A Trustworthy Gospel

Posted: April 17, 2016 in Luke, Uncategorized
Tags:

Luke 1:1-4, “A Trustworthy Gospel”

Few things are as gripping as a true story.  There’s a reason so many movies and TV shows start out with the phrase, “Based upon a true story…”  The old Dragnet TV show routinely began with the line, “Ladies and gentlemen: the story you are about to hear is true. Only the names have been changed to protect the innocent.”  We watch/read these stories closely, all the while thinking to ourselves that no matter how hard or unusual the story may seem, it actually happened.

Of course there’s a big difference between those stories and the one we begin today in the Gospel of Luke.  Luke isn’t based upon a true story; it is a true story!  What we read here (and throughout all the Bible) is true history – actual fact.  How true is it?  So much so that you can (and should!) bet your life upon it.

That’s not to say that the book wasn’t written with an agenda in mind.  It was, and Luke is upfront with his intentions.  But the main focus of Luke’s agenda is truth.  His reader(s) needed to know that the gospel which they heard was true, and that is what Luke set out to prove.  We need to know that the gospel is true if we are to believe it, and we must believe it, or we cannot see the kingdom of God!

BACKGROUND:
Before we jump to the prologue of the book itself, we need to take a look at the backstory.  That Luke wrote the gospel that bears his name is something that is conceded by even opponents of the gospel.  Though the text is technically anonymous, nearly every ancient manuscript attests to Luke’s authorship, and the early church fathers were absolutely unanimous on it.

Who was Luke?  We know him in the New Testament to have been a travel companion of Paul’s, first mentioned by him in his letter to the Colossians, where he describes Luke as his beloved physician (Col 4:14).  Paul also mentions him in his final letter, as one who remained by his side even after all others had left Paul in prison (2 Tim 4:11).  Where Luke is not mentioned by name is the one place many people might expect to find him: the book of Acts.  Luke never identifies himself (directly) in either of his books, but he is most definitely seen in the book of Acts when the narrative changes from 3rd person to 1st person (Acts 16:10).  Paul had seen a vision of a man from Macedonia pleading with him to come help them, by sharing the gospel in Macedonia.  It seems that Paul & Silas met Luke in Troas & from there he was a frequent (though not constant) travel companion.  Some early Christian writers state that Luke was originally from the city of Antioch, but the Bible gives us no indication of his city of origin (other than perhaps Troas).  Wherever he was from, he was likely a Gentile – which is an amazing display of grace from the Lord.  After all, this man was responsible for writing ¼ of the New Testament!

Again, Paul described Luke as a physician, and his education is seen throughout his writing.  Not only through his medical knowledge (he pays a great deal of attention to physiological issues as they arise), but also through his excellent Greek and general attention to detail.  His written Greek is virtually in a different class than the other gospel writers (and Paul, for that matter), and his historical details are impeccable.  That wasn’t always through to be the case.  For years, historians laughed at Luke, thinking him to be foolish & inaccurate, only to have Luke’s account proven true time & time again as more archaeological discoveries are made.  He truly is an ancient historian of the highest caliber, and his writings provide wonderful evidence of the accuracy that comes from someone writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

As to when Luke wrote his gospel, it’s always difficult to pinpoint a precise date with these things, but we have more hints with Luke & Acts than with other books.  It seems very possible to date Luke to 59-60AD (give or take 1-2 years), with it being the last of the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke).  Luke shows a heavy reliance upon Mark (as does Matthew), and shares some information in common with Matthew as well.  How can we be so certain of an early date?  Because it is plainly the first part of a two-part series (Luke-Acts).  The book of Acts begins by directly referring to this gospel, tying it with the book, and Acts ends at a pretty specific timeframe.  Paul is shown arriving in Rome as a part of his first Roman imprisonment, which can be dated around 61AD.  From Paul’s letters, we can surmise he was later re-arrested & historically we know that he was executed during the reign of Caesar Nero, no later than 67-68AD.  Luke, in his writings, has zero mention of Paul’s death & other imprisonment, and that seems highly unusual for someone who documented Paul’s travels with such detail.  It’s so unusual for Luke not to mention it, that any argument for a later date simply stretches beyond credibility.  Thus Acts was likely written around 61-62AD, which pushes Luke’s gospel to no later than 59-60AD.  (FYI, this also means that Matthew had to be written earlier than Luke, and Mark written even earlier than that.  Thus the earliest gospel account dates back to barely a decade or so after Jesus’ resurrection.  In ancient terms, that’s basically covering current events!)

