"Questions and Answers" by Hiram Kemp and Neal Pollard

Bear with me, I've got 3 gadgets up here and I'm trying to figure them

out. Good evening, everybody. Thank you

for coming out. It's a good Sunday evening crowd. Glad that

you're here. As Neil mentioned this morning, this has

become a regularity for this congregation to

periodically engage in a period of question and answers.

This congregation provides great questions.

Tonight is no exception. This congregation also has

a couple of guys that give great answers from the Word of God, and we're

certainly blessed to have them. So, we've got 10

questions tonight, again, very good questions. So,

without any further ado, we'll go ahead and get right into it.

And Neil, I believe you have the

first one tonight. How can we be sure when

commands in the Bible are given as cultural

and not as law? I think this is a

very crucial and basic question to how we

interpret the Scriptures, because Scripture was written

in another time and another place by people

who spoke different languages originally. And customs,

cultural norms change in places and time. So the

question becomes, when we encounter something in Scripture, when are we looking at something

that is cultural and not applicable to us? Or when

we look at something, when does it go beyond the culture? We might use the

word transcend or override the culture. I think before we

get to the heart of our question, we all need to understand

that culture is going to have some bearing on commands. A lot of the commands

in the Bible. Let me give you just a couple of examples to kind of

represent the point. The command comes in 1 Timothy

1 Timothy 2:9

2:9 for the woman of God to be modest.

Now that command is going to be stuck into a

cultural context necessarily. If you think back 150

years ago, what the culture would have said was modest

would be completely different. For example, A woman's ankle could not be shown or

it would be immodest. But when it comes to how we

look at the way that culture evolves, there are

biblical principles that are going to influence that. And so, we are not going to

ever arrive, or we should never arrive, at a place where what we choose

to do by way of modesty is something that would

conflict with what the Word of God has to say. So, there are the principles

of purity and holiness and brotherly love that are going to influence

us in some cases to be countercultural on that, but the culture affects that.

Or how about good manners? 1 Peter 2:12, we're to conduct ourselves

1 Peter 2:12

excellently among the Gentiles, and that takes in a lot,

even a lot more than manners, but manners differ from one place to another.

So culture impacts some of the things

that we are told by way of commands. But as I mentioned a moment ago,

commands override the culture.

There are times where the culture wants to do things. You think back in the

first century, it was cultural norms to engage

in having multiple wives or to ignore the poor.

And of course, the Christian couldn't do that in those settings. And today you would

think about some practices that are cultural norms. Abortion is legal in

our country. Fornication is commonly practiced. And yet

that goes against the norm, the law of Scripture. So how can we go

to passages and to be able to determine when it's binding

on us today and it's not simply cultural. This is not exhaustive,

we can't be, but let me give you some principles that I think will help

with regard to that. If Scripture is telling us something that's

universal in its scope, then it is binding. It's not

just cultural. And I'll give you a couple of examples. In Acts 2:38-39,

Acts 2:38–39

you have the folks on Pentecost being told to repent and be baptized every one

of them in the name of Christ for the remission or forgiveness of sins,

and you'll receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. The promise is unto you

and your children and them that are afar off, even as

many as the Lord our God shall call. Not just the folks present on

Pentecost, but all folks. Or how about in Acts 17:30

Acts 17:30

where we see that the time of ignorance God once overlooked, but now

commands all men everywhere to repent. It's a universal

principle. Not just for the folks on Mars Hill, but for everybody.

Also, if it's a timeless principle, that is, that if it's not for just

one place and one time, then it is not cultural, it's something

that's binding on us. I think of Noah, who's told in

Genesis 9:6 not to shed blood. If you shed blood

Genesis 9:6

of someone, then that blood will be required of you because man is made in

the image of God. This is before the old law and the

death penalty and the avenger of death. And so this is a principle

that applies to all times. And some other examples would be marriage,

Matthew 19:8. We'll talk about that more in another question.

Matthew 19:8

But Jesus says, Moses, because of the hardness of your heart, permitted it to be

so, but from the beginning it was not this way. So he steps outside

of that culture and he says, this is not a time-sensitive or

in this culture only. 1 Timothy 2:12 would be another example.

1 Timothy 2:12

There'd be other passages that would say that. And so that's something

else that's a consideration for us.

Another consideration as to whether it's cultural versus whether it's

normative is, are there exceptions to it?

So if there's a command in the New Testament and we don't see an exception

somewhere else, then perhaps we see this as something that crosses

that boundary. Examples of some that would be both.

1 Timothy 2:12, a woman is not to have

1 Timothy 2:12

authority over the man or to— she's to learn quietly and submissively.

Are there any exceptions to this in the New Testament? There's not.

So then that becomes the practice. Romans 16:16 says,

Romans 16:16

greet one another with a holy kiss. Is there an exception to

this? Yes, in 3 John 14, when I see you face to face.

Or Galatians 2:9, I'm going to extend to you the right hand of fellowship.

Galatians 2:9

There's more than one way to greet. And so we're not bound by the holy

kiss. Same with other cultural

examples that we might give, like the head covering.

1 Corinthians 11:5-16, at Corinth, this was a sign

1 Corinthians 11:5–16

of submission. A woman in the public assemblies was to cover her head.

But 1 Timothy 2:9, 1 Peter 3:3 shows us

1 Timothy 2:9 1 Peter 3:3

they didn't cover their heads where Peter addressed, or to the church at

Ephesus in 1 Timothy 2:9. And so it's a cultural thing,

1 Timothy 2:9

it's not a binding thing. How about singing?

Ephesians 5:19, Colossians 3:16.

Ephesians 5:19 Colossians 3:16

Are there any exceptions to that? And we don't see that. And so the practice

is to sing in the custom of the church or a cappella because

there is not an exception. So this just begins. There's a whole lot more to

say about that. But we've got to be able to notice that there are times

when principles override the culture, and we're

going to go with what God's Word says regardless of what culture we're in.

Thank you. Hiram? Okay, thank you.

