Search
You searched for 'Revelation'
I've found 36 results!
Simon Wartanian
|
26,978 views |
63,926 words
|
5:35:37 hours |
06 March 2015 23:27
Simon Wartanian
|
26,926 views |
35,236 words
|
3:04:25 hours |
04 March 2015 20:52
- Necessity of Scripture (paragraph 1)
- Scripture As Self-Revelation (paragraph 1)
- Canon of the Old Testament (paragraph 4)
- Canon of the New Testament (paragraph 3)
- Inspiration of Scripture (paragraph 2)
- Inerrancy and Infallibility of Scripture (paragraph 1)
- Authority of Scripture (paragraph 4)
- Sufficiency of Scripture (paragraph 6)
- Sola Scriptura (paragraph 1, 10)
- Authentication of Scripture (paragraph 5)
- Perspicuity of Scripture (paragraph 7)
- Interpretation of Scripture (paragraph 9)
This chapter is in many ways based upon the truths in 2 Timothy 3:16. All the particular subjects which are treated are part of a unified whole doctrine about God’s Word.
§1 The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain, and infallible rule
- The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain, and infallible rule of all saving knowledge, faith, and obedience 1, although the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, as to leave men inexcusable 2; yet are they not sufficient to give that knowledge of God and his will which is necessary unto salvation. 3 Therefore it pleased the Lord at sundry times and in divers manners to reveal himself, and to declare that his will unto his church 4; and afterward for the better preserving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure establishment and comfort of the church against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan, and of the world, to commit the same wholly unto writing; which maketh the Holy Scriptures to be most necessary 5, those former ways of God’s revealing his will unto his people being now ceased. 6
- Isa. 8:20; Luke 16:29; Eph. 2:20; 2 Tim. 3:15-17[1]
- Ps. 19:1-3; Rom. 1:19-21, 32; 2:12a, 14-15
- Ps. 19:1-3 with vv. 7-11; Rom. 1:19-21; 2:12a, 14-15 with 1:16-17; and 3:21
- Heb. 1:1-2a
- Prov. 22:19-21; Luke 1:1-4; 2 Peter 1:12-15; 3:1; Deut. 17:18ff; 31:9ff, 19ff; 1 Cor. 15:1; 2 Thess. 2:1-2, 15; 3:17; Rom. 1:8-15; Gal. 4:20; 6:11; 1 Tim. 3:14ff; Rev. 1:9, 19; 2:1 etc.; Rom. 15:4; 2 Peter 1:19-21
- Heb. 1:1-2a; Acts 1:21-22; 1 Cor. 9:1; 15:7-8; Eph. 2:20
Holy Scripture, which is defined to be the 66 books of the Old and New Testaments, is “sufficient, certain, and infallible”. This means that Scripture is enough; true and sure; and cannot err. What is the scope of this sufficiency, certainty, and infallibility? The Confession says that Scripture is the only infallible “rule of all saving knowledge, faith, and obedience”. Holy Scripture is given as a measuring line and a standard. It is a standard of standards. There are other standards and rules besides the Bible, but the Bible alone is the “sufficient, certain, and infallible rule”. The Bible is the norm and rule to test everything else by.
Paragraph 1 then moves to speak about the insufficiency of general Revelation for salvation. The “light of nature, and the works of creation and provi...
Simon Wartanian
|
3,445 views |
12,397 words
|
1:05:40 hours |
09 February 2022 21:11
- Do the second coming of Christ, the resurrection and judgment of all humanity, and the inauguration of the eternal kingdom, occur as aspects of one great event, or are they separated by a temporary messianic kingdom that lasts a thousand years?
- Are we able to predict when any of the “end-time” events will occur by paying attention to the events transpiring in the Middle East or other geopolitical occurrences?
- What is the role of the church in all of this?
The major eschatological positions (premillennialism, postmillennialism and amillennialism) differ on the nature and timing of the kingdom in Revelation 20. He then proceeds to briefly lay out the eschatological positions and words which are often used.