What was it that Luke wrote?  He wrote of a Jesus who is the Savior of the world.  If Matthew wrote to Jews, and Mark wrote to Romans, Luke wrote to Gentiles.  The same Messiah who is the King of the Jews is also the King of the World.  The same Christ who is the Son of David is also the Son of Adam.  God’s plan for salvation through Jesus is first given to Israel, but it is bigger than ethnic Israel.  God’s plan of salvation through Jesus is His plan for all the world!  That’s what Luke emphasizes time & time again (which is fitting considering his own probable Gentile background). Luke shows Jesus seeking and saving the lost, and it is a constant theme through his gospel.  Jesus is shown reaching out to those who were purposefully forgotten by the religious leaders (i.e. religious hypocrites) of the day.  Be them women, diseased, beggars, or Gentiles, Jesus loved them all, and showered them with practical expressions of His compassion.  He healed them, fed them, loved them, and proclaimed to all of them the good news of the kingdom.  None were left out, for Jesus had been sent for all of them.

  • This is still the good news that we proclaim!  When we tell people about Jesus, we don’t have to worry and wonder if Jesus actually wants to save the particular person we’re talking to…He does!  Jesus came for you, for me, for them, for all.  There’s not a single person in all the world that God does not desire to hear the gospel and have faith.  (Which means there’s no lack of opportunity for us to tell them!)

As to why Luke wrote his gospel, that’s what he explains in his prologue/introduction.  In some of the finest written Greek of the New Testament, Luke tells his friend Theophilus exactly why he’s writing: he wants Theophilus to know this is all true.  We believe a trustworthy gospel.

It’s all one sentence in Greek, but we’re going to break it into chunks, looking at the events of the gospel narrative: (1) what others had done, (2) what Luke did, (3) what we might know.

Luke 1:1–4

  • What others had done (1-2)

1 Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us,

  • Events were written.  Others had written prior Luke, and Luke was well aware of the other accounts.  Right from the get-go, Luke is quick to give credit to others who had gone before him.  He doesn’t downgrade the others or think less of them – on the contrary, he applauds them.  Praise God for those who had spoken & written of the gospel before!  Praise God that it went out through the lips & pens of other people!  If it was all dependent on Luke (or any of us) as a single individual, that would be a sad state indeed.  We are not alone within the Body of Christ, and we ought to praise God for others who proclaim the truth.  We might not agree with 100% of what someone else says, but if we agree on the essentials of Jesus, that’s enough.  As for Luke, he did agree with the other gospel writers, and it’s evident by the way he incorporates their material.  It’s hard to agree with someone to a greater extent than by quoting them, and that’s basically what Luke does through much of his gospel.
    • Keep in mind that not everyone who wrote a so-called “gospel” wrote a book than can be trusted.  But the ones Luke read did.  After Luke wrote (and after John wrote), many others wrote heretical gospels, primarily out of what’s known as the heresy of Gnosticism.  The so-called gospels of Thomas, of Mary, of Philip, and of Judas are all heretical, as is the gospel of Peter (which isn’t necessarily gnostic, but still false).  These are ancient writings that claim a famous person as an author, but without any evidence to the fact.  They often contradict the canonical gospels of the New Testament, and are filled with all kinds of errors.  Sadly, they get a lot of press from liberal media outlets, and are presented as being “lost” gospels on-par with the Biblical gospels.  We can know this without a doubt: there are no lost gospels.  The books contained within our New Testaments are the books recognized by the early church as having the stamp of the Holy Spirit upon them, which are inspired & without error in their entirety.  There is a reason so few copies of these gnostic gospels exist: the church saw right through them.  They knew they were wrong & didn’t bother keeping them.  Yet with the true gospels, they went to painstaking efforts to ensure that these writings were copied again & again & again.  They wanted these books to get into the hands as many people as possible.  Why?  Because these books contain the truth of God regarding Jesus Christ.  These books contain the good news of God’s salvation! 
  • Events were fulfilled.  The word chosen by Luke has a history outside the New Testament of referring to the finishing of legal or financial matters.  These things were fully accomplished, fully completed.  In regards to his gospel account, he refers to the fact that the events surrounding Jesus were brought to a conclusion.  These weren’t things about which there were open-ended questions or mysteries.  These things were done.  They were known.  Specifically, they were accomplished/fulfilled “among us.”  Jesus’ ministry wasn’t done in secret, behind closed doors.  The resurrection wasn’t revealed to just one or two men who were conspiring together.  These things happened in front of all – everyone knew.  And that takes us to the next point…
  • Events were verified.  There were “eyewitnesses and ministers of the word.”  Luke had not been one of them – he was a second-generation believer.  Yet there were many who were first-generation believers & eyewitnesses.  They personally experienced these things for themselves.  Luke’s own companion of Paul had been an eyewitness in his own right.  Paul may not have walked with Jesus during His earthly ministry, but he most definitely was a first-hand witness to the Resurrected Lord Jesus Christ.  It was because the Lord Jesus personally appeared to Paul that Paul got saved in the first place!  It was these eyewitnesses that Luke interviewed to great extent (something which he gets to in vs. 3), and so even though Luke himself wasn’t there, there were many others who were.  Their accounts were true and verifiable.  If someone didn’t believe Luke, they could do the investigation for themselves and come up with the same answers.
  • Events had been delivered.  Luke & others were the stewards of what was given to them.  When he wrote of eyewitnesses, he also wrote of “ministers/servants,” of which he could easily be included.  These servants were handed the word (λογος, though used in a different context than John), and they passed it on.  They served the Lord by serving others, hand-delivering the message of Christ to them.
    • Same with us!  We are saved by this gospel, and we are kept by this gospel, but we are not to keep this gospel to ourselves!  Stewards use what have been entrusted to them.  For a heart surgeon not to use the knowledge he/she has to save someone’s life is downright criminal.  They have knowledge that might save a life; we have knowledge that saves souls.  Use it – share it – pass it on.
  • What Luke did (3)