All right, Hiram has the second question tonight.

I'm not sure I've seen this discussed before in church,

but it says, is the Shroud of Turin authentic? Could it be?

Is it a matter of fellowship? Okay,

so first things first, I'm going to answer the last part of this question.

Is it a matter of fellowship? The answer is absolutely not. It's not a

matter of fellowship. If you're unfamiliar with what the Shroud of Turin is, um,

it's also called the Holy Turin or the Holy Shroud

by some people. It's an artifact that's been found, and some

people believe because of an image that is on this garment, on this

linen garment, that it depicts the face and body of Jesus,

and that it is the very linen shroud that was placed in the empty tomb.

And so people that are on the side of believing it's authentic point to

gospel passages where the shroud is mentioned.

You think about Matthew 27:59, Mark 15:46,

Matthew 27:59 Mark 15:46

Luke 23:53, and John 19:40.

Luke 23:53 John 19:40

All 4 gospel accounts tell us that when Joseph of Arimathea buried

Jesus, he also wrapped his body in this linen cloth,

or some translations go with the linen shroud. It was first displayed

in a church in France in, I believe, 1534, and there are just varying ideas

on whether or not people think it's authentic. I believe it's been carbon dated

or tested twice, and from what I found and what I've seen in trying to

research and look up the Shroud of Turin, and you can do your own study

on this, the first time it was tested, it's been dated to the medieval period

of the 1500s. And so some people say that's where it is. Others say,

nope, there needs to be more work done. And we'll find that this is authentic.

This was the shroud or the cloth that Jesus was wrapped in, and it goes

back to 1st century times. Could it be authentic?

The answer to that question is possibly, yes. My conclusion, though,

is I don't believe it is. And here are some of the reasons why.

First, I believe so far all of the information we have

pointed to the medieval time period of the 1500s. Second,

the apostles never mentioned anything about having this cloth that was

wrapping— wrapped Jesus's body up. Nobody mentions this as being a part

of ancient artifacts that the New Testament authors say that they had or that they

pointed to. And in a more important way, I think throughout Scripture what you find

is God is really not a fan of leaving behind certain artifacts that his people

might end up worshiping in the process and trying to produce

artifacts in relation to truth. Think about 2 Kings 18:4. Moses lifts up

2 Kings 18:4

a bronze serpent in the wilderness, and people eventually take that and worship

it for a long time or use it in idol worship. And during the reign

of Hezekiah, it's ultimately destroyed. And last

but certainly not least, throughout the New Testament, the,

the focus of proof and evidence that's supposed to draw people

to the truth of the resurrection is really not any archaeological discovery

or ancient artifact. It's apostolic testimony based on these eyewitnesses,

2 Peter 2. Chapter 1, verse 16, 2 Peter 1:16-17.

2 Peter 1:16–17

Faith comes by hearing, Romans 10:17, and also by the

Romans 10:17

empty tomb and the proclamation of those who witnessed it and saw it, 1 Corinthians

1 Corinthians 15:1–10

15:1-10. And so the evidence in the New Testament is we walk by

faith and not by sight, not that we have this linen shroud that would clearly

evidence that Jesus was in this tomb and then raised from the dead, but instead

based on the proclamation of the gospel. And so that's what I think is in

relation to the Shroud of Turin. But there are prominent New Testament scholars

that think otherwise, and maybe some of you do too. I want to end where

we started. It's not a matter of fellowship. In the end, it really wouldn't make

a difference if we had it or if we didn't in the grand scheme of

things, because God has authorized the Scriptures, the New Testament, as the

final revelation of who Jesus is and why we should believe that he came,

he died, and that he rose from the dead. Thank you.

I agree with that in substance. I'm probably one who's a little bit more receptive

to the possibility of it. I would place it in the realm of other archaeological

discoveries that have been made that don't replace faith,

but that augment that. And as we get more sophisticated

in AI and some of the other innovations arrive that

may make people a little bit more jaded about discoveries, God seems to come along

sometimes and make those things available. But at the end of

the day, even if that's so, I agree with that last question. It's not a

matter of fellowship. And I agree very much with what's said, that the, the basis

of our faith needs not to be on archaeological discoveries,

but on the testimony of Scripture, because it's a far more sure witness

than anything outside of that, though we may look to other things.

Thank you. Okay, next one is for Neil.

Hebrews 10:26 states that if we sin willfully after

Hebrews 10:26

being baptized, there is no exception— the expectation of

forgiveness. Does that mean a person cannot repent and receive the grace

of God? What is real repentance? And Hebrews

Hebrews 10:26

10:26 says, for if we sin willfully after

we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice

for sins. So I think that the Hebrews

writer, and by the way, I don't— we don't know who it is. The name

Paul may come out of my mouth. It's just going to be an accident,

a slip. But the writer of Hebrews is writing

about 2 groups of people. And oftentimes writers do that. There in Hebrews,

you have those who have already fallen away, Jewish Christians who let external

pressures cause them to abandon the faith. You have

other passages in Hebrews like Hebrews 6:4-6 that would say something very similar.

Hebrews 6:4–6

What he seems to be dealing with in Hebrews chapter 10 is those who,

Hebrews 10 · chapter mention

this present participle here, they are going on and sinning willfully.

This is their present state. This is where they find themselves. And the

Hebrews writer describes what that looks like. They have counted

the covenant with which they were set apart by God an unholy thing.

They have trampled underfoot the Son of God. They've done despite to

the Spirit of grace. They have cast away their confidence. They have shrunk

back. He says in verse 35 and 39, There's this group

of people who have left the church and have gone back to where they had

come from. And in the condition in which they find themselves,

there is no sacrifice because the sacrifice only belongs

in Christianity. They've abandoned the sacrifice to go back to where there was

no sacrifice. So that described them as they were.

The Hebrews writer's writing this letter of exhortation, this sermon

indicates that he has a desire for everyone to

be back in faithful fellowship with one another and with God.