Interpreting prophecy
Nature of Prophecy
In chapter 2, entitled “Interpreting Prophecy and Apocalyptic” he lays out the hermeneutics needed which will be used in interpreting prophecy. This is mainly directed against dispensational premillennialism with its insistence on “consistent literal interpretation,” especially of prophecy. Before we a priori decide upon a “literal interpretation” of prophecy, we must first understand the nature of prophecy. The prophets primarily did two things: “(1) They warned God’s people of the consequences of disobedience to the Lord’s ways by oracles of judgment; and (2) They called God’s people back to faithfulness by oracles of salvation” (pp. 6-7). Their purpose was to change the behavior of people and call them to repentance rather than give them things interesting to think about or a map of the future. Their primary function was forth-telling rather than fore-telling. What makes prophecy difficult is the medium in which it was given to the prophets. They are sometimes given in a dream or visionary form. This means that such a prophecy must be interpreted in line with its literature, and not the same as Genesis or Exodus which is narrated history. The way that God talks to the prophets is said to be “in dark sayings” (Ps. 78:2; cf. Num. 12:6-8), which obviously does not mean that such a prophecy is clear on first sight. Prophecy, in comparison with didactic (teaching) or historical portion of the Bible, is less clear.
Contingency
Another important factor to keep in mind when dealing with prophecy is that, because it is concerned with the behavior of God’s people, it is therefore contingent. “God announced this principle of contingency in Jer 18:6–11; 26:12–13; 36:1–3; Ezek 18:1–32; 33:10–20” (p. 8). Sometimes this principle is explicitly stated (Menn adduces Jer 38:17–18; 42:7–17; Acts 27:21–44; Rom 11:17–24). Other times it is not stated though it is nonetheless conditional (Menn adduces Exod 32:9–14; Isa 38:1–5; Jonah 3:1—4:2; Matt 19:27–28. “In Matt 19:27–28 the promise by Jesus to the Twelve that they would judge the twelve tribes of Israel included Judas.”). This principle of contingency is also clearly seen in the preaching of Jonah to Nineveh which simply was “Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown!” (Jonah 3:4). There are no ifs or buts to be seen in Jonah’s prophecy, but God clearly relented from the disaster which He intended to bring on Nineveh. Wh
...
Simon Wartanian
|
33,268 views |
73,377 words
|
6:24:05 hours |
06 March 2015 19:29
- Jer. 10:7; Mark 12:33[1]
- Gen. 4:1-5; Exod. 20:4-6; Matt. 15:3, 8-9; 2 Kings 16:10-18; Lev. 10:1-3; Deut. 17:3; 4:2; 12:29-32; Josh. 1:7; 23:6-8; Matt. 15:13; Col. 2:20-23; 2 Tim. 3:15-17
The light of nature or natural Revelation as we call it shows that there is a God, Who hath lordship and sovereignty over all (Rom. 1:19-23). That there is a God, no one will be able to deny when they stand before God. Both creation and the Creator testify to God. This is basic Romans 1. Furthermore, this God is just, good and doth good unto all (Ps. 145:9) as evidenced by the things which we have and receive. Therefore, He is to be worshiped and served with the whole of our being. Yet He is not to be worshiped as we like. But the acceptable way of worshipping the true God, is instituted by Himself (Ex. 20:4-6; Deut. 4:2; 12:29-32). It is God Who determines how He is to be worshiped. This acceptable way is limited by His revealed will, i.e., Holy Scripture. The unacceptable way of worshipping God as according to the imagination and devices of men (Acts 17:29; Col. 2:23), the suggestions of Satan, visible representations (Ex. 20:4-6) and any other way not prescribed in the Holy Scriptures (Lev. 10:1-3) is abominable to God and He is not pleased with it. God is not to be worshiped as we think He would like to be worship. Why should we think of ways of worshipping Him when He has revealed how He desires to be worshiped? Neither is He to be worshiped through or by any visible representations. This excludes all images and statues of the persons of the Godhead as well as the saints who according to Roman Catholic theology can act as intercessors between us and God/Jesus. The most important aspect of what is called the Regulative Principle of Worship is expressed in the last clause: any other way not prescribed in the Holy Scriptures. Not only is He to be worshiped according to His revealed will, but He is not to be worshiped through that which He has not revealed. If it is not prescribed in the Holy Scriptures, it should not be an element of His worship. If it is prescribed in the Holy Scriptures, it should.