3 it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus,

  • Why another gospel?  If other books had been written, why would another be necessary?  Again, Luke wasn’t downplaying or degrading those who had written before him – he was simply adding to what had been done.  It is the ‘addition’ that is the key.  The gospel of Luke contains elements that are totally unique – unseen in Matthew or Mark (or John, for that matter).  Without Luke, we would know nothing about the birth history of John the Baptist, or the background & history of Mary.  In fact, we’ll find that even Luke’s genealogy of Jesus follows Mary’s lineage; not Joseph’s (as Matthew did).  Luke contains teachings of Jesus found nowhere else: the Good Samaritan (10), the rich fool (12), the lost coin, sheep, & prodigal son (15), and the rich man & Lazarus (16) are among the most famous teachings of Jesus, yet cannot be found in any of the other gospel accounts.  Beyond the birth history of Jesus from Mary’s perspective, Luke is also the only gospel writer to give any account at all of His childhood, providing the story of Jesus in the temple.  Luke is the one who tells us of the raising of the widow’s son (7), the wee little man of Zaccheus (19), Jesus’ trial before Herod (23), His words to the repentant thief on the cross (23), and His post-resurrection walk to Emmaus (24), and much more.  Yes, others had written of the gospel, but the church would be far poorer without this gospel!
    • Similar questions are sometimes asked of why more churches are needed.  “There are already so many churches in the area…why plant one more?”  Luke understood that although other people had written, he still had something to offer.  Likewise with churches.  Other congregations might be there, but there is still something to offer – there is more to do.  To be sure, church planters ought to be careful not to try to build a work on someone else’s foundation (Rom 15:20).  To simply shuffle existing believers from building to building isn’t the goal.  But as long as there are people who are unsaved & undiscipled, there is a need for churches.  If there are still people in a city who need to know Jesus, then there is a need for someone to reach them for Christ. 
  • Events were researched.  The word Luke uses to describe this point is interesting, and the NKJV editors actually paraphrase it a bit when they translate it as “having had a perfect understanding.” Literally, the word for “understanding” (παρακολουθέω) means to trace, follow, investigate carefully.  The idea is to follow a course of events – to check something out.  Some people follow politics – others follow football – Luke followed the events of Jesus.  He had researched things & done his homework.  He wasn’t a novice to all of this, spouting ideas & opinions from the top of his head.  He knew exactly what he wrote, because he had followed these things for quite some time.  This is evident in the abundance of material he has that is unique to his gospel.  Luke was quite the historian & researcher!  He seems to have personally interviewed Mary at length, as well as the parents of John the Baptist, and who knows how many other people.  He certainly had the time to do it.  Remember that he was an off/on companion of Paul.  There are certain points in the narrative of Acts where Luke writes in the 1st person, but there are other times he writes in the 3rd person – even after his initial joining at Troas.  Obviously we cannot say with any certainty what Luke was doing in that time, but it’s not a difficult idea to suggest that he was so intrigued by what he knew of Jesus from Paul, that he used whatever “down-time” he had to go research these issues on his own.  The perfect opportunity for Luke would have been while Paul was in prison in Caesarea for two years, waiting because of the purposeful delays of Felix (Acts 24).  It would have been relatively easy for Luke to travel throughout Judea at that time, being so close, and conduct his historical research.  Whenever he did it, the point is that he did, and that’s what he included in his book.
