We are here in Matthew chapter 16, continuing our series on the Alphabet of Bible Doctrines. I am going to preach to you about the doctrine of Christ. A lot of people might be confused by this title, because this is not a sermon about Jesus — and I am going to explain it as I go — but it is going to lead us to Jesus and it is going to make sense as I explain what the sermon is about.

Matthew 16:13: "When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets." He said unto them, but whom do you say that I am? Obviously when Jesus came he caused quite a division. Some people believed on him, some loved him, some hated him. Everybody had an opinion. He was a bit of a celebrity in that day — well known, and in a way a lot of people hated him — and he asked what people were saying about him. Some said he was John the Baptist, some said Elias — which is Elijah — some said Jeremiah. Basically people were saying one of the prophets had risen again or was coming in their spirit or power.

Then he says, but who do you think I am? Those following Jesus are going to have a very different opinion than those outside. "And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." He says, Thou art the Christ. Not thou art Christ — thou art the Christ. Why? Because the Christ was a doctrine. It was something that was known from the Old Testament. Christ was not really part of his original name. His name was Jesus. But we say Jesus Christ. It is like if I were to ask you who is the president of the Philippines — you would say President Bongbong Marcos. You are putting that description or title into his name and it becomes part of his name. When you say Jesus Christ you are saying Jesus is the Christ. Jesus is the Saviour. There is nothing wrong with that. What we are talking about is the doctrine of the Christ — the doctrine of the Messiah — that was prophesied all throughout the Old Testament.

Peter also said the Son of the living God, because that is actually part of the doctrine that was understood about the Christ — that he was the Son of the living God. Verse 17: "And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." Jesus has just done a comparison between himself and John the Baptist, himself and Elijah, himself and Jeremiah. Is there any comparison between Jesus and John the Baptist? No comparison whatsoever — other than they both had a miraculous birth, and John the Baptist was the greatest man born among women, the Bible says — and yet there is no comparison to Jesus Christ. He is not saying Peter, you are the Rock and I am founding the church upon you. He just showed nobody compares to him. The church is founded upon the truth that Jesus is the Christ. The rock mentioned all throughout the Old Testament. Verse 20: "Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ." You would not call me Matthew the Stucky. Christ is not merely part of his name — it is a description of who he was, a doctrine learned and taught in the Old Testament.

The Doctrine of the Messiah Was Known

Go to John 1. If he is telling Peter not to tell people he is the Christ, obviously that means people are aware that there is a Christ — a Saviour mentioned all throughout the Old Testament. It is a matter of whether or not they believe on Jesus as being the Christ. John 1:19: "And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou? And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ." They are basically asking so as to be able to accuse him of blasphemy or whatever — and he says, I am not the Christ. But it shows they had an understanding of who the Christ was.

Verse 25: "And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet?" There was an understanding about the Christ that was taught in the Old Testament — people were aware of it before Jesus Christ revealed himself. Verse 26: "John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not; he it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy to unloose." The context is never broken from the topic of the Christ throughout John 1.

Verse 29: "The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world." The doctrine of the Christ taught that the Christ is the Lamb of God and that the Christ is going to take away the sin of the world. That is part of the doctrine of the Christ. Now what is John referencing when he calls Jesus the Lamb of God?

Go to Genesis 22. Genesis 22:7: "And Isaac spake unto Abraham his father, and said, My father: and he said, Here am I, my son. And he said, Behold the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?" This is the great picture we see in the Old Testament of a father being willing to sacrifice his son. If you are a parent in this room, the most painful thing to you would be being willing to sacrifice your child. God the Father sacrificing his son is the most painful thing he could possibly do to himself — it shows the greatest love he could possibly show. As an individual, Jesus being willing to die was the greatest love he could show. But as a parent, laying down the life of your child — you would rather lay down your own life, would you not?