And so there's no indication that he's saying that this is an irreversible

situation, and it certainly would not synthesize

with the rest of the New Testament. It would not agree with

the heart and the mind of God. Why Luke 15,

where you have a prodigal who is in the father's house, who goes off and

has done certainly what the Hebrews writer is saying here, and has thrown everything

away, he comes back and what reception is he given?

Or you think about 1 John 1:9 where John is writing to

1 John 1:9

Christians and he is talking about how it's possible for them to come back.

And it was one of our memory verses this quarter, he is faithful and righteous

to forgive us of our sins. And so the Hebrews writer is

writing to those who are in a current state

of having abandoned the Lord. But if they'll come back, And the

Lord will receive them and will restore them. That's the heart of God. That's the

New Testament message. And the last question is,

what is real repentance? Well, first of all, that's something the Bible determines

for us. And we can— we're not necessarily

to be the analyst for that in others. If somebody's abandoned, has left the Lord,

and they come back. And by the way, church discipline. You have a man who

had his father's wife and had been withdrawn from Paul said

that they were to receive him back, 2 Corinthians chapter 2,

2 Corinthians 2 · chapter mention

when he had repented and been restored. Same thing in 2

Thessalonians 3 and verse 6. How do you treat somebody who is away from the

fold, who has left? You're to exhort them as a brother to get them back.

So the whole message of scripture is to get them back.

Repentance literally means to change the mind

that leads to a change of action. Best passage, there are others,

that combine all of what's involved in repentance is 2 Corinthians

2 Corinthians 7:10–11

7:10-11. It involves a godly sorrow that

leads to salvation, that repentance, and it proves itself.

It does everything it can to show the change of life.

Anything that's amiss, we try to make it right. That to me is repentance,

and that's what the Hebrews writer wants for them to exhibit. All right.

I'd just say on Hebrews 10:26 and other passages like it,

Hebrews 10:26

whenever you're reading in the Bible, whenever we're reading Scripture, and we

come across something that we think clearly just is contrary to everything else

we've read in Scripture, if there seems to be a major contradiction in passages—

on the one hand, God says He forgives us if we repent, and then Hebrews

Hebrews 10:26

10:26 says there's no longer any sacrifice for sins or forgiveness possible—

there needs to be some harmonizing on our part. The Bible's not in conflict with

itself. There must be something special going on in Hebrews 10:26, as Neil

Hebrews 10:26

mentioned, And this involves people who are living in such a way that they don't

want God's forgiveness. But Hebrews 10:26, just as an example,

Hebrews 10:26

but in a more general sense, whenever you're reading Scripture and you come across a

passage that seems to fly in the face of everything else you've read

and studied, especially about the character of God, it always means you need

to go back, we need to go back and rethink our interpretation of a passage

and make sure we're harmonizing those passages together. And maybe something unique

or the context is being dealt with in that passage And not that God

has somehow changed His personality and His character concerning His

desire to forgive. Thank you. All right, Hiram,

this next one is for you. Question number 4,

explain 1 Timothy 2:8. What is meant by

1 Timothy 2:8

the lifting of holy hands? What about clapping hands

in worship? Is the Hebrew term yada justification

for this? And I'm sure my Hebrew is just right on there. It was spot

on, Chris. Perfect. All right, if you got your Bible out, go ahead and turn

to 1 1 Timothy 2:8. There are several aspects to this question, and I want

1 Timothy 2:8

to try to take them one by one as briefly as we can. The first

thing is 1 Timothy 2 and verse 8. 1 Timothy— Paul tells you he wrote

this book in chapter 3 and verse 15 so that Christians would know how to

behave themselves in the household of God, which is the church of the living God,

the pillar and the ground of truth. In this book where he's telling us how

to conduct ourselves in the household of God, in 1 Timothy 2, he talks

about how this ought to be done. And so 1 Timothy 2 1 through 4,

Paul tells Christians who they're to pray for and why.

He says pray for all people everywhere, government officials, so that we

can live a quiet and peaceful life in godliness in Christ Jesus. And then

in 1 Timothy 2:5-7, he talks about how all of this was made possible.

1 Timothy 2:5–7

Jesus is the one mediator between God and man, and in verses 6 and

7, he gave his life as a ransom to be testified of at the proper

time. And then our verse, in verse 8, after he says all of this,

he says, I would that men pray everywhere lifting up holy hands without wrath

and without doubting. In 1 Timothy 2:8, when Paul mentions this

1 Timothy 2:8

lifting up of holy hands, Paul's not really talking in this passage about

a prayer posture. He's talking about the holy life

that a person is supposed to live as they approach God in prayer. This is

sometimes called in more technical terms a synecdoche. And maybe you don't know

that term, but you know what a synecdoche is. It's where a part stands for

a whole or a whole stands for a part. So say somebody is working on

a job and the boss comes in and says, you know, we need some new

faces around here. He doesn't really mean we need new mugs. He means what?

We need new people. The face stands for everybody. Or suppose

you're on a ship and somebody says, all hands on deck. They don't just mean

the hands. They mean the totality of the person. And so in 1 Timothy 2:8,

1 Timothy 2:8

when Paul says, I would that men pray everywhere, lifting up holy

hands, He's using a synecdoche. The hands represent the entire

person, and Paul's saying, if you're going to lead in prayer as a Christian man,

I want you to do so with a holy life, and that's symbolized primarily

by the hands. And this is done throughout Scripture. In Psalm 24:4,

Psalms 24:4

the Bible talks about approaching God with clean hands and a pure heart.

And in James 4:8, James says, cleanse your hands, you sinners,

James 4:8

and purify your hearts, you double-minded. James doesn't mean follow the CDC

code, wash and sanitize. When he says clean hands, he means a pure life.

And that's what Paul's talking about in 1 Timothy 2 and verse 8.