    • So what?  So the things we read here (and elsewhere in the Bible) are not made-up.  They aren’t imaginary fairy-tales or mythologies invented to cover up basic ignorance.  These are real, historical accounts of real, historical people.  These things really happened.  These people really existed.  There really was a Man named Jesus of Nazareth who was born of a virgin, healed the sick, raised the dead, showed compassion to the poor, confronted the religious hypocrites, and then suffered upon the cross, died, and rose again from the grave on the third day.  All of that really happened.  It’s not just a nice story; it’s historical truth.
  • Events were organized.  Luke wrote “an orderly account.”  Luke wasn’t interested in simply spouting off as many facts about Jesus as possible.  He not only did his research, but he took the time and effort to organize it in such a way that his writing could be understood.  What makes this interesting is that Luke doesn’t say how he organized the account – just that he did so.  Generally speaking, the flow of the gospel narratives are the same: Luke begins with the infancy narrative (something addressed by Matthew, but not by Mark) – proceeds to a general Galilean ministry – a journey to Jerusalem – and the events surrounding Jesus’ suffering, death, and resurrection.  However, the details within those broad sections are different.  There are times where Luke follows Mark’s order of events closer than Matthew, and other time where he diverges.  This isn’t error; it’s evidence of organization.  Luke (and all of the gospel writers) had reason why they wrote, and they brought out certain themes along the way.  Matthew, for example, wanted to show how Jesus fulfilled Jewish prophecy, so one of the features of his organization was to demonstrate this happening time & time again.  As for Luke, his overall theme was to show the Perfect Man bringing redemption to the world, and the events he describes were purposefully chosen and arranged to demonstrate this.  The key to remember is that although the gospel accounts contain biographical information about Jesus, they are not biographies.  Each one of these books was written with a purpose…primarily that of evangelism.  John made this explicit in his own later gospel: John 20:30–31, "(30) And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; (31) but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name."  That isn’t only true of the 4th gospel, but for each one of them.
    • Of course, the obvious follow-up question is DO you believe?  Do you believe what has been written?  Do you believe the testimonies you have been told?  When Luke did his research, he read what had been written in the past, spoke to people whose lives had been transformed – perhaps even spoke to those who had been opposed to Jesus.  All of the evidence was there – it just needed to be heard and believed.  Maybe you’ve been on the fence about Jesus for a while – it’s time to get off and make a decision.  It’s time to actually assess the evidence for yourself, and admit that it is abundant.  Too many things have proven true – too many lives have been forever changed all because of the Lord Jesus Christ.  Are there hypocrites & liars out there?  Yes – and they were soundly condemned by Jesus.  Don’t blame Jesus for the failings of His followers.  We cannot blame a stovetop for someone’s burn if he’s the one who puts his hand to it, ignoring the heat.  Neither can we blame Christ when purported Christians ignore His commands.  Today it’s time to examine the evidence & believe.
  • Who was Theophilus?  Both Luke’s gospel & the book of Acts begins with a dedication to Theophilus, and many people through the centuries have wondered who he was.  The short answer is: we don’t know.  It’s possible he was some sort of Roman official, judging by the title with which Luke addresses him here: “most excellent Theophilus.”  Considering that some scholars theorize that Acts was written as an apologetic for Paul (his legal defense) regarding his Roman trial, it’s possible that Theophilus was one of the officials assigned with investigating the charge against him.  At the same time, “Theophilus” literally means “Lover of God” or “Beloved of God,” so others suggest this might be a cryptic reference to either a single Christian (perhaps a wealthy patron who helped underwrite the cost of Luke’s research) or to all Christians in general.  Again, there’s no way of knowing.  Apparently the name was fairly common in the Roman empire, so without more information we cannot know.
  • What we might know (4)

4 that you may know the certainty of those things in which you were instructed.