There Is A God
Creation testifies to everyone without question that there is God. General Revelation is sufficient to reveal God to the world and to hold them accountable (see chapter 20). Everyone knows that there is a God. But not only that there is a God, but also that this is a God that must be worshiped. This explains the countless religions that have existed and still exist. It is all because of the Fall that we have a multitude of religions rather than only one. Romans 1 speaks about those who suppress the truth about God through idolatry. All religions in one way or another try to appease the god(s) and serve them. That is the sense that they get from General Revelation. There is a God to Whom they owe their existence and blessings, therefore they are to serve and love Him. But the Confession is quick to add the way in which the true God wants to be worshiped is instituted by Himself alone. To that now we turn our attention.
What Is The Regulative Principle?
In the words of Derek Thomas, “the regulative principle of worship states that the corporate worship of God is to be founded upon specific directions of Scrip...
Simon Wartanian
|
11,906 views |
3,261 words
|
0:17:00 hours |
05 March 2015 19:57
Chapter 20: Of the Gospel, and of the Extent of the Grace Thereof
This chapter concerns itself with the emphasis and necessity of special Revelation for salvation. This chapter is absent in the Westminster Confession, but it was taken from the Savoy Declaration of the Puritan Congregationalists. Concerning the historical background, Dr. Sam Waldron writes:
The contents of the chapter indicate that the error in view depreciated the necessity of the special Revelation contained in the Scriptures for salvation. A general knowledge of the period permits the educated guess that the Puritan authors had already sensed the intellectual tendency which would later produce Deism, with its emphasis on the sufficiency of human reason and natural Revelation and its opposition to supernatural Revelation and the distinctive tenets of Christianity. Such men wanted to establish a completely rational basis for the existence of God and morality. They disliked the idea that a special Revelation given only to some men was necessary to worship and serve God acceptably.[1]
Against such men, the Confession asserts the necessity of special Revelation about God through the gospel and Scripture for salvation. The Confession acknowledges the strength of natural/general Revelation, but general Revelation is not enough for salvation. General Revelation is enough for condemnation. The gospel and the work of the Holy Spirit are necessary for salvation. This chapter concerns itself less with “what” the gospel is than to confess the necessity of special Revelation over against those who would reject special Revelation and claim that they can come to salvation merely through general Revelation.
§1 God was pleased to give forth the promise of Christ
- The covenant of works being broken by sin, and made unprofitable unto life, God was pleased to give forth the promise of Christ, the seed of the woman, as the means of calling the elect, and begetting in them faith and repentance; in this promise the gospel, as to the substance of it, was revealed, and [is] therein effectual for the conversion and salvation of sinners. 1
- Gen. 3:15 with Eph. 2:12; Gal. 4:4; Heb. 11:13; Luke 2:25, 38; 23:51; Rom. 4:13-16; Gal. 3:15-22; Rev. 13:8[2]
The covenant of works that was given to Adam was broken by sin and thereby made unprofitable unto life (see also chapter 6:1). Now, it only administers its curse—death. Therefore, God was pleased to give forth the promise of Christ (Gen. 3:15; Eph. 2:12) as He had purposed to save the elect by Christ from all eternity. In this promise of Christ, the gospel was revealed as the means of calling the elect (Gal. 3:8; Luke 2:25, 38). As the gospel was revealed in this promise, God worked to beget in the elect faith and repentance so that they would embrace this promise, which was effectual for the conversion and salvation of sinners (Gal. 3:15-22). This promise of Christ was, essentially or in substance, the promise of the gospel and salvation, which is what Christ accomplished on behalf of the elect.