Now pivoting from that, in relation to holy hands in general

though, I think this is dealing with a prayer posture. And I'll just say

this about what the Bible teaches concerning this: there are various

prayer postures mentioned throughout the Bible, and every time we see them, they're always

meant to communicate something about the person approaching

God in prayer and what they're trying to communicate. So, for example, sometimes a person

has their face lifted up and it's symbolizing I'm looking up

to God, dependence toward God. Psalm 121:1,

Psalms 121:1

John 17:1, Jesus prayed that way. Sometimes a person

John 17:1

is on their knees and it's submission and it's suggesting help

and worship. Acts 7:60, that's what Stephen does before

Acts 7:60

he dies. Or a person may be laid out on the ground as Jesus

was in Matthew 26:39, and that also also symbolizes submission

Matthew 26:39

and this idea that, God, I completely lay myself before you and I need your

help. And then there's the posture of lifting one's hands in

prayer, and it's a biblical prayer posture. You find it in the Old Testament,

Psalm 134:2, Psalm 141:2,

Psalms 134:2 Psalms 141:2

but also in the New Testament, Luke 24:50,

Luke 24:50

before Jesus ascends, he lifts his hands and blesses the people

as he does that. And so So, it is a prayer posture. It's not commanded,

neither is it expected that everybody's going to do that. I think when you think

about a worship service especially, congregational and cultural practice

do matter. And so, if I'm in a place where that's not happening,

then I don't think we ought to poke anybody in the eye and introduce something

that would be foreign or would be a stumbling block. But I also think just

because something's foreign to us doesn't necessarily mean it's foreign

to Scripture. And there are different ways to raise hands. The raising of hands doesn't

have to be straight up vertically like this. It was often done in the ancient

world with this posture, symbolizing several things. First, there's nothing in

my hands, nothing corrupt, nothing immoral, nothing impure.

But secondly, and we sing a song about this,

nothing in my hands I bring. God, I have nothing with which to recommend

myself to you. I'm in complete need and dependence. On who you are.

And so the lifting up of hands in prayer, it's an ancient biblical practice

with precedent both in the Old and in the New Testament. And again, I think

people do it today for various reasons, but we shouldn't try to impugn on the

motives of others. We just simply have to echo what the Bible says on it.

And the last thing, hand clapping in worship. Hand clapping in worship,

whether you mean accompanying the singing and song or in

response to the sermon, so far as I can tell from the New Testament,

it is an unbiblical practice. Christians are to sing. Our worship

is to be vocal, Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16.

Ephesians 5:19 Colossians 3:16

And preaching is really not a performance, a performative act where we would

clap in applause. But if we do agree or affirm something being said

in the sermon, the biblical response is to simply utter an affirmation

of amen, 1 Corinthians 14 and verse 16, and that would be

sufficient. And I don't think I can improve on Chris's Hebrew, but the

Hebrew term yada It doesn't communicate anything about hand

clapping in worship or praise. It often is used in the Old Testament

explicitly for verbal praise, verbal expression

in song or in prayer and praise toward God. So when you're talking about a

worship service, hand clapping in worship is never

mentioned or authorized as an accompaniment to singing. Neither is

it a biblical response to the preaching of God's Word. Thank you,

Neil. Okay. All right,

Neil, you have the next one, question number 5.

And I think this— we're all impacted by this at some point or another dealing

with it. Is it wrong to attend church service with a friend that

is not a Christian or with a friend that attends a denomination?

Now, I, I grasp the, the very serious nature

of this, and so I'm going to I thought about there,

there are some complicated factors that one has to overcome in

order to justify doing this. And I'm going to put it in the form of

questions that I think we need to ask ourselves to help us to,

to form our decisions with regard to this. And to me,

when you put those together, it makes it very difficult for us to

answer in any way other than yes, it would be wrong. And here

are the, here are the questions I think we need to ask. Number one,

We need to ask, is it okay to go and worship God in

a way that violates his will? The Bible's very

clear on what God wants in worship, and everything

that we do in worship needs to be put through the filter of Scripture.

And if there is a place where we are going where they're going to be

violating that, where they're teaching for doctrines the commandments of men, Matthew 15:8-9,

Matthew 15:8–9

then we should never want to be anywhere worshiping God in a way that

violates his will. Number 2, what will engaging in such

worship do in your effort to teach that how one worships God

matters? And so as I'm trying to determine this, what will my

presence there do in the ongoing effort that I'm trying to make in

order to get them to obey the gospel and simply be a New Testament

Christian? That would be a problem. Number 3, would you be going in order

to avoid an uncomfortable conversation or to avoid being seen

as judgmental or harsh. I think this is at the heart of that because none

of us want to be perceived in that way. And so this peer pressure that

we face may push us in a direction

that we know is inconsistent with what the New Testament teaches.

You think about Romans 12:1-2, we're not to be conformed

Romans 12:1–2

to this world, but to be transformed by the renewing of our mind so

that we may prove what is the good and acceptable and perfect will of God.

Not only that, but Ephesians 5:11-12, though it's talking

Ephesians 5:11–12

about moral issues there, says that we're not to have fellowship with the

unfruitful works of darkness, but rather to reprove them. And so, we're not going to

put ourselves in a place where because

we feel this peer pressure, we're going to acquiesce and do something

that we— just to avoid conflict. Number 4,

is there another way to try and show them respect for their religious convictions

or to reach common ground that does not require us to compromise God's

Word. Here's where I think we find ourselves a lot of times, and that's in

1 Corinthians 9:19-22. We want to be all

1 Corinthians 9:19–22

things to all men. Now, that means that there is a certain

amount of accommodation, but that accommodation ends with violating

the will of God. For example, Paul says, to those who are without law,

I became as one without law, yet not being without law, but being

under the law of Christ. So Paul says, my accommodation does

not allow me to cross lines that God has laid down in scriptures.

And then number 5, we always want to be wise and never do anything that

makes our job of reaching our lost friends harder or that creates

stumbling blocks. Our impulse is to try to reciprocate when

someone has done something for us and has come with us, but we cannot

reciprocate in a way that ever causes us to violate God's commands

in any way. And that's how I would answer that. Ira, you want to add?