Verse 8: "And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together." A lamb is never actually offered in Genesis 22 — the animal offered is a ram. So what is Abraham saying in verse 8? God will provide himself a lamb. What he is saying is that God will be the one who dies and pays for our sins. We also get this picture of a father being willing to sacrifice his son. So what is John saying in John 1? He is saying that Jesus Christ is God in the Flesh, he is the Son of God, and he is going to die and pay for the sins of the whole world. That is part of the doctrine of the Christ.

Back to John 1, verse 34: "And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God." The Christ is going to be the Son of God. Verse 41: "He first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ." When I say we are preaching on the doctrine of the Christ, another way to word that is the doctrine of the Messiah. We are on letter C today, not M. In our modern day if you ask people about the Christ they would merely think of Jesus, but if you ask them about the Messiah they might say it is a future thing — they do not realise it is the same thing. The Messiah is the Christ.

There is a famous Independent Baptist preacher named Sam Gipp who made the statement from behind a Baptist pulpit: do not say Jesus is your Messiah — he is not my Messiah, he is the Messiah of the Jews. What? The Messiah is the Christ. When you say Jesus Christ, you are saying Jesus is the Messiah. And he is the Messiah of everybody — because it is all through Jesus Christ. The only way to heaven is through Jesus. He is the Messiah of the Muslims, the Christians, the Catholics, the Buddhists, the Hindus — because he died for the sins of the whole world, and whether or not you believe on him determines whether or not you go to heaven. He is the Christ of the whole world.

In Islam, Jesus is believed to be the Messiah. And yet is it not true that Muslims have such a problem with Jesus being the Son of God? They claim to believe the Old Testament. Did you miss the part about Genesis 22 and Abraham sacrificing his son? They think it is crazy to believe Jesus is the Son of God and the Trinity — but what I think is crazy is to say he is the Messiah but he is not God or the Son of God, when that is exactly what the Bible teaches in the Old Testament. That is part of the doctrine of the Christ. It makes no sense to say he is the Messiah but he is not God, because all throughout the Old Testament it shows the Messiah is going to be God.

The article on Islam also says the Quran asserts that Jesus was not crucified, nor died on the cross, but was miraculously saved by God. Let me ask you — how are you a Messiah if, instead of actually dying for the sins of the world as the Bible teaches in the Old Testament, you are just miraculously saved by God? How are you a Christ? How did you do anything more significant than Moses if you did not die for the sins of the world? To say he is the Messiah means he died for the sins of the world, that he is God in the Flesh, the Son of God. If he was miraculously saved by God, why would he be the Messiah? How did he save his people if he did not die for them? It does not make any sense. The doctrine of the Messiah, the doctrine of the Christ, teaches that he is going to be the Son of God, he is going to be God, he is going to be the Lamb of God, he is going to take away the sin of the world.

The Qualifications of the Christ

Now as I said so far, the doctrine of Christ teaches that the Christ, the Messiah, is going to be God in the Flesh, the Son of God, he is going to take away the sin of the world, he is going to be the Lamb of God. But how do you have any proof that that is Jesus? Somebody could show up and say I am God in the Flesh. Do not people do that? The Bible says there are going to be false christs — there always have been, there always will be. What makes Jesus different from all of those people? Well, there are other things in the doctrine of Christ that were known to show us who he was when he came.

Matthew 2:1: "Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem, saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him." Obviously these wise men had understood something about the deity of Christ — they are coming to worship before a baby. They understand this is God in the Flesh, they have come to worship and recognise him as the newborn king. They know he is God, born King of the Jews. Notice the reaction from Herod in verse 3: "When Herod the king had heard these things, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him." Why is Herod troubled? He would not care that Jesus is the Son of God, he would not care that Jesus is God or the Saviour. What he cares about is — wait, King of the Jews? I am the king. That is what he is upset about.