Salvation was always through Christ, whether people were consciously aware of that or not. They were saved by faith alone and by not works. By loosely reading the Old Testament and seeing the absence of the cross, we may think that salvation was by works under the Old Testament, but now, in the New Testament era, it is by grace. This is completely false and a grave mistake. Salvation has always been by g...
Simon Wartanian
|
37,072 views |
65,864 words
|
5:42:00 hours |
04 March 2015 21:27
From these definitions, we observe that a covenant seeks to bring man to a better state of existence or being. It doesn’t seek to leave man in the place he was prior to the covenant. Dr. Richard Barcellos observes:
Think of the Noahic covenant. Prior to its Revelation as found in Genesis 6-9, the earth was potentially subject to a universal flood due to the justice of God being executed on the earth against the wickedness of man. We know this for certain because that is exactly what happened. The Noahic covenant, which includes man (Noah and his descendants), also involves every living creature (Genesis 9:9-10, 15, 16). It embraces and benefits the earth as well (Genesis 8:22...Genesis 9:13...Jeremiah 33:20, 50...). That divine covenants are revealed to man for “the advancing and bettering of his state” [Nehemiah Coxe] can also be said of all other divine covenants with man throughout the Bible. Abraham (along with his carnal and spiritual seed) was better off for the covenant revealed to him. The Israelites were better off for the covenant revealed to them. It promised them blessings from God that were not promised to them prior to its promulgation. David and the Israelites were better off for the covenant revealed to them, and believers of all ages are much better off for the Revelation of the new covenant in its promissory form in the Old Testament and in its concluded, or historically ratified, form in the New Testament.[7]
Nehemiah Coxe writes:
The immediate and direct end therefore, of God’s entering into covenant with man at any time (so far as concerns man himself) is the advancing and bettering of his state. God never made a covenant with man in which his goodness to him was not abundantly manifest. Yes, such is his infinite bounty that he has proposed no lower end to his covenant transactions with men than to bring them into a blessed state in the eternal enjoyment of himself. And therefore, when one covenant (through the weakness of man in his lapsed state) has been found weak and unprofitable as to this great end of a covenant because insufficient to accomplish it, God finds fault, abolishes it, and introduces another in which full provision is made for the perfect salvation of those that have interest in it (Hebrews 8:7, 8).[8]
Now that we know what a covenant is, let us delve into the covenants of which the Bible speaks.
The Covenant of Works
We begin our study of the covenants with the Covenant of Works because that is the way our Confession starts this chapter. Some may be searching for the phrase “Covenant of Works” in paragraph 1 or the whole chapter. You won’t find it. But that does not mean that the concept of the Covenant of Works is not here. A few reasons may be given as to why the Confession does not use the phrase “covenant of works” in this chapter, while the sister confessions do. First of all, if we compare the title of the chapter, in the Westminster and Savoy confessions we have “Of God’s Covenant with Man”, while in the 1689 we have “Of God’s Covenant.” The 1689 focuses on the Revelation and establishment of the Covenant of Grace, while the others treat God’s covenants from the beginning and not only focusing upon the Covenant of Grace. The 1689 “concentrates on the covenant of grace and either assumes or implies the cov...
Simon Wartanian
|
34,482 views |
77,737 words
|
6:42:45 hours |
05 March 2015 19:46
specifically and predominantly, the Decalogus, or Ten Commandments; also called the lex Mosaica …, as distinct from the lex ceremonialis …and the lex civilis, or civil law. The lex moralis, which is primarily intended to regulate morals, is known to the synderesis [the innate habit of understanding basic principles of moral law] and is the basis of the acts of conscientia [conscience–the application of the innate habit above]. In substance, the lex moralis is identical with the lex naturalis …but, unlike the natural law, it is given by Revelation in a form which is clearer and fuller than that otherwise known to the reason.[2]
And then Dr. Barcellos adds:
As noted above, the Moral Law is summarily comprehended in the Decalogue, not exhausted by it. Though the formal promulgation of the Decalogue had a unique redemptive-historical context and use, it is nothing other than the Natural Law incorporated into the Mosaic Covenant. This is one of its uses in the Bible but not all of its uses.