I would just say, Neil talked about this at the very end. Sometimes it is

this response, it seems unfair. We want people to come with us,

and we should also be willing to go with them. And I would just say,

especially as it relates to evangelism, as Neil already mentioned,

sometimes the response is nobody has to go with anybody. Maybe they

don't go with me and I don't go with them, and I say, hey,

you don't have to violate your conscience. I don't have to violate my conscience.

We can sit down and study the Bible together. I've talked with people

and we'll say, well, I want to go to check it out so I can

point out the error. But in 2026, we can just watch

it online. I already see what you're doing in worship. You can see what we're

doing in worship. And then let's just both, as unbiasedly as we

can, try to sit down and open the Bible and study together. And so if

we can do that, we can still reach the same goal without physically being present.

And sometimes the answer is Well, maybe they don't come with me to worship,

and that's okay. That's one opportunity or method of evangelism, but it's not

the only one. We can just sit down without going to anybody's church service and

let's study the Bible and then agree to hopefully attend where the Bible is being

practiced in its fullness. Good answers. All right,

Hiram, I think you're next here.

How do we have faith that God hears our pleas for His

help? This is

a struggle as we pray, and I don't know about you, but surely there have

been times in my life praying and you just are wondering, though you're a Christian,

is anybody on the other side listening? And how can you have assurance that God

hears you? Well, there are several lines of reasoning that I'll go through.

The first is the Bible regularly and repeatedly tells Christians

to cast their cares on God, 1 Peter 5:7,

1 Peter 5:7

or to come before God with our anxieties and our concerns, Philippians 4:6-7.

Philippians 4:6–7

And the Bible also affirms that when we do this and when we're righteous,

and I just take righteous to mean we belong to God and we behave like

we do. And the Bible says that the eyes of the Lord are over the

righteous and his ears are open to our prayers, 1 Peter 3:12.

1 Peter 3:12

Psalm 62:8 says, trust in the Lord at all times.

Psalms 62:8

Pour out your heart to God. God's a refuge for us, or God is our

refuge and strength, a very present help in times of trouble. Psalm 46:1.

Psalms 46:1

So the first thing is we can have faith that God hears our pleas for

his help because the Bible repeatedly tells us that he does. The Bible tells

us to pray and reminds us that God will hear and that God will help.

But secondly, I think we need to appreciate and consider what it

means to pray in the name of Jesus. So to pray in

and through the name of Jesus is not just biblically how we sign off on

our prayers. To pray in the name of Jesus means we approach

God with Jesus as our mediator. And when we approach God, yes, by Jesus's

authority and with his permission, but Jesus is going in with us

into the throne room of God and granting us divine access. And so

at the end of John's Gospel, in John 14:14,

John 14:14

in John 16:23, and in John 16:24,

John 16:23 John 16:24

Jesus says several times, before this you've asked nothing in my

name, but ask and you will receive so that God's joy may be fulfilled in

you. Or God wants to hear from you in prayer, and when you ask in

my name, you receive as a Christian a hearing with God previously

unknown to humanity. And then third, and I would not

discount this, how do we have faith that God hears our pleas for his help?

Because you know that God has answered you so many other times in your life.

And I don't think that's merely anecdotal. Just think about your own life and times

you've prayed to God for specific things, and God has heard,

and God has intervened, and God has helped. In 2 Corinthians chapter 1,

2 Corinthians 1:9–11

verses 9 through 11, Paul says, we trust in the living God who delivered

us from so great a death, who does deliver, and we've set our hope on

God that he will deliver us yet again. So Paul looked at the threefold deliverance

of God— past, present— and that gave him hope and confidence

for the future. When Jacob stood before Pharaoh in Genesis 48

and verse 15, he says, the God of my fathers Abraham and Isaac,

and the God who has been my shepherd all my life long. And every

Christian, really every person in the world in a sense, could say that. God has

been our shepherd our whole life long. So if you have any doubts about,

does God hear me and my pleas for help? Look to the Scriptures that trust

and verify that He does. Remember, you approach Him not in your own name and

confidence, but in and through the name of Jesus. And then third, just take

a look not only at all the prayers He's answered in the past biblically for

others, But in your own life, how many times have you prayed to God and

it's been made apparent, it's evident, the only way I got out of this or

the response that I received is a clear indication that God does hear,

that God does answer, even when we don't know it or appreciate

it or sometimes agree with or like the answer. In Psalm 77:19,

Psalms 77:19

the psalmist says, God, your way is through the flood and through the waters,

and you are ever present with me, though your feet I see them not.

And the psalmist is saying, God, you've been right there all along,

even in the times when your presence was not readily available,

even still you were with me. And that confidence is ours

in the new covenant to a greater degree. Neil?

I'll just say 1 John 5:14 explicitly

1 John 5:14

says, this is the confidence that we have in him. If we ask anything according

to his will, he hears us. And so he's told us he's going to do

that. And just as we can count on every promise that God gives, we can

count on this one. And so, I think that's wonderful

to know. Thank you. Neil has question

number 7. God's pattern and law for marriage is

the same from the beginning. It hasn't changed. Jesus taught the same thing.

How do we answer those who bring up those who had multiple wives but

were still described as righteous, such as,

Abraham, David, Jacob, et cetera.

So there's a lot of understanding in this question that really will kind of

help the answer. I really think that the heart of this answer is in Matthew

Matthew 19:3–9

19:3-9, where Jesus is tested by

the Pharisees and they want to know if it's lawful for a man to put

away his wife for any cause. And Jesus establishes

what God's original intent was, that from the beginning,

God made them male and female. And for this cause, a man shall leave his

father and mother and shall cleave unto his wife. And they shall be one flesh.

Well, they didn't like that answer. A lot of times folks don't like God's

answer and they want it to be broader than it is. And so they point

to the Law of Moses in which Deuteronomy

Deuteronomy 24:1–4

24:1-4 is being referenced that there would be a law of

divorcement, at least to free the man to be able to get married to someone

else. And there were certain restrictions in that, but it was a different

time under that law that permitted them to do so.

