is simply finding illustrations, not types. In other words, typology is determined by Scripture. The Holy Spirit inspired the use of types; illustrations and analogies are the result of man’s study. For example, many people see parallels between Joseph (Genesis 37\-45\) and Jesus. The humiliation and subsequent glorification of Joseph seem to correspond to the death and resurrection of Christ. However, the New Testament never uses Joseph as a model of Christ; therefore, Joseph’s story is properly called an illustration, but not a type, of Christ.

Why are the newer translations of the Bible missing verses?

Answer If you compare the King James and New King James Versions with the newer translations (e.g., the New International Version, English Standard Version, Christian Standard Bible, New Living Translation, etc.), you will notice that several verses are entirely missing from the newer translations. Examples of missing verses and passages are John 5:4, Acts 8:37, and 1 John 5:7\. Another example is Mark 16:9–20, although that passage is always placed in the text or in footnotes. In addition to the few missing verses, there are numerous words and phrases that are missing from newer translations. Why do these translations omit these verses, phrases, and words? Are the newer translations taking verses out of the Bible, as some claim? No, the newer translations are not removing verses from the Bible. Rather, the newer translations are attempting to accurately present what the biblical writers originally wrote, and that means leaving out anything that was not part of the original text. Any content “missing” in newer translations is believed by most scholars to not have been in the Bible to begin with. The KJV was translated in AD 1611; the New Testament translators of the KJV used a Greek manuscript called the [Textus Receptus](Textus-Receptus.html). Since that time, many biblical manuscripts have been discovered that predate the Textus Receptus, and these older manuscripts, in theory, are likely to be more accurate. In their research, Bible scholars and textual critics have discovered some differences between the Textus Receptus and the older manuscripts. It seems that, over the course of 1,500 years, some words, phrases, and even sentences were added to the Bible, either intentionally or accidentally. The “missing verses” mentioned above are simply not found in some of the oldest and most reliable manuscripts. So, the newer translations remove these verses or place them in footnotes or in brackets because the translators believe they do not truly belong in the Bible. For example, John 5:4 is included in the KJV, but in the NKJV the verse has a footnote attached explaining that it is not found in many Greek texts; the NASB includes the verse in brackets; the NIV places the verse in a footnote, so John 5:4 is “missing” in the actual text. The disputed portion is this: “waiting for the moving of the waters; for an angel of the Lord went down at certain seasons into the pool and stirred up the water; whoever then first, after the stirring up of the water, stepped in was made well from whatever disease with which he was afflicted” (John 5:3–4, NASB). Here is a possible explanation of how John 5:4 ended up in the Bible: a scribe is writing out John 5, in which Jesus visits the [pool of Bethesda](Pool-of-Bethesda.html): “Here a great number of disabled people used to lie—the blind, the lame, the paralyzed. One who was there had been an invalid for thirty\-eight years” (John 5:3–5\). But then the scribe gets to verse 7, as Jesus speaks to the man about his desire to be healed, and the man says, “I have no one to help me into the pool when the water is stirred” (verse 7\). The scribe considers the man’s reference to “stirred” water as a source of possible confusion, as John does not expound on it. So the scribe writes a quick note in the margin to explain why the invalid was waiting for “stirred” water—an angel came down at certain times to make something special happen. The scribe’s notation was an attempt to aid the reader in understanding Scripture. But then, as more and more copies of that manuscript were made, the scribe’s marginal note was transferred from the margin and inserted into the actual text as part of the passage. It may be that the later copyist misconstrued the intention of the marginal note: instead of being a commentary of sorts, the note was seen as the scribe’s attempt to correct a mistake, inserting a verse he had accidentally left out. Thus, what the scribe meant as a helpful gloss resulted in John 5 expanding by one verse. It is important to remember that the verses in question are of minor significance. None of them change in any way the crucial themes of the Bible, nor do they have any impact on the Bible’s doctrines—Jesus’ death and resurrection; Christ’s being the only way of salvation; and the doctrines of heaven and hell, sin and redemption, and the nature and character of God. These doctrines are [preserved](preservation-Bible.html) intact through the work of the Holy Spirit, who safeguards the Word of God for all generations. It is not a matter of the newer translations missing verses, and it is not a matter of the KJV translators adding to the Bible. It is a matter of determining, through careful research and textual science, what content was most likely part of the original manuscripts of the Bible.

Why isn’t the Bible in chronological order?

Answer The books of the Bible are not in chronological order; rather, they are primarily arranged according to type of literature. For example, Genesis through Esther are historical and are grouped together, Job through Song of Solomon form another group of mainly poetry, and Isaiah through Malachi are prophecy, with some historical narrative. Similarly, Matthew through Acts are historical, Romans through Jude are letters to churches or individuals, and Revelation is prophecy. Within the type of literature, the books of the Bible are sometimes arranged in a basic chronological order. For example, Isaiah’s prophecies occurred before Jeremiah’s prophecies. In other cases, the books are arranged longest to shortest, such as for [Paul’s epistles](Pauline-epistles.html). To arrange the Bible’s content in chronological order, some books would have to be split up and inserted into other books. For example, 1 and 2 Chronicles would have to be parceled out into 1 and 2 Samuel and 1 and 2 Kings. There might be some benefit in grouping historical narratives that cover the same event, but the overarching theme of 1 and 2 Chronicles would be lost in the process. That theme with its related purpose, to encourage exiles returning to Jerusalem of their spiritual heritage concerning the priesthood and the temple, can only be followed by reading 1 and 2 Chronicles as a unit. Additionally, some books of the Bible are hard to place chronologically, because we aren’t sure exactly when they were written or when the events they record took place. For example, no one is sure when the book of Job was written, although there are hints within the book that Job himself lived early in human history. Chronologically, the book of Job would probably fall within the book of Genesis. Some lists place it between Genesis 11 and Genesis 12\. The fact that the Bible isn’t in chronological order can sometimes make studying the Bible difficult, especially for the student who wants to keep various passages from multiple books in their historical context. That is where chronological Bibles come in. A chronological Bible puts the content of the Bible in chronological order. As an example, Isaiah ministered during the times of the kings. So a chronological Bible puts Isaiah’s prophecies in the appropriate places in the books of 1 and 2 Kings. A detailed chronological Bible, as well as many study Bibles, will also harmonize the four gospels, putting all the events in the life of Christ in chronological order. Bibles International provides a basic chronology of the books of the Bible, placing them in the following order, according to the time of the events described in the books (https://biblesint.org/images/pages/PDFs/Chronological\-Order.pdf, accessed 2/28/22\): Genesis Job Exodus Leviticus Numbers Deuteronomy Joshua Judges Ruth 1 Samuel 2 Samuel 1 Chronicles Psalms Song of Solomon Proverbs Ecclesiastes 1 Kings 2 Kings 2 Chronicles Isaiah Jeremiah Lamentations Hosea Joel Amos Obadiah Jonah Micah Nahum Habakkuk Zephaniah Ezekiel Daniel Ezra Esther Nehemiah Haggai Zechariah Malachi Matthew Mark Luke John Acts 1 Thessalonians 2 Thessalonians 1 Corinthians 2 Corinthians Galatians Romans James Colossians Philemon Ephesians Philippians 1 Peter 2 Peter Hebrews 1 Timothy Titus 2 Timothy Jude 1 John 2 John 3 John Revelation Other chronologies place the epistles of Galatians and James earlier in the list. A detailed list of biblical content in chronological order, broken into chapter and verse divisions, is available from Walk Thru the Bible (www.walkthru.org/wp\-content/uploads/bible\-reading\-plans/Chronological\-Bible\-Reading\-Plan.pdf, accessed 2/28/22\). The order of the books in the Bible is not inspired. One way to organize the books of the Bible is chronologically. That, for the most part, is a simple process of finding internal cues and following the history of the people and events described. No list will be absolutely definite, but Bible students can have a good idea of the order of the events in Scripture. Here is a link to where chronological Bibles can be purchased through Christianbook.com \- [Chronological Bibles](https://www.christianbook.com/Christian/Books/easy_find?event=AFFp=1011693&N=0&Ne=1000&Ns=product.number_sold&Nso=1&Ntk=product.long_title_desc&Ntt=Chronological%20Bible&Nu=product.endeca_rollup.).

Who divided the Bible into chapters and verses?

Answer When the books of the Bible were originally written, they did not contain chapter or verse references. The Bible was divided into chapters and verses to help us find Scriptures more quickly and easily. It is much easier to find "John chapter 3, verse 16" than it is to find "for God so loved the world..." In a few places, chapter breaks are poorly placed and as a result divide content that should flow together. Overall, though, the chapter and verse divisions are very helpful. The chapter divisions commonly used today were developed by Stephen Langton, an Archbishop of Canterbury. Langton put the modern chapter divisions into place in around A.D. 1227\. The Wycliffe English Bible of 1382 was the first Bible to use this chapter pattern. Since the Wycliffe Bible, nearly all Bible translations have followed Langton’s chapter divisions. The Hebrew Old Testament was divided into verses by a Jewish rabbi by the name of Nathan in A.D. 1448\. Robert Estienne, who was also known as Stephanus, was the first to divide the New Testament into standard numbered verses, in 1555\. Stephanus essentially used Nathan’s verse divisions for the Old Testament. Since that time, beginning with the Geneva Bible, the chapter and verse divisions employed by Stephanus have been accepted into nearly all the Bible versions.

Is it important to know Greek and Hebrew when studying the Bible?

Answer Martin Luther, the great Protestant reformer, wrote the following in regard to the importance of understanding Greek and Hebrew when studying the Bible: "The languages are the sheath in which the sword of the Spirit is contained." God sovereignly chose to have His Word written in Hebrew (the Old Testament) and Greek (the New Testament). Our modern English translations of the Bible are excellent. Most of the major English translations available today are superb renderings of the original Greek and Hebrew. However, in any translation, not everything that was communicated in the original language can be precisely conveyed in another language. Some nuances do not transfer well from one language to another. As a result, a translation rarely is a perfect rendering of the original. (This is one reason why the Amplified Version was published.) An example of this is the "aspect" of Greek verbs. English verbs have tenses—past, present, and future. Greek verbs have these same tenses, but they also have what is known as "aspect." Present\-tense Greek verbs mean more than the action is occurring presently. A Greek verb can also carry the meaning that the action is occurring continually or repeatedly. This is lost in English unless the aspect word "continually" or "repeatedly" is added to the translation along with the verb. A specific example of this is Ephesians 5:18, "...be filled with the Spirit." In the original Greek, this verse is telling us to continually be filled with the Spirit. It is not a one\-time event—it is a lifelong process. This "aspect" is lost in the English translation. With all that said, the Bible also makes it clear that the Spirit is the author of the Bible and that He will help us to understand His Word (2 Timothy 3:16\-17; John 14:26\). You do not have to know Hebrew and Greek in order to understand the Bible. God’s intended message for us is accurately communicated in English. You can have confidence that God can reveal the meaning of His Word to you without your knowing Greek and Hebrew. Perhaps this is a good analogy: reading the Bible without knowing Greek and Hebrew is like watching a basic television, while reading the Bible knowing Greek and Hebrew is like watching an 85" UHD 8K television with stereo surround sound. You can fully understand what is going on with the basic television, but the 85" UHD 8K television with stereo surround sound gives added depth and clarity. With the help of the Holy Spirit, anyone can accurately understand the Bible in English. However, knowing Hebrew and Greek helps to better understand the nuances and richness of the biblical texts.

Who is Jesus Christ?

Answer Unlike the question “[Does God exist?](Does-God-exist.html)” the question of whether Jesus Christ existed is asked by relatively few people. Most accept that Jesus was truly a man who lived in Israel 2,000 years ago. The debate begins with the discussion of Jesus’ full identity. Almost every major religion teaches that Jesus was a prophet or a good teacher or a godly man. But the Bible tells us that Jesus was infinitely more than a prophet, a good teacher, or a godly man. [C. S. Lewis](C-S-Lewis.html) in his book *Mere Christianity* writes the following: “I am trying here to prevent anyone from saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him \[Jesus Christ]: ‘I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God.’ That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic—on a level with a man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil of hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon; or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God. But let us not come up with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that option open to us. He did not intend to” (Macmillan, 1952, p. 55–56\). So, who did Jesus claim to be? Who does the Bible say He is? First, He is God in the flesh. Jesus said in John 10:30, “I and the Father are one.” At first glance, this might not seem to be a claim to be God. However, look at the Jews’ reaction to His statement. They tried to stone Him “for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God” (John 10:33\). The Jews understood Jesus’ statement as a claim to be God. In the following verses, Jesus never corrects the Jews or attempts to clarify His statement. He never says, “I did not claim to be God.” When Jesus said, “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30\), He truly was claiming equality with God. In John 8:58 Jesus claims pre\-existence, an attribute of God: “‘Very truly I tell you,’ Jesus answered, ‘before Abraham was born, I am!’” In response to this statement, the Jews again took up stones to stone Jesus (John 8:59\). In claiming pre\-existence, Jesus applied a name for God to Himself—I AM (see Exodus 3:14\). The Jews rejected Jesus’ identity as God Incarnate, but they understood exactly what He was saying. Other biblical clues that Jesus is God in the flesh include John 1:1, which says, “The Word was God,” coupled with John 1:14, which says, “The Word became flesh.” Thomas the disciple declared to Jesus, “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28\), Jesus does not correct him. The apostle Paul describes Jesus as “our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ” (Titus 2:13\). The apostle Peter says the same, calling Jesus “our God and Savior” (2 Peter 1:1\). God the Father bears witness of Jesus’ identity as well: “But about the Son he says, ‘Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever; a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom.’” (Hebrews 1:8; cf. Psalm 45:6\). Old Testament prophecies such as Isaiah 9:6 announce the deity of Christ: “For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, **Mighty God**, **Everlasting Father**, Prince of Peace” (emphasis added). Why is the question of Jesus’ identity so important? Why does it matter whether Jesus is God? Several reasons: • As C. S. Lewis pointed out, if Jesus is not God, then Jesus is the worst of liars and untrustworthy in every way. • If Jesus is not God, then the apostles would likewise have been liars. • Jesus had to be God because the Messiah was promised to be the “Holy One” (Isaiah 49:7\). Since no one on earth is righteous before God (Psalm 53:1; 143:2\), God Himself had to enter the world as a human. • If Jesus is not God, His death would have been insufficient to pay the penalty for the sins of the whole world (1 John 2:2\). Only God Himself could provide an infinite, eternally valuable sacrifice (Romans 5:8; 2 Corinthians 5:21\). • God is the *only* Savior (Hosea 13:4; cf. 1 Timothy 2:3\). If Jesus is to be the Savior, then He must be God. Jesus had to be both God and man. As God, Jesus could satisfy God’s wrath. As a man, Jesus had the capability of dying. As the God\-man, Jesus is the perfect Mediator between heaven and earth (1 Timothy 2:5\). Salvation is available only through faith in Jesus Christ. As He proclaimed, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6\).

Textual criticism - what is it?

Answer Simply stated, textual criticism is a method used to determine what the original manuscripts of the Bible said. The original manuscripts of the Bible are either lost, hidden, or no longer in existence. What we do have is tens of thousands of copies of the original manuscripts dating from the 1st to the 15th centuries A.D. (for the New Testament) and dating from the 4th century B.C. to the 15th century A.D. (for the Old Testament). In these manuscripts, there are many minor and a few significant differences. Textual criticism is the study of these manuscripts in an attempt to determine what the original reading actually was. There are three primary methods to textual criticism. The first is the Textus Receptus. The Textus Receptus was a manuscript of the Bible that was compiled by a man named Erasmus in the 1500s A.D. He took the limited number of manuscripts he had access to and compiled them into what eventually became known as the Textus Receptus. The Textus Receptus is the textual basis behind the King James Version and New King James Version. A second method is known as the Majority Text. The Majority Text takes all of the manuscripts that are available today, compares the differences, and chooses the most likely correct reading based on which reading occurs the most. For example, if 748 manuscripts read "he said" and 1,429 manuscripts read "they said" the Majority Text will go with "they said" as the most likely original reading. There are no major Bible translations that are based on the Majority Text. The third method is known as the critical or eclectic method. The eclectic method involves considering external and internal evidences for determining the most likely original text. External evidence makes us ask these questions: in how many manuscripts does the reading occur? what are the dates for these manuscripts? in what region of the world were these manuscripts found? Internal evidence prompts these questions: what could have caused these varying readings? which reading can possibly explain the origin of the other readings? The New International Version, New American Standard, New Living Translation, and most other Bible translations use the Eclectic Text. Which method is most accurate? That is where the debate begins. When the methods are first described to someone, the person typically picks the Majority Text as the method that should be used. It is essentially the "majority rules" and the "democratic" method. However, there is a regional issue to consider here. In the first few centuries of the church, the vast majority of Christians spoke and wrote in Greek. Starting in the 4th century A.D., Latin began to become the most common language, especially in the church. Starting with the Latin Vulgate, the New Testament began to be copied in Latin instead of Greek. However, in the eastern Christian world, Greek continued to be the dominant language of the church for over 1,000 more years. As a result, the vast majority of Greek manuscripts are from the eastern / Byzantine region. These Byzantine manuscripts are all very similar to each other. They likely all originated in the same few Greek manuscripts. While being very similar to each other, the Byzantine manuscripts have numerous differences with the manuscripts found in the western and central regions of the church. So, it essentially boils down to this: if you started with three manuscripts, one was copied 100 times, another was copied 200 times, and the third was copied 5,000 times, which group is going to have the majority rule? The third group, of course. However, the third group is no more likely to have the original reading than the first or second group. It only has more copies. The critical / eclectic method of textual criticism gives equal "weight" to the manuscripts from different regions, despite the manuscripts from the East having the overwhelming majority. How does the critical / eclectic method work in practice? If you compare John 5:1\-9 in the King James Version (Textus Receptus) and the New International Version (Critical Text), you will notice that verse 4 is missing from the NIV. In the KJV, John 5:4 reads, "For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had." Why is this verse missing from the NIV (and the other Bible translations which use the Critical Text)? The eclectic method works as follows: (1\) The text of John 5:4 does not occur in most of the oldest manuscripts. (2\) The text of John 5:4 occurs in all of the Byzantine manuscripts, but not many of the non\-eastern manuscripts. (3\) It is more likely that a scribe would add an explanation than it is that a scribe would remove an explanation. John 5:4 makes it more clear why the crippled man wanted to get into the pool. Why would a scribe remove this verse? That does not make sense. It does make sense for that the tradition of why the crippled man wanted to get into the pool would be added. As a result of these concepts, the Critical / Eclectic Text does not include John 5:4\. No matter what method of textual criticism you believe is correct, this is an issue that should be discussed with grace, respect, and kindness. Christians can and do disagree on this issue. We can debate the methods, but we should not attack the motivations and character of those with whom we disagree on this issue. We all have the same goal—to determine the most likely original wording of the Bible. Some simply have different methods to achieve that goal.

Did Jesus have brothers and sisters (siblings)?