The Decalogue contains the summary and the essence of the Moral Law, but it does not contain all the moral laws. For example, there is no “thou shalt respect elders”, but we understand that this is comprehended under the fifth commandment to honor our parents, and derived from it.
Positive Law
Positive Law simply said is a moral law that has no basis in nature nor is it self-evident, but is based upon a commandment of God. Dr. Barcellos defines positive laws as:
Positive laws are those laws added to the Natural or Moral Law. They are dependent upon the will of God. These laws are “good because God commands them.” They become just because commanded. The first Positive Laws were given to Adam in the Garden (Gen. 1:28; 2:17), as far as we know. Subsequent Positive Laws are spread throughout the Old and New Testaments. Positive laws can be abrogated for various reasons. They are not necessarily universal or perpetual. Some obvious illustrations of Positive Law in the Old Testament are circumcision and animal sacrifices and two New Testament illustrations are baptism and the Lord’s Supper under the New Covenant...Neither circumcision, animal sacrifices, baptism, or the Lord’s Supper are either universal or perpetual.[3]
§1 God gave to Adam a law of universal obedience written in his heart
- God gave to Adam a law of universal obedience written in his heart, 1 and a particular precept of not eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil; 2 by which he bound him and all his posterity to personal, entire, exact, and perpetual obedience; promised life upon the fulfilling, and threatened death upon the breach of it, and endued him with power and ability to keep it. 3
- Gen. 1:27; Eccles. 7:29; Rom. 2:12a, 14-15[4]
- Gen. 2:16-17
- Gen. 2:16-17; Rom. 10:5; Gal. 3:10,12
Adam was given a law of universal obedience written in his heart (Rom. 2:14-15). Even in his innocence, man was never without the law of God (chapter 4:2). This law is a law of universal obedience, i.e., it concerns everyone. The location of this law was not in stone, but in his heart; it was inward. In addition to this law, he was also given a particular precept of not eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil (Gen. 2:16-17). By obedience to the law and the precept he was given, he was bound along with all his posterity to personal, e...
Simon Wartanian
|
12,620 views |
8,095 words
|
0:42:03 hours |
13 April 2015 23:31
Amillennialism
This book lays out the classic view of Amillennialism which is Dean Davis[1] believes (as others also do) is the classic eschatology of Church History and the Reformation.
The word amillennialism means no millennium. However, amillennarians do not deny the existence of a millennium, only that it begins after the Parousia and that it will last for a literal thousand years. Instead, they teach that the thousand years of Revelation 20 symbolize the present Era of Proclamation, during which time Christ reigns with (the departed spirits of) his saints in heaven. Amillennarians are, then, “present-millennarians.” Pages 23-24
Basically, Amillennialism teaches that the Millennium of Revelation 20 started from the cross and will end at the Second Coming of our Lord, spanning over 2 millennia up till now and is thus to be interpreted symbolically, rather than literally. The Millennium is the Gospel Era, or as Dean likes to call it, the Era of Proclamation.
This is a simple chart laying out the Amillennial vision of Salvation History.
The Kingdom of God
One of the very ups of this book was the extensive study of the Kingdom of God in the New and Old Testaments. My understanding of the Kingdom of God was really expanded.
A Definition of the Kingdom of God
Dean Davis defines the Kingdom of God as:
In essence, the Kingdom of God is the direct reign of God the Father, through the Son, by the Spirit, over his redeemed creatures; creatures who have been rescued from every spiritual and physical enemy, and restored to every spiritual and physical friend that God planned for them in the beginning. Also, the Kingdom is the blessed realm that this redemptive reign creates, and over which it forever rules. Page 65.