Now of course there was confusion about the doctrine of the Christ, because we understand there are two comings. He came the first time as a Saviour; he is going to come the next time as the king and ruler. But even though this doctrine existed, people get confused on it. It is easy for us to look back and see it all clearly. But as you are reading Old Testament scriptures and you see he is going to die for everyone, he is going to be the Son of God, and he is going to be the king — how does this all work together? Herod gathers all the chief priests and scribes together and demands where Christ should be born. When he says that, he is not asking where Jesus was born — he is asking where the Christ is supposed to be born according to the scriptures. And they said unto him in verse 5: "In Bethlehem of Judaea: for thus it is written by the prophet."

One of the qualifications in the doctrine of Christ is that he is going to be born in Bethlehem. That narrows down the possibilities considerably. A lot of people say they are God, a lot of people say they are the Son of God or the Saviour — and yet none of them were born in Bethlehem. If somebody comes to you and says I believe I am God in the Flesh, ask them — were you born in Bethlehem? No? Well, you are either just confused or a reprobate. Because you have to be born in Bethlehem. That is one of the qualifications, and it is not vague — it was clearly known. Verse 6: "And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda, art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel."

Go to Micah chapter 5, which is where they are quoting from. Micah 5:2: "But thou, Beth-lehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." The Messiah, the Christ, is going to be born in Bethlehem. And the wise men completely understand this — they are not just worshipping a normal man, they are worshipping God. What does it mean when it says from everlasting? It teaches that the Messiah is going to be God in the Flesh. Why? Because he was not created. He is from everlasting. All of us in this room had a moment we were born. Now, physically Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary, and he was all God and all man — but Jesus has been around from the very beginning. He was not created by God. He is God. God has always been a Trinity — it always existed, always will exist. He is from everlasting. So this verse they are quoting about the doctrine of the Christ teaches that the Christ is going to be God in the Flesh. The wise men completely understand this.

We believe what we believe by faith, and God expects us to walk by faith. But look at these cults where some person says he is God or he is a modern-day prophet. What proof do they have? Why would anyone believe that? It is ludicrous. But that is not the same thing as Jesus. When he came, it was not just that he said I am God and you just have to believe it. There is actual proof. The fact that he was born in Bethlehem was one of the prerequisites.

Now a website from Jews for Judaism argues against this. The article misquotes the reference — it says Micah 5:1, when it is Micah 5:2 — and then changes from everlasting to from ancient days, which is what modern versions also say. Well, Brother Stucky, how do you know which is right — the King James or the modern versions? Considering that the doctrine of the Christ through all the verses we have looked at shows he is going to be God in the Flesh, it would not make sense to say from ancient days, implying he was created, because the doctrine shows he is going to be God. Everlasting as the King James says is correct. The article also states that except for the birth reference in Luke 2, everything points to Jesus being from Nazareth — basically saying we do not really know if he was born in Bethlehem. But King Herod seemed to know. His religious scholars seemed to know. They said very clearly: Bethlehem. And Jesus being known as someone from Nazareth does not change his birthplace, any more than me being known as someone from West Virginia changes the fact that I was actually born in Iowa — I just moved away before I was one year old. Where you are from and where you are born are different things.

The article further says that being born in Bethlehem is of questionable value in establishing Messianic credentials for Jesus. They say maybe he was born in Bethlehem, but there are so many things he did not fulfil that it cannot matter. That is a strange argument. It seemed pretty important to Herod. It seemed pretty important to his religious scholars. The Messiah will be born in Bethlehem was a sure thing, not a maybe. And when you ask them to name all those things he supposedly did not fulfil, they say so many — but they cannot give you a clear one. It is the same thing as when people say there are so many verses that say you have to repent of your sins to be saved — can you give me one? There are just so many. They repeat the claim but they cannot produce the verse.

The other thing they get wrong is the number of comings. How many comings are there of Jesus? Two — first coming and second coming. They get confused because they say he did not rule his people, he did not become the king. Yes — because there are two comings. And here is the interesting thing: Judaism may have partially figured this out, because they developed the concept of Messiah ben Joseph — a suffering servant — and Messiah ben David — a kingly ruler. It is like, why do you not believe it is Jesus then? You understood from the Old Testament that there would be a saviour and then a kingly ruler — so what are you missing? He was born in Bethlehem. That is a pretty strong proof.