Answer Jesus’ brothers are mentioned in several Bible verses. Matthew 12:46, Luke 8:19, and Mark 3:31 say that Jesus’ mother and brothers came to see Him. The Bible tells us that Jesus had four brothers: James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas (Matthew 13:55\). The Bible also tells us that Jesus had sisters, but they are not named or numbered (Matthew 13:56\). In John 7:1\-10, His brothers go on to the festival while Jesus stays behind. In Acts 1:14, His brothers and mother are described as praying with the disciples. Galatians 1:19 mentions that James was Jesus’ brother. The most natural conclusion of these passages is to interpret that Jesus had actual blood half\-siblings. Some Roman Catholics claim that these “brothers” were actually Jesus’ cousins. However, in each instance, the specific Greek word for “brother” is used. While the word can refer to other relatives, its normal and literal meaning is a physical brother. There was a Greek word for “cousin,” and it was not used. Further, if they were Jesus’ cousins, why would they so often be described as being with Mary, Jesus’ mother? There is nothing in the context of His mother and brothers coming to see Him that even hints that they were anyone other than His literal, blood\-related, half\-brothers. A second Roman Catholic argument is that Jesus’ brothers and sisters were the children of Joseph from a previous marriage. An entire theory of Joseph’s being significantly older than Mary, having been previously married, having multiple children, and then being widowed before marrying Mary is invented without any biblical basis. The problem with this is that the Bible does not even hint that Joseph was married or had children before he married Mary. If Joseph had at least six children before he married Mary, why are they not mentioned in Joseph and Mary’s trip to Bethlehem (Luke 2:4\-7\) or their trip to Egypt (Matthew 2:13\-15\) or their trip back to Nazareth (Matthew 2:20\-23\)? There is no biblical reason to believe that these siblings are anything other than the actual children of Joseph and Mary. Those who oppose the idea that Jesus had half\-brothers and half\-sisters do so, not from a reading of Scripture, but from a preconceived concept of the perpetual virginity of Mary, which is itself clearly unbiblical: “But he \[Joseph] had no union with her \[Mary] until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus” (Matthew 1:25\). Jesus had half\-siblings, half\-brothers and half\-sisters, who were the children of Joseph and Mary. That is the clear and unambiguous teaching of God’s Word.

What is Christology?

Answer The word "Christology" comes from two Greek words meaning "Christ / Messiah" and "word" \- which combine to mean "the study of Christ." Christology is the study of the Person and work of Jesus Christ. There are numerous important questions that Christology answers: [Who is Jesus Christ?](who-is-Jesus.html) Almost every major religion teaches that Jesus was a prophet, or a good teacher, or a godly man. The problem is, the Bible tells us that Jesus was infinitely more than a prophet, a good teacher, or a godly man. [Is Jesus God? Did Jesus ever claim to be God?](is-Jesus-God.html) Although Jesus never uttered the words “I am God,” He made many other statements that can’t be properly interpreted to mean anything else. [What is the hypostatic union? How can Jesus be both God and man at the same time?](hypostatic-union.html) The Bible teaches that Jesus is both fully human and fully divine, that there is no mixture or dilution of either nature, and that He is one united Person, forever. [Why is the virgin birth so important?](virgin-birth.html) The virgin birth is a crucial biblical doctrine because it accounts for the circumvention of the transmission of the sin nature and allowed the eternal God to become a perfect man. [What does it mean that Jesus is the Son of God?](Jesus-Son-of-God.html) Jesus is not God’s Son in the sense of how we think of a father/son relationship. God did not get married and have a son. Jesus is God’s Son in the sense that He is God made manifest in human form (John 1:1,14\). A Biblical understanding of Jesus Christ is crucial to our salvation. Many cults and world religions claim to believe in Jesus Christ. The problem is that they do not believe in the Jesus Christ presented in the Bible. That is why Christology is so important. It helps us to understand the significance of the deity of Christ. It demonstrates why Jesus is the atoning sacrifice for our sins. Christology teaches us that Jesus had to be man so that He could die \- and had to be God so that His death would pay for our sins. It is perhaps the most important area of theology. Without a proper understanding of who Jesus Christ is and what He accomplished, all other areas of theology will be errant as well. An in\-depth study of Christology has incredible personal impact on the believer’s daily life. As we delve into the heart of Jesus, we begin to grasp the amazing concept that He, being fully Man and fully God, loves each of us with a never\-ending love the extent of which is hard for us to imagine. The various titles and names of Christ in the Scriptures give insight into who He is and how He relates to us. He is our Good Shepherd, leading, protecting and caring for us as one of His own (John 10:11,14\); He is the Light of the world, illuminating our pathway through a sometimes dark and uncertain world (John 8:12\); He is the Prince of Peace (Isaiah 9:6\), bringing tranquility into our tumultuous lives; and He is our Rock (1 Corinthians 10:4\), the immovable and secure base who we can trust to keep us safe and secure in Him.

Is the resurrection of Jesus Christ true?

Answer Scripture presents conclusive evidence that Jesus Christ was in fact resurrected from the dead. Christ’s resurrection is recorded in Matthew 28:1\-20; Mark 16:1\-20; Luke 24:1\-53; and John 20:1–21:25\. The resurrected Christ also appeared in the Book of Acts (Acts 1:1\-11\). From these passages you can gain several “proofs” of Christ’s resurrection. First is the dramatic change in the disciples. They went from a group of men frightened and in hiding to strong, courageous witnesses sharing the gospel throughout the world. What else could explain this dramatic change other than the risen Christ appearing to them? Second is the life of the apostle Paul. What changed him from being a persecutor of the church into an apostle for the church? It was when the risen Christ appeared to him on the road to Damascus (Acts 9:1\-6\). A third convincing proof is the empty tomb. If Christ were not raised, then where is His body? The disciples and others saw the tomb where He was buried. When they returned, His body was not there. Angels declared that He had been raised from the dead as He had promised (Matthew 28:5\-7\). Fourth, additional evidence of His resurrection is the many people He appeared to (Matthew 28:5, 9, 16\-17; Mark 16:9; Luke 24:13\-35; John 20:19, 24, 26\-29, 21:1\-14; Acts 1:6\-8; 1 Corinthians 15:5\-7\). Another proof of the resurrection of Jesus is the great amount of weight the apostles gave to Jesus’ resurrection. A key passage on Christ’s resurrection is 1 Corinthians 15\. In this chapter, the apostle Paul explains why it is crucial to understand and believe in Christ’s resurrection. The resurrection is important for the following reasons: 1\) If Christ was not raised from the dead, believers will not be either (1 Corinthians 15:12\-15\). 2\) If Christ was not raised from the dead, His sacrifice for sin was not sufficient (1 Corinthians 15:16\-19\). Jesus’ resurrection proved that His death was accepted by God as the atonement for our sins. If He had simply died and stayed dead, that would indicate His sacrifice was not sufficient. As a result, believers would not be forgiven for their sins, and they would remain dead after they die (1 Corinthians 15:16\-19\). There would be no such thing as eternal life (John 3:16\). “But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep” (1 Corinthians 15:20 NAS). Finally, Scripture is clear that all those who believe in Jesus Christ will be raised to eternal life just as He was (1 Corinthians 15:20\-23\). First Corinthians 15 goes on to describe how Christ’s resurrection proves His victory over sin and provides us the power to live victoriously over sin (1 Corinthians 15:24\-34\). It describes the glorious nature of the resurrection body we will receive (1 Corinthians 15:35\-49\). It proclaims that, as a result of Christ’s resurrection, all who believe in Him have ultimate victory over death (1 Corinthians 15:50\-58\). What a glorious truth the resurrection of Christ is! “Therefore, my dear brothers, stand firm. Let nothing move you. Always give yourselves fully to the work of the Lord, because you know that your labor in the Lord is not in vain” (1 Corinthians 15:58\). According to the Bible, the resurrection of Jesus Christ is most definitely true. The Bible records Christ’s resurrection, records that over 500 people witnessed the resurrected Christ, and proceeds to build crucial Christian doctrine on the historical fact of Jesus’ resurrection.

Why is the virgin birth so important?

Answer The doctrine of the virgin birth teaches that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin. That is, when [Mary](virgin-Mary.html) conceived Jesus, she had never had sexual intercourse. Jesus’ birth, therefore, was truly miraculous. The virgin birth of Jesus is a crucially important doctrine and one that the Bible plainly teaches in Matthew 1:23 and Luke 1:27, 34\. Let’s look at how Scripture describes the virgin birth. The [angel Gabriel](angel-Gabriel.html) visits the Virgin Mary to bring her the news that she would be the mother of the Messiah. Mary asks, “How will this be, since I am a virgin?” (Luke 1:34, ESV). Gabriel’s reply indicates the miraculous nature of the conception: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God” (Luke 1:35\). The angel points not to any human act but to the Holy Spirit and the power of God as the agency of Jesus’ birth. Jesus would properly be called the Son of God. Gabriel later repeats the news to [Joseph](Joseph-the-father-of-Jesus.html), betrothed to be married to Mary: “What is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 1:20\). Joseph needed this information because, “before they came together, \[Mary] was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 1:18\). Accepting God’s word on the matter, Joseph proceeded to take Mary as his wife, but she remained a virgin until *after* Jesus was born: “He did not consummate their marriage until she gave birth to a son” (Matthew 1:25\). The gospel writers are judicious in their wording to maintain the doctrine of the virgin birth. In his genealogy of Jesus, Luke mentions that Jesus was “the son (as was supposed) of Joseph” (Luke 3:23, ESV). In his genealogy, Matthew carefully avoids calling Joseph the father of Jesus; rather, he speaks of “Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah” (Matthew 1:16\). The virgin birth of Jesus Christ was predicted in the Old Testament: “The Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel” (Isaiah 7:14, quoted in Matthew 1:22\). There is also a possible allusion to the virgin birth in Genesis 3:15, which says that the “seed” of “the woman” would destroy the serpent. The Bible teaches the preexistence of the eternal Son of God. In Isaiah 9:6, the child who is “born” is also the son who is “given.” In like manner, Galatians 4:4 also teaches the preexistence and virgin birth of Christ: “God sent His Son, born of a woman.” The virgin birth is important because that was the means by which “the Word became flesh” (John 1:14\). The [incarnation](incarnation-of-Christ.html) is when the eternal Son of God took on human flesh; without losing any of His divine nature, He added a human nature. That miraculous, history\-changing event took place in the Virgin Mary’s womb. In the virgin birth, the immaterial (the Spirit) and the material (Mary’s womb) were both involved. Just as, at creation, “the earth was formless and empty” and dark (Genesis 1:2\), Mary’s womb was an empty, barren place. And just as, at creation, “the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters” (Genesis 1:2\), the Spirit of God came upon Mary (Luke 1:35\). Only God can make something out of nothing; only God could perform the miracles of creation, the incarnation, and the virgin birth. The virgin birth is important in that it preserves the truth that Jesus is fully God and fully man at the same time. His physical body He received from [Mary as her biological child](Jesus-son-of-Mary.html). But His eternal, holy nature was His from all eternity past (see John 6:69\). Jesus had no sin nature (Hebrews 7:26\) and therefore was able to be our perfect substitute (1 Peter 1:19\), conquering sin and death once for all (Hebrews 10:10\). Not only was He able to take away our sin, but He was tempted in every way that we are, yet without sin. Therefore, He is our perfect sacrifice and also able to empathize with our weaknesses (Hebrews 4:15\). Our God miraculously became man to save us and graciously reveal His love for us. The virgin birth of Jesus is an example of God’s gracious work on our behalf. God took the initiative—Mary was not looking to become pregnant—it was all God’s idea. Joseph had no role in the conception—his body was not involved—so the power had to come from God. In a similar way, our salvation is based solely on God’s initiative and God’s power—we did not seek God, but He sought us; and we did nothing to earn our salvation, but we rely on God’s power. Unsurprisingly, Jesus’ enemies among His contemporaries denied His virgin birth. They went so far as to publicly accuse Jesus of being a Samaritan, i.e., a person of mixed race (John 8:48\). Those today who would deny the virgin birth contradict the clear teaching of Scripture, call into question other miracles recorded in the Bible, and open the door to a denial of Christ’s full deity or His full humanity.

Is Jesus God?

Answer Some who deny that Jesus is God make the claim that [Jesus never said that He is God](did-Jesus-say-He-is-God.html). It is correct that the Bible never records Jesus saying the precise words, “I am God.” This does not mean, however, that Jesus never claimed to be God. **Is Jesus God? — Jesus claimed to be God.** Take for example the words of Jesus in John 10:30, “I and the Father are one.” We need only to look at the Jews’ reaction to His statement to know He was claiming to be God. They tried to stone Him for this very reason: “You, a mere man, *claim to be God*” (John 10:33, emphasis added). The Jews understood exactly what Jesus was claiming—deity. When Jesus declared, “I and the Father are one,” He was saying that He and the Father are of one nature and essence. John 8:58 is another example. Jesus declared, “I tell you the truth … before Abraham was born, I am!” This is a reference back to Exodus 3:14 when God revealed Himself as the “I AM.” The Jews who heard this statement responded by taking up stones to kill Him for blasphemy, as the Mosaic Law commanded (Leviticus 24:16\). **Is Jesus God? — His followers declared Him to be God.** John reiterates the concept of Jesus’ deity: “The Word \[Jesus] was God” and “the Word became flesh” (John 1:1, 14\). These verses clearly indicate that Jesus is God in the flesh. Acts 20:28 tells us, “Be shepherds of the church of God, which He bought with His own blood.” Who bought the church with His own blood? Jesus Christ. And this same verse declares that God purchased His church with His own blood. Therefore, Jesus is God. Thomas the disciple declared concerning Jesus, “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28\). Jesus does not correct him. Titus 2:13 encourages us to wait for the coming of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ (see also 2 Peter 1:1\). In Hebrews 1:8, the Father declares of Jesus, “But about the Son He says, ‘Your throne, O God, will last forever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.’” The Father refers to Jesus as God, indicating that Jesus is indeed God. In Revelation, an angel instructed the apostle John to only worship God (Revelation 19:10\). Several times in Scripture Jesus receives worship (Matthew 2:11; 14:33; 28:9, 17; Luke 24:52; John 9:38\). He never rebukes people for worshiping Him. If Jesus were not God, He would have told people to not worship Him, just as the angel in Revelation did. Beyond these, there are many other passages of Scripture that argue for Jesus being God. **Is Jesus God? — The reason Jesus must be God.** The most important reason that Jesus must be God is that, if He is not God, His death would not have been sufficient to pay the penalty for the sins of the world (1 John 2:2\). A created being, which Jesus would be if He were not God, could not pay the infinite penalty required for sin against an infinite God. Only God could pay such an infinite penalty. Only God could take on the sins of the world (2 Corinthians 5:21\), die, and be resurrected, proving His victory over sin and death. Is Jesus God? Yes. Jesus declared Himself to be God. His followers believed Him to be God. The provision of salvation only works if Jesus is God. Jesus is God incarnate, the eternal Alpha and Omega (Revelation 1:8; 22:13\), and God our Savior (2 Peter 1:1\).

Did Jesus go to hell between His death and resurrection?

Answer There is a great deal of confusion regarding this question. The concept that Jesus went to hell after His death on the cross comes primarily from the [Apostles’ Creed](apostles-creed.html), which states, “He descended into hell.” There are also a few Scripture passages that, depending on how they are translated, describe Jesus going to “hell.” In studying this issue, it is important to first understand what the Bible teaches about the realm of the dead. In the Hebrew Scriptures, the word used to describe the realm of the dead is [*sheol*](sheol-hades-hell.html). It simply means “the place of the dead” or “the place of departed souls/spirits.” The New Testament Greek equivalent of *sheol* is *hades*, which also refers to “the place of the dead.” The New Testament indicates that sheol/hades is a temporary place, where souls are kept as they await the final resurrection and judgment. Revelation 20:11–15 makes a clear distinction between hades and the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the permanent and final place of judgment for the lost. Hades, then, is a temporary place. Many people refer to both hades and the lake of fire as “hell,” and this causes confusion. Jesus did not go to a place of torment after His death, but He did go to hades. Sheol/hades is a realm with two divisions—a place of blessing and a place of judgment (Matthew 11:23; 16:18; Luke 10:15; 16:23; Acts 2:27–31\). The abodes of the saved and the lost are both generally called “hades” in the Bible. The abode of the saved is also called “Abraham’s bosom” (KJV) or “Abraham’s side” (NIV) in Luke 16:22 and “paradise” in Luke 23:43\. The abodes of the saved and the lost are separated by a “great chasm” (Luke 16:26\). When Jesus died, He went to the blessed side of sheol, or paradise. (Some believe, based on a particular interpretation of Ephesians 4:8–10, that Jesus took believers with Him from sheol to another place of bliss that we now call heaven. More likely, Ephesians 4 refers to the [ascension of Christ](ascension-Jesus-Christ.html).) All the unbelieving dead go to the cursed side of hades to await the final judgment. All the believing dead go to the blessed side of hades to await the resurrection. Did Jesus go to sheol/hades? Yes, according to Jesus’ own words, He went to the blessed region of sheol. Some of the confusion has arisen from such passages as Psalm 16:10–11 as translated in the King James Version: “For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. . . . Thou wilt show me the path of life.” “Hell” is not a correct translation in this verse. A correct reading would be “the grave” or “sheol.” Jesus said to the thief beside Him, “Today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43\); He did not say, “I will see you in hell.” Jesus’ body was in the tomb; His soul/spirit went to be with the blessed in sheol/hades. Unfortunately, in many versions of the Bible, translators are not consistent, or correct, in how they translate the Hebrew and Greek words for “sheol,” “hades,” and “hell.” Some have the viewpoint that Jesus went to “hell” or the suffering side of sheol/hades in order to further be punished for our sins. This idea is completely unbiblical. It was the death of Jesus on the cross that sufficiently provided for our redemption. It was His shed blood that effected our own cleansing from sin (1 John 1:7–9\). As He hung there on the cross, He took the sin burden of the whole human race upon Himself. He became sin for us: “God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Corinthians 5:21\). This imputation of sin helps us understand Christ’s struggle in the Garden of Gethsemane with the cup of sin that He asked to pass from Him (Matthew 26:39\). As Jesus neared death, He said, “[It is finished](it-is-finished.html)” (John 19:30\). His suffering in our place was completed. His soul/spirit went to hades (the place of the dead). Jesus did not go to “hell” or the suffering side of hades; He went to “Abraham’s side” or the blessed side of hades. Jesus’ suffering ended the moment He died. The payment for sin was paid. He then awaited the resurrection of His body and His return to glory in His ascension. Did Jesus go to hell? No. Did Jesus go to sheol/hades? Yes.

What happened during Jesus’ childhood?

Answer Other than Luke 2:41–52, the Bible does not tell us anything about Jesus’ youth. From this incident we do know certain things about Jesus’ childhood. First, He was the son of parents\* who were devout in their religious observances. As required in the law, Joseph and Mary made the yearly pilgrimage to Jerusalem for the Feast of the Passover. When Jesus was 12 years old, they brought Him along on the trip to celebrate the Feast with them. Luke paints a picture of a typical boy in a typical family of that day. We see also in this story that Jesus’ lingering in the temple was neither mischievous nor disobedient, but a natural result of His knowledge that He must be about His Father’s business. That He was astonishing the temple teachers with His wisdom and knowledge speaks to His extraordinary abilities, while His listening and asking questions of His elders shows that He was utterly respectful, taking the role of a student as was fitting for a child of His age. From this incident to His baptism at age 30, all we know of Jesus’ youth was that He left Jerusalem and returned to Nazareth with His parents and “was obedient to them” Luke 2:51\. He fulfilled His duty to His earthly parents in submission to the 5th commandment, an essential part of the perfect obedience to the law of Moses which He rendered on our behalf. Beyond that, all we know is that “Jesus grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men" (Luke 2:52\). Evidently, this is all God determined that we needed to know. There are some extra\-Biblical writings which contain stories of Jesus’ youth (the Gospel of Thomas, for example). But we have no way of knowing whether any of these stories are true and reliable. God chose not to tell us much about Jesus’ childhood – so we have to just trust Him that nothing occurred which we need to know about. *\*While we believe it is accurate to describe Joseph and Mary as Jesus’ parents, it is very important to remember that Mary was Jesus’ biological mother with Joseph being Jesus’ adoptive father.*

Where does the Old Testament predict the coming of Jesus Christ?