This he does not merely assume, but ably goes to prove it from the Bible, here is a summary of his five points:
- The Kingdom is the direct reign of God the Father (Mt 6:10)
- The Kingdom is a sphere of wholeness and blessing (Mt 9:35; 10:7-8; 12:28)
- The Kingdom is mediated by the Son of God (John 5:19, 30; 6:38; 8:28; 12:49; 14:10)
- The Kingdom is effected by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28; Acts 1:4-8)
- The Kingdom is a realm beneath a reign (Mt 13:41-42; Rev 11:15)
Thereby is indeed the definition that he gives is justified and satisfactory.
The Two-Staged Kingdom
Amillennarians see the Kingdom of God coming in two stages, separated by the Parousia of our Lord:
- The Kingdom of the Son (already, the present Era of Proclamation)
- The Kingdom of the Father (not yet, the future World/Age to Come)
Now, the terminology used here is not meant to give the idea that the Son has no share in the second stage of the Kingdom or that the Father has no share in the first, but rather is taken from 1 Corinthians 15:24-28 where we learn that at the Coming of our Lord, the Lord Jesus will deliver His Kingdom, His consummated Kingdom to God the Father and will be subjected to Him. Thus, seeing a difference between the present Kingdom of the Son (which is to be delivered up to the Father) and the coming Kingdom of the Father (which is the eternal World to Come). This terminology is also supported by Matthew 13:41-43.
The two-staged Kingdom is seen from Jesus’ own contrast of this present age and the age to come. Here is a table I made for myself: ...
Simon Wartanian
|
15,037 views |
16,377 words
|
1:25:50 hours |
06 March 2015 23:30
All Men
Returning to our passage in Acts 17:31, we see the subjects of this judgment being the world. Scripture teaches that both believers and unbelievers will appear before God in the Last Judgment. This is evident from Ecclesiastes 12:14; Matthew 7:21-23; 12:36-37; 25:31ff; Acts 17:30-31; Romans 2:6-16; 14:10-12; 2 Thessalonians 1:5-10; Revelation 11:18; 21:11-15. Sometimes Scripture is so explicit that it refers to believers having to stand before the judgment seat of God (Rom. 14:10-12; 1 Cor. 4:5; 2 Cor. 5:10; Ps. 50:4-6). Other times, the Scriptures warns of the judgment against the wicked (Matt. 10:15; 11:22, 24; 2 Pet. 2:9; 3:7), but they both will stand before the throne of God on the last day, that is what Scripture teaches. Not only men but angels also will come into the Judgment (Matt. 8:29; 1 Cor. 6:3; 2 Cor. 2:4; Jude 1:6).
Angels
The Confession states that even the apostate angels will be judged. This is a Day of Judgment not only for men but also for angels. This is obviously based on Scripture. In Matthew 8:29, we read the demon speaking about a time in which he, along with his companions, will be tormented. In Jude 1:6, we read that “the angels who did not stay within their own position of authority”, God “has kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment of the great day”. In 2 Peter 2:4, says that “God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to chains of gloomy darkness to be kept until the judgment”. There is a time at which these angels will have to stand before the throne of Christ to be judged and condemned. Finally, 1 Corinthians 6:3 says, “Do you not know that we are to judge angels?” There are a lot of questions and speculations about this passage and the idea. Who are meant by the angels? Are good angels also included? Then this would probably be the only passage where good angels are subjects of judgment. Are they fallen angels? Then this will agree with other passages (2 Pet. 2:4; Jude 1:6), therefore, it seems to me that the passage is speaking of fallen angels. But I cannot be dogmatic because generally the word “angel” is used positively. In other places where it means fallen angels, the context makes that clear (2 Pet. 2:4 “angels when they sinned”; Jude 1:6 “angels who did not stay within their own position”). Therefore, it seems that the New Testament is not clear whether good angels will be subjects for the judgment, although I doubt that they will be. What is clear is that fallen angels surely will subjects of the Last Judgment.