The Virgin Birth

Go to Isaiah 7. Another qualification of the doctrine of the Christ. Isaiah 7:14: "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel." A virgin is going to conceive and have a child. That really narrows down the possibilities. There are some candidates if you are born in Bethlehem, but you do not have too many people even claiming to have been born of a virgin. The closest thing is people who try to deify Alexander the Great — they say his mother was struck with a lightning bolt and then she was pregnant with Alexander. But she was not a virgin at that time; she had already slept with her husband. That is not a virgin birth. A virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Emmanuel. Matthew 1:22–23 tells us what that means: "Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us." Once again, that gives us the idea of the Christ being God in the Flesh. This was known, this was taught in the Old Testament. Those that were actually saved and reading their scriptures would have understood these things.

Now what would modern Jews say? They try to explain away this verse. You say you believe the Old Testament — but not the actual Christ that is mentioned from Genesis to Malachi. Here is what modern Judaism is saying: he is not going to be God, no miraculous birth, he is not going to be the Son of God, he is not going to die for the sins of the world. What Messiah are you talking about? Because the doctrine of the Christ taught that he is going to be the Saviour. It honestly makes more sense for Islam to say he is the Messiah but he is not God and not the Son of God, than for Judaism to say that — because Judaism says they still believe the Old Testament and are looking for the Messiah. But the Old Testament that they say they believe teaches very clearly what the doctrine of the Christ involves: born in Bethlehem, born of a virgin, God in the Flesh, the Son of God, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.

Jesus Declared He Was the Christ

People claim that Jesus never said he was God, never said he was the Messiah, never said he was the Christ. Let us see if that is true.

John 8:56–59: "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad. Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by." Before Abraham was, I am. That does not make grammatical sense — until you understand what he is saying. If you remember in your Old Testament, Moses said, what am I going to tell the people your name is? And what did God say to Moses? I AM THAT I AM. That is what you should tell them. So when Jesus says before Abraham was, I am, it is a clever way of saying I am God in the Flesh. And that is actually what a lot of people around that day understood it to mean — because notice what it says in verse 59. They took up stones to cast at him. Why are they trying to stone him? Because he blasphemed — according to them. He declared himself to be God. And then he just goes through the midst of them. How do you get through the midst of 20 people trying to grab you? I believe this is a miracle. He says I am God in the Flesh, they try to kill him, and then — where did he go? Just passed through the midst of them. Another proof right there.

Go to Daniel 9. The doctrine of the Christ teaches that the Christ is going to be God, the Son of God, taking away the sins of the world. And Jesus said that throughout his life. When Jesus Christ makes statements that he is the Messiah or the Christ, he is saying he is God, he is the way to heaven. Daniel 9:25–26: "Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself." What does it mean to be cut off? It means to die — to be killed. The Messiah, the Christ, is going to be killed. But not for himself. Why did Jesus die? Not for himself. He died for me, he died for you, he died for the sins of the whole world. He did not die for himself. He willingly became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Not for himself. That is not something a lot of people are going to do. Most people will not willingly die for somebody else. When Jesus was around, you could question the Virgin birth, you could question being born in Bethlehem — and then here is another proof: he is going to die but not for himself. And when he died it was like he did not mind dying. Obviously he went through the pain, but I am saying he willingly did it. Pilate gets frustrated with him because this is not the way people normally speak — people are usually begging for their life. Not Jesus. Because he was born to die upon Calvary.