Answer There are many Old Testament prophecies about Jesus Christ. Some interpreters place the number of Messianic prophecies in the hundreds. The following are those that are considered the clearest and most important. Regarding Jesus’ birth—Isaiah 7:14: “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.” Isaiah 9:6: “For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” Micah 5:2: “But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times.” Concerning Jesus’ ministry and death—Zechariah 9:9: “Rejoice greatly, O Daughter of Zion! Shout, Daughter of Jerusalem! See, your king comes to you, righteous and having salvation, gentle and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey.” Psalm 22:16\-18: “Dogs have surrounded me; a band of evil men has encircled me, they have pierced my hands and my feet. I can count all my bones; people stare and gloat over me. They divide my garments among them and cast lots for my clothing.” Likely the clearest prophecy about Jesus is the entire 53rd chapter of Isaiah. Isaiah 53:3\-7 is especially unmistakable: “He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth.” The “seventy sevens” prophecy in Daniel chapter 9 predicted the precise date that Jesus, the Messiah, would be “cut off.” Isaiah 50:6 accurately describes the beating that Jesus endured. Zechariah 12:10 predicts the “piercing” of the Messiah, which occurred after Jesus died on the cross. Many more examples could be provided, but these will suffice. The Old Testament most definitely prophesies the coming of Jesus as the Messiah.

On what day was Jesus crucified?

Answer The Bible explicitly states, in all four Gospels, that Jesus was crucified on preparation day (Matthew 27:62; Mark 15:42; Luke 23:54; John 19:14,31\). He rose again on the first day of the week (Matthew 28:1; Mark 16:1; Luke 24:1; John 20:1\). Determining the day of the week for the crucifixion would seem to be straightforward, but it’s not. Several factors must be considered: the Jewish mode of reckoning a day, the start of [Passover](what-is-Passover.html) and the Feast of Unleavened Bread, and three calendars: Jewish, Julian, and Gregorian. Three possibilities emerge: Jesus was crucified on what we would call a Friday, on a Thursday, or on a Wednesday. Here is a brief look at each viewpoint: **Jesus was crucified on a Friday** *Early Friday: Jesus eats the Passover. Late Friday: Jesus is crucified and buried. Early and late Saturday (the Sabbath): Jesus is in the tomb. Early Sunday: Jesus rises from the dead, and the women find the empty tomb.* The traditional view is that Jesus was crucified on a Friday. According to this timeline, Jesus was killed in AD 30, and the day of preparation was Passover, Friday, Nisan 14\. That was the time to eat the Passover meal and to ready dwellings for the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which began the next day, Saturday, Nisan 15\. The fact that Jesus was killed on Passover accords well with 1 Corinthians 5:7, which calls Christ “our [Passover lamb](Passover-Lamb.html).” Mark 15:42 says that Jesus was crucified on “the day before the Sabbath”; proponents of the Friday view consider the “Sabbath” here to be the weekly observance held on Saturday. Immediately after Jesus was taken down from the cross, the women present followed the body of Jesus to the tomb to see where it was laid. This happened “late on Friday afternoon, the day of preparation, as the Sabbath was about to begin” (Luke 23:54, NLT). On the day after the crucifixion (Saturday, Nisan 15\), the chief priests and the Pharisees met with Pilate, who agrees to have the tomb sealed and guarded (Matthew 27:62\). The Friday view has Jesus in the tomb for three days by reckoning part of a day as a full day: Jesus was buried late in the day Friday (Day 1\) and was entombed Saturday (Day 2\) and the first part of Sunday (Day 3\). Another argument for Friday points to verses such as Matthew 16:21 and Luke 9:22, which say that Jesus would rise “on the third day.” Sunday is the third day from Friday. According to the Friday view, the “three days and three nights” prophecy of Matthew 12:40 was fulfilled in that both Jesus and Jonah were “confined” in difficult situations where they could not move about freely for three periods of darkness (night) and three periods of light (day). The three nights of confinement for Jesus were His arrest on Thursday night and His time in the tomb Friday night and Saturday night (or, as reckoned in the Jewish method—in which a day begins at sunset—early Friday, early Saturday, and early Sunday). The three days for Jesus were all day Friday, all day Saturday, and part of Sunday. **Jesus was crucified on a Thursday** *Late Thursday: Jesus is crucified and buried. Late Thursday through early Sunday: Jesus is in the tomb. Early Sunday: Jesus rises from the dead, and the women find the empty tomb.* One point to be made in favor of the Thursday view is that Jesus’ prophecy of the sign of Jonah specifically includes *three nights* as well as three *days* (Matthew 12:40\). If the crucifixion occurred on Thursday afternoon, the three days and three nights are all accounted for. As for Luke’s statement that Jesus was taken down from the cross because “the sabbath was about to begin” (Luke 23:54\), the Thursday view points out that there were actually *two* Sabbaths that week, the first Sabbath starting at sundown Thursday, followed by the regular Sabbath starting at sundown Friday. In fact, John’s account says that “the next day was to be a special Sabbath” (John 19:31\); Passover was considered a special Sabbath (see Leviticus 16:29–31; 23:7, 24–32, 39\). Further, Matthew 28:1 says that the resurrection occurred “after the Sabbaths” (Berean Literal Bible)—the plural *sabbaths* being in the original, confirming there were multiple Sabbaths between the crucifixion and the resurrection. So, the “Passover” Sabbath was followed immediately by the “weekly” Sabbath, making the first opportunity to prepare the body for burial on Sunday at first light—and the women came to the tomb to do just that. Thursday advocates also point to several passages that indicate the number of days between the crucifixion and the resurrection. For example, in John 2:19, Jesus says, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.” Three days from Thursday is Sunday. In addition, when Jesus appears to the two men on the [road to Emmaus](road-to-Emmaus.html) on resurrection Sunday, they state that “it is the third day since all this took place” (Luke 24:21\). A natural reading of this sentence would place the crucifixion on Thursday. Advocates for a Thursday crucifixion consider the “Preparation Day” to be the day before the Passover, the High Sabbath (John 19:14\). Preparation day was the day that the Passover lamb was killed prior to the Passover meal that evening—which, according to Jewish reckoning, was the beginning of the next day (Mark 14:12\). It is clear from the Old Testament instructions on the Passover (Exodus 12:6; Leviticus 23:5\) that the lamb was to be slaughtered late in the day on the 14th day of the Hebrew month of Nisan—which was Thursday afternoon in AD 32\. Thursday advocates point out that at the same time Israel was slaughtering their Passover lambs on Nisan 14, Jesus, the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29\) was dying on a cross. Thus was fulfilled the prophetic symbolism of the Passover (1 Corinthians 5:7\). Based on this timeline, Thursday proponents also argue that the Last Supper, eaten on Wednesday evening, was not the Passover meal. The main course at Passover was a lamb, and there is no lamb mentioned at the Last Supper. Only bread and wine are mentioned. **Jesus was crucified on a Wednesday** *Late Wednesday: Jesus is crucified and buried. Early Thursday (Passover) through Late Saturday (Sabbath): Jesus is in the tomb. Friday (between the two Sabbaths): the women buy and prepare the spices. Early Sunday: Jesus rises from the dead, and the women find the empty tomb.* Those who argue for a Wednesday crucifixion agree with the Thursday view that there were two Sabbaths that week, but they separate them by a day. The first Sabbath, in this view, was the Passover Sabbath starting Wednesday evening following the crucifixion (Mark 15:42; Luke 23:52–54\). Then came a non\-Sabbath day (Friday) and then the weekly Sabbath starting Friday evening. The women purchased spices *after* the Sabbath, according to Mark 16:1—meaning the Passover Sabbath. Luke 23:56 says that, after the women saw where Jesus was buried, “they went home and prepared spices and perfumes. But they rested on the Sabbath in obedience to the commandment.” The Wednesday argument states that the women could not purchase the spices *after* the Sabbath and prepare those spices *before* the Sabbath unless there were two Sabbaths that week, separated by a day. Supporters of the Wednesday viewpoint see theirs as the only explanation that does not violate the biblical account of the women and the spices and holds to a literal understanding of Matthew 12:40\. The “three days and three nights” of Matthew 12:40 are reckoned as follows: early Thursday (Day 1\), late Thursday (Night 1\), early Friday (Day 2\), late Friday (Night 2\), early Saturday (Day 3\), and late Saturday (Night 3\). A difficulty with the Wednesday view is that the disciples who walked with Jesus on the road to Emmaus did so on “the same day” of His resurrection (Luke 24:13\). The disciples, who do not recognize Jesus, tell Him of Jesus’ crucifixion (verse 20\) and say that “today is the third day since these things happened” (verse 21\). Wednesday to Sunday is four days. A possible explanation is that they may have started their count on Wednesday *evening* at Christ’s burial, which begins the Jewish Thursday, and Thursday to Sunday could be counted as three days. **Conclusion** While the day of the crucifixion is debated, the day of the resurrection is absolutely clear: Scripture says that [Jesus rose](resurrection-Christ-important.html) on the first day of the week. What’s more important than knowing the day of the week of Jesus’ death is believing that He *did* die and that He rose from the dead. Equally important is *why* He died—to take the punishment that all sinners deserve. Jesus is truly the [Lamb of God](Jesus-Lamb-of-God.html) who takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29\). Putting your trust in Him results in eternal life (John 3:16, 36\)! This is true whether He was crucified on a Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday.

What did Jesus look like?

Answer The Bible nowhere gives a physical description of what Jesus looked like during His incarnation. The closest thing we get to a description is in Isaiah 53:2b, “He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to Him, nothing in His appearance that we should desire Him.” All this tells us is that Jesus’ appearance was just like any other man’s – He was ordinary\-looking. Isaiah was here prophesying that the coming suffering Servant would arise in lowly conditions and wear none of the usual emblems of royalty, making His true identity visible only to the discerning eye of faith. Isaiah further describes the appearance of Christ as He would appear as He was being scourged prior to His crucifixion. “His appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any man and his form marred beyond human likeness” (Isaiah 52:14\). These words describe the inhuman cruelty He suffered to the point that He no longer looked like a human being (Matthew 26:67; 27:30; John 19:3\). His appearance was so awful that people looked at Him in astonishment. Most of the images we have of Jesus today are probably not accurate. Jesus was a Jew, so He likely had dark skin, dark eyes, and dark hair. This is a far cry from the European/Caucasian Jesus in most modern portrayals. One thing is clear: if it were important for us to know what He really did look like, Matthew, Peter and John, who spent three years with Him, would certainly be able to give us an accurate description, as would His own brothers, James and Jude. Yet, these New Testament writers offer no details about His physical attributes.

Why are Jesus’ genealogies in Matthew and Luke so different?

Answer Jesus’ genealogy is given in two places in Scripture: Matthew 1 and Luke 3:23\-38\. Matthew traces the genealogy from Jesus to Abraham. Luke traces the genealogy from Jesus to Adam. However, there is good reason to believe that Matthew and Luke are in fact tracing entirely different genealogies. For example, Matthew gives Joseph’s father as Jacob (Matthew 1:16\), while Luke gives Joseph’s father as Heli (Luke 3:23\). Matthew traces the line through David’s son Solomon (Matthew 1:6\), while Luke traces the line through David’s son Nathan (Luke 3:31\). In fact, between David and Jesus, the only names the genealogies have in common are Shealtiel and Zerubbabel (Matthew 1:12; Luke 3:27\). Some point to these differences as evidence of errors in the Bible. However, the Jews were meticulous record keepers, especially in regard to genealogies. It is inconceivable that Matthew and Luke could build two entirely contradictory genealogies of the same lineage. Again, from David through Jesus, the genealogies are completely different. Even the reference to Shealtiel and Zerubbabel likely refer to different individuals of the same names. Matthew gives Shealtiel’s father as Jeconiah while Luke gives Shealtiel’s father as Neri. It would be normal for a man named Shealtiel to name his son Zerubbabel in light of the famous individuals of those names (see the books of Ezra and Nehemiah). One explanation, held by the church historian Eusebius, is that Matthew is tracing the primary, or biological, lineage while Luke is taking into account an occurrence of “levirate marriage.” If a man died without having any sons, it was tradition for the man’s brother to marry the widow and have a son who would carry on the deceased man’s name. According to Eusebius’s theory, Melchi (Luke 3:24\) and Matthan (Matthew 1:15\) were married at different times to the same woman (tradition names her Estha). This would make Heli (Luke 3:23\) and Jacob (Matthew 1:15\) half\-brothers. Heli then died without a son, and so his (half\-)brother Jacob married Heli’s widow, who gave birth to Joseph. This would make Joseph the “son of Heli” legally *and* the “son of Jacob” biologically. Thus, Matthew and Luke are both recording the same genealogy (Joseph’s), but Luke follows the legal lineage while Matthew follows the biological. Most conservative Bible scholars today take a different view, namely, that Luke is recording Mary’s genealogy and Matthew is recording Joseph’s. Matthew is following the line of Joseph (Jesus’ legal father), through David’s son Solomon, while Luke is following the line of Mary (Jesus’ blood relative), through David’s son Nathan. Since there was no specific Koine Greek word for “son\-in\-law,” Joseph was called the “son of Heli” by marriage to Mary, Heli’s daughter. Through either Mary’s or Joseph’s line, Jesus is a descendant of David and therefore eligible to be the Messiah. Tracing a genealogy through the mother’s side is unusual, but so was the virgin birth. Luke’s explanation is that Jesus was the son of Joseph, “so it was thought” (Luke 3:23\).

When did Jesus know that He was God?

Answer Jesus was always God. From eternity past He has been the second Person of the Trinity, and He always will be. The question of when, after the [Incarnation](incarnation-of-Christ.html), the human Jesus knew that He was God is interesting, but it is not addressed in Scripture. We know that, as an adult, Jesus fully realized who He was, expressing it this way: “Very truly I tell you, . . . before Abraham was born, I am!” (John 8:58\). And when He prayed, “Now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began” (John 17:5\). It also seems that, as a child, Jesus was already aware of His nature and work. When Jesus was twelve years old, Joseph and Mary took the family to Jerusalem. On their way home, they were concerned about Jesus’ being missing from their caravan. They returned to Jerusalem and found Jesus “in the temple courts, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions” (Luke 2:46\). His mother asked Jesus why He would disappear and worry them so. Jesus asked in return, “Why were you searching for me? . . . . Didn’t you know I had to be in my Father’s house?” (verse 49\). Joseph and Mary did not understand Jesus’ words (verse 50\). Whatever those around Him did not grasp, it seems that Jesus, at a very young age, did know that He was the [Son of God](Jesus-Son-of-God.html) and that the Father had foreordained the work He was to do. After the incident in the temple, Luke says, “Jesus grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man” (Luke 2:52\). If at this point in Jesus’ human experience He knew everything, He would not need to “grow in wisdom.” We emphasize that this was Jesus’ *human* experience. Jesus never ceased being God, but in some matters He veiled His divinity in accordance with the Father’s will. Thus, the Son subjected Himself to physical, intellectual, social, and spiritual growth. The Son of God voluntarily put Himself in the position of needing to assimilate knowledge as a man. When did Jesus know that He was God? From the heavenly perspective, the Son knew from eternity past who He was and what His earthly work was to be. From the earthly perspective, the incarnate Jesus came to that realization at some point early in life. Just when that point was, we cannot know for sure.

What does it mean that Jesus is the Son of Man?

Answer Jesus is referred to as the “Son of Man” 82 times in the New Testament (NIV and ESV). In fact, *Son of Man* is the primary title Jesus used when referring to Himself (e.g., Matthew 12:32; 13:37; Luke 12:8; John 1:51\). The only use of *Son of Man* in a clear reference to Jesus, spoken by someone other than Jesus, came from the lips of Stephen as he was being martyred (Acts 7:56\). ***Son of Man* is a title of humanity.** Other titles for Christ, such as [*Son of God*](Jesus-Son-of-God.html), are overt in their focus on His deity. *Son of Man*, in contrast, focuses on the humanity of Christ. God called the prophet Ezekiel “son of man” 93 times. In this way, God was simply calling Ezekiel a human being. *Son of man* is simply a periphrastic term for “human.” Jesus Christ was truly a human being. He came “in the flesh” (1 John 4:2\). ***Son of Man* is a title of humility.** The Second Person of [the Trinity](Trinity-Bible.html), eternal in nature, left heaven’s glory and took on human flesh, becoming the Son of Man, born in a manger and “despised and rejected by mankind” (Isaiah 53:3\). The Son of Man had “no place to lay his head” (Luke 9:58\). The Son of Man ate and drank with sinners (Matthew 11:19\). The Son of Man suffered at the hands of men (Matthew 17:12\). This intentional lowering of His status from King of Heaven to Son of Man is the epitome of humility (see Philippians 2:6–8\). ***Son of Man* is a title of deity.** Ezekiel may have been *a* son of man, but Jesus is *the* Son of Man. As such, Jesus is the supreme example of all that God intended mankind to be, the embodiment of truth and grace (John 1:14\). In Him “all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form” (Colossians 2:9\). For this reason, the Son of Man was able to forgive sins (Matthew 9:6\). The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath (Mark 2:28\). The Son of Man came to save lives (Luke 9:56; 19:10\), rise from the dead (Mark 9:9\), and execute judgment (John 5:27\). At His trial before the high priest, Jesus said, “I say to all of you: From now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven” (Matthew 26:64\). This statement immediately ended the trial, as the court accused the Lord of blasphemy and condemned Him to death (verses 65–66\). ***Son of Man* is a fulfillment of prophecy.** Jesus’ claim before the high priest to be the Son of Man was a reference to the prophecy of Daniel 7:13–14, “I was watching in the night visions, And behold, One like the Son of Man, Coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, And they brought Him near before Him. Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, That all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, Which shall not pass away, And His kingdom the one Which shall not be destroyed” (NKJV). Daniel saw glory, worship, and an everlasting kingdom given to the Messiah—here called the “Son of Man”—and Jesus applied this prophecy to Himself. Jesus also spoke of [His coming kingdom](kingdom-of-God.html) on other occasions (Matthew 13:41; 16:28\). The author of Hebrews used a reference to the “son of man” in the Psalms to teach that Jesus, the true Son of Man, will be the ruler of all things (Hebrews 2:5–9; cf. Psalm 8:4–6\). The Son of Man, in fulfillment of [Old Testament prophecy](messianic-prophecies.html), will be the King. Jesus was fully God (John 1:1\), but He was also fully human (John 1:14\). As the Son of God and the Son of Man, He is deserving of both titles.

Could Jesus have sinned?