What is the nature of this judgment? There are a lot of questions about this, but there are also a lot of speculation as Scripture does not seem to say how exactly the saints will judge angels. Most seem to think that this judgment will consist in approving the judgments of God made against the fallen angels and the wicked.
At The Parousia
The Bible also teaches that the Last Judgment will take place at the coming of Christ, on the last day, that is the only time indication that the Bible gives (Matt. 24:36). 2 Thessalonians 1:5-10 tells us that we will be granted relief “when the Lord J...
Simon Wartanian
|
19,211 views |
21,954 words
|
1:58:30 hours |
05 March 2015 18:34
The other senses in which pistis is used are active. The first is the act of believing. So, the New Testament speaks of faith in God in general. Jesus said to His disciples, “Have faith in God [πίστιν θεοῦ, pistin theou]” (Mark 11:22). Paul says to the Thessalonian church that their “faith in God [ἡ πίστις...τὸν θεὸν, he pistis...ton theon] has gone forth everywhere” (1 Thess. 1:8). An element of “the elementary doctrine of Christ” is “faith toward God [πίστεως ἐπὶ θεόν, pisteus epi theon]” (Heb. 6:1). Peter says that through Christ we are “believers in God” (the adjective of pistis), so that our “faith and hope are in God [τὴν πίστιν ὑμῶν...εἶναι εἰς θεόν, ten pistin humon...einai eis theon]” (1 Pet. 1:21).
But more prominently, faith is spoken of as in faith in Christ. Paul’s gospel call was “repentance toward God, and faith toward [πίστιν εἰς, pistin eis] our Lord Jesus Christ” (Acts 20:21). Acts 3:16 speaks of ”faith in his name [τῇ πίστει τοῦ ὀνόματος αὐτοῦ, te pistei tou onamatos autou]” and “faith that is through Jesus [ἡ πίστις ἡ δι’ αὐτοῦ, he pistis he di autou]”. The passage very simply teaches that our faith is not only in Christ, but it is always through Christ! Faith in Christ may also be seen in the following passages: Acts 24:24; Romans 3:22, 26; Ephesians 3:12; Galatians 2:20; 3:22, 26; Ephesians 1:15; Colossians 1:4; Philippians 1:29; 1 Timothy 1:14; 3:13; 2 Timothy 1:13; 3:15; James 2:1. While not directly, it is also deducible from the context as in Romans 1:8; 5:1-2; 1 Corinthians 2:5; 15:14, 17; Ephesians 2:8 and passages about justification by faith (e.g., Acts 15:19; Rom. 3:28, 30; 9:30, 32; Gal. 3:8; see chapter 11).
Faith is also spoken of as the set of doctrine or religion. This sense is found in 1 Timothy 1:19 where he is told to “[hold] faith [πίστιν, pistin] and a good conscience. By rejecting this, some have made shipwreck of their faith [πίστιν, pistin]”. Matthew Poole observes here, “By faith here is meant, the doctrine of faith, and the holding of it signifies a steadiness of the mind’s assent unto it, without wavering or fluctuation, much less deserting or denying it.”[6] “Hymenaeus and Alexander” have shipwrecked their (profession of) faith (1 Tim. 1:20). In Philippians 1:27, Paul speaks of “the faith of the gospel [τῇ πίστει τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, te pistei tou euangeliou]” for which they are to strive, which seems to mean the doctrine or teaching of the gospel. In Titus 2:2, older men are to be “sound in faith [τῇ πίστει, te pistei]”, which means sound in doctrine. Jude 3 calls us “to contend for the faith [πίστει, pistei (it occurs at the end of the sentence)] that was once for all delivered to the saints.” This faith was handed down to the saints by them who came before us. It was said of Paul in Galatians 1:23 that ‘“He who used to persecute us ...