  • Events were taught.  Whoever this Theophilus was, he had been “instructed” in these things.  He had heard some things about Jesus already, and seemingly wanted to know more.  It emphasizes the fact that not only had there been teachers, ministers, and stewards of the word – there had also been students.  There had been people willing to listen.
    • So often, we operate under the assumption of the opposite.  Christians hesitate to share the gospel because they’re afraid no one will listen.  It’s true that some people will reject the news – some people will resist the news – some people will ignore it…but some will listen!  Some will receive it, and receive it gladly.  When Jesus taught the parable of the soils, He only spoke of one soil out of four that received the same seed (the word) and actually bore fruit.  When Paul shared the gospel from city to city throughout the Roman empire, he was rejected far more often than he was received.  If it happened with him (and others), why would we think it will be different with us?  Yes, the message of the gospel will be denied…but not always.  Theophilus is proof…and so are you!  If you received the gospel, why be so quick to think that someone else will not?  Surely other people will receive it as well.  Perhaps part of our problem with evangelism is not so much the fear of rejection, but the lack of faith for success.  Some will believe.  We need to start with that expectation, and go out from there.
  • Events were true.  This is the bottom line…this is the ultimate reason Luke wrote.  He wanted Theophilus to know that the things he heard were things that were true.  Theophilus could safely put his trust in the work he had heard of Jesus – his salvation would be secure in Christ.  When we say we have a “certain hope” in Jesus, we’re speaking of solid, bedrock truth.  The gospel isn’t wishful thinking; it is proclaimed fact.  We believe in a certain, historic, verifiable faith.  Objection: “That’s a big claim, preacher!  How exactly can someone verify an event from 2000 years ago?  How can you be sure this is actual history, as opposed to just another religious story or myth?”  That’s a good question – it’s an important question.  It’s one thing to know what we believe; it’s another to know why we believe it.  Luke’s whole purpose in writing was to provide certain, historical proof of the gospel that had been taught.  If we cannot know that the gospel in which we believe is true, then what’s the point in believing?  Why give our lives to Jesus if we cannot trust Him?  At that point, He is as useful as Zeus or Yoda or the Flying Spaghetti Monster or whatever figment of our imagination.  Jesus has to be real if He is to be trusted.  He is.
    • Jesus historically lived.  Although this ought to go without saying, it seems that more and more people today try to cast doubt on the man of Jesus actually existing in the past.  To be blunt, that position is sheer ignorance.  Even honest atheistic scholars acknowledge the historical existence of Jesus.  Not only do the four gospels, the book of Acts, and the other letters of the New Testament witness of Him (which is all valid testimony, being that they are first-hand sources in addition to the many church fathers), but Jesus is mentioned by several ancient non-Christian historians as well.  Tacitus, Pliny the Younger, and Josephus each mention Jesus, as does the Babylonian Talmud.  There is vastly more evidence for Jesus’ historical existence than most other individuals from history that we just assume are real.
    • Jesus historically died.  This might be stating the obvious, simply because everyone dies, but it is the manner in which Christ dies that matters.  Jesus of Nazareth suffered and died the death of the cross.  Again, this is attested not only in the New Testament & church fathers, but also in some of those same non-Christian sources.  There is no credible argument against Jesus’ death by crucifixion.  What makes this important is the lack of a credible charge.  There is zero indication that Jesus was a criminal, or that He raised an army, yet He was crucified as an enemy of Rome, under the charge that He was the King of the Jews.  This is exactly what the Bible prophesied would happen to their Messiah (Ps 23), and it played out with Jesus.  Why would Rome kill a supposed King who wasn’t a threat?  All of this gives credibility to the gospel account.
    • Jesus historically rose from the grave.  By far, this is most important.  After all, it doesn’t matter if Jesus lived and died if He never lived again.  He would just be another man of history, inconsequential to the rest of us.  Even the Bible goes so far to say that if Jesus didn’t rise from the grave, all of our faith in Him is futile (1 Cor 15:17).  Yet Jesus did rise.  People saw Him dead & buried – the Romans certified His death, and His burial in the garden tomb was not only witnessed, but it was sealed and guarded.  The Jewish leaders went to great lengths precisely to prevent rumors of resurrection.  Yet on Sunday morning, Jesus rose.  The Roman guards failed in their duties and lived to tell the tale, when they should have died.  The Jewish priests and leaders vehemently resisted the disciples, but never once contradicted them on Jesus’ resurrection.  Three thousand people in Jerusalem put their faith in Jesus on the day of Pentecost, just 50 days after Jesus’ was crucified at the insistence of the people of the same city.  They knew Jesus was risen, because they had seen the evidence for themselves.  This is all in addition to the various physical appearances of Jesus: to the women at the tomb, to the apostles, to the men on the road to Emmaus, to over 500 people at one time, even later on in a personal appearance to Paul.  To those who argue for conspiracies, how can an ancient conspiracy survive that many people?  Paul had no reason to convert, nor did the people of Jerusalem.  They had been actively opposed to Jesus.  Something happened to drastically change their minds.  Something did: Jesus was risen from the dead.  Beyond those initial days & weeks, the truth never changed.  The apostles were tortured, jailed, and killed for their faith.  Not once did they change their testimony that Jesus is risen.  If two bank robbers are caught, they’ll often change their story to avoid consequences – the apostles faced far worse, and they didn’t change one bit.  There is only one reasonable conclusion from it all: Jesus literally rose from the dead.  He is alive.
      • If He did, then everything else is true.  If Jesus rose from the dead, everything He taught is accurate.  Everything He demonstrated is true.  He IS God, and we must have faith in Him in order to see the kingdom of God.  He does offer eternal life, and we must repent from our sins & believe upon Him in order to receive it.
    • This isn’t even to examine how Jesus historically fulfilled prophecy (over 300 of them!) or how the writings of the New Testament are astonishingly accurate and historically preserved (far more than any other document ever written).  The events of Jesus are true.  This is something on which we can base our lives.