Answer There are two sides to this interesting question. It is important to remember that this is not a question of whether Jesus sinned. Both sides agree, as the Bible clearly says, that Jesus did not sin (2 Corinthians 5:21; 1 Peter 2:22\). The question is whether Jesus could have sinned. Those who hold to “impeccability” believe that Jesus could not have sinned. Those who hold to “peccability” believe that Jesus could have sinned, but did not. Which view is correct? The clear teaching of Scripture is that Jesus was impeccable—Jesus could not have sinned. If He could have sinned, He would still be able to sin today because He retains the same essence He did while living on earth. He is the God\-Man and will forever remain so, having full deity and full humanity so united in one person as to be indivisible. To believe that Jesus could sin is to believe that God could sin. “For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him” (Colossians 1:19\). Colossians 2:9 adds, “For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form.” Although Jesus is fully human, He was not born with the sinful nature that we are born with. He certainly was tempted in the same way we are, in that temptations were put before Him by Satan, yet He remained sinless because God is incapable of sinning. It is against His very nature (Matthew 4:1; Hebrews 2:18, 4:15; James 1:13\). Sin is by definition a trespass of the Law. God created the Law, and the Law is by nature what God would or would not do; therefore, sin is anything that God would not do by His very nature. To be tempted is not, in and of itself, sinful. A person could tempt you with something you have no desire to do, such as committing murder or participating in sexual perversions. You probably have no desire whatsoever to take part in these actions, but you were still tempted because someone placed the possibility before you. There are at least two definitions for the word “tempted”: 1\) To have a sinful proposition suggested to you by someone or something outside yourself or by your own sin nature. 2\) To consider actually participating in a sinful act and the possible pleasures and consequences of such an act to the degree that the act is already taking place in your mind. The first definition does not describe a sinful act/thought; the second does. When you dwell upon a sinful act and consider how you might be able to bring it to pass, you have crossed the line of sin. Jesus was tempted in the fashion of definition one except that He was never tempted by a sin nature because it did not exist within Him. Satan proposed certain sinful acts to Jesus, but He had no inner desire to participate in the sin. Therefore, He was tempted like we are but remained sinless. Those who hold to peccability believe that, if Jesus could not have sinned, He could not have truly experienced temptation, and therefore could not truly empathize with our struggles and temptations against sin. We have to remember that one does not have to experience something in order to understand it. God knows everything about everything. While God has never had the desire to sin, and has most definitely never sinned, God knows and understands what sin is. God knows and understands what it is like to be tempted. Jesus can empathize with our temptations because He knows, not because He has “experienced” all the same things we have. Jesus knows what it is like to be tempted, but He does not know what it is like to sin. This does not prevent Him from assisting us. We are tempted with sins that are common to man (1 Corinthians 10:13\). These sins generally can be boiled down to three different types: “the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life” (1 John 2:16 NKJV). Examine the temptation and sin of Eve, as well as the temptation of Jesus, and you will find that the temptations for each came from these three categories. Jesus was tempted in every way and in every area that we are, but remained perfectly holy. Although our corrupt natures will have the inner desire to participate in some sins, we have the ability, through Christ, to overcome sin because we are no longer slaves to sin but rather slaves of God (Romans 6, especially verses 2 and 16\-22\).

What does it mean that Jesus is the son of David?

Answer Seventeen verses in the New Testament describe Jesus as the “son of David.” But the question arises, how could Jesus be the son of David if David lived approximately 1,000 years before Jesus? The answer is that Christ (the Messiah) was the fulfillment of the prophecy of the seed of David (2 Samuel 7:12–16\). Jesus is the promised Messiah, which means He had to be of the lineage of David. Matthew 1 gives the genealogical proof that Jesus, in His humanity, was a direct descendant of Abraham and David through Joseph, Jesus’ legal father. The genealogy in Luke 3 traces Jesus’ lineage through His mother, Mary. Jesus is a descendant of David by adoption through Joseph and by blood through Mary. “As to his earthly life \[Christ Jesus] was a descendant of David” (Romans 1:3\). Primarily, the title “Son of David” is more than a statement of physical genealogy. It is a Messianic title. When people referred to Jesus as the Son of David, they meant that He was the long\-awaited Deliverer, the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecies. Jesus was addressed as “Lord, thou son of David” several times by people who, by faith, were seeking mercy or healing. The woman whose daughter was being tormented by a demon (Matthew 15:22\) and the two blind men by the wayside (Matthew 20:30\) all cried out to the Son of David for help. The titles of honor they gave Him declared their faith in Him. Calling Him “Lord” expressed their sense of His deity, dominion, and power, and calling Him “Son of David,” expressed their faith that He was the Messiah. The Pharisees understood exactly what the people meant when they called Jesus “Son of David.” But, unlike those who cried out in faith, the Pharisees were so blinded by their own pride that they couldn’t see what the blind beggars could see—that here was the Messiah they had supposedly been waiting for all their lives. They hated Jesus because He wouldn’t give them the honor they thought they deserved, so when they heard the people hailing Jesus as the Savior, they became enraged (Matthew 21:15\) and plotted to destroy Him (Luke 19:47\). Jesus further confounded the scribes and Pharisees by asking them to explain the meaning of this very title: how could it be that the Messiah is the son of David when David himself refers to Him as “my Lord” (Mark 12:35–37; cf. Psalm 110:1\)? The teachers of the Law couldn’t answer the question. Jesus thereby exposed the Jewish leaders’ ineptitude as teachers and their ignorance of what the Old Testament taught as to the true nature of the Messiah, further alienating them from Him. Jesus’ point in asking the question of Mark 12:35 was that the Messiah is *more* than the physical son of David. If He is David’s Lord, He must be greater than David. As Jesus says in Revelation 22:16, “I am the Root and the Offspring of David.” That is, He is both the Creator of David and the Descendant of David. Only the Son of God made flesh could say that.

Why was Jesus baptized?

Answer At first glance, it seems that Jesus’ baptism has no purpose at all. John’s baptism was the baptism of repentance (Matthew 3:11\), but Jesus was sinless and had no need of repentance. Even John was taken aback at Jesus’ coming to him. John recognized his own sin and was aware that he, a sinful man in need of repentance himself, was unfit to baptize the spotless Lamb of God: “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?” (Matthew 3:14\). Jesus replied that it should be done because “it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness” (Matthew 3:15\). There are several reasons why it was fitting for John to baptize Jesus at the beginning of Jesus’ public ministry. Jesus was about to embark on His great work, and it was appropriate that He be recognized publicly by His forerunner. John was the “voice crying in the wilderness” prophesied by Isaiah, calling people to repentance in preparation for their Messiah (Isaiah 40:3\). By baptizing Him, John was declaring to all that here was the One they had been waiting for, the Son of God, the One he had predicted would baptize “with the Holy Spirit and fire” (Matthew 3:11\). Jesus’ baptism by John takes on an added dimension when we consider that John was of the tribe of Levi and a direct descendant of Aaron. Luke specifies that both of John’s parents were of the Aaronic priestly line (Luke 1:5\). One of the duties of the priests in the Old Testament was to present the sacrifices before the Lord. John the Baptist’s baptism of Jesus could be seen as a priestly presentation of the Ultimate Sacrifice. John’s words the day after the baptism have a decidedly priestly air: “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (John 1:29\). Jesus’ baptism also showed that He identified with sinners. His baptism symbolized the sinners’ baptism into the righteousness of Christ, dying with Him and rising free from sin and able to walk in the newness of life. His perfect righteousness would fulfill all the requirements of the Law for sinners who could never hope to do so on their own. When John hesitated to baptize the sinless Son of God, Jesus replied that it was proper to “fulfill all righteousness” (Matthew 3:15\). By this He alluded to the righteousness that He provides to all who come to Him to exchange their sin for His righteousness (2 Corinthians 5:21\). In addition, Jesus’ coming to John showed His approval of John’s baptism, bearing witness to it, that it was from heaven and approved by God. This would be important in the future when others would begin to doubt John’s authority, particularly after his arrest by Herod (Matthew 14:3\-11\). Perhaps most importantly, the occasion of the public baptism recorded for all future generations the perfect embodiment of the triune God revealed in glory from heaven. The testimony directly from heaven of the Father’s pleasure with the Son and the descending of the Holy Spirit upon Jesus (Matthew 3:16\-17\) is a beautiful picture of the trinitarian nature of God. It also depicts the work of the Father, Son, and Spirit in the salvation of those Jesus came to save. The Father loves the elect from before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4\); He sends His Son to seek and save the lost (Luke 19:10\); and the Spirit convicts of sin (John 16:8\) and draws the believer to the Father through the Son. All the glorious truth of the mercy of God through Jesus Christ is on display at His baptism.

Why did Jesus have to experience so much suffering?

Answer Jesus suffered severely throughout His trials, torture, and crucifixion (Matthew 27; Mark 15; Luke 23; John 19\). His suffering was physical: Isaiah 52:14 declares, “There were many who were appalled at Him—His appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any man and his form marred beyond human likeness.” His suffering was emotional: “All the disciples deserted him and fled” (Matthew 26:56\). His suffering was spiritual: “God made him who had no sin to be sin for us” (2 Corinthians 5:21\). Jesus had the weight of the sins of the entire world on Him (1 John 2:2\). It was our sin that caused Jesus to cry out, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46\). Jesus’ brutal physical suffering was augmented by His having to bear the guilt of our sins and die to pay our penalty (Romans 5:8\). Isaiah predicted Jesus’ suffering: “He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed” (Isaiah 53:3, 5\). This passage specifies the reason for Jesus’ suffering: “for our transgressions,” for our healing, and to bring us peace. Jesus told His disciples that His suffering was certain: “The Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life” (Luke 9:22; cf. 17:25\). Note the word *must*—He must suffer, and He must be killed. The suffering of Christ was God’s plan for the salvation of the world. Psalm 22:14–18 details some of the suffering of the Messiah: “I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint. My heart has turned to wax; it has melted away within me. My strength is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth; you lay me in the dust of death. Dogs have surrounded me; a band of evil men has encircled me, they have pierced my hands and my feet. I can count all my bones; people stare and gloat over me. They divide my garments among them and cast lots for my clothing.” In order for this and other prophecies to be fulfilled, Jesus had to suffer. Why did Jesus have to suffer so badly? The principle of the innocent dying for the guilty was established in the garden of Eden: Adam and Eve received garments of animal skin to cover their shame (Genesis 3:21\)—thus, blood was shed in Eden. Later, this principle was set in the Mosaic Law: “It is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life” (Leviticus 17:11; cf. Hebrews 9:22\). Jesus had to suffer because suffering is part of sacrifice, and Jesus was “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (John 1:29\). Jesus’ physical torture was part of the payment required for our sins. We are redeemed “with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect” (1 Peter 1:19\). Jesus’ suffering on the cross showed the devastating nature of sin, the wrath of God, the cruelty of humanity, and the hatred of Satan. At Calvary, mankind was allowed to do his worst to the [Son of Man](Jesus-Son-of-Man.html) as He became the Redeemer of mankind. Satan may have thought he had won a great victory, but it was through the cross that the [Son of God](Jesus-Son-of-God.html) triumphed over Satan, sin, and death. “Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this world will be driven out” (John 12:31; cf. Colossians 2:15\). Jesus suffered and died in order to secure salvation for all who would believe. The night of His arrest, as Jesus prayed in Gethsemane, He committed His all to the task: “Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done” (Luke 22:42\). The cup of suffering was not taken from Christ; He drank it all for us. There was no other way for us to be saved.

What were the seven last words of Jesus Christ on the cross and what do they mean?

Answer The seven statements that Jesus Christ made on the cross were (not in any particular order): (1\) Matthew 27:46 tells us that about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?” which means, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” Here, Jesus was expressing His feelings of abandonment as God placed the sins of the world on Him. As Jesus endured that weight of sin, He, who alone is holy, was “made . . . to be sin for us” (2 Corinthians 5:21\), and He cried out in agony. This cry from the cross echoed the statement in Psalm 22:1\. (2\) “[Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing](Father-forgive-them.html)” (Luke 23:34\). Those who crucified Jesus were not aware of the full scope of what they were doing because they did not recognize Him as the Messiah. While their ignorance of divine truth did not mean they deserved forgiveness, Christ’s prayer in the midst of their mocking Him is an expression of the limitless compassion of divine grace. (3\) “[I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise](today-paradise.html)" (Luke 23:43\). In this passage, Jesus is assuring one of the criminals on the cross that when he died, he would be with Jesus in heaven. This was granted because even at the hour of his death, the criminal had expressed his faith in Jesus, recognizing Him for who He was (Luke 23:42\). (4\) “[Father, into Your hands I commit my spirit](into-your-hands-I-commit-my-spirit.html)” (Luke 23:46\). Here, Jesus is willingly giving up His soul into the Father’s hands, indicating that He was about to die – and that God had accepted His sacrifice. He “offered up Himself unblemished to God” (Hebrews 9:14\). (5\) “[Dear Woman, here is your son!](woman-behold-your-son.html)” and “Here is your mother!” When Jesus saw His mother standing near the cross with the Apostle John, whom He loved, He committed His mother’s care into John’s hands. And from that hour John took her unto his own home (John 19:26\-27\). In this verse Jesus, ever the compassionate Son, is making sure His earthly mother is cared for after His death. (6\) “[I am thirsty](I-thirst.html)” (John 19:28\). Jesus was here fulfilling the Messianic prophecy from Psalm 69:21: “They put [gall](gall-in-the-Bible.html) in my food and gave me vinegar for my thirst.” By saying He was thirsty, He prompted the Roman guards to give Him vinegar, which was customary at a crucifixion, thereby fulfilling the prophecy. (7\) “[It is finished!](it-is-finished.html)” (John 19:30\). Jesus’ last words meant that His suffering was over and the whole work His Father had given Him to do, which was to preach the Gospel, work miracles, and obtain eternal salvation for His people, was done, accomplished, fulfilled. The debt of sin was paid.

What does it mean that Jesus is the Son of God?

Answer Jesus is not God’s Son in the sense of a human father and a son. God did not get married and have a son. God did not mate with Mary and, together with her, produce a son. Jesus is God’s Son in the sense that He is God made manifest in human form (John 1:1, 14\). Jesus is God’s Son in that He was conceived in Mary by the Holy Spirit. Luke 1:35 declares, “The angel answered, 'The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God.’” During His trial before the Jewish leaders, the High Priest demanded of Jesus, “I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God” (Matthew 26:63\). “‘Yes, it is as you say,’ Jesus replied. ‘But I say to all of you: In the future you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven’” (Matthew 26:64\). The Jewish leaders responded by accusing Jesus of blasphemy (Matthew 26:65\-66\). Later, before Pontius Pilate, “The Jews insisted, ‘We have a law, and according to that law He must die, because He claimed to be the Son of God’” (John 19:7\). Why would His claiming to be the Son of God be considered blasphemy and be worthy of a death sentence? The Jewish leaders understood exactly what Jesus meant by the phrase “Son of God.” To be the Son of God is to be of the same nature as God. The Son of God is “of God.” The claim to be of the same nature as God—to in fact be God—was blasphemy to the Jewish leaders; therefore, they demanded Jesus’ death, in keeping with Leviticus 24:15\. Hebrews 1:3 expresses this very clearly, “The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of His being.” Another example can be found in John 17:12 where Judas is described as the “[son of perdition](son-of-perdition.html).” John 6:71 tells us that Judas was the son of Simon. What does John 17:12 mean by describing Judas as the “son of perdition”? The word *perdition* means “destruction, ruin, waste.” Judas was not the literal son of “ruin, destruction, and waste,” but those things were the identity of Judas' life. Judas was a manifestation of perdition. In this same way, Jesus is the Son of God. The Son of God is God. Jesus is God made manifest (John 1:1, 14\).

Who was responsible for Christ’s death?

Answer The answer to this question has many facets. First, there is no doubt the religious leaders of Israel were responsible for Jesus’ death. Matthew 26:3–4 tells us that “the chief priests and the elders of the people assembled in the palace of the high priest, whose name was Caiaphas, and they schemed to arrest Jesus secretly and kill him.” The Jewish leaders demanded of the Romans that Jesus be put to death (Matthew 27:22–25\). They couldn’t continue to allow Him to work signs and wonders because it threatened their position and place in the religious society they dominated (John 11:47–50\), so “they plotted to take his life” (John 11:53\). The Romans were the ones who actually crucified Him (Matthew 27:27–37\). Crucifixion was a Roman method of execution, authorized and carried out by the Romans under the authority of Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor who sentenced Jesus. Roman soldiers drove the nails into His hands and feet, Roman troops erected the cross, and a Roman solider pierced His side (Matthew 27:27–35\). The people of Israel were also complicit in the death of Jesus. They were the ones who shouted, “Crucify him! Crucify him!” as He stood on trial before Pilate (Luke 23:21\). They also cried for the thief Barabbas to be released instead of Jesus (Matthew 27:21\). Peter confirmed this in Acts 2:22–23 when he told the men of Israel, “You, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross.” In fact, the murder of Jesus was a conspiracy involving Rome, Herod, the Jewish leaders, and the people of Israel, a diverse group of people who never worked together on anything before or since, but who came together this one time to plot and carry out the unthinkable: the murder of the Son of God. While God did not literally kill Jesus, God allowed Him to be put to death by the hands of the Jews and Romans. Acts 2:23 emphasizes God’s sovereign knowledge as He allowed people to brutally and unlawfully murder His Son: “This man was handed over to you *by God’s deliberate plan and foreknowledge*; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross” (emphasis added). While God did not stop people from physically killing Jesus, He also did not allow death to have the final say: “But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him” (Acts 2:24\). Christ’s death and resurrection was part of God’s perfect plan to eternally redeem all who would believe in Him. "God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God" (2 Corinthians 5:21\). Jesus’ sacrificial death on the cross provides salvation for all who trust in Him. All who have come to Christ in faith are guilty of His blood, shed on the cross for us. He died to pay the penalty for our sins (Romans 5:8; 6:23\). In the movie *The Passion of the Christ*, the director, Mel Gibson, was the one whose hands you see actually driving the nails through Christ’s hands. He did it that way to remind himself, and everyone else, that it was our sins that nailed Jesus to the cross.

Was Jesus Christ married?

Answer The recent discovery and translation of the fourth\-century "Jesus’ wife papyrus" has reopened the discussion as to whether Jesus had a wife / was married. The "Jesus’ wife papyrus" says, "Jesus said to them, 'My wife ...'" This discovery is interesting in that it is the first Gnostic writing to explicitly state that Jesus had a wife. While a couple of the Gnostic gospels mention Jesus having a close relationship with Mary Magdalene, none of them specifically state that Jesus was married to her or to anyone else. Ultimately, it does not matter what the "Jesus’ wife papyrus" or Gnostic gospels say. They have no authority. They have all been proven to be forgeries invented to create a Gnostic view of Jesus. If Jesus had been married, the Bible would have told us so, or there would be some unambiguous statement to that fact. Scripture would not be completely silent on such an important issue. The Bible mentions Jesus’ mother, adoptive father, half\-brothers, and half\-sisters. Why would it neglect to mention the fact that Jesus had a wife? Those who believe/teach that Jesus was married are doing so in an attempt to “humanize” Him, to make Him more ordinary, more like everyone else. People simply do not want to believe that Jesus was God in the flesh (John 1:1, 14; 10:30\). So, they invent and believe myths about Jesus being married, having children, and being an ordinary human being. A secondary question would be, “Could Jesus Christ have been married?” There is nothing sinful about being married. There is nothing sinful about having sexual relations in marriage. So, yes, Jesus could have been married and still be the sinless Lamb of God and Savior of the world. At the same time, there is no biblical reason for Jesus to marry. That is not the point in this debate. Those who believe Jesus was married do not believe that He was sinless, or that He was the Messiah. Getting married and having children is not why God sent Jesus. Mark 10:45 tells us why Jesus came, “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” Do you want to learn about the true "wife" of Jesus? If so, please read our article on "[What does it mean that the church is the bride of Christ?](bride-of-Christ.html)"

How is Jesus Christ unique?