And even before that time, we've got to remember that God will

judge everybody that lives under the covenant in which they lived. So you think about

2 of the individuals, there was another one, I think Elkanah was on the original

question. And Elkanah and Jacob and Abraham,

Abraham and Jacob would've lived under the patriarchal age.

Elkanah and David would've lived under the Law of Moses. And in both of those

dispensations, God had this broader law that

allowed men out of the hardness of their hearts without the fullness of the revelation

we have in Christ to be able to have multiple wives or to have concubines.

There were a lot of other things that existed under those former covenants

that we would not try to press into the kingdom of Christ today. They were

going to be judged by the laws that they had and the commands that God

gave them. Whatever God permitted in the past, Jesus says,

Moses, because of the hardness of your heart, permitted it to be so.

But I say unto you, he's already taken them back to the Garden

of Eden and said, here's the original intention of God for marriage, one husband,

one wife for life. And just to remove all doubt,

he says, to be my follower, to be my disciple,

this is for everybody, whosoever we are, whatever had

been done in the past and called righteous, it's not going to be so under

the covenant of Christ. The old law, we're not under, we can't be under 2

at once, Romans 7:1-4. Christ nailed it to the cross, Ephesians 2

Romans 7:1–4

and Colossians 2. What we have is better, Hebrews 8:6-8.

Hebrews 8:6–8

And under our covenant, we go back to God's original design,

one husband, one wife for life, except for fornication and

death, where in those 2 circumstances, one, if they—

who they marry is permitted to be married, can be married again.

I mean, in addition to that, I would just say in reading the Old Testament

and looking at Abraham, David, and these others, every time somebody in

the Bible had more than one wife, it went terribly.

And God evidences this repeatedly. Like, it's always bad— Jacob,

David, Abraham, Solomon. And so in historical narrative in

the Old Testament, God doesn't come out and say, thou shalt not, but he does

give a sampling size and say, look at how Jacob's life went when his

2 wives were competing about who could give him the most children. Look at David's

life. Look at what happened when Abraham went outside of God's will. So Jesus in

the New Covenant, as Neil mentioned, makes this evident. But also in the Old Testament,

God repeatedly shows nobody had things go well for them

when they married multiple people and practiced polygamy.

That's good. All right, Hiram, you get the next

one. It's a rather broad question here. Can you explain the

last 10 chapters of Ezekiel, such as the new temple,

the prince, water flowing from the temple, Etc.,

but just 10 chapters.

I'll say something about the prophets

in general, and then we'll apply it to Ezekiel. So when you get to the

major prophets— Isaiah, Jeremiah,

Ezekiel, Lamentations, Daniel— the major

prophets are typically— and the minor prophets too, but let's just stick with the major

for now— they're typically doing 3 things. And I think if we get these 3

things down, it'll help clear up some of what's happening at the end of Ezekiel.

On the first hand, the prophets are typically telling God's people that because

of their sin and their idolatry, they're going into slavery— Babylonian slavery,

Assyrian slavery or captivity— and that's their punishment from God. And that's normally

pretty apparent to people that read these books. But then there are 2 additional things

being said after that slavery time period or that punishment.

Number one, after you go into the captivity, the slavery,

whether it's Babylon or Assyria, better days are coming.

God's going to restore Jerusalem. He's going to restore the temple.

Jerusalem is going to be this great and awesome place. And then in addition

to that, there are capital B better days that are coming that point past

that time period to the Messiah and to the New Covenant. And those

days are also described using the same terminology: new temple,

new priesthood. Things are going to be great. It's going to be glorious. The challenge

in reading the prophets though is that the lowercase b better days that are going

to happen in the land of Jerusalem when they come back from slavery, and the

capital B better days that are going to come in the New Covenant are often

described using the same terminology. And so the question becomes, well, which one is

the prophet talking about? And I think there are some helps that can

clear this up for us as we read. The first thing is there's this phrase

that's typically used in the prophets, and whenever you see this in the prophets,

it's normally talking about capital B better days,

Messianic time period with Jesus. When He fixes everything,

and it's the phrase, in that day. When you're reading the prophets and you

read, in that day, that's an indication that He's talking about not

in that 24-hour period, but in that Messianic age, here are the great

things that are going to happen. Then secondly, just look at the New Testament itself,

and does it say anything about the things that are taking place in the prophets

and describe the New Covenant age as fulfilling those things?

And then look at the context of the passage.

So quickly, with relation to Ezekiel in the last 10 chapters— the new

temple, the prince, the water flowing from the temple— I think when you read Ezekiel,

really chapter 40 down through 48, it becomes pretty clear that

the things Ezekiel is talking about— challenging, difficult, tedious,

no doubt— he's looking forward to New Covenant and New Testament times for

the following reasons. The temple that Ezekiel describes as being built,

if you read and study the dimensions, it was never rebuilt in the

time of Nehemiah, Ezra, and those that returned. Furthermore, it's so massive

it wouldn't fit in physical Palestine. However, it does

nearly word for word depict the very same temple that John

describes at the end of the Bible in Revelation 21 and 22. His description

of the heavenly city is nearly identical to that which Ezekiel mentions

in Ezekiel 40 through 48. On top of that, Jesus describes himself

as the temple John 2:19-22.

John 2:19–22

The flowing waters that will flow from the temple— Jesus says, I am

going to provide living water, John 4:10-14. And describes

John 4:10–14

his people as the royal priesthood, the new temple, the holy house of

God, 1 Peter 2:5-9. So the last 10

1 Peter 2:5–9

chapters of the book of Ezekiel is challenging and difficult reading, and you might be

reading this and saying, when is this happening? What is this about? If you keep

in mind that the prophets are sometimes talking about a lowercase b better days coming,

physically going to happen in Jerusalem after the slavery that happened in

the days of Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zerubbabel. But in addition to that, there's a capital

B Better Day coming in Messianic times.