Conclusion:
Luke has provided a trustworthy gospel – do you believe it?  Over the next many months, we have the wonderful opportunity to study Luke’s gospel verse-by-verse, but all of the wonderful events and stories mean nothing if they are just stories.  If it’s all a bunch of fictional feel-good stuff, then it’s still fiction in the end.  It wouldn’t be trustworthy, and we wouldn’t be able to have any hope in Jesus.  But it’s not.  Luke was intentionally careful to examine the evidence that was before him, to research it, to think it through, to write it out, and to present in such a way that Theophilus could know that it was all true.  And it is.

The gospel we believe is the true gospel.  Through it, we receive everlasting life.  We have our sins forgiven, and we look forward to a glorious eternity with the Lord Jesus.  The gospel is the good news of Jesus Himself, and we can trust every single thing that the Bible proclaims of Him.  He really did live, die for our sins, and rise from the dead.  It is certifiably true.

The gospel we proclaim is the true gospel.  This news isn’t something we merely receive; it’s something we’re supposed to give out as well.  We may not be eyewitnesses of the original events of Jesus, but we are witnesses to the things we have experienced.  If you are a born-again believer in Jesus Christ, you have been personally transformed by the Living God.  You can speak as an eyewitness of your own testimony.  In addition, we are all stewards of the gospel of Jesus Christ.  The same message that spoke of the God who transformed us is the message we can give to others.  Pass it on – give it out.  Know that there will be some who listen.  It won’t be everyone, but there will be someone.  That someone needs to know the truth.  That someone needs to be saved.  God has specifically equipped you to tell that someone, so tell them.  Ask to be renewed by God the Holy Spirit, directed by Him, and then ask for the faith, courage, and conviction to follow through as you tell someone of Jesus.

Today, you might be that Someone.  Maybe you’ve considered the claims of the gospel in the past, but only in passing.  Maybe you had a bad experience in a church, or you had some other reason to doubt the claims of Christianity.  Today, put those doubts to rest.  The gospel of Jesus Christ is trustworthy – it’s true.  Jesus did die for you, and He did rise from the grave.  You too can put your faith and trust in Him & receive the promise of everlasting life.  Just as Luke wrote later on, when recording the word of Paul to his Philippian jailer on how to be saved, Paul and Silas told him, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your whole household.” (Acts 16:31).  You can be saved today, and you can know it without a doubt when you believe the gospel of Jesus Christ. 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s