Answer 1\. *Jesus Christ is unique as the [only begotten](only-begotten-son.html) Son of God* (Psalm 2:7, 11–12; John 1:14; 3:16; Luke 1:35\). Jesus is the “one\-of\-a\-kind” Son of God in that He shares the same divine nature as God. 2\. *Jesus Christ is unique in that He is eternal.* He existed from eternity past, He exists in the present, and He will exist for all eternity in the future (John 1:1–3, 14; John 8:58\). 3\. *Jesus Christ is unique in that He is [sinless](Jesus-sinless.html).* He never committed a sin and, although fully human, has no sin nature. He is the Holy One of God (Acts 3:14; John 6:69; 1 Peter 2:22; 1 John 3:5\). 4\. *Jesus Christ is unique because He alone is the One who bore our sins.* As our Sin\-bearer, He grants us forgiveness and salvation and a right standing with God. No one else could take away our sin (Isaiah 53; Matthew 1:21; John 1:29; 1 Peter 2:24; 1 Corinthians 15:1–3\). 5\. *Jesus Christ is unique because He is the only Way to the Father* (John 14:6; Acts 4:12; 1 Timothy 2:5\). There is no other way to salvation. He is the only righteous One, and He exchanged His perfect righteousness for our sin (2 Corinthians 5:21\). 6\. *Jesus Christ is unique in that He alone had power over His own death and the ability take back His life again* (John 2:19; 10:17–18\). Note: His resurrection was not a “spiritual” one, but physical (Luke 24:39\). His resurrection from the dead, never to die again, distinguished Him as the unique Son of God (Romans 1:4\). 7\. *Jesus Christ is unique, as seen in the fact that He alone accepted worship as an equal with the Father* (John 20:28–29; Philippians 2:6\). Indeed, God the Father states that the Son is to be honored as He is honored (John 5:23\). All others in Scripture, whether Jesus’ disciples or angelic beings, rightly reject that worship (Acts 10:25–26; 14:14–15; Matthew 4:10; Revelation 19:10; 22:9\). 8\. *Jesus Christ is unique in that He has the power to give life to whom He will* (John 5:21\). 9\. *Jesus Christ is unique because the Father has committed all judgment to Him* (John 5:22\). Having lived in this world perfectly, He is the only One qualified to judge the world. 10\. *Jesus Christ is unique because He was with the Father and directly involved in the creation.* It is by the hand of Christ that all things are held together (John 1:1–3; Ephesians 3:9; Hebrews 1:8–10; Colossians 1:17\). 11\. *Jesus Christ is unique in that He will rule the world at the end of this present age* (Hebrews 1:8; Isaiah 9:6–7; Daniel 2:35, 44; Revelation 19:11–16\). 12\. Jesus Christ is unique in that He alone was conceived by the Holy Spirit and [born of a virgin](virgin-birth.html) (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:20–23; Luke 1:30–35\). 13\. *Jesus Christ is unique in that He demonstrated the attributes of God.* In His ministry, Jesus showed that He had the power to forgive sins and heal the sick (Matthew 9:1–7\); to calm the wind and waves (Mark 4:37–41; Psalm 89:8–9\); to know people inside and out (Psalm 139; John 1:46–50; 2:23–25\); and to raise the dead (John 11; Luke 7:12–15; 8:41–55\). 14\. *Jesus Christ is unique because He [fulfilled prophecy](prophecies-of-Jesus.html).* There are a great number of prophecies concerning the Messiah’s birth, life, resurrection, person, and purpose. All were fulfilled by Him and no other (e.g., Isaiah 7:14; 9:6–7; 53; Micah 5:2; Psalm 16:10; 22; Zechariah 11:12–13; 13:7\).

Was Jesus ever angry?

Answer When Jesus cleared the temple of the moneychangers and animal\-sellers, He showed great emotion and anger (Matthew 21:12\-13; Mark 11:15\-18; John 2:13\-22\). Jesus’ emotion was described as “zeal” for God’s house (John 2:17\). His anger was pure and completely justified because at its root was concern for God’s holiness and worship. Because these were at stake, Jesus took quick and decisive action. Another time Jesus showed anger was in the synagogue of Capernaum. When the Pharisees refused to answer Jesus’ questions, “He looked around at them in anger, deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts” (Mark 3:5\). Many times, we think of anger as a selfish, destructive emotion that we should eradicate from our lives altogether. However, the fact that Jesus did sometimes become angry indicates that anger itself, as an emotion, is amoral. This is borne out elsewhere in the New Testament. Ephesians 4:26 instructs us “in your anger do not sin” and not to let the sun go down on our anger. The command is not to “avoid anger” (or suppress it or ignore it) but to deal with it properly, in a timely manner. We note the following facts about Jesus’ displays of anger: 1\) His anger had the proper motivation. In other words, He was angry for the right reasons. Jesus’ anger did not arise from [petty](Bible-pettiness.html) arguments or personal slights against Him. There was no selfishness involved. 2\) His anger had the proper focus. He was not angry at God or at the “weaknesses” of others. His anger targeted sinful behavior and true injustice. 3\) His anger had the proper supplement. Mark 3:5 says that His anger was attended by grief over the Pharisees’ lack of faith. Jesus’ anger stemmed from love for the Pharisees and concern for their spiritual condition. It had nothing to do with hatred or ill will. 4\) His anger had the proper control. Jesus was never out of control, even in His wrath. The temple leaders did not like His cleansing of the temple (Luke 19:47\), but He had done nothing sinful. He controlled His emotions; His emotions did not control Him. 5\) His anger had the proper duration. He did not allow His anger to turn into bitterness; He did not hold grudges. He dealt with each situation properly, and He handled anger in good time. 6\) His anger had the proper result. Jesus’ anger had the inevitable consequence of godly action. Jesus’ anger, as with all His emotions, was held in check by the Word of God; thus, Jesus’ response was always to accomplish God’s will. When we get angry, too often we have improper control or an improper focus. We fail in one or more of the above points. This is the wrath of man, of which we are told “Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry, for man’s anger does not bring about the righteous life that God desires” (James 1:19\-20\). Jesus did not exhibit man’s anger, but the righteous indignation of God.

Why did Jesus say, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”

Answer “And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46, KJV). This cry is a fulfillment of Psalm 22:1, one of many parallels between that psalm and the specific events of the crucifixion. It is difficult to understand in what sense Jesus was “forsaken” by God. It is certain that God approved His work. It is certain that Jesus was innocent. He had done nothing to forfeit the favor of God. As [God’s own Son](Jesus-Son-of-God.html)—holy, harmless, undefiled, and obedient—God still loved Him. In none of these senses could God have forsaken Him. The prophet Isaiah says this about the Messiah: “Surely he took up our pain and bore our suffering, yet we considered him punished by God, stricken by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed” (Isaiah 53:4–5\). Jesus redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us (Galatians 3:13\). He was made a sin\-offering, and He died in our place, on our account, that He might bring us near to God. It was this, doubtless, that intensified His sufferings and part of why Jesus said, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” It was the manifestation of God’s hatred of sin, in some unexplained way, that Jesus experienced in that terrible hour. The suffering He endured was due to us, and it is that [suffering](Jesus-suffering.html) by which we can be saved from eternal death. In those awful moments, as evil men were allowed to do whatever they wanted to Jesus, our Lord expressed His feelings of abandonment. God placed the sins of the world on His Son, and Jesus for a time felt the desolation of being unconscious of His Father’s presence. It was at this time that “God made Him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Corinthians 5:21\). There is another possible reason for Jesus to cry out, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” It could be that Jesus’ intent in quoting Psalm 22:1 was to point His hearers to that psalm. When they read Psalm 22, they would no doubt see the many fulfilled prophecies included in that song of David. Even while experiencing the agony of the cross, Jesus was teaching the crowds and proving yet again that He was the Messiah who fulfilled the Scriptures.

What was Jesus like as a person?

Answer Although He had “no beauty of majesty to attract us to him...” (Isaiah 53:2\), it was Jesus’ personality that drew men to Him. He was a man of great character. The more we understand what Jesus was like, the more we can seek to emulate His character. What was Jesus like? Jesus had a *compassionate* nature. He had compassion on the crowds “because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd” (Matthew 9:36\). Because of His compassion for them, He healed their diseases (Matthew 14:14; 20:34\), and because of their hunger, He compassionately created enough food to feed large crowds on at least two occasions (Matthew 14:13–21; 15:29–39\). Jesus was *serious* and *focused*. He had a mission in life and never got sidetracked from it, knowing the weightiness of it and the shortness of time. His attitude was that of a *servant*. He “did not come to be served, but to serve” (Mark 10:45\). *Kindness* and *selflessness* characterized His personality. Jesus was *submissive* to His Father’s will when He came to earth and subsequently went to the cross. He knew that dying on the cross was the only payment His Father could accept for our salvation. He prayed the night of His betrayal by Judas, “My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will” (Matthew 26:39\). He was a submissive Son to Mary and Joseph, as well. He grew up in a normal (sinful) household, yet, Jesus “was obedient” to His parents (Luke 2:51\). He was *obedient* to the Father’s will. “He learned obedience from what he suffered” (Hebrews 5:8\). “For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet he did not sin” (Hebrews 4:15\). What was Jesus like? Jesus had a heart of *mercy* and *forgiveness*. On the cross, He prayed, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing” (Luke 23:34\). Jesus was *loving* in His relationships. For example, John 11:5 says, “Now Jesus loved Martha and her sister and Lazarus” (John 11:5\). John referred to himself as the disciple “whom Jesus loved” (John 13:23\). Jesus had a reputation for being *good* and *caring*. He healed often so that the people might know who He was. Truly He proved to be the Son of the living God by all the miracles He did, all the while showing concern for the afflictions of those around Him. Jesus was *honest* and *truthful*. He never violated His own word. He spoke truth wherever He went. He lived a life we could follow explicitly. Jesus said, “I am the way and the truth and the life.” (John 14:6\). At the same time, He was *peaceable*. He did not argue His case, nor try to bully His way into people’s hearts. What was Jesus like? Jesus was *intimate* with His followers. He spent quality and quantity time with them. He desired their fellowship, taught them, and helped them focus on what was eternal. He was also intimate with His heavenly Father. He prayed to Him regularly, listened, obeyed, and cared about God’s reputation. When Jesus saw the moneychangers who were taking advantage of worshipers, He drove them out. He said, “It is written, ‘My house will be a house of prayer’; but you have made it ‘a den of robbers’” (Luke 19:46\). Jesus was a *strong* but meek *leader*. Everywhere He went (until the inevitable decline), the people followed Him, eager to listen to His teaching. The people were amazed at the *authority* with which Jesus spoke (Mark 1:27–28; Matthew 7:28–29\). Jesus was *patient*, knowing and understanding our frailties. Several times in the Gospels, Jesus verbalized His patience in the face of our faithless provocations (Matthew 8:26; Mark 9:19; John 14:9; cf. 2 Peter 3:9\). All believers should desire to emulate Jesus’ character traits through the power of the Holy Spirit. The things that drew people to Jesus should be the very things that draw people to us. We need to read God’s Word (the Bible) to know and understand who God is and His will for us. We should do everything for the glory of the Lord (1 Corinthians 10:31\), living as salt and light in the world and pointing others to the amazing truth of Jesus and salvation in Him (Matthew 5:13–16; 28:18–20\). Philippians 2:1–11 is a helpful summary of what Jesus was like and how we should imitate Him: “Therefore if you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any common sharing in the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, then make my joy complete by being like\-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and of one mind. Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others. In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death— even death on a cross! Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”

Did Jesus fight Satan for the keys to the kingdom?

Answer Keys are a symbol of control. Keys keep people in or out. If they do not have a key to a lock, they cannot enter or exit. Keys grant the holder access to interiors and their contents, and in ancient times the wearing of large keys was a mark of status in the community. In the New Testament, the word "Hades" has a twofold usage: in some cases it denotes the place of all the departed dead (the grave \- Acts 2:27,31\); in others, it refers to the place of the departed wicked (Hell \- Luke 16:23; Revelation 20:13\-14\). Since Christ alone has conquered death and has Himself come out of grave, He alone can determine who will enter death and Hades and who will come out. He has the "keys." He has authority over death and the place of the dead. Satan has never possessed these "keys." Satan has never had power to determine who goes to Heaven (the Kingdom) and who goes to Hell. Jesus did not have to fight Satan for the keys because the keys were never in Satan’s possession. God and God alone has power over death and Hell (Revelation 1:18\). Jesus did not have to fight Satan for anything because Jesus’ death on the cross was His ultimate victory. Colossians 2:15 tells us, "...and having disarmed the powers and authorities, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross." For the Christian, there is no need to fear death and hell. Christ is in control of both, and the one who has faith in Christ will never enter hell. But it must be remembered, ONLY Christ has the keys to the Kingdom. This is why Jesus told us He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life and that NO ONE can come to the Father except by Him (John 14:6\).

What does it mean that Jesus is the Lamb of God?

Answer When Jesus is called the Lamb of God in John 1:29 and John 1:36, it is referring to Him as the perfect and ultimate sacrifice for sin. In order to understand who Christ was and what He did, we must begin with the Old Testament, which contains prophecies concerning the coming of Christ as a “guilt offering” (Isaiah 53:10\). In fact, the whole sacrificial system established by God in the Old Testament set the stage for the coming of Jesus Christ, who is the perfect sacrifice God would provide as atonement for the sins of His people (Romans 8:3; Hebrews 10\). The sacrifice of lambs played a very important role in the Jewish religious life and sacrificial system. When John the Baptist referred to Jesus as the “Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29\), the Jews who heard him might have immediately thought of any one of several important sacrifices. With the time of the Passover feast being very near, the first thought might be the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The Passover feast was one of the main Jewish holidays and a celebration in remembrance of God’s deliverance of the Israelites from bondage in Egypt. In fact, the slaying of the Passover lamb and the applying of the blood to doorposts of the houses (Exodus 12:11\-13\) is a beautiful picture of Christ’s atoning work on the cross. Those for whom He died are covered by His blood, protecting us from the angel of (spiritual) death. Another important sacrifice involving lambs was the daily sacrifice at the temple in Jerusalem. Every morning and evening, a lamb was sacrificed in the temple for the sins of the people (Exodus 29:38\-42\). These daily sacrifices, like all others, were simply to point people towards the perfect sacrifice of Christ on the cross. In fact, the time of Jesus’ death on the cross corresponds to the time the evening sacrifice was being made in the temple. The Jews at that time would have also been familiar with the Old Testament prophets Jeremiah and Isaiah, who foretold the coming of One who would be brought “like a lamb led to the slaughter” (Jeremiah 11:19; Isaiah 53:7\) and whose sufferings and sacrifice would provide redemption for Israel. Of course, that person was none other than Jesus Christ, “the Lamb of God.” While the idea of a sacrificial system might seem strange to us today, the concept of payment or restitution is still one we can easily understand. We know that the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23\) and that our sin separates us from God. We also know the Bible teaches we are all sinners and none of us is righteous before God (Romans 3:23\). Because of our sin, we are separated from God, and we stand guilty before Him. Therefore, the only hope we can have is if He provides a way for us to be reconciled to Himself, and that is what He did in sending His Son Jesus Christ to die on the cross. Christ died to make atonement for sin and to pay the penalty of the sins of all who believe in Him. It is through His death on the cross as God’s perfect sacrifice for sin and His resurrection three days later that we can now have eternal life if we believe in Him. The fact that God Himself has provided the offering that atones for our sin is part of the glorious good news of the gospel that is so clearly declared in 1 Peter 1:18\-21: “For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your forefathers, but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect. He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake. Through him you believe in God, who raised him from the dead and glorified him, and so your faith and hope are in God.”

What is the Jesus Seminar?

Answer The "Jesus Seminar" was begun by New Testament "scholar" Robert Funk in the 1970s. It was Funk’s desire to rediscover the "historical Jesus" that was hidden, he believed, behind almost 2,000 years of Christian traditions, myths, and legends. The Jesus Seminar was created to examine the biblical gospels and other early Christian literature to discover who Jesus truly was and what He truly said. The Jesus Seminar was (and still is) comprised almost entirely of individuals who deny the inspiration, authority, and inerrancy of the Bible. The agenda of the Jesus Seminar is not to discover who the historical Jesus was. Rather, the purpose of the Jesus Seminar is to attack what the Bible clearly says about who Jesus is and what He taught. The crowning publication of the Jesus Seminar is a work that goes through the four biblical gospels and the gospel of Thomas and proceeds to determine what Jesus truly said and taught. It divides Jesus’ words from the gospels into categories based on how likely it is that Jesus truly said them. Words in red indicate words that Jesus most likely said. Words in pink represent words that Jesus possibly said. Words in gray indicate words that Jesus likely did not say, but are close to what He might have said. Words in black represent words that Jesus definitely did not say. It is interesting to note that in this work from the Jesus Seminar there are more words in black than in red, pink, and gray combined. Almost the entire gospel of John is in black. It is also interesting that the gospel of Thomas is given a significantly higher percentage of red and pink words than the biblical gospels. It is absolutely ridiculous, even offensive, to think that a group of "scholars" today can more accurately determine what Jesus did and did not say than the authors of the gospels, who wrote in the same century in which Jesus lived, taught, died, and was resurrected. The "scholars" of the Jesus Seminar do not believe in the deity of Christ, the resurrection of Christ, the miracles of Christ, or the substitutionary atonement death of Christ. Perhaps most significantly, they deny that the Holy Spirit is the author of all Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16\-17\), having moved the minds and hands of all the writers (2 Peter 1:20\-21\). Since the Jesus Seminar does not believe these Christian doctrines, they relegate anything that Jesus says in support of them as "black." Essentially, the agenda of the Jesus Seminar is, "I do not believe Jesus is God, so I am going to remove anything that records Jesus saying or teaching that He is God from the gospels." The claim that the purpose of the Jesus Seminar is to "discover the historical Jesus" is false and misleading. The true purpose of the Jesus Seminar is to promote the Jesus that the Jesus Seminar believes in instead of the Jesus of the Bible.

What is the hypostatic union?

Answer The hypostatic union is the term used to describe how God the Son, Jesus Christ, took on a human nature, yet remained fully God at the same time. Jesus always had been God (John 8:58, 10:30\), but at the incarnation Jesus became a human being (John 1:14\). The addition of the human nature to the divine nature is Jesus, the God\-man. This is the hypostatic union, Jesus Christ, one Person, fully God and fully man. Jesus’ two natures, human and divine, are inseparable. Jesus will forever be the God\-man, fully God and fully human, two distinct natures in one Person. Jesus’ humanity and divinity are not mixed, but are united without loss of separate identity. Jesus sometimes operated with the limitations of humanity (John 4:6, 19:28\) and other times in the power of His deity (John 11:43; Matthew 14:18\-21\). In both, Jesus’ actions were from His one Person. Jesus had two natures, but only one personality. The doctrine of the hypostatic union is an attempt to explain how Jesus could be both God and man at the same time. It is ultimately, though, a doctrine we are incapable of fully understanding. It is impossible for us to fully understand how God works. We, as human beings with finite minds, should not expect to totally comprehend an infinite God. Jesus is God’s Son in that He was conceived by the Holy Spirit (Luke 1:35\). But that does not mean Jesus did not exist before He was conceived. Jesus has always existed (John 8:58, 10:30\). When Jesus was conceived, He became a human being in addition to being God (John 1:1, 14\). Jesus is both God and man. Jesus has always been God, but He did not become a human being until He was conceived in Mary. Jesus became a human being in order to identify with us in our struggles (Hebrews 2:17\) and, more importantly, so that He could die on the cross to pay the penalty for our sins (Philippians 2:5\-11\). In summary, the hypostatic union teaches that Jesus is both fully human and fully divine, that there is no mixture or dilution of either nature, and that He is one united Person, forever.

If Jesus is God, why did He not know when He would return?

Answer Speaking of His second coming, Jesus said, “No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father” (Matthew 24:36; cf. Mark 13:32\). The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus is God (John 1:1, 14\), and we know that God is omniscient. So it seems strange that Jesus would say that He did not know when He would return. The key to understanding Jesus’ seeming lack of knowledge in this matter lies in the nature of the [Incarnation](incarnation-of-Christ.html). When the Son of God became a man, He remained fully God, but He also took on a true human nature. Jesus retained all the attributes of divinity, yet, as a man, He voluntarily restricted their use. This was part of the “[self\-emptying](kenosis.html)” or self\-renunciation spoken of in Philippians 2:6–8\. When Christ entered our world, He laid aside the privileges that had been His in heaven. Rather than stay on His throne in heaven, Jesus “made himself nothing” (as the NIV translates Philippians 2:7\). When He came to earth, “he gave up his divine privileges” (NLT). He veiled His glory, and He chose to occupy the position of a servant. There were times when Jesus publicly manifested His divine knowledge and power on earth (John 2:25; 11:43 –44\). On those occasions, Jesus’ demonstrations of His divinity were directed by the Father. On other occasions, He had no such directive from the Father, and He kept His glory veiled. On all occasions, Jesus obeyed the Father’s will: “I always do what pleases him,” He said (John 8:29\). So, when Jesus said He did not know when He would return, He was actively humbling Himself and taking the form of a servant (see Philippians 2:7–8\). Since no other mortal knows the time of Jesus’ return—that information is the Father’s alone (Matthew 24:36\)—Jesus voluntarily restricted His knowledge on that point. It was part of Jesus’ submission to the Father (see John 5:30; 6:38; 8:28–29\) and His mission to live a human life. Some things Jesus apparently chose to “give up the rights” to be privy to during His earthly ministry. The knowledge of when He would return was one of those things. Jesus, now exalted in heaven, surely knows all, including the timing of His [second coming](second-coming-Jesus-Christ.html).