You'll see that much of that points forward to the time

of Jesus Christ as the Messiah. I'll just say, the more you read the Old

Testament closely and carefully, you'll see that God really has more

Easter eggs tucked in the Old Testament than a Taylor Swift album.

I mean, God just plants all sorts of things that are going to

happen eventually that point to the time of Jesus Christ. And I think the end

of Ezekiel is no different. Thank you, Neil. You got any Taylor Swift

references you'd like to add? Who is that? No,

I was hoping you would tell me. Okay.

All right. Question number 9.

For Neil. In Romans

Romans 16:1

16:1, Paul calls Phoebe a diakonos.

How was that pronunciation? Perfect. Deacon, servant, or minister.

It is the same word he used in 1 Timothy 3:8-13.

1 Timothy 3:8–13

How do we respond to those who use this passage as

biblical justification for female deacons and

claim we are ignoring it? Romans 16:1 says,

Romans 16:1

I commend to you Phoebe, our sister, who is

a servant of the church in Cenchreae.

Go ahead and read verse 2 as well. Okay. That you may receive her

in the Lord in a manner worthy of the saints and assist

her in whatever business she has need of you. For indeed,

she has been a helper of many and of myself also.

Okay. So Paul, when he gets to Romans chapter 16, has an extended

Romans 16 · chapter mention

series of greetings. That begins with Phoebe and runs throughout the chapter.

And depending on if any of you are carrying an NIV,

you may see that the word deaconess is how

they translate diakonos. If you have a New American Standard

Bible, as I often use, it'll have a footnote or

a rendering there, a marginal note saying that, or deacon

or deaconess. This word diakonos is found 29

times in 27 verses. And not just with

this verse, but a word, but with any word that we're looking at, you've got

to look at how it's translated everywhere.

Instead of just focusing in on one, or in this case, 2 passages where

that word is used, and in that second passage, I think we can all agree

for reasons we'll look at in a moment that diakonos should

be translated deacons or this particular office. We've got

to look at how it's used throughout those other 27 times. 25 verses.

The word simply means, as it said there, servant and minister.

That is the more general way that it's translated. Typically,

that's how it is translated. For example, Jesus in

Matthew 20:26 and Matthew 23:11 says the same

Matthew 20:26 Matthew 23:11

thing, that if you want to be great, you have to be a servant.

That's the word, same word that's used right there. In John 2:5,

John 2:5

you have the servants at the wedding feast at Cana

who fill up the jars, the water pots. That's the

word that's used to describe them. Even in Romans 13:4,

Romans 13:4

talking about those governmental officials whom God uses,

he calls them ministers. It's the same word that's used there.

So when a word is translated throughout the New Testament, you've got

to look at the context. And all of that comes together. All the uses

of any word form what we call a semantic range. And all that

means is the full way in which the word is used. We have that in

English. This is not Taylor Swift, but how about the word dog? That's a word

we use in English, and that word has a sense in which it means a

canine, but it also can mean some other things.

To talk about somebody who's a scoundrel, some will refer to them as a dog,

using the same English word in a different way. There was a time

some years ago when it was a colloquial term for a friend

or a buddy. What's up, dog? You know, and it's the same word and it's

used in a little bit of a different way. Or you can use it to

speak of a person generally. It's a lucky dog.

Same word, there's a range.

When we get to 1 Timothy 3:8-13, to go back

1 Timothy 3:8–13

to what was said a moment ago, you have the Apostle Paul laying down how

one is to behave in the household of God. He has dealt with the roles

of men, 1 Timothy 2:8, and women, 1 Timothy

1 Timothy 2:8 1 Timothy 2:9–15

2:9-15. Right on the heels of that, he gives

us qualifications for 2 official works in the

church, one being the elder in verse 1 through 7 of chapter 3, and then

for deacons in verse 8 through 13. In that

special class of qualifications, you have him saying that he is

to be the husband of one wife. It's the only list of qualifications in

the New Testament. Seems to be pointing to those who are men.

Somebody says, well, what about verse 11? Well, the word there is simply women.

You can make a stronger, stronger case that these women would be qualifications

for women who are wives of deacons, and they can't disqualify

their husbands through their behaviors, as it is to say that this is a list

of qualifications for a deacon or deaconess.

And so I think we read too much into the text, and even translators

have done that to say that this should be translated deaconess.

The way that it was read— did you read from the ESV? New King James.

New King James is a straightforward rendering

of that, a sensible translation that

she is a servant in the church in Cenchreae. Did she have some official

job that she did? It seems to be indicated not just here, but in 1

1 Timothy 5:10

Timothy 5:10, there are women who are widows who could be placed

on the roll or the register who had done certain works

and they could be paid for those things, or at least supported

in the work that they were doing. But there's no sense in which we

should look at this and say, this is an official work, this is an official

job. And it certainly doesn't seem to synthesize

or to agree with all that the New Testament says.

But everybody who is a Christian is

to be a servant of Christ. And it would be foolish for

us to ignore that in the work of the

church in any place I've ever been and that we would ever be, that work

could not get done without the active service and work of

women, as well as men who aren't married and men who

don't have children who are serving in some capacity. You think about every

major thing that's done at Cumberland Trace, the fingerprints of

women are all over that and it would not succeed, it could not

happen without them. But as to whether she serves

in an official capacity, in an appointed way,

I think we strain to say that that's what Romans 16:1 is saying.

Romans 16:1

Okay. Hiram, any— okay. All right. Hiram, the last

one will go to you. Explain Acts

Acts 21:17–25

21:17-25. Were the elders in Jerusalem

condoning Jews holding to the old law even

after they sent a letter to the Gentiles telling them they

did not need to hold to the old law.