Go to John 4. Two references where Jesus clearly says he is the Messiah, he is the Christ. John 4:25–26: "The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things. Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he." This woman understands that Messiah is the Christ. And as an unsaved person she had an understanding that the Christ is going to be God, he is going to be omniscient, he is going to know everything. She has this understanding because the doctrine of the Christ taught it. And then she went her way into the city and said: "Come, see a man, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ?" She understood before she got saved that the Christ is going to know everything, he is going to be God in the Flesh. And when Jesus proclaims it after telling her all this information about herself, she says, is not this the Christ? And Jesus said in verse 26: I that speak unto thee am he. And yet people say Jesus never claimed to be the Messiah.

I was literally in a church one time and a person came to the pastor after the sermon and argued that Jesus never taught he was the Messiah. Why would a first-time visitor walk into a church and go up to the pastor with that? But the pastor showed him this verse and one other, and then the man said, well, I guess I was wrong. And then the pastor immediately told him to leave and never come back to the church. If somebody came into our church and tried to say Jesus is not the Christ, just get out of here and join the Muslims or the Jews, because we believe that Jesus is the Christ. Do not come in here and blaspheme our Saviour. People might say the pastor was too harsh. No, he did the right thing. What was that first-time visitor going to try to teach the second time he came?

Mark 14:61–62: "But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed? And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. Then the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any further witnesses? Ye have heard the blasphemy." Why do they say it is blasphemy? Because he is declaring himself to be God. When he says I am the Christ, that is what he is saying — I am eternal, I am God in the Flesh, I am the Son of God. Because that was the doctrine associated with the Christ. And he said you are going to see me sitting on the right hand of power — a powerful way to say: you can kill me right now, but we will see what happens one day. Every knee is going to bow. Verse 64: "Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And they all condemned him to be guilty of death."

This doctrine of the Christ is something that was prophesied all throughout the Old Testament, and for thousands of years they were looking forward to this day. There would have been sermon after sermon preached about it — this is what we are looking for. In our modern day it is not exactly the same thing, but we preach about the second coming, and there is confusion about it because we see through a glass darkly. But those that actually knew their God and were doing exploits for him — like Daniel, who understands prophecy pretty well — they would have understood what it says in Genesis 22, in Isaiah 7:14. They would have understood this doctrine. And you see even unsaved people in the New Testament having an understanding that the Christ is going to know all things, he is going to be omniscient, he is going to be God, he is going to die for the sins of the world. They did not necessarily have all these things perfectly put together the way we do today looking back 2,000 years. But they understood from the doctrine that the Christ is going to be the Saviour, God, the Son of God, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.

Conclusion

What proof do you have that it is Jesus? Born of a virgin — that narrows it down to one candidate. Born in Bethlehem. Died but not for himself. And then all throughout the Old Testament it talks about the Living God, the Living God, the Living God — and Jesus said I am the resurrection and the life, I am the way, the truth, and the life. What he is teaching in those verses is: I am God in the Flesh, I am the Living God. And when he rose again from the dead — that is proof he is the Living God. And yet the Jews say, well, what sign do you show us? Born of a virgin, born in Bethlehem, died but not for himself, rose again from the dead — it makes no sense that they would reject Jesus as being the Christ. It is ridiculous. He gave every sign you could possibly want.

But here is what you need to understand: you can give people all the signs in the world and it does not mean they are going to get saved. Because even though our faith is not a blind and stupid faith — our faith makes sense — it is still something we take by faith. It makes sense. I think you would be an idiot not to believe that Jesus is the Christ when you see all these things. But there are people who just choose to be stubborn, no matter what evidence you give them. Make no mistake about it: Jesus proved himself to be the Christ. Living a perfect life. Dying for our sins. All the miracles. And very specific things — born in Bethlehem, born of a virgin, resurrected himself from the dead, and died but not for himself.

Dear Heavenly Father, thank you for allowing us to be here on Christmas day and being able to celebrate the life and death of Jesus Christ and what he did for us. Thank you for sending your Son to die and pay for our sins — to be cut off but not for himself, to die for our sins when we did not deserve it. Help us to understand what this Christmas season is about. It is not about us. It is about your Son Jesus Christ who died and paid for our sins. We pray these things in Jesus' name. Amen.