If Jesus was God, why did He call God "My God?"

Answer This can definitely be a confusing issue. It all goes back to the "mystery" of the Trinity. When Jesus was on the cross, He quoted Psalm 22 (Matthew 27:46; Mark 15:34\). This was a psalm of David, but it was a Messianic prophecy as well. The entire psalm contains remarkable predictions by David concerning the coming Messiah. So, one of the reasons He called God "my God" was to fulfill the prophecy of the psalm. At the moment of His death on the cross, Christ was experiencing the abandonment and despair that resulted from the outpouring of divine wrath upon the sin that He bore. This was the price He paid to redeem His church–all who would ever believe in Him–and He paid it in full. At the cross, Jesus in His humanity voluntarily surrendered His will to the Father in order to finish the task for which He came into the world. In the same way, He voluntarily emptied Himself of certain aspects of His deity when He came to earth as a man. In some way we can’t fully understand, God the Father turned away from God the Son for that moment, and Jesus died a very lonely death. There are other places He calls God His God. In John 20:17 and Revelation 3:2,12, Jesus calls God "My God." Why would God call Himself "My God"? It has to do with Christ’s relationship to His Father. Even though Christ is the eternal God Himself incarnate, He is still a different person from the Father. As a man and as man’s representative (Son of Man), Jesus’ person was dependent on the Father and, like us, looked to the Father for strength, guidance, wisdom, etc. Therefore, God the Father was the God of Jesus. The Father is the God of the Son, but it doesn’t imply inferiority, only a difference in roles. Please also read our article on the [Trinity](Trinity-Bible.html).

What was the meaning and importance of the transfiguration?

Answer About a week after Jesus plainly told His disciples that He would suffer, be killed, and be raised to life (Luke 9:22\), He took Peter, James, and John up a mountain to pray. While praying, His personal appearance was changed into a glorified form, and His clothing became dazzling white. Moses and Elijah appeared and talked with Jesus about His death that would soon take place. Peter, not knowing what he was saying and being very fearful, offered to put up three shelters for them. This is undoubtedly a reference to the booths that were used to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles, when the Israelites dwelt in booths for seven days (Leviticus 23:34–42\). Peter was expressing a wish to stay in that place. Then a cloud enveloped them, and a voice spoke from the cloud: “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased. Listen to him!” (Matthew 17:5\). The cloud lifted, Moses and Elijah had disappeared, and Jesus was alone with His disciples, who were still very much afraid. Jesus warned them not to tell anyone what they had seen until after His resurrection. The three accounts of this event are found in Matthew 17:1–8, Mark 9:2–8, and Luke 9:28–36\. Undoubtedly, the purpose of the transfiguration of Christ into at least a part of His heavenly glory was so that the “inner circle” of His disciples could gain a greater understanding of who Jesus was. Christ underwent a dramatic change in appearance in order that the disciples could behold Him in His glory. The disciples, who had only known Him in His human body, now had a greater realization of the deity of Christ, though they could not fully comprehend it. That gave them the reassurance they needed after hearing the shocking news of His coming death. Symbolically, the appearance of Moses and Elijah represented the Law and the Prophets. But God’s voice from heaven – “Listen to Him!” \- clearly showed that the Law and the Prophets must give way to Jesus. The One who is the new and living way is replacing the old – He is the fulfillment of the Law and the countless prophecies in the Old Testament. Also, in His glorified form they saw a preview of His coming glorification and enthronement as King of kings and Lord of lords. The disciples never forgot what happened that day on the mountain and no doubt this was intended. John wrote in his gospel, “We have seen His glory, the glory of the one and only” (John 1:14\). Peter also wrote of it, “We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of His majesty. For He received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to Him from the Majestic Glory, saying, ‘This is my Son, whom I love; with Him I am well pleased.’ We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with Him on the sacred mountain” (2 Peter 1:16\-18\). Those who witnessed the transfiguration bore witness to it to the other disciples and to countless millions down through the centuries.

Who is the Holy Spirit?

Answer There are many misconceptions about the identity of the Holy Spirit. Some view the Holy Spirit as a mystical force. Others see the Holy Spirit as an impersonal power that God makes available to followers of Christ. What does the Bible say about the identity of the Holy Spirit? Simply put, the Bible declares that the [Holy Spirit is God](is-the-Holy-Spirit-God.html). The Bible also tells us that the Holy Spirit is a divine person, a being with a mind, emotions, and a will. The fact that the Holy Spirit is God is clearly seen in many Scriptures, including Acts 5:3\-4\. In these verses Peter confronts Ananias as to why he lied to the Holy Spirit and tells him that he had “not lied to men but to God.” It is a clear declaration that lying to the Holy Spirit is lying to God. We can also know that the Holy Spirit is God because He possesses the characteristics of God. For example, His omnipresence is seen in Psalm 139:7\-8, “Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence? If I go up to the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in the depths, you are there.” Then in 1 Corinthians 2:10\-11, we see the characteristic of omniscience in the Holy Spirit. “These are the things God has revealed to us by his Spirit. The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. For who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God.” We can know that the Holy Spirit is indeed a [divine person](Holy-Spirit-person.html) because He possesses a mind, emotions, and a will. The Holy Spirit thinks and knows (1 Corinthians 2:10\). The Holy Spirit can be grieved (Ephesians 4:30\). The Spirit intercedes for us (Romans 8:26\-27\). He makes decisions according to His will (1 Corinthians 12:7\-11\). The Holy Spirit is God, the third Person of the Trinity. As God, the Holy Spirit can truly function as the Comforter and Counselor that Jesus promised He would be (John 14:16, 26; 15:26\).

What is the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit?

Answer The concept of “blasphemy against the Spirit” is mentioned in Mark 3:22–30 and Matthew 12:22–32\. Jesus has just performed a miracle. A demon\-possessed man was brought to Jesus, and the Lord cast the demon out, healing the man of blindness and muteness. The eyewitnesses to this exorcism began to wonder if Jesus was indeed the Messiah they had been waiting for. A group of Pharisees, hearing the talk of the Messiah, quickly quashed any budding faith in the crowd: “It is only by [Beelzebul](who-Beelzebub.html), the prince of demons, that this fellow drives out demons,” they said (Matthew 12:24\). Jesus rebuts the Pharisees with some logical arguments for why He is not casting out demons in the power of Satan (Matthew 12:25–29\). Then He speaks of the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit: “I tell you, every kind of sin and slander can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come” (verses 31–32\). The term [*blasphemy*](blasphemy-blaspheme.html) may be generally defined as “defiant irreverence.” The term can be applied to such sins as cursing God or willfully degrading things relating to God. Blasphemy is also attributing some evil to God or denying Him some good that we should attribute to Him. This particular case of blasphemy, however, is called “the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit” in Matthew 12:31\. The Pharisees, having witnessed irrefutable proof that Jesus was working miracles in the power of the Holy Spirit, claimed instead that the Lord was possessed by a demon (Matthew 12:24\). Notice in Mark 3:30 Jesus is very specific about what the Pharisees did to commit blasphemy against the Holy Spirit: “He said this because they were saying, ‘He has an impure spirit.’” Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit has to do with accusing Jesus Christ of being demon\-possessed instead of Spirit\-filled. This particular type of blasphemy cannot be duplicated today. The Pharisees were in a unique moment in history: they had the Law and the Prophets, they had the Holy Spirit stirring their hearts, they had the Son of God Himself standing right in front of them, and they saw with their own eyes the miracles He did. Never before in the history of the world (and never since) had so much divine light been granted to men; if anyone should have recognized Jesus for who He was, it was the Pharisees. Yet they chose defiance. They purposely attributed the work of the Spirit to the devil, even though they knew the truth and had the proof. Jesus declared their willful blindness to be unpardonable. Their blasphemy against the Holy Spirit was their final rejection of God’s grace. They had set their course, and God was going to let them sail into perdition unhindered. Jesus told the crowd that the Pharisees’ blasphemy against the Holy Spirit “will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come” (Matthew 12:32\). This is another way of saying that their sin would never be forgiven, ever. Not now, not in eternity. As Mark 3:29 puts it, “They are guilty of an eternal sin.” The immediate result of the Pharisees’ public rejection of Christ (and God’s rejection of them) is seen in the next chapter. Jesus, for the first time, “told them many things in parables” (Matthew 13:3; cf. Mark 4:2\). The disciples were puzzled at Jesus’ change of teaching method, and Jesus explained His use of [parables](what-is-a-parable.html): “Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. . . . Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand” (Matthew 13:11, 13\). Jesus began to veil the truth with parables and metaphors as a direct result of the Jewish leaders’ official denunciation of Him. Again, the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit cannot be repeated today, although [some people try](blasphemy-challenge.html). Jesus Christ is not on earth—He is seated at the right hand of God. No one can personally witness Jesus performing a miracle and then attribute that power to Satan instead of the Spirit. The [unpardonable sin](unpardonable-sin.html) today is the state of continued unbelief. The Spirit currently convicts the unsaved world of sin, righteousness, and judgment (John 16:8\). To resist that conviction and willfully remain unrepentant is to “blaspheme” the Spirit. There is no pardon, either in this age or in the age to come, for a person who rejects the Spirit’s promptings to trust in Jesus Christ and then dies in unbelief. The love of God is evident: “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16\). And the choice is clear: “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on him” (John 3:36\).

What is the kenosis? What does it mean that Jesus emptied Himself?

Answer The term *kenosis* refers to the doctrine of Christ’s “self\-emptying” in His incarnation. The word comes from the Greek of Philippians 2:7, which says that Jesus “emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men” (ESV). The word translated “emptied” is a form of *kenoó*, from which we get the word *kenosis*. Notice that Philippians 2:7 does not specify *what* the Son of God “emptied” Himself of. And here we must be careful not to go beyond what Scripture says. Jesus did not empty Himself of His divine attributes—no such attributes are mentioned in the verse, and it is obvious in the gospels that Jesus possessed the power and wisdom of God. Calming the storm is just one display of Jesus’ divine power (Mark 4:39\). In coming to earth, the Son of God did not cease to be God, and He did not become a “lesser god.” Whatever the “emptying” entailed, Jesus remained fully God: “in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form” (Colossians 2:9\). It is better to think of Christ’s “emptying” of Himself as a laying aside of the *privileges* that were His in heaven. Rather than stay on His throne in heaven, Jesus “made himself nothing” (as the NIV translates Philippians 2:7\). When He came to earth, “he gave up his divine privileges” (NLT). He veiled His glory, and He chose to occupy the position of a slave. The kenosis was a self\-renunciation, not an emptying Himself of deity. Nor was it an exchange of deity for humanity. Jesus never ceased to be God during any part of His earthly ministry. He did set aside His heavenly glory. He also voluntarily refrained from using His divinity to make His way easier. During His earthly ministry, Christ completely submitted Himself to the will of the Father (John 5:19\). As part of the kenosis, Jesus sometimes operated within the limitations of humanity. God does not get tired or thirsty, but Jesus did (John 4:6; 19:28\). God knows all things, but it seems that, at least once, Jesus voluntarily surrendered the use of His omniscience (Matthew 24:36\). Other times, Jesus’ omniscience was on full display (Luke 6:8; John 13:11; 18:4\). There are some false teachers who take the concept of kenosis too far, saying that Jesus gave up all or some of His divine nature when He came to earth. This heresy is sometimes referred to as the kenosis theory, but a better term is *kenoticism* or *kenotic theology*, to distinguish it from biblical understanding of the kenosis. When it comes to the kenosis, we often focus too much on what Jesus gave up. The kenosis also deals with what Christ took on. Jesus added to His divine nature a human nature as He humbled Himself for us. Jesus went from being the glory of glories in heaven to being a human being who was put to death on the cross. Philippians 2:7–8 declares, “Taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to death—even death on a cross!” In the ultimate act of humility, the God of the universe became a human being and died for His creation. The kenosis is the act of Christ taking on a human nature with all of its limitations, except with no sin. As one Bible scholar wrote, “At His incarnation He remained ‘in the form of God’ and as such He is Lord and Ruler over all, but He also accepted the nature of a servant as part of His humanity” (J. J. Müller, *The Epistles of Paul to the Philippians and to Philemon*, p. 82\).

How do I identify my spiritual gift?

Answer There is no magic formula or definitive test that can tell us exactly what our spiritual gifts are. The Holy Spirit distributes the gifts as He determines (1 Corinthians 12:7\-11\). A common problem for Christians is the temptation to get so caught up in our spiritual gift that we only seek to serve God in the area in which we feel we have been gifted. That is not how the spiritual gifts work. God calls us to obediently serve Him in all things. He will equip us with whatever gift or gifts we need to accomplish the task He has called us to. Identifying our spiritual giftedness can be accomplished in various ways. Spiritual gift tests or inventories, while not to be fully relied upon, can definitely help us understand where our gifting might be. Confirmation from others also gives light to our spiritual giftedness. Other people who see us serving the Lord can often identify a spiritual gift in us that we might take for granted or not recognize. Prayer is also important. The one person who knows exactly how we are spiritually gifted is the gift\-giver Himself—the Holy Spirit. We can ask God to show us how we are gifted in order to better use our spiritual gifts for His glory. Yes, God calls some to be teachers and gives them the gift of teaching. God calls some to be servants and blesses them with the gift of helps. However, specifically knowing our spiritual gift does not excuse us from serving God in areas outside our gifting. Is it beneficial to know what spiritual gift(s) God has given us? Of course it is. Is it wrong to focus so much on spiritual gifts that we miss other opportunities to serve God? Yes. If we are dedicated to being used by God, He will equip us with the spiritual gifts we need.

When / How do we receive the Holy Spirit?

Answer The apostle Paul clearly taught that we receive the Holy Spirit the moment we receive Jesus Christ as our Savior. First Corinthians 12:13 declares, “For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink.” Romans 8:9 tells us that if a person does not possess the Holy Spirit, he or she does not belong to Christ: “You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ.” Ephesians 1:13\-14 teaches us that the Holy Spirit is the seal of salvation for all those who believe: “Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory.” These three passages make it clear that the Holy Spirit is received at the moment of salvation. Paul could not say that we all were baptized by one Spirit and all given one Spirit to drink if not all of the Corinthian believers possessed the Holy Spirit. Romans 8:9 is even stronger, stating that if a person does not have the Spirit, he does not belong to Christ. Therefore, the possession of the Spirit is an identifying factor of the possession of salvation. Further, the Holy Spirit could not be the “seal of salvation” (Ephesians 1:13\-14\) if He is not received at the moment of salvation. Many passages make it abundantly clear that our salvation is secured the moment we receive Christ as Savior. The ministries of the Holy Spirit are often confused. The receiving/indwelling of the Spirit occurs at the moment of salvation. The [filling of the Spirit](Spirit-filled.html) is an ongoing process in the Christian life. We hold that the [baptism of the Spirit](Spirit-baptism.html) also occurs at the moment of salvation. Some other Christians do not, believing that the baptism of the Spirit comes subsequent to salvation. In conclusion, how do we receive the Holy Spirit? We receive the Holy Spirit by simply receiving the Lord Jesus Christ as our Savior (John 3:5\-16\). When do we receive the Holy Spirit? The Holy Spirit takes up permanent residence in us the moment we believe.

What is Pneumatology?

Answer The word Pneumatology comes from two Greek words which mean "wind, air, spirit" and "word" \- combining to mean "the study of the Holy Spirit." Pneumatology is the study of God the Holy Spirit, the third Person of the Trinity. It answers numerous important questions about the Holy Spirit: [Who / what is the Holy Spirit?](who-Holy-Spirit.html) There are many misconceptions about the identity of the Holy Spirit. Some view the Holy Spirit as a mystical force. Others understand the Holy Spirit as the impersonal power God makes available to followers of Christ. What does the Bible say about the identity of the Holy Spirit? [When / How do we receive the Holy Spirit?](receive-Holy-Spirit.html) This discussion is controversial because the ministries of the Holy Spirit are often confused. The receiving / indwelling of the Spirit occurs at the moment of salvation. The filling of the Spirit is an ongoing process in the Christian life. [What is the baptism of the Holy Spirit?](Spirit-baptism.html) The baptism of the Holy Spirit may be defined as that work whereby the Spirit of God places the believer into union with Christ and into union with other believers in the Body of Christ at the moment of salvation. [How can I be filled with the Spirit?](Spirit-filled.html) It is important to distinguish between the indwelling and filling of the Spirit. The permanent indwelling of the Spirit is not for a select few believers, but rather for all believers. This is in contrast to the commanded filling of the Spirit found in Ephesians 5:18\. [Are the miraculous gifts of the Spirit for today?](miraculous-gifts.html) This is not a question of can the Holy Spirit give someone a miraculous gift. The question is does the Holy Spirit still dispense the miraculous gifts today. Above all else, we entirely recognize that the Holy Spirit is free to dispense gifts according to His will (1 Corinthians 12:7\-11\). Many Christians have an unbiblical perception of the Holy Spirit. Some understand the Holy Spirit as a power or force given to us from God. This is not biblical. Pneumatology teaches us that the Holy Spirit is a Person, with a mind, emotions, and will. The Holy Spirit is Jesus’ "replacement" on earth (John 14:16\-26; 15:26; 16:7\). The Holy Spirit is received at salvation (Romans 8:9\) and is the permanent possession of every believer in Christ (Ephesians 1:13\-14\). Pneumatology helps us to understand these issues and recognize the Biblical roles of the Holy Spirit in our lives today. The study of Pneumatology is of immense benefit to the Christian. In the pages of Scripture, we come face to face with the third Person of the Trinity, God Himself in spirit, and we see His very personal and intimate ministry to us. Through Him, we come to know God’s love for us “because the love of God has been poured out in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who was given to us” (Romans 5:5\). To understand the ministry of the Holy Spirit is to find joy in His role as our Comforter (John 16:7; Acts 9:31\) who not only helps and comforts us, but who comes to our rescue when our hearts are so burdened we cannot even pray for relief (Romans 8:26\). When we pursue the knowledge of the Holy Spirit we find, to our great delight, that He not only lives within us, but He does so forever, never to leave or forsake us (John 14:16\). All these truths are burned into our hearts when we study Pneumatology. A good summary verse for Pneumatology is John 16:8\-11, "When He (the Holy Spirit) comes, He will convict the world of guilt in regard to sin and righteousness and judgment: in regard to sin, because men do not believe in me; in regard to righteousness, because I am going to the Father, where you can see me no longer; and in regard to judgment, because the prince of this world now stands condemned."

Are the miraculous gifts of the Spirit for today?

Answer First, it is important to recognize that this is not a question of whether God still performs miracles today. It would be foolish and unbiblical to claim God does not heal people, speak to people, and perform miraculous signs and wonders today. The question is whether the miraculous gifts of the Spirit, described primarily in 1 Corinthians 12–14, are still active in the church today. This is also not a question of can the Holy Spirit give someone a miraculous gift. The question is whether the Holy Spirit still dispenses the miraculous gifts today. Above all else, we entirely recognize that the Holy Spirit is free to dispense gifts according to His will (1 Corinthians 12:7\-11\). In the book of Acts and the Epistles, the vast majority of miracles are performed by the apostles and their close associates. Paul gives us the reason why: “The things that mark an apostle—signs, wonders and miracles—were done among you with great perseverance” (2 Corinthians 12:12\). If every believer in Christ was equipped with the ability to perform signs, wonders, and miracles, then signs, wonders, and miracles could in no way be the identifying marks of an apostle. Acts 2:22 tells us that Jesus was “accredited” by “miracles, wonders, and signs.” Similarly, the apostles were “marked” as genuine messengers from God by the miracles they performed. Acts 14:3 describes the gospel message being “confirmed” by the miracles Paul and Barnabas performed. Chapters 12–14 of 1 Corinthians deal primarily with the subject of the gifts of the Spirit. It seems from that text “ordinary” Christians were sometimes given miraculous gifts (12:8\-10, 28\-30\). We are not told how commonplace this was. From what we learned above, that the apostles were “marked” by signs and wonders, it would seem that miraculous gifts being given to “ordinary” Christians was the exception, not the rule. Beside the apostles and their close associates, the New Testament nowhere specifically describes individuals exercising the miraculous gifts of the Spirit. It is also important to realize that the early church did not have the completed Bible, as we do today (2 Timothy 3:16\-17\). Therefore, the gifts of prophecy, knowledge, wisdom, etc. were necessary in order for the early Christians to know what God would have them do. The gift of prophecy enabled believers to communicate new truth and revelation from God. Now that God’s revelation is complete in the Bible, the “revelatory” gifts are no longer needed, at least not in the same capacity as they were in the New Testament. God miraculously heals people every day. God still does amazing miracles, signs, and wonders and sometimes performs those miracles through a Christian. However, these things are not necessarily the miraculous gifts of the Spirit. The primary purpose of the miraculous gifts was to prove that the gospel was true and that the apostles were truly God’s messengers. The Bible does not say outright that the miraculous gifts have ceased, but it does lay the foundation for why they might no longer occur to the same extent as they did as recorded in the New Testament.

Is being slain in the Spirit biblical?

Answer Most commonly, being “slain in the Spirit” happens when a minister lays hands on someone, and that person collapses to the floor, supposedly overcome by the power of the Holy Spirit. Those who practice slaying in the Spirit use Bible passages that talk about people becoming “as dead” (Revelation 1:17\) or of falling upon their face (Ezekiel 1:28; Daniel 8:17\-18, 10:7\-9\). However, there are a number of contrasts between this biblical falling on one’s face and the practice of being slain in the Spirit. 1\. The biblical falling down was a person’s reaction to what he saw in a vision or an event beyond ordinary happenings, such as at the transfiguration of Christ (Matthew 17:6\). In the unbiblical practice of being slain in the Spirit, the person responds to another’s touch or to the motion of the speaker’s arm. 2\. The biblical instances were few and far between, and they occurred only rarely in the lives of a few people. In the slain in the Spirit phenomenon, falling down is a repeated event and an experience that happens to many. 3\. In the biblical instances, the people fall upon their face in awe at either what or whom they see. In the slain in the Spirit counterfeit, they fall backwards, either in response to the wave of the speaker’s arm or as a result of a church leader’s touch (or push in some cases). We are not claiming that all examples of being slain in the Spirit are fakes or responses to a touch or push. Many people claim to experience an energy or a force that causes them to fall back. However, we find no biblical basis for this concept. Yes, there may be some energy or force involved, but if so, it is very likely not of God and not the result of the working of the Holy Spirit. It is unfortunate that people look to such bizarre counterfeits that produce no spiritual fruit, rather than pursuing the practical fruit which the Spirit gives us for the purpose of glorifying Christ with our lives (Galatians 5:22\-23\). Being filled with the Spirit is not evidenced by such counterfeits, but by a life that overflows with the Word of God in such a way that it spills over in praise, thanksgiving, and obedience to God.

What is the baptism of the Holy Spirit?

Answer The baptism of the Holy Spirit may be defined as that work whereby the Spirit of God places the believer into [union with Christ](union-with-Christ.html) and into union with other believers in the body of Christ at the moment of salvation. The baptism of the Holy Spirit was predicted by John the Baptist (Mark 1:8\) and by Jesus before He ascended to heaven: “For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 1:5\). This promise was fulfilled on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1–4\); for the first time, people were permanently indwelt by the Holy Spirit, and the church had begun. First Corinthians 12:12–13 is the central passage in the Bible regarding the baptism of the Holy Spirit: “For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink” (1 Corinthians 12:13\). Notice that we “all” have been baptized by the Spirit—all believers have received the baptism, synonymous with salvation, and it is not a special experience for only a few. While Romans 6:1–4 does not mention specifically the Spirit of God, it does describe the believer’s position before God in language similar to the 1 Corinthians passage: “What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.” The following facts are necessary to help solidify our understanding of Spirit baptism: First, 1 Corinthians 12:13 clearly states that all have been baptized, just as all been given the Spirit to drink (the indwelling of the Spirit). Second, nowhere in Scripture are believers told to be baptized with, in or by the Spirit, or in any sense to seek the baptism of the Holy Spirit. This indicates that all believers have had this experience. Third, Ephesians 4:5 seems to refer to Spirit baptism. If this is the case, Spirit baptism is the reality for every believer, just as “one faith” and “one Father” are. In conclusion, the baptism of the Holy Spirit does two things, 1\) it joins us to the body of Christ, and 2\) it actualizes our co\-crucifixion with Christ. Being in His body means we are risen with Him to newness of life (Romans 6:4\). We should then exercise our spiritual gifts to keep that body functioning properly as stated in the context of 1 Corinthians 12:13\. Experiencing the one Spirit baptism serves as the basis for keeping the unity of the church, as in the context of Ephesians 4:5\. Being associated with Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection through Spirit baptism establishes the basis for our separation from the power of indwelling sin and our walk in newness of life (Romans 6:1\-10; Colossians 2:12\).

What is the role of the Holy Spirit in our lives today?

Answer Of all the gifts given to mankind by God, there is none greater than the presence of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit has many functions, roles, and activities. First, He does a work in the hearts of all people everywhere. Jesus told the disciples that He would send the Spirit into the world to “will convict the world regarding sin, and righteousness, and judgment” (John 16:8, NASB). Everyone has a “God consciousness,” whether or not they admit it. The Spirit applies God’s truths to people's minds to convince them by fair and sufficient arguments that they are sinners. Responding to that conviction brings us to salvation. Once we are saved and belong to God, the Spirit takes up residence in our hearts forever, sealing us with the confirming, certifying, and assuring pledge of our eternal state as His children. Jesus said He would send the Spirit to us to be our Helper, Comforter, and Guide. “And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever” (John 14:16\). The Greek word translated here “Counselor” means “one who is called alongside” and has the idea of someone who encourages and exhorts. The Holy Spirit takes up permanent residence in the hearts of believers (Romans 8:9; 1 Corinthians 6:19\-20; 12:13\). Jesus gave the Spirit as a “compensation” for His absence, to perform the functions toward us that He would have done if He had remained personally with us. Among those functions is that of revealer of truth. The Spirit’s presence within us enables us to understand and interpret God’s Word. Jesus told His disciples that “when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth” (John 16:13\). He reveals to our minds the whole counsel of God as it relates to worship, doctrine, and Christian living. He is the ultimate guide, going before, leading the way, removing obstructions, opening the understanding, and making all things plain and clear. He leads in the way we should go in all spiritual things. Without such a guide, we would be apt to fall into error. A crucial part of the truth He reveals is that Jesus is who He said He is (John 15:26; 1 Corinthians 12:3\). The Spirit convinces us of Christ’s deity and incarnation, His being the Messiah, His suffering and death, His resurrection and ascension, His exaltation at the right hand of God, and His role as the judge of all. He gives glory to Christ in all things (John 16:14\). Another one of the Holy Spirit’s roles is that of gift\-giver. First Corinthians 12 describes the spiritual gifts given to believers in order that we may function as the body of Christ on earth. All these gifts, both great and small, are given by the Spirit so that we may be His ambassadors to the world, showing forth His grace and glorifying Him. The Spirit also functions as fruit\-producer in our lives. When He indwells us, He begins the work of harvesting His fruit in our lives—love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self\-control (Galatians 5:22\-23\). These are not works of our flesh, which is incapable of producing such fruit, but they are products of the Spirit’s presence in our lives. The knowledge that the Holy Spirit of God has taken up residence in our lives, that He performs all these miraculous functions, that He dwells with us forever, and that He will never leave or forsake us is cause for great joy and comfort. Thank God for this precious gift—the Holy Spirit and His work in our lives!

How does God distribute spiritual gifts?

Answer Romans 12:3\-8 and 1 Corinthians chapter 12 make it clear that each Christian is given spiritual gifts according to the Lord’s choice. Spiritual gifts are given for the edification of the body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:7, 14:12\). The exact timing of the giving of these gifts is not specifically mentioned. Most assume that spiritual gifts are given at the time of spiritual birth (the moment of salvation). However, there are some verses that may indicate God gives spiritual gifts later as well. Both 1 Timothy 4:14 and 2 Timothy 1:6 refer to a gift that Timothy had received at the time of his ordination “by prophecy.” This likely indicates that one of the elders at Timothy’s ordination spoke about a spiritual gift that Timothy would have to enable his future ministry. We are also told in 1 Corinthians 12:28\-31 and in 1 Corinthians 14:12\-13 that it is God (not us) who chooses the gifts. These passages also indicate that not everyone will have a particular gift. Paul tells the Corinthian believers that if they are going to covet or long after spiritual gifts, they should strive after the more edifying gifts, such as prophesying (speaking forth the word of God for the building up of others). Now, why would Paul tell them to strongly desire the “greater” gifts if they already had been given all they would be given, and there was no further opportunity of gaining these greater gifts? It may lead one to believe that even as Solomon sought wisdom from God in order to be a good ruler over God’s people, so God will grant to us those gifts we need in order to be of greater benefit to His church. Having said this, it still remains that these gifts are distributed according to God’s choosing, not our own. If every Corinthian strongly desired a particular gift, such as prophesying, God would not give everyone that gift simply because they strongly desired it. If He did, then who would serve in all of the other functions of the body of Christ? There is one thing that is abundantly clear—God’s command is God’s enablement. If God commands us to do something (such as witness, love the unlovely, disciple the nations, etc.), He will enable us to do it. Some may not be as gifted at evangelism as others, but God commands all Christians to witness and disciple (Matthew 28:18\-20; Acts 1:8\). We are all called to evangelize whether or not we have the spiritual gift of evangelism. A determined Christian who strives to learn the Word and develop his teaching ability may become a better teacher than one who may have the spiritual gift of teaching, but who neglects the gift. Are spiritual gifts given to us when we receive Christ, or are they cultivated through our walk with God? The answer is both. Normally, spiritual gifts are given at salvation, but also need to be cultivated through spiritual growth. Can a desire in your heart be pursued and developed into your spiritual gift? Can you seek after certain spiritual gifts? First Corinthians 12:31 seems to indicate that this is possible: “earnestly desire the best gifts.” You can seek a spiritual gift from God and be zealous after it by seeking to develop that area. At the same time, if it is not God’s will, you will not receive a certain spiritual gift no matter how strongly you seek after it. God is infinitely wise, and He knows through which gifts you will be most productive for His kingdom. No matter how much we have been gifted with one gift or another, we are all called upon to develop a number of areas mentioned in the lists of spiritual gifts: to be hospitable, to show acts of mercy, to serve one another, to evangelize, etc. As we seek to serve God out of love for the purpose of building up others for His glory, He will bring glory to His name, grow His church, and reward us (1 Corinthians 3:5\-8, 12:31–14:1\). God promises that as we make Him our delight, He will give us the desires of our heart (Psalm 37:4\-5\). This would surely include preparing us to serve Him in a way that will bring us purpose and satisfaction.

What does it mean to walk in the Spirit?

Answer Believers have the [indwelling Spirit](indwelling-of-the-Holy-Spirit.html) of Christ, the Comforter who proceeds from the Father (John 15:26\). The Holy Spirit assists believers in prayer (Jude 1:20\) and “intercedes for God’s people in accordance with the will of God” (Romans 8:27\). He also leads the believer into righteousness (Galatians 5:16–18\) and produces His fruit in those yielded to Him (Galatians 5:22–23\). Believers are to submit to the will of God and walk in the Spirit. A “walk” in the Bible is often a metaphor for practical daily living. The Christian life is a journey, and we are to walk it—we are to make consistent forward progress. The biblical norm for all believers is that they walk in the Spirit: “If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit” (Galatians 5:25, KJV; cf. Romans 8:14\). In other words, the Spirit gave us life in the new birth (John 3:6\), and we must continue to live, day by day, in the Spirit. To walk in the Spirit means that we yield to His control, we follow His lead, and we allow Him to exert His influence over us. To walk in the Spirit is the opposite of resisting Him or grieving Him (Ephesians 4:30\). Galatians 5 examines the work of the Holy Spirit in the believer. The context is freedom from the Law of Moses (Galatians 5:1\). Those who walk in the Spirit “eagerly await by faith the righteousness for which we hope” (verse 5\) and are free from the Law (verse 18\). Also, those who walk in the Spirit “will not gratify the desires of the flesh” (verse 16\). The [flesh](the-flesh.html)—our fallen nature under the power of sin—is in direct conflict with the Spirit (verse 17\). When the flesh is in charge, the results are obvious (verses 19–21\). But when the Spirit is in control, He produces godly qualities within us, apart from the strictures of the Law (verses 22–23\). Believers “have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires” (verse 24\), and now we walk in the Spirit (verse 25\). Those who walk in the Spirit are united with Him and are the bearers of the fruit the Spirit produces. Thus, those who walk in the Spirit *walk in [love](fruit-Holy-Spirit-love.html)*—they live in love for God and for their fellow man. Those who walk in the Spirit *walk in [joy](fruit-Holy-Spirit-joy.html)*—they exhibit gladness in what God has done, is doing, and will do. Those who walk in the Spirit *walk in [peace](fruit-Holy-Spirit-peace.html)*—their lives are not defined by worry or anxiety (Philippians 4:6\). Those who walk in the Spirit *walk in [patience](fruit-Holy-Spirit-patience.html)*—they are known for having a “long fuse” and do not lose their temper. Those who walk in the Spirit *walk in [kindness](fruit-Holy-Spirit-kindness.html)*—they show tender concern for the needs of others. Those who walk in the Spirit *walk in [goodness](fruit-Holy-Spirit-goodness.html)*—their actions reflect virtue and holiness. Those who walk in the Spirit *walk in [faithfulness](fruit-Holy-Spirit-faithfulness.html)*—they are steadfast in their trust of God and His Word. Those who walk in the Spirit *walk in [gentleness](fruit-Holy-Spirit-gentleness.html)*—their lives are characterized by humility, grace, and thankfulness to God. Those who walk in the Spirit *walk in [self\-control](fruit-Holy-Spirit-self-control.html)*—they display moderation, constraint, and the ability to say “no” to the flesh. Those who walk in the Spirit rely on the Holy Spirit to guide them in thought, word, and deed (Romans 6:11–14\). They show forth daily, moment\-by\-moment holiness, just as Jesus did when, “full of the Holy Spirit, \[He] left the Jordan and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness” to be tempted (Luke 4:1\). To walk in the Spirit is to be filled with the Spirit, and some results of the Spirit’s filling are thankfulness, singing, and joy (Ephesians 5:18–20; Colossians 3:16\). Those who walk in the Spirit follow the Spirit’s lead. They “let the word of Christ dwell in \[them] richly” (Colossians 3:16, ESV), and the Spirit uses the Word of God “for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16\). Their whole way of life is lived according to the rule of the gospel, as the Spirit moves them toward obedience. When we walk in the Spirit, we find that the sinful appetites of the flesh have no more dominion over us.

Is speaking in tongues evidence for having the Holy Spirit?

Answer There are three occasions in the book of Acts where speaking in tongues accompanied the receiving of the Holy Spirit—Acts 2:4, 10:44\-46, and 19:6\. However, these three occasions are the only places in the Bible where speaking in tongues is an evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit. Throughout the book of Acts, thousands of people believe in Jesus and nothing is said about them speaking in tongues (Acts 2:41, 8:5\-25, 16:31\-34, 21:20\). Nowhere in the New Testament is it taught that speaking in tongues is the only evidence that a person has received the Holy Spirit. In fact, the New Testament teaches the opposite. We are told that every believer in Christ has the Holy Spirit (Romans 8:9; 1 Corinthians 12:13; Ephesians 1:13\-14\), but not every believer speaks in tongues (1 Corinthians 12:29\-31\). So, why was speaking in tongues the evidence of the Holy Spirit in those three passages in Acts? Acts 2 records the apostles being baptized in the Holy Spirit and empowered by Him to proclaim the gospel. The apostles were enabled to speak in other languages (tongues) so they could share the truth with people in their own languages. Acts 10 records the apostle Peter being sent to share the gospel with non\-Jewish people. Peter and the other early Christians, being Jews, would have a hard time accepting Gentiles (non\-Jewish people) into the church. God enabled the Gentiles to speak in tongues to demonstrate that they had received the same Holy Spirit the apostles had received (Acts 10:47, 11:17\). Acts 10:44\-47 describes this: “While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God. Then Peter said, 'Can anyone keep these people from being baptized with water? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have.'“ Peter later refers back to this occasion as proof that God was indeed saving the Gentiles (Acts 15:7\-11\). Speaking in tongues is nowhere presented as something all Christians should expect when they receive Jesus Christ as their Savior and are therefore baptized in the Holy Spirit. In fact, out of all the conversion accounts in the New Testament, only two record speaking in tongues in that context. Tongues was a miraculous gift that had a specific purpose for a specific time. It was not, and never has been, the only evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit.

How can I be filled with the Holy Spirit?

Answer In Ephesians 5:15–20, the apostle Paul teaches believers how to experience a holy relationship with God—how to live for Him, obey Him, and discover His will as we serve Him. He writes, “So be careful how you live. Don’t live like fools, but like those who are wise. . . . Don’t act thoughtlessly, but understand what the Lord wants you to do. Don’t be drunk with wine, because that will ruin your life. Instead, be filled with the Holy Spirit, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs among yourselves, and making music to the Lord in your hearts. And give thanks for everything to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ” (NLT). The pagan people of Ephesus worshiped their god in drunken orgies: “They believed that to commune with their god and to be led by him, they had to be drunk. In this drunken state, they could determine the will of their god and determine how best to serve and obey him” (Anders, M., *Galatians–Colossians* *Holman New Testament Commentary*, vol. 8, Broadman \& Holman Publishers, 1999, p. 172\). By contrast, Paul commanded believers to be filled with the Holy Spirit. We are filled with the Holy Spirit when we cautiously consider our actions and yield ourselves to the Spirit’s power, allowing Him to guide, influence, and govern our behavior. We carefully align our daily choices and decisions with the wisdom and truth Scripture teaches. Being filled with the Holy Spirit in the context of Paul’s teaching in Ephesians 5:18 differs from the [indwelling](indwelling-of-the-Holy-Spirit.html) of the Holy Spirit at salvation (see John 14:16–17\). Those who believe in Jesus Christ and accept His gift of salvation receive the life\-giving, eternal “Living Water” of the Holy Spirit (John 7:37–39; see also 1 Corinthians 12:13; 2 Corinthians 1:22; Galatians 3:14; Ephesians 1:13\). Everyone who belongs to Jesus Christ has the Spirit of God living in him or her (Romans 8:9\). Nevertheless, we can hinder or stifle the work of the Spirit in our lives (1 Thessalonians 5:19\) and even “grieve the Holy Spirit” (Ephesians 4:30\). Sin and rebellion against God’s will hinder us from being filled with the Holy Spirit. When we give in to sinful temptations and worldly desires, when we lose control and do what we know is wrong, living as we did before accepting Christ’s salvation, we prevent God’s Spirit from guiding, influencing, and governing our behavior. The Holy Spirit is [grieved](grieve-Holy-Spirit.html) and [quenched](quench-Holy-Spirit.html) because He is not allowed to reveal Himself in our lives as He wants to, with expressions or “fruits” of “love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self\-control” (Galatians 5:22–23\). When we sin, we should confess our transgressions to God as soon as possible (1 John 1:9\) and renew our commitment to being filled with the Spirit. Jesus was filled with the guiding influence of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 4:1; Luke 4:18; 10:21\). So was John the Baptist (Luke 1:15\), his mother Elizabeth (Luke 1:41\), and his father Zechariah (Luke 1:67\). Old Testament saints like Bezalel (Exodus 31:3; 35:30\), Joshua (Deuteronomy 34:9\), Samson (Judges 13:25; 15:14\), and Micah (Micah 3:8\) were filled with the Holy Spirit. The believers at [Pentecost](day-Pentecost.html) were “filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them” (Acts 2:4\). Peter (Acts 4:8\), Paul (Acts 13:9\), and “the disciples were filled with joy and with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 13:52\). In contrast, Ananias allowed himself to be filled with Satan (Acts 5:3\). When we are filled with the Holy Spirit, we “walk by the Spirit” (Galatians 5:16\) and are “led by the Spirit” (Galatians 5:18\), “live by the Spirit,” and “keep in step with the Spirit” (Galatians 5:25\). According to the apostle Paul, being filled with the Holy Spirit makes the difference between life and death. When we belong to Jesus, “the power of the life\-giving Spirit” frees us “from the power of sin that leads to death” (Romans 8:2, NLT). “The mind governed by the flesh is death, but the mind governed by the Spirit is life and peace” (Romans 8:6\). Instead of living in bondage to sin and fear of death, we live as God’s adopted children (Romans 8:14–15\). Spirit\-filled believers trade in “fear and timidity” for “power, love, and self\-control” (2 Timothy 1:7\). They sing “psalms and hymns and spiritual songs . . . and \[make] music to the Lord in \[their] hearts. And give thanks for everything to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Ephesians 5:19–21, NLT). A heart overflowing with music, joy, and thankfulness to God usually signals a believer who is filled with the Holy Spirit. Finally, Paul described Spirit\-filled believers as those who “submit to one another out of reverence for Christ” (Ephesians 5:21, NLT). We can be filled with the Holy Spirit daily by yielding our will to God in submission and obedience to His Word. There is no formula to follow other than to allow Him to fill us and control every part of our lives—our thoughts, emotions, bodies, and actions. Only as we submit to Him and are filled with the Holy Spirit can we experience a harmonious relationship with God and one another.

What is the difference between a talent and a spiritual gift?

Answer There are similarities and differences between talents and spiritual gifts. Both are gifts from God. Both grow in effectiveness with use. Both are intended to be used on behalf of others, not for selfish purposes. First Corinthians 12:7 states that spiritual gifts are given to benefit others and not ourselves. As the two great commandments deal with loving God and others, it follows that one should use his talents for those purposes. But to whom and when talents and spiritual gifts are given differs. A person (regardless of his belief in God or in Christ) is given a natural talent as a result of a combination of genetics (some have natural ability in music, art, or mathematics) and surroundings (growing up in a musical family will aid one in developing a talent for music), or because God desired to endow certain individuals with certain talents (for example, [Bezalel](Bezalel-and-Oholiab.html) in Exodus 31:1\-6\). Spiritual gifts are given to all believers by the Holy Spirit (Romans 12:3, 6\) at the time they place their faith in Christ for the forgiveness of their sins. At that moment, the Holy Spirit gives to the new believer the spiritual gift(s) He desires the believer to have (1 Corinthians 12:11\). Romans 12:3\-8 lists the spiritual gifts as follows: prophecy, serving others (in a general sense), teaching, exhorting, generosity, leadership, and showing mercy. First Corinthians 12:8\-11 lists the gifts as the word of wisdom (ability to communicate spiritual wisdom), the word of knowledge (ability to communicate practical truth), faith (unusual reliance upon God), the working of miracles, prophecy, discerning of spirits, tongues (ability to speak in a language that one has not studied), and interpretation of tongues. The third list is found in Ephesians 4:10\-12, which speaks of God giving to His church apostles, prophets, evangelists, and pastor\-teachers. There is also a question as to how many spiritual gifts there are, as no two lists are the same. It is also possible that the biblical lists are not exhaustive, that there are additional spiritual gifts beyond the ones the Bible mentions. While one may develop his talents and later direct his profession or hobby along those lines, spiritual gifts were given by the Holy Spirit for the building up of Christ’s church. In that, all Christians are to play an active part in the furtherance of the gospel of Christ. All are called and equipped to be involved in the “work of the ministry” (Ephesians 4:12\). All are gifted so that they can contribute to the cause of Christ out of gratitude for all He has done for them. In doing so, they also find fulfillment in life through their labor for Christ. It is the job of the church leaders to help build up the saints so they can be further equipped for the ministry to which God has called them. The intended result of spiritual gifts is that the church as a whole can grow, being strengthened by the combined supply of each member of Christ’s body. To summarize the differences between spiritual gifts and talents: 1\) A talent is the result of genetics and/or training, while a spiritual gift is the result of the power of the Holy Spirit. 2\) A talent can be possessed by anyone, Christian or non\-Christian, while spiritual gifts are only possessed by Christians. 3\) While both talents and spiritual gifts should be used for God’s glory and to minister to others, spiritual gifts are focused on these tasks, while talents can be used entirely for non\-spiritual purposes.

What is the meaning of perfect in 1 Corinthians 13:10?

Answer First Corinthians 13:10 says, “When that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away” (KJV). The ESV puts it this way: “When the perfect comes, the partial will pass away.” The “in part” or “partial” things are the gifts of [prophecy](gift-of-prophecy.html), knowledge, and tongues (verses 8–9\). There will be a time when these gifts will cease because something better (“that which is perfect”) will replace them. *Perfect* means “complete”—the incomplete will be replaced by the complete. There is some debate as to what the coming of the “perfect” thing is. The two most common views are the completion of the Bible and the glorification of believers in heaven. It is our view that the “perfect” thing to come is the glorification of believers in heaven, or, more properly, the eternal state. The completion of the Bible did not put an end to the gift of prophecy (“forth\-telling” or preaching) or knowledge (understanding of Scripture). The church is continually being edified today by Spirit\-filled preachers and teachers who exercise these gifts. But, for the time being, we are limited in our understanding: “We know in part and we prophesy in part” (1 Corinthians 13:9\). When we get to heaven, the “partial” things will give way to the “perfect,” and preaching and teaching will no longer be needed. What about the gift of tongues, which is mentioned alongside prophecy and knowledge in 1 Corinthians 13:8 (but not in verse 9\)? The precise wording of verse 8 may hold a clue: the prophecies are said to “cease”; knowledge is said to “pass away”; and tongues are said to “be stilled” (in contrast to love, which “[never fails](love-never-fails.html)”). Paul uses one Greek verb in reference to the completion of prophecy and knowledge, and a completely different Greek verb in reference to the completion of tongues. The implication is that prophecy and knowledge will be “rendered inoperative or abolished” by an external force, but the gift of [tongues will cease](cessationism.html) on its own. So, when the perfect comes, prophecy and knowledge are actively ended, but tongues will already have ended. First Corinthians 13:11–12 says, “When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.” When shall we see face to face? When shall we know fully, even as we are fully known? This will occur when we pass from this life and enter God’s glorious presence in heaven (see 1 John 3:2\). When we are glorified in heaven, the perfect will have come, and we will truly have put childish ways behind us.

What is praying in the Spirit?

Answer Praying in the Spirit is mentioned three times in Scripture. First Corinthians 14:15 says, “So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind.” Ephesians 6:18 says, “And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the saints.” Jude 20 says, “But you, dear friends, build yourselves up in your most holy faith and pray in the Holy Spirit.” So, what exactly does it mean to pray in the Spirit? The Greek word translated “pray in” can have several different meanings. It can mean “by means of,” “with the help of,” “in the sphere of,” and “in connection to.” Praying in the Spirit does not refer to the words we are saying. Rather, it refers to how we are praying. Praying in the Spirit is praying according to the Spirit’s leading. It is praying for things the Spirit leads us to pray for. Romans 8:26 tells us, “In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express.” Some, based on 1 Corinthians 14:15, equate praying in the Spirit with praying in tongues. Discussing the gift of tongues, Paul mentions “pray with my spirit.” First Corinthians 14:14 states that when a person prays in tongues, he does not know what he is saying, since it is spoken in a language he does not know. Further, no one else can understand what is being said, unless there is an interpreter (1 Corinthians 14:27\-28\). In Ephesians 6:18, Paul instructs us to “pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests.” How are we to pray with all kinds of prayers and requests and pray for the saints, if no one, including the person praying, understands what is being said? Therefore, praying in the Spirit should be understood as praying in the power of the Spirit, by the leading of the Spirit, and according to His will, not as praying in tongues.

Will the Holy Spirit ever leave a believer?

Answer Simply put, no, the Holy Spirit will never leave a true believer. This is revealed in many different passages in the New Testament. For example, Romans 8:9 tells us, “…if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ.” This verse very clearly states that if someone does not have the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit, then that person is not saved. Therefore, if the Holy Spirit were to leave a believer, that person would have lost the saving relationship with Christ. Yet this is contrary to what the Bible teaches about the eternal security of Christians. Another verse that speaks to the permanence of the Holy Spirit’s indwelling presence in the life of believers is John 14:16\. Here Jesus states that the Father will give another Helper “to be with you forever.” The fact that the Holy Spirit will never leave a believer is also seen in Ephesians 1:13\-14 where believers are said to be “sealed” with the Holy Spirit, “who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory.” The picture of being sealed with the Spirit is one of ownership and possession. God has promised eternal life to all who believe in Christ, and as a guarantee that He will keep His promise, He has sent the Holy Spirit to indwell the believer until the day of redemption. Similar to making a down payment on a car or a house, God has provided all believers with a down payment on their future relationship with Him by sending the Holy Spirit to indwell them. The fact that all believers are sealed with the Spirit is also seen in 2 Corinthians 1:22 and Ephesians 4:30\. Prior to Christ’s death, resurrection, and ascension into heaven, the Holy Spirit had a “come and go” relationship with people. The Holy Spirit indwelt King Saul, but then departed from him (1 Samuel 16:14\). Instead, the Spirit came upon David (1 Samuel 16:13\). After his adultery with Bathsheba, David feared that the Holy Spirit would be taken from him (Psalm 51:11\). The Holy Spirit filled [Bezalel](Bezalel-and-Oholiab.html) to enable him to produce the items needed for the tabernacle (Exodus 31:2\-5\), but this is not described as a permanent relationship. All of this changed after Jesus’ ascension into heaven. Beginning on the day of Pentecost, the Holy Spirit began permanently indwelling believers (Acts 2\). The permanent indwelling of the Holy Spirit is the fulfillment of God’s promise to always be with us and never forsake us. While the Holy Spirit will never leave a believer, it is possible for our sin to “quench the Holy Spirit” (1 Thessalonians 5:19\) or “grieve the Holy Spirit” (Ephesians 4:30\). Sin always has consequences in our relationship with God. While our relationship with God is secure in Christ, unconfessed sin in our lives can hinder our fellowship with God and effectively quench the Holy Spirit’s working in our lives. That is why it is so important to confess our sins because God is “faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:9\). So, while the Holy Spirit will never leave us, the benefits and joy of His presence can in fact depart from us.

What is the filioque clause / filioque controversy?

Answer The filioque clause was, and still is, a controversy in the church in relation to the Holy Spirit. The question is, “from whom did the Holy Spirit proceed, the Father, or the Father and the Son?” The word *filioque* means “and son” in Latin. It is referred to as the “filioque clause” because the phrase “and son” was added to the Nicene Creed, indicating that the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Father “and Son.” There was so much contention over this issue that it eventually led to the split between the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches in A. D. 1054\. The two churches are still not in agreement on the filioque clause. John 14:26 tells us, “But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name...” John 15:26 tells us, “When the Counselor comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father, He will testify about me.” See also John 14:16 and Philippians 1:19\. These Scriptures seem to indicate that the Spirit is sent out by both the Father and the Son. The essential matter in the filioque clause is a desire to protect the deity of the Holy Spirit. The Bible clearly teaches that the Holy Spirit is God (Acts 5:3\-4\). Those who oppose the filioque clause object because they believe the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son makes the Holy Spirit “subservient” to the Father and Son. Those who uphold the filioque clause believe that the Holy Spirit proceeding from both the Father and the Son does not impact the Spirit being equally God with the Father and the Son. The filioque clause controversy likely involves an aspect of God’s person that we will never be able to fully grasp. God, who is an infinite being, is ultimately incomprehensible to our finite human minds. The Holy Spirit is God, and He was sent by God as Jesus Christ’s “replacement” here on earth. The question of whether the Holy Spirit was sent by the Father, or by the Father and the Son, likely cannot be decisively answered, nor does it absolutely *need* to be. The filioque clause will perhaps have to remain a controversy.

What is the fruit of the Holy Spirit?

Answer Galatians 5:22\-23 tells us, “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self\-control.” The fruit of the Holy Spirit is the result of the Holy Spirit’s presence in the life of a Christian. The Bible makes it clear that everyone receives the Holy Spirit the moment he or she believes in Jesus Christ (Romans 8:9; 1 Corinthians 12:13; Ephesians 1:13\-14\). One of the primary purposes of the Holy Spirit coming into a Christian’s life is to change that life. It is the Holy Spirit’s job to conform us to the image of Christ, making us more like Him. The fruit of the Holy Spirit is in direct contrast with the [acts of the sinful nature](works-of-the-flesh.html) in Galatians 5:19\-21, “The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.” This passage describes all people, to varying degrees, when they do not know Christ and therefore are not under the influence of the Holy Spirit. Our sinful flesh produces certain types of fruit that reflect our nature, and the Holy Spirit produces types of fruit that reflect His nature. The Christian life is a battle of the sinful flesh against the new nature given by Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17\). As fallen human beings, we are still trapped in a body that desires sinful things (Romans 7:14\-25\). As Christians, we have the Holy Spirit producing His fruit in us and we have the Holy Spirit’s power available to conquer the acts of the sinful nature (2 Corinthians 5:17; Philippians 4:13\). A Christian will never be completely victorious in always demonstrating the fruits of the Holy Spirit. It is one of the main purposes of the Christian life, though, to progressively allow the Holy Spirit to produce more and more of His fruit in our lives—and to allow the Holy Spirit to conquer the opposing sinful desires. The fruit of the Spirit is what God desires our lives to exhibit and, with the Holy Spirit’s help, it is possible!

Is a believer supposed to be able to feel the Holy Spirit?

Answer While certain ministries of the Holy Spirit may involve a feeling, such as conviction of sin, comfort, and empowerment, Scripture does not instruct us to base our relationship with the Holy Spirit on how or what we feel. Every born\-again believer has the indwelling Holy Spirit. Jesus told us that when the Comforter has come He will be with us and in us. “And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever—the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you” (John 14:16\-17\). In other words, Jesus is sending one like Himself to be with us and in us. We know the Holy Spirit is with us because God’s Word tells us that it is so. Every born\-again believer is indwelt by the Holy Spirit, but not every believer is controlled by the Holy Spirit, and there is a distinct difference. When we step out in our flesh, we are not under the control of the Holy Spirit even though we are still indwelt by Him. The apostle Paul comments on this truth, and he uses an illustration that helps us to understand. “Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit” (Ephesians 5:18\). Many people read this verse and interpret it to mean that the apostle Paul is speaking against wine. However, the context of this passage is the walk and the warfare of the Spirit\-filled believer. Therefore, there is something more here than just a warning about drinking too much wine. When people are drunk with too much wine, they exhibit certain characteristics: they become clumsy, their speech is slurred, and their judgment is impaired. The apostle Paul sets up a comparison here. Just as there are certain characteristics that identify someone who is controlled by too much wine, there should also be certain characteristics that identify someone who is controlled by the Holy Spirit. We read in Galatians 5:22\-24 about the “fruit” of the Spirit. This is the Holy Spirit’s fruit, and it is exhibited by the born\-again believer who is under His control. The verb tense in Ephesians 5:18 indicates a continual process of “being filled” by the Holy Spirit. Since it is an exhortation, it follows that it is also possible to not be filled or controlled by the Spirit. The rest of Ephesians 5 gives us the characteristics of a Spirit\-filled believer. “Speaking to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. Sing and make music in your heart to the Lord, always giving thanks to God the Father for everything, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ” (Ephesians 5:19\-21\). We are not filled with the Spirit because we feel we are, but because this is the privilege and possession of the Christian. Being filled or controlled by the Spirit is the result of walking in obedience to the Lord. This is a gift of grace and not an emotional feeling. Emotions can and will deceive us, and we can work ourselves up into an emotional frenzy that is purely from the flesh and not of the Holy Spirit. “So I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh...Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit” (Galatians 5:16, 25\). Having said that, we cannot deny that there are times when we can be overwhelmed by the presence and the power of the Spirit, and this is often an emotional experience. When that happens, it is a joy like no other. King David “danced with all his might” (2 Samuel 6:14\) when they brought up the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem. Experiencing joy by the Spirit is the understanding that as children of God we are being blessed by His grace. So, absolutely, the ministries of the Holy Spirit can involve our feelings and emotions. At the same time, we are not to base the assurance of our possession of the Holy Spirit on how we feel.

What is the purpose of the church?

Answer Acts 2:42 could be considered a purpose statement for the church: “They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.” According to this verse, the purposes/activities of the church should be 1\) teaching biblical doctrine, 2\) providing a place of fellowship for believers, 3\) observing the Lord’s supper, and 4\) praying. The church is to teach biblical doctrine so we can be grounded in our faith. Ephesians 4:14 tells us, “Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming.” The church is to be a place of fellowship, where Christians can be devoted to one another and honor one another (Romans 12:10\), instruct one another (Romans 15:14\), be kind and compassionate to one another (Ephesians 4:32\), encourage one another (1 Thessalonians 5:11\), and most importantly, love one another (1 John 3:11\). The church is to be a place where believers can observe the Lord’s Supper, remembering Christ’s death and shed blood on our behalf (1 Corinthians 11:23\-26\). The concept of “breaking bread” (Acts 2:42\) also carries the idea of having meals together. This is another example of the church promoting fellowship. The final purpose of the church according to Acts 2:42 is prayer. The church is to be a place that promotes prayer, teaches prayer, and practices prayer. Philippians 4:6\-7 encourages us, “Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.” Another commission given to the church is proclaiming the gospel of salvation through Jesus Christ (Matthew 28:18\-20; Acts 1:8\). The church is called to be faithful in sharing the gospel through word and deed. The church is to be a “lighthouse” in the community, pointing people toward our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. The church is to both promote the gospel and prepare its members to proclaim the gospel (1 Peter 3:15\). Some final purposes of the church are given in James 1:27: “Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.” The church is to be about the business of ministering to those in need. This includes not only sharing the gospel, but also providing for physical needs (food, clothing, shelter) as necessary and appropriate. The church is also to equip believers in Christ with the tools they need to overcome sin and remain free from the pollution of the world. This is done by biblical teaching and Christian fellowship. So, what is the purpose of the church? Paul gave an excellent illustration to the believers in Corinth. The church is God’s hands, mouth, and feet in this world—the body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:12\-27\). We are to be doing the things that Jesus Christ would do if He were here physically on the earth. The church is to be “Christian,” “Christ\-like,” and Christ\-following.