Reading the New Testament in Order

The Bible makes sense, more than many people may realize. One of the blogs we posted recently was about reading the Bible fairly. This is a subset of that same vein, about reading the Bible in order, specifically, the New Testament.

We have what are called the 4 Gospels. Then we have the Book of the Acts of the Apostles. Then we have the Epistles. Then we have the Book of Revelation.

The Gospels talk about Christ. They talk about him being the incarnation of God, God manifest in the flesh. They talk about him having power on earth, and showing an example to humanity of how to do the Father's business. They talk about him coming to fulfill the law. They talk about how that his blood was shed for the sins of the world. They talk about his crucifixion, his burial, and his resurrection. They talk about his focus on another testament that was to come.

The Book of Acts talks about the birth of the New Testament church. It speaks of Christ's charge to his disciples before his ascension into Heaven, that they would tarry until they received the Holy Ghost. Christ is the chief cornerstone in their message, his resurrection being the infallible proof that their gospel was true. The Book of Acts talks about the plan of salvation that they preached: repentance, baptism in the name of Jesus Christ, receiving the Holy Ghost (being born of water and of the Spirit, as Jesus laid out in John 3:5). The Book of Acts shows the experience that the apostles held as necessary, and shows that it was in effect in all places where their word was received.

The Epistles (Romans-Jude) talk about how the saints are to live. Each epistle is written to a group that we can read about in some way in the Book of Acts, people who had received the same experience described in Acts 2, and in Acts 8, and in Acts 10, and in Acts 19. Allusions to their experience are often contained in these epistles (like in 1 Corinthians 1, or 1 Peter 1, or the beginning of Jude, or Galatians 1), often in the first chapter, qualifying the audience or reader as someone that has "come through the Book of Acts," so to speak. After people came into the faith, they were instructed on how to live, how to behave, how to dress, how to treat each other, etc. The government of the church is described. Matters and issues are settled in detail. Detailed wisdom and insight into the components of the New Testament as backed by the Old Testament and the book of Genesis are expressed. There is also a great deal of warning against false doctrines. Paul, John, Peter, and Jude all talk at length about how that there will be men who preach false messages, turning people away from the true doctrine and experience that was presented by the apostles at the command of Jesus Christ.

The Book of Revelation tells us many things about the end of the world. There is much mystery and prophecy, and much to be interpreted and understood. Description is given about the world to come, and promises are made about the joy that is to be experienced. There is also much written about the judgment that is to come on the ungodly. It's a very weighty and very mysterious book.

These books were not just organized in this order by a group of carnal men, but we understand that the general groupings of these books is in chronological order. Christ came before the apostles. Christ ascended before the New Testament church started. The churches were established, and then they were instructed, and given wisdom. The Revelation was given and addressed to churches that the apostles had already worked with for years.

It stands to reason that in order to truly understand what is to be understood from the writings of the New Testament, we'd need to have a chronological understanding of the writings themselves. But not everyone agrees. I'm amazed at the number of people who start out trying to fully grasp the Book of Revelation before understanding who Jesus even is. And I am also saddened by the people who delve deeply into the epistles, without having the experience that is contained in the Book of Acts...

We must first understand who Jesus is. He is God manifest in the flesh (John 1:1, 14, Matthew 1:18-23, John 10:30, John 14:8-9). He came to save man from sin, through the shedding of his blood, and faith in his name (Luke 24:47). He came to start a new testament (Matthew 5:17, John 3:3-5, Mark 16:15-18, Matthew 28:18-20).

Once we know who Jesus is, and his purpose, and his commission to the leadership of the New Testament church, we must know what the early church experienced, and what they preached for others to also experience. They preached repentance, baptism in Jesus's name, receiving the Holy Ghost, evidenced by speaking in other tongues (Acts 2:4, Acts 2:15-18, Acts 2:38, Acts 8:14-17, Acts 10:44-48, Acts 19:1-6). They preached faith in the return of Jesus Christ (Acts 3:22-23, Acts 17:31, Acts 24:25). All of this was held true by the knowledge and witness of the resurrection of Jesus Christ (Acts 1:3, 8, 15-22, 2:32-33, 3:15, 4:2). This faith and experience is how people became part of the church, as we'd expect from John 3:5.