Acts 21, starting in verse 17, says, and when he

had come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly. On the following day,

Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present. When he

had greeted them, he told in detail those things which God had done among

the Gentiles through his ministry. And when they heard it, they glorified

the Lord, and they said to him, you see, brother, how many myriads of Jews

there are who have believed, and they are all zealous

for the law. But they have been informed about you that

you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake

Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk

according to the customs. What then? The assembly must certainly

meet. For they will hear that you have come. Therefore,

do what we tell you. We have 4 men who have taken a vow.

Take them and be purified with them and pay their expenses so that they

may shave their heads and that all may know that those

things of which they are informed concerning you are nothing,

but that you yourself also walk orderly and keep the law. But concerning the

Gentiles who believe, we have written and decided that they should observe no

such thing, except that they should keep themselves from things offered

to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual

immorality. Okay, Acts 21:17-25.

Acts 21:17–25

Paul comes back from his 3rd missionary journey, and as he typically

does, he goes to Jerusalem to let them know about the great things God had

done in his travels with the Gentiles. And as Chris just read,

they hear it, they're excited, excited, but they say, Paul, we have a problem.

All these Jews know you're here, and it's been reported in and around

Jerusalem that around the world you've been going around telling everybody, don't keep

the Law of Moses, don't circumcise their children, and reject the other customs.

And there's a sense in which Paul really said no such thing. Paul simply said

that the Law of Moses, circumcision, etc., no longer saved

anybody, and you couldn't appeal to those Old Testament covenant

things for justification or for salvation. Salvation is now in and through the person of

Jesus Christ. And they tell Paul, the way to fix this is we've got 4

men that are under a vow, possibly the Nazarite vow of Numbers

6. And they say, Paul, we would really like it if you pay their expenses,

go through this sacrifice with them, and then everybody that hears about

this will know you don't have a problem with the Old Testament law. There'll be

peace and things will be great. If you're worried about the Gentiles. Paul, don't worry

about that. Remember the letter we sent in Acts 15? The Gentiles

don't have to do these things. Don't worry about it. But we really need you

to do this. It'll go well for your evangelistic efforts while you're

here in Jerusalem. There have been 2 major schools of thought on what is happening

in Acts 21, and I'll let you decide for yourself. But the first is

that these elders, James and others, did no wrong. What's happening

here is they're applying the principle Neil mentioned earlier from 1 Corinthians 9,

and they're asking Paul, just become all things to all men culturally,

just go through the steps of this Old Testament sacrifice and ritual

so that you'll be able to better reach the Jews that are in Jerusalem.

And some people think that's exactly what Paul's doing.

But then there are others that believe that Paul, in going

through with this, and the elders and James that were encouraging him to do this,

were in the wrong and were sinning because they're saying, hey Paul, we know we

said the Old Testament that law is no longer binding, but it would really look

good to the Jews that are in this area. And if you could just do

this for us, it would really go great and things would end in a good

way. And the more I read the book of Acts, the more I think the

second of those options is true, and that the elders in the

spirit of compromise tried to get Paul to do something that really wasn't

in his best interest. And if you read the rest of the book of Acts,

you'll see it didn't go well. Paul's arrested and

riot breaks out because he's in Jerusalem and it didn't appease or it didn't help.

I would just say this, regardless of what you think about what happened in Acts

21, there are some lessons that even people that really know the Bible

well— and by this time Paul had written Galatians and the book of Romans—

even people that really know the Bible well can make big mistakes,

even about things they previously taught, preached, and believed,

and that every one of us needs the blood and the grace of Jesus.

As Paul would say in Galatians 2, even Barnabas was carried away with the hypocrisy.

And the third thing is the tension between Jews and Gentiles

was very strong in the first century. I think sometimes we just

read over this, but we fail to see how hard it would have been to

be a Jewish person in the first century and not only become a Christian,

but also to have fellowship with Gentiles and to be among your

other Jewish kinsmen and to be able to say, I'm doing this because I believe

it's right and because God authorized it. And you see these men,

spiritual leaders and titans in the New Testament, struggling with

how to go about doing this and be honoring to God, but also in

some sense how to save face with their countrymen. And it's just a

reminder to us that spiritual compromise is dangerous, and it's a struggle and

temptation that we all face. And so God is merciful and gracious,

but let's always hold to the truth, because in the end,

compromise of a sinful nature doesn't really help us to

win other souls and doesn't glorify God.

Thank you, Neil.

Thank you, man. Great job. This congregation is

certainly blessed to have these 2 men.

God works in a mighty way through them, and thankful, thankful for each of them.

It's always appropriate when we do assemble together that we offer an invitation if

someone needs to come to Christ, if someone needs to be become in

Christ. You know, in Ephesians chapter 2,

Ephesians 2 · chapter mention

Paul diagnoses the human condition of all those who are outside

of Jesus Christ. In verse 1, he diagnoses that condition

as being dead, dead spiritually. He says, you were

dead in your trespasses and sins. This chapter

goes through a transformation that takes place in the life

of all those who have obeyed the gospel. At one point, we were

dead in our trespasses and sins. Verse 2 says, in which

you once walked according to the course of this world,

according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works

in the sons of disobedience, among whom also we all once conducted ourselves

in the lust of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the

mind, and were by nature children of wrath, just as

the others. If you have not obeyed the gospel,

if you're not in Christ, if you have not done what we're

told to do in Colossians chapter 2, which is a sister epistle to the

Colossians 2 · chapter mention

book of Ephesians, then you still find yourself in those 3 verses.

But there is a transformation that takes place when we obey the gospel,

when we come to Him, starting in verse 4. And here's

who's responsible for it. But God, but God, who is rich in

mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,

even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive

together with Christ. By grace you have been saved. And raised

us up together and made us sit together in the heavenly places in

Christ Jesus. Ephesians is about the blessings that we

have being in Christ. If you're not in Christ,

We invite you to come and be in Christ,

putting Christ on in baptism. Or if you've wandered away

and you need to come home or you need prayers, would you come right now

as together we stand and sing?

When the trumpet of the Lord shall sound, and time shall

be no more, and the Lord embrace eternal life

in bear. When the saved on earth shall