Once we know what it takes to be part of the church (John 3:3-5, Romans 8:9, Acts 2:38-39), and have experienced it, then it is time to move on to the epistles. Notice what this means, in that each of the epistles was either written to a church, to churches, or to a church leader who was to instruct a church or churches... Being part of a church, and having a man of God in your life, is crucial. But the thing to note here is that these people who were being instructed or taught first came through the Book of Acts! Trying to read and apply and interpret the epistles, without the fundamental experience of the Book of Acts, is an example of reading the Bible unfairly. There are scriptures that talk about believing in the Lord, and whosoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved, and that we're saved by faith, and so on that are all found in the epistles. People often quote these as if the apostles preached an easy-believism message. This happens because people read the epistles without the proper chronological context and contextual understanding of the audiences. Paul did not need to tell the Ephesians to be baptized in Jesus's name, or to receive the Holy Ghost speaking in tongues - we already see that's what he preached in Ephesus in Acts 19! The epistle to the Hebrews did not talk about this experience, because the Hebrews were there on the day of Pentecost in Acts 2, and the Samaritans received the word of God and this experience in Acts 8... We have to understand and believe that the apostles Paul and Peter only preached one gospel. When he went to Rome, he preached the same message he preached everywhere else. So, he didn't write to the Romans commanding them to be baptized and receive the Holy Ghost, because we understand they had already done these things! And yet still we see references to this in the epistles, reminding them of why they did what they did, or that it was what they did that caused him to write to them so specifically. We see this in Romans 6:4, where Paul talks about how they were baptized. He also talks about how the saints were baptized in 1 Corinthians 1. He talks in Ephesians 1 about the Ephesian church having received the Holy Ghost, and also in Romans 8 about how they received the Spirit of God; the same he did in 1 Corinthians 2, and in Galatians 2 and 3, and so on. Likewise did the other apostles. Yes, the apostles get into the nuts and bolts of this faith by talking about Old Testament prophecies tied together, such as Joel prophesying that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved (emphasizing that Gentiles could be saved, and emphasizing the necessity of the name being applied in salvation). They pull and strengthen the ties of our faith by referencing the established concept of righteousness not being earned by works but by faith, as shown with Abraham. But they also point out that Abraham had to show his faith, through circumcision, otherwise his faith was to be cancelled out, and his righteousness along with it. So, to quote or study Romans 10:13 or Ephesians 2:8 as though they hold the whole truth of the plan of salvation is not reading the Bible fairly, and it robs men of the fulness of salvation and experience in Jesus Christ. The epistles can only truly apply to those who have done what those to whom the epistles were written had done, in terms of doctrine and experience. Jesus spoke the words in red that we read and hold dear in John 3:16, but you must understand that he also spoke the words in red that we see in John 3:5, which is shown and explained in Acts 2:38. Christ laid a foundation for what is to be experienced, and the apostles' writings in the epistles confirm those who have received the experience. The experience itself - is in the Book of Acts.

And it is only after a saint has been established in daily living and church government, and has been strengthened in the tenants of our faith, that they should ever delve deeply into an understanding of the Book of Revelation. It was written to established churches, that had come through the epistles, who had been warned of false doctrines, who had been taught the wisdom and verity of the New Testament, who knew the apostles' doctrine and stances.

All the New Testament must be believed and lived. We must know and believe in Christ (Mark 16:16). We must be born again, of water and of the Spirit: baptized in Jesus's name, and filled with the Holy Ghost (Acts 2:38). We must grow in knowledge (Ephesians 4:13). And we must endure to the end, whatever it takes, looking for the return of our Lord Jesus Christ (Revelation 3:21). But we can't do these things adequately if we don't do